|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
Hello,
I've heard that steel gives a nicer ride and I've also heard that a properly made aluminum frame is as nice as a steel frame. It seems that when I read reviews for steel bikes people praise the ride quality and when a bike is accused of having a harsh ride it's an aluminum one. Can anyone help clear this up for me? How did steel and aluminum get the reputations they have? Is it possible that aluminum can be as nice to ride as steel but often isn't? Does the price range affect it? Can you suggest some good aluuminum commuter bikes (maybe road bike or cyclocross with good tire clearance and is rack and fender compliant) for $1000 or less with the kind of ride quality steel is famous for? Thanks. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
I've heard that steel gives a nicer ride and I've also heard that a
properly made aluminum frame is as nice as a steel frame. It seems that when I read reviews for steel bikes people praise the ride quality and when a bike is accused of having a harsh ride it's an aluminum one. You can build a great-riding bike out of either material (steel or aluminum), but... steel is no longer found on el-cheapo bikes, so it's more likely that you can find a cheap clