Stainless steel frame

drlodge

I agree the 953 has very little advantage over 853 but it attracts a hefty premium.

What I do like about my frame is the bare seat/chain stays so I have no paint to get chipped from chain slap. But you can do as a mate of mine did - get 853 with 953 chain stays and leave the r/h chain stay bare.

secretsam

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Unless you have a problem with rust (damp shed combined with poor maintenance), stainless adds un-necessary costs and gives you virtually no benefit.
Those who believe in the magic properties of the most expensive and trendy materials (being stainless or titanium or scandium rich alloys) have to come to terms with engineering, that will tell you there is no significant difference, not one your body can perceive, which is instead down to frame geometry and tubes size.
I have 853, which is the same as 725, which is the same as 531, which si the same as Columbus Nemo, which is the same as Columbus SL. Having owned one of each, I've never noticed one steel being different.

Moral: save you money and get an 853 frame instead

Ugo - is this really the case - that 531 -> 725 -> 853??? I thought that they were developments, but were now stiffer, lighter and (importantly) could be welded, so didn't need expensive, difficult to build, heavy lugs??

Whatever happened to 753, then, which was a trickier but lighter version of 531???

drlodge

There are many many tubings, all described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_Cycle_Technology

The evolution as Ugo states is not necessarily a strict evolution, but simply there have been many differnet tubings created over the years and those created more recently may be seen to have superceded older tube types.

Here are some of the main ones, the entry for 653 was updated by me after speaking with an old guy at Reynolds about my condor 531 Pro tubing. I think there are all as "stiff" as each other, the difference being better tubes can be made lighter and hence the frameset is lighter and more resiliant. Stiffness is down to the geometry and make up of the tubing used in the frame.

531 - Manganese/Molybdenum
753 - Heat-Treated Manganese-Molybdenum

525 - Cold worked Chromoly
725 - Heat-Treated Chromoly

853 - Seamless air-hardening heat-treated
953 - Maraging stainless steel.

oldmuthariley

Isn't 953/ Xcr supposed to be stronger than other steels :?:

sungod

yes both are stronger, they're actually stronger than titanium typically used for bikes, this allows lighter tubing for a given strength and improved fatigue performance vs. ti

also shiny, which is most important

drlodge

Just don't confuse stronger with stiffer. 953 is very strong and incredibly hard, its practically like armour plating. Compare that with 531 which is as soft as butter. But both have the same Young's Modulus or "stiffness".

Stronger metal tubing can be made thinner and therefore lighter. With lightness comes a slightly better ride e.g. compare the ride from identical geometry frames made from 953 vs scaffold tubing. Other than that, there's little difference. My 953 frame rides a bit better than my 531 Pro, but that is probably more down to the carbon fork, geometry and how it fits me.

ugo.santalucia

Forget about tensile strength... if you need to resource to that number, it means your bike is severely underengineered.

Strength in a frame comes from the triangle design, remove the triangle and you need a hell of a lot more steel to keep the frame together, as clearly demonstrated by the super heavy bikes with no top tube.
The properties of the frame are down to how the triangles are designed first, how big the tubes are second, then how thick they are and last by a long mile by which material they are made of.

mikenetic

There's a lot that could be said about various steel alloys used in bike frames, but the different tube sets will behave in different ways, primarily depending on the relatively small amounts of materials added to the "base" steel.

953 is thinner and therefore lighter as a means as well as an ends. You can use oversized tubes (which are stiffer) without attracting the weight penalty that might happen with other alloys. Ugo's makes some of this point above. The tube profiles make a difference. Compared to 531, almost all modern steel bike tubing is all oversized. To get a 531 frame of comparable stiffness to a 953 one would produce a very heavy bike. Likewise, a 953 bike might rattle your teeth out if the requirements of the rider weren't considered appropriately.

The steels are also designed with different fabrication methods in mind. Air-hardening ones like 853 and 953 work great with TIG, for example, because of the temperatures involved. Columbus Zona is very good at resisting loss of strength when overheated, and works well with TIG & bronze fillet brazing.

753 was one of the first heat treated steels used in bike fabrication. However, it was easy to overheat, weakening the material. At the time it was introduced some builders still used hearth brazing as a fabrication technique. 753 didn't like that at all, which is why Reynolds demanded you build test frames in it that they assessed before they would certificate you to work with it. It's been superseded by other alloys.

Steel isn't a magic material, but with the available mix of tube profiles and characteristics you can build a very broad range of bikes with (comparatively) small amounts of tooling that can make a magical bike. And that's the trick of it.

bmxboy10

Have to say I have mixed views on this thread. Half of me thinks it's interesting the other thinks it's all really quite dull. The message seems to be steel is steel, just enjoy riding it!

jonny_trousers

solboy10 wrote:

Have to say I have mixed views on this thread. Half of me thinks it's interesting the other thinks it's all really quite dull. The message seems to be steel is steel, just enjoy riding it!

