Road Cycling - Steel vs. Aluminum Weight Dependant?

In my continuing saga to find the perfect bike for me I'm finding myself left with an important question: Are steel bikes better suited for heavier riders? I've read quite a lot in the last two weeks about different frame materials and the general consensus appears to be that aluminum is harsher than steel, although they've done quite a lot in the last few years to improve aluminum's compliance. Now, it seems to me that the lighter a person is, the less they would be jarred by a stiffer frame. Is this correct or am I way off base here? I'm only 140 lbs. so I'm wondering if steel's legendary ride would be an unnecessary consideration for someone as light as I am. The other major benefit of steel seems to be its durability. So, can similar durability and comfort be found in mid level aluminum frames? (i.e. $900-1200 range) I've been looking at models like Fondriest's Madonna's, Felt's F35's, Wilier's Lavaredo, etc. but I'm somewhat concerned that I might be getting a bike that's not durable or comfortable enough for training rides, and could be toast in 5 years. Any insight?

Steel !!!!!
The LIGHTER you are the harsher the ride on Aluminum

I rode a Co-Motion "Espresso" recently 200+ miles VERY NICE!
( Reynolds 853 main tubes w/ Wound Up Fork ( included)
Price is very competitive and frame can be custom made for you as well
Very smooth and climbed and accelerated as good or better than any bike I've ridden including Colnago C-40 and Master Light, Masi Prestige, and 3V, De Rosa Steel, Klein, Canondale, Sannino, Merckx etc. etc.

I've NEVER. ( nor do I know anyone who has), ridden any Aluminum bike that rode as smooth as Steel ( and they're not that much lighter)

Ride Ferrous and Furious
Pat

I'm on the same boat, debating between both materials, although the scale is tipping towards STEEL.
I've been researching for a month now, reading like a maniac about both materials and these conclusions are facts:
Aluminum is good but it'll eventually fail (metal fatigue) on a ceratin given time frame, the more you ride it the sooner it'll have to get it "retired", becomes dangerous, like I said depending on your riding it could be a year or 15/20 yrs. as to Steel could (and i say COULD) last a life time provided you don't abuse it beyond its metal properties/capacities.
The thing with Al is that microscopic cracks take place in the metal which compounded eventually will collapse or fail, somehow, one way or another, I've started to belive what I read on the post: Steel is REAL.
I guess it is.
I'm inclining towards the Bianchi Vigorelli in my case, maybe, but I have yet to test ride it. The Giro I tested, rode nice and stealthly for instance, very light and nice looking bike, but the truthis I'm not a racer, so weight is not an issue to me, of course I don't want to ride a clunker either, the Vigorelli is pretty light for a steel frame.
my 2 cents
Corsaire

I think aluminum's 'fragility' is greatly overblown. If it were a significant problem then you wouldn't see 80+ % of bike frames on bikes over $500 or so made of aluminum. The lifespan of an al road bike is going to be in the 50kmi plus range for the average rider. ATB bikes are stressed much more highly than road bikes (and built more robustly) and are almost universally aluminum, except for those above $2500-3000 in price. I wouldn't agonize over the lifespan of the bike based on its frame material. Ride character is another matter as is cachet. AL bikes are very competitive in the low weight range of frames and frame weights in the 2# 9-120z range are achieved with Al, carbon and Ti frames. Steel will generally be above 3#, but this difference is insignificant for most riders. Steve

In my experience, aluminum frame have held up well. So far I have put about 40,000 miles on 3 different aluminum frames and I never had any hint of trouble with them. I am a large guy too - 190 lbs when I get my weight down and sometimes a bit heavier :rolleyes: . I have gotten rid of the bikes because of component obsolescence, components wearing out, or because the paint job was starting to look cruddy and often a combination of all three.

Theoretically, aluminum will eventually fail from fatigue, but the engineers have added material to the critical stress points and I doubt that this will ever happen to anyone except possibly the most relentless high mileage riders.

