Steel lugged frames/bikes ???

[Froze]

Mr Beanz, I'm a bit of a fanatic about making sure stuff is over engineered when I buy stuff, because I feel the failure rate is substantially reduced by doing so. Remember what I said in an earlier post about my Enve fork, I weigh 175 pounds and the Enve 1.0 which is rated for a 220 or 240 pound rider would be fine for me...but I decided on the 2.0 model because it was rated for a 350 pound rider. What's interesting between those two forks I actually about 2 years after I got the bike got to ride a friend of mines bike that he put on a 1.0 because he wanted a lighter fork, but during the test ride it didn't have that riding on rails eeling I get with the 2.0, it felt a bit noodly, not bad but something that I was glad I didn't buy.

As I said before most bikes are rated for a 240 max weight rider which means most bike you get on will be borderline...however keep in mind that's what the legal department of the manufactures tell them, so I'm sure they'll take a heavier rider then what their rate for but if something happens the legal department will point out that a person exceeded the intended weight limit of the bike and therefore they're not responsible for any lawsuit that could arise.

I also checked the internet for bike rider weight limits and apparently all frame materials have raised the bar, so my original information was out of date. So the new (not sure when these went into effect) weight limits are as follows: all materials starts at 275 pounds for road bikes and goes up to 330 pounds for hybrid bikes. So the industry raised the bar from 240 pounds that they use to have. I remember back in 1984 Trek 760 (a steel bike) only had a 175 pound limit, but since then Americans have gotten larger so I think that's why the new higher limits are now being imposed. Trek has a 300 pound limit on their road bikes and so does Cannondale.

Locally, and because so many people buy Treks here, I have heard of few complaints about Trek not resolving their warranty claims in a manner in which was pleasing to the customer, but again those are very far and few between. You said you got a better bike, but one guy I know had a lifetime warranty on a CF bike he had for roughly 20 years failed at a joint and Trek said that since that frame has been out of production for so long that the only frame they could give him was a aluminum frame! So that got me to thinking so I asked my bike shop friend what would happen if my 1984 steel Trek 660 (second from the highest level frame they made) frame failed and it has a lifetime warranty how would Trek handle it since they no longer make lugged steel frames, he said they would give me their cheapest aluminium frame which would be unacceptable to me.

 

[Mr. Beanz]

Mr Beanz, I'm a bit of a fanatic about making sure stuff is over engineered when I buy stuff, because I feel the failure rate is substantially reduced by doing so. Remember what I said in an earlier post about my Enve fork, I weigh 175 pounds and the Enve 1.0 which is rated for a 220 or 240 pound rider would be fine for me...but I decided on the 2.0 model because it was rated for a 350 pound rider. What's interesting between those two forks I actually about 2 years after I got the bike got to ride a friend of mines bike that he put on a 1.0 because he wanted a lighter fork, but during the test ride it didn't have that riding on rails eeling I get with the 2.0, it felt a bit noodly, not bad but something that I was glad I didn't buy.

As I said before most bikes are rated for a 240 max weight rider which means most bike you get on will be borderline...however keep in mind that's what the legal department of the manufactures tell them, so I'm sure they'll take a heavier rider then what their rate for but if something happens the legal department will point out that a person exceeded the intended weight limit of the bike and therefore they're not responsible for any lawsuit that could arise.

I also checked the internet for bike rider weight limits and apparently all frame materials have raised the bar, so my original information was out of date. So the new (not sure when these went into effect) weight limits are as follows: all materials starts at 275 pounds for road bikes and goes up to 330 pounds for hybrid bikes. So the industry raised the bar from 240 pounds that they use to have. I remember back in 1984 Trek 760 (a steel bike) only had a 175 pound limit, but since then Americans have gotten larger so I think that's why the new higher limits are now being imposed. Trek has a 300 pound limit on their road bikes and so does Cannondale.

Locally, and because so many people buy Treks here, I have heard of few complaints about Trek not resolving their warranty claims in a manner in which was pleasing to the customer, but again those are very far and few between. You said you got a better bike, but one guy I know had a lifetime warranty on a CF bike he had for roughly 20 years failed at a joint and Trek said that since that frame has been out of production for so long that the only frame they could give him was a aluminum frame! So that got me to thinking so I asked my bike shop friend what would happen if my 1984 steel Trek 660 (second from the highest level frame they made) frame failed and it has a lifetime warranty how would Trek handle it since they no longer make lugged steel frames, he said they would give me their cheapest aluminium frame which would be unacceptable to me.

Yes, I am counting on the over engineering myself. But I would not consider one that said 240 limit knowing I will almost always be above. Same with forks, like you, give me the beefier version.

Some steel frames I viewed had a 240 limit as well.

 

[Mr. Beanz]

Bike wise Lynskey makes a bike for big riders called the R480: https://lynskeyperformance.com/r480-road-race-bike/ If you by some chance want to go this route please let me know, I have some ideas for changes for the bike that will beef it up a bit better but most importantly increase the reliability of other stuff on the bike twice a long.
g.

Strange but I read a few reviews and they do not look real good for this bike. One dude said it did not accelerate well, not good for racing and did not track well down mountains.

They did say it was a strong frame!

Another couple guys in a forum asked what was up with Lynskey as they were pretty much trying to give their bikes away.

I guess being a heavy rider, it would feel different to me. But they did say it was not a good sprinter either. Not that I sprint but overall, the reviews were not all that good.

I did see they were on sale for less than half price. Down from 2200 to 1079 or so.

Kind of hard to get a good reviews as most guys testing them are lightweights.

Might be interesting just to have a bike that would last forever. If I had the money right now, I might have taken the chance at that price.

 

[Mr. Beanz]

Nice price on the Lynskey.

https://www.adrenalinebikes.com/store.cfm?do=DetailProduct&productid=177205

 

[Froze]

Did you get the Lynskey? I noticed it isn't in stock as of today.

If a bike is made for heavy riders than that means it has stronger stiffer frame, which means it would track just fine down mountain roads if a heavy rider is on it, if a light rider is on it then that may be true what they said. Think of it as a pickup truck, if the truck is carrying no weight they tend to ride harsher, but put 500 pounds or more into it and the truck rides smoother. I have a friend who use to drive semi's and he said the same thing, he didn't really like driving a empty trailer because the truck rode harsher and didn't track well as it did when loaded.

Accelerate well? Nonsense, again go back to the stiffness factor of a stronger frame, that would allow more power to be transmitted to the rear wheels. Because the bike was built for larger and or stronger riders the frame is heavier than their standard frame, the bike complete weighs 19 pounds so acceleration maybe a bit off pace of a 15 pound bike, but then again you would have a less than 200 pound rider on the 15 pound bike vs a more than 200 pound rider on the 19 pound bike, the weight of the heavier rider alone would be detrimental for sprinting or accelerating!

Not good for racing or good for sprinting? I think what you read was bull ****, maybe some people at Litespeed got together to try to destroy Lynskey bikes. Read this instead: https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/a26872899/lynskey-r480-review/ Because of it's stiffness it won't have a lively feel to it, but that's now what the bike was designed for, and that lively feel would probably return with a heavier rider. This same sort of thing applied to the Big Legged Emma bike too, I remember reading reviews about it when it came out.

I think the R480 would be perfect for you in my opinion. Since they can't give their bikes away find a a used one in your size and save a ton of money!