JohnJ80

I'm going to be building a new bike this winter. Given my difficulty getting a decent fit, I'm having a frame made. I'm planning on a stainless steel frame to replace my older carbon frame (circa 2007) that has a lot of miles on it and has been run into the garage on top of the car once. Dave Anderson of Anderson Custom Bikes in St. Paul will build it.

I'm planning on having this be an modern compact frame geometry with Ultegra 6870 Di2 with a DA 9000 crank I already have. Frame size will be somewhere in the 56-57cm range, Enve 2.0 fork, etc... I have two sets of wheels, both tubular: Easton 38mm Carbons and HED Belgium C2/DT 350/32 spoke wheels

I'd like to get a sense of the weight of the bike from those that have a similar bike already. I've got a weight estimate from my spreadsheet that has costs and components on it but I'd like to get a sense of what happen in the real world.

I'm not a weight weenie but I don't really want to get any heavier than my current bike which is not a particularly light CF bike (17.7 or so). But, within reason, I'd like to keep it as light as possible for car top wrangling and I just like the way a light bike feels.

Anyone have any examples?

J.

bikemig 

I'd listen to the advice of the builder and go with the tubing/weight that he recommends. You are paying him for his expertise, right? He knows what will hold up over time.

clausen

I have my Colnago Master at 18.2 not going all weight weenie with Campagnolo Centaur and Zonda wheels. I've seen one in 16s with light weight wheels and full Record.

With identical components and wheels, any difference you do notice would most likely be do to geometry and not a extra pound.

JohnJ80

Of course, and it's a collaborative effort. But a frame is just part of the weight - about a third to a quarter depending on bike, I want to make sure I'm covering the rest of the bases as well as the frame. Since a steel frame is not going to be lighter than a CF frame, the devil is in the detail.

J.

bikemig 

There's a discussion here (with links) of a lightweight steel R&E bike:

The lightest custom racing bicycles | Lighter than carbon fiber | The Steel Rodriguez Outlaw

Obviously this is ad copy for their bike but it gives you an idea of what can be done with steel and the info/links are I think useful.

Vicegrip

As you have noted weight a consideration I have to ask why stainless steel. I work with metals and stainless steel is a an interesting metal group to work with but strength to weight is poor at best. In the metals titainum is all over stainless steel with regards to finished strenght to weight. In order to make the steel resist corrosion compromises have to be made in other aspects.

rpenmanparker 

Reynolds stainless tubing is super strong due to air hardening and cold working techniques. Perhaps not as good a strength to weight ratio as Ti, but very competitive with the best of non-stainless modern bicycle steels. It is phenomenal stuff.

OP, lightest steel frames these days are about 2.5 lb (here is where someone will come in and claim lighter, but no matter). Normal is about 3.5 lb. These are frame only. If you can get to 3.0 lb, you are doing really well. I can't predict weight for the build up you are considering, but beating 17.7 lb isn't hard. I have a 4+ lb steel frame bike that weighs about 16.25 lb with clinchers. Of course, I have SRAM Red and a carbon fork on it, which makes things a lot easier. Also I weigh the bike in showroom condition, without pedals, computer mounts or water bottle cages. Those are worth about 0.75 lb on my bikes. If you want a light bike, you have to attend to every detail.

FBinNY 

You are going to have a very tough time hitting your weight target unless you use a CF fork. With a CF fork you should be able to come very close without going nuts, but don't forget that things like saddles are where there are large weight differences.

What you might do, is get Dave A. to give you the approximate weight of the frame and fork, then compare that to typical CF frames and forks. That will give you the difference, which you can add to the weight of a comparably equipped full carbon bike.

Vicegrip

details of this weight and that method aside the simple fact is steel alloys are compromised in order to reduce oxidation. Stainless fastners are nice bit are not as strong as their non stainless counterparts. The strongest steels are not stainless. I am not trying to second guessthe op and his desire for a stainless frame only that he wants stainless and low weight. Stainless is also very sensitive to proper welding and has a small heat range tolerance during fabrication.
Ti is also finicky for that matter.

