I don't read anything in Pina's post that speaks of decades of service. Is decades of service really a gold standard for bicycles anyway? I see bikes that are decades old every weekend. Most...if not all... decades old bikes are out of date, don't shift all that well, aren't really all that comparable with modern metallurgy, have components that are inferior to modern components, etc. You can, of course, replace components but over decades that can add up to much more than the cost of several bikes.

As for the long term service of aluminum, I have aluminum bikes that are used all year long and have hundreds of hours and thousands of hard riding miles on them. My commuter bike is a 2005 Salsa aluminum that shows no signs of giving up. I have a 2003 Specialized Stumpjumper that is my main mountain bike that I use without reservations.

Buy a bicycle because of the bicycle, not because of the material that it is made of. Look for a good bike at a good price that fits your needs and your body well, Pina. Ride a bunch of bikes and forget the frame material.

My steel Moto B is approaching 40 years old, rides smooth as glass, can ride all day, frame has minor surface rust. The 'Nago Dream is lighter, stiffer (Al frame, carbon fork) and simply superior frame geometry and performance (Fortunately modern bikes have far better front fork geometry than the Moto B). I live 2500' from the Pacific Ocean in a wet and windy PNW..my next bike will be Ti. I'm 58, 5'10" 190. A quality steel bike is possibly the superior buy given all the great tech advances, materials available and for the heavier riders, a few pounds weight difference is hardly worth the $$$ unless bragging rights are important. I've been cruising CL and there are occassional good deals on used bikes in steel, Al, Ti to be had

Whenever I buy most anything (especially some mode of transportation), I buy for quality of service and longevity, because you never can tell anything about future affairs. So yeah, for me decades of service would most certainly be considered as some kinda golden standard, if at all possible.

Also, it pays to be handy with a wrench, so you can make your own repairs and perform your own installments, whenever you're ready for an upgrade. Hopefully, your steed will be trusty enough to last for several upgrades...

One nice thing about steel bikes is they have steel threads. So you're less likely to strip something, which can be a real downer.

Otherwise, there's not much in it unless you're going to spend real money.

Oh, and they're fixable. That's nice too.

At the rate that it seems most BF-ers either replace of "upgrade", I don't know why anyone cares about longevity. The average useful life of a BF bike frame appears to be about 1.5 years.

So ride whatever you want.

we should measurable of a bicycle frame durability/lifespan in miles/km not in years or decades.

In that case, steel would win hands down!

My only aluminum frame is coming up on 120,000 miles (and over 20 years). None of my steel frames lasted nearly that long in miles although some have lasted more years.

Chances are, that's only because you ride your aluminum framed bike more often, most probably...

If your steel bikes are still around, no doubt they can triple the mileage of that aluminum one you've got.

I know that I must have well over 200,000 miles on my Nishiki Sebring by now...

It's almost thirty years old!

Aluminum for the handle, but I'd make the Blade out of steel .

Now that's what I'm talikin' 'bout! :thumb:

Most of the steel ones broke - and at mileages well under what I have on the aluminum one.

What's with the multiple steel vs. aluminium threads suddenly? I think some one is trolling just to see long arguments ..

I've belonged to two road bike clubs and one touring club, where everybody rode the hell outta their road bikes then, and most of those same steel framed road bikes are still around since the mid eighties. In three cases, they're still being ridden religiously, just like I ride my Nishiki!

***************

The thing about steel frames is that, when they do "fail", they tend to become compromised at their weld points.

...Usually, steel frames can be salvaged via welding. :)

I was, of course, referring to the common, imaginary theory that steel bikes have some special properties of longevity. But you knew that, right?

Yes, one of mine was salvaged by replacing a tube over 35 years ago. But I still have some scars on my face and hands to remind me that steel bikes can fail suddenly and with serious consequences. But there was no welding - it was/is a lugged and brazed frame.

No I didn't. I thought you were talking about rust. My mistake. In my experience (I'm 59 and have ridden seriously for about 40 years) both steel and aluminum will last a good long time. My longest steel bike was a Trek 520 with Reynolds 501 that I bought new in 1985 and finally traded for a new bike at an lbs this past summer (22 years), and The Rig is a Trek 4300 aluminum that I've ridden the heck out of for 7-1/2 years now.

