Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Steel frames

Started by tafi · · Last activity · 16 posts · 3,620 views

← Back to Cycling Equipment

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postSteel framestafi · 20 May 2004 02 / This pagePosts 1–16Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #16531Aussie · 21 May 2004

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
20 May 2004
Last activity
21 May 2004
Original author
tafi
Posts
16
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
3,620
Views / 30 days
0
Topics
Steel framesAluminium frames

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–16 of 16
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Original post
    tafi
    Archived post
    #1

    My first bike was dodgy aluminium which wasn't good for much. My second bike is a steel Tomassini made from Columbus Genius Steel which handled like a dream, my third bike is a Trek 5500 carbon which is a little slower in the corners but has power transfer for climbs and pounding.

    For some unknown bloody reason I have started to lust after steel bikes again.

    The ideal would be a steel frame that handles just like the Tomassini but has the stiffness and Trek carbon with a frame weight under 1.4kg (for say a 54cm size). I'd probably use this as a training rig. The Tomassini is nice but is a bit long for me in reality (It's a 56cm top tube and I need something more like a 52 or 53cm, though the seat tube is right at 55cm - I have long legs).

    I have looked at a few very nice looking pictures on the net the past few days of the Cervelo Super Prodigy and Renaissance, Serotta CSi and Coeur d'Acier, Denti, Australian Ciombola, Gios, Colnago and Viner. They all have their strengths and weaknesses though everyone seems to love the Super Prodigy and Renaissance and I like the look of these and also the Serottas.

    In the recent past Columbus hasn't really developed much in terms of sections and alloying, whereas Dedacciai has hit the lightweight end of the spectrum pretty hard with the use of a new BB shell and carbon chainstays. There is also Reynolds and True Temper but I know relatively little about these.

    Now I hear from Serotta that for 2004 they are using "new" cloumbus "Niobium" tubing. Having checked the columbus website I noticed that it is not operating and is under construction. Does this mean that they are finally about to give us the next installment in the Steel saga?

    I'd like a discussion on this topic becuase there are so many subtleties to frame construction when you have almost infinite combinations of individual tubes with different alloys, sections, butting, brazing/welding. The list goes on and on and on.

    In case you can't tell I am a big fan of the custom taylored frame to give the rider exactly the qualities that they want.
    Steel seems to have the balance of this ability with a price to make it more accessible than than titanium.

    I think I'm going to go away now and rebuild my Tomassini!

    Report
  2. boudreaux
    Archived post
    #2
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by tafi
    My first bike was dodgy aluminium which wasn't good for much.

    In the recent past Columbus hasn't really developed much in terms of sections and alloying, whereas Dedacciai has hit the lightweight end of the spectrum pretty hard with the use of a new BB shell and carbon chainstays. There is also Reynolds and True Temper but I know relatively little about these.

    Now I hear from Serotta that for 2004 they are using "new" cloumbus "Niobium" tubing. Having checked the columbus website I noticed that it is not operating and is under construction. Does this mean that they are finally about to give us the next installment in the Steel saga?

    Hard to beat alot of current light Al frames for performance and not alot of money. Columbus hasn't done anything?? Heard of Foco and Ultra foco?? CF stays add nothing to good steel,but marketing loves it. Niobium is more marketing I think than anything of real substance.We now return you to your regularly scheduled fantasy programing.

    Report
  3. ed073
    Archived post
    #3
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by boudreaux
    Hard to beat alot of current light Al frames for performance and not alot of money. Columbus hasn't done anything?? Heard of Foco and Ultra foco?? CF stays add nothing to good steel,but marketing loves it. Niobium is more marketing I think than anything of real substance.We now return you to your regularly scheduled fantasy programing.

    I'm on an Ultrafoco Scapin EOS7 Ultrafoco sloping...best frame I've ridden and beautifully made. Shame it doesn't get more use!

    It's a pity steel is now limited to ultra-low and ultra-high end only....doubtful we'll see it used by any pro teams again.

    Report
  4. sal61
    Archived post
    #4

    The best of carbon and steel? Hmmm, check out the Lemonde
    spine bikes.
    http://www.lemondbikes.com/spine/index.shtml
    Steve

    Report
  5. tafi
    Archived post
    #5
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by boudreaux
    Hard to beat alot of current light Al frames for performance and not alot of money. Columbus hasn't done anything?? Heard of Foco and Ultra foco?? CF stays add nothing to good steel,but marketing loves it. Niobium is more marketing I think than anything of real substance.We now return you to your regularly scheduled fantasy programing.

    Foco and ultra foco have been around since mid-late 90s. It is now 2004. In at least five years Columbus has come up with nothing in their steels

    Report
  6. boudreaux
    Archived post
    #6
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by ed073


    It's a pity steel is now limited to ultra-low and ultra-high end only....

    Hooey.

    Report
  7. ed073
    Archived post
    #7
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by tafi
    Foco and ultra foco have been around since mid-late 90s. It is now 2004. In at least five years Columbus has come up with nothing in their steels

    just about anything from now with regard to steel will be a marketing exercise....it's still just tinkering with iron alloys when you break it down. Carbon, magnesium, thermoplastics, aluminium and Ti alloys are where any major gains in frame construction are going to be made in future

    Report
  8. tafi
    Archived post
    #8

    A couple of you guys have missed the point.
    I am talking about steel bikes, their construction and the sorts of tubing which gives the qualities we each love in a frame. I am not after recommendations (yet) but ideas on the philosophies behind ye olde steel and some of the engineering nous.

    As an example, I recently looked at the american Independant Fabrications website. In the past they have been known for picking and chosing from Reynolds, True Temper and Columbus Foco/Ultrafoco tubes to get a good bike frame.