There is a reason most folks don't use stainless for bike frames.

FBinNY 

Times change, and so do materials. Teynolds new SS alloy has excellent mechanical properties, rivaling that of non-stainess alloys used on bikes. In any case, the issue and weight barrier for steel hasn't been strength for a long time. The problem is flex and riding properties. Unlike Ti and aluminum, steel cannot be rolled into larger diameter tubes to increase rigidity because the walls get too thin. It's that tube diameter and wall thickness limit that sets the floor for steel frames, not steels strength.

bt

I would buy an off the shelf carbon frame and ride it like I stole it.

This ain't the seventies

sced

Guy plunks down big coin for custom SS and worries about weight.

merlinextraligh

Reynolds 953 has the highest strength to weight ratio of all the tubesets they make, approaching that of titanium.

And it looks really cool.

Vicegrip

non troll question. Given the above why is it not a common frame material? Apology to the op for the hyjack too.

Edit. A quick check on the alloy shows it requires post fabrication and welding heat treatment to maintain properties even in thin wall form. Frame builder has to be able to properly treat or send it to be treated.

JohnJ80

Great information - thanks!

What's hard to get is real world examples of what actual bikes weigh. With some of the development on tubing in recent years, I was surprised to see some of the actual build weights on frames recently.

Yep. Will have a carbon fork.

I know this won't be as light as a carbon bike. I just want to keep it in the sub 17.7lb range for wrangling purposes (shoulder problem).

J.

rpenmanparker 

Light wheels are key to a light build.

Kopsis

A typical older "entry level" CF frame will tip the scales at 1500g (3.3 lb). A "high end" steel frame should easily be under 3.5 lb. So you're only looking a a quarter pound disadvantage which you can make up with lighter components. What's a little puzzling is why a CF bike (even with a relatively heavy frame) running an Ultegra/DA mix and tubulars would come in at nearly 18 lbs? Frame, fork, group, wheelset, and tires gets you (conservatively) to about 13.6 lb, so you have 4.1 lb in saddle, bars, stem, seatpost and misc. which seems quite high (even if you include pedals and bottle cages).

merlinextraligh

Other than looks, I don't think it offers major advantages to Ti, and it appears to be more expensive, likely, at least in part, for the reasons you mention.

That said, I want a Waterford built 953 frame, as an homage to a vintage chromed Paramount.

RollCNY

Reynolds 953 is a martensitic stainless. Most bolts that you reference are austenitic. It is a primary difference between 300 and 400 series stainless.

JoeB14

I apologize for a reply that ignores your original question...but I had Dave build me a steel frame a couple years ago and I was very happy with the entire process. The bike fits and rides very well, and is the one of three that I ride the most.

47p2

I have an off the shelf Genesis Volare built with Reynolds 931 tubing and full Ultegra 6800 which tips the scales at around 8kg. Certainly not a lightweight but it is comfortable enough to ride an imperial century without feeling like I've killed myself

FBinNY 

Yeah, definitely a serious risk for hernia if you lift it.

BoSoxYacht

Yep. The CF frame I'm having built has a projected weight of around 2 pounds. Enve makes some lightweight tubing.



Stainless steel is for boat anchors.

BoSoxYacht

You are way off. Try more like 1000-1100. My 61cm Pedal Force(purchased in 2007) weighs 1050g

FBinNY 

Why are folks debating CF frames. The OP asked about the projected weight of a 931 SS frame he was considering. We don't know why he wants a steel frame, but that's not our concern, the fact is that he does.

I also see no conflict between opting for steel and being concerned about weight. I'm sure the OP knows that a steel frame won't be as light as a CF frame, but simply wants to know if it will come into the stated range, which I believe it will, though just barely.