Forum menu
@daffy yes geometry plays a part but it’s not the whole story. The flaremax is a tiny bit slacker and a tiny bit longer but the difference in feel between the two goes way beyond that. I never believed the steel is real hype and didn’t have high expectations of the cotic but was really surprised just how much more compliant it is when descending rough stuff.
As a mechanical engineer, I really have a hard time believing that what you're feeling as compliance can be the difference in the way the STEEL tubing moves over how the AIR suspension is working on it's linkages. Only at the very max level of shock compression would the tubes possibly start to bend. If we've talking about the bike bending out of plane, again, it's more likely to happen around the linkages, than it is at the tubes. The one exception may be at the bottom bracket. where the linkages are having little effect and its more to do with the downtube and chainstay stiffness.
I have had steel, ally and carbon MTB and road bikes. The only one I could tell any difference with was a particular ally road bike that was so harsh it rattled your fillings. The only other difference was the carbon ones were lighter and easier to pedal uphill otherwise it's down to what individual manufacturers do with their materials
The only other difference was the carbon ones were lighter and easier to pedal uphill
And the steel ones looked better...
@daffy I appreciate you're actually qualified to discuss these things and I'm just a unqualified bozo who rides the bikes. All I can report is my perception. I've no idea where the compliance comes from, whether it's linkages or tubes. As core mentioned above, the new model has an extra brace joining the BB, downtube and steattube, which is presumably to increase stiffness in that area. If the ride feel is nothing to do with frame material then I'd love an alu or carbon flaremax to save some weight.
Steel is real until you realise titanium is better. Lol
Steel is real until you realise titanium is better. Lol
My ti hardtail will disagree.
@daffy I appreciate you’re actually qualified to discuss these things and I’m just a unqualified bozo who rides the bikes. All I can report is my perception. I’ve no idea where the compliance comes from, whether it’s linkages or tubes. As core mentioned above, the new model has an extra brace joining the BB, downtube and steattube, which is presumably to increase stiffness in that area. If the ride feel is nothing to do with frame material then I’d love an alu or carbon flaremax to save some weight.
I just think they're two very different bikes and the combination of geometry, suspension dynamics and possibly weight do make the Cotic feel immeasurably better, and I have absolutely no doubt that you can feel it. Additionally, I full appreciate that material can make for a vastly different feeling. Carbon wheels built the same way as alloy wheels are (for me) far too stiff. I reduce the spoke count and the crossing to make them feel better for me.
Steel is real until you realise titanium is better. Lol
Until it cracks!! Imho the bike industry standards of welding ti aren't good enough.
I have, quite a bit binners, though not that specific one (I'm guessing it's not yours as its not in blue and yellow livery)
Thing is, it's not inexpensive (it is for what it is mind) and as the saying goes you don't look at the mantlepiece.
I want to like it very much and that will likely render any demo I might get rather superficial become, you know, I've already decided I like it.
I'm mainly looking for someone to tell me its all hype and buy the (whole) saracen instead or the opposite, obviously.
Just look at this thing though. Just look at it! Its virtually pornographic
I'll take a modern carbon full sus over that Land Rover chassis any day.
[i
Just look at this thing though. Just look at it! Its virtually pornographic
I don't know how the shocks are mounted on these (spherical bearings?) because it's a whole lot of loading that is being dealt with by the shock. It will corner very well though
Just look at this thing though. Just look at it! Its virtually pornographic
Sorry but the swingarm just reminds me of the late nineties bottom of the range Marin single pivot thing.
I’m sure it’s a lovely bike tho.
I don’t know how the shocks are mounted on these (spherical bearings?) because it’s a whole lot of loading that is being dealt with by the shock.
It's an x2 so it'll blow up long before that's a concern
If we’ve talking about the bike bending out of plane, again, it’s more likely to happen around the linkages, than it is at the tubes. The one exception may be at the bottom bracket. where the linkages are having little effect and its more to do with the downtube and chainstay stiffness.