Generally, heavy riders favor stiff bikes. They put more stress on a bike and a stiff bike helps the handling under load.

A light rider does not need a really stiff bike.

Big and powerful riders put more bending stress on a frame. To resist bending you need stifness. You get stiffness by having tubes with a wide diameter compared to their length (ie fat).
You can make fat tubes out of any material, but Al allows you to do this without a huge weight penaly. Fat-tubed Al is a good design for heavier riders. Its not so good for smaller or lighter riders.

There is more to a bike than just the metal. Danish company Principia are legendary for making lightweight Al frames which ride like steel. In independant tests of durability, they outlasted a range of steel and ti bikes on a fatigue-inducing rig.
Steel does fracture, mainly due to heat damage of thin-walled tubing, or inapropriate braze-ons. All material fail if they are used badly.
Im a steel rider, and I like steel, but I dont get religious about it. For big, tall and powerful riders, Id recomend fat-tubed Al. For short, light riders Id say Ti or steel in a thinner-tubed design.

Big and powerful riders put more bending stress on a frame. To resist bending you need stifness. You get stiffness by having tubes with a wide diameter compared to their length (ie fat).
You can make fat tubes out of any material, but Al allows you to do this without a huge weight penaly. Fat-tubed Al is a good design for heavier riders. Its not so good for smaller or lighter riders.

There is more to a bike than just the metal. Danish company Principia are legendary for making lightweight Al frames which ride like steel. In independant tests of durability, they outlasted a range of steel and ti bikes on a fatigue-inducing rig.
Steel does fracture, mainly due to heat damage of thin-walled tubing, or inapropriate braze-ons. All material fail if they are used badly.
Im a steel rider, and I like steel, but I dont get religious about it. For big, tall and powerful riders, Id recomend fat-tubed Al. For short, light riders Id say Ti or steel in a thinner-tubed design.Ya think the tubs are fat because they need to be twice as big as steel to be as strong?

In my continuing saga to find the perfect bike for me I'm finding myself left with an important question: Are steel bikes better suited for heavier riders? I've read quite a lot in the last two weeks about different frame materials and the general consensus appears to be that aluminum is harsher than steel, although they've done quite a lot in the last few years to improve aluminum's compliance. Now, it seems to me that the lighter a person is, the less they would be jarred by a stiffer frame. Is this correct or am I way off base here? I'm only 140 lbs. so I'm wondering if steel's legendary ride would be an unnecessary consideration for someone as light as I am. The other major benefit of steel seems to be its durability. So, can similar durability and comfort be found in mid level aluminum frames? (i.e. $900-1200 range) I've been looking at models like Fondriest's Madonna's, Felt's F35's, Wilier's Lavaredo, etc. but I'm somewhat concerned that I might be getting a bike that's not durable or comfortable enough for training rides, and could be toast in 5 years. Any insight?I have 2 alum bikes and just got my steel fuji.The difference is even apparent to me and i just ride.My friend just got a cervelo prodigy and has had a alum cervelo for a few years and even before i asked the difference in ride he told me,wow what a difference,smooth.He races.

Strength and stiffness are not the same. Al needs to be fat, so it can be stiff, so you dont bend it and cause fatigue.
If you want to make fat tubes out of any material, you need thicker siewalls to prevent "beer can" collapse. Al allows you to add material without a huge weight penalty.
Steel can be used in more flexible more thinner tubes without the risk of breaking.

I wont say that one material or design is better than another, but the fat-tube design and Al work for each other in big frames, and the thin tube design works for steel in med-small.
Ive seen custom steel bikes for really big guys, and these ride like noodles. You cant just make steel tubes longer, and the triangles bigger and retain sufficient stiffness for a powerful rider. This is where you need a fat tube.

Ive seen the fat-tube/Al style applied to small frames with small triangles, short tubing, and lighter less powerfull riders. They build in far too much stiffness for the rider.
Making an Al bike ride comfortably and reliably is not easy, and there are very few companies who have really mastered the material.

