Steel, Aluminum, Ti and Carbon bikes, interesting write-up
12-09-07, 07:38 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Steel, Aluminum, Ti and Carbon bikes, interesting write-up
I found this interesting write-up about the difference between Steel, Aluminum, Ti and Carbon bikes; I think my next bike may be steel since the ride is said to be more comfortable.
How many people here have both a carbon and steel bike, or have a carbon bike but will be looking to get a steel bike next?
https://www.smartcycles.com/frame_materials.htm
I guess this is probably old news to may bike aficionados here, but I thought it was an interesting article. Question, do most of the top-end steel bikes manufacturers now use this lighter Nivachrome steel? I always thought steel frames were so much heavier than carbon but it seems that there are some very light steel frames out there also.
How many people here have both a carbon and steel bike, or have a carbon bike but will be looking to get a steel bike next?
https://www.smartcycles.com/frame_materials.htm
We know more about steel than any other of the materials used to build bikes. It is one of the basic building blocks of our civilization. Even though it has been over 150 years since Henry Bessemer figured out how to produce steel commercially and cheaply, new developments keep coming. In the early 1990s, Columbus announced the introduction of Nivachrome steel. Previous steels used to build bikes were chrome-moly alloys that lost as much as 40% of their strength after brazing. Nivachrome was the first alloy specifically developed for building bicycles. In the hands of a competent builder, Nivachrome loses only 10% of its strength after building. Also, it is a highly ductile steel (not brittle like glass) and has a very high tensile strength. The results? Steel tubes could be made thinner and lighter.
Previously, because so much strength was lost in brazing or welding, the tubing maker had to put a lot of redundant material in the tubing to allow for the loss of strength. A normal tube in 1976 was 0.9mm at the butted end and 0.6 in the center. With Nivachrome, that changed to 0.7mm at the butt and 0.4 in the center. This is a reduction of 1/3 of the mass of the tube with no loss of strength or durability.
Previously, because so much strength was lost in brazing or welding, the tubing maker had to put a lot of redundant material in the tubing to allow for the loss of strength. A normal tube in 1976 was 0.9mm at the butted end and 0.6 in the center. With Nivachrome, that changed to 0.7mm at the butt and 0.4 in the center. This is a reduction of 1/3 of the mass of the tube with no loss of strength or durability.
Last edited by MulliganAl; 12-09-07 at 08:10 AM.
12-09-07, 08:01 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm goiong from high end steel to carbon at the moment, but only because the steel frame was way too small, and the first/best replacement frame to come along was a great deal on a carbon. Still not built up fully. I'll let you know in a couple of weeks how it compares to the steel.
12-09-07, 09:17 AM
#3
Don't Bug Me
When I switch back to my steel Bianchi after riding my carbon or Ti bike, it is just too heavy and sluggish handling. I really don't notice any huge difference in ride quality in the steel either, but maybe that is just me.
12-09-07, 10:28 AM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Spencer, IN
Posts: 689
Bikes: Trek 5200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I like the way my good steel bikes ride vs. my carbon fiber bike. They have a springy, snappy feel that can't be replicated in Carbon. But the carbon fiber bike is stiffer, lighter, and faster. When I'm racing or doing a fast group ride, I go for the carbon. When doing centuries or club riding, I use steel. Both have their pluses and minuses.
IMO - the design of the frame has a lot more to do with the ride quality and stiffness than the material.
IMO - the design of the frame has a lot more to do with the ride quality and stiffness than the material.
12-09-07, 11:05 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 4,850
Bikes: Yeti ASRc, Focus Raven 29er, Flyxii FR316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I found this interesting write-up about the difference between Steel, Aluminum, Ti and Carbon bikes; I think my next bike may be steel since the ride is said to be more comfortable.
I guess this is probably old news to may bike aficionados here, but I thought it was an interesting article. Question, do most of the top-end steel bikes manufacturers now use this lighter Nivachrome steel? I always thought steel frames were so much heavier than carbon but it seems that there are some very light steel frames out there also.