In the plane off the bike I’m with you all the way. Even more so on a hardtail
But all bike are really bendy out of the plane. Stand next to any bike and press on a pedal with your foot. So it sends entirely plausible a stem FS is much more flexible out of the plane of the bike
Binners , that swingarm looks like a borked umbrella. I've had steel, I've had carbon and I know which one I prefer.
And it's not for Titanium, the 'bike for life'. But not a very long life. And they all look the same
Imo Curtis' are suited to hardtails only.
I'm sure it's an alright kinda ride though. Why not buy a Tranny full suss and build a Curtis hardtail. Think of it like a N+2 😁
I personally like the idea of a simpler single pivot bike with a steel front triangle and a Composite swingarm (has been done before)
But the examples I’ve seen look horrific 😀
Even the Swarf Curve?
It was like a decade ahead, high pivot idler and everything...
I’ll take a modern carbon full sus over that Land Rover chassis any day.
That, and a Santa Cruz I saw on here today both have horrific head tubes. Looks like it's unfinished and reminds me of the bottom bracket area on my old Whippet. Pretty sure carbon full suss bikes used to look better?
As for the Curtis, agree that the rear end looks like a early 2000's BSO unfortunately as I want to like it.
I ride an Orange full suss though so what do I know, right?
“ As a mechanical engineer, I really have a hard time believing that what you’re feeling as compliance can be the difference in the way the STEEL tubing moves over how the AIR suspension is working on it’s linkages.”
Stop thinking in 2D. Lean the bike over and consider all the force vectors when cornering. The forces are big, the levers are long (front and rear contact patches to grips and pedals) and there’s not a lot of material in any bike frame, even a long travel steel full-sus. They bend!
@kelvin - can you elaborate why Cotic rejected all the carbon swing arm prototypes? I’ve always wanted a Cotic, but I’d be much more interested if they had a repairable (steel or carbon) rear end. My main issue with alloy on expensive full sussers is that when it cracks it’s doomed to the bin - at least carbon and steel can be relatively easily and cheaply fixed. Obviously not an issue if the alloy frame has a lifetime warranty, but smaller brands usually only have a few years, plus then it has ramifications for the second hand market (which in a world where we need to recycle things for longer isn’t great).
You’re wrong.
no, you’re wrong
Get a demo ride. Don’t buy a bike on theory.
you mean hypothesis.
I do favour steel bikes (Cotic fanboi) but will happily admit that it's more a philosophical and aesthetics thing than anything I can easily or measurably feel in ride dynamics.
In fact, the absolute stiffest and most uncompliant bike I have is a steel one. My BFe feels like it absolutely refuses to bend in any plane. Probably the fact that it's a tiny 14" frame has a lot to do with that but when I first got it it was noticeably stiffer at the rear than it's predecessor which was an Identiti Mr Hyde who's rear triangle was made from thick square section (aluminium) girders.
And then, the smoothest bike I've owned was an Orange Alpine 160. massive aluminium frame but buttery smooth single pivot suspension. Having said that, I know from regularly riding behind a mate who also had one that the single pivot rear end on those bikes was laterally and twisterally (?) all over the place to a scary looking extent which I guess negated any harshness inherent in the frame.
TLDR. Buy whatever bike built from whatever material that you can afford, does the job you want it to, and (most importantly) like the look of. Unless you're a world class rider, then differences in ride quality due to frame material are likely to be way less noticeable than other factors.
Stop thinking in 2D. Lean the bike over and consider all the force vectors when cornering. The forces are big, the levers are long (front and rear contact patches to grips and pedals) and there’s not a lot of material in any bike frame, even a long travel steel full-sus. They bend!
So when I explicitly stated “out of plane”, so expressly NOT 2D, and that there would be some feel? Of course they bend, but I’d wager it’s bending more at the joints/linkages between the main triangle, shock and swingarm than it is in the steel tubes of the front triangle.
