ModeratedUser150120149

I borrowed a road bike for a person who is coming to visit me. It is a Trek 420 Fast Track; which is an all steel bike.

I had never ridden a steel road bike before and I needed to check it out anyway so I put a few miles on it this afternoon. It has frame mounted shifters which took some getting used to. But, other than that it performed pretty well compared to my carbon bike. The carbon one is much smoother and much more comfortable on chip coat and other rough roads than the steel bike. But, the steel bike feels better than the aluminum ones I have ridden.

It isn't objectionably heavy and gave me no trouble on hills, which surprised me. I expected it to be a heavy beast. But, such was not the case. it is a few pounds heavier than my carbon bike but not so much it becomes a performance problem, at least in the way I use a bike.

Summary: Carbon in my experience is the smoothest and most comfortable. But this steel bike as an unexpected star. I can only guess how a more modern bike would be. When it comes time for another road bike steel is going to be on my acceptable list.

RU55EL

One of these days I'm going to have to try a carbon frame bicycle. I bought a Masi steel frame in 1988 and have never had a desire to replace it. Your post has me a little curious though.

cyclinfool

The 420 is a pretty old frame - early 80's I believe, touring frame, butt welded.
Not sure of the steel used but I would have thought it was around 5 lbs heavier than you CF bike - maybe 22 to 23 lbs.
As for ride, if should be very different, not as responsive but very stable. DOn't know what you are riding in CF but I would have thought the Trek would provide a softer ride as I think it should be a longer wheelbase. With all that said, if you are getting interested in Steel - look at more modern tubing, there is a big different in bith weight and ride. One example, my early 90's Simincini is Columbus XLS tubing and weights in at only 2lbs heavier than my Tarmac (per my bathroom scale). The latest steel frames can narrow that gap by another lb. There is a big difference in steels. The new steels also provide a better ride than the older steels.

Personally I am a steel bike snob, I own AL, steel and CF. On a century my steel bike is my weapon of choice. However on a fast club ride or climbing and when I want to stay up with the young bucks I'll choose CF. AL is my commuter - it can take abuse. I find my steel bike gives a better long term ride, however my Tarmac and my Simincini are different geometrys with different wheels, tires, bars & seat. Unless all were the same it is impossible to really make a fair assessment.

NOS88

I consider myself lucky in that I have steel, carbon, aluminum, titanium, and steel/carbon mix bikes. I like them all or I wouldn't own 'em. I've also ridden all of the listed materials in bikes that I really didn't care for. To me, material is important, but not as important as design and build.

akohekohe

+1

DnvrFox

+2

Pretty much echoes both Sheldon's and Jobst Brandt's thoughts, as I recall. However, I would love to try a CF, and my LBS wants me to get a custom built Ti.

So many choices, so little time and $$.

John E

I ride vintage steel exclusively, but I concur that there are good and bad bikes in any given frame material.

leob1

You never rode a steel road bike? When did you start riding?

CraigB

I'm a little surprised to see someone post in this particular section that they just rode a steel bike for the first time.

Seriously, though, I've always enjoyed steel. The only bad steel experience I ever had was with one particular bike - my first true racing bike back in the mid '80s. I've always been a Clyde and this Gitane had a habit of flexing a little bit side-to-side when I'd get out of the saddle to climb. The problem manifested itself in unexpected upshifts, something I rarely welcomed during those times. But I had ridden plenty of other steel frames that didn't have that problem, so I assume it was an issue limited to that particular frame.

1bluetrek

Once upon a time I had a Centurion Turbo, Man I miss that Bike! Riding an AL Trek 1500 now days, It rides pretty nice for AL but that steel Centurion was sweet!

kr32

I haven't either and started about two years ago. Well I did ride when I was in high school and earlier but that was 40 years ago. Wait I did ride a steel mtb in the early 80's for a short time while I was married, a Ross, still have it too but never ride it.( I think it was/is steel)

bobbycorno

...and not what I'd call a high end one either. You owe it to yourself to try a really good handmade frame, if only for a frame of reference. Something like a DeRosa, Sachs, Serotta, etc (or even a top-line steel Trek) would be a REAL eye-opener.


SP
Bend, OR

JamieElenbaas

The other night, I had the opportunity to ride a top of the line 1983 steel Colnago with Campy Record groupo and silk tires. It is a single owner bike in perfect condition - climbing onto it felt like entering some kind of time machine.

The bike had zero flex that I could tell. The ride can only be described as elegant. My alu/carbon combo is twitchy by comparison. I think I could have fallen asleep on the Colnago it was so smooth and stable. It was a fun experience, but I was terrified of putting a scratch in it.

BikeWNC

The Trek 420 Fast Track was made in the mid 90s. It certainly isn't an example of a high end steel frame.

