Walter

A Litespeed Ultimate and a LeMond Maillot Jaune are my main rides. Both the Ti and the 853 are great rides, no complaints. The fact that the LS has more aggressive geometry and a tighter wheelbase than the LeMond but still gives a great ride tells you about well built Ti. (My LS is from the end of the Lynskey owned era, I've heard but have not experienced bad things about LS after the Lynskey's sold).

I'm very happy with both but to my, initial, surprise find myself on the LS much more often.

FWIW, YMMV, and so on.

dr_lha

Sorry to be slowly catching up on this thread after almost 3 weeks away... you can get Gunnars that look nice, but you have to spend a lot of money to get to that point! I hate the "Star Wars" Gunnar logo, the alternative is pretty nice. This I think looks like a really pretty frame paint job, for example:
Gunnar Grand Disc in British Racing Green with Panda Panels by Gunnar Cycles, on Flickr

Jarrett2

Yeah but you can get this or this for less and they look better, imo:



I really like this one, but don't need a break away at this point:

Jarrett2

I just want to know what the secret steel is!

BillyD

This.

Grant Peterson's Ishiwata steel on his '90s RB-1 creations.

Heavenly.

dr_lha

You won't get any argument with me on the looks of the Ritchey vs Gunnar, especially given the amount of money you have to pay for the paneling and pin striping to get a Gunnar frame to look half-unugly.

Oh and the secret steel is: It's an alloy of titanium, aluminum and carbon fiber.

Jarrett2

LOL, probably

BillyD

In riding quality I favor the Bridgestone over my Merlin Cyrene, which is no slouch in it's own right.

RJM

Lugged steel is secret steel. For some reason I can't make the picture bigger, but this is my Rivendell Roadeo in an older build scheme. It's a great riding bike.

exime

Man that Ritchey logic is beautiful though

mawashi

No you can't but at least there are more choices than the 2 mention. Besides the standards for disk brakes have yet to be finalized so why the rush to get them when calipers have been doing fine for the longest time.

It sucks that you can't test bikes n steel bikes are getting rarer. However, the great news is adrenaline has a great selection of fine bikes. If it's your first serious racer, you can't really go wrong with the Ritchey road logic 2 and at around 1700 it comes with ultegra which is the second tier from Shimano.

However, don't get too caught up with materials as there are many great bikes under 3000. Fuji transonic which is an aero carbon bike used in the tour de France can be had for ard 3k. Do some research there are great bikes like the giant propel, canyon ultimate or aeroad which are bikes used at the very top of cycling and yet are rather affordable. For example the canyon ultimate was just usd 2.5k+ so you'll be able to get some great rides at very decent prices.

To give you an even bigger headache, Lynskey has some great bikes on clearance and they have a trade in program as well.

https://www.lynskeyperformance.com/s...html?limit=all
https://www.lynskeyperformance.com/store/tradein-form

dr_lha

I'll be thinking about that when I'm riding mine 101 miles through the PA countryside tomorrow.

79pmooney

61 vs 54. 7 cm. Say the seat stays add up to roughly the same as the seat tube, and the head tube is half again heavier. So 7 + 7 + 7 X 1.5 = 24.5 cm = 1 foot of additional seat tubing to make a 61 cm frame. Also figure that probably one or two tubes are spec'ed heavier/thicker wall for a 61 cm bike than a 54 cm bike to keep the stiffness similar (and that's probably going to be the down tube that is heavier, the longest tube on the bike). Now that steel vs ti difference doesn't look very big.

Edit: Oops! Didn't notice I was on page one of 16!

Looking at that photo of the rust on the stainless frame - I look at the words "stainless steel" as meaning "steel that stains less", not "steel without stain". All stainless steel is subject to stain. Stainless steels are created to resist certain toxic chemicals. Under those conditions, they do very well. In other conditions, not so. Not all stainless steels are at their best around a salt environment (as any ocean sailor knows well).

Ben

Bandera

16 pages and going of:

This New Titanium Porridge is Too Cold
My Previous CF Porridge Was Too Hot
My Steel Porridge Seems Just Right BUT My Porridge Quest Must Go On....and On.... and On to the Ideal Platonic Porridge.

How is that Not amusing?
Even Goldilocks went w/ "this works" and had breakfast, the Princess took some Ambien and said "F the Pea" I'm getting some sack time.

You may re-"start" at any time.

-Bandera

HardyWeinberg

Isn't there a point where spending enough on a Gunnar makes a Waterford look more appealing?

mawashi

Uncheck the Retrieve remote file and reference locally box.

Jarrett2

The part you missed is no one asked you to read it, much less comment on it.

You may bow out at any time. I promise you won't be missed.

halfspeed

That poor bike is so confused.

Jarrett2

I can finally answer my own question. After quite a bit of research and now having ridden a couple titanium bikes and a number of steel bikes, I say "they" are wrong.

Modern, lightweight steels such as Reynolds 853, 953, True Temper OX Platinum and S3 have surpassed titanium as the "super" metal for bike frames.

This chart makes a lot more sense to me now after feeling the difference between a few different steel and titanium tubesets:



Along with the info here:
Strong Frames | Tubing Information

Jarrett2

Oh and I ended up buying that Gunnar Roadie frame at the LBS and having it built to spec. It turned out better looking that I thought it would and after riding it a bit I have determined that it is the shiz

JohnJ80

My take has been that you can build a good frame or a bad frame with any of the materials available - Ti, Steel, Stainless Steel, Carbon. Or at least, you can build in almost any set of typical characteristics with any of those materials. However, with steel, it's just easier because the material is easier with which to work.

I now have two steel bikes in large part because I needed some custom work to deal with my long legs, long torso, short arms, and a worn out neck. This would have been prohibitively expensive to do in carbon and to a lesser degree with Ti. The easiest way for me to get what I wanted was with steel. Given that today's steel is not the same steel your father built his bikes from, it's now possible to build a light, fast, compliant/comfortable frame in steel using the same straightforward steel assembly techniques that have been refined over the decades.

J.

jamesdak 

LOL, and as a steel owner (multiple 853 bikes) and advocate I just went the opposite direction and ordered my first Ti bike. The price was right and even with my funky fit I was able to get into an "off the shelf" Ti bike that'll fit me just fine. Getting old and comfort for the long rides I do is winning out over speed. Enjoy your new ride!

Trakhak

Great choice, and congratulations. No one can accuse you of rushing into an impulse buy!

All the talk about steel is making me consider taking my Reynolds 853 bike out for the first time in 10 years.

rpenmanparker 

It just isn't that simple. The design that makes best use of the chosen material will make a huge difference. And road feel is not a simple function of strength-to-weight ratio. Either with regard only to the material or considering design as well, road feel is a complex property. I wouldn't say a modern steel frame cannot feel as good as the best of modern Ti, but so far in my experience my Merlin Works CR Ti is better than any steel I have felt. Second place goes to the steel Ritchey Breakaway.

fietsbob

Down side? It Is a Bottom Bracket it's at the Bottom


You wont be going in for the BB 30 an all the press fit BBs but you can always Get a Normal Square taper BB


Want stiff? I packed up a Lynskey bike, a touring rider crossed the country On ... the Downtube was Huge.

I think it was one of these : https://www.lynskeyperformance.com/store/backroad.html