Road Cycling - 853 vs high end aluminum

Okay as I have said, I would like to upgrade from my old 1987 Cannondale to a new bike. I have looked at quite a few, but have not taken the road tests. I have searched this room as far as I could go, and learned a lot. I realize that
1. The bike that fits that you like, and can afford, that is your bike
2. Steel tends to be somewhat of a softer ride absorbing some of the shock, especially on long rides
3. Steel tends to be a little bit more weight, but that is the tradeoff
4. There are very good grades of aluminum, and bad, just like in all alloys.
5. Components can be upgraded, but it is nice to get what you want, when you buy your new bike.
6. Ultegra and Durace, not a lotta difference, but Durace is #1
7. Made up mind, would rather have Ultegra than 105
8. Now do I want comfort or speed, or both
9. I realize that if I could afford a good titanium frame, than I would have both.
10. Well I cannot justify, nor afford the expense, in this day & time.

So at 46, soon to be 47, comfort is my main goal. I have seen a Fuji Team which I thought was a great looking bike, with all ultegra components along with Ritchie etc. Now as you know, Fuji has their high end aluminum (xfus), and I was also interested in the same exact bike the Marselles, steel 853 frame. They don't have any in stock in the Marselles, but they did have a roubiax pro 56 which was a little to big, but the salesman said I should take both for a spin to compare the ride.

It makes sense, no problem. I did ask his opinion about 853 vs the xfuse technology, and he said that there wasn't going to be a great difference between the two. In a long ride you may feel better on a steel, but it may not be that much difference. So I like the team, but has anyone compared the 853 to the Fuji
xfuse, or other 853 steel like the lemonds to a good aluminum frame?

Sorry about the length, I am wordy. :)

I to am looking at the marseille.Great buy at 1250 but sale ends on the 15th.So they dont have it.They said only a few days to get it,this was at performance.Its really a great buy.I was going up this weekend to get it but went into jaxs and saw they have the zurich for 1613,another pretty good buy.Difference,zurich has a much better wheelset and the hole frame is 853 and of course how it fits.I'm test riding the zurich tomorrow and will get one or the other.

I can only shed this much light on the issue. When I test-rode the Roubaix Pro, I also test-rode the Roubaix. This is as close as you're likely to get to isolating the frame material as the only variable (also, the Roubaix had a triple, the Pro a double, but they were still very similar bikes). These were 56cm frames.

The Roubaix Pro and the Marseilles frames are the same, under the paint. The Roubaix is not a "high-end" aluminum frame, of course.

In my test ride (which was just an 8-mile loop on each bike, but which did include a decent climb and a very fast descent) the steel frame was clearly superior for me. It handled better. It felt more controllable over rough pavement. It climbed just as well, and it was faster in the descent (probably because I felt more confident on it in high-speed turns).

And whatever the difference in frame weight might have been, I didn't notice it.

All very subjective, I know, and it says nothing about how I might have liked a more refined, better tuned aluminum frame with the same geometry. But I didn't want to spend that much.

RichC

is high end aluminum more comfortable, or just lighter? i'm guessing the latter.

High end aluminum is lighter and more comfortable. Columbus Starship can even be re-welded. Easton Ultralite rides very much like steel, thanks to the shape of the butting. High-end alu, combined with carbon stays gives as comfortable a ride as any steel, at much lighter weight and with better lateral stiffness.

All this "steel is better than alu" BS might have been true five years ago, but it isn't now. Buy a steel bike if you like the retro vibe, but don't go thinking it's going to be better than alu. What you inevitably get is an expensive, relatively heavy bike that dampens vibrations because it's heavier and not because of some mythical, magical property of steel.

Marseille,56cm,19.4 pounds.Most good steel bikes,zurich,prodigy,the fuji,khs800,all under 20 pounds and some at 19 pounds.IMO,if you dont race,a road bike under 20 is great.

A road bike at 20 will seem featherlight compared to my 27lbs mtb, I am not worried about weight with the roadie

I'd have to throw a word in for the Lemonds... I've only been riding mine a week.. and it is smooth as butter... it is 853 pro steel, setup with Full Ultegra, and weighs definitely less than 20 lbs.. I put it on a scale, and it read at 17 lbs... I'm not totally sure that is right.. but below 20 seems liek a safe bet... I haven;t ridden an AL bike... my understanding is that they are much stiffer, which gives you a much better power output ratio compared to steel, but usualyl not as comfortable and forgiving as steel... ont he other hand.. I've talked to peple who say that with the right setup; i.e. carbon fork, certain seatposts, etc., you can get an AL bike that is just as comfortable as steel... it's a crap shoot.... try different brands in your price range, and find the one that feels best.. that will be the bike for you :-)

Jeff

peloton: yeah... i see now... that explains why the CAAD5 cannondale i fell in love with but didn't buy feels more comfortable than my old 2000 specialized allez.....

time for a new frame... well... i'll give this one a couple more years :)

Compare a Fuji 853 steel bike to a Fuji Team Super lite with the X-fusion aluminum alloy. The Team Super Lite seemed as comfortable to me. I think it is even as comfortable as my OCLV. I use it for centuries and found I am very comfortable, and of course, it is very light. Just a thought to try if you can.

I did test ride a new Cannondale. I must admit, it was more comfortable than older aluminum rigs I had ridden. I believe it was an R2000 (road, ultegra). While it was more comfortable than other aluminum rigs, I still don't think it was as comfortable as my current steel ride. However, the Cannondale accelerated like crazy. A very solid, stiff ride that I found to be potentially addictive.

One of the biggest problems I have with production steel bikes today is that they try too hard to compete with the weight of aluminum and ti. Because of that, they use super thin tubing that results in a flimsy, flexible frame. I'm sorry, but I want a steel frame not only for comfort and durability, but also for longevity. These lightweight steel frames only provide the comfort part.

If I were to get a steel road frame, I'd probably get a Surly Pacer (what I have now), a Seven Cycles, a Steelman, or a Richard Sachs. There are a few others I'd consider also. With the exception of the Pacer, all of them will run you a pretty penny. However, you can get a well-built, heavier set steel frame that will stand the test of time (barring any unforseen wrecks).

Waterford makes some outstanding lugged steel custom frames and, of course, they're pricey (but beautiful!) They also make a series of hand-welded steel frames that are marketed under the name Gunnar (they have a website). These are made at the Waterford factory by the same frame buillders, using the high end Reynolds and Tru Temper alloys & Waterford cast dropouts. They are terrific values if you are looking for a quality steel frame, and can be ordered with your choice of several steel or carbon forks.

There are plenty of great steel framebuilders in the US. Thats before you even consider UK or Italy. Names like Gunnar, Surley and Soma probably provide the best cost/performance.
Modern tubing such as 853 is very thin, but the steel is much tougher than traditional 531. The only tubeset I know which is too flimsy for regular use are the early editions of Reynolds 753. These really were like beer cans.

Anybody know where I can find a 2003 54cm Fuji Team Super Lite?

Old thread is old? ;-)

Old thread is old? ;-)

yes