RNAV

I've got an Emonda SL, and love it. The ride, handling, comfortable geometry, etc. is fantastic. I've also heard similarly great comments regarding the Emonda ALR. So why not build a steel Emonda?

Seattle Forrest

And why not a bamboo one too while they're at it?

CafeVelo

Because the purpose of the model is low weight, and while you can make a light steel frame, it will concede a pound or more to other materials. The steels that can achieve the lowest weights are also very hard to work with compared to other materials (except ti), and the majority of consumers and manufacturers have abandoned steel outside of touring, and bringing it back would require an extensive campaign that nobody's got an interest in doing. I like steel, but I don't think I would like a steel emonda. The best steel bikes are designed ground up to be made of steel, and make the most of the given properties it offers.

WalksOn2Wheels

What's wrong with the ALR?

McBTC

You mean, why doesn't someone make a short wheelbase with a steep head angle and slack seat tube angle bike with a really tall head tube and longish effective top tube?

badger1

To answer the title question, probably. That also answers the question why Trek would be extremely unlikely to do so: sales wouldn't come remotely close to covering the costs of development/production.

JohnDThompson 

And there are plenty of sweet-riding steel Treks on the used market at a fraction of the cost a new bike would run.

Bah Humbug

The Breezer thread illustrates it perfectly: the steel frame aficionados would cheer its release, then wait a year until Trek gave up and sold them at fire-sale prices to clear the inventory, then ask why more companies don't make steel bikes.

MCODave

Trek still makes a steel touring bike, because in that category steel still sells. If you include Trek-made Lemonds, Trek hasn't had a steel "racing" road bike since the late 90's or early 2000's. As noted before, there are plenty of nice older steel Treks and Lemonds still around you could build up as a resto-mod.

WalksOn2Wheels

That's the other thing. Trek tends to not half ass things, so I would imagine it would be a proper modern steel road bike and it would likely be not very cheap. So for the minority of riders who are anti-carbon, it would be a great bike, but so prohibitively expensive that they would still ride their 1995 steel frames. And for the rest of the market, you're suddenly looking at a bike that is close in price to a well equipped carbon frame that weighs a good bit less and rides very nicely. It wouldn't make any damn sense. There are plenty of boutique steel manufacturers out there to satisfy the small amount of people willing to spend real money on them.

Doge

What is this bike? "SL TREK EMONDA ULTRALIGHT ALU " Anyone got a link / picture. It may be a Euro version. Can anyone compare to a carbon frame for racing?

Wilfred Laurier

The Emonda is a racing bike and steel doesn't make sense for racing bikes because carbon and aluminum are better.

Doge

What kind of racing bike is it?

Wilfred Laurier

A 'road' racing bike.

Doge

Thanks for that. Hills, crits, cobbles? I'd like to know more. It is an option for my kid.

RJM

Well, their race bikes are in three categories, really. They have the Domane which would be their endurance frame, the Madone which is their Aero frame, and the Emonda which is their lightweight frame....

So,
Domane = cobbles
Madone = Aero
Emonda = Hills

Doge

I did not know. This is for a very hilly race. Thank you.
Any comparisons to a carbon bike. Say a Tarmac?

GlennR

Sorry... i'm not biting.

McBTC

How about a cost-effective modern bike combining the best all the materials offer --e.g., CF frame, seatpost and fork, alloy components, handlebars and wheels, leather saddle, steel tube nipples...

Doge

Straight forward question. I'm looking for data.

This is for this race:



Riding this (maybe).

WalksOn2Wheels

I'm sorry, I realized that I failed to answer your original question:

[h=2]Am I the only one who thinks Trek should make a steel Emonda?[/h]
Yes. You are most likely the only person in the world that thinks that.

RNAV

Trek initially set out to produce the lightest production family of bikes in the world. And then they introduced the entry-level S range. And then they introduced the ALR range (some of which are lighter than the carbon S range). So there is weight overlap between the carbon and aluminum ranges.

The guys over at Rodriguez are a boutique shop capable of producing sub-14 lb. steel racing bikes. So I don't think anyone can really argue that steel bikes can't be racing bikes. Besides, there's a plethora of steel bike manufacturers, so clearly there's a market for steel bikes.

Why can't Trek, with it's greater purchasing power and manufacturing capacity, produce a lightweight steel bike at a reasonable cost and break into the steel bike market? Further, it would round out the product line of the Emonda family. Take your pick: carbon, aluminum, steel.

Wilfred Laurier

Light weight does not mean it is a good bike. The fastest cyclists in the 80s rode on 20 lb bikes, even though lighter was possible, because the trade-offs (lack of stiffness, lack of strength) required for a superlight steel frame are too great a price to pay.

rpenmanparker 

Lee, the market for upper end steel bikes is minuscule compared to other materials. I'm guessing all those producers together don't amount to a single major player in CF, Al, and Ti. It is a truly esoteric area.

rpenmanparker 

Yes, but in fairness, the technology today was not available then. Light, stiff and comfortable steel is a reality now.