I’m in the market for a winter hardtail and my heart says go for steel (Bfe, P7, Switchback), but my head says save yourself a couple of hundred quid and just get an aluminium frame.

Back in the day steel was real, but how much of that was down to skinnier tubes, QR rear ends and long flexy seatposts. Now that we’ve got dropper posts, CEN tests, and fat seat tubes and droppers, how much of that steel feel is lost and we’re just paying for nostalgia in extra cost and weight?

3 pages

imho the benefits of steel now lie in it’s durability. Especially as you’re considering a BFe…

It’s still a great material to ride. Granted there are burly steel frames which aren’t so lively but they are still so much nicer than aluminium frames IMO. Current bike of choice is a Singular Rooster.

It’s the zing that makes it worthwhile.

Are we talking bikes or chicken?

Three of my four bikes are steel, the other’s a carbon road bike. One is brilliant, one is neutral i.e. it could be any material really, the third is a bit dull.

Fortunately the dull one is my commuter/winter bike and the brilliant one is my main MTB. The neutral one is the fat bike where there’s so much else going on that it’s hard to pin anything down specifically to the frame.

Are we talking bikes or chicken?

Well, both, but not at the same time. That’d would just be crazy overzing.

For MTB’s I reckon most of it is in the ‘long and flexy’ seatpost.

I’ve got two frames, identical apart from frame material.

After pissing about with them for over 10 years, I know the frame material does make a difference, but not as much as switching from a flexy post to a stiff one.

If you’re a shortarse and anywhere near Burnley, you’re welcome to try it for yourself.

Real(ly) heavy. Well my last steel frame was.

the only time I notice it on my soul is when I land it badly/sideways you feel the rear end flex then otherwise not so much,

I like the ride and the looks that steel gives, though Alu has come a long way and has some great ride qualities now I don’t think you can beat a steel frame for looks.

Stones hitting the down tube sound much better as well.

Cheers, Steve

@Rusty – I’m not a shortarse nor anywhere near Burnley, but thanks for the offer 🙂

Yeah, there’s definitely something really aesthetically pleasing about a steel frame.

So real they made a film about it.

I worked briefly in a bike shop when I was much younger, one of those old Cinder Cones came in and I hankered for one from that day. I’ve got a Swift at the mo, seems a bit hefty but it’s a nice frame.

It’s partly the properties of the material of course but you can’t just expect to knock together a frame in steel and for it to have the properties for which steel has a reputation for (zing, compliance, feel). The design of the frame taking advantage of those properties plays a huge part I think.

My Production Privee frames(I have two now. It was an accidental purchase) for example, use an ovalised chainstay which really does add in some compliance. My Oka is just the most comfortable hardtail I’ve ridden and I’ve ridden loads.

They probably have some sort of fancy acronym for the ovalised tubes and what they do but meh, they do make a difference. I had a Transition Transam before and it was way more rigiderer (but still great)

I’ve had rigid steel frames but am convinced by what Production Privee do with their pig iron. 🙂

I would only buy steel hardtails now I think. Mind you, I also have a steel full suspension enduro gnarpoon rig.

imho the benefits of steel now lie in it’s durability.

I reckon they lie in it’s repairability. But that only matters if you’re spending a lot on a frame, as a decent new Alu frame can be had form about the same as a decent repair and respray on a steel frame.

Geometry is far more important than material. Steel vs alu the main difference is about 1.5lb (give or take) frame weight.

If you want comfort get a suspension seatpost or a full sus.

philjunior – Member
imho the benefits of steel now lie in it’s durability.

I reckon they lie in it’s repairability.

another good point.

i was mostly thinking about the resistance of steel frames to things like cable rub, chain suck, etc. And Aluminium BB threads always make me a little nervous…

Well my 853 rigid bike is very nice to ride as was my aluminium hardtail and then it was also excellent when all the parts migrated to a carbon frame.

My carbon Defy is a is a fantastic ride whereas my steel Croix de Fer now feels like a horrible unresponsive uncomfortable pile of scaffold poles in comparrison.

My Robert’s White Spider in pre CEN skinny Columbus tubing was also wonderful.

I probably wouldn’t buy another steel bike now though unless I was looking for a custom build.

use an ovalised chainstay which really does add in some compliance

Shennanigans!

