Colnago Master-Steel Frames

davoj

Hi guys,

I am considering buying a Colnago master and using it as my main bike, I don't race and just do sportives so would this be considered a big no to go back to a Steel frames??

Is there a big weight difference and does it rust?

Would appreciate any feedback on anyone that has one or done the same.

Cheers

marjorie dawes

i have a steel frame and i think it weighs 2.8kg i think an aluminium frame are half that,
i have also recently ridden my mates cannondale caad8 (alloy) and couldn't believe how comfy it was,
the only advantage to the steel is a springy comfey ride (and looks in my opinion) well the caad 8 was just as comfy

rolf_f

marjorie dawes wrote:

i have a steel frame and i think it weighs 2.8kg i think an aluminium frame are half that,
i have also recently ridden my mates cannondale caad8 (alloy) and couldn't believe how comfy it was,
the only advantage to the steel is a springy comfey ride (and looks in my opinion) well the caad 8 was just as comfy

Just because your steel frame is made out of the armour plate from the Battleship Tirpitz doesn't mean all steel frames are as heavy. As far as I can see, the weight of the Master is normally quoted between 1.6 and 1.8 kilos including forks. The Caad 8 seems to be a little under 1.5kg, Obviously, frame size needs to be taken into account but the Colnago doesn't seem to be made out of the scaffold poles you are riding

http://www.totalcycling.com/index.php/p ... _PR82.html

So there is a weight difference but not so much and you could always find weight savings elsewhere. As for rust - it shouldn't do. My 20 year old Dawes Horizon is made from cruder materials than the Colnago and has done many thousands of miles in all weather and looks better than some bikes only a few months old. The pic below isn't that informative but does show a well used steel bike doesn't have to be a crumbly piece of rust! I own two steel road bikes, a steel MTB and two carbon road bikes (alloy frames lack something for me!) and, whilst I do love the carbon frames, somehow there is always a little of the BSO about them compared to the real, steel bikes!

Evil Laugh

Master's are heavier than that, I weighed mine, the results are on the thread in my sig. Think it was about 1.7 plus forks.

They are also surprisingly stiff frames. The forks are very very good. The frames are not the spongey steel you describe they are much firmer.

The frames are chromed under the paint so you do have protection against rust but they are not stainless steel so they will corrode.

They paint around the dropouts and stays is a bit fragile as it's painted onto polished chrome. If you paint on something polished it doesn't adhere as well as to a keyed surface.

rolf_f

Maybe the design has changed? The heaviest weight I found was 2kg and the lightest 1.6 but most in the 1.6-1.8 and I think that included the forks.

I don't like the idea of the whole frame being plated though - seems a bit of a crappy solution adding weight and, as you say, weakening the paint finish.

As for rust, just because its steel doesn't mean rust should be a problem except in the very long term. My 531 framed Raleigh has plenty of untreated scratches and scuffs and they show surface rust only. I'd hope that the Colnagos steel is of similar quality.

cedargreen

Good quality steel frames are actually made from lightweight steel alloys in which steel is combined with chrome, manganese, molybdenum. Even the lightest steels can't match the lightest carbon, aluminium or titanium frames but the weight penalty isn't all that great.

Steel frames will rust if you strip all the paint off and leave them outside in the rain, but visit a well used bike park at a train station or university and you'll see dozens of steel framed bikes from the 1970's and 1980's in everyday use. With a bit of TLC a steel bike will last a lifetime.

Are you eally set on a Colnago- I imagine it's pretty expensive and you can get a superb steel frame from Condor/ Rourke/ Mercian/ Bob Jackson to name but a few for around £600-£700, with the added advantage that you can visit their shops and discuss your requirements and get properly fitted. The real advantage of steel is the availability of true custom build. If the colnago is your dream bike though, just go for it.

rolf_f

cedargreen wrote:

Are you eally set on a Colnago- I imagine it's pretty expensive and you can get a superb steel frame from Condor/ Rourke/ Mercian/ Bob Jackson to name but a few for around £600-£700, with the added advantage that you can visit their shops and discuss your requirements and get properly fitted.

Bob Jackson charge not much more than £400 for a standard geometry handmade frame. £600 gets it made to measure.

davoj

Thanks guys for the feedback, i think i will go for it and purchase one. cheers

thegreatdivide

If your size isn't in stock be prepared for a 3 month wait!

