In short. Ridgeline corrodes dramatically less than copper does, in the same water, under the same test conditions. That is not our claim; it is the conclusion of an independent study run by Lancaster University's School of Engineering.
Lancaster ran three independent analytical methods on samples of Ridgeline tube (CSST) and copper tube exposed to identical accelerated corrosion conditions: XPS (X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy), ICP-OES (mineral leaching into water), and optical microscopy at high magnification. The three methods triangulate. Surface chemistry, what is actually leaving the pipe into the water, and what the surface looks like before and after.
Across all three methods, Ridgeline showed essentially no measurable corrosion. Surface chromium content was preserved, indicating the protective passive layer was intact and able to self-repair. Iron and chromium readings in the test water remained at trace levels consistent with background, not consistent with material loss from the pipe wall. Microscopy showed the tube surface unchanged before and after testing.
Copper, in the same conditions, showed the opposite. XPS recorded a 3% drop in surface copper after testing. ICP-OES showed copper concentration in the water rising from 0.13 ppm at 16 hours to 1.5 ppm by day 8. Copper was actively being removed from the pipe and entering the water. Microscopy showed substantial surface damage.
Lancaster's verdict, in their own words: "With no evidence of corrosion in all three analysis methods, it is clear that corrosion has not occurred for CSST… As copper showed corrosion in all analysis methods, it is also correct to state that CSST will last longer than copper when in domestic hot water systems."
That is a written, third-party engineering finding that Ridgeline tube outlasts copper tube in UK domestic water service.
Evidence: independent testing at Lancaster University (2022).
Link to this answer