livedarklions

I agree that's the point of a lot of people who do it, but I don't think you're justified in calling them idiots for doing so. It's not a definitively wrong use of the word.

Lemond1985

I freely admit that my Cannondale is objectively "faster" (especially during sprints) than any of my steel bikes, but steel really has the edge in comfort. Plus it's a "mature" product, meaning it's been studied and thought about for well over 100 years, so the technology is extremely well-developed.

If steel really was "faster", every pro in the peloton would be using steel frames, but they don't. There is at least one "ex pro" who does though, and you gotta respect his steel Paramount. He obviously knows his stuff, and absolutely loves the bike:

goldensprocket

...and aluminum axles, titanium saddle rails, carbon fork.

satrain18

My entire point is that the idea that it is impossible to make light, strong and stiff steel bikes simply isn't true.


-Tim-[/QUOTE]

Only if you weigh no more than 150-160 lbs. To a heavier person, it's like riding a wet noodle.

79pmooney

I just spent a weekend riding 70 miles of gravel, 5000' up and down on my Peter Mooney as a celebration if it turning 40. Sweet ride! Didn't envy the guys riding their new gravel bikes costing far more; jut their legs that were sometimes ad much younger than my legs as their bikes were. Later this summer my bike will hit 50,000 miles.

In that 40 years, it has done fast club rides, long day rides (130 miles + a few times), up and down mountains. It has crashed. Minor crashes, hard crashes. It's fallen over and hit things. Seen less than gentle treatment from movers. And every time I get on it, I get reminded it is a sweet, sweet ride! (I have two custom ti bikes, so it isn't like the rest of the time I ride crap.)

Now, steel does not mean the "magic" is there. Steel can be done badly. Like any material, the details need to be tailored to a good fit for that rider and use. Still, there is a very long history of steel bikes that were that "magic". Many builders and a quite a few big companies regularly did and do turn out those bikes.

Ben

indyfabz

A frame materials thread gets you guys every time. It's like Lucy with the football.

satrain18

Also a 2x11 drivetrain will easily add three or four pounds to the overall weight.

79pmooney

It's a matter of the right material for the job. Many bike parts can be built lighter, far more easily and at lower cost in aluminum. (I don't think I have ever owned an aluminum bike axle. To me, that is a place, like QR skewers, where steel is the right material for the job.) Seat rails - ti has more give in this crucial bike/body interface. I'm light and I ride ti railed seats. CF forks - lighter. (That said, I will never own one and and just stick to good steel forks I trust. I've owned a few with sweet rides.)

Ben

goldensprocket

Context is key. His use of those materials illustrates his hypocrisy.

Ritchey claimed:

"So they don't make springs out of aluminum, they barely make springs out of carbon fibre - they do make some springs out of titanium but with some limitations. But in the same way that a spoke is steel and an axle is steel and a chain is steel and other things on the bike that are important are made of steel - a frame is steel for a reason."

BTW, aluminum axles are ubiquitous, especially on high end hubs. Ritchey claims that the carbon forks offer wider tire clearance.

satrain18

What about internal rusting?

Kovkov

Depends if modern technology leads to improved products or just to decreasing manufacturing costs.

TimothyH

With all due respect, you simply don't know what you are talking about.

This simply isn't true and your statement illustrates a fundamental lack of understanding about the most basic aspects of steel frames made today.

I weigh 175 and my True Temper S3 steel bike is anything but a wet noodle. It is as stiff as any carbon bike made today.


-Tim-

goldensprocket

So you've ridden every carbon bike made today, right?

Because if you haven't, you're just pulling that "fact" out of your nether regions.

Trakhak

Yes. My steel, aluminum, and carbon bikes ride pretty much the same, because they all fit me the same and have nearly identical geometries: more specifically, nearly identical wheelbases.

If you're used to a steel bike with a sport-touring wheelbase and then ride a carbon bike or an aluminum bike with a shorter wheelbase, you're likely to think that the frame material is responsible for the very different feel of the bike, but the material has a much smaller effect than the wheelbase.

I've owned about a dozen high-end steel racing bikes over the years, and I still have one 25-year-old Reynolds 853 bike, but I haven't ridden it more than a couple of times since I got my first aluminum bike, 15 years ago. It's a fine bike; I just prefer my aluminum bikes, especially on fast descents, where the handling is delightfully predictable.

Finally, since this is turning into a lengthy steel-versus-carbon-versus-aluminum thread, including the usual claims about steel's near-invincibility, here's that 1997 German Tour magazine fatigue test of a number of different frames and different frame materials (spoiler: all the steel frames [and both titanium frames] cracked; the frames that did not crack were all either carbon or aluminum).

Reynolds 

I'm a steel fan, but that article isn't serious IMO... it says of 2014 CF frames that they "exploded on impact" and double and triple butted steel tubes are "new frame building techniques".

Reynolds 

Maybe the word shouldn't be "real" - some of us like steel frames, especially classic ones, for other reasons, like aesthetics (thin straight tubes, horizontal top tubes, lugs) and tradition (with more than 150 years of steel bicycles). Valid reasons IMO.

base2 

I weigh 200, and had a bike built for crossing any road on any continent carrying 100 pounds of stuff & it is a 3 pound frame & lighter than most carbon.

Vari-Wall ThermLX tubing.

It rides like a Cadillac.

Steel is real.

The rest of the weight is component selection. I assure you, what Tim says is true. I've ridden their sub 14 pound Outlaw & it's amazing. They have one on display & it's one of their most popular bikes.

ridelikeaturtle

What about it? Do you store your bike underwater?

wolfchild

I sprayed some rust proofing oil inside my steel frames because I ride all year round in all weather conditions...Cro- moly steel is pretty rust resistant and will last a very long time even without rustproofing. I've never seen a steel bicycle rust out.

mstateglfr 

Because the benefit of a material for one thing doesnt mean its a benefit for all other things?

mstateglfr 

Only if you weigh no more than 150-160 lbs. To a heavier person, it's like riding a wet noodle.[/QUOTE]

I am 240# and havent found riding steel frame and fork bikes to be like riding a wet noodle. This goes for traditional diameter tubing and OS tubing. I own a lot of steel road, gravel, and touring bikes that are from the 80s, 90s, and present. I am 6'5 too, so the diamond frames are large too, which doesnt help things.


We all ride differently though. Perhaps my output isnt close to yours. Just saying that weight neednt be a reason to not ride a steel frame bike.

mstateglfr 

Ill update you in this thread the first time this actually affects me. Dont wait up.
Also- a large % of Taiwan built steel frames are ED dipped to prevent rust. Others are zinc base coated. And then there is just the low odds of a frame being affected by internal rusting. If it is affected by internal rusting, its due to a lack of maintenance.

86az135i

I'm well aware of that fact. Point is author gave analogies where if were true, you'd think steel should be used more then just the frame.

Dr.Lou

I have neither the time or crayons to explain!

Trsnrtr

Let's keep it civil, please. I know that's a lot to ask in a frame materials thread, but please try.