mstateglfr 

yes a steel frame can be built under uci weight.
I still am not sure what steel frame is lighter than equal level carbon frames though, which is what I disagreed with.

an oval top tube will flex more vertically and not laterally.
a bi-oval downtube will help resist bottom bracket twist.

While these are known, I'm not sure how much it actually matters and affect the ride compared to plain round tubes of equal butting.
So in that view, I could see it as a gimmick just like an aero frame is proven, but so incrementally small that it effectively doesn't help a lot of cyclists.

John_V 

mmmmm! A new BF discussion - aluminum vs wooden bats.

Koyote

My bat is made of double-butted lugged steel.

Wileyone 

I prefer Fillet braised bats myself. Less chance of foul balls.

LV2TNDM

The difference between today's steel alloys and the stuff up through the eighties and early nineties is pretty big. Not to say the older steel wasn't great. My SLX Tommaso is still a joy to ride.

But the air hardening steel alloys of today are pretty damn amazing. Light, strong and responsive. One local frame builder I worked for never used the traditional brace between the chain stays at the BB shell. Consumers and LBS people complained occasionally, thinking he left it off due to laziness. Not.a.chance.

In the old days, a steel rear triangle was kinda fragile. Re-spacing dropouts was done with ease. Cannondale bragged how strong their rear triangles were by showing a rider crouched on the rear dropouts of a bare frame lying on the ground and said, "If you did this to a steel frame, it would collapse!" or something to that effect. And they were right.

Well, that ain't the case today! Or at least with the steel frames I was tasked with working on. The True Temper rear triangles were BEASTS! I often had to re-space cross frames from 130mm to 135. So that's just 2.5mm change at each dropout. Well, it took ALL my 200 lbs and strength to get these things to budge. And this was with all the right tools, frame table, etc. And again, no chain stay bridge. And this was the thinner stayed road/cross frame model. The mountain frame chain stays were even beefier. Luckily, I never had to change spacing on them; doing so would have required a press. So today's steels are in a completely different arena. There's really no comparison to the previous chrome molybdenum steels of yesteryear.

Problem is, the industry has (or says it has) "moved on" to bigger and better things. Progress, technology, carbon fiber is "space-age" stuff, blah, blah, blah. Steel lost its sex appeal decades ago (for the average, less-knowledgeable consumer). Those of us who know quality bikes & frames still have a great appreciation of quality steel frames. And luckily for us, they're still widely available, if mostly at the boutique level. That said, it's nice to see the big manufacturers like Surly, AllCity, etc. keep the consumer steel market going. Even the big manufacturers have resumed steel production after abandoning it over a decade ago.

Steel is still real, but you won't find it adorning many full-page ads in the latest cycling rag.

livedarklions

You're Off-topic--we're discussing the proper tool for beating dead horses.

LV2TNDM

Thyssenkrup is doing exactly this with steel:
https://bikerumor.com/2019/07/18/thy...tweight-steel/

And to say welding tubes together is outdated is simply wrong. Welding air hardening steels increases strength at the heat-affected zone, avoiding many of the shortcomings of previous steel tubes. Welding metals is far from something manufacturers don't do any more.

And hydroformed frames are STILL WELDED! Thyssendrup welds the two halves of the frames together. So much for "outdated" manufacturing processes!

genejockey 

Ah, *ping!* of the bat, the roar of the crowd.....

Wileyone 

The "Fake" crowd that is.

icemilkcoffee 

I didn't say welding is outdated. I said welding off the shelf tubes together is outdated. The link you had about Thyssenkrupp developing pressed/formed steel is exactly what I was talking about- this is the way forward for steel. Hopefully their technology will lead somewhere.

