Originally Posted by
unterhausen
Just for reference, typical high end steels like Columbus Niobium have ultimate tensile strengths of 160,000 to 180,000 psi, so high carbon steel is what I would consider low-end steel. Most production 4130 bikes are heavier and stiffer than a lot of riders really like. A bike frame made out of high carbon steel is 5-10% heavier, and thus stiffer, but it isn't really different in any way that is of consequence to a rider. To me, ranking steels in that category seems a little pointless. To anyone that's not making thousands of frames a year, the difference in price is inconsequential.
So really high carbon steel is only approaching the lower quality chromoly type steels but a big improvement on lower end high tensile steel used in frames that came before it? 50% improvement maybe. I realise we aren't talking high end frames here but still if there has been an improvement in budget steel frames, it's nice to know meaning the budget steel frames aren't as bad as they used to be, a bit lighter a bit more competitive.
Would that be fair to say or are there other factors of importance?
If you were buying a bike one with a conventional high tensile steel frame (low carbon) and another with a high carbon steel frame everything else being equal it makes sense to buy the high carbon steel frame bike? Everything else being equal you would expect the high carbon steel frame bike to be lighter.
If so it makes steel more competitive again with aluminium because the pricing of high carbon steel is still very competitive and below that of aluminium it seems for budget bikes so allows some small improvements elsewhere in a bicycle, drivetrain etc. It would also explain why many low cost Chinese bicycle manufacturers are pushing high carbon steel as something better.