Steel Full Suspension Bikes

I’m thinking about a new FS short travel trail bike and been looking at the Cotic Flare Max (I own a Mk5 Soul) but I’m wondering about the benefit of steel for a FS – I ‘get it’ for HTs and road bikes but what is the benefit over carbon or ali when used for FS?

I’ve had an Orange Four but didn’t like it as it was too big, the TRANCE ADVANCED PRO 29 1 is looking good and will be a hell of a lot lighter than the Flare Max. Yes I know weight isn’t everything but lugging a heavy bike up hills isn’t much fun.

So what’s the benefit of steel FS over carbon or ali on a trail come XC type bike?

I think it comes down to what you like. There is some opinion that the give / flex in a steel frame gives better traction (ie the flex helps the wheel track the ground better) and a nice “feel”, but as with a hardtail frame it totally depends how a frame is made and isn’t necessarily down to just frame material.

I also think there’s less difference in frame weight than you might think. In the past few weeks I’ve ridden similar style bikes made of carbon, aluminium and steel. The weight difference was only a couple of pounds, the kit hanging off them made a bigger difference.

Maybe have a test ride of the Flare and see what you think.

I’m sceptical that frame material really makes a noticeable difference on a full suss bike, but the FlareMax is easily the best bike (for me) that I’ve ever ridden.

So, now I’ve gone and looked on Cotic’s website at their photos of the Flare Max. I thought I had scratched the new bike itch and didn’t need a new one.

Thanks. Very. Much.

No problem. Happy to help. Let me know if you want more pictures. I have loads :)

I don’t like full  suspension bikes… love my FlareMax :-)

When I was looking at the original rocket it was certainly in the same weight category as bikes of a similar intent (take a bit of abuse rather than long legged trail bikes with the same travel).

So comparable to commencal meta and lighter than yeti sb66 if I recall correctly

Rode a Rocket ages ago, loved it. Not because it was steel but just because of the geometry/position/suspension acion/etc. Choose something based on those and if it’s steel then great

(Based on how good the Rocket was i expect the Flare to be brilliant)

.

Lovely people too, broke my Yeti at the Classic Weekender, fourth ride out. Yeti dealer there with demo bikes, rang Silverfish, they wouldn’t let him lend me one for the weekend. Cy from Cotic was walking passed, “That looks a mess. We’ve got a prototype Rocket in the van, if you get stuck come and say hello” Rocket was excellent, not what I was after next time I bought a bike, but oddly enough now I’m looking at hardtails a Solaris is at the top of my list, any form of Yeti much nearer the bottom.

There is some opinion that the give / flex in a steel frame gives better traction (ie the flex helps the wheel track the ground better)

This sounds like utter marketing bollocks. I have never ridden a steel FS bike (or carbon for that matter), but I have ridden a lot of different aluminium FS bikes. A FS bike provides several inches of travel, the flex in a steel frame will be measured in millimeters, at most. A well designed suspension frame will have a very rigid front subframe and very rigid rear subframe, with all the movement provided by the suspension (plus tyres, obviously). If the frame is flexing so much to be noticeable, then the shock and the pivot bearings will be constantly misaligned so everything will be binding and will wear out prematurely.

I’m not a frame builder, but my understanding is that you can build a good steel frame with fairly basic equipment, but aluminium requires much more expensive equipment. For mass-production, it’s worth investing in the equipment to build aluminium, but not for low-volume production. Therefore, boutique frame builders are limited to steel because aluminium would be too expensive.

Dunno about grip, but I definitely prefer steel frames..

I’ve got a Rocket 275 and a Production Privee Oka. I think there is something in the resonance of the material perhaps but to me it does have a different feel, albeit a small one.

As mentioned though, design is the biggest factor. Currently, I wouldn’t buy any other hardtail frame over a Production Privee.

Full suss, maybe I would but I love the aesthetics of my skinny Cotic.

I think there is something in the resonance of the material

Resonance is not the same thing as flex. When you think about it, standard hardtail frames have a straight seat tube which is effectively incompressible. The only vertical compliance in the frame can come from the seatstays flexing, but this will be an order of magnitude smaller than the flex in the tyre (and probably much less than in a long seatpost and wide handlebars). Different materials and frame designs will have different resonance properties which riders might notice, but the idea that a steel frame will flex enough to affect grip is nonsense. You wouldn’t be able to notice it unless you had solid tyres.