Evil Laugh

Those weights sound a bit unrealistic to me.

My stripped steel frame is made of one of the lightest tubings (Colnagos aren't) and my frameset weighs 2.28 kg incl hollowtech BB which I guess is about 200g. I've had an old master and if anything it was heavier than my new one.

1.6 kg for frame and forks is I'd say almost impossible for steel but happy to be proven wrong! You'd be talking about the frame coming in at around a kilo which is light for Carbon.

Evil Laugh

Hey if you're a 57cm I can do you a good deal!

ugo.santalucia

The difference in weight is not a big issue, we are talking a pound, 0.5% more in the bike + rider combined weight and no, modern steels don't rust, unless you really treat them badly.
A Master is a beautiful frame, but will set you off around £ 1700,

may I lure you to have a look at this Look?

viewtopic.php?f=40049&t=12831597

marjorie dawes

Rolf F wrote:

marjorie dawes wrote:

i have a steel frame and i think it weighs 2.8kg i think an aluminium frame are half that,
i have also recently ridden my mates cannondale caad8 (alloy) and couldn't believe how comfy it was,
the only advantage to the steel is a springy comfey ride (and looks in my opinion) well the caad 8 was just as comfy

Just because your steel frame is made out of the armour plate from the Battleship Tirpitz doesn't mean all steel frames are as heavy. As far as I can see, the weight of the Master is normally quoted between 1.6 and 1.8 kilos including forks. The Caad 8 seems to be a little under 1.5kg, Obviously, frame size needs to be taken into account but the Colnago doesn't seem to be made out of the scaffold poles you are riding

http://www.totalcycling.com/index.php/p ... _PR82.html

So there is a weight difference but not so much and you could always find weight savings elsewhere. As for rust - it shouldn't do. My 20 year old Dawes Horizon is made from cruder materials than the Colnago and has done many thousands of miles in all weather and looks better than some bikes only a few months old. The pic below isn't that informative but does show a well used steel bike doesn't have to be a crumbly piece of rust! I own two steel road bikes, a steel MTB and two carbon road bikes (alloy frames lack something for me!) and, whilst I do love the carbon frames, somehow there is always a little of the BSO about them compared to the real, steel bikes!

thankyou rolf f, for your kind words
the weight i quoted for my steel frame was from the dawes web page, it is made of reynolds 620 tubing, the hole bike only weighs in at 9.5kg
so depending on components it doesent have to be the"TIRPITZ"

davoj

ugo.santalucia wrote:

The difference in weight is not a big issue, we are talking a pound, 0.5% more in the bike + rider combined weight and no, modern steels don't rust, unless you really treat them badly.
A Master is a beautiful frame, but will set you off around £ 1700,

may I lure you to have a look at this Look?

viewtopic.php?f=40049&t=12831597

Class bike, I really like it but I have my eyes on the Colnago master, I live in Ireland so its hard to get a good 2nd hand one but I will keep looking.

Thanks though

bobgfish

I've got a steel Colnago from the 1990's . It's not a master but a cheaper one made from Columbus Brain tubing. It's a 53cm and the bare frame weighs 1850grams. The Forks are 634 grams. Aiming to get the bike to abut 8 kilo's but doubt it will go much lighter than that.

If you are after a steel frame this guys seem to collect and sell a few. I have ordred from him and would do again. Payment is via Paypal so reasonable safe.
/http://matuzmaster.hu/en/vintage-frames/colnago-frames/

rolf_f

marjorie dawes wrote:

thankyou rolf f, for your kind words
the weight i quoted for my steel frame was from the dawes web page, it is made of reynolds 620 tubing, the hole bike only weighs in at 9.5kg
so depending on components it doesent have to be the"TIRPITZ"

It's a fair cop - I retract my overly harsh comments on your item of 620! But I think it isn't fair to condemn steel as having little advantage over aluminium. Apart from anything else, steel is more repairable and can last indefinitly whereas alloy frames aren't exactly likely to be handed down through the generations. I'll stick to steel or carbon for my own bikes.

