ianjk

I'd get a dent filled in on my $400 Motobecane or my Pista in a heartbeat.

It isn't like it is rocket science, or expensive.

carleton

Are you calling me a liar, bra?

No, no, seriously, bra are you saying that I don't speak the truth, bra?





Seriously, though. I've witnessed or experienced everything that I've posted here. I'm a solid (or gelatinous) 250 (depends on stuff) and a few years back I had Pista Concept which held up fine. I wound up buying 2 more. Not because they broke, more because I can't keep a bike longer than a year (I go to meetings for that now). But we've all considered getting a custom bike made and I had a few beers with one builder and that's where I got the quotes above. Dude literally had me half-scared to ride home on my bike thinking that it would buckle under me.

Now I see guys at the track pulling a couple of Gs through the turns at 35+ MPH...at over 250LBS on aluminum bikes. So, I'm not too worried no more

devilshaircut

I do think that strength is an over-promoted feature of steel. That having been said though, I do think a lot of steel bikes are extremely extremely nice and high-end.

Incidentally, I am a little jealous of Carleton's setup at the track btw. Strangely, the first time I went to the track, I saw him there and remembered his bike. I am bad with names, decent with faces, but good with bikes.

carleton

Thanks! It's a blast to ride.

PedallingATX

yeah I think it's BS when people say that steel is stronger. I just think that aluminum vs. steel is kind of a pointless argument b/c they are both good for different things. I would not want my road bike to be steel b/c weight is my #1 concern w/ it (and I have a $150 saddle to make it comfy).

But on my FG, I want something that I can drop stairs with, hit people, and throw against brick walls. I do have a CF fork on my FG, but I also think that CF is pretty strong, so I'm not worried about abusing it.

I really do wish that more companies made inexpensive titanium bikes, though. I would love a Ti bike.

noobiya

+1
haha!! it feels like that, doesn't it? The own all the knowledge and the coolness! and they're @#$king picky! I have a singlespeed alum and I love it! and it's a Specialized Langster Seattle .. haha

noobiya

haha God! I love you guys!!!

JohnDThompson 

4. Lugs look nice.

JohnDThompson 

Err... I have.

iansmash

what like aluminum isn't fixable?

devilshaircut

You could get a lugged carbon frame.

carleton

Let's see what everyone has to say. I could be wrong.

https://www.bikeforums.net/singlespeed-fixed-gear/550525-poll-have-you-ever-had-your-damaged-steel-bike-repaired.html

dervish

i just felt the claim that material doesnt matter was a bit absurd. I do, however, agree that construction is very important

cc700

it was rhetorical.

like when you say:

Words are meaningless;

It's how you use them.

bicycle

bamboo is the best
https://www.calfeedesign.com/bamboo.htm

doctrine

In terms of material properties, steel is actually about 3 times "stiffer" (Young's Modulus) than aluminum.

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/yo...lus-d_773.html

rudetay

Meh, this happens and is true of every single faction of cycling.

There's lots of roadies that do prefer Brooks saddles. Many of these are also the same people that pay lots of money for a custom TIG welded Strong frame. Reference the Serotta forum for proof. And, I really don't think anyone is really thinking clips and straps with sneakers is a high performance set-up. But, it does fit commuting and short trips very well. Check Rivendell or Velo-Orange if you want more proof of this kind of thing. Would Rivendell ever make an aluminum frame with Record 11? No. Is there a distinct market for what Rivendell does sell, of course.

In regards to the Steel vs. everything else argument. I just have steel frames because they were within my means to purchase, their equivalents in aluminum, titanium, or carbon fiber likely would not have been.

Hirohsima

This post is all about my generalization of FG cyclists. I think steel is so loved by the FG/SS crowd based on demographics. My opinion is that the vast majority of FG cyclists are under the age of 30. I also think that the likelyhood of someone posting on a web forum goes WAY up if a person is under 30.

Steel bikes are fine... and custom builds can be very nice. But I think the real reason steel is so popular is that the FG culture says retro is cool paired with the fact that they genearlly have limited funds. How many times a week do you see a college student asking about how to build up a "fixie"? Did anyone have $ in college? Who has a ton of money under 30? Not many.

Retro also = not buying into what the big names are selling. Specialized/Trek/Cannondale are all touting high end carbon and big aluminum tubes on their midrange bikes.

