"Best" frame material and why.........
 

I prefer steel but there are other frame materials than steel.

This story talks about these materials..........

What is the greenest type of bike frame? | Grist

I have two vintage racers. One is aluminum and one is 531c steel. I could not care less how "green" it is.

Keeping it realistic, consider both the manufacturing and usage impacts if a bicycle is bought and used in lieu of a car.

I'm not being anti car here, but if just a small percentage of the multi-car households in the USA gave up one car, and planned their tirps better using a bicycle instead for short errands where possible, there's tremendous potential for improvement.

So, that is about a 2:1 ratio carbon to end product.

And a 20 lb bike will require about 40 lbs of carbon/fuel.

A pint a pound... and it is equivalent to about 5 gallons of fuel to produce one bicycle. WHEW.

I'm not quite sure how many mile I've put on my primary bike, but it is in the range of 25,000 to 50,000 miles.

So that works out to be 5,000 to 10,000 miles to the gallon. Not too bad. And the bike's not worn out yet.

I suppose one should also apply the same formula to a car, so a 3,000 pound car ==> 6,000 pounds of "carbon" ==> 750 gallons of fuel to produce it before it even gets out the dealership door.

What I see as the "greenest" thing of a bicycle is just getting people outside on the bicycle. Everything else is just icing on the cake.

====================

Note, depending on how one calculates, it may be 2-3 tons of CO[sub]2[/sub] per ton of petroleum, so that actual fuel usage may be lower. However, there is a lot of additional machining and welding work on the bike, as well as transportation of the bike and components. Plus "consumables".

I don't follow the "green movement"...My favourite frame material is steel.

Oh god this question has been debated ad-nauseum. The best, as is well known and undisputed, is carsteelimum, with the specific forumulas depending on which tube.

Why would anyone ride an archaic, heavy steel bike? Carbon bikes are lighter, stronger, and better in every way.

Not all steel bikes are "heavy." The frame is only a small portion of weight. Some people find that steel provides a smoother ride. Light is not always better, depending on how you use yor bike.

Steel bikes that are "light" are far more delicate then even the most overblown claims of the anti carbon luddites in regards to CF bikes. Steel may provide a smoother ride than aluminum, but not than CF. When is lighter not better? Take two touring bikes, both with all the necessary accoutrements, both equally strong. The lighter one is better. That's just a fact.

This "best frame material" discussion is headed the same way as all others. People rehashing their predetermined preferences and prejudices with no serious discussion or the various considerations that may make one better for some people, and another better for others. In the end, nobody changes his mind.

I, own bikes made of brazed steel, bonded (not welded) aluminum, and welded Ti, and each is comparable to the other though there are differences. I don't own a CF frame, but the Ti bike has a CF fork, and that too is serving well.

All materials are great if used well, and terrible if used badly.

The list overlooks the greenest material, bamboo.
EDIT: Oops, went back and read it all the way through. Bamboo did get a mention.

Not everyone is of the latest and greatest mentality. That concept might be hard to grasp in some segments of consumerism

When i am biking 2 miles downtown, or 5 miles to a play in the next town, material is pretty irrelevant. The most important thing is to have tires wide enough to deal with potholes and poorly maintained roads. A forever "townie" bike is good enough for me!

If the question is "best", which is how this question was posed, than I'm afraid "greatest" does matter. Pretty much to the exclusion of all other considerations.

Steel and aluminium bikes can take a lot more abuse and beating then carbon bikes. Carbon bikes require torque wrench just to install and tighten a seat post or to install another carbon component. Dings and scratches can weaken carbon and make it crack. I don't want to deal with such fragile material.

If I had the disposable income, I'd buy another carbon fiber bike. Always nice to have options & they do(the right one!) have a certain appeal. But, so do many Frame materials. I really enjoyed my Klein aluminum frame. Though the ride was a little stiff, it was responsive & ate up corners with the best of them. Given my druthers, I'll take a steel bike from the 80's, with high end steel & racing geometry. To me, that's where it's at. No better riding experience.

Carbon frames/components may have their place in racing where every gram of weight counts and where performance is of greatest importance...For daily commuting and utility riding steel or aluminium is a much better material.

Why? Certainly not because they are stronger. DH mountain bikes are made of CF. They are the strongest bikes of all.

I don't think its a racing bike issue. Any material can be built into a competitive weight. The steel frame I built ended up at 17lbs, built up. & there was plenty of room to cut weight from that. I'm loud & proud with my opinion that steel frames are still quite relevant. However, there is one area where carbon fibre has an edge. It can be shaped into any thing the mind can imagine. You can put all of the frame weight into very specific areas. With that Said, a steel frame with a great set of wheels isn't far enough off to make it a losing proposition.

either way it's a subjective determination driven by market forces with no precise definition as the responses to this thread continue to prove

Except that all the anti carbon folks are basing their opinion on the nebulous facts that steel is real, aesthetics, and imaginary dangers involving failure modes. The quantifiable best material is CF. Lighter, stronger, more versatile.

Tourists and commuter ride modern, lightweight butted steel frames, which have a typical lifespan measured in decades.
Steel is tougher than carbon/epoxy and more resistant to scratch, score and impact damage.
Threaded eyelets for rack and fenders can be permanently brazed on. Few carbon bikes have eyelets; they are fine for racing but no-one makes a decent carbon production tourer or utility/commuter. Parlee is perhaps the only outfit making a custom [light-duty] tourer. See prices. $8000 frame only.
Workshops for small-production runs and one-off custom bikes are easier to setup for steel so you see more novel designs and sizes. Most carbon bikes are racebikes, all UCI compliant, medium sizes (S/M/L)

Magnesium won't dent or buckle and is much more comfortable than even steel due to its inherent vibration dampening characteristics.

Having ridden steel, carbon, and aluminum in multiple permutations, I can say for certain magnesium is the most comfortable by far no even close. Does not make it the best. Best for what? Best aerodynamic road bike? Cervelo S5 of Felt AR. Best for a mountain TT would suggest the lightest weight= carbon. Best for long distance endurance events? Certainly not carbon. Best for touring with fenders and racks? Again, not carbon. Wide tires for touring? Not carbon.

If there was a best, N + 1 would not exist.

Paketa Custom Magnesium Bicycles :: Stronger Than Carbon Fiber and Aluminum

I would be interested in seeing these magnesium bikes put together I have worked with magnesium and machining takes special techniques because of its flammable natural .
I have never been on a carbon bike. I rode a Titanium bike up and down the parking lot once. so I can not comment on those, of steel and aluminum I just can't find any love for aluminum . ( I have tried) I ride for health and enjoyment I don't care about bike weight I have a 50 lb mongoose brutus that I ride around the neighborhood
Roy

Because my vintage Schwinn Paramount gets a lot more oohs and aahs and attention and admiration than any carbon bike I've ridden.