I am asking this question in the hope that it does NOT turn into a "my frame is better than yours" and people knocking what other people use, so be nice please.
I have three Saracen bikes now that used to be (one, mine) and two my sons, who have since moved on, all three are Alloy, and I am happy with them, however.
Years back I bought a Sanderson Life frame, Reynolds 853 steel, it has always been a great ride, for me and I am 100% happy with it.
I was watching many (BETTER) YouTube "proper" cycle channels, in the UK especially, and it is said that a good steel frame is loved by many cyclists, for things that mean nothing to me except I like the ride, I assume that is feedback.
Does anyone else have steel bikes that they say are (when good steel) something people aspire to.
I have steel, aluminium and previously titanium, never ridden a carbon bike, though have had a couple of sets of carbon forks. Some bikes I've liked more than others, I doubt the frame material has ever been the biggest contributor.
I think the conventional wisdom is that it's guage and wall diameter which matter rather than whether it's steel, aluminium or titanium. Having said that, there's probably more opportunity to find a frame with a desirable feel amongst quality steel frames because there are so many to choose from. But you need to try a lot to find the one that chimes. I haven't found mine yet.
I previously had a very pretty Charge Plug 5 (2015) in Tange Prestige steel. Super comfy, not too heavy and lovely to look at.
Unfortunately, I happened to crash it and with two dents (one in top tube, one in downtube) it ended up as a write-off on the grounds of economical repairs.
Fast forward until now and I've recently acquired a lovely Genesis Day One. It's colour I don't see often, either. I paid £70 for it, it's Reynolds 520 so on the heavier side, but I've single-speeded it and it's a lovely little ride.
(The photo is a little darker than the actual colouring of the bike, which is the drab/military-style green:
I’ve got a Dawes Super Galaxy circa 2009, which is 853. I don’t ride it much but it’s a very comfortable ride. It’s effectively my gravel/touring bike but I don’t do much of either these days. My favourite steel bike that I’ve owned was my old Langdale 531c road bike that I rode from 1980 until 1998.
A mate had a Sanderson soloist - which I really really wanted - but never got my hands on one. Loved it and used to ride it at the dirt track...
A long term steel frame lover, I picked up a Alloy Ridgeback Flight road bike frame a couple of years ago, and now built I swap it between SS, Alfine and 1 or 2 x 10. it's basically made my much loved steel Charge Plug 5 and Mixer redundant...
I've found out the expensive way that to get the best comfort from a steel frame then it needs to be designed for the weight of the rider and any baggage. A touring bike with a lightweight rider and no baggage is likely to give a harsh ride.
Usually riding a Spa Cycles Aubisque or a Rohloff-equipped Spa Cycles Elan Ti
I’m not sure anyone would aspire to the steel bike I have currently, although maybe they do, but what I think is worth mentioning is that steel frames have come in many different forms down the years, and they are very different to ride.
My personal experience is limited to mainstream things, mid-range Peugeot “sports tourers” in the 70s/80s, an early hybrid through the 90s, 00s, and early 10s, then a few years of an Al/C CX bike (very quick, but a bit of a bone shaker), then a short try of a steel heavy tourer that was too barge-like in handling for my purposes, and now a modern steel bike in the form of a Croix de Fer.
The earlier bikes were slim-built, rim brakes, with slim, curved forks, and that combo makes for very comfy bikes. I was playing about with a 1990 Peugeot hybrid last year and that reminded me just how smooth-riding those bikes were - amazingly good for basic, run-of-the-mill machines. The CdF is a very nice bike, but with stiff front legs to deal with disc brakes, and a somewhat more robust build overall, it doesn’t have the same airy feel, and needs really good tyres to feel totally comfy, despite actually being lighter on the scales by two or three kg than the old bikes.
So ….. it’s more complicated than “steel is wonderful” IMO.
PS: my one short try of a carbon bike, a neighbour’s, I found very strange indeed. So airy that it felt like riding nothing, but it sure would take me some time to get used to the handling of nothing ….. there seemed to be no feedback and no weight to use in turns etc. Suffice to say that it didn’t make me want to own one.
From my personal experience of steel, alloy and carbon bikes the biggest factor for ride comfort is geometry. I've a Columbus tubed frame with tight clearances that gave a much harsher ride than either of my alloy or carbon road bikes. All three materials can make for great bikes and each has its pros and cons.
