persona

Hi ..

I've been chatting with a friend about touring, and he told me that a steel bike would be better over an aluminium bike for touring.

I know that a steel one is stronger although it's heavier. Strength would be advantageous especially when touring, since should a frame crack, a steel one would be easier to weld back, compared to aluminium. He told me that chances are, an aluminium one would probably give way under stress when heavily loaded.

His side of the story has some grounds to it, but then again, I personally feel that with modern technology and manufacturing, aluminium bikes should be just as strong, be it for offroad use or perhaps touring use.

After searching, it seems to me that the more popular bike for touring would be a Trek 520, amongst others. And it happens to be a cro-mo bike.

What are your take on this? I presently own a 01 GT Aggressor 3.0 which I intend to use for short touring, not in excess of 2 weeks. Would I be able to use it, or am I better off looking for a sturdier frame? I've just noticed that the chainstay seems kind of short, but I think I'll try to fix that later.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks for reading.

Juha

I have done several short tours (max 1 week) on my aluminium frame Nishiki hybrid. No problems whatsoever, and some of these tours have been totally self-supported camping trips with (way too) much gear on bike. I need to learn to leave at least some of the useless junk at home!

I have also towed a kayak trailer some 150kms now with the same bike. I am planning a two week combined kayak-bike tour for next summer, and have no reason not to use the same bike.

Your friend is correct in stating that a cracked alu frame will be more difficult to repair, so if you tour in remote places that might be a point. Other than that I would just get a sturdy frame that fits me well and can be equipped with fenders, racks etc. and not worry about it too much. Try short trips with the Aggressor and see if you like the way it rides.

--J

sat_cycle

true, the trek 520 is steel, but Cannondale's touring bikes are aluminum and many people do loaded touring without problems on them also.

I think that in the big scheme of things, the argument that if your bike breaks, you want it to be steel so you can get it welded is not very practical. If you are touring you will mostly likely make a splint with hardware and pipe clamps, etc, and worry about getting it welded when you finish your tour . . . at least that's what I would do

late

Most towns have a machine shop where you can get a frame welded.
But it's not really an issue except in the 3rd world. You can overnight
a frame in the developed world. But you don't want to be in the middle of Mongolia with a busted frame. You might not live to talk about it. Which brings up a question I have. Why do people go to such places? After a day of riding in Italy, for example, you can sit in a pleasant restaurant and have a great meal. Sleep in good bed. Have real espresso in the morning. Enjoy a very nice country, heck, you can even get a custom bike. I think that's my definition of cycling heaven.

librarian

Over the 30 years that I have been touring I have had 2 steel (Fuji Touring, Lotus Touring) and 2 aluminum (Cannnondale St400, Giant OCR Touring which I am putting together as we speak).

I like the stiffness of the aluminum plus the fact that I think it propertys of aluminum dampen out shocks better.

Years ago when aluminum became popular they used to say " beat on a steel pan then beat on a aluminum one, you can feel how aluminum dampens out the vibrations." It made sense to me and that's why I bought my Cannondale.

After crossing the USA and several other loaded tours, I feel that at least for me, I made the right frame decision.

gregw

Steel framed bikes are an excellent choice for touring, but not for many of the reasons your friend gave you.

"I know that a steel one is stronger although it's heavier" Not really correct, a bike frame is as strong as it's design, and weight is not as big an issue on a bike you intend to load down with stuff anyway.


"since should a frame crack, a steel one would be easier to weld back, compared to aluminium. " Myth also, try to weld thin wall steel frame with an electric stick welder or even a general purpose wire fed welder, you will burn a hole right through it. Though this is not really a problem because frame failures are very rare.

"I personally feel that with modern technology and manufacturing, aluminium bikes should be just as strong, be it for offroad use or perhaps touring use." Your feelings are correct.

I'm not saying to not go with a steel frame, just don't do it for the wrong reasons. The best reason to go with a steel frame is there are more choices in steel frame touring bikes than aluminum.

I would also beg to differ on the usual folklore on shifters and brakes, but that's another issue.
FWIW Greg

KrisPistofferson

I can see their being plenty of positives for touring with aluminum. I personally prefer steel, but only for reasons irrelevant to their metallurgical properties. I know I haven't come across a steel frame yet that could climb like aluminum, and one certainly has to bust a lot of hills when touring! The old "finding a welder" anecdote is only really applicable in the third world, as someone else pointed out. Also, people who are predisosed to hate on aluminum refuse to acknowledge the difference between cheapo and high end aluminum frames, as well as the fact that reputable frame manufacturers have teams of lawyers and engineers that don't make "crack'n'fail" frames!

