Best steel frames available

ubergn0men

As topic. Which manufacturers make the best steel frames?

Was dead set on getting an alu HT, but read so much about the feel of steel is more lively and smoother to ride. Saw GT offered the Kashmir 9R 1.0. Anyone have experience of this one, or any other GT frames in steel?

If you have advice on brands offering complete bikes with good steel frames, do tell!

turnerjohn

I had a 1999 Orange P7 (the original XC beast before they made it more freeride) which rode superbly and wasn't heavy at all...would recommend

Barrelmaker

Check out On one, Ragley and Cotic for full builds. Other manufacturers that do frame only steel frames are Dialled, Sanderson and i'm sure there are many more that I can't think of.

paul.skibum

I ride a Cove Handjob - steel hardtail - the frames are a bit pricey these days due to the cost of steel (http://www.tweekscycles.com/Product.do? ... tAod_EoAWw - £445) - 130mm fork these days (mine is only a 100mm rated) but nothing fancy - I find mine to be a pretty direct bike, accelerates well, has a little forgiveness in the tail vs many ali bikes and can tackle anything you want.

I think the Cove nicely fills a middle ground between agro hardcore bikes and overly xc oriented.

supersonic

but read so much about the feel of steel is more lively and smoother to ride

A lot of what you have read is probably untrue I am afraid. In the 90s steel frames did tend to have a lot of flex (torsional and sideways flex, not vertical) as they were very light weight (many sub 4lbs), while aluminium frames were cruder than todays offering with stif overized tubes.

Nowadays things have changed. Steel frames are heavier and stiffer, aluminium forming means that many are light yet filter out vibration very well. Shape for shape, a piece of steel is 3 times stiffer than aluminium.

Sure, try some out if you can, but you may be surpised, and big tyres/saddles/grips and suspension have a big effect on comfort.

The Rookie

For great quality steel frames, check out the Pace offerings, but as SS says, make sure you know what you want rather than think you want!

cooldad

I thought we'd all decided in the other thread that a carbon 456 was ideal.

mattshrops

The cotic rocket looks properly awesome. No idea what it rides like??

ubergn0men

cooldad wrote:

I thought we'd all decided in the other thread that a carbon 456 was ideal.

Again, I'm really unsure about going with a carbon. I will have this bike as a do it all with occasional bombing and probably crashing. I do realise the carbon frame is extremely durable for riding, but I also know the properties of carbon fiber being a victim of forces in bad directions.

I started the thread for future reference of people searching for steel frames, aswell as getting some alternatives myself.

supersonic

You have far more chance of denting a thin steel frame than carbon. When carbon is done right is is the best frame material for all purposes by far. I don't know what you have been reading!

But besides the point, if you want steel I would demo some. Rocket is full suspension mind, and steel, in my opinion, is a daft material to make a full suspension frame from.

lawman

I can really see why people like steel hardtails, but as Sonic says I really don't get the rocket with its half steel/ half aluminum build, just doesn't make sense to me! on paper the geometry looks spot on, but I can't see the benefit of the steel in a full sus application. In terms of full suspension bikes carbon wins hands down for me, lighter, stronger and can be tuned very effectively for a given purpose, it's the present and future that's for sure. I'm still unconvinced of its application in hardtails though, as most of the carbon hardtails I've ridden have been harsh and uncomfortable over longer rides. Granted its not a huge number of carbon hardtails I've ridden, but still there has been this theme among the few I have tried. This is where steel and titanium are best IMO. The extra spring and vibration damping make more sense on hardtails for a bit of give. I'm a huge carbon fan and as far as full suspension bikes go I'm carbon all the way, but I'm starting to sway towards a steel hardtail as my second bike as my c456 is just too uncomfortable over longer rides and more miles.

rockmonkeysc

I went from a steel On-One hardtail frame to an aluminium Giant hardtail and the Giant was less harsh. The only advantage I found with steel is that it can be welded easily if you break it.

ubergn0men

I don't see the use for a FS steel frame either. A super rigid alu would be way better choice for this I believe. Reason I'm looking for a steel frame is for the flexiness. Alu is much more prone to fatigue breakage, hence their frames can't allow any flex. Even with zero flex it will break eventually.

Steel on the other hand is not as sensitive aluminum to cycled load. It can be allowed to flex some, without worrying too much about the fatigue breakage.

Carbon fiber on the other hand is not really affected by fatigue as this is (from what I learned) limited to metals. Ofc, if you break fibers over and over again it will eventually break at one point.


So, the reason I'm looking for a steel frame is for the flex. Carbon frames do probably flex similary, but I would just really prefer a steel frame for peace of mind. I'll likely get a carbon frame from On one in the future, but currently a steel is what I want.

stuisnew

A lot of sense written above but if you go for steel check out Genesis. Can be a little expensive at full rrp.

The Rookie

Aluminium frames flex more than the early ones as they are designed much better that they used to be, allowing some flex doesn't necesarily affect the fatigue life.

Steel on the other hand has got much stiffer since the old days of the 'pencil' seat stays..... I really don't think there is anything in it.

Northwind

Many steel frames aren't very "steely"... Basically the thicker and heftier the tubes, the less twang/springyness you get. And cheap frames (or really hard use frames) tend to have a lot of metal in them. So you get your Inbreds, Sovereigns, BFes etc, which weigh as much as a car, and couldn't be any deader if you shot them through the head.

Ironically my C456 and my Scandal rode more like a classic steel frame than any of the steel On Ones...

In conclusion- Cotic Soul or gtfo Or something similiar. It doesn't have to be expensive, but, making a suitably strong frame with skinny tubes tends to mean expensive tubesets.

Oh aye and speaking of Cotic...

ubergn0men wrote:

I don't see the use for a FS steel frame either. A super rigid alu would be way better choice for this I believe.

Cy's written a lot about the design of the Rocket but the thing that everyone misses is that it's as stiff as a stiff thing... And not even particularily heavy (it's no lightweight either but then it's strong like ox.). Good link here:

http://www.cotic.co.uk/geek/steel-full-suspension

Carbon's probably better most of the time, mind. But then a Mojo's RRP is about twice that of a Rocket's. I still reckon carbon (or similiar composites) are the future for quality bikes but there's still plenty of room for well made metal frames.