Butted 4130 vs 631 vs 853
Hi guys -
Am looking to get a custom steel bike made for my wife, as a general gravel/beater/rain bike (she already has a carbon road bike and will likely add a S-Works Tarmac when the new SL7s come out). I am toying between these 3 options as a choice of frame materials - yeah, its a pretty wide range, I know. Given the use case, I dont want to spend more than I have to, but obviously, if spending a little more gets me better performance, I am happy to do so. There's about a $500 jump in frameset price when i go from double-butted 4130 chromoly to 631, and from 631 to 853. There's also a weight reduction of approx 200gm and 400gm with each step up. Leaving aside the question of weight, any opinions on whether the ride quality would be significantly different? As mentioned, this is going to be training/exploring/general riding bike, likely clad with 700x32 rubber - she has other bikes for racing or going fast. Also, while she is a pretty strong rider at almost 3.5W/kg, she's under 110lb and isnt exactly putting out megawatts. So looking for something that is smooth but also not an absolute pig to ride. Yes, I am aware that other factors also play a role - am just looking for an indicative sense of what the sweet spot for price/performance might be, in terms of choosing materials for a bike with this intended usage. If the 853 is going to be a noticeably more fun ride, i will spring for that. If the difference is mainly weight but the ride feel wont be too different, then i might go for a slightly less expensive option. Thoughts? |
The first question is what has your frame builder said about this and what tube set (or tube mix) are they recommending? Getting this off the internet is a little like walking in to the kitchen of a restaurant and questioning the ingredient choices of the chef. Some frame builders really take offence to this.
With that being said, the primary difference in the tube sets is in the wall thickness of the tubing. The difference in the steel makeup and tubing diameter allows for thinner tube walls. These factors effect the stiffness of the frame. There are a lot of gross generalizations here, this is pretty high level. Also consideration like disk brakes and what fork, carbon or steel, are important. I would add that I wouldn't limit a gravel or all-road bike to 32 mm, you can always run a smaller tire but 43 mm tires are awesome. |
I'm surprised that the weight and price differences are as big as you're being quoted. 631 is only a little bit stronger than 4130. It's just meant to respond better to welding but not by so much that the tube gauges it's available in are any different. Here in the UK it costs about the same, but that's probably because it's one of the few things that are actually made here. It's a very nice product but not really any different in practice to seamless double-butted 4130.
853 is heat-treated 631 so is stronger and can therefore be made thinner. But most of the tubes available are not any thinner unless you get the ones branded "853 Pro-team", which you probably aren't as this is a gravel bike. I would talk to your framebuilder about the actual gauges he's thinking of using. Most of the 853 tubes intended for gravel bike use are stronger but similar gauges. Given the use-case I would go with thin gauges for light weight and a lively comfortable ride-- something like 0.8mm/0.5/0.8 but probably "oversize" so 1 1/8" TT and 1 1/4" DT. Any of the three alloys suggested would be fine for such a frame, and if 4130 is significantly cheaper because of the side of the pond you're on, no reason not to use that. |
Thanks for the info, guys.
The framebuilder makes really nice bikes- he's made a custom gravel-style bike for me back in 2012, before gravel even existed: lugged, clearance for 40mm tires with long reach caliper brakes. He's also made a steel lugged/carbon tubed bike for a friend that my friend really likes. But he's more of a MTB rider himself and isnt really able to provide the sort of nuanced answers on ride quality that I am looking for. So with him, the buyer needs to be a bit more informed about what s/he wants, in terms of tubing, gauge, etc. So if i hear you guys correctly: - there isnt a big difference between 631 vs 4130 - the specific tubings here would be a Taiwanese 4130 vs Reynolds 631 (with the Reynolds having some of their alloy additives) - If I go with 853, it makes sense if i can get the 0.8/0.5/0.8 gauge with 1.125" TT and 1.25" to get the benefit of the better strength/size ratio of the 853 So it seems to be - either stick with 4130 or go for the 853. Edit - just spoke to the builder. He is also recommended Omnicrom as an alternative, saying it might be a little more dent resistant. Any thoughts on Omnicrom vs 853 as a choice? Price is close enough to not be a factor. |
Originally Posted by guadzilla
(Post 21569852)
Thanks for the info, guys.
