Originally Posted by bkrownd
The part where the condition of a frame 20-30-40-50 years from now is presented as if it's somehow a valid issue in the "frame wars". Its a bogus arguement, because the frame is long beyond its intended lifetime by then.
Gee, that seems pretty similiar to what I wrote above:
Originally Posted by bookishboy
1. Are you a competitive racer? If yes, then weight is probably more important than long-term durability.
2. Are you trying to plan for your bike frame to be useable in 20, 30 years or more? If yes, then steel is probably your better bet. If not, then it's all up to personal preference.
It is a valid issue in the "frame wars" if you specifically intend to buy a bike that can last, and last, and last. One which may not only service you, but your children or nieces/nephews a full generation from now.
Did you even read what I wrote before laying into me with hyperbole about ridiculous arguments, your Chewbacca Defense, and being a moron if someone is interested in an older bike?
I'm also not certain that we can infer an intended product lifespan, when both steel and aluminum Swifts are sold with a lifetime frame warrantee.