Shifty

Pistoferson sums up the discussion very well, I'd just add that you need to try lots of bikes before you select the one for you. The range of options are wide, you just need to find the bike you find comfortable and affordable. Don't be afraid to ask your bike shop to load up a bike for a test ride, the shop I bought from had sand bags in the shop that they used for this purpose. If you find a shop that will do this, and has a great selection, you'd have a real advantage. If no one is set up to give this type of test ride, think about putting together a setup, and take it with you to the shops.
One last thing, Cannondale has been making touring bikes since the mid 1980's, that's a lot of experience I'd say. You know they have seen the failures and have made needed adjustments.

jeff williams

Well that's more cycling than I've done, and you have both types of frame material so...I'm left holding my hat.

Miles2go

Hello persona

I did some quick searches on your bike since I wasn't familiar with it. It seems a common thread is that it has some component issues and if that's true it would be a dependability concern. Here is some of what I found:

Some reviews of your bike

While you can tour on just about any bike, you'd probably enjoy something that's more touring specific unless it's off road touring you are thinking of. A trailer such as the BOB Yak is something you might want to consider if you stick with what you have. This negates heel clearance issues you'd face with panniers. My wife and I toured the Katy Trail pulling Yaks with our front suspended mountain bikes and the set up worked great. This works on the road too with the right tires. Trailers vs. panniers is a whole other argument that again comes down to personal preference.

As to steel or something else...

One of my favorite thoughts is "To each their own." I'm not about to beat you over the head with what I happen to be riding or using.

Unfortunately there *are* people that don't seem happy unless they are waving some kind of flag high in someone else's face. I'm not saying that all people lamenting of the properties of steel are caught in up in a fad. We come to like what we like but each frame material has it's advantages. My point for you not to be distracted by some of the more forceful flag wavers. If someone seems overly polarized toward one thing or another how objective can they be? It's best just to chuckle at this behavior and do your own field testing.

Personally, I've logged over 80K miles on lugged steel. Yep, no exaggeration though I wish those were mostly touring miles rather than road racing miles. Anyway, I have plenty of experience on Steel, Ti, Carbon and Alu and here's my advice...

Sit down and really think about what kind of touring you are going to be doing during the ownership of this touring bike. Once you get that figured out, don't buy something that's "too nice" for you to feel comfortable having it in that role. There's something to be said for riding a low key bike that you won't mind getting scratched and beat up to some degree. This is especially true if you want to lock it up where you can for a walk around town or an hour long hike to the water fall, etc. In this regard, I see a lot of value in a tourer such as the one "Regular Guy" has built up (found in another thread).

As far as frame materials go, *for me* there is little value in any of the arguments for or against one or the other. Find the bike that fits you well, including your needs and *ride it*. Touring should be about the people you meet, the places you go, the difficulties you overcome and so on... not what material your frame is made of.

Best of luck to ya!

Ron
Utah...for now.
Jasper, Banff, Calgary & Edmonton this July.

jeff williams

I had a look at the mtbreview..not all good. The frame is considered fine-
the drive and wheels not.
It's an entry offroad bike that won't stand much off-roading without major upgrading from the sounds of it.

I think the geometry is wrong for touring...too upright.

"Would I be able to use it, or am I better off looking for a sturdier frame?"

Yes, but I think a 'road' oriented frame would work better, and maybe a solid fork with the braze-ons for front panniers?

"I've just noticed that the chainstay seems kind of short, but I think I'll try to fix that later."

How are you going to alter the chainstay length? You have tubing and weld aluminium?

On the good side, the frame is probably going to last, has a comfortable geometry, a nice bike to take to the lake\light trail and ride around.
I don't mean to say 'woah, bad ride' just you may be trying to do something that bike is not intended to do.
Also on a tour would be a lousy time to have drive components start acting up.

bkrownd

"give way under stress when heavily loaded"? What are you going to load it with - an elephant? This is metal people, not plastic - it's strong stuff. Your wheels will "give way" long before the frame does. As for frames cracking, I'm not sure why that would happen on the road other than a manufacturing defect or major collision. Welding a broken frame...it hardly seems worth it unless it's a custom frame.

MichaelW

If you have a bike and you want to tour for 2 weeks, then use whatever you have. People have toured on every kid of bike. I have toured on cheapo hire bikes. If you were preparing for a big expedition then that is another matter altogether.
You can get good, proven touring bikes in Al (Cannondale, Koga Myata). One of the reasons that steel is used, apart from being an excellent material, it that it is easier to knock up in a small workshop. Besides offering custom geometry, you can also specify exactly how you want your braze-ons, cable runs and other stuff attached to the frame. I had a dynamo mount brazed onto my seatstay, not a option with any Al frame.

Miles2go

I thought I'd write once more to give you a couple of links to share with your buddy.

Yes, if it were me having a budget of say $xxx.xx for a used touring bike and I found two that fit my desires perfectly, one AL and one Steel, I'd *probably* go for the steel bike if all else were equal.

That said, I'd tour the world on aluminum and wouldn't worry about it. Alu bikes can usually be found cheaper and I'd rather spend the difference on a good tent and other gear.

