Is steel real?

Youre all looking a this all wrong.

Its a Push bike. and an off road bike at that.

Do you like the Curtis?
Do you want the Curtis?
Can you afford the Curtis?

Buy a Curtis*

(* Test ride a Curtis first)

I see it a bit like Morgan building bits of their cars from Ash, they don’t essentially do it because it’s better, they do it because they can and people will buy it because it’s a bit different and it makes them stand out from the crowd.

Over thinking decisions is half the fun isn’t it?
Also the whole purpose of this place is to ask for various opions then ignore them all – including your own.

@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.

I’ve a prestige p7

The P7 has never been made from Prestige tubes. It sort of replaced the Prestige in the line up back in 93 but was always a very different bike.

I like my steel Pace and Ragley + reckon the material does add something to the ride but I also love my aluminium full suss. I’d just get the one you like the look of.

@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.

Just look at this thing though. Just look at it! Its virtually pornographic

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.

Chapaking  – 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