Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

Any reason for high-ten?

Notices
Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

Any reason for high-ten?

Old 03-06-15, 12:17 PM
  #1  
willydstyle
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 654
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Any reason for high-ten?

Is there any purpose for which high-ten or high-carbon frames are better suited than cromoly?
willydstyle is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 12:21 PM
  #2  
randyjawa 
Senior Member
 
randyjawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada - burrrrr!
Posts: 9,544

Bikes: 1958 Rabeneick 120D, 1968 Legnano Gran Premio, Rocky Mountain Cardiac

Mentioned: 165 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 721 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 178 Times in 135 Posts
Of course there are situations where high ten or high-carbon would be better. If commuting or errand running or low lever exercise/recreation is your goal, then high ten or high carbon would be perfectly adequate and at prices the average guy, or gal, won't bock at.

If high level performance or ride quality is the issue, then one might be better off seeking a more exotic tubing set, providing that geometry and componentry compliment the rider's intentions.
__________________
"98% of the bikes I buy are projects". Learn how to find, restore and maintain vintage road bicycles at... MY "TEN SPEEDS"
randyjawa is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 12:24 PM
  #3  
Wilfred Laurier
Seor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 4,998
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 619 Post(s)
Liked 247 Times in 179 Posts
If you want a stiffer bike made from steel (like for a loaded tourer or cargo bike), thicker walled tubes are generally used, and then the higher strength of the more expensive steels is not necessary.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 12:32 PM
  #4  
Bandera 
~>~
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: TX Hill Country
Posts: 5,936
Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1111 Post(s)
Liked 148 Times in 97 Posts
Originally Posted by willydstyle View Post
Is there any purpose for which high-ten or high-carbon frames are better suited than cromoly?
The ubiquitous British 3 speeds of the "For the Love Of" thread are hi-ten.
Remarkably durable, inexpensive and pleasant to ride in village or town, accept no substitute.

-Bandera
__________________
'74 Raleigh Internat'l. '77 Trek TX900 FG. '90 Vitus 979. '10 Merckx EMX3. '13 Soma Stanyan
Bandera is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 12:39 PM
  #5  
Darth Lefty 
Disco Infiltrator
 
Darth Lefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 10,531

Bikes: Schwinn Paramount, Salsa Timberjack, Diamondback Expert TG, Burley Samba

Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1843 Post(s)
Liked 391 Times in 266 Posts
You will burn more calories
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Darth Lefty is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 12:43 PM
  #6  
Henry III 
is just a real cool dude
 
Henry III's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Thumb, MI
Posts: 3,162
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
When a high five just won't cut it.



You have to break out the big guns. The High Ten.



Oh wait your asking about frame tubing. It's more...economical and sounds better then saying your bike is made from fence posts.
Henry III is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 12:44 PM
  #7  
tricky
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Upper Left, USA
Posts: 1,090
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked 44 Times in 38 Posts
Beater bike. Another plus for cheap tube bikes is that there is a lot of overlap in bike boom hi-ten frames with no derailleur hanger or cable stops. Could be useful if a clean looking SS is what you are after.
tricky is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 12:59 PM
  #8  
yipyipyip
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 77
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
They're cheaper and don't ding as easily as thinner tubes. Perfect for beaters and city bikes. I have a hi-ten fixed-gear and it's lovely. Indestructible, low-maintenance, fun to ride.
yipyipyip is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 12:59 PM
  #9  
oddjob2
Still learning
 
oddjob2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: North of Canada, Adirondacks, NNJ
Posts: 11,580

Bikes: Too many

Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 829 Post(s)
Liked 19 Times in 11 Posts
How else would Wallyworld differentiate there BSOs?

Industrial bikes, like a Worksman, perhaps the last USA made mass production bikes.
oddjob2 is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 01:08 PM
  #10  
3alarmer
******
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,010

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 253 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16819 Post(s)
Liked 829 Times in 653 Posts
Originally Posted by Wilfred Laurier View Post
If you want a stiffer bike made from steel (like for a loaded tourer or cargo bike), thicker walled tubes are generally used, and then the higher strength of the more expensive steels is not necessary.
...this ^^^ is also my understanding. The whole point of the more exotic alloy steels is to draw them thinner to save some weight, possibly to make the frame more lively.
3alarmer is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 01:09 PM
  #11  
JohnDThompson 
Old fart
 
JohnDThompson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 21,107

Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.

Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1989 Post(s)
Liked 331 Times in 239 Posts
Originally Posted by willydstyle View Post
Is there any purpose for which high-ten or high-carbon frames are better suited than cromoly?
When cost is a defining characteristic, high-ten/high carbon steel can save a few bucks per frame.
JohnDThompson is online now  
Old 03-06-15, 01:31 PM
  #12  
qclabrat
Senior Member
 
qclabrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,185
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Liked 41 Times in 37 Posts
I can understand main tubesets and but can the stays and fork tubes be drawn thin enough to make a significant weight difference?

About 2 years ago when may wife and I were still "going out", we each bought entry his/her mtbs

her's was a Trek with cromo mains with hi-ten fork and stays, mine on the other hand was all cromo (Fisher)

The bike were the same size but the Fisher was much lighter by at least 3 pounds. I always thought it was mostly weight of lighter parts

how much less could you shave off btwn the two frames, I never stripped them to compare, one is overseas now, so no way to test
qclabrat is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 01:36 PM
  #13  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,365

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6983 Post(s)
Liked 354 Times in 272 Posts
High tensile steel alloys are not high carbon ' Most steel contains less than 0.35 percent carbon. To put this in perspective, keep in mind that's 35/100 of 1 percent.'
fietsbob is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 02:20 PM
  #14  
CroMo Mike 
Senior Member
 
CroMo Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Richmond, Virginia
Posts: 1,257

Bikes: Listed in my signature.

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
I always assumed the Hi-Ten label was there to let us know that the tubes were at least better than (something else, maybe low-ten, or maybe cast iron).
__________________
My C&V Bikes:
1972 Bottecchia Professional, 1987 Bottecchia Team C-Record, 1982 Colnago Super,
1995 Bianchi Campione d'Italia, 1995 DeBernardi Thron Super Record,
1985 Fuji Team (On loan to me)

CroMo Mike is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 02:43 PM
  #15  
noglider 
aka Tom Reingold
 
noglider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: High Falls, NY, USA
Posts: 38,575

Bikes: 1962 Rudge Sports, 1971 Raleigh Super Course, 1971 Raleigh Pro Track, 1974 Raleigh International, 1975 Viscount Fixie, 1982 McLean, 1996 Lemond (Ti), 2002 Burley Zydeco tandem

Mentioned: 464 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6197 Post(s)
Liked 702 Times in 469 Posts
Originally Posted by CroMo Mike View Post
I always assumed the Hi-Ten label was there to let us know that the tubes were at least better than (something else, maybe low-ten, or maybe cast iron).
Hi-Ten is short for high tensile strength steel. High is a relative word. It is highly strong as compared with something else, but what? Jello, I suppose. Basically, high means low, since there is no basis for comparison.
__________________
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog

When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments. Elizabeth West, US author

Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
noglider is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 02:46 PM
  #16  
3alarmer
******
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,010

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 253 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16819 Post(s)
Liked 829 Times in 653 Posts
Originally Posted by qclabrat View Post
I can understand main tubesets and but can the stays and fork tubes be drawn thin enough to make a significant weight difference?

About 2 years ago when may wife and I were still "going out", we each bought entry his/her mtbs

her's was a Trek with cromo mains with hi-ten fork and stays, mine on the other hand was all cromo (Fisher)



The bike were the same size but the Fisher was much lighter by at least 3 pounds. I always thought it was mostly weight of lighter parts

how much less could you shave off btwn the two frames, I never stripped them to compare, one is overseas now, so no way to test

....better alloy steel tubing is drawn to these specs. ^^^



...This ^^^ was the only example that came up on a Google search for Hi ten tubing thickness. I don't think they bother to butt the stays, so for the stay thicknesses, use the 1.2 figure.


There's a noticeable weight difference in bare frames made from the different materials, stripped and held in the hand. Really, there is. and most of the Hi ten you run into is not butted at all.
3alarmer is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 03:03 PM
  #17  
eschlwc
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: on the beach
Posts: 4,859

Bikes: '73 falcon sr, '76 grand record, '84 davidson

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
it's a little heavy. it can still make for a decent bike.

eschlwc is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 03:26 PM
  #18  
dddd
Ride, Wrench, Swap, Race
 
dddd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 7,046

Bikes: Cheltenham-Pederson racer, Boulder F/S Paris-Roubaix, Varsity racer, '52 Christophe, '62 Continental, '92 Merckx, '75 Limongi, '76 Presto, '72 Gitane SC, '71 Schwinn SS, etc.