I guess this is probably old news to may bike aficionados here, but I thought it was an interesting article. Question, do most of the top-end steel bikes manufacturers now use this lighter Nivachrome steel? I always thought steel frames were so much heavier than carbon but it seems that there are some very light steel frames out there also.
To say that steel will make a more comfortable frame than Ti, Carbon or even aluminum is absurd and displays a lack of knowledge about the things they SHOULD know about.
And, those superlight steel frames will cost you an arm and a leg. No one besides custom builders works with superlight steel, because it's not very economical to do so. The masses don't want steel, so the custom builders fill the niche, and do quite well serving a smaller crowd.
12-09-07, 11:21 AM
#6
Erstwhile Trogon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,032
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Barring some sexy uber-bike coming along in CF, I can't imagine buying anything but steel in the future.
Have no interest in aluminum bikes - I like what I have.
Have no interest in titanium bikes - same comment.
CF still holds some appeal strictly from an eye candy perspective. If Look for example came along with something irresistable - I'd consider it.
From here on though - I like to do custom and steel is the way to go. For me it has no limitations.
Have no interest in aluminum bikes - I like what I have.
Have no interest in titanium bikes - same comment.
CF still holds some appeal strictly from an eye candy perspective. If Look for example came along with something irresistable - I'd consider it.
From here on though - I like to do custom and steel is the way to go. For me it has no limitations.
12-09-07, 11:49 AM
#7
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posts: 32,989
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene '04; Bridgestone RB-1 '92
Mentioned: 325 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11960 Post(s)
Liked 6,629 Times
in
3,477 Posts
I didn't know you were a troll DK. And to dare use the term "absurd" in a statement that is nothing if it isn't absurd is . . . very laughable. It is inarguable in most opinions that steel is the most comfortable bike material. In fact, steel is so comfortable there would virtually be no use for it as a bike material if it wasn't. The only thing that comes close to it in most opinions is Ti, and in my particular experience, the Ishiwata steel on my Bridgestone is a silkier ride to me than even my Ti Merlin.
Not to say that frame geometry and design are non-factors. But just looking at frame materials . . . all else being equal steel will come out ahead every time.
__________________
See, this is why we can't have nice things. - - smarkinson
Where else but the internet can a bunch of cyclists go and be the tough guy? - - jdon
12-09-07, 12:19 PM
#8
Banned.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
i'm so curious about steel...i want one...
i have a carbon road bike, carbon tt/tri bike, a titanium cyclocross/utility/touring/commuting bike on the way, and an aluminum mountain bike i plan on getting this spring. now i want a steel bike too!!!!! now...i just have to find a way to justify it...maybe it can be my campus bike? i don't know...
btw...who are the highly respected custom steel frame makers?
i have a carbon road bike, carbon tt/tri bike, a titanium cyclocross/utility/touring/commuting bike on the way, and an aluminum mountain bike i plan on getting this spring. now i want a steel bike too!!!!! now...i just have to find a way to justify it...maybe it can be my campus bike? i don't know...
btw...who are the highly respected custom steel frame makers?
12-09-07, 12:22 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 7,481
Bikes: Too many to list!
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
I own an AL, a steel and a carbon framed road bike. They all ride differently because of the different wheelsets/tires and size of the frame tubes - not really because of the frame material. All else being equal (and it never is), you can compare frame material. Other than that, you really can't compare with any level of accuracy.
To me, frame material is darn near a non-issue given the above.
... Brad
To me, frame material is darn near a non-issue given the above.
... Brad
12-09-07, 12:32 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 4,850
Bikes: Yeti ASRc, Focus Raven 29er, Flyxii FR316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I didn't know you were a troll DK. And to dare use the term "absurd" in a statement that is nothing if it isn't absurd is . . . very laughable. It is inarguable in most opinions that steel is the most comfortable bike material. In fact, steel is so comfortable there would virtually be no use for it as a bike material if it wasn't. The only thing that comes close to it in most opinions is Ti, and in my particular experience, the Ishiwata steel on my Bridgestone is a silkier ride to me than even my Ti Merlin.
