Cyccommute says:

Cyccomute, I happen to own four bicycles. One of them is the Trek 7.5FX. If it's heavier than the oldest chromoly steel bike that I have, I most certainly can't detect it! However, I'm a fairly strong guy and sometimes I have trouble distiguishing between feather weights. Besides, as men, if were not racing, what do we care about an extra pound or two! What we should really be concern about, is our overall investment, and whether we'll be able to cycle a decade from now when the economy might be in even worse shape. Sure, an aluminum bike might feel light and look shiny today. However, its lively service may very well begin to subside and begin to weigh heavily upon our minds as time transpires. Heaven forbid, if we should experience any medium impactive forces upon our aluminum frames. Aluminum tends not to be too forgiving, you know. No major bicycle manufacturer is going to honor any frame warranty where its obvious that the frame was involved in an accident. As a matter of fact, if you read most bicycle warranties, most are not worth the paper they're written upon.

BTW..How do you know that the Atwood weighs so much more than the 7.2FX? ...The Atwood's weight is not published. To say that's it's so much heavier without any evidence whatsoever, I think, would seem to be, just a tad disingenuous.

Nobody's saying anything about ticking time bombs...That's you, attempting to put words in my mouth! However what I am saying, is that the mere use of your aluminum bicycle, each time you use it, brings it closer to its point of failure, due to its already proven limited stress threshold. Aluminum has a short fatigue life. That's just a scientific fact that we simply cannot ignore! It's like a conventional American marriage! Young handsome man meets young beautiful woman. They get married, grow old together, and eventually die!- That's you with your aluminum.

OTOH - I marry an extermely gorgeous and beautiful woman who has special DNA. She simply gets better with time. She does not and cannot age! Time, simply doesn't affect her! I never feel inclined to cheat, because to me, she's just as beautiful thirty years after our marriage, as she was the very day that I first married her. That's me with steel!


Yes, steel bikes do break! However, they almost always break at the joints where they can be welded back together again. That's easy with steel. It's not so easy and reliable afterwards, with aluminum. Also, when those cracks and points of breakage do occur with aluminum, as a result of impact, that breakage can occur anywhere, because aluminum is more highly susceptible to random stress point failure.

Who said anything about aluminum exploding? That's not what aluminum does! Aluminum snaps! It breaks! I know. I've heard it snap before and I can assure you, it's not a very pleasant sound.

Have you been smoking again or something? ...Where'd you get that from?...I never said that!!!


Yes, I know! Now this is one issue that needs to be seriously addressed. I personally, would like to see more chromoly steel frames in MTN biking. As a matter of fact, most freeriding MTN bikers would prefer chromoly to aluminum, just like most BMX cyclists. In fact, most successful, dirt jumping, freeriding MTN bikers, carry the value of chromoly steel with them from the BMX experience. It's only the BMX and DH MTB racers who appreciate the composition of the aluminum bicycle frames more so than that of chromoly steel.
What? ...Do you mean, they couldn't answer those simple questions?...Darn!

Aluminum wheels, do break! Aluminum handlebars, do break! Aluminum seatpost, do break! Where have you been that you don't know that information?

No. We're not talking about more than an ounce, because the topic was solely about the weight of a threaded versus a threadless headset, only. Not all of those other components, that you've just now, most propitiously thrown into the mix!

All I ask, is that you type what you mean to say, Cyccomute. Otherwise, readers will be forced to mind-read. Of course, we all know what an impossible feat of amazement that could prove to be! :twitchy:

Much better, Cyccomute! Now, let's see if you can continue to do such good work! :D

Cyccomute, if you were left alone overnight at a well-supplied LBS, by opening time first thing in the morning, I'm certain that you would have a steel bicycle frame with the best of well-installed components. The likes of which would surpass that of either the Trek 7.7FX or the FX+. That would most certainly be at least one step up from say, a Trek 7.2FX! I say that, not only because you would have properly installed much better components on the bicycle, but because, that bicycle's frame is made of steel, too!

From what I know about Trek's customer service folks and their people on the ground, I'm not too certain that I'd give two shakes about what Trek thinks or doesn't think!

-Slim :)

PS.

BTW - I happen to agree with MechBgon, as well! :thumb:

Right, and this is why aircraft never use aluminum parts, particularly not in crucial areas like the airframe, wings or landing gear. It always warms the cockles of my heart to see an all-steel 50-year-old B-52 cruising over to Fairchild AFB. Imagine if THOSE were made of aluminum. oh wait.

Hey Axiom, if it's of interest, I sneaked into the LBS and weighed a 17.5" 7.2FX, 2012 model. It's 26.4 pounds. If you ride a taller one, figure somewhere in the 27-pound area.