Mentioned: 95 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 726 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 155 Times in 118 Posts
Originally Posted by fietsbob View Post
High tensile steel alloys are not high carbon ' Most steel contains less than 0.35 percent carbon. To put this in perspective, keep in mind that's 35/100 of 1 percent.'
Yes, good point. ^

I am remembering these details from my time in engineering school at NC State:

A seemingly very small percentage of carbon or alloying elements can go a looong way in altering iron's structure.

"High carbon" might designate a hardened steel where parts are roasted at high temperature while buried in carbon powder, as with bearing cones.

Tubing, otoh, is cold-worked to some degree during manufacture, so too much carbon or alloying elements will reduce the metal's ductility, preventing as much cold-work processing (such as butting , thinning, bulging, ovalizing, crimping and flaring) from being done.

Smaller/finer grain structure (smaller crystals with smaller slip planes) defines hardness, tensile strength and fatigue resistance characteristics, and can be achieved in several ways:

1) Faster cooling causes crystals to initiate in a much greater number of locations within the metal, so crystals grow only to much smaller sizes during cooling before reaching the boundaries of neighboring growing crystals. Contrarily, slower cooling grows fewer but larger crystals. Large crystals are softer, and their larger slip planes generate higher fatigue stresses at their boundaries.

2) Carbon molecules interrupt the growth of crystal slip planes during cooling, so these slip planes are smaller and cold-working potential is limited by the resulting reductions of yield (slip) along these crystal planes.

3) Alloying elements help to better disperse any given amount of carbon into a greater number of sites, and produces much better strength characteristics versus larger nodules of carbon dispersed in plain iron (as in nodular iron). Alloying elements themselves can also interrupt the growth of crystal slip planes, which of course also limits the metal's ductility (the amount of cold-work deformity permissible before ruptures are initiated).

Cold-forging physically crunches down the larger iron crystals in steel while maintaining a very high level of 3D compressive force that inhibits the formation of voids/occlusions in the resulting finer-grained structure. The reduction in size of "slippery planes" makes for a more interlocked series of structures which resist slip movement and thus reduce yield and fatigue tendencies under service conditions.

Growth and presence of large crystals in metals is the enemy of high hardness, tensile strength and yield strength, but does allow for a greater degree and larger number of post-cooling cold-work processes as is needed to cold-draw and mandrel-work the metal into useful shapes. The cold work processes themselves then reduce crystal size and thus increase hardness and strength.

"Directional grain" resulting from forging/coldworking does not imply long, continuous crystals, but rather a directional pattern to the now-smaller crystals, which can enhance or detract from directional strength variations in the metal.
dddd is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 03:27 PM
  #19  
dddd
Ride, Wrench, Swap, Race
 
dddd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 7,046

Bikes: Cheltenham-Pederson racer, Boulder F/S Paris-Roubaix, Varsity racer, '52 Christophe, '62 Continental, '92 Merckx, '75 Limongi, '76 Presto, '72 Gitane SC, '71 Schwinn SS, etc.

Mentioned: 95 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 726 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 155 Times in 118 Posts
Originally Posted by eschlwc View Post
it's a little heavy. it can still make for a decent bike.


AMEN to that!
dddd is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 03:32 PM
  #20  
ThermionicScott 
7-speed cultist
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 19,875

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2681 Post(s)
Liked 553 Times in 399 Posts
That "road-hugging weight" smooths the ride.
__________________
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 03:52 PM
  #21  
Cougrrcj 
Over forty victim of Fate
 
Cougrrcj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 3,227

Bikes: A few...

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 55 Posts
Not all Hi-Ten bikes are heavy. Case in point is my trusty '75 Fuji S-10S. At 26.1 pounds for a 23" frame bike, it was relatively light in its day. This in the era of 35- to 40-pound boom bikes like the Schwinn Continental/Suburban or typical department store bikes. A real high-end 'lightweight' back then was 21-22 pounds.

