yogi13

I've ridden steel, aluminum and carbon bikes. If they're well designed and fit you right they all work, and I'm sure Ti does also. All materials have some advantages and disadvantages related to weight, compliance, failure modes and probably a half dozen other things. I'll probably be pilloried for saying this, but it's gotten a lot harder to buy a new steel-framed bike without paying for a custom, and if you're a newbie you're better off getting fitted by an LBS than trying to get something used that will fit right. Bottom line, your roubaix is a nice ride designed for putting in long miles. If it's fun when you're pedaling, your LBS steered you right.

markwebb

I see this all the time as a retort to steel is a better material.....but I don't get it. Frame dynamics more a component of design??? I don't think I agree. A newer 853 steel frame or an older 531 or similar lugged frame both are remarkable all day comfort riding machines.

I'm not sure what is meant by "design". Design defined as what??? Do you mean frame geometry??? If so, I'll profer that the same frame geometry in a steel frame will offer a more comfy ride than the same geometry in an alumninum frame.

When you guys use this catch-all phrase Frame dynamics more a component of design to make the contention that the material is less relevant, what the heck to you mean by "design". I contend that given the same geometry, steel is more comfortable than aluminum. I've ridden many aluminum frames and never found one that was comfortable after 20 or so miles compared to a steel frame.

I guess I don't get it; I ride the most comfortable bike I can, which is always without fault steel. If I could afford Ti I might try it - I hear they are similar to steel and maybe in some cases superior. I'd also look at carbon. but I am hard on bikes and often careless; a plastic carbon frame would not last very long with me. Aluminum is my last choice all things considered.

But aluminum - the use of aluminum IMHO and from my observations has more to do with economics and ability to produce a frame at lower costs and slightly lower weight than it does because aluminum has any advantages in performance. And a good newer steelie is a quite lite machine anyway; if you're an average Joe wanna-be racer you can get faster by losing a few pounds around your body mid-section than you can by buying a slighter lighter alum frame.

I just don't get it. Help me out here.

CrossChain

Poet Yeats said, "It's the dancer, not the dance." For us, its the rider, not the ride. Gotta keep your eyes on the prize....fitness, pleasure, speed, personal achievement.......frame material is merely a tool to get there. Grant Peterson says the best you can say of a bike is: "It doesn't get in my way."

Your choice of materials won't make you better. Only your own effort, sacrifice, and whatever else is inside you will do that. We spend too much time on what is mostly a marginal concern.

carpediemracing 

Material is less important than how it's executed.

A really bad carbon frame (Walmart?) won't represent that genre well - but if you got a reasonably designed frame, it will fly the carbon colors proudly. Ditto aluminum and steel.

When someone pounded on aluminum, I couldn't resist writing on the material debate:
https://sprinterdellacasa.blogspot.co...-material.html

If you get the opportunity to ride a different bike for a decent distance, take it. File away your impressions and you'll be able to make a more complete choice the next time you buy a bike or frameset.

Finally, as others have pointed out, you should know more about how someone's info online might be prejudiced in a particular way (even me). I've met one of the people who wrote in that link you posted and would take his recommendations with a grain of salt.

hope this helps,
cdr

Phantoj

The author of that article makes several claims that are incorrect.

"Modern metallurgy teaches that if a steel tube is bent and released repeatedly, it will not break as long as the amount of this bending remains within what engineers call the "elastic" range of the metal."

or

the deformation of carbon under load is not linear, the worse the jolt or impact, the harsher the feel. It can make a good road nice, but it will make a bad road terrible as it bites back when the usual elastic limit of the carbon is reached.

for example. Simply not true.


Then there's a lot of unsubstantiated opinion, too.

ericcox

I have one steel (deddacai steel, lugged frame), and one carbon bike (Orbea Onix). I previously had a frame made from TT OX Gold (similar properties to 853). I like them all, but the carbon bike is more comfortable on long rides than either steel frame was / is.

But it really comes down to preferences. If you like steel, buy steel. If you like carbon, buy carbon, etc. etc. Why so many are so concerned about others preferences is beyond me.

cat0020

If you have a limited budget.. steel is the economical choice..

If you have some bucks to spend.. titanium does not rust, no need for paint, light in weight, very similar to steel ride quality.. it's the best real world frame material IMO.

If you have limited bucks and want the lighter frame for racing and don't mind replacing it every (few) season(s), go aluminum.

If you want the hotest, sexiest race machine.. carbon fiber.. but you'll probably regret it after the first scratch you get on the first scratch.

earleybird

I think a lot of what determines our preferences is our first experience. I started on steel and I expect I'll finish on it. I love the look of carbon but I'm too heavy for it. Aluminium is very rigid and stiff unless softened by carbon stays and forks.
I think you should try the other frame materials when you can. Borrow friends bikes and try em.
I love my steel frames . I have one I brazed together when I was at college in the 80's My favourite is a 15 year old 653 Ribble which is unbelievably light and confortable to ride I wouldn't swop it for a De Rosa Idol .

Scooper

This sums it up for me as well. My steel bikes are very comfy for my 65 year old butt on 100 mile rides, and I have confidence in their structural integrity. CF may be just as comfortable and just as sound structurally, but I'm not curious enough about them to invest the $$$ to find out. The custom steel bike I bought in March is probably the last one in any material I'll ever buy, and it's an absolute joy to me. The 61cm frame is Reynolds 953, and weighs only 1650g, so the "weight penalty" for a good steel frame is not really a significant factor.