The moral I'm taking is enjoy steel, but don't waste your money on the posh stuff.

bmxboy10

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

solboy10 wrote:

Have to say I have mixed views on this thread. Half of me thinks it's interesting the other thinks it's all really quite dull. The message seems to be steel is steel, just enjoy riding it!

The moral I'm taking is enjoy steel, but don't waste your money on the posh stuff.

Agreed

ugo.santalucia

Take advice from Mikenetic, as he builds his own frames and knows a lot on the topic...

Or ask him to build you a frame...

oldmuthariley

yep, don't bother going for a 953 rourke - its too heavy and too expensive...

i've got a custom made lugged zona frame with max forks for sale if your'e interested OP?

mikenetic

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Take advice from Mikenetic, as he builds his own frames and knows a lot on the topic...

Or ask him to build you a frame...

Well that's very kind of you to say so! It's nice to be able to share what I know, but I'm fully aware that despite making my own frames my knowledge is still reasonably limited. I'm trying to learn more all the time though. Basically, when it comes to making bikes I'm very, very, nosy.

EKIMIKE

I'm of the opinion that with a few exceptions steel frames in general are severely over-priced right now, for a variety of reasons and not least because of the fashionable aesthetic. For that reason alone I'd avoid the top of the range stainless stuff unless you really have money to burn. It's just not worth it.

FatTed

Get a columbus spirit for lugs steel frame. Buy from the frame builder that you talk to. the custom experience includes knowing who built your frame, and that they measured you for it. rather like getting a suit.
I have a Llewellyn, superb experience, superb build.
Read this
http://www.habcycles.com/m7.html

ugo.santalucia

EKIMIKE wrote:

I'm of the opinion that with a few exceptions steel frames in general are severely over-priced right now, for a variety of reasons and not least because of the fashionable aesthetic. For that reason alone I'd avoid the top of the range stainless stuff unless you really have money to burn. It's just not worth it.

I agree... custom frames are very expensive, as builders refuse to use quicker and cheaper assembly methods like TIG welding and prefer to spend hours polishing joints to make them seamless.
For something welded in Taiwan and badged over here (like genesis) you are looking at 300-700 pounds depending on the grade of steel

bmxboy10

Bob Jackson's are also much cheaper

matt_n-2

JAMIE4759 wrote:

Hi all. Seriously contemplating Stainless steel frame for next summer. Looked at Condor Stainless Acciaio, Rourke 953, Mercian 953, Cinelli and a beautiful XCR frame made by Longstaffs in Staffs. Anyone using stainless? I want something for fast club rides, possibly in the future crit races, but also comfortable enough for century rides and long rides in the peaks. Any views welcome. Or, should I just stick to my carbon Condor Leggero?

What about Pegoretti or Baum?

rolf_f

ugo.santalucia wrote:

EKIMIKE wrote:

I'm of the opinion that with a few exceptions steel frames in general are severely over-priced right now, for a variety of reasons and not least because of the fashionable aesthetic. For that reason alone I'd avoid the top of the range stainless stuff unless you really have money to burn. It's just not worth it.

I agree... custom frames are very expensive, as builders refuse to use quicker and cheaper assembly methods like TIG welding and prefer to spend hours polishing joints to make them seamless.
For something welded in Taiwan and badged over here (like genesis) you are looking at 300-700 pounds depending on the grade of steel

As solboy says, Bob Jackson are rather better value. Properly handmade, lugged for about £500 in 631 with bespoke a couple of hundred extra. They are nicely finished as well - not necessarily absolutely flawless but it's a bike frame and they look very nice! Make a lot of frames (eg Genesis) look like distinctly marginal value at least relatively.

ugo.santalucia

Rolf F wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

EKIMIKE wrote:

I'm of the opinion that with a few exceptions steel frames in general are severely over-priced right now, for a variety of reasons and not least because of the fashionable aesthetic. For that reason alone I'd avoid the top of the range stainless stuff unless you really have money to burn. It's just not worth it.

I agree... custom frames are very expensive, as builders refuse to use quicker and cheaper assembly methods like TIG welding and prefer to spend hours polishing joints to make them seamless.
For something welded in Taiwan and badged over here (like genesis) you are looking at 300-700 pounds depending on the grade of steel

As solboy says, Bob Jackson are rather better value. Properly handmade, lugged for about £500 in 631 with bespoke a couple of hundred extra. They are nicely finished as well - not necessarily absolutely flawless but it's a bike frame and they look very nice! Make a lot of frames (eg Genesis) look like distinctly marginal value at least relatively.

Sure, a lugged frame is nice, but for those looking for something stiff and racey maybe a bit dated...

rolf_f

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Sure, a lugged frame is nice, but for those looking for something stiff and racey maybe a bit dated...

Effective frame stiffness is as much a function of the frame as the weight of the rider sat on it - you can have too stiff. I don't think steel would be my first choice for stiff and racy anyway.

