Is steel really that much better?

zoglug

Hey everyone,

In a previous post, i was asking about how much is too much on a first bike, and from that, id come to the conclusion spend what you can afford! On this basis, id pretty much settled on an On One 456.

However, when i move back from Dubai, the gf is wanting to get a house etc, so i feel that my bike budget (i am a keen cyclist but has mainly been on the tarmac) is shrinking. Now the lure of the On One was the steel frame, ok, the components were very good too but the comfort people spoke about from a steel frame was drawing me towards it.

So now i have a new question, is steel that much more comfortable than alu thats its worth spending over a grand on it, compared to buying something like a Cube Acid, or Rockhopper, or Mongoose Tyax Elite? As i am absolutely certain my missus would much rather i came home with a Mongoose Tyax Elite at £350 than and On One 456 or Ragley Blue Pig at around £1,100!

Cheers

Zog

warpcow

It's not necessarily more comfortable (especially with On One), just different. Rather than listening to the usual "It's strong and springy!"/"No, it's heavy and outdated!" you'll get on most forums, you're better off just trying to ride one. It's still just a bike at the end of the day.

I own an Inbred, and think it rides really well. It's not really got as much 'steel-feel' as other steel bikes (and I've had a few), but the frame geometry is spot-on for me, and they're cheap! Then there are also quite a few people who think steel frames just look nicer, and that a little added weight is not an issue. The geometry (imo) and components will obviously be better than a £300 bike.

GyatsoLa

I think its wrong to think in terms of steel being 'more comfortable' or such-like. I think bike design and tube choice is just as important as material.

To give an example - I have three steel mtb's - an On One Inbred, a Kona Unit (singlespeed version of the Explosif) and a custom off-road tourer from Robin Mather. They all feel very different. The Unit has what I think of as a classic steel feel - taut but springy. My Mather is very lovely to ride but I don't think it feels that much different from a good alu frame (hard to say without using identical components). In all honesty, I never got on that well with the Inbred, but that was more a geometry thing that a material one - its a little too long in the top tube for me.

aaronmroach

I still have my M-Trax Ti 4000 sl from my racing days back in the mid to late 90's, it's a Titanium reynolds 853 mixed tube frame (it has Ti top down and seat tube with reynolds rear stays and frame lugs). It has a very forgiving ride on UK trails and seems to kill most of the buzz my alloy chameleon used to transfer to my legs!!!

I do miss the feel of a light weight steel frame on the trails, I would recomend you buy one and keep it for rainy days!!!!!!!

Apparantly if you can stretch to the Pace RC104 it rides like the muts nuts!!!!

Fudgie

I've got a steel framed Whyte and also a slightly older Kona Kula alu. They're both about the same weight and the performance is similar. However, the Kona gives a rather unforgiving hard ride compared to the Whyte which absorbs the hardest edges of the trail. But some alu bikes are softer and vice versa.

I'd say that the difference is down to individual bikes rather than frame material and choosing steel over alu is a luxury rather than a necessity. So if the budget is tight stick to alu.

If you really want comfort you'll have to go full-suss but that's a lot more money!

AndyOgy

I'll be keeping it steel from now on. Well, avoiding aluminium anyway.

Three of my bikes are around 20 years old. Two of those are steel and one is aluminium. Both the steel ones still ride like they're brand new. The aluminium one has....issues.

I got a Rockhopper (alu) a couple of years ago. It felt great at first and it's still one hell of a climber. It just feels a bit 'dull' now, like it's lost it's zest. There are some who will say that it's just me getting used to the frame. But the same thing doesn't happen with steel bikes, it's almost like they improve with age.

Anyway, just got a 456 and finished building it up recently. Haven't had chance to ride it aggressively off road yet but early indications are that it's gonna be a whole heap of fun to ride.

The Rookie

There is no reason why Ally can't be as forgiving as steel, its all in the design of the tubing (although the characteristics of spring 'rate' versus the hysteresis (internal damping) will always be different).

As an example my daughter as just reframed her Scott Voltage (super stiff chain and seat stays as suites its design criteria - she got it as getting a frame for her 5'3" is hard) with a Dirty Jo Full Creme, the one thing she noticed straight away was how much more forgiving and comfortable the Dirty Jo frame was (and it weighs about 1Kg less as well!) compared to the Scott, but while its about as 'forgiving', its more 'twangy' (rebounds quicker) than the GT Chucker steel frame she had tried out (Bought as a donor bike for my wifes bike build).

