Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

steel frames-lugged vs. butted?

Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

steel frames-lugged vs. butted?

Old 09-08-04, 08:14 AM
  #1  
rj987652003
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
steel frames-lugged vs. butted?

I have an older italian lugged columbus tubing steel bike, but I notice all the new steel bikes are butted.

What are the advantages/disadvantages of each?
 
Old 09-08-04, 08:16 AM
  #2  
galen_52657
Banned.
 
galen_52657's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Towson, MD
Posts: 4,020

Bikes: 2001 Look KG 241, 1989 Specialized Stump Jumper Comp, 1986 Gatane Performanc

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rj987652003
I have an older italian lugged columbus tubing steel bike, but I notice all the new steel bikes are butted.

What are the advantages/disadvantages of each?
Unless it is fillet-brazed, it is welded. Welding is cheaper and faster to produce.
galen_52657 is offline  
Old 09-08-04, 08:22 AM
  #3  
boze
gentleman of leisure
 
boze's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 669
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
not all new steel frames are butted.

i got a cheap lugged italian steel frame from gvhbikes - look in their "special deals" section. but yeah, you usually won't see it on any new bikes that don't cost well over $2000.
boze is offline  
Old 09-08-04, 08:47 AM
  #4  
531Aussie
Aluminium Crusader :-)
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 10,040
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Below is a very interesting site for steel lovers, but you must be
warned that Henry James in VERY PRO STEEL and VERY "PRO LUGS", but
I highly recommend reading it:
http://www.henryjames.com/faq.html.

After reading his FAQ/FMS page I was never gunna buy a lugless frame,
but I've since calmed down, and now have two lugless steel bikes.
Apparently the new steels are designed to be welded and not lugged, and
they are supposed to be stronger than the old lugged stuff because they
gain strength after being subjected to the heat....but who knows? Many
bike shop guys have told me that it would be silly to lug one of the modern steels.

The weight issue is a bit misleading. Frame companies often claim that
lugless frames are lighter, simply because there are no lugs, but the lugless
tubes tend to have slightly larger diameters, therefore balancing out the
weight. For example, I have several old, lugged frames, one of which is a
1988 (!!) lugged 58cm Raleigh 531c which weighs 1864g (4.1lbs) without
the fork, and the "modern super dooper" lugless frames I have weigh
1670g (3.68lbs) and 1687g (3.72lbs) respectively. So, the removal of the
lugs, and 16 years of progress, although having improved strengh and stiffness,
the weight has only dropped about 180g (0.396lbs)!!!!!

Hmmmmm, that hasn't really answered your question, has it?

Let's see......lugs look better, but larger tubes on the new bikes look better
531Aussie is offline  
Old 09-08-04, 09:02 AM
  #5  
Fat Hack
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
It's difficult to compare the pros and cons of each because the old steels are different to the new: the older steels are not as strong as the new ones but they were strengthened by using lugs. The new steels are supposed to be much stronger, even without the lugs.

Occasionally, some of the newer, cheaper lugless frames will not have smooth welds, and can therefore look crappy.

Jeez, I haven't really answered your question either
 
Old 09-08-04, 09:07 AM
  #6  
a2psyklnut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Parrish, FL
Posts: 7,963

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Advantage to lugged. If you damage a tube it can be replaced/repaired. Can't do that with a welded frame.

Advantage to lugged. Appearance. Some lugs are works of art and if you have patience, the paint jobs can be incredible.

Advantage to welded. Cost and availability.

L8R
__________________
"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming, "WOW, What a Ride!" - unknown
"Your Bike Sucks" - Sky Yaeger
a2psyklnut is offline  
Old 09-08-04, 10:15 AM
  #7  
Fat Hack
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
Originally Posted by a2psyklnut
Advantage to lugged. If you damage a tube it can be replaced/repaired. Can't do that with a welded frame.
SH1T!! Is this true?
 