BluesDawg

+1
A decent bike. Not crap by any means, but probably not a good comparison to whatever CF bike the OP is riding.

stapfam

93 and I got a high end steel bike for the time. Admittedly Mountain but a Kona Explosif. Still gives a good ride today but I also have a mid range Steel bike in the wifes GT talera from the same time. Give me High end steel frames over mid range anytime. And in comparison to the low end stuff- Chalk and cheese does not come into it.

Then onto early aluminium frames. Heavier than steel- Rock solid and took some controlling.

But you have to choose the frame material That suits you. I do have a good CF frame in the Giant TCR-C But I have a better frame in the high end Aluminium Boreas. Better for me that is.

BluesDawg

...or even a high quality Japanese production bike like a Bridgestone RB-1.

NOS88

Sorry for the short hijack, but BD, have you decided what you're going to do about Ribby?

leob1

I still have a '79 Centurion Super Elite, it rode nice then, it still rides nice now. They made nice bikes. And nothing is as pretty as a lugged frame!
PS. If you ever get to NJ, give me a shout, I'll let you take it for a ride.

DnvrFox

I stopped at a Sunflower grocery today while riding my 1999 Lemond B A Reynolds 853 steel.

Out of the blue, this very fit looking young man (about 40-45) comes up to me and says "That is a wonderful bike. I used to lead tours in Europe and rode all over Europe on my Lemond just like that one. I know Greg Lemond, and that is simply the sweetest riding bike ever."

This is not the first time I have had folks remark about my bike, including folks at 2 different LBS's - about what a great bike it is. Made me feel good!!

BluesDawg

Not yet. Waiting to see how things develop on many fronts.

Monoborracho

Steve Katzman

Interesting that so many people believe that. I agree about the newer lightweight steels being lighter than the older ones - no argument there.

Perhaps some of you may remember, several years back a now defunct magazine, I think it was called Road Bike Review (not sure - memory fading - this is the over 50 group?) did an interesting comparison test of steel road bike frames. They took about 6 or 8 frames, ranging from the cheapest low quality steel tubing to the state of the art hand built frames with the best tubing available and painted them all with identical paint and outfitted them all with the same componentry so that it would be difficult to tell them apart. They let their reviewers ride them all and pick out their favorites based on ride quality, handling, etc.

You would think that these professional reviewers, being so savvy, would have unanimously chosen the top one or two models as being the best riding steel frame. Not so! The favorites came out all over the range, many admitting that they couldn't tell the difference. So much for the belief that better tubing or better construction made for a better riding experience.

I own several "snob appeal" bikes myself, like Masi and Serotta steel, Serotta Ti, custom Al Simonetti, Co-Motion steel tandem and Carbon Scott CR1. While I would like to think that my steel frames are superior riding machines to run of the mill mass produced Trek 420's and the like, I can't really be sure if I would be able to tell them apart in a blind test. Probably not. Fortunately (?) they are not all painted the same and I can take pride in their construction details and enjoy riding all of them. In conclusion I believe that when we buy ourselves an expensive bike we have the urge to justify the additional cost to ourselves (and maybe others) by somehow sensing superior performance, be it real or not. I call that the placebo effect.

lhbernhardt

I find that there's a significant number of riders who only appreciate steel frames after they've bought their carbon fiber bike. I think it has something to do with just having a state-of-the-art bike. The fact you've got the cf now makes you comfortable enough to ride the steel. My current ride is a steel Rodriguez fixie (True Temper OX Platinum), which I ride all the time. My carbon fiber Trek has zero kilometers on it all year (but this may change in a couple of weeks).

I find a good steel frame is just more "lively" than cf. I love the way the steel frame vibrates on bumpy roads. Carbon fiber is light and stiff, but it feels "dead" after a while. A steel frame is just so much more interesting to ride, even with carbon forks, handlebars, and seatpost.

But if you currently own a steel frame and don't yet have a cf, get the cf just so you can say you've got one. Then you will be OK with riding steel. You may even develop a preference for it.

Luis

lhbernhardt

I agree completely with this perceptive and informative post. I have always maintained that bicycle road tests are total hogwash. They are far too subjective, and too much of the performance is dependent on the engine. You can take your existing road bike, and move the brake levers up or down about a half-inch, and I guarantee it will feel completely different. You want your existing bike to just jump out of the turns like a rocket? Just replace the chain and rear cassette and put more air in the tires.

The one time I could tell any difference in handling was when I got my first carbon fiber Trek, and it wasn't the frame material. Previously, I had used fashionable Italian frames built for the North American criterium market (Masi). When I tried the Trek, it could corner like it was on rails by comparison, but this was only because it had a slightly longer top tube.

Luis