Mountain Biking - Steel Mountain bikes can be light; but is there a market?

I recently saw a couple of posts about steel ATBs
seems there are always some questions about these

They can be light; but does anyone want one? Is there a market?

Here is one that is lighter than most hardtails; is reynolds 853; but who would buy it? What would be be worth?

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t213/bikedoctor/fly853_side.jpg

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t213/bikedoctor/fly853onscale.jpg

Motobecane Fly 853 is 21.1 without pedals; so about 22bs with. Lighter than most Aluminum or CF hardtails. But does it have the 'bling' value to interest buyers?

Steel is real but I dont like the design of that frame. It looks too 90's to me. Nice weight though! That wheelset must weigh 1500g total?

One of my son's has a 1998 Specialized HardRock steel frame bike that he absolutley refuses to part with - it's not his main bike, or even his racing bike - it's his FUN bike. He likes the ride.

I went to your site with my credit card in hand to buy the Outcast 29er. Sadly, I was mistaken. I thought it was steel. I went back to the look more at the monocog.

For me steel on a rigid bike is a very nice application.

When you turn one out drop me a line!

Thanks for checking in with the riders mike!

Further, I think 42X18 is a bad idea for stock gearing. I think going with 2:1 is the way to go stock.

Steel is real but I dont like the design of that frame. It looks too 90's to me. Nice weight though! That wheelset must weigh 1500g total?

don't all steel frames look like that?

I like steel. I've been considering one of the Nashbar 853 frames.

The frame and fork should also be Disc Brake Compatible (does this add to your cost significantly?) and then offer it with the V's and offer one with BB7's for $450. I expect the disc model would sell well and create a bit higher profit margin(?).

Switch out the "copper" for a Matte brown.

Keep the eyelets.

I am getting excited about this model!

Edit: this is regarding the outcast (http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/motobecane/outcast29_08.htm) currently on your site.

Steel is real but I dont like the design of that frame. It looks too 90's to me.

Too 90s? What 90s hardtail had a radically sloping top and down tube that steep to allow for a 4-5" fork? And what 90s hardtail had disc mounts? I think you're confusing skinny steel tubes with the 90s. Steel has always been skinny except for the exotic hair-thin tubes you see on some road bikes which require fat tubes.

Not sure there's much of a market though. Too bad you can't tell how many 853 frames Nashbar has sold. Personally, I doubt all that many. Niche market to be sure. How many do you have to sell to consider it worth bringing them in?

I think if a person runs high-volume tubeless tires at 28-30psi on a basic aluminum frame, that the bike will be as comfortable as steel and the frame will be cheaper and lighter to boot.

Most people in the market for a mtb (younger generation) have no memory of a steel bike, and simply consider them rusty boat anchors compared to aluminum. Fat tubes are all the rage in mtb and road bikes. They're fashionable.

All that being said, I think it's nice to have a mix of offerings and no one does that better at this point than BD. What other bicycle manufacturer sells steel, aluminum, carbon AND titanium framed bikes these days. I don't think there is anyone else. That is something to be proud of, and a distinction to be singled out for.

I used the term loosely. What I should have said was "I dont like it".

For some reason I have "steel", "29'er", and "rigid" on the brain lately.

For some reason I have "steel", "29'er", and "rigid" on the brain lately.

Thanks to this thread its back on my mind. Even though I am trying to thin out the herd. I add "economical" to your list.

Not a bad deal on MC closeout. (http://www.sagecycles.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=BK06RL2901)

It's 22 lbs in spite of the frame, not because of it.

An AL or CF frame with the same build kit would typically be lighter.

I'm not sure I understand the question, if there is one.

I'd stick with Ti and come up with a CF hard tail and dual suspension offering Mike. Steel is a niche market of retro dudes who are fading away in my view. Ti really is better in my view, although that is almost retro these days, there's still a strong market for that. Much moreso than steel.