So if i hear you guys correctly: - there isnt a big difference between 631 vs 4130 - the specific tubings here would be a Taiwanese 4130 vs Reynolds 631 (with the Reynolds having some of their alloy additives) - If I go with 853, it makes sense if i can get the 0.8/0.5/0.8 gauge with 1.125" TT and 1.25" to get the benefit of the better strength/size ratio of the 853 So it seems to be - either stick with 4130 or go for the 853. Edit - just spoke to the builder. He is also recommended Omnicrom as an alternative, saying it might be a little more dent resistant. Any thoughts on Omnicrom vs 853 as a choice? Price is close enough to not be a factor. Omnicrom sounds like awesome stuff but there's little to go on besides marketing material from Columbus or Reynolds :) Columbus have an anti dent treatment which I think is a kind of heat treatment. 853 is also heat treated and will therefore resist dents. But denting is unlikely to be a problem anyway. |
Sounds like your builder is trying to sell you the top of the line tubing, 853 and Omnicrom are light weight tubing designed more for go fast road bikes. Below are some of the different tubing suppliers and the Columbus catalog links. All a gravel bike needs for tubing is a good mid level medium thick walled tubing the really thick tubes are for MTBs. All my opinion.
https://www.cycle-frames.com/steel/. (Nova) https://www.bikefabsupply.com/steelbicycle-tubing http://www.columbustubi.com/pdf/Colu...talogue-V3.pdf |
Dent resistance is a real thing. I remember back in the day when my ELOS frame, that had .4mm center butts, traumatically fell onto a bike rack striking the top tube in the middle and denting it. Oh the horror!
|
If she's less than 110lbs, then chances are she's shorter than 5'6". That means her road frames are pretty small. Also, it sounds like she's an experienced rider who is used to riding performance bikes. If you build her up a so-so bike, she will probably quickly wish she was on a nicer ride.
I guess I'm in the minority in that I'd definitely opt for thinner wall and smaller diameter tubes. A 1" .7/.4/.7 top tube and 9/8" .7/.5/.7 down tube would be great for her. Go with the lightest seat tube and seat stays the builder can get his hands on and the right chain stays for whatever max tire clearance she wants. The price difference among steel tubes isn't that great (excluding stainless). |
Originally Posted by niknak
(Post 21570921)
If she's less than 110lbs, then chances are she's shorter than 5'6". That means her road frames are pretty small. Also, it sounds like she's an experienced rider who is used to riding performance bikes. If you build her up a so-so bike, she will probably quickly wish she was on a nicer ride.
I guess I'm in the minority in that I'd definitely opt for thinner wall and smaller diameter tubes. A 1" .7/.4/.7 top tube and 9/8" .7/.5/.7 down tube would be great for her. Go with the lightest seat tube and seat stays the builder can get his hands on and the right chain stays for whatever max tire clearance she wants. The price difference among steel tubes isn't that great (excluding stainless). |
Originally Posted by wsteve464
(Post 21570387)
Sounds like your builder is trying to sell you the top of the line tubing, 853 and Omnicrom are light weight tubing designed more for go fast road bikes. Below are some of the different tubing suppliers and the Columbus catalog links. All a gravel bike needs for tubing is a good mid level medium thick walled tubing the really thick tubes are for MTBs. All my opinion.
Originally Posted by niknak
(Post 21570921)
If she's less than 110lbs, then chances are she's shorter than 5'6". That means her road frames are pretty small. Also, it sounds like she's an experienced rider who is used to riding performance bikes. If you build her up a so-so bike, she will probably quickly wish she was on a nicer ride.