I've got no problem with people wanting to have their own thing. But I find it difficult to believe that given the choice of a 531/631/853 frame vs something built like a Tarmac/Madone 9.x/Super6 someone will go with steel. (If their focus is on performance) There will be a few, but those are the people Riv is targeting.

I find the comfort card played too often. My aluminum SS bike is actually slightly more comfortable that my full carbon road bike, because the fit is slightly better. And the whole steel soaks up the road better may be true, but does not preclude an aluminum bike from doing the same, but with better power transfer.

If the main focus of street riden FG bikes was about performance and efficiency then you would see more aluminum and carbon frames. But the truth is, IMHO, FG for the street is more about fun, fashion, and utility. See the "track bars" thread if you need proof of this.

carleton

^^

Awesome post, Hiroshima. I think you hit the nail on the head.

charles vail

I regularly ride my 25 year old Raleigh Technium Aluminum and steel epoxy bonded road bike frame. Its a converted two speed freewheel bike with high carbon steel (not even chrome moly...wow!) fork and stays and the three main tubes are 6061 Aluminum. I weigh 255 pounds and I have a few thousand miles on it with no problems. Its is just a matter of time though before the Aluminum fatigues or one of the bonded joints pop but then again, a steel dropout could crack or the fork could too. I'm trying to ride it enough to cause it to fail.....hopefully I'll notice any cracks before embarking on my next ride. I have plenty of steel bikes and prefer the material for its ability to flex virtually indefinitely without cracking suddenly. I figure most of the riders on this forum are lightweights and probably will never wear out any decently constructed aluminum frame. I'd be more concerned about some of the early carbon fiber frames.
The look of slender steel tubing seems proper to me unlike most extreme oversize or hydro formed aluminum frames. Go steel!

iamthenoise

most of us here are bike lovers 1st, and concerned with the athletics of biking 2nd. to answer the OP's question:

Q: Why does it seem like you guys don't like aluminum frames for fixed/single speed bikes?

A: (quick answer: skip to the last line of this post)

It may seem that way, but its not. many people here ride aluminum frames and like them. many people ride steel and like them. both are fine, both have noticeable ride and weight qualities that probably do not factor heavily into most people's cycling lives. but we all like to know a little about what we spend our money on so we debate the things we purchase (or read on the internet, or saw happening once, etc) on a forum. many of us have legitimate performance related reasons for buying our gear, but at the end of the day, most of us factored aesthetics and the reputation of brands/items primarily into our decision to purchase.

a good example? i really liked Leader bikes when i first got into biking. very tech looking, very low priced. many experienced riders who have had leaders have similar complaints about them, especially when compared to similarly designed aluminum frames (cost aside).

the argument gets out of control here. aluminum is reportedly better for this/ that/ the other/ reasons, but leader bikes are not the same grade aluminum as the nicer bikes that give aluminum its great rep. nor are they (as reported in many threads) as well manufactured as xyz's aluminum frame.

i still think leaders arent the worst thing in the world, i DO however, think people buy them for aesthetic and price reasons over performance reasons...in other words, the illusion of a high-performance bike...


*its hard to pose a black and white question like the OP's....not all steel bikes are the same, not all aluminum frames are the same.

mkeller234

My 1990 aluminum Trek is still ticking along just fine and it is closing in on 20 years. I rode this same bike 52.4 miles last weekend and thought it was plenty comfortable too.

LupinIII

sometimes i don't get tarck stuff

i've only ridden steel, alu, and titanium. titanium is glorious.

on the one hand I see ZOMG njs track bikes with dura ace cranks and hubs and nitto drops and stems and deep section rims, and they sell for like 2k. i mean, they're nice, but I picked up my lynskey titanium bike with full Red for 2k. Looking at the welds on this bike it's hard to say the craftsmanship on an njs frame is so much more beautiful, I can see my lynsky got a lot of TLC in tennessee. the componentry on both is top notch, but the Red group is much more complex than any track group.

and then people say they have 1.2-1.5k in their pistas and pakes and then i get really confused.

Murderface

oops didnt realize i was doing some revival stuff here
clicked a link from another thread

oldfixguy

Lugs. With lugs I'm hot. Smokin'. Without lugs I'm an old guy on a kids toy. Lugs are everything. Big lugs.