Agree with the above comments - there's a lot of myth and legend with steel frames in particular but how a bike rides is a combination of frame material, components, geometry and weight.
My first road bike was an 853 frame (in the fairly early days of 853). Can't honestly remember much about it other than it held its own nicely in road and circuit races but then it was up against similar bikes so a direct comparison is difficult.
It was however blown away by the bike that replaced it, an aluminium frame that was far lighter and stiffer. But that's not entirely down to the frame material - the geometry was very different, the alu frame was compact compared to the horizontal top tube design on the 853 frame and road bikes were going through fairly rapid improvements around that time anyway.
The old bike had a 1" headset and quill stem, the new one was 1.125" ahead which improved stiffness and responsiveness so it would be very difficult to attribute the differences solely to frame material.
Current road bike is carbon and that's another world apart again. Stiffer, more comfortable, faster and just much more confidence inspiring to ride.
But again, road bike tech has moved on a lot and not all of those differences are frame materials based.
Should add actually, I think the differences on MTB are even more difficult to pin down because of the sheer range of design out there.
I've had steel, aluminium and titanium MTBs but they were all so different in design, geometry, componentry and intended purpose that frame material was probably the least of the concerns.
JohnR wrote: ↑23 May 2023, 9:02pm
I've found out the expensive way that to get the best comfort from a steel frame then it needs to be designed for the weight of the rider and any baggage. A touring bike with a lightweight rider and no baggage is likely to give a harsh ride.
I'm hovering around the 60-63kg mark, riding the above with a light backpack mostly and I find it very forgiving, on and off-road.
I have only ever had steel bikes, so I can't compare with other materials. They were all rather different.
Old heavy Raleigh with 3-speed Sturmey Archer gears and the usual rubbishy Raleigh steel parts. I gave it ape hanger bars for a while when they were all the rage. Looked cool but rode like a dog.
Old unknown "racer" with steel parts and Huret derailleur gears - a bit better to ride - went youth hostelling on it.
Rusty old 3-speed ancient thing from my Mum's cleaner's husband - turned out to be 531 single on the main frame - a stealth student bike that could burn off nifty racers at the lights. The seat post was a weird size, as I discovered when someone nicked it. I used a piece of tin can as a shim to fit a standard post.
A new Holdsworth real "racer" low end model with 531 single that I took around Europe and over the alps with camping gear - it was OK to ride even loaded down hairpins.
A second hand bike I had repaired as one seat stay had rusted through - double butted 531 and built up myself to be quite nice but rode funny - sold it.
A custom-built Wester Ross in double butted 531 with all the gear and nice wheels, still side pull brakes like all the rest - rather steep angles 73 deg I think and short frame but good for fast touring except on rough ground as the tyres are too narrow. The steerer bearing is pitted so no longer so nice to ride.
A luxury tout terrain 5th Avenue GT Rohloff in Dedacci steel which goes like a bomb over anything with any amount of luggage for miles and miles day and night - now with 37mm Schwalbe Marathon Supreme tyres even better than the Marathon Racers.
A Brompton which must have done over 40k km in nearly 20 years commuting and shopping. It may not be the nicest ride but it is the bike I have with me on tram, bus and train, sometimes even in the car boot (mine or a friend's).
Steel has always been OK for me but as with everything I have found that quality shows and a relaxed tourer frame geometry with wider tyres is more comfortable. With Rohloff gears I can usually burn off the derailleurs at the lights as gear changing is fast and possible while stationary.
I am NOT a cyclist. I enjoy riding a bike for utility, commuting, fitness and touring on tout terrain Rohloff, Brompton M3 and Wester Ross 354 plus a Burley Travoy trailer.
I was the biggest fan of steel frames going for many years. Still am, really, but a couple of things tarnished my view. First was my Raleigh 708 frame, a particular favourite, inexplicably fracturing in two places. Second was the purchase of a Van Nicholas Titanium frame that is particularly nice when riding out of the saddle and giving it a bit of welly.
Steel frames can be all things to all people. There are good ones and bad ones and everything in between and opinions on each will vary, rider to rider.
The best two frames I have presently are steel. A Reynolds 731OS by Rick Green and a (designed by me) 531 mountain bike by Denis Field that is 34 years old and still as competent and rewarding as the day it was built.
The older I get the more I’m inclined to act my shoe size, not my age.