Nice bike, as to the bling factor Niner bike seems to sell a lot of steel frame hardtails.

this thread is gay

of course there is a market. i am racing a steel hardtail in cross country in the series i am running now.

however, i wouldn't sell any steel frames because the only one worth buying is the Cove Handjob.

you won't sell many


mx

I LOVE my Niner (Brand) 29er!

http://www.ninerbikes.com/index.asp

Most of their bikes are Reynolds 853, I have an S.I.R.9 set up geared w/ SRAM components.

There's a market, mostly in 29ers it seems right now. It is almost as comfortable cross country as my Caddilac Rocky Mountain FS bike. But it climbs so much better!

Oh, for the weight conscious, the Steel framed SIR9 is 4.5lbs (advertised by Niner) and the Aluminum EMD9 is 3.5lbs (advertised by Niner), some of the weight is in the EBB of the SIR9.

this thread is gay



All of cycling is gay.

All of road cycling is gay.

fixed

All of cycling is gay.

yeah, but i don't know what the deal is with this bikesdirectdude.com

mx

fixed

:beer:

hahahah, i was slow to catch that one! (hey, wait. i am a roadie too :( )

mx

Road cycling may indeed be gay, but MTBers are gayer, muddier, and considerably more deranged. On the other hand they are friendlier and generally are generally more prepared to party.

Road cycling may indeed be gay, but MTBers are gayer, muddier, and considerably more deranged. On the other hand they are friendlier and are generally more prepared to party.

:roflmao:

mx

I think my next bike/ frame is going to be 853 or Ti or maybe even carbon

yes, there is a market - i just bought a ss steel rigid 29er, and i want to buy a steel ss 26" inch frame now... steel makes so much sense to me for a bike that is going to be abused - imo, it will handle it better than cf, ti, or al. for someone who rides hard and doesn't have disposable income, steal is where it's at.

I think my next bike/ frame is going to be 853 or Ti or maybe even carbon

Thanks for narrowing it down for us.

I think my next bike/ frame is going to be 853 or Ti or maybe even carbon

or bamboo.

If you have any doubt that aluminum has a better strength-to-weight ratio than steel, just consider the number of aluminum airplanes you see compared to the number of steel airplanes.

If you have any doubt that aluminum has a better strength-to-weight ratio than steel, just consider the number of aluminum airplanes you see compared to the number of steel airplanes.

There's a lot more to a bike frame than strenght to weight ratio.

I'd stick with Ti and come up with a CF hard tail and dual suspension offering Mike. Steel is a niche market of retro dudes who are fading away in my view. Ti really is better in my view, although that is almost retro these days, there's still a strong market for that. Much moreso than steel.

Agreed. I would like to see more high end dual suspension offerings. Something lighter and really XC focused (like 3" travel both ways) at like 22-23lbs
And then maybe something more of an all mountain at like 5" or 6" inches both ways. The only higher end full suspension you have is sort of a tweener to me and seems to never be in stock.

or bamboo.

no

I'd rock a steel frame if it rode well, especially so if it was lighter/better handling than my current ride. Oh, and ease up on the semicolons, man...

Those motobecane bikes seem pretty solid for the price. They make a decent steel track bike for the price as well.

Is there a market? Yes. How big is it? I don't know. Is it a high-end market? Maybe not.

I think the word is out that Ti and Steel are good hard tail materials. I believe they are a better (smoother) ride than Al. Still, Al will have a market, as will CF, as a light weight high performance bike. Steel and Ti, I don't believe are quite that light without being noodley.

Materials aside, people expect to pay more for Ti as it's harder to get a hold of and there is a perceved ride quality and lightness associated with the material. People will pay for lightness as they, generally, think the lightness will make a better race/performance bike, and people will pay for performance. Where does that leave steel? Somewhere in the middle, I believe. It certainly can not maintain a premium that Ti will. Premium due to lightness will be more of a Al and CF thing. I believe steel can maintain a middle area with the slightly heavier Al frames. However, it may take a paradigm shift to get wide acceptance. Just hearing Al v. steel, conjures images of light v. heavy, particularly to those who may not be into riding as much.