    To get the ball rolling. Some people may remember the Foco megatubes chainstays. They look really chunky. Does anyone have any feeback on the stiffness and responsiveness of frmaes made with these chainstays?

    Report
  9. boudreaux
    Archived post
    #9
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by tafi
    Foco and ultra foco have been around since mid-late 90s. It is now 2004. In at least five years Columbus has come up with nothing in their steels

    I'd call late 90s at later for ultra foco. But'what't the point. Adding a new fairy dust is often more marketing than improvement.It can only get so light without sacrificing durability anyway. eom16.5 is a bit long in the tooth too. What has Reynolds done since 853 which was never considered a real lightwight anyway?

    Report
  10. ed073
    Archived post
    #10
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by tafi
    A couple of you guys have missed the point.
    I am talking about steel bikes, their construction and the sorts of tubing which gives the qualities we each love in a frame. I am not after recommendations (yet) but ideas on the philosophies behind ye olde steel and some of the engineering nous.

    As an example, I recently looked at the american Independant Fabrications website. In the past they have been known for picking and chosing from Reynolds, True Temper and Columbus Foco/Ultrafoco tubes to get a good bike frame.

    To get the ball rolling. Some people may remember the Foco megatubes chainstays. They look really chunky. Does anyone have any feeback on the stiffness and responsiveness of frmaes made with these chainstays?

    If they are anything like the stays on my old MX Leader Merckx, then they'll be like trying to bend a block of granite.

    Report
  11. tafi
    Archived post
    #11
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by ed073
    just about anything from now with regard to steel will be a marketing exercise....it's still just tinkering with iron alloys when you break it down. Carbon, magnesium, thermoplastics, aluminium and Ti alloys are where any major gains in frame construction are going to be made in future

    What makes you say this? Titanium and Aluminium are made in Alloys just like Steel is, why are they any different?

    True, the development of new resins and manufacturing techniques mean that Carbon holds a great deal of potential for frames. However carbon is difficult to make into custom frames without using some sort of aluminium/steel/ti lug which in my opinion is a design weakness.

    Besides I am not interested in talking about Aluminium or carbon.

    I am interested in steel. This is one of steel's great advantages. It can be brazed or welded with much higher reliability and ease than can Aluminium or Titanium and at the same time can be made into custom dimensions.

    It seems that there are a lot of people who cannot get over the similar hype which is spewing out of manufacturers of carbon and Aluminium frames.

    "Steel is heavy"
    "Steel is old"
    "Steel can't be made stiff"

    Bollocks! This is sprouted by people using a material (ie: Aluminium) which has a LOWER Youngs modulus than steel. And where has being old been a disadvantage? If it works, it works irrespective of how old hat the base material may be. I will conceede that Steel frames can be heavier but if you had to build an Al frame to last as long as a steel one, it would have to be just as heavy.

    Report
  12. tafi
    Archived post
    #12
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by ed073
    If they are anything like the stays on my old MX Leader Merckx, then they'll be like trying to bend a block of granite.

    Thank you! Now we have some constructive disscussion about steel. Any othre contributions about STEEL? (Not Aluminium or Titanium or Magnesium or Carbon)

    Report
  13. boudreaux
    Archived post
    #13
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by tafi




    This is one of steel's great advantages. ........and at the same time can be made into custom dimensions.

    And aluminum and Ti cannot?? Gimmie a break. I like steel,but I ain't gonna loose alot of sleep over it. Maybe Grant Petersen at www.rivbike.com has some of what you want to hear in his steel spiel.

    Report
  14. boudreaux
    Archived post
    #14
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by tafi
    Thank you! Now we have some constructive disscussion about steel. Any othre contributions about STEEL? (Not Aluminium or Titanium or Magnesium or Carbon)

    This is constructive discussion? The Merckx is built of old school columbus Max Nivacrom which you have already dissed, and it's a tank,compared to anything built out of foco. My Strong built with Foco has the same stays,and is absolutely stiff,but so are lots of others built with less esteemed steel. The strong frame is also about 1.25 pounds lighter than that Max tubed tank.

    Report
  15. ed073
    Archived post
    #15
    Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by boudreaux
    This is constructive discussion? The Merckx is built of old school columbus Max Nivacrom which you have already dissed, and it's a tank,compared to anything built out of foco. My Strong built with Foco has the same stays,and is absolutely stiff,but so are lots of others built with less esteemed steel. The strong frame is also about 1.25 pounds lighter.

    True....the lugged and chromed Nivacrom Merckx was nothing special on the scales, especially with 32-hole Ambrosio clincher training wheels in! But rock-solid doesn't go near describing it.

    My Ultrafoco Scapin is (perhaps) less stiff, but the weight difference is ridiculous. Both full steel frames (and fork on the Merckx), both excellent in their construction and performance....but defintely horses for different courses.

    Report
  16. 531Aussie
    Archived post
    #16

    I've been going through a similar process, and I've decided that the Superprodigy is what I want. If I could afford a Scapin I'd think about them, but there's no way I'm spending 3 or 4 grand on a frame.

    I've been rambling on about this on bikeforums.net recently: the Cervelos are one of only 4 or so steel frames to pass the EFBe fatigue test: http://www.efbe.de/defbefrm.htm (click on 2004 results). I know some forum "experts" consider the EFBe data to be dubious, or at least less than 100% complete, but I'm still impressed by the Cervelo's performance.

    I've had mixed results with aluminium; I've owned three alu frames, one of which I love (a 1999 Specialzed Allez Comp), but the other two I HATED (an Evolution, and a Dedacciai 7003 frame).
    So, I think alu is a bit hit or miss, and a five minute test ride around the Superstore parking lot isn't really gunna tell you what a bike is like.🙂

    Report

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionCycling Equipment Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.