G
Gary Young
Guest
"Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles" <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
> And, if you buy into the idea that material is irrelevant, the only reason to support buying a
> steel frame would be based upon aesthetics or some notion about repairability that no longer
> applies (because it typically costs as much, if not more, to repair a steel frame these days as it
> does to replace it, if it suffers major trauma, and if it's minor stuff, what's the big deal,
> since some other material would have survived as well?).
[...]
I agree that there's hype surrounding steel no less than other materials, but I'm not sure I'd
dismiss steel's repairability quite so quickly. When a cantilever brake stud broke on my steel
touring bike, I got it replaced for about $70 and was quoted a figure as low as $35. That's not a
major trauma, but it's certainly not "no big deal" either. Would I have had to buy a new frame if my
bike were aluminum?
[...]
> And, if you buy into the idea that material is irrelevant, the only reason to support buying a
> steel frame would be based upon aesthetics or some notion about repairability that no longer
> applies (because it typically costs as much, if not more, to repair a steel frame these days as it
> does to replace it, if it suffers major trauma, and if it's minor stuff, what's the big deal,
> since some other material would have survived as well?).
[...]
I agree that there's hype surrounding steel no less than other materials, but I'm not sure I'd
dismiss steel's repairability quite so quickly. When a cantilever brake stud broke on my steel
touring bike, I got it replaced for about $70 and was quoted a figure as low as $35. That's not a
major trauma, but it's certainly not "no big deal" either. Would I have had to buy a new frame if my
bike were aluminum?