Invalid Estimate! ...That's a guesstimation! Invalid! Invalid! Warning! Invalid Estimate!

- Slim :)

Yeah, the stresses that aircraft are subjected to are greater than those that a bicycle experiences.

They said I would fit the 20" - 22" 7.2FX. Thank you mech for weighing the bike! I am going to assume that I will feel a huge difference when I am riding the 27Lb 7.2FX compared to the 47Lb "hellmart" bike, correct?

Absolutely.

Yes. I guessed 30 lbs. That's pretty close given that I was going on pure speculation. But, then, you already knew the weight because mechBgon posted it 3 hours before your post.

No, an aluminum bikes service will not "weigh heavily" on my mind with time. I don't think about the frame material at all while I ride. I think about the ride and traffic and little Jimmy running out in front of me and how to descend the rock garden and a whole host of other things. I don't 'think' about the frame at all. I don't worry that the bike is going to collapse in a heap nor that the frame is going to snap. I do check the bike for cracks occasionally but I'd do that if I had a steel or titanium or carbon bike.

As for warranties, I've had two bikes replaced under warranty. No questions were asked about the bike or how I rode them. Personally, if I crashed a bike in such a way as to ruin the bike, I wouldn't expect the manufacturer to replace the frame. I certainly didn't when I ran one into the side of a car nor when I bent the frame when I hit an unmarked trench.

And is buying one bike to ride the rest of your life really the point? If everyone did that, there would be no bicycles made. Look at the touring bike market for a real world example of what happens when people buy one bike and keep it for 20, 30 or 40 years. From 1985 until 2008 (roughly), the touring bike market was almost nonexistent. It's had a little bit of a surge lately but is starting to taper off again because people aren't buying touring bikes.

On the other hand, look at the mountain bike market. Mountain bikes have been booming since the mid80s. It's driven by innovation and changing technology that makes people want to replace the bikes they have with better bikes.

As has been demonstrated by mechBgon's post above, I'm not a bad judge of bike flesh. The Atwood has a steel seat post, steel saddle clamp, steel headset and steel frame. The steel frame isn't going to be a wonder frame like the Rodriquez Trillium so it's likely to be a fairly heavy frame. All that steel adds up to a whole lot of extra weight. It's certainly not going to be all that close to the 27 lb that mechBgon estimated. All those steel parts are going to increase the weight a good 5 to 7 lbs over the FX. That's noticeable.

You certainly implied it.

Aluminum almost always breaks at welds too. That's where all bikes are weakest. Heating of the metal around the weld causes weakening of the metal. The welds themselves are strong but the heat that spreads away from the weld causes changes in the crystalline structure of all metals.

And, while steel bicycle frames may be repaired, it's not as easy as you think. Even fairly inexpensive frames like the Atwood use thin walled steel and require special skill to repair. And once repaired, they would be suspect for riding for any appreciable amount of time. You could certainly repair an aluminum frame as well but, again, the repair would be suspect.

Again, you implied it.

Again, you implied it. Go read your own posts, man.


Freeriders (more correctly "all mountain riders") don't want steel frames for the simple reason that steel full suspension mountain bike frame would weigh what a motorcycle weighs. All mountain riding means that, occasionally, you have to ride up something. Assuming the same volume of steel and aluminum for a full suspension bike (valid because of all the different tubes that make up a full suspension bike), a steel full suspension bike would weigh 3 times as much as an aluminum bike. In other words, a 5 lb aluminum bike frame would balloon to a 15 lb steel frame. That's not too pleasant if you have to ride up something.

By the way, downhill bikes aren't steel. They are aluminum.


Then why haven't you changed all your parts to more durable steel parts?

What I said:

What you said:

I don't see anything about only the headset. The Atwood does have more steel parts: seatpost, seatpost clamp, stem, headset, frame. That adds up.

Context and reading comprehension.

Nope. I'd have an aluminum bike with well chosen components because I'm not enamored of steel like some people. But I already have a well equipped bike shop. It's called my garage. I also have access to a bike coop filled to the gills with steel bikes. I wouldn't give a plug nickel for 99.9% of them. The other 0.1% I might look at but I probably wouldn't buy one.

And I wouldn't touch a Trek FX+ with a ten foot pole. The '+' doesn't refer to a higher quality bike. It's an electric. That's cheating.

Yeah, the FX should put a smile on your face :) Easier to carry up/down stairways too, if your commute includes any of that (mine does).

As for the little sideshow here about the theoretical longevity of it, because it's aluminum... steel has its own weaknesses, and one of those is rusting from the inside out. If we're talking about keeping a commuting bike for >10 years, in Florida, I'd worry more about steel rusting than aluminum fatiguing :)

Cyccommute says:

Good, but if you own an aluminum framed bike, check your frame more frequently. The life you save may be your own.