Not to say that frame geometry and design are non-factors. But just looking at frame materials . . . all else being equal steel will come out ahead every time.
12-09-07, 01:10 PM
#12
Blast from the Past
Comfort is dependent on how the steel is formed into tubes (double and triple butting, etc), the geometry, and the actual fit of the bike.
To say that steel will make a more comfortable frame than Ti, Carbon or even aluminum is absurd and displays a lack of knowledge about the things they SHOULD know about.
And, those superlight steel frames will cost you an arm and a leg. No one besides custom builders works with superlight steel, because it's not very economical to do so. The masses don't want steel, so the custom builders fill the niche, and do quite well serving a smaller crowd.
To say that steel will make a more comfortable frame than Ti, Carbon or even aluminum is absurd and displays a lack of knowledge about the things they SHOULD know about.
And, those superlight steel frames will cost you an arm and a leg. No one besides custom builders works with superlight steel, because it's not very economical to do so. The masses don't want steel, so the custom builders fill the niche, and do quite well serving a smaller crowd.
Im convinced the rise of the Carbon frame has as much to do with the development of cheap manufacturing techniques overseas as anything else.
There are some great bikes out there whichever direction you go.
12-09-07, 01:34 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I have a steel commuter and a CF race bike. There is no comparison in terms of climbing and handling, CF is much stiffer and more responsive. However, for day-to-day riding I am not afraid to lock up my steel bike to a lighpoll.
12-09-07, 01:58 PM
#14
Nerd Rider
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
that is not an interesting writeup. That is an out of date rant by a retrogrouch. Here are the legitimate arguments for steel that I've heard:
1) Aesthetics. If you like the look of lugged steel then that's great. Buy it if it makes you happy.
another semi-legitimate argument for steel is fatigue life. It is true that Aluminum bikes have a finite fatigue life, but that life is quite long. It's also not clear to me that Steel bikes are loaded below their fatigue limit.
Otherwise steel bikes are probably heavier, more prone to corrosion problems, and more flexible than bikes built of other materials. If you want a better ride put fatter tires on your bike.
1) Aesthetics. If you like the look of lugged steel then that's great. Buy it if it makes you happy.
another semi-legitimate argument for steel is fatigue life. It is true that Aluminum bikes have a finite fatigue life, but that life is quite long. It's also not clear to me that Steel bikes are loaded below their fatigue limit.
Otherwise steel bikes are probably heavier, more prone to corrosion problems, and more flexible than bikes built of other materials. If you want a better ride put fatter tires on your bike.
05-15-08, 10:51 PM
#15
Go Big Red
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
What about the steel bikes with carbon parts?https://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...BSI%26otn%3D12
05-15-08, 11:09 PM
#16
Peloton Shelter Dog
Ti 'doesn't ride as well as steel'. Yeah, OK. Whatever you say poindexter.
05-15-08, 11:13 PM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: On the intramaweb thing.
Posts: 1,016
Bikes: Steel geared. Steel Fix.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Why don't we have plastic bikes?
Surely some modern plastic would be good frame material??
Surely some modern plastic would be good frame material??
05-15-08, 11:25 PM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 927
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Frame material selection is highly ego-involved. People like what they like and no one can tell them otherwise. In the end, I think there's a reason that steel, titanium, and carbon are sharing the high-end market and that no one has reached dominance. People like various materials, and some like even more to be associated with what that material is associated with. If carbon makes you feel like a Tour rider on your group ride, go for it. If steel allows you to reconnect with your cycling past and you enjoy being the dark horse old-school guy, go for it. Any of the three will build up to a fine frameset.
