Classic & Vintage - Defending steel to the death! :)

Why?

My Cannondales seem to be great bikes, to me. Should I be concerned?


you mean crack n fail??

Just kidding. Aluminum is a fine material for making bikes.

Why?

My Cannondales seem to be great bikes, to me. Should I be concerned?



John, thanks for the reassurance. I will ride on in confidence!

My 86' ST500 cracked and was replaced under warranty and so did its replacement.
But do I think aluminum is crap? Nope. I may find another C-dale under my butt eventually.
I also cracked my 78' Hiawatha at the head/top tube joint. I can still picture my dad and his buddy brazing it back together. Oh that bike looked so cool after that!
At least to my 13 year old eyes.
Material is immaterial in this thread.......

no matter what frames are good, bad, or ugly, next time I see a Douglas Motive aluminum frame, I'm all over it. I should never have sold the one I had...

http://velospace.org/files/P1080559.JPG

A couple of things:

-There is nothing funny or cute about being mean or aggresive to someone over something that simply does not matter. Sorry to sound preachy, but I just can't respond to the content of the thread without saying that first.

-There are so many reasons why I like steel bikes. None of them are original, and I can't express them any better than others here have, so I will merely join them in it. However, for me, the biggest reason I ride them is that I am cheap.

-Weight is not everything in cycling, but in many situations, it is a big thing. Steel bikes are not really ever going to be amongst the lightest of bikes. The people who ride professionally in most any types of cycling ride CF. They are not stupid, and they do not like losing. What more is there to say? This is far less of an issue for me when I pulling my trailer full of groceries, but its not like it is not a factor.

jim

I have very little extra cash, I am never going to race professionally, I like olds things and I'm a fat old guy....
so for me it's steel.
That said alternative frame material is amazing. A person's choice in the matter is of no concern to me....if they want feel superior because they ride CF then they are challenged emotionally...that's their problem...to get in a altercation with them over it serves no worthwhile purpose...you would have done better to ask them if ,since they won't need them anymore, if you can have all their old, heavy,useless steel framed bikes!

Since aluminum was brought up...I've heard all of the stories about aluminum breaking pretty much the same as the stories for carbon fiber and for similar reasons. I'm also sure that if they really broke with anything like the frequency many C&V'ers seem to think there would have been a class action lawsuit and many rich(er) lawyers and the bike companies would have stopped selling them. Anyway, I have only one complaint about aluminum. Now admittedly I don't have a lot of experience with aluminum. My mountain bike is aluminum but it's dual suspension so that doesn't count. But my wife's mountain bike is a hard tail and I've ridden that. I put 1.5" slicks on it and used it as a commuter for a while. Even with wide tires running at 60-psi or so every time I hit a bump it felt like somebody kicked me in the backside. I didn't like that ride at all. My steel road bikes don't feel like that even with narrow high-pressure tires.

My Bianchi weighs 20.5 lbs. If I had an extra $12k to drop on a sub 15-lbs CF bike today I'm pretty sure I would notice the difference and be pleased with the ride. But for the money I could afford to spend even a CF bike would be more like 17-18-lbs and I really don't see how that would be worth the trouble. In fact a new wheel set on the Bianchi would probably drop a pound and get pretty close for a lot less money.

I myself don't understand the reaction from some CF bike owners that popped up too. in the end, there is no perfect frame material out there for everyone. Bikes will fail once in a while, one way or another, regardless of what material it's made of and there's nothing wrong with discussing cases of failure if it helps us understand how the material works. It all comes down to how frame makers ultilize what ever materials they use, properly. One biker will prefer one to the other and it will be alomost impossible to change their minds on their preference.
Reminds me of how carpenters somtimes argue about different handle materials for their hammers. Some like wood, some like metal and some like fiberglass, but in the end, after so many years, they are all still made and are sold next to each other satisfying millions of carpenters and craftsmen all over the world and none had taken over as the universal material for hammer handles.

Chombi
84 Peugeot PSV

You're all wrong, Bamboo is the wave of the future!
http://www.calfeedesign.com/pages/images/NewBamboo.png

I like 'em all.

You're all wrong, Bamboo is the wave of the future!

...with CF spokes, eh?

-Kurt

You're all wrong, Bamboo is the wave of the future!

Just a little too Planets of the Apes for my taste.

jim

I call "troll".

Getting in a fight - albeit a sissy fight - over frame material? Even to a bike geek like myself, that goes into levels of dorkiness that I didn't think were possible.

For all the worriers about CF (I have steel and CF...love 'em both); chill. CF is a brittle material, which is a misunderstood term in the general public. Brittle simply means that instead of bending, the material will fracture. But it takes a LOT to get to that fracture.

Brittle materials, by the way, tend to fail in tension rather than from shearing forces; and tension is a force that normal bike frames simply do not fail from.

Brittle is also the opposite of Ductile, which is what many metals are. In order to strengthen metals and make them suitable for things like, say, bicycle frames, engineers seek ways around the plastic deformation properties of metals: Alloying, shapes, etc. In other words, many of the advances in alloying steel have been in the quest to make the steel more brittle.

I knew a guy who sold CF bikes with a simple demo. He had a CF tube, and some Al and Steel tubes. He invited the customer to strike each one as hard as he/she could with a hammer.

Most walked out with CF bikes.

And before I get pilloried here, I would like to profess my love of my '84 japanese steel, and point out that I am currently in the process of ordering custom steel with S&S couplers. But, the frame material wars get old...and yet I'm still participating! :D

One of my hardest working bikes is a 1999 Trek 7500 with an Al frame and steel fork... since I bought it several years ago I have put nearly 10,000 hard miles on this bike and it has held up perfectly.

On road, off road, commuting, touring, and towing a loaded cargo trailer on a frequent basis haven't caused any problems.

As far as ride goes it does need some 700:28's under her at about 90 psi to make things plush and high psi tyres would impart a pretty harsh ride.

You should argue about tastes, that what they say. The thing is that some love steel bikes, maybe because of chrome forks and chainstays, thin tubes joined by intricate lugs, or perhaps the thought of someone hand brazing the frame 25 years ago. Carbon on the other hand is beautiful by it's flowing curves, visible fibers under the thick gel coat, and it's feather weight. It's the same as people appreciate cars, there are some that love vintage roadsters, and some that rather burn rubber on compact rice rocket, and there are some racing stock cars and formulas mixed in the middle.
On the other side is practicality. You wouldn't choose to tow a yacht behind a Honda Fit, compete in the drag race with a minivan. Same goes for bikes, that's why carbon dominates Tour De France, and Olympic games. But if you want a conversation piece on the local group ride, nice looking steel bike will do.
So choose your weapons wisely.

You wouldn't choose to tow a yacht behind a Honda Fit, compete in the drag race with a minivan. .

You were saying?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLIlqY6SwxA

You were saying?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLIlqY6SwxA

lol the Caravans came with a 2.4? liter turbo that was insanely easy to hop up. It was also the engine in the Conquest TSI and the Mitsubishi version of that car, name escapes me. I had a Conquest. Blew the engine after doing some mods to the engine. As I coasted to a stop, engine making death rattles, a huge cloud of smoke went past me, couldn't see more than 5 feet away. I learned that blown a head gasket and other damage means the car can't even move itself. It was fun while it lasted.

As for the steel etc debate, it's like cars. Some folks want an Aston Martin DB4, some would rather a new Vantage. There's no law against liking one over the other.

And if you're going to dump liquids on someone, do it in defense of cycling, not against a fellow cyclist:
http://sprinterdellacasa.blogspot.com/2007/05/story-tatooed-arm.html

cdr