thehammerdog

I just came across this lovely new frame....stainless steel....Nice I was wondering why ?

Seems Ti is dying, steel while real is costly, Stainless yes cool but is it needed?

anythoughts?

https://velonews.com/article/91135

merlinextraligh

Needed, No.

Allows you to build a very cool, light, fantastic riding, comfortable, custom bike that won't corrode, yes.



My next bike may well be a Waterford lugged, 953 frame with stainless steel lugs. Built with Campy Super Record. A modern bike, but also an homage to the classic chrome Paramounts.
(not sure about the fork though)

rollin

Cinelli Xcr. A forum member posted a build earlier this week, slipped my mind who it was. Recommended frame price of $4,600.00 (!)

kimconyc

iab is the guy who has that Cinelli. That's probably the most gorgeous frameset I have ever seen. The welding looks so slick that lugs would take away from the sleek lines IMHO.

fordfasterr

link

Trogon

Like titanium, you can do some interesting things with it - bright polish, etching, exposed panels. Done well, it makes for a very nice ride. I've had my 953 frame for about 2 years, it's one of my favorites.

clausen

That's a beautiful frame. Love the chainstays.

merlinextraligh

To focus this thread a bit, a discussion of the plusses and minuses compared to Ti would be interesting. It would seem that 953 is very similar to Ti. Both light, both corrosion resistent, both well suited for custom sizing, both can give a great ride properly used.

So what would the reasons be to prefer 953 over Ti?

kimconyc

yield strength
lugs
"steel is real" (Ti has a "dead" ride quality)

ok_commuter

Yeah, that's gorgeous. But I'd definitely go with a traditional Waterford steel curved fork. I love that fork more every time I ride it, and I'm starting to think it's the main difference between "The Ride" and the ride of other similar steel frames. No way I'd risk losing that feel by using a carbon straight blade fork, even a nice once.

kimconyc

Good steel forks are known to have better ride quality than carbon forks. The only advantage of CF over steel, given that both are high quality, is weight.

Having said that, I feel bad for the De Rosa I am working on that will have a CF fork. I might even ba*****ize it even more by not going Campy. I will be sure to post it in C&V when I am done

bikefix

Wow. that Waterford frame is delicious! Thanks for the posting!
From what I've read, stainless steel is quite flexible and does not lend itself to be very lightweight.
953 vs. Titanium? That's a close race brother! For one, 953 is much less available than titanium. I think Ti tends to be lighter. But strength-wise, i remember them being more or less equal.
Anyone know about the cost difference?

sheddle

Peg Responsorium.

Stainless is way too expensive for me, does it even give better ride quality than high-end steel?

kimconyc

I'm not an engineer but I don't think that the steel itself provides a better ride quality. However, because it is stronger than regular steel, you can use different butted and sized tubes, which would normally not be possible with regular alloyed steel, which will change how the bike rides. This gives it the "feel". This is how I understand it.

Trogon

I don't think there are any valid reasons to do one over the other. Mine was built because I was curious about what the material had to offer. I already had a ti bike and so it seemed a fun thing to do for comparison sake.

Built to the same dimensions and equipped similarly, 953 rides a lot like titanium. It's not particularly light, my frame came out in the 3.25 lbs. range for what is essentially a size 57. It's pretty stiff too and not unlike my Vamoots in almost every way.

Cost-wise = no advantage in either direction, you're going to pay $2-$3000 for a custom frame in both cases. Of course, both have some lower priced outliers.

It's more or less a niche material in my opinion, you do it because you have some idea about how you want it to look and the material choice stems from that. For example, you can't easily do a shiny lugged frame in titanium, if that's what you're after and it's hard to get that matte titanium finish in 953 or XCR.

In my case, it was a fun project, I doubt I'd go back to the well a second time.

sced

You can get the same / better look by chrome plating a regular steel frame and fork for about $400. Nice used Reynolds 853 frames go for less that $300 on Ebay.

Drag

I believe a knowledgeable fabricator can make a Ti frame "lively", just as well as another could make a "dead" bike of any material.

Those polished stainless steel tubes and lugs do have a wonderful aesthetic however.

Trogon

Not sure where this idea that stainless looks like chrome came from. It doesn't, unless it's highly polished to do so.

Last bike I would ride would be chromed.

merlinextraligh

Perhaps from this:







Note in the last pic the frame is 953, and the fork chromed 531.

Trogon

Well yea, that's probably where the idea comes from. But in hand, stainless looks nothing like chrome. Unpolished 953 looks a lot like titanium. Polished 953 looks like polished steel, not chromed steel. It doesn't have the wavy imperfections, it doesn't peel and it doesn't suffer from pinholes that allow water to seep in causing corrosion and even more peeling.

Suggesting that a chromed 853 frame would be cheaper is correct. Proposing that it would be better or even similar is completely off the mark. Apples and oranges.

iab

Trogan is correct, chrome has a better shine than polished stainless. But the chroming process is very toxic and it is known to chip, then rust underneath the chrome. There is good and bad with both. Here is my stainless XCR, more pics here, https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=534318

iab

Retail is for goyim.

sced

I was merely pointing to a functionally excellent alternative that offers a very similar look and feel and costs a small fraction of the "luxury" SS frames mentioned. Like a good paint job, a good chrome job if respected for will last a looooooooog time. I don't know what alloys are used in the "luxury" frames above, but not all stainless is really stainless.

kimconyc

I am goyim and I don't pay MSRP. I still manage to spend a ludicrous amount on my bike habit.

flatlander_48

I would say that there there are varying degrees of resistance to rust within the 300 and 400 series stainless steels. For example, 409 is about the cheapest stainless that you can buy. It is only slightly more rust resistance than non-stainless steels because it is light on the heavy metals (reduced chromium content and no nickel). Basically it allows you to say that your product has stainless, but that's about it...