Old 09-08-04, 11:31 AM
  #8  
diddidit
Senior Member
 
diddidit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: West Michigan
Posts: 304

Bikes: Black Ruby, Big Red, and a nameless Schwinn MTB

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fat Hack
SH1T!! Is this true?
Yep, they're brazed together. Heat the lugs enough to re-melt the brazing and they'll come apart. It's sort of like taking apart soldered copper pipe, although brazing is a hotter process and forms a stronger bond.

did
diddidit is offline  
Old 09-08-04, 11:48 AM
  #9  
Phatman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NC
Posts: 3,411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by a2psyklnut
Advantage to lugged. If you damage a tube it can be replaced/repaired. Can't do that with a welded frame.
L8R
yea, right. its theortically possible, but its a lot of $$. it doesn't make economic sense, plus, if you're in a crash or something, other things will be screwed up, and before you know it, its better to just get a new frame and transfer the parts.
Phatman is offline  
Old 09-08-04, 01:04 PM
  #10  
2Rodies
El Diablo
 
2Rodies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Austin Tx, Ex So Cal
Posts: 2,750

Bikes: Cannondale CAAD8/Record 10s, Felt DA700 Chorus 10s,

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Phatman
yea, right. its theortically possible, but its a lot of $$. it doesn't make economic sense, plus, if you're in a crash or something, other things will be screwed up, and before you know it, its better to just get a new frame and transfer the parts.

Not true! In 92 I crashed and bent the top tube of my $1800.00 Tomissini. Sent it back to the factory and they repaired it and repainted it for $650.00. The frame true and just like it was when it was new.
2Rodies is offline  
Old 09-08-04, 11:10 PM
  #11  
froze
Banned.
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Posts: 4,761

Bikes: 84 Trek 660 Suntour Superbe; 87 Giant Rincon Shimano XT; 07 Mercian Vincitore Campy Veloce

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
531Aussie: My "old" 84 Trek 660 when I was racing it and had it in racing form weighed 21.5 pounds (with a steel fork, and tubulars); yet just last week a LBS weighed a 2004 Trek Madone (low end one) and it weighed 20 pounds with Ultegra components and Rolf wheels! You mean my old steel bike only weighed 1 1/2 pounds more then a carbon fiber bike? All I have to do is put my bike back into race form and add a carbon fork and the darn thing would weigh about the same as the Carbon Fiber job! (maybe adding also CF handlebars, and seatpost). Where is the weight savings that supposely the bike manufactures are pushing? But then Giant has a 16 pound CF bike, so that's pretty light.
froze is offline  
Old 09-08-04, 11:36 PM
  #12  
531Aussie
Aluminium Crusader :-)
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 10,040
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by froze
531Aussie: Where is the weight savings that supposely the bike manufactures are pushing? But then Giant has a 16 pound CF bike, so that's pretty light.
That's what I meant. My new super dooper Superprodigy (frame only) is only 177g light than the old lugged Raleigh!! The Cervelo also requires an external seat-post clamp which weighs 26g, but the old 531 requires heavier STI cable retainers, so, the difference in weight with all the screws and STI cable retainers is 174g (ok, only 3g difference). But still, 16 years of improvements in strength and stiffness have only provided a weight difference of 173g.

So, yeah, you could "schmikko" up your TREK and get it very light.
If you check out Weight Weenies (http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings.php), you'll notice that all the fancy the new steel frames, even the Scapins, struggle to get under 3.6lbs, and I'd be surprised if your frame was more than 4.2lbs without the fork.

Is that what you meant?

I once saw this guy's bike which was 531, but with a carbon fork, light wheels, titanium cassette, etc, and it was so light I couldn't believe it.
531Aussie is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
vintagerando
Bicycle Mechanics
17
03-09-18 11:24 AM
acrowder
Bicycle Mechanics
2
08-20-13 07:24 PM
nesdog
Road Cycling
4
04-23-13 03:55 AM
AlphaRed
Classic & Vintage
15
05-15-11 07:04 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.