I think the "properties of longevity" that is theorized in the forums is because steel can be repaired and can be bent back when you crash.

I ride and build steel bicycles and currently do not own an aluminium framed bicycles although one of the very best bicycles I had was a Trek 7500 hybrid that was so beloved by my friend I passed it along to her knowing it would give her many many years of trouble free service with a buy back options should she decide to part with it.

I don't think that is gonna happen.

Pick the frame that suits you, regardless of the material as it is unlikely you will wear out any frame unless you lay down some insane miles and beat your bikes to death.

Although steel frames are repairable, one must consider whether or not the repair is going to be cost effective as frame builders do not work for free and materials keep getting more and more expensive.

That is you. Perhaps Pina's needs are different.

Perhaps...

You're a good guy, Cyccommute! :thumb:

I love all the talk about "if a steel frame breaks it can be welded blah de blah de blah" or "if it fails on you touring somewhere, you can get it fixed."

Who DOES that?

Sure...I'll just push her on over to Ye Olde Smithy and have him fire up the torch and the forge for me. No one does this...they just like the idea of it. What they do is go to the bike shop, inquire as to whether it's covered by warranty, and let that determine what the next frame (or whole bike) is going to be.

Which basically means that every frame material lasts forever, or until you tire of it.

If my steel Ritchey breaks, I'll be on the phone with...Ritchey. The cost of fixing it and getting it paint matched alone would net me a new frame if Ritchey won't take care of it. And if they do, I don't care if TR himself welds it back together (well, maybe a little :D ), so long as I'm riding again soon. New frame, my frame, whatever.

Not that I actually anticipate this happening, but it's all a very imaginary "advantage" to steel. Of course, I don't anticipate my AL CAAD9 breaking either.

Well, yes. That is one advantage for touring. If you go to a place where you can't buy a new frame (or bike). Or can't afford one. That's an option. 90% of paths on this planet are not paved and a lot more vilages have people who can weld steel, than those who can weld aluminium.

But that makes sense for really long touring, in less developed places of the planet, it is irrelevant if you're going to be riding within 100 miles from home.

I met some cyclotourists from Germany this summer. Asked them about tools, asked them why they didn't take MTBs, since it is easier to get spares for MTBs, than 28" wheels. They said: "we call shop in Germany, they can send any spare part here within a week, we're in no hurry. Carry credit cards". :)

Actually, I'm thinking of riding along the Danube when it gets warmer and I'd like to pass through Novi Sad. I figure I can just take my commuting MTB attach a rear rack, do zero maintenance and just take off. It's so well developed along the Danube, that I could just get any part whenever anything breaks. I also think that I can camp or stay in a guest house without booking anything.

I was warned about Hungary: to make sure I find a room, or an organized camp to sleep. Gangs of gypsies. Not sure about Romania. In Serbia it is cool, except for crazy drivers - they don't see you, and often when they do, they think you should jump off the road so they don't have to slow down. If you ride with a helmet and some packed things, they might realize you're "some crazy foreigner" and give you a break. :)

Parts in Serbia are OK for MTB, but a real pain for a road bike. E.g. an Acera is way more practical/replaceable than Sora.

PM. for a phone number if you need anything when passing through these parts. It is a lovely route to see, especially in the east (near Kladovo). Danube is as wide as the sea. Amazing sights. Lots of cyclotourists from all over the world to meet.

Also, if going back the same route, make sure you use the alternate side of the river (when safe and possible). Some parts offer different experience just going down the other side. Right bend of Danube is a lot nicer for bicycle from the western border, until Belgrade. Then you can switch sides - see where roads are nicer. Big part going along Romanian border is nice to see from both Serbian (right), and Romanina (left) riverside.

That canyon (part going along Serbia-Romania border) is tricky when it rains. Rocks slide on the road, blocking it. If there has been rain in the past 48 hours, you can expect rocks all over the road, drivers swerving to avoid them and causing trouble. It is safer to go there in the rain, than wait for it to stop, soak up the soil, because that's when things start rolling down the hill sides.