@hols2

This sounds like utter marketing bollocks. I have never ridden a steel FS bike (or carbon for that matter)

“I don’t know what I’m talking about, but I’ll talk about it anyway”

I’ve had carbon, aluminium and steel FS bikes. There’s something about my Rocket 275 that just *feels* better… can’t really put my finger on it, but it’s definitely down to the material – probably something to do with flex or resonance though, being enough to soak up some of the vibrations.

Ah but what is the  ambient temperature of the materials when you ride these frames? 😃

Thanks for the replies chaps so we have had flex, no flex, resonance and weight of only 2lb more on a frame.

i own bikes in Ti, steel and carbon, plus I’ve had ali (mtb and road) and they do feel different from each other but none of them are FS. (Well the ali was but it was an old radiator)

too be honest I still can’t find a reason why a steel FS is going to be better or even as good as a carbon FS for my needs which is a shame as I really like the look of the Flare Max (plus its cheaper)

The call of the Giant seems too much I think following more research.

can’t really put my finger on it, but it’s definitely down to the material

“I don’t know what I’m talking about, but I’ll talk about it anyway”

Unless you compare the same frame designs made with different materials and built up with identical components, you can’t know whether it’s the material or something else. It could be the handlebars, the grips, the saddle, the seatpost, the tyres, etc. People claim to be able to tell the difference between spoke tension, so you really don’t know what it is about a particular bike that makes it feel compliant or harsh.

I’m not saying that different frame materials won’t have different resonant properties, but the idea that a steel frame will flex enough to affect grip on a suspension bike with 6″ of travel is marketing BS.

the idea that a steel frame will flex enough to affect grip on a suspension bike with 6″ of travel is marketing BS.

The idea is that the flex can be lateral rather than vertical in the same plane as the suspension travel. When the bike is leaned over this layetal flex becomes vertical compliance help the bike track the ground and increase grip. Well that’s the theory. In practice I’m not sure I could discern the difference, but I can see the theory and how the flex is different to suspension travel.

When the bike is leaned over this layetal flex becomes vertical compliance help the bike track the ground and increase grip.

Utter nonsense.

I have found frame material irrelevant on any MTB due to the 2+ inch soft tyres.  Even on a road bike with 23c tyres at 100PSI it is only just noticeable.  I think people feel what they want to feel….

The “steelness” is a complete non event in terms of riding my (old) Rocket. Weight is pretty much a non issue too – mine’s 30lb built as a solid trail/enduro bike, pretty much the same as anything similar.

Have a poke through the “geek” section of the Cotic website – Cy did a good article about why he decided to use steel. Largely about being able to tie the BB and the pivot locations together in a solid fashion.

Practically speaking – my Rocket is the only full sus I’ve had that isn’t covered in dents from rock strikes. The 2 Intenses I had were particularly bad for this.

I’m not saying that different frame materials won’t have different resonant properties, but the idea that a steel frame will flex enough to affect grip on a suspension bike with 6″ of travel is marketing BS.

Flex to you is uppy downy shit that wont be noticed as the suspension and tyres do the same thing right? How about when the bike is leant over in a corner? Is it possible that there could be some sideways flex along the length of the frame?

Ah..too slow – you’ve already debunk that theory with soild facts (and years of experience riding steel FS bikes) :P

I just prefer the look of steel bikes. There’s just something about the skinny steel tubes that looks right to me. I have a Flare at the moment. It’s my first proper foray in to full suspension and other than trying to get the shock dialled in it’s brilliant. I can’t tell much difference in weight when riding compared to my last two hardtails.

“Utter nonsense.”

The nonsense is your lack of knowledge or understanding of the complexity of suspension and chassis engineering on any two wheeled vehicle. It is well known in the fields of motorbike and mountain bike design that an excessively stiff frame will have a negative impact on both cornering grip and handling predictability.

This is obvious to anyone with an intuitive feel for engineering because all bikes lean over when turning, and the higher G the turning forces, the greater the lean angle and the less effective the suspension is. That’s when the chassis compliance matters. If you prefer to pootle about on your high horse wearing your blinkers of certainty whilst telling everyone how much more you know than them, then you’ll never go around a corner fast enough to notice this.

Hols2 you should probably try riding a steel full sus or a carbon full sus to get a real idea.

I have owned modern carbon, aluminium and steel enduro bikes plus put time on plenty of others. Steel defintely has very different feel to carbon and aluminium. The ride is a lot more compliant on a steel bike.

I’ve been to engineering school and studied structural engineering. Have you?

The basic thing with suspension is that you want the suspension pivots to be very rigidly mounted so that all the movement is the suspension moving, not the frame flexing. Race car constructors spend millions on building very stiff carbon fibre monocoques or steel spaceframes to give a very rigid structure to mount suspension to.