Hey guy! You should be more careful!

...I've known a lot of cyclists in my day. None have ever had any luck with frame warranties.


No, Cyccomute. The reason that touring bikes don't sell like the other bikes, is that almost all touring bikes are made of chromoly steel. Chromoly steel lasts a heck of a lot longer than the aluminum bikes. Touring bikes are made of steel due to the increased ride quality of a steel bike. Most seasoned tourers no better than to attempt to ride across the country on an aluminum bicycle. I've had my Nishiki Sebring for almost thiry years now. It remains my most favored riding bike to date. It rides slightly better than my other two steelys and much better than my Trek 7.5FX, and that's despite technological innovations!

All I really care about is a bike that can safely and reliably transport me from point A to point B. I don't care about any technological hokus pokus. I'm a commuter, not a MTN biker. This is the commuter forum!
However, it's a good thing that we've had our MTN biker brethern be more convenienced with better suspension systems. OTOH, that's got nothing to do with the average cyclist feeling enthusiastic about making future bike purchases if they're like the average cyclist. Since most of us are either commuters or utilitarian cyclists, we couldn't care any less about being in a rush to buy another bike. In fact, many commuters reach for the Craigslist just to find a twenty or thirty year old bike, for commuting purposes.

Again, most of us normal guys, don't care about a couple extra pounds, if were just commuting, and not racing. Nobody cares about their bike weighing twenty-four pounds instead of twenty-eight pounds...


I did not! :p


Aluminum has also been known to crack right near the center of the top tube! :eek:

AGREED! Highly Suspect, too! :thumb:

I did not! :p

I read my own posts, all of the time. I personally find them, exciting!

:D Don't you?...

Some of the most successful MTB free-riding, dirt jumping, and street-styling, cyclists in the world, are currently developing a cultural bridge between BMX and MTN biking. As a part of this development is the chromoly MTB.

Check one of them out right here:

www.norco.com/bikes/dirt-street/26-inch/two50/

I know, as they should be, if they're racing!...Where'd you get anything contrary to that fact, from me?

Have you been dipping into the holiday spirits, today? :lol:

Because aluminum wheels are better at stopping with my rim brakes in the rain. Other than that, I'll take chromoly steel components over aluminum ones, any day of the week. As soon as my aluminum components wear out (which I'm certain will be soon), I'll replace them with chromoly.

Not much :D

The universal truth :D

You don't, because you improperly referred to the threaded fork, when you should have referenced the threaded headset. I overlooked that error...

You should repeat this statement very loudly as you gaze into the mirror...

You have just insulted and blasphemed against the most high god of steel..

Prepare for eternal damnation and spiritual retribution! :mad:

Alright! You started this mess! I didn't intend to type FX+. I meant to type FX! Whatever you have, it must be contagious! Now, I've got it, too! :eek:

Most Respectfully,

- Slim

Hey, since you guys apparently have a lot of time on your hands, how about carbon fiber? Any thoughts? Is it a good frame material?:lol:

Carbon fiber has much promise! However, since it is highly susceptible to impact damage. It simply should not be used for DH MTB racing at all. However, it's most probably the best road bike racing frame material, to date. Some XC MTB frames are made of CF. However, they have a ways to go before CF can be safely debuted into the DH racing bike circuit!

If you're not racing with CF, I can see no practical reason for using it while it's in its current technological state.

- Slim :)

PS.

Geez! Now that's it! I'm entirely too busy for anymore posts today! :lol:

I'm not really worried about the longevity, as I will end up purchasing a whole new bike after two or three years. I checked and the warranty seems perfect. The warranty, paired with my knowledge and ability to properly maintain a bicycle should mean I have nothing to worry about. I am only two days away from purchasing it, and I am very excited. I really appreciate all the help guys!

:-)

Like I said...too many words ago:o... ride the wheels off it:thumb:

Update: I just built a 20" 7.2FX and it weighs 26.6 pounds, so I think even the 22" will be near 27 even.

Also, here's one modification I'd request, if I were the buyer: have them remove the NoOb Spring™ from the front brake's noodle, if they didn't do that already.

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/f...n/IMG_0037.jpg

Typically a weld SHOULD be stronger than the surrounding metal if the robot was set correctly, also anyone not an excuse for a welder can weld and alloy frame back together. Also my dealer has never once gotten a broke frame replace whatever the cause. There are lots of steel proponents hell I was one for a while but after going alloy...... well that was that. I have a couple of f's and they are pretty slick, really can't go wrong there.