LegendLust

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

EKIMIKE wrote:

I'm of the opinion that with a few exceptions steel frames in general are severely over-priced right now, for a variety of reasons and not least because of the fashionable aesthetic. For that reason alone I'd avoid the top of the range stainless stuff unless you really have money to burn. It's just not worth it.

I agree... custom frames are very expensive, as builders refuse to use quicker and cheaper assembly methods like TIG welding and prefer to spend hours polishing joints to make them seamless.
For something welded in Taiwan and badged over here (like genesis) you are looking at 300-700 pounds depending on the grade of steel

As solboy says, Bob Jackson are rather better value. Properly handmade, lugged for about £500 in 631 with bespoke a couple of hundred extra. They are nicely finished as well - not necessarily absolutely flawless but it's a bike frame and they look very nice! Make a lot of frames (eg Genesis) look like distinctly marginal value at least relatively.

Sure, a lugged frame is nice, but for those looking for something stiff and racey maybe a bit dated...

Bob Jackson can produce very nice lugless fillet brazed frames. I should know – I used to have one

sungod

pfft!

a well executed stainless steel frame is excellent, price is irrelevant

if you've not got one you're demonstrably spouting uninformed drivel, if you do have one you'll know i'm right

plus, stainless steel is shiny

Moonbiker

Idea does appeals to me as my frame is covered in rust, so if I was getting a steel frame would like one that didn't rust.

EKIMIKE

sungod wrote:

a well executed stainless steel frame is excellent, price is irrelevant

Thing is, i'd happily own a stainless steel frame or steel frame in general but the price is very relevant - it puts me off when it's wayyy over the odds. I don't want to get robbed just to make a fashion statement (which is the primary reason why steel is generally very expensive right now).

Now, dropping lots of dosh on something that is unique (preferably to you as a rider - i.e. fitted perfectly and other personal touches) and with an extra special level of finishing that requires genuine craftsmanship is worth it. I don't see many builders doing this though. Maybe Feather and Donhou from what i've seen in the UK (I haven't really been looking though). I don't understand Rourke's prices at all, which is a shame because they seem to make decent bikes. Just massively overpriced.

cycleclinic

However having two steel frames at two different end of the spectrum the lugged traitor with tubing similar to 531 series and the Sannino with its light thin large diameter tubing the Sannino is by far the best to ride quickly, it is also the most comfortable. So I would say there is a huge canyon between a lugged steel frame and top end Stainless frame. They both have there roles and they both do it well. So while this thread has become confused a bit the OP best decide what he/she wants from the bike and have buy accordingly.

Steel is most certainly not like any other steel my old metallurgy lecturers (Dr. Stratford in particular) would have a fit a that comment. Renoylds 853 though is probably as high up the pecking order most mortal folk need to go and just get the frame made to the geometry that suits you. 853 come in many tube sizes so it can make a touring bike or a stiff race frame you see that the important think tube sizes and geometry get that right and you will be fine.

woolwich

Just to add my own observations. Early in my frame building career I deliberately built frames with identical geometry, size and tube diameters but with different steels, then ran them with identical running gear, tyre pressures etc. I still have a loft full of the things. I concluded that I could definitely feel a difference in ride quality between materials. In a blindfold test I probably couldn't tell the difference between any of the heat treated steels but I am quite confident I could tell he difference between an 853/725/Spirit and a non hardened steel.
As mentioned though I am in full agreement that the material choice falls some way below the bikes design. I once built a full compact frame in hardened steel. It was truly awful, an expensive mistake. I had one glorious ride down a recently resurfaced Izoard on it. In all other circumstances and certainly UK roads it was a harsh monster. This is why I took a horizontal top tube bike to Flanders this year.
Materials, tube size and geometry aside there is more to Frame building than meets the eye. The actual sticking them together is quite simple but crazy stuff like how you brace/bridge the stays can have a profound effect on the handling/compliance. Again I have chopped out chain stay bridges out of frames for direct comparison. Simple things that can be overlooked can have massive effects, like where the butt profiles on the tube are, how much butt you retain where on the frame. Some frame builders will push the envelope more than others here which is why you can get discrepancies in weight by more than a few hundred grams in apparently identical bikes.

on-yer-bike

Someone asked about Pegoretti and Baum. Ive never seen a Baum in the flesh but from what Ive heard and seen in pictures the build quality is amazing. Pegoretti Im much more familiar with as there is a Marcelo down stairs. I havent ridden many modern steel bikes to compare it to but an old elite racer I know said it was the best bike he had ridden and went and bought one. Ive briefly ridden a disc Super Acciao and it was ridiculously stiff and uncomfortable. Its also a compact frame. The Pegoretti feels fast and smooth and plenty stiff enough for me, the rear triangle is massive for a steel bike. If you buy direct from Dario its much cheaper than buying from the London retailer but still quite expensive. You dont have to have a fancy paint job and you can choose any colour you want from the RAL colour book. I was going to buy a Rourke after watching and reading Its 'All About the Bike' but a Pegoretti seemed a lot more romantic. Apparently Dario has all his tubes custom made by Columbus.