Originally Posted by
phoebeisis
SIMPLE rule for bikes components-determining "best" is SIMPLE-put them on a BALANCE/SCALE-
Aluminum is BETTER than steel in respect to the thing bike folks want- WEIGHT!
All the rest is esthetics.
CF> TITANIUM> ALUMINUM >STEEL
Steel tubes are esthetically more pleasing to "older folks"-
and to anyone who has an eye
Big fat tubes-kinda ugly-
Thin tubes-are elegant.
You can make them equally "stiff"
Steel is more elastic-in theory-it could mean a more compliant ride-but the tires-volume pressure-have MUCH more effect on ride quality
So if you don't mind fat ugly tubes-aluminum or CF is "best"
Titanium-just view it as expensive lighter harder to work with steel-tubes almost as thin
Steel is for old cranks who like its look-the others are "better"- for bikes-LIGHTER is better-Lance doesn't ride a STEEL bike-good reason for that)
.I like steel frames(esthetic)-they are more dent resistant-if you avoid the really thin 1970's 531 tubing(had one-I could literally deflect it with my thumb fingers)-it would spring back but I sure as heck can't do that with my 853 MTB bike(but I'm old now...)
CF TITANIUM ALUMINUM STEEL in order of goodness by things that can be measured-starting with WEIGHT!
Want to know the best bike components-weigh them-Across all lines- just weigh them-the lighter "stuff" gets top drawer finishing and materials-
You're basing all of these on a set of assumptions not necessarily shared by all other cyclists.
Steel is repairable and more resistant to damage than the other materials commonly used on bike frames. Have I seen steel frames fail? Absolutely. Most often at a joint, where the builder might have been more at fault than the material. Have I seen steel break mid-tube? Yes, but not often. I have seen a lot of broken Al frames, and a lot of broken CF frames about 8 to ten years ago, ie, my "shop" days.
Steel tends to fail in a more predicatable way.... yes, there are exceptions, but often, steel bends or folds a bit without totally failing immediately. CF and Al can fail totally with little or no warning. CF is a hazard once scratched. All metal frames may be a hazard once dented, but steel less so than Al, plus steel resists dents better than Al in most cases. Ti fails too, and from what I've read, it fails pretty frequently when the number of ti frames in circulation as compared to steel and Al is considered. Steel, Al, and CF are not easily repaired. Steel is, although admittedly, most damaged steel frames never receive repair, even when it's possible.
If youre a competitive racing cyclist, steer clear of steel. If you're a practical, ride-to-work, ride-to-play kind of cyclist, steel may well be your best bet, even without taking aesthetics into account. I started out on steel as a kid, and when I returned to cycling in the 90s, I was soooo stoked about Al frames. I only owned 2 of those before the excitement turned to disappointment. The frames didn't fail, but they got some nice dings in 'em without any notable abuse or crashes. No thank you.