05-15-08, 11:33 PM
#19
Navy Recruiter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 500
Bikes: Trek VRX 300; Scott Speedster S2; Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
i'm so curious about steel...i want one...
i have a carbon road bike, carbon tt/tri bike, a titanium cyclocross/utility/touring/commuting bike on the way, and an aluminum mountain bike i plan on getting this spring. now i want a steel bike too!!!!! now...i just have to find a way to justify it...maybe it can be my campus bike? i don't know...
btw...who are the highly respected custom steel frame makers?
i have a carbon road bike, carbon tt/tri bike, a titanium cyclocross/utility/touring/commuting bike on the way, and an aluminum mountain bike i plan on getting this spring. now i want a steel bike too!!!!! now...i just have to find a way to justify it...maybe it can be my campus bike? i don't know...
btw...who are the highly respected custom steel frame makers?
-Barry-
05-15-08, 11:36 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Comfort is dependent on how the steel is formed into tubes (double and triple butting, etc), the geometry, and the actual fit of the bike.
To say that steel will make a more comfortable frame than Ti, Carbon or even aluminum is absurd and displays a lack of knowledge about the things they SHOULD know about.
And, those superlight steel frames will cost you an arm and a leg. No one besides custom builders works with superlight steel, because it's not very economical to do so. The masses don't want steel, so the custom builders fill the niche, and do quite well serving a smaller crowd.
To say that steel will make a more comfortable frame than Ti, Carbon or even aluminum is absurd and displays a lack of knowledge about the things they SHOULD know about.
And, those superlight steel frames will cost you an arm and a leg. No one besides custom builders works with superlight steel, because it's not very economical to do so. The masses don't want steel, so the custom builders fill the niche, and do quite well serving a smaller crowd.
05-15-08, 11:37 PM
#22
Batüwü Creakcreak
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The illadelph
Posts: 20,791
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times
in
160 Posts
WRONG. My Reynolds steel Bianchi is substantially more comfortable (read less road buzz/vibration) than my alum. frame Allez (both have carbon fork). Riding 30 plus miles on chip seal road with my Alez is jarring and makes my wrists and neck ache...not so with the Bianchi. The "softer" ride of steel is readily apparent after a few miles. I have not ridden a cf frame for more than 2 miles so I cannot compare....maybe a good solution for my yet to arrive stimulus check.
So are wheels, tires, saddle, fork, etc, right?
05-16-08, 04:33 AM
#23
Aluminium Crusader :-)
As far as I remember, Nivacrom (made by Columbus) was introduced around '88 or '89!! Even way before that, Reynolds' heat-treated "753" steel was around in 1976 or '77!! Nivacrom was kinda superseded in 1999 by Columbus Thermacrom; and Columbus has since introduced 'better'/lighter steels: https://www.columbustubi.com/eng/1.htmin this day and age, despite the 'advances' of steel, steel frames are always gunna be "way" heavier than carbon. A light steel frame (without fork) is around 1400/1500g, but a light carbon frame is around 850g!!
Last edited by 531Aussie; 05-16-08 at 04:44 AM.
05-16-08, 04:42 AM
#24
Peloton Shelter Dog
Here's my steel vs. Ti experience: 1996 or so I get a Jamis Dragon hard tail MTB. Cro-moly steel. Love the bike. Very resiliant. Then in 1999 I upgrade to the Jamis Reynolds 853 Dragon. Lighter, etc., but too stiff for me. Never liked it compared to the original Dragon. Just got a Motobecane Fly Ti hard tail. LOVE it, much more lively and resiliant than either of the previous steel hard tails.
I've been riding Ti road bicycles since 1991. I've never ridden a steel frame that compares in comfort, overall feel, etc.
I've been riding Ti road bicycles since 1991. I've never ridden a steel frame that compares in comfort, overall feel, etc.
05-16-08, 04:50 AM
#25
Aluminium Crusader :-)
It was probably appropriate to generalize about materials many moons ago -- say, the early '90s -- because most steel frames were similar, and most alu frames were similar (early '90s Kleins and Cannondales), but these days, any material can be made stiff or comfortable. I've had modern alu frames that were more felxy than any steel frame I've ever had; and carbon can be made as stiff as bricks or floppy as wet noodles