For the record: I'm on a steel touring bike and my wife is on aluminum. My preference is for 26" wheels and that's what brought me to owning these bikes. 26" or 700C is another "argument" where the saying, to each their own, works very well.

Anyway, there are countless travel logs on the net by expedition like tourers that just happen to ride aluminum bikes.

Here's a link to the journals of a guy that won a low to mid-range Alu hybrid and toured all over with it. He now rides an Alu recumbent.
Out there on Alu

Here's a link to the journals of a guy that's been riding his 97 Cannondale for long time. I wouldn't be surprised if Mark has put over 40K miles on his bike. He also has a neat camera rig.
Out there on Alu 2

So "Aluminum bike for touring???"...Certainly.

Ron
Utah...for now.
Jasper, Banff, Calgary & Edmonton this July.

jamawani 

I've probably got close to 100,000 miles on my aluminum Trek 8000 - model year 1988 - and it hasn't ever given me problem one - plus I've done some extreme rough roads in the backcountry and in the far north. When I'm on steel nowadays it feels like spaghetti.

Best - J

persona

Hi everyone.

Thanks for the cool replies.

Miles2go ->
Perhaps I didn't state my specs clearly. ;p The frame is a 2001 GT Aggressor 3.0 Only the frame is stock. I've probably changed everything else which can be changed. Don't ask my why I didn't change the frame. Long story. ;p XTR drivetrain, XT hubs, Avid mech disc brakes, RS SID Race. Mavic X517 rims. Not too sure if the rims would hold out though. I've for a set of rhynolites with non-disc deore hubs which I can probably use, but that'll mean swapping the disc brakes out in favour of V-brakes. Then again, maybe if I were to rebuild the wheels with more crosses, it MAY just work.

I live in Singapore. Problem is, I've not seen any LBS bringing in YAKS, or trailers for that matter. Appears that touring isn't a very "IN" thing. I don't think I can afford to import a Yak, so panniers will have to do.

The touring I plan to do would be road. Cycle northwords thru Malaysia. Should be pretty decent and civilized, so I'm not very worried.

jeff williams ->
If I were to look for a sturdier frame, chances are, it would be another cross country oriented frame, only that it'll probably be sturdier, eastern tubing probably, gussets where needed ... blah blah. I'm not sure if I'll be doing any more tours after this one, so a MTB would probably go a longer way.

Oh, I don't think I'll alter the chainstay length. Don't think I can anyway. ;p It's either a new frame for me, or "try" to shift the panniers a little further back, if possible. Either that, or try to fix them on higher, to avoid my feet. Only issue I foresee is that if I have the bags / panniers higher or further back, I believe it will affect the overall balance of the bike, although it may be slight.

the homealien

Sounds fun. If you pass through Batu Pahat, say hello to the Puthuval family.

halfspeed

Most discussions/arguments about frame materials on sites like this are so full of BS, folklore, baseless prejudice, and useless anecdotes that you are unlikely to get anywhere near accurate information. Do some googling for serious articles from serious people with the appropriate frame building and materials engineering background.

If you're not interested in that level of technical detail, then test ride some =bikes= and remember that a material is only part of what makes a frame and a frame is only part of what makes a bike.

markwebb

Actually it's quite the opposite - an aluminum frame shakes you up a lot more than steel. With aluminum you NEED a carbon seat post and carbon fork and even carbon stays to smooth out the ride. There is a lot of effort in the industry to offer and provide solutions to the harsh ride characteristics of aluminum compared to other frame materials.

Aluminum frames are a lot cheaper to make than a steel frame, hence their popularity. They are more profitable for bike companies, which is why they are so readily available. They can be cranked out in huge volumes from cheap labor factories in the far east. That's why there are so many aluminum frames. If steel was as cheap to produce you would see more steel frames.

Weight is not that big an issue unless you are racing. I can lose 2 pounds out of my body frame and not worry about 2 pounds on my bike frame. And if you're doing loaded extended tours, the weight of the frame is sorta inconsequential compared to your body weight and your load weight in panniers and such.

gregw

This quote and reply illustrate halfspeeds post perfectly!! Both are completely wrong.

SteelCommuter

It's at the point where these questions simply provoke the same rehearsed answers, received opinions, and a few sensible comments. I'd guess this discussion has been responded to in this forum a billion times, give or take a few.

@persona, OP: I know you didn't mean anything, but look at what you did This topic has been beaten to death. Just look at the forum history if you want to hear all the same stuff. A search is easy, and it will reduce redundant topics.

@Halfspeed: I think bikeforums should have a feature where whenever a thread begins with this question (or carbon, etc.) your post is automatically attached.

You can make any of these frame materials have the properties you want for a touring frame. Just get a touring frame.

USAZorro

It's a proven fact. Aluminum bikes are uglier than steel.







It's a joke - even though the statement matches my aesthetic.

I love to see other people on aluminum bikes - it makes the next used steel bike I buy less expensive.