Daffy, (at the risk of sounding patronising here!) the frame tube flex that's being talked about here is mostly twistiy along the line if the head tube, seat tube and rear axle. Suspension movement reduces many of the forces causing that but a rider hauling on or loading a wide bar with majority of their weight going through one pedal can put a lot of torque through a frame in a corner. The whole frame can flex (depends on material and design oc), the suspension compresses but that doesn't take out all forces and it can takes surprisingly little sideways force to deflect top and down tubes so that the seat and head tubes are out of line.
Even the Swarf Curve?
OK, I hadn't seen that. Looks pretty good.
I was thinking of stuff like this...
Daffy - The forums and comments sections are full of engineers in unrelated fields saying that steel bikes can't possibly feel different to other materials "because science". Yet subjective reports from people who have actually ridden them say otherwise.
How do you reconcile that? Are we all gullible fools? Or could you perhaps not have the grasp of the subject you think you do?
Sorry but the swingarm just reminds me of the late nineties bottom of the range Marin single pivot thing.
I was thinking shopping trolley myself.
Cha****ng - in defence Daffy, there are great many reasons why subjective opinions aren't considered scientific, as there are far too many confounding variables. Nothing is standardised. The riders aren't blinded, so they wander into any assessment with their own expectations up and running. The trails will be different, or the conditions will be different, or the tyres, or the geometry, or whether the rider had a poo that morning, or or or. And then there's the idea of what 'better' is in a given context anyway? Faster? Poppier? More fun? More gooderer at corners? What constitutes 'more gooderer' anyway?
It is *spectacularly* hard to remove any and all variables from this debate (which, of course, has been going on for decades). No, you're not gullible fools - but you are human. The idea of 'science' is to try to remove the 'human' from the scenario. Something that an internet forum is somewhat crap at doing.
Something that an internet forum is somewhat crap at doing.
I don't know about that. Go read some of the politcs threads. You'll have most of the human removed from you quite quickly (start somewhere over halfway and I wager a shinny £1 coin it'll be completely gone by the bottom of whichever page you landed on).
Daffy, (at the risk of sounding patronising here!) the frame tube flex that’s being talked about here is mostly twistiy along the line if the head tube, seat tube and rear axle.
This topic comes up repeatedly, with the same arguments being made every time. A few years back, Brant explained that the major point of flex is around the junction between the top-tube and head-tube. Depending on the frame design, you can apparently get a lot of flex there, and not just torsional.
The stiffness of a tube is mostly down to the diameter and aluminium is much less dense than steel so you can use larger diameter tubes, but build a lighter frame. It would be possible to build a flexy aluminium frame if you used small diameter tubes, so the flex is not intrinsic to steel, it's down to the design of the specific frame.
“Of course they bend, but I’d wager it’s bending more at the joints/linkages between the main triangle, shock and swingarm than it is in the steel tubes of the front triangle.”
But why? As an engineer surely you understand that it’s easier to bend a long tube than a short linkage if both are built to withstand similar forces before failure?
“The forums and comments sections are full of engineers in unrelated fields saying that steel bikes can’t possibly feel different to other materials “because science””
As another engineer this continues to drive me crazy. I see it in other fields too. I don’t understand why so many engineers massively over-simplify things that are outside their specialist field.
My late grandpa was a very talented electronic engineer who worked on pioneering computer hardware throughout the second half of last century - but I remember him saying he couldn’t understand why you’d have wider tyres on a car because the contact patch is defined by the tyre pressure and vehicle weight…
The idea of ‘science’ is to try to remove the ‘human’ from the scenario. Something that an internet forum is somewhat crap at doing.
And bike product reviews are a total waste of time as well then.
😀
so the flex is not intrinsic to steel, it’s down to the design of the specific frame.
That's not entirely true, yes you could make an alu frame that deforms similarly to steel but the way it handles that isn't the same. How they work harden, how plastic they are etc are properties of the material so you could build an alu frame that bends like a steel frame but in so doing it will be more (or less) likely to snap, permanently deform etc.
As such depending on what material you use the amount of acceptable deformation will change and there's only so much you can tune that with tubes.