Don't know, I guess I'm just rambling and writing free form here. These are just some thoughts off the top of my head.

I'd stick with Ti and come up with a CF hard tail and dual suspension offering Mike. Steel is a niche market of retro dudes who are fading away in my view. Ti really is better in my view, although that is almost retro these days, there's still a strong market for that. Much moreso than steel.

My ala carte at sub 25 without trying and 80mm fork begs to differ. If I put all the weight weenie parts that mike does on his bikes, it would be in the 23lb range or less.

I recently saw a couple of posts about steel ATBs
seems there are always some questions about these

They can be light; but does anyone want one? Is there a market?

Here is one that is lighter than most hardtails; is reynolds 853; but who would buy it? What would be be worth?

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t213/bikedoctor/fly853_side.jpg

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t213/bikedoctor/fly853onscale.jpg

Motobecane Fly 853 is 21.1 without pedals; so about 22bs with. Lighter than most Aluminum or CF hardtails. But does it have the 'bling' value to interest buyers?

That top tube routing is tired at best. The down tube needs a gusset at the head tube junction and you could route the shifter cables there.

There are so many components on that bike that just need to be tossed for parts that won't fail. Ditch the seatpost, saddle, gusset the down tube to the head tube, throw away those tires.

yeah, it might weight 22 or 23lbs at that point but at least it would be rideable.

don't all steel frames look like that?

No.

http://jrauckman.smugmug.com/photos/35052635_R5JqM-L.jpg

Hard to tell from the pic, but the tubes are actually more triangular.

I recently saw a couple of posts about steel ATBs
seems there are always some questions about these

They can be light; but does anyone want one? Is there a market?

www.gunnarbikes.com

What's the Motobecane frame weigh?

That top tube routing is tired at best. The down tube needs a gusset at the head tube junction and you could route the shifter cables there.

There are so many components on that bike that just need to be tossed for parts that won't fail. Ditch the seatpost, saddle, gusset the down tube to the head tube, throw away those tires.

yeah, it might weight 22 or 23lbs at that point but at least it would be rideable.

Now come on. That is pure anti-BD crap. Things need to be tossed so it does not fail? Seriously? Like that Seatpost. A ritchey Alum seatpost. Let me be clear - that is not gong to fail. You list that and the seat as you specifics. Okay . . . the seat is junk. But what else. You act like this bike would need everything replaced.

Now come on. That is pure anti-BD crap. Things need to be tossed so it does not fail? Seriously? Like that Seatpost. A ritchey Alum seatpost. Let me be clear - that is not gong to fail. You list that and the seat as you specifics. Okay . . . the seat is junk. But what else. You act like this bike would need everything replaced.

That seatpost IS junk. I have one it bits sitting around somewhere. The saddle IS junk.

Tires: JUNK and only good for someone trying to sell a light bike.
That SID fork is good for someone that weighs 150-160lbs and really isn't good for technical stuff. It's just too flexy for riders 170 and beyond. The 2008 SID may be a different story but that's the older fork and has the 28mm uppers (FLEXY). The Fox F32 100 isn't THAT much heavier and will take more punishment.

I race a steel Ala Carte HT and just came in 1st in my last race Junior. I would have ridden my FS bike during that race but I BROKE my right chainstay on the preride.

Call me back when the cable routing is different, there is a gusset on the down tube, it has a Fox F32 100RLC or Fox F32 80RLC on it and has at least Sram X.9 on it. I could ride Shimano and have but now prefer Sram.

I'd also like to have a 7" rotor on the front.

I don't care what anyone says about those Vuelta wheels. I've tried them. They lasted ONE ride.

While we are at it, how about some tubeless action?

Anti BD BS? No, just coming from a guy that has BROKEN frames, seatposts, saddles, forks, wheels and the list goes on.....