Old Tuggo

I have aluminium frames and carbon framed bikes but my old Colnago steel framed one descends much better.

marjorie dawes

Rolf F wrote:

marjorie dawes wrote:

thankyou rolf f, for your kind words
the weight i quoted for my steel frame was from the dawes web page, it is made of reynolds 620 tubing, the hole bike only weighs in at 9.5kg
so depending on components it doesent have to be the"TIRPITZ"

It's a fair cop - I retract my overly harsh comments on your item of 620! But I think it isn't fair to condemn steel as having little advantage over aluminium. Apart from anything else, steel is more repairable and can last indefinitly whereas alloy frames aren't exactly likely to be handed down through the generations. I'll stick to steel or carbon for my own bikes.

i too am a big fan of steel, i much prefer the look, and as you say, it has longevity, 3 out of the 4 cycles i own are steel. 8)

Bordersroadie

davoj wrote:

Hi guys,

I am considering buying a Colnago master and using it as my main bike
Cheers

My winter/spring/autumn bike is a 27 year old Reynolds 531 (steel/chrome/moly as described above) framed lightweight tourer with modern components. I've had it since new and recently had it sandblasted and re-enamelled and I would expect another 27 years out of it. It's around 10kg and just lovely to ride so have no plans to ditch it.

A great resource for all things retro is http://www.retrobike.co.uk where you will get loads of advice including how to fit modern groupsets onto an old frame etc etc etc. You may also see old Colnagos for sale but mosstly they're just being shown off, and who can blame them!

Chris James

Rolf F wrote:

marjorie dawes wrote:

thankyou rolf f, for your kind words
the weight i quoted for my steel frame was from the dawes web page, it is made of reynolds 620 tubing, the hole bike only weighs in at 9.5kg
so depending on components it doesent have to be the"TIRPITZ"

It's a fair cop - I retract my overly harsh comments on your item of 620! But I think it isn't fair to condemn steel as having little advantage over aluminium. Apart from anything else, steel is more repairable and can last indefinitly whereas alloy frames aren't exactly likely to be handed down through the generations. I'll stick to steel or carbon for my own bikes.

To be fair to you Rolf F, the Dawes site says the Clubman (made form 520 steel) weighs 10.8kg not 9.5kg.

I don't know where they get the weights from on lots of bikes. i have a an old Dawes Audax, made from 631 , so a better steel (abeit with steel not carbon / alloy fork), and mostly 105 rather than the Clubmans Sora, and yet that was supposed to be over 11kg as originally specced.

It rides nicely though.

Personally I would avoid chroming on steel frames as if they are not baked out properly you can get hydrogen embrittlement. The Colnago Master looks nice, but I think you can get better for a lot less from home grown builders. A mate of mine has a beautiful Chris Marshall in Columbus Life which knocks sports off the Colnago for two thirds the price.

marjorie dawes

Chris James wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

marjorie dawes wrote:

thankyou rolf f, for your kind words
the weight i quoted for my steel frame was from the dawes web page, it is made of reynolds 620 tubing, the hole bike only weighs in at 9.5kg
so depending on components it doesent have to be the"TIRPITZ"

It's a fair cop - I retract my overly harsh comments on your item of 620! But I think it isn't fair to condemn steel as having little advantage over aluminium. Apart from anything else, steel is more repairable and can last indefinitly whereas alloy frames aren't exactly likely to be handed down through the generations. I'll stick to steel or carbon for my own bikes.

To be fair to you Rolf F, the Dawes site says the Clubman (made form 520 steel) weighs 10.8kg not 9.5kg.

I don't know where they get the weights from on lots of bikes. i have a an old Dawes Audax, made from 631 , so a better steel (abeit with steel not carbon / alloy fork), and mostly 105 rather than the Clubmans Sora, and yet that was supposed to be over 11kg as originally specced.

It rides nicely though.

Personally I would avoid chroming on steel frames as if they are not baked out properly you can get hydrogen embrittlement. The Colnago Master looks nice, but I think you can get better for a lot less from home grown builders. A mate of mine has a beautiful Chris Marshall in Columbus Life which knocks sports off the Colnago for two thirds the price.

my dawes clubman, as you say is quoted at 10.5kg, when built with pedals, it came in at 11kg,
but the fsa slk compact crankset, calipers, stem and post, along with ksyrium sl elites and flux saddle, has made the difference,
the replaced items now are attached to my dawes milkrace, and has made it a great winter trainer,,