Whats a really big guy?6' 200lbs

I have raced both Alu and steel frames for years. In the "old days" alu frames were very harsh for me at 6'2" 175lb. At one point I changed teams and we were on Bianchi frames and I opted for a steel Reynolds tubed frame. The ride was much better for those long road and stage races but I felt the bike climbed poorly.

This year I started the shopping process for a new frame and ordered a steel Bianchi Boron XL frame. Then I looked at a Orbea XLR8R frame made of Alu, Zinc, and Magnesium. I ended up buying the Orbea so now am back to a non steel frame. I must say this bike rides as well as my steel frame did per the advice of my pro shop. Partly due to the rear triangle is carbon and the design of the main triangle is designed to absord the road. It works, and I am not at my prime race weight and am training on this bike at 190LB. This is a very light frame that climbs very well.

Point being, steel or other material, any might be the right frame depends on your feel and desire. I didn't think I would ride anything other then steel but never say never.

I have raced both Alu and steel frames for years. In the "old days" alu frames were very harsh for me at 6'2" 175lb. At one point I changed teams and we were on Bianchi frames and I opted for a steel Reynolds tubed frame. The ride was much better for those long road and stage races but I felt the bike climbed poorly.

This year I started the shopping process for a new frame and ordered a steel Bianchi Boron XL frame. Then I looked at a Orbea XLR8R frame made of Alu, Zinc, and Magnesium. I ended up buying the Orbea so now am back to a non steel frame. I must say this bike rides as well as my steel frame did per the advice of my pro shop. Partly due to the rear triangle is carbon and the design of the main triangle is designed to absord the road. It works, and I am not at my prime race weight and am training on this bike at 190LB. This is a very light frame that climbs very well.

Point being, steel or other material, any might be the right frame depends on your feel and desire. I didn't think I would ride anything other then steel but never say never.

I forgot to mention that Bianchi on the steel Boron frame in order to make the frame as light as they did had to make the wall thin. They wouldn't warrenty the frame if my weight was over 180Lb.

I forgot to mention that Bianchi on the steel Boron frame in order to make the frame as light as they did had to make the wall thin. They wouldn't warrenty the frame if my weight was over 180Lb.I dont think its any lighter then my fuji and weight was never talked about.Thats strange.

Honestly life span of a frame I would not worry about to much now if you have legs 30 inch calves okie it is a concern since you will fatigue a aluminum frame but for 99% of us out there it is not that big a deal. All frames will eventualy fail, steal might be 30 years down the road and aluminum 20 years down the road for the average rider. If you get let's say only 10 years out of yoru frame and it is $1,500 that is just a bit over $12 a month so it is a good deal. Basicaly what I am saying forget what everything you read and go for a few test rides see what feels best to your body. I like the feel of aluminum frames on average, and like my CF bike best of all. You can also look at some Ti frames. My two most comfortable riding bikes I would say are my BpSteal CF bike and my Fuji Cyclocross which is Aluminum.

I dont think its any lighter then my fuji and weight was never talked about.Thats strange.
I thought it was odd myself but didn't worry about it that much as when training and racing I weigh under 180lb.

Honestly life span of a frame I would not worry about to much now if you have legs 30 inch calves okie it is a concern since you will fatigue a aluminum frame but for 99% of us out there it is not that big a deal. All frames will eventualy fail, steal might be 30 years down the road and aluminum 20 years down the road for the average rider. If you get let's say only 10 years out of yoru frame and it is $1,500 that is just a bit over $12 a month so it is a good deal. Basicaly what I am saying forget what everything you read and go for a few test rides see what feels best to your body. I like the feel of aluminum frames on average, and like my CF bike best of all. You can also look at some Ti frames. My two most comfortable riding bikes I would say are my BpSteal CF bike and my Fuji Cyclocross which is Aluminum.Hell i wish they would'nt last that long so i would have a reason to get a new bike sooner.:D