Meanwhile for today's craft steel frame makers, they should start doing more of this:


And less of this:

Germany_chris

I think what always gets forgotten in threads like this is second look factor. If your goal is to build the fastest bike possible composite frames are where it's at, layup changes, fiber changes, et. al. can built just about the perfect bike for any weight and any power output to go fast but something is lost. If I go to *pick a builder* tell that person what I'm looking for and what I want to do they're going to mix and match tubes to make that happen, if lugs give you a pants tent then you can get those, if one of a kind is your jam you can have that, If your inner weight weenie needs voice that can make that happen no matter what you choose from a steel Speedvagen with all the bits and bobs to a Rivendell with a technomic it's going to make you look back at it. There are bikes that are tools and there are bikes that are feel and that's where the disconnect starts. If your goal is racing you need to decide if you want to race a clock or the dude next to you if Brevets get your juices flowing than get a nice steel frame, if you live for the peloton and the chess that comes with it there's nothing better than a composite.

We all view bikes and our reasons for riding them differently, I'm very much a utility kinda guy I see beauty in a nice steel frame whether it's a Kirk or a Surly just like I see beauty in a Sebenza, a Sinn, and a Jeep but I no chit get it if you don't. I want to throw crap on my bike and Jeep and see stuff, I want to live in no where Alaska, I want quiet, camp fires, and self reliance but I really do get the need for culture, people and great restaurants.

Just pick your thing and have at it, it's the coolest thing about being a grown-up, we get to make our history and our life.

guy153

They're mostly still basically chrome molybdenum. Those rear triangles might have been heat-treated CrMo which does make it harder to bend them. The "air hardening" steels (Reynolds 631 and the heat-treated version, 853) are supposed to be a bit stronger in the heat affected zone around the weld than you would get with CrMo which is very cool, but in practice the tube and butt profiles are about the same as for CrMo steels, and the ultimate tensile strength of the alloy is about the same as CrMo.

And CrMo is only slightly stronger than Reynolds 531 which just about everything (from mid-level to high end) was made of forever. The main difference is you can't weld 531. We had heat-treated steels back in the 70s as well (Reynolds 753 for example).

So they're all better now than they were, but not by very much, until you get to the super high-zoot stainless alloys but those are tricky to work with and rarely used.

You can always re-space a rear triangle with a piece of threaded rod and a few nuts. Crank it out to about 160mm for a 130 or 165mm for a 135mm and it will spring back to about the right place. But it's quite a good idea not to use heat-treated steel for the rear triangle anyway, especially if you have to dimple it, and you always have to re-space a bit when building the frame.

Reynolds have the really sweet pencil-thin road seatstays which are 0.6mm wall available as 525 (regular CrMo) or 725 (the same thing heat-treated). There's no reason not to just use the 525 ones-- the 725 aren't any thinner wall or lighter. Just less ductile.

bruce19

I am not particulary inclined to any frame material but that is wrong. There are differences.

bruce19

Wrong again.

Litespud

indeed - but differences in materials are so overshadowed by frame design and tires they’re almost academic

Litespud

well said - this isn’t a zero-sum game. There’s a frame material and bike design for every person and every situation. Long may it continue

Wileyone 

Oh my God guys, just go ride your bikes

livedarklions

I just rode a nice 25 on my Serotta, weird-shaped steel chain stays and all.

Mulberry20

I have a 13 year old Serotta that is my daily bike. It has Campy Chorus on it. I’ve been offered $3,700 for it. Not sure anyone would want a carbon bike that was 13 years old, just saying.

Wileyone 

I took my Holdsworth out this morning and never once did I think I would rather be on anything else.

unterhausen

the current market has a niche for steel, but it's not the cheap bikes of old. It's upscale. Almost all the cheap bikes are aluminum.

Jax Rhapsody

Depending on the aluminum, they will be, like the Cannondale r series and it's fat tubes. Not to mention tube shape.

rsbob 

Rode this bad boy today just for the helluvit. Not a round tube to be found. The cows liked it but wanted to know about the saddle. I told them synthetic.

After getting a new wheel set with Conti 5000s for the carbon, the Gatorskins will be going. Enjoy the differences between the bikes.



Is that a leather saddle?

livedarklions

Not at Walmart. A lot , maybe most, of the really cheap ones are steel. Kent and Huffy especially.

livedarklions

I'm going to have to fully inspect and vet that bike. About 6k miles riding it should do. Let me know when you will drop it off.

Cow's tag on the right looks like she's been labeled as a pig.