What 'real' weight savings is there in the frame/fork between hi-ten and the more exotic butted steel tubing? Maybe three pounds at most, probably closer to two pounds. The rest is components. Ten years later, the mid-grade Miyata 'Semi-pro' series 310/710/910 was still 24-25 pounds and they had double-butted CrMo...
__________________
'75 Fuji S-10S bought new, 52k+ miles and still going!
'84 Univega Gran Tourismo
'84 Univega Viva Sport
'86 Miyata 710
'90 Schwinn Woodlands
Huffy MTB - for trips to corner store
Unknown brand MTB of questionable lineage aka 'Mutt Trail Bike'
Plus or minus a few others from time-to-time
Cougrrcj is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 04:20 PM
  #22  
Lascauxcaveman 
Senior Member
 
Lascauxcaveman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Posts: 7,551

Bikes: A green one, "Ragleigh," or something.

Mentioned: 173 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1436 Post(s)
Liked 162 Times in 111 Posts
All these answers you all giving are about why high-ten is quite often acceptable, the OP was asking about situations where high-ten would be better. Apart from the stiffness-due-to-tube-wall-thickness one, I don't think any of your answers satisfy the OPs question. And even then, you could, if you really wanted to, make thicker walled tubing out of cro-mo*, so even then, hi-ten is not really any better.

[/troll]

*and yes, I realize one the advantages of cro-mo is you can make thinner tubing from it, thereby saving weight.
__________________
● 1971 Grandis SL ● 1972 Lambert Grand Prix frankenbike ● 1972 Raleigh Super Course fixie ● 1973 Nishiki Semi-Pro ● 1980 Apollo "Legnano" ● ● 1984 Nishiki Landau ● 1984 Peugeot Vagabond ● 1985 Shogun Prairie Breaker ● 1986 Univega Nuovo Sport ● 1986 Merckx Super Corsa ● 1987 Schwinn Tempo ● 1988 Schwinn Voyageur ● 1989 Trek 400 ● 1989 Bottechia Team ADR replica ● 1990 Cannondale ST600 ● 1993 Technium RT600 ● 1996 Kona Lava Dome ●
Lascauxcaveman is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 04:44 PM
  #23  
Cougrrcj 
Over forty victim of Fate
 
Cougrrcj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 3,227

Bikes: A few...

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 55 Posts
OK, Lighter doesn't always mean better. I like the way the S-10S soaks up the bumps in the road, making for a smooth ride. Good enough? Of course that may also be the long-ish wheelbase... Happy now?
__________________
'75 Fuji S-10S bought new, 52k+ miles and still going!
'84 Univega Gran Tourismo
'84 Univega Viva Sport
'86 Miyata 710
'90 Schwinn Woodlands
Huffy MTB - for trips to corner store
Unknown brand MTB of questionable lineage aka 'Mutt Trail Bike'
Plus or minus a few others from time-to-time
Cougrrcj is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 04:58 PM
  #24  
willydstyle
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 654
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Lascauxcaveman View Post
All these answers you all giving are about why high-ten is quite often acceptable, the OP was asking about situations where high-ten would be better. Apart from the stiffness-due-to-tube-wall-thickness one, I don't think any of your answers satisfy the OPs question. And even then, you could, if you really wanted to, make thicker walled tubing out of cro-mo*, so even then, hi-ten is not really any better.

[/troll]

*and yes, I realize one the advantages of cro-mo is you can make thinner tubing from it, thereby saving weight.
Yes, this was exactly what I was asking.
willydstyle is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 05:12 PM
  #25  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,634

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 959 Post(s)
Liked 76 Times in 70 Posts
High-ten was cheaper. It was mainly featured on low-priced bikes. CrMo is today seen as cheep, but back in the '60's until lately it was a more premium product. Also being stronger it allowed thinner tubing walls which in turn allowed a better-riding frame, which was a usually marketed as a feature of more costly frames that were built up with better parts.

It doesn't make too much sense to evaluate high-ten against the best that is or was out there. But from a product design point of view (utility, durability, performance AND cost) it could make a superior product at a price point. I believe if Raleigh for example could have beaten the Paramount product offerings using high-ten, they would have tried to.

Another example: the top Lexus sports car (FFS?) is carbon fiber. Is it a better material than steel? Yes, it has some properties that offer better performance than steel. Is it always a better choice for Toyota to make a car? No, because for any other car in the Toyota stable, price is a significant concern. And that constraint rules out carbon fiber. But it's hard to argue that steel is inherently better than C for a performance or racing car body.
Road Fan is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.