Bianchigirll 

My answer used to be the early '90s when Columbus introduced the excellent Nivachrome steel tube sets. However there is still in intrest in and development of steel tubes. I also think at some point people who began riding on carbon will see the light and realize how much better their riding experience could be one a quality steel machine. I would not be surprised to see a steel renaissance in the next few years.


IMHO the big bike companies pushed carbon on everyone simply because it was cheap to produce.

Blue Belly

Don't say that out loud. Customer base doesn't like it .

Carbon bikes are certainly better in some situations. A pure sprinter can have a machine with an incredible amount of triangle stiffness at a very low weight cost. Just one example. But, the extreme silliness that has insued in some bike shapes has some of us shaking our heads & laughing. I suppose there will always be the technically & the traditional minded who take sides.

KonAaron Snake 

The 90s nivachrome is my sweet spot too...I think those bikes often get overlooked, and they have spectacular ride characteristics. I haven't ridden anything more modern/cutting edge than that...I don't know if 953 and scr are dramatic improvements.

Jarrett2

I wish I could get into the paint on those, but I can't.

gomango

I agree with this as well.

Count me in.

KonAaron Snake 

How much has steel progressed since the Nivacrhrome stuff GMG? I'd really like to try out the ultra modern SCR stuff like IAB's Cinelli, or Scooper's 953 Waterford.

gomango

Subtle differences from your Primato, maybe not so subtle from your Marnati.

I've ridden a 953 framed Waterford for a 60 mile day trip and it very nice. I could see owning one at some point.

I rode a KVA framed A Train earlier this summer and that was very nice as well. That bike was set up for gravel and again, all day performance and comfort were excellent.

I have to be honest though. I have a bunch of bikes that are excellent all day riders and the differences are very subtle between all of these bicycles. I think tires, fit and saddles make or break a bike for me more than the steel used in the frameset.

For example, I just rode my Hollands on a 90 mile ride two days ago and I ended the day feeling just fine. The Hollands is made from ELOS and it couldn't be a nicer ride for the money. I am more convinced than ever the above mentioned combination is more important to me than the material used in the frameset.

The only other intangible not mentioned often enough is the role/importance of the master builder's ability to make just the right bike for the individual's needs. They need to really listen when you are plunking down the hard earned cash.

sam_cyclist

Do you have figures on production costs?

busdriver1959

I have no idea if it's a reliable quote but I've read that that $2000 frame cost Gitrekalized about $200.

noglider 

There is a lot of demand for various geometries and tube sizes, so that's one reason builders don't use lugs any more. Lugs were made in large batches, without the ability to customize them. I believe TIG welding is a cheaper process, too. I hear it is as strong as lugged construction. It used to be that welding was weaker than lugging.

old's'cool

As an engineer, I am motivated more by technical elegance than appearance. So if a brazed (internal or external fillet) or welded joint performs as well or better, is cheaper to produce, and looks reasonable in terms of quality (no appreciable spatter, pinholes/gaps, or irregularities), it's perfectly fine with me for a utilitarian bike, which defines all the bikes in my fleet. In my continent-wide fleet about half are not lugged, but narrowing down to my home fleet and the bikes I ride myself (as opposed to "guest bikes", there is only one non-lugged frame/fork. That is of course due to the prevalence of lugs in the period covered by these bikes, i.e. mid-70s to late 80s.

brandon98

If Wraith made bikes actually sized for the over 6 foot crowd AND had some option besides gloss primer grey for the finish, I'd give 'em a look-see.

gomango

I'm on the other side of this coin.

So, Robbie may well be right. imho

I like the no nonsense approach of the color scheme.

Also, the Wraith looks great in person.

Nice attention to details and let's face it, when you put Campy Athena on anything it looks great.

Thanks for the heads up on the sizing chart though. I'm a touch over 6' and I might have to be careful with the sizing.

Here's a stock picture from Wraith.



I will likely retire quite a few of my off road bikes next spring and see if I can make it with just one other than the Niner.

I am strongly considering the Wraith Paycheck and an Elephant NFE.

rootboy 

This discussion reminds me of a similar one in the world of the bamboo fly rod makers, if you'll allow me a digression. The comparison is apropos, I think. I don't collect, or use bamboo fly rods much. By I do own a couple made by a man considered perhaps the best ever. Jim Payne. Many argue that the quality of the output of makers since the renaissance in hand made fly rods in the last 30 years is better than ever. Which is probably true.

