fuji86

A lot of good perspectives. For a folding bike cheaper the better. If it last you 10-20 years, $ 200 isn't going to be that much amortized over the life of the bike. A 20" folder, does it matter on flat land what it weighs ? In hilly areas it probably does, but a 20" bike isn't going up one side of the bridge very fast, even if it's a Wal-Mart non-folding bike. If you have to lug the folder up several flights of stairs for condo people, weight matters too. Get the one that makes the most sense for convenience and portability in those situations and how often you do that, otherwise riding them, that's pretty much a wash, for a 20" folder in terms of ride, get the most comfortable one. Might be the slightly heavier one, it takes bumps and unpaved roads a little nicer ?

JulianEdgar

I've built recumbent trikes from aluminium and chrome moly steel. I've owned folding bikes made from steel and folding bikes made from aluminium.

From a builder's perspective, I'd much rather use chrome moly than aluminium; in my experience it is much for forgiving of overloads and fatigue. In fact, when you work with thin-walled chrome moly tube, you can only be astonished at how strong it is and how when loaded to the point of major deflection, it will still spring back to shape after that overload is removed.

From the perspective of the buyer of a commercial product, I think that it's pretty difficult to divorce the material per se from the overall design. As people have pointed out, the frame designs for alumnium and steel will be different to cater for the different characteristics of the material, and so also will suspension systems, etc.

I guess what I am saying is that the final deisgn needs to be judged in the totality of the bike, not just on frame material.

Fibber

I had for a time (2007) both a Dahon Speed D7 (4130 chromoly steel) and a Vitesse D7 (7005 aluminum). The components (other than the frame material) were virtually identical between the two. The price difference from one of the big retailers was under $70. That difference later dropped (year end clearance) to virtually nothing.

After some internal debate, I decided to keep the Vitesse and return the Speed. Two factors in favor of the Vitesse - weight and corrosion resistance. Factors in favor of the Speed - a slightly more forgiving ride (a little more bending flex, or just in my mind??), perceived longevity (less fragile), slightly smaller folded size.

While the frames do look identical, the larger aluminum tubing diameter results in a slightly larger frame with a different hinge size, and thus it doesn't fold to quite as compact a size.

I ride on heavily salted roads, so rust was a big concern. Yes, aluminum can develop inter-granular corrosion that can cause fractures, but it at least doesn't look as unsightly, until it suddenly breaks! (I know, maybe a poor trade-off...).

While the Vitesse only weights 1.7 lbs less, it seems like a ton more when trying to cantilever it over the rear bumper of the car and into a storage bag. Leverage amplification - and every pound stresses my old back.

miamimike

My Experience is limited to two dahons in the past couple years; my 1st Dahon was a Boardwalk(high tensile steel) at 30.5 lb and my 2nd is a Dahon Mu Uno(Alum, approx 22 lb). Due to the fact that I may, on one day, load and unload, Fold and unfold my bike and wheel it thru the metro stations up to the platforms(100-200 yards in some situations ) while transporting it up & down the escalators in our Metro Train Stations 3-4 times from the time I leave home until the time I arrive home, weight, even 8.5 lbs , is a huge factor for me(and my back). My Mu Uno is a Dream(weightwise) in comparison to my old Steel Boardwalk SS . Not to forget, our Bike Racks on our City Buses are a few feet off the ground and performing this loading & Unloading & stretching drill 2-4 times a day gets old so a bike weighing 8.5 pounds lighter is a huge comfort factor. I loved the ride quality of my old steel boardwalk but the comfort factor of loading & unloading & rolling the folded Mu Uno works better for me. And once I arrive on Public transportation, the Bike ride distances are usually under 3 miles.

snafu21

How funny to see older threads revived. Like the other poster I've owned a Speed D7 steel, and a Vitesse D7, - alloy. Very similar bikes other than the frame material . I think that that the choice of tyres will have a far greater effect on ride comfort for the average rider like me, and the fatter 'comfort' tyres like Marathons and Big Apples make frame material comfort comparisons academic, especially as the alloy or steel frame Dahon D7 bikes both have Cro-Moly forks. But on my alloy frame Hammerhead with skinny Stelvio tyres, the ride was harsh beyond comprehension, one reason for selling it. If Marathnos would not have murdered its soul, I would have fitted them and kept it. The other; at downhill speeds on Stelvios, the bike would bounce itself off the road on rough surfaces, despite the front suspension.

I do prefer an alloy frame, mass = inertia, and every time the bike goes into a road dip, minor imperfection, or pothole, the energy to lift it out again comes from your feet, unless you're going downhill or have a tailwind. Carrying a folder is also a factor, as others say.

On road bikes, but not yet folders, the debate must now factor in carbon fibre, which the roadies say is more forgiving than alloy. On a folder, comfort and practicality are for many, the overriding factors. Hence the 14Kg + bikes which are currently selling well.

thatsut

two hyperthetical biker riders crash one on a aluminium one on a cromo. one bends and springs the other cracks and bends and cant be bent back. personally i want cromo so if i do crash in the middle of nowwhere at lease i have a better chance of riding my bike off. hang-a-bout... i do have a cromo frame. sweet!!!

tcs

Back to the OP's original question. Nobody rides a frame. They ride complete bicycles.

1997 was the last year Trek manufactured a large number of steel models and the last year they listed weights in their full line catalog. They offered comparable off road bikes with either steel or aluminum frames, comparable road bikes, hybrids, etc.

At the same weight, the steel framed bikes were less expensive. At the same cost, the steel framed bikes were lighter.

...and steel stem, bars, cranks, seat post and rims?

tcs

Guppeh

I think dwood may be right -- Aluminum does not respond well to flexing at all, so designers make sure it doesn't have any opportunity to do so. While with Steel frames, flexing is sometimes deliberately allowed as part of the design (for instance, the front forks may be designed to bend a little bit to adsorb shock). I've heard Titanium's tolerance for flexing allows this to be carried to an extreme, allowing integral parts of the frame to be designed to function as springs.

thatsut

crom stem check..crom bars check.. i do have alloy rims, however they have this modern bit of technology called pnuematic tyres and the alloy seat post doesnt go straight up actually there is a soft flat thing a seat i think. ahhh i feel beeter now sarcasm out of system sorry tcs.

no for me i cant feel the difference but i do like that cromo can be fixed most places.

Autoworker

STRONG
LIGHT
CHEAP

Pick 2.