With a 6″ travel FS mountain bike, the frame flex will be much, much smaller than the suspension movement, even if you have the bike laid over. If the frame flexed enough laterally to provide useful suspension, then it would be like riding a piece of spagetti. Frame designers go to a lot of trouble and expense to eliminate flex from FS frames, they do not try to design flexy frames.

Steel defintely has very different feel to carbon and aluminium. The ride is a lot more compliant on a steel bike.

I’m not saying they don’t feel different. The question is whether a steel full suspension frame has enough flex that it improves the suspension performance. That’s utter nonsense.

I’ve been to engineering school and studied structural engineering. Have you?

I went to a Convent school and has sex education lessons from a nun. Have you?

Race car constructors spend millions on building very stiff carbon fibre monocoques or steel spaceframes to give a very rigid structure to mount suspension to.

am sure arian ward once sent me a photo of a GP1 motorcycle that had had the yokes modified to allow them to flex in the corners

**** disclaimer****

just wish someone had told us all these years we have been doing it wrong

I went to a Convent school and has sex education lessons from a nun.

That explains your familiarity with flexible rear ends.

Frame designers go to a lot of trouble and expense to eliminate flex from FS frames, they do not try to design flexy frames.

Not all frame designers. Though I would say the aim is better described as compliant rather than flexy.

I know it’s a mag bike review and as such needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, however…….

Simple and Steel | Starling Murmur Factory Edition Review

Keep going I’ve nearly filled out my bingo card!

for me my steel Solaris LOOKS nicer and is the best riding of all the hard tails I’ve owned in my opinion, cotic seem genuinely decent folks and looking at frame only costs are quite competitive. That’s were my money is going next.

ive also owned orange’s of various types. If they were a touch cheaper I’d of bought one of those but frame + paint + shock upgrade + sticker just edged it.

seriously if you can tell the difference in lateral flex and compliance I’ve got some snake oil to sell.

I’m not a metal guru nor suspension god but, I do think there is something in the ‘flex’ of a frame build for a two wheeled vehicle.

When banked over rounding a corner, if there are surface undulations and bumps that can be smoothed slightly by some compliance/twist/flex call it what you will in the frame, then I can believe it is a good thing. Suspension moves vertically which of course isn’t vertical when the bike is tilted over so the frame twisting a tad could help.

I’m only talking fractions and nothing noodle like but, there has to be something in it.

The point about a race car being build so solidly it doesn’t move at all is not the same argument, as in general a car doesn’t bank round corners so the suspension will always move vertically in the same plane, within a few degrees allowing for somebody roll.

Just how much this can influence the feel of a bicycle in comparison with a motorbike at 150mph I have no idea but, the principle is sound imho.

I’ve ridden a few steel FS bikes, Cotics and a Starling.

Speaking generally, they have a more damped ride feel than an aluminium bike of similar angles. It’s subtle in the case of the Cotics and obvious on the Starling.

I studied philosophy at a former polytechnic. Hols2 would be firmly in the a priori camp, IYKWIM.

oh the other blusterfuck in the argument here is the world extends outside the walls of this fishbowl

people buy with their hearts  the vast majority don’t give a **** for your argument and like the colour and the fact everyone else says its ok

edit im sure one of the darling deity designers will be along for you to fawn over in a moment and hang on their every word.

<span class=”cb-itemprop”>Leaning the bike over is when you really feel the qualities of the steel frame and the suppleness of a single-pivot suspension platform. It subtly twists, bends and absorbs energy beautifully, keeping the rubber in the dirt and the rider on whichever line they choose.</span>

From the article above…It’s almost like this guys has A. ridden a steel FS bike. B. Knows how to ride a bike and C. isn’t full of shit

Over to you Hols…what does your textbook say? :D

Race car constructors spend millions on building very stiff carbon fibre monocoques or steel spaceframes to give a very rigid structure to mount suspension to.

Apples and pears. Race car designers are trying to provide a stable platform for the aero package as there is way more to gained from that.

 people buy with their hearts  the vast majority don’t give a **** for your argument and like the colour and the fact everyone else says its ok

To be honest one of the reasons I’m considering a Starling as my next bike is that you can choose any colour.

FWIW I studied Astrophysics at Leeds university, but what do I know about bike design, it’s not exactly rocket science.

KTM relies on steel motorcycle chassis

https://motocrossactionmag.com/ask-the-mxperts-will-ktm-make-an-aluminum-frame-will-the-japanese-switch-to-steel/

https://steelisreal.bike/2018-demo