Steel
Comments
-
Bought this a few weeks ago from a jumble sale for 25 euros. Rode it up my local hill, which is 1100 vertical meters at 9% in 1h13. I can only go 11 minutes better on my carbon bike, on a good day.
Just 11 minutes!? That's a heck of a difference.
@964cup. Don't worry, I rode steel for 20 years plus.
Dont forget a few things beyond material. Down tube shifters. Less gears. Desire to break time records...
Much heavier rotation weight with the wheels (also have 28mm Michelin tires on them).BASI Nordic Ski Instructor
Instagramme0 -
Utterly pointless comment.If you are going for steel for your only/best bike forget the retro, lugged, narrow-tubed stuff and get a modern steel frame that can compete with carbon.
Utter nonsense.
So tell me then - in what way can a 'modern' steel frame compete with carbon, that a lugged frame can't..??0 -
Very briefly (I read /a lot/ about this before getting my xcr frame..), modern steel tube sets use very special alloys that are strong enough to make tubes with very thin walls, as well as being able to be welded at high temperatures. So you can make larger diameter tubes that are robust and also light (thinner walls means less material). Tube diameter has by far the greatest effect on stiffness of a steel frame than any other factor, with the possible exception of wall thickness. You could make a really stiff frame from narrow diameter tubing with very thick walls, but it would be very heavy. Ultra thin walled newer alloys allow both stiffness and light weight.
Utterly pointless comment.If you are going for steel for your only/best bike forget the retro, lugged, narrow-tubed stuff and get a modern steel frame that can compete with carbon.
Utter nonsense.
So tell me then - in what way can a 'modern' steel frame compete with carbon, that a lugged frame can't..??
Lugs are simply redundant on a frame made of 853, xcr etc because these tubes are designed to be TIG welded at high temperatures (older tubes needed to be fillet brazed, a lower temperature process, and/or lugged). They are purely decorative and simply add weight. Nothing wrong with adding a bit of weight for decorative purposes if that's your thing I suppose, but for me it is aesthetcially unpleasing on a modern steel frame because it is non functional.
Also nothing wrong with old school frames if you like the springy feel of course - they are well suited to a particular type of riding, but my comments were directed at the OP who is looking to replace a carbon frame for what I took to be purely practical reasons.0 -
Sounds like you are quoting from websites, rather than actual user experience. Lugs, brazing, tig welding, etc - are just different methods of joining tubes. One is not inherently better than the other.
'Old school' frames are not 'springy' - it's possible that some may be, but you've clearly never ridden a good, handbuilt 653/753 lugged race frame. Leave that kind of uneducated bullsh1t to the cycling mags.0 -
Well, I'm not a frame builder but please don't accuse me of quoting anyone, I am simply dexcribing my own understanding of the issues, doubtless incomplete but I think at least half-informed...Sounds like you are quoting from websites, rather than actual user experience. Lugs, brazing, tig welding, etc - are just different methods of joining tubes. One is not inherently better than the other.
'Old school' frames are not 'springy' - it's possible that some may be, but you've clearly never ridden a good, handbuilt 653/753 lugged race frame. Leave that kind of uneducated bullsh1t to the cycling mags.
Different tube welding methods produce different results with different tubes - even if that's just added unnecessary weight. But some of the modern steel alloys actually require high-temperature welding to make the strongest join (the steel is hardened or cured at high temperatures).
I'm sure it's possible to make a stiff frame from older narrow tube sets, but it's always going to be possible to make an equally stiff but considerably lighter frame, or a stiffer frame of the same weight, from modern wider diameter tubes made with more advanced alloys.
Modern steel tubesets can produce something that comes much closer to carbon in terms of the weight/stiffness trade-off. Metulurgy and steel frame design hasn't stood still in the last 30 years.0 -
Also nothing wrong with old school frames if you like the springy feel of course - they are well suited to a particular type of riding, but my comments were directed at the OP who is looking to replace a carbon frame for what I took to be purely practical reasons.
I would agree with this perspective, actually. I'm definitely not against modern retro frames (i.e. old stock or similar tubing, lugs, threaded steerer, etc), but there is virtually no difference between the modern product and the old one - and a good old 531 or SL frame will cost you massively less, even if you have a replica respray with decals or modernise anything (etc etc). Production techniques and the material HAVE moved on, and there's little comparison between the old and the new.
For perspective, my TT frame is only 753, but it's really stiff - it even has a big solid steel plate at the front (intersecting the top and down tubes behind the headtube). Light, too - about 1600g - which is comparable with many more modern examples.0 -
To the OP, it's sounds as though no bike, steel or ?? would have survived what your last three bikes have been through. Not trying to sway you from steel, I own a steel bike and have never owned a CF, but maybe you should do as many test rides as possible on different bikes of all materials and then make you decision on what you like best. From what I have seen steel is going to be the most durable in most situations but CF has the advantage of being able to be repaired even if snapped in half and usually less expensive than replacing damaged steel tubes. A roof rack for your car sounds like a good investment as well. 8)0
-
With the luck he's had I can see a low bridge or car park entrance coming into play. Maybe a bigger car with a mattress in the boot for the bike to lie on.A roof rack for your car sounds like a good investment as well. 8)0 -
Fnaar fnarr
Maybe a bigger car with a mattress in the boot for the bike to lie on.A roof rack for your car sounds like a good investment as well. 8)
0 -
-
Sounds like you are quoting from websites, rather than actual user experience. Lugs, brazing, tig welding, etc - are just different methods of joining tubes. One is not inherently better than the other.
'Old school' frames are not 'springy' - it's possible that some may be, but you've clearly never ridden a good, handbuilt 653/753 lugged race frame. Leave that kind of uneducated bullsh1t to the cycling mags.
I disagree, old school frames were often quite springy, especially in the larger sizes. The tube diameters were fixed at the size of available lugs. The better steels were actually worse in this regard as they typically had thinner walls to save weight. Added to this there was a fashion for larger frames with less seat post showing.
I had a handbuilt 531c frame in 24.5 inch size, with 1 inch quill steerer that was distinctly whippy. I have a 57cm (approx. 22 inch) 631 tig welded oversize tubed frame with 1 1/8" aheadset and that is much stiffer and (to me) a better ride all round.
I agree much of the steel is real rubbish that is spouted is semi mystical BS about ride quality, but modern oversized tubes are much stiffer due to physics - google 'second moment of area'.
Of course, it all depends on how stiff you actually want the frame to feel.0 -
On the other hand, a modern TIG welded frame is unlikely to be very repairable if a car runs over it!0
-
On the other hand, a modern TIG welded frame is unlikely to be very repairable if a car runs over it!
This. Ditto titanium, aluminium and carbon of course.0 -
Interesting links although the last one displays an almost complete lack of understanding of the dynamic behaviour of composites (in their case, carbon fibre composites)... or perhaps a suitable amount of FUD if you're selling stainless tubing
0