But there is still something about the classic old rods from the great makers of the "golden era" that makes them more desirable to some folks. Many modern bamboo fly rods are fantastic. But I'd still rather own and use an old classic. Much like the difference between a modern steel frame and one from the masters of the past.

iab

I'm a heathen.

I have been using my father's rods this week and he has a collection of old and new. I'll use different rods on different streams mostly depending on the thickness of the foliage.

But on the lake going for perch and panfish, I use them all. Can't tell the difference.

Road Fan

It's my sweetest spot! This year I've focused on riding my 2005 Mondonico ELOS over my 1980-ish SL Mondonico, not to mention I crashed and burned the SL frame. But, my performance on the ELOS feels MUCH stronger than it ever did on the SL Mondo, and that was already quite good. Unfortunately I don't have a functional 531 DB frame to compare to. It does make me want to try the ones that came after ELOS, and of course 853 or 953.

Not a very C&V attitude, is it?

Last I read, 953 frames are often lighter than carbon, but don't quote me because the statement is wide enough to drive a truck through! And I don't remember where I saw it.

Superia

These look nice!!! the price on the other hand...

Airlight Steel Race Cycles ? Jaegher

noglider 

Sure! By objective measures, the new stuff is better, but there are legitimate reasons to prefer the old stuff. I'm not planning to buy a new bike any time soon, and my favorite bike is still my 1982 McLean. Sentimentality is just one reason to prefer the old, and it is totally legitimate.

mtnbke

Steel doesn't make a very good bike. There is a reason that a Taiwanese aluminum racing road bike from BikesDirect.com will completely embarrass and outperform any vintage steel Colnago, Pinarrello, Cinelli, Merckx, or what have you. There is a reason that a steel racing bike was not competitive when Klein/Cannondale changed the paradigm. An aluminum bike was lighter, stronger, and stiffer. On a road bike, or for a racing context efficiency, translating limited wattage to the road is paramount. Steel bikes typically had flexy frames and didn't have bottom bracket rigidity.

Steel bikes are a great entry point for emerging frame builders or even master frame builders to make bikes. It takes almost nothing in terms of equipment and technology to start building steel bikes. Klein and Cannondale and Bianchi used to have to rely on master aluminum welders to make bikes because it is so much more difficult to weld aluminum than to braze or TIG weld steel. This has changed with controller adjusted feeding systems, "hot-start" current technology, and computerized current control to prevent end of weld cratering. This is why Taiwan can build a better bike out of aluminum with better welds than Cannondale or Klein actually could back in the day. Cannondale and Klein had to pay a lot to get experienced and qualified master aluminum welders. This technology that eliminated most of the nightmare issues with fabricating aluminum didn't exist then.

So the "peak" of steel bikes, absolutely was '83. When Cannondale came out with the Cannondale Sport Touring bike in 1983 everything changed. Miguel Indurain was the last person to win the Tour de France on a steel bike (1993). He was the first person to win a Tour on an aluminum bike (1994). The paradigm changed and while a lot of people want to advocate that "steel is real" in reality steel is just simple and cheap to fabricate bikes with. Even a previous paradigm aluminum bike (Klein, Cannondale) will be a rocket bike compared to any steel race bike (even using modern Ox Platinum or other newer tech steel tubing). A steel bike will always be heavier, it will never climb as well, will never sprint as well, and will never be as efficient as a classic aluminum bike or modern carbon bike.

If you are talking about when steel bicycles started looking like Art bikes, where actual performance was secondary, and were being built to be beautiful like Rivendell, Velo Orange, and Soma you could say the "peak" is now I guess. Anyone owning a vintage Rene Herse would disagree, perhaps.

Jarrett2

You had me right up until this point.

Jarrett2

I find it interesting that pro racing determines what's good for the entire industry.

Can you imagine if the auto industry was like that. Soccer moms riding popping the clutch at a stop light in a Formula One car.

gomango

You've got that right.

Makes it easy to hang out on MTBR and flyfishing blogs.

Superia

Those steel bicycles from Jaegher I showed a few posts earlier only weigh 6.4kg...

Scooper

This Cinelli XCr comes in a 6.6kg ready to ride...



Bikes of the Bunch: Cinelli XCr | Cyclingtips.com

Road Fan

You mean, with pedals!