I'm just looking at that bike and for so few more dollars the components could be higher quality and not so dang worried about how much it weighs. I've got friends that race the Trek 8000 straight out of the box with zero changes and it weighs 25lbs. They race Expert and podium. My Steel HT has beefier componets that the bike above, weighs close to 24lbs and will handle my 200lbs all day long. I guarantee that the stock saddle and seatpost on the bike above WOULD come back in pieces either the 1st or 2nd ride if I had it.

That seatpost IS junk. I have one it bits sitting around somewhere. The saddle IS junk.

Tires: JUNK and only good for someone trying to sell a light bike.
That SID fork is good for someone that weighs 150-160lbs and really isn't good for technical stuff. It's just too flexy for riders 170 and beyond. The 2008 SID may be a different story but that's the older fork and has the 28mm uppers (FLEXY). The Fox F32 100 isn't THAT much heavier and will take more punishment.

I race a steel Ala Carte HT and just came in 1st in my last race Junior. I would have ridden my FS bike during that race but I BROKE my right chainstay on the preride.

Call me back when the cable routing is different, there is a gusset on the down tube, it has a Fox F32 100RLC or Fox F32 80RLC on it and has at least Sram X.9 on it. I could ride Shimano and have but now prefer Sram.

I'd also like to have a 7" rotor on the front.

I don't care what anyone says about those Vuelta wheels. I've tried them. They lasted ONE ride.

While we are at it, how about some tubeless action?

Anti BD BS? No, just coming from a guy that has BROKEN frames, seatposts, saddles, forks, wheels and the list goes on.....

I'm just looking at that bike and for so few more dollars the components could be higher quality and not so dang worried about how much it weighs. I've got friends that race the Trek 8000 straight out of the box with zero changes and it weighs 25lbs. They race Expert and podium. My Steel HT has beefier componets that the bike above, weighs close to 24lbs and will handle my 200lbs all day long. I guarantee that the stock saddle and seatpost on the bike above WOULD come back in pieces either the 1st or 2nd ride if I had it.


You are an exception. period. More power to you for being powerful and for going hard. 90% of MTB riders (and I am talking 90% of those that actually ride trails and XC) would never break that post. I actually do not understand how you could you could break an alum seat post in 1 or 2 rides. A majority could ride those wheels for years. So you are very hard on bikes. As such, I think few out of the box bikes are going to meet your needs. I think OEM's and BD alike cannot make bikes to target your demographic. It would hurt their sales. They would be heavy bikes that are overbuilt for a huge majority of riders. That is bad business.

I do agree 100% that those tires are purely used to reduce the advertised weight. Way too light, too little tread, too thin to be of any real XC use.

And yeah, that shock is flexy. But I think it is a decent shock for many riders. I am about 175 and it is just fine with me.

Weight sells. That is just reality in bikes. BD lists weight (most do not) and the 2 bikes I have from them have weighed in accurately which is nice. There are clearly tradeoffs for lightweight. Especially at the costs he is selling stuff.

You are an exception. period. More power to you for being powerful and for going hard. 90% of MTB riders (and I am talking 90% of those that actually ride trails and XC) would never break that post. I actually do not understand how you could you could break an alum seat post in 1 or 2 rides. A majority could ride those wheels for years. So you are very hard on bikes. As such, I think few out of the box bikes are going to meet your needs. I think OEM's and BD alike cannot make bikes to target your demographic. It would hurt their sales. They would be heavy bikes that are overbuilt for a huge majority of riders. That is bad business.

Yeah, my 24lb HT is such a boat anchor. It's lighter than a new Trek 8000.

Keep thinking those thoughts on that Ritchey seatpost. It will fail at the top where it attaches to the saddle. Oh yes...it will. Bad....bad.......oh so bad design.

Thomson isn't exactly a boat anchor and is probably lighter than that Ritchey.

Apparently, you and I are hanging out with a different crew of MTB riders. Are you riding the mosquito trail at Blanket Creek by chance? Maybe a paved Rail Trail?