The bigger question is if there's any benefit to a frame that flexes to 11. (or indeed downsides like those specialized strut* frames that ate shocks)
*might be wrong on that but I seem to recall it was the strut design on the enduro and something else
As another engineer this continues to drive me crazy. I see it in other fields too. I don’t understand why so many engineers massively over-simplify things that are outside their specialist field.
You don't, you all over *complicate* your specialist field in order to keep the membership exclusive but you forget to do it when dealing with something outside your experience. It's like doctors spending seven years learning various latin words for "hurty" and "swollen" so we think they're cleverer than we is.
I owned - though not quite at the same time - aluminium, steel and titanium versions of the first Ragley hardtails with pretty much identical components. They were all designed, apparently to maximise the benefits of the material used, most obviously the aluminium Mmmbop used drain-pipe sized tubes and was brutally harsh. The steel Blue Pig had noticeably more spring/compliance/whatever to it, but was quite heavy. The Ti was a little springier than the steel frame, but quite a lot lighter and had something really special about it, 'thing'; or whatever you want to call it. I still have it and still ride it.
I don't for a minute think that qualifies me to make any sort of objective judgement, but that's how they felt to me and the difference between the aluminium and steel frames was significant. I also owned a steel-framed Voodoo Wanga, which was nicely compliant. On the road, Lynskey made, Planet X ti frame, which still rides beautifully even with narrow, by modern standards, 25mm tyres.
Anyway, I absolutely love my gen 3 FlareMAX. It has a lovely warm feel to the ride, that's hard to describe. I don't know whether that's down to the steel front triangle or not, but it feels special every time I ride it. Most alloy and carbon full sus I've ridden just seem a bit bland to me. Not bad, but kind of anonymous, but equally, that's just me and I may simply be deluding myself.
That video Kelvin posted is worth a watch. Really interesting.
KTM use steel for the Moto Gp bikes chassis, despite having suspension costing 6 figures. They've probably spent way more on R&D than the entire mtb industry. Suspension is pretty pants on a non vertical plane, so the chassis allows it to maintain some give and avoid chatter. It allows them to adapt it a lot easier than alloy. Carbon can do that depending on the layering.
It's like having spokes too tight on a wheel.
TLDR
Full suspension though I’m not sure I grasp the theory and compared with aluminium it’s heavy. As I see it, the “flex” and compliance should come from the suspension action, which will move more readily than the frame, you don’t want much if any lateral deflection as it can cause binding in the bearings of the pivot (vertically compliant, laterally stiff to coin a phrase).
Pump tyres up to 40 psi... ride .. let down to your usual ride.
Does it make more diff on a HT? Yep and different but its still a desirable characteristic (pretty much)
Swap a XC tyre like a Exo or Exo+ for a gravity at the same pressure...
Definitely different, heavier .. its still a desirable characteristic in some circumstances and not in others...
Someone probably already said but you can weld Steels... (stainless can be a pain admittedly) ... I can't really see when welding and heat treating a broken alloy one is financially viable?
I think the Orange Subzero I has as a youngun put me off aluminium hardtails for a long time
Utterly brutal and I still cracked it
That said, I realise modern alu frames with modern parts are very different. I still buy steel almost exclusively, but I accept this is largely for aesthetic reasons, and the practical fact that single speeds are always easier to find in steel
Some steel full sussers are stunning:
practical fact that single speeds are always easier to find in steel
That's because the Venn diagram for "likes single speeds" and "likes steel bikes" is a small circle inside a bigger one.
What's the second one?
There's some to about the starling that doesn't work for me, the very noodly back end and the huge headtube brace just don't sit properly IMO.
Some steel full sussers are stunning:
I want this more than any other at the moment.
I have precisely zero use for it.
Dear lord Tom.
That it's hideous. Actually I think I'm going to report that post in the interest of other people's occular health
Agreed. It’s almost like a not very good at art kid’s attempt to draw an Orange!
Anyway steel is real but Ti is betterer.