Simon

Ian43

I had a Boardman team which got stolen and a friend lent me an On one Inbred for a 50 mile sportive, and I thought as it was a slightly bigger frame I might struggle and it would be heavier, well I can report that it was fantastic and did me proud and was far lighter than I imagined it would be. I would gladly own one they are great bikes.

Pudseyp

Aluminium is lighter can can be as strong...it depends on the wall thickness of the steel and the temper of the aluminium. It also depends on how the frames are made such as hydroforming and the butting...so tecnically the steel vs alloy debate is bollocks really....

Aluminium frames will also be slightly more comfortable to ride as you will get some flex...also it doesn't rust...so look after it and it will allways be as good as steel

The Rookie

Pudseyp wrote:

Aluminium frames will also be slightly more comfortable to ride as you will get some flex...

You were doing really well to that point...are you saying steel doesn't flex? Which of course it does, so your point was.....

Simon

Pudseyp

The Beginner wrote:

Pudseyp wrote:

Aluminium frames will also be slightly more comfortable to ride as you will get some flex...

You were doing really well to that point...are you saying steel doesn't flex? Which of course it does, so your point was.....

Simon

But steel will always be stiffer

supersonic

As a tube, with the same dimensions, yes.

This does not mean the frame will be stiffer. Entirely depends on the design and profiles, as you originally said.

The Rookie

Why? Steel has greater sterngth, so wall thicknesses are lower, so the flex ends up about the same just with the steel frame weighing a little more. In fact it the steel can be made with proportionately thinner walls as the elastic limit (so it dents rather than springing back) is higher (proportionate to the strength). The real difference is the internal hysterisis that means ally frames ping back faster whereas a steel frame has more internal damping and it is that characteristic that makes a steel frame feel more comfortable, but if you like a taught 'race' feel frame you may prefer ally.

Simon

supersonic

Aluminium frames can be made far stiffer than steel frames for the same weight. There is a limit on how thin you can make the tube, and the ratio of the tube thickness to tube diameter has an upper limit if which passed makes the tube prone to buckling.

If looking at simple tubes, two of the same dimensions will have the steel tube three times stiffer, yet three times heavier than an aluminium. But if you double the aluminium tubes diameter yet keep the wall thickness the same, you now have a tube that is eight times stiffer than previously, but only twice the weight. So the tube is 8/3 times stiffer than the steel one, yet 2/3rds its weight. This is generally why many aluminium frames feel stiffer than steel ones.

But those figures can be manipulated a lot. Some alloys allow thinner wall tubes, and have higher tensile strengths. But stiffness really does come down to the end profiles.

Absorbtion of high frequency buzz is a different matter ;-)

Pudseyp

Like I said it all depends on what steel and what aluminium...there are hundreds of grades and tempers...so steel being stronger than aluminium is a bold statement to make...

Strength refers to the maximum load that a material can be subjected to without yielding.

Stiffness refers to how much a material bends when a load is applied.

supersonic

The tensile strength of the material has no bearing on the modulus though in the steels and alus used in the bike industry though. Cheap hit ten steel has the same modulus as Reynolds 853.

But the frames will often feel different, as like I said before, the tubing profile is key. Plus you can use thinner 853 tubes as it is stronger.

rockmonkeysc

I prefer steel for hardtail frames though I haven't tried a top end aluminium frame but my On-One 456 Summer Season has a much better ride than my mates Rockhopper or my Hardrock. The nicest hardtail I have rode is the Orange P7 (steel), amazing ride quality & they somehow seem to hide the extra weight very well, it feels no heavier to ride than my Hardrock single speed which is 5lb lighter.

zoglug

Cheers guys!

Very interesting discussion here, but im guessing most have had this several times before! As i say, i was just curious as it will be my first mountain bike and i was certain it was the On One! Then the gf almost died when i told her how much, so i have had to reasses! Appreciate there are a lot of differences in components etc but thought id see about frame material!