Most of my bikes are steel, and a significant proportion of the ones I have had but no longer own were also steel, and I love it as a material, but if you honestly believe that those slightly ovalised chainstays have any real effect on the compliance in the back end I reckon you’re deluding yourself.

Whatevs, I’m not deluding myself. As I say, I’ve ridden lots of steel frames and these PP bikes feel different in the chainstay.

What happened with imported frames when the CEN stuff kicked in, did frames like the Niner Sir9 immediately get a chunk heavier too? Was there a magical year for the last load of (relatively) light steel frames?

I’ve ridden lots of steel frames

me too, but let’s not play that game, it’s childish and won’t end well for either of us 😉

these PP bikes feel different.

I wasn’t disputing that, nor was it a put down on your frame. But I do not believe that any noticeable compliance comes from the ovalisation of those chainstays alone.

I combination with other aspects of the frame design and back end maybe, but simply ovalising the chainstays there does not magically make the back end of a bike compliant.

Most vertical compliance (and there really isn’t much in a frame) comes from the top tube, seat tube, and to a lesser degree downtube. Super skinny or flexy stays can play a part too, but that’s in extremis and normally overshadowed.

Lateral flex on the other hand is what most people feel as compliance in steel frames and that’s an even bigger can of (subjective) worms.

Feel free to model it and come back with some numbers and FEA to show how big an effect it has though, I’d be genuinely curious to see.

Those Production Privee frames look gorgeous. Might add it to the list for consideration

Pay for design, not specifically material.

That said, steel is tough (in a material properties way) and IMO that translates to a bike thats a bit more tolerant of rough treatment, like laying it down on rocks, and the general battering that MTBs receive. If they’re used ‘properly’.

Feel free to model it and come back with some numbers and FEA to show how big an effect it has though, I’d be genuinely curious to see.

Or you could, seeing as you’re disputing my actual experience of riding the thing. I have my evidence.. 😉

I combination with other aspects of the frame design and back end maybe, but simply ovalising the chainstays there does not magically make the back end of a bike compliant.

I don’t think that they ‘simply’ ovalised the chainstays, I’m fairly sure they put a bit more thought/design into it and presumably tested the ideas.
The seatstays are ovalised too for what it’s worth.

Anyway, all other subjective things aside, skinny tubed steel frames really do tend to look good(also subjective)

Or you could

I have either the software nor the time, but if someone else has the time to do it, I am genuinely interested as I don’t believe that it has much effect, but I would love to be able to quantify that either way. Do you know if PP have any data available? I’d assume if it was a big selling point or specific feature of theirs they would be able to quantify and demonstrate the difference.

seeing as you’re disputing my actual experience of riding the thing

For the 2nd time… I’m NOT disputing your experience. I’m disputing your explanation.

experience:

My Oka is just the most comfortable hardtail I’ve ridden

explanation:

use an ovalised chainstay which really does add in some compliance.

My steel bike is the most comfortable one I own. It’s also the only one with 4″ tyres. It’s real though.

Steel is real, big tyres are big liars. Or something.

IHN – Member
That’d would just be crazy overzing.

My life needs some overzing !!

amedias – Member
Do you know if PP have any data available?

No data as far as I’m aware of but they do make a thing of it as below. Of course, what a company says and the reality is often different, but, I personally think that there is some truth in what they are saying from my experience alone.

Translated from French/written by a Andorran person on their website about the Shan model.
The key point of the SHAN is the vertical flexibity of the rear end thanks to the KTP flex system. This allows more grip, more comfort and more efficiency in down-hill section! To achieve it we’ve developped our own specific bladed tubes for the chainstays and the seatstays their increase the vertical flexibility. We didn’t use bridge between chainstays for the same idea. The seatstays are not heat treated to allow a maximum flexibility.

To insure the performance of our KTP flex system, we should used high-end tubes. That’s why our SHAN are made with Japanese cromo 4130 triple butted tubing. All tubes are heat treated before welding excepted the seat stay to keep more even flexibility.

Reminds me of Cannondale.

this:

…The seatstays are not heat treated to allow a maximum flexibility.

is bobbins.