Yeah, my 24lb HT is such a boat anchor. It's lighter than a new Trek 8000.

Keep thinking those thoughts on that Ritchey seatpost. It will fail at the top where it attaches to the saddle. Oh yes...it will. Bad....bad.......oh so bad design.

Thomson isn't exactly a boat anchor and is probably lighter than that Ritchey.

Apparently, you and I are hanging out with a different crew of MTB riders. Are you riding the mosquito trail at Blanket Creek by chance? Maybe a paved Rail Trail?

yeah . . . an internet tough guy. You are so big and strong no bike can contain you.

Did you say your last race as a Jr? How old does that make you? If you are young and have broken essentially all parts of a bike and regularly would destroy middle of the road parts, then you are an exception. End of story. MTB's would not sell if the majority of riders were breaking mid to upper level stuff every time they road. I am not doubting you, but you have to understand there is a huge difference between the riding paved tail people and destroying everything you touch.

yeah . . . an internet tough guy. You are so big and strong no bike can contain you.

Did you say your last race as a Jr? How old does that make you? If you are young and have broken essentially all parts of a bike and regularly would destroy middle of the road parts, then you are an exception. End of story. MTB's would not sell if the majority of riders were breaking mid to upper level stuff every time they road. I am not doubting you, but you have to understand there is a huge difference between the riding paved tail people and destroying everything you touch.

reading comprehension must not be your strong point Jr.

No, I am not racing Jr...Jr.

No the difference is that the Ritchey post is a piece of junk. The Sid is flexy as all get out and is using a 28mm upper (on the bike he's selling). It's good for 150lb pros.

His bike will be 22+lbs WITH pedals and by the time you ditch that saddle, seatpost and get some descent tires on it...will be closer to 22.5 or 23. My bike is 24lbs ready for combat.

6'1" and 195

My HT is bulletproof and I'm now riding a StumpJumper FSR as my other bike. STOCK other than my 143 Rival saddle (stock was 133), XTR pedals and my favorite cranks, tubeless, and lock on grips.

Again....you and I must be riding different trails. I hear the Katy Trail is good this time of year. Maybe some racks and Panniers is what you need.

I just listed what I would change on the bike speaking from experience. REAL experience and parts that would last.

Fox F32 fork is a much better choice for real riding. All day riding. 12 hour endurance riding.

Even a Reba would be a better choice.

That steel framed bike is a 27.2 seat post and it being a HT....Thomson is the ONLY post I would trust.

For FS, I used Easton EC90. On my current rig, I'm using the stock specialized 30.9 seatpost. It's a monster.

That Ritchey looks like it's made by Kalloy and honestly...it's junk.

Agreed. I would like to see more high end dual suspension offerings. Something lighter and really XC focused (like 3" travel both ways) at like 22-23lbs
And then maybe something more of an all mountain at like 5" or 6" inches both ways. The only higher end full suspension you have is sort of a tweener to me and seems to never be in stock.

Agreed. I would especially like to BD entering the realm of longer travel bikes. A nicely designed single pivot bike with nice components and a good price would definitely catch my eye.

I don't want to get in the middle of this mess, but I will agree 'bout the SID. I'd definitely have spec'd a Reba at the very least. The F series is a jewel though.

I don't want to get in the middle of this mess, but I will agree 'bout the SID. I'd definitely have spec'd a Reba at the very least. The F series is a jewel though.

Correct

what's going on here?

:)

mx

Look - I am 100% sure I am much less hard on equipment than you. I am 100% you are a better stronger rider. Great. You are not going to get my point so why am I trying? One last time - a vast majority of riders would not break that seat post. Make all the pannier jokes you want. I am talking about people riding medium difficulty trail (which is all I will ever see here in IN) and riding them fairly hard. I have no doubt you are this hard on equipment and that there are others out there like you. To you it is clearly a badge of honor (I searched your various posts around here). I am glad I do not have your set of balls because I could not afford the equipment losses.