I guess I'm in the minority in that I'd definitely opt for thinner wall and smaller diameter tubes. A 1" .7/.4/.7 top tube and 9/8" .7/.5/.7 down tube would be great for her. Go with the lightest seat tube and seat stays the builder can get his hands on and the right chain stays for whatever max tire clearance she wants. The price difference among steel tubes isn't that great (excluding stainless). So yeah, i dont want to stick her with a heavy bike that she isnt excited about. She's also very light - under 110lb - so weight matters a fair bit for her. If the lighter/nicer bike is more fun to ride, I'd rather get that. Also, re your recommendation - wouldnt a beefier downtube make more sense, for power transfer? Re dents - what kind of risks are we talking about? On crashing or through normal usage with stones hitting the downtube, for example? If it is a greater chance of crash damage, i am not too worried - can always send it back and have the tubing replaced, if it comes to that. If it is damage from just riding around, that's a different story. |
Originally Posted by guadzilla
(Post 21576160)
Also, re your recommendation - wouldnt a beefier downtube make more sense, for power transfer?
Re dents - what kind of risks are we talking about? On crashing or through normal usage with stones hitting the downtube, for example? If it is a greater chance of crash damage, i am not too worried - can always send it back and have the tubing replaced, if it comes to that. If it is damage from just riding around, that's a different story. IMO, the bigger tubes you see on steel bikes these days are just following the aesthetic trend of beefy tubing found first on aluminum, then ti, and now carbon. Steel doesn't need to be as big to perform the same. I suggested using a 9/8" .7/.5/.7 downtube. That'll be just fine against road and gravel debris kicking up. I like to add a bit of clear protective tape to the underside of my frames that see off-road use, just to protect the paint. |
Agree that 9/8 DT and 1" TT will ride really nice and be fine for power transfer and everything. I only suggested oversize because it's a gravel bike and it sort of goes with the chunkier stays you will end up with and general off-road robustness.
If you don't really need off-road capability maybe go for a road frame with 25mm max width tyres and pencil-thin seatstays with straight chainstays. I think this is the nicest riding setup for the road. |
Originally Posted by guadzilla
(Post 21576160)
Also, re your recommendation - wouldnt a beefier downtube make more sense, for power transfer?
Re dents - what kind of risks are we talking about? On crashing or through normal usage with stones hitting the downtube, for example? If it is a greater chance of crash damage, i am not too worried - can always send it back and have the tubing replaced, if it comes to that. If it is damage from just riding around, that's a different story. In all those years I never had trouble with dents either. Heat treated tubing is more dent resistant. Well one time mine fell off of the roof of my car but of course that is special abuse. One of the reasons steel frames were made with more robust tubing is because most were made in a production environment not suited to treating light tubing with special care. Also they have to assume the rider might weigh a great deal more than your wife and needs stronger tubing so the frame won't break. |
Originally Posted by Doug Fattic
(Post 21576419)
There is a liveliness I can feel that doesn't happen with heavier tubing. When I made my last one I was 5'8" and 135lbs. I think the myth that a frame should be unyielding to transfer power has been debunked. A frame rides the nicest when there is a bit of give that doesn't beat one to death that robs energy.
|
This seems like the classic mistake of guys designing a women's bike and using their male driven competitiveness as the guide points. I've build a number (or at least for a hobby guy a bunch) of small lady's frames and can agree with the lack of the need for the stiffness that guy driven mags seem to market.
A 110 lbs and small in stature there's no way she needs a stiff and tight frame, unless she has raced at the highest levels and knows her stuff. And if that's the case the guys need to listen to her and not male speak for her. Andy |
A $500 upcharge for 631 vs. double-butted 4130 Taiwanese tubing is ridiculous.