Before I bought my Soul, I was riding aluminium. Best quote I read “aluminium is steel with the life sucked out of it”

All my rides are now steel!

…The seatstays are not heat treated to allow a maximum flexibility.
is bobbins

I’m no metal expert so can you explain why?
Heat treating makes the steel harder, then it’s tempered to make it less brittle I thought.
If they don’t harden and temper it, what would that mean for a length of tube in this circumstance?

I’m quite aware of the amount of marketing bobbins the public are subjected to but interested in why not heat treating it would make no difference?

All dependent on tube thickness/diameter whatever the material used.

I’ve ridden an old 456 with stays thin like pencils and a narrow 27.2mm seat post, it was bliss….also beneficial was the straight steerer which I’m sure added more flex than tapered steerers today…add in the 2.5 tyres I like to ride and it was exceptionally comfortable despite being cheap and not being the 853 steel that people rave about.

More recently I owned a steel Ragley that took a tapered steerer fork, had a 31.6mm seat post and stays that were thick like a snooker cue….the ride was completely different despite the material being the same.

I’m now on an Alu Dartmoor that rides the same as the steel Ragley, it’s all big tubes and heavy duty welding like the Ragley….im still a massive fan of steel however, I never worried about breaking it, cracks appearing etc and I was always confident it could be repaired by a local welder if the worst happened.

Geometry is more important as others said, it’s why I went to the Dartmoor….it is longer in reach and slightly slacker in head angle.

That said I do like the Production Privee idea of not putting a brace between the chain stays. I reckon that would be beneficial for lateral flex in any material and also aid tyre clearance and mud clearance….wonder if I could cut the one out of my Dartmoor!?

My mk1 Scandal was lovely, I bought a mk2 one, it was less lovely. I don’t think my Swift is as comfortable as the old Scandal. It does have much more tyre clearance though.

Could well be rose tinted goggles.

kayak23 – Member

“bobbins”

I’m no metal expert so can you explain why?

i’ll try.

Heat treating makes the steel harder, then it’s tempered to make it less brittle I thought.

‘heat treatment’ is a catch-all-term, it can be used to harden, strengthen, soften, etc. depends on the material / temperature / cooling rate.

I’m quite aware of the amount of marketing bobbins the public are subjected to but interested in why not heat treating it would make no difference?

first, stiffness and strength are different characteristics. Strength is defined by the force (per unit area) the material will resist before failure. Stiffness is defined by the force (per unit area) required to elongate a tensile test piece to double it’s original length, or, the force at strain = 1.

the stiffness of steel is about 210GPa (1,000,000,000 N per m2).

the stiffness of Aluminium is about 70GPa.

these are more or less fixed constants, like density. In fact, stiffness is quite closely related to density, as stiffness has it’s source in the inter-atomic forces and the distances between atoms.

Stiffness is not significantly affected by heat-treatment, in very much the same way that density is not significantly affected by heat-treatment.

What awhiles said pretty much nails it. The only difference you’d get would be if it was yielding, at which point it would work harden (and increase the yield stress) and/or ratchet (and then break). In both cases if it was yielding over many bumps, it would break.

If the strength was lower, or welds not heat treated and more allowance needed for residual stresses that heat treatment would remove (and preventing them from helping fatigue to get going) more material would be required, and if more material was required, it would be stiffer/less compliant.

Tires/seatposts/saddle rails/supple forks are where it’s at if you are looking for something to keep your hardtail comfy.

@Philjunior – I’m not looking specifically for comfort and recognise that it’s going to be a bumpier ride, I’m more concerned about buying a steel frame (at a premium) to get none of the supposed benefits.

I don’t have access to any decent FEA, but if you like I’ll try and knock up a hand calc in my spare time.

Essentially though, lateral stiffness will vary due to tube size, vertically all frames that don’t have a spring there will be “stiff”, due to triangulation (this will also eliminate any benefit from the ovalisation on the chainstay – if you can’t compress the seatstays it doesn’t matter what you do to the chainstays). I’ll include a calc for tyre stiffness too (assuming a flat surface to give the best possible effect of frame vs tyre). I suspect that any difference vertically will be marginal comparing typical steel vs typical alu. frames.

If anyone beats me to it with FE (including the tyre), I’ll not bother of course!