back to Pena

Yes But Who Made [ the contract specifications if a Brand is made,
as filled by a Contract Manufacturer, as most are these days]

it matters More than what it is made out of.

That's just it, I don't think a frame is significantly likely to break at all, - whether it's aluminum or steel. And if it does break, in an accident for example, it may break in multiple places or in ways that aren't conducive to being repaired by welding. Further, if it's an accident there's a good chance that other stuff will be broken as well, so it's not like your just going to carry it down to the local welder and an hour later you're ready to go.

My guess is that most people who end up damaging a frame enough that it needs to be welded, are going to want another frame anyway. There are exceptions, and you obviously are one. In my case, as much as I prefer to repair than to discard, I'd want a new frame (or a different one).

Thanks for all of you input guys. I went a tested a bunch of bikes this past weekend sadly any bike that was made with a steel frame was a special order. I wasn't able to ride a modern steel bike frame. The only options where Aluminum and Carbon. And I'f I'm not riding it first I'm not special ordering it. So I guess my choice in frame material was kind of made for me. I think I'm gonna go with a Felt Z85. It's a very responsive and comfortable frame with decent components in my price range.

That's a great choice! I'm sure you'll be happy with it!

Yes it does! It states that, "energy demands drop sharply when manufacturers work with recycled metal".

Also, taken from the horse's mouth (an actual bicycle company)...checkout what Soma states about the cost of aluminum frame production vs chromoly steel:

www.somafab.com/faqs

Read the part where the question asked is, "Why do you do steel, when most people are using aluminum?"

Sure. It says that energy demands drop when recycled materials are used. It did not say that it pushed the cost below that of using steel.

Read the whole article and you will understand that the cost for Ford to produce aluminum bodies for the F150 will be higher than it is to produce steel bodies.


You mean this quote: It looks like a bad cut and paste job. Something is missing between "now" and "because" so I'm not sure what exactly they meant to say. They definitely mention weight and low cost but they don't say it's cheaper than steel. Remember that carbon is an increasingly common frame material and compared to that or titanium, aluminum is cheaper.

The "$500 dollar or less" comment would imply that they can't build a bike out of aluminum in that price range which is comparable in quality to a steel frame of the same price (at their volume anyway). They say nothing about $500 or more.

TJ! Are you a lawyer or something? :D

The word missing between "now" and "because" is the word, "is"! :lol:

*******

Yes, I read the whole article about using aluminum as a weight savings measure for Ford trucks. However, at the end of the article, they seem to be saying that once you throw recycled aluminum into the mix, finances change drastically...

I read that as saying, "If we used aluminum we'd have to invest more money in frame design to get good ride feel and strength characteristics."

You still need to drop "because of" to get the grammar to work out. I suspect sloppy editing rather than cut-and-paste.

...throwing in recycled aluminum changes the cost differential but doesn't alter the fact that aluminum bodies will be more expensive. The difference just isn't as much.


The word might be "is" but even if that's it, the sentence is still awkward.

I also wonder if the Soma folks are comparing common straight gauge 6160 aluminum tubing vs. the butted 4130 steel tubes they use. In that case, I believe that low end aluminum frames could be cheaper, but not because aluminum as a material is cheaper than steel.

Compare hydro-formed 7005 butted aluminum tubing to 4130 butted steel tubing and I'll bet the resulting steel frame is cheaper unless the tubing is from some fru-fru tubing manufacturer.

You only get that Andy_K, because you're a very imaginative person! :lol:

More simply, it's merely stating that at that particular price point, steel offers a greater ride in terms of comfort and is an inherently stronger material, anyway. Since the bulk of bicycles sold are sold under the $300 price point, and the overwhelming majority of those are made of aluminum, the low cost of aluminum is quite the driving force of the bicycle industry's profit margin.

70% of all US bicycles are sold by the big box bike store mass market merchants.

If you were to insert the word "is" between the words, "now" and "because", you'd get the gist of the transmission, regardless as to the use of proper or improper grammar.

Steel all day.

Steel vs. Alum. No difference in my mind. I am 235 pounds of middle aged thunder. Ride steel road frames that are antiques with well over 23k on them. Also have a Habanero titanium frame that is ridden most of the time now. It has the grace of steel, stiffness of slightly less than alum, and the durability of ti.
You ought to check it out, especially if you have access to parts on the cheap. Never will I purchase a new alum or steel frame again. Hi dididly dee, its ti for me! Totally hooked, no scratches, chipped paint, corrosion or too stiff or flexy a ride. Kind of like a good bowl of porridge.

Yeah, I think everybody likes Titanium! :thumb:

Now back on topic...

But what determines the price point? Is it all cost of materials? Doubtful. Is it cost of production? Not the last time I brushed up on economics.

If you've got an aluminum frame with round tubes and an aluminum frame with "hydro-formed" tubes in all kinds of exotic shapes, the round one will cost less to produce, but that's not why it's at a lower price point. It's at a lower price point because consumers are willing to pay more for something with "hydro-formed" in the marketing materials. The exotic shape, if correctly designed, also happens to be the thing that's necessary for aluminum to compete with steel in terms of ride feel and strength.

Really, half the strength of steel, twice the weight of aluminum. Only available in goofy looking styles. No thanks.

Rebel!

You march to a totally different tune, don't cha! :lol:

Ah...Truly something to consider...;)

What you are missing is that the finances for using aluminum change drastically. Refining aluminum from bauxite is horribly expensive because it is an electrochemical process (titanium is expensive for the same reason but the amount of energy needed is even higher). But once you have made the metal, the cost of recycling it is minimal.

Steel, on the other hand, cost less to refine from ore because it goes through a relatively cheap chemical process. Once made it is more energy intensive to recycle but that cost pales in comparison with the initial cost of refining aluminum from ore.

Steel is also cheap because we have a crap load of it dating back to the iron age. Aluminum refining by the electrochemical process is only about 100 years old and even less on a commercial basis. The amount of aluminum available is relatively small compared to the amount of iron and steel out there.

Sorry but the yield strength of titanium is close to that of steel. The stiffness is about half that of steel.

I knew aluminum was better.

[QUOTE=cyccommute;15000357]

I'm not missing anything...That IS my point, precisely!

Yeah, I know____.

Though Aluminum is the most abundant metal contained within the earth's crust, it's also the most expensive to extract from its ore. It's almost always bound within its bauxite ore!

Grrrrrr! :mad:


:roflmao2:

it won't rust (low maintenance as i'll use less water/chemicals from washing it much less often = good for the environment) and it's easily recycled (energy-efficient re-use = good for the environment).

seems like a no-brainer.

You are still missing the point. Steel is cheap compared to aluminum due to the economies of scale. That's why you find it on cheap bikes, in car panels and car parts, in bridges and houses and buildings, etc. Aluminum would be better for some things like car body panels because of the weight savings but once you start using it on the scale that automobile manufacturers want to use it, you'll have to start refining it from ore which drives the cost up tremendously. Car manufacturers could burn though our stockpile of aluminum very quickly. Your dream of us all riding steel bikes would quickly be realized:rolleyes:

Aluminum, by the way, is found in many more minerals in the earth's crust than just in bauxite. Clay, feldspar, tourmaline, ruby, corundum (the sand of 'sand paper') and turquoise are all aluminum containing minerals. Wikipedia lists 189 pages of minerals that contain aluminum. Bauxite just happens to be the one that is easiest to get the aluminum out of.