Now questioning if its sensible to spend the grand on my first bike, or take delivery of one of the cheaper hardtails to get to grips with! No doubt im going to be flying off it more often than not and to wreck a £1,000 bike would kill me! Or if that didnt the gf would! ha ha!

AndyOgy

Get the cheaper one to begin with. Then put a little aside each month and save up for the On-One. That way, after riding the cheaper one for a while, you'll appreciate just how great the 456 really is.

Don't get sucked into upgrading the cheaper bike.

The Rookie

Go for a Carrera Fury, can be had (when on 'offer' for less than £500 and its certain that a £1000 bike isn't twice as good, that or the Voodoo Hoodoo for about the same price. As AndyO says don't upgrade it (unless or until parts have worn out anyway), apart from maybe Forks/wheels (once you know you like the MTB thing), then you keep the originals and put them, back on and move the better ones onto your 456 frame when you get it.....

Simon

supafly1982

The Beginner wrote:

Why? Steel has greater sterngth, so wall thicknesses are lower, so the flex ends up about the same just with the steel frame weighing a little more. In fact it the steel can be made with proportionately thinner walls as the elastic limit (so it dents rather than springing back) is higher (proportionate to the strength). The real difference is the internal hysterisis that means ally frames ping back faster whereas a steel frame has more internal damping and it is that characteristic that makes a steel frame feel more comfortable, but if you like a taught 'race' feel frame you may prefer ally.

Simon

torsion bars are a good example

rockmonkeysc

Now questioning if its sensible to spend the grand on my first bike, or take delivery of one of the cheaper hardtails to get to grips with! No doubt im going to be flying off it more often than not and to wreck a £1,000 bike would kill me! Or if that didnt the gf would! ha ha!

It would take a LOT to damage an On-One frame, mine has been crashed hard plenty of times and not even marked the paint yet!
Aluminium frames can dent very easily, especially light weight, hydroformed frames like the Rockhopper, the tubes are extremely thin in places

Pudseyp

supafly1982 wrote:

The Beginner wrote:

Why? Steel has greater sterngth, so wall thicknesses are lower, so the flex ends up about the same just with the steel frame weighing a little more. In fact it the steel can be made with proportionately thinner walls as the elastic limit (so it dents rather than springing back) is higher (proportionate to the strength). The real difference is the internal hysterisis that means ally frames ping back faster whereas a steel frame has more internal damping and it is that characteristic that makes a steel frame feel more comfortable, but if you like a taught 'race' feel frame you may prefer ally.

Simon

torsion bars are a good example

And what has that got to do with it ?? I as SS and I have stated it's usage dependant....take an egg for an example, you can crack it easly on the side but it can take considerable pressure from the base to top...
If steel is that good, why aren't we making aircraft, cars, trains out of it and why are all the steel mills closing...

Anonymous

To summarise.
Steel is inferior, generally
Singlespeeders are just wrong
Paint on OnOne frames is legendarily poor.

/End thread.

rockmonkeysc

Nothing wrong with the glow in the dark paint on my Summer Season, nice and thick &still not even a scratch after several big crashes. It seems to be better than old on-one frames.
Nothing wrong with single speed, it's surprisingly good fun

bike-a-swan

yeehaamcgee wrote:

To summarise.
Steel is inferior, generally
Singlespeeders are just wrong
Paint on OnOne frames is legendarily poor.

/End thread.

I have one, and naahhhhh
I have one, and yes, probably....
I have two, and I really hope not any more!

Northwind

RockmonkeySC wrote:

It would take a LOT to damage an On-One frame, mine has been crashed hard plenty of times and not even marked the paint yet!

With most On Ones all you have to do is give it a hard stare and the paint falls off! They're painted with early learning centre poster paints I think.

Some steel frames are stiff. Some aren't. My aluminium Mmmbop's massively stiffer than my steel BFe, which is a lot stiffer than my aluminium Scandal was, which was stiffer than my steel Soul was. It's just one factor of many.

Acehole

Still got my 1995 Marin Pine Mountain, double butted cromoly. It's so tough that my rims have given in a few times, yet the frame is still solid. It's also super light, the whole bike only weighs 10.5kgs with rigid forks. It's stiffer than any aluminium I've ever ridden but I've not ridden any highend aluminium bikes so I can't compare.
Looking for another steel frame, let's hope they make them like they use to.