First of all, a comparable double-butted 4130 tubeset made in Taiwan for Nova Cycle Supply, for example, costs around $115. That includes head tube, down tube, top tube, seat tube, chainstays, and seat stays. A 631 tubeset goes for about $160 at retail. Likewise, an 853 tubeset costs about $220. So for an additional $1000 paid to the builder you can go from a $115 tubeset to a $220 tubeset. :foo: I understand that 853 is a little more difficult to work with given its thin gauge and hardness, but that's ridiculous. 631 doesn't even come in any particularly light gauges. A 200 gram weight reduction isn't enormous but it's hard to imagine where the builder is getting these numbers from, unless they uses some very porky touring gauge 4130. They need to be more transparent and specific about the cost of materials and labor and what is going into this quote. |
I don't know why people are so quick to complain about a framebuilder expecting to be paid. This builder is probably under-charging for the cheap tubing as opposed to over-charging for the expensive tubing.
|
Materials are the smallest part of the cost of making a frame. Time and tooling is generally the greater portion. Working with harder heat treated tubing is a lot more time consuming, unless you have the tooling (which has it's carrying costs). I've avoided using the harder tubes, more then I have done, for much of this reason. Thinner walls also take more care to handle and finish. I know of no builders who over charge for their products although I do believe many undercharge. Andy
|
Originally Posted by Cynikal
(Post 21569080)
I would add that I wouldn't limit a gravel or all-road bike to 32 mm, you can always run a smaller tire but 43 mm tires are awesome.
|
Thanks for all the info, guys.
Point taken about the tube sizing - I dont have a lot of experience on what the tradeoffs re tube sizing vs stiffness are (and I also did not realize that my ignorance of these things is considered male-speak and a case of not listening to my wife, as one poster so virtuously put it :roll:) but it seems pretty unanimous that the 1" 7/4/7 and 9/8" 7/5/7 TT and DT would be the way to go. While this is definitely going to be a build with clearance for atleast 40-42mm tires - and yes, disc brakes - we dont expect to be doing anything particularly gnarly - just gravel and light off-road. Let's say 80% tarmac, 20% off road. Re pricing - the builder is not in the US, and the custom duties here are all weird - and he also has to deal with MOQs (there isnt a lot of demand for 853, I imagine). As I said, guy is a friend and i am pretty confident that he is not ripping me off. The weight differences he gave me were just off-the-cuff, as well. Once we decide on the frame and geometry, he will get me more precise info. So to narrow this down further - assuming we go with the tube sizing mentioned above, would the grade of steel make a big difference in ride quality? From what i can gather, it doesnt appear to be the case - but just thought I would confirm. (Also - appreciate everyone taking the time to provide info - this has been super-helpful) |
Originally Posted by guadzilla
(Post 21578345)
.
So to narrow this down further - assuming we go with the tube sizing mentioned above, would the grade of steel make a big difference in ride quality? From what i can gather, it doesnt appear to be the case - but just thought I would confirm. |
Originally Posted by Nessism
(Post 21570833)
Dent resistance is a real thing. I remember back in the day when my ELOS frame, that had .4mm center butts, traumatically fell onto a bike rack striking the top tube in the middle and denting it. Oh the horror!
|
4130 unlike 631 & 853 is not a individual company trade name. it's an AISI - SAE steel alloy designation..
|
Bumping this thread up with a follow-up question.
After much thought, we have decided to get Breakway-style bikes for both of us. I am gonna flip my Bike Friday and also my current steel bike (which has more of a CX geometry) and go for a more gravel-style design, with a greater BB drop and also disc wheels. So 2 questions: 1/ Would that impact the tubing choices for her? 110lb, 1" 07/4/7 top tube, 9/8", 7/5/7 DT was what we had decided on, based on input here 2/ For an 180lb guy like me, who puts out more power and more torque, should i consider thicker diameter tubing? The builder feels that the above may be a little too noodly for me, but as I said, he's more of a MTB guy and not a roadie, so may be being overly conservative. He is suggesting something like the oversized tubes used by Battaglin. |
Originally Posted by guadzilla
(Post 21741148)
Bumping this thread up with a follow-up question.
2/ For an 180lb guy like me, who puts out more power and more torque, should i consider thicker diameter tubing? The builder feels that the above may be a little too noodly for me, but as I said, he's more of a MTB guy and not a roadie, so may be being overly conservative. He is suggesting something like the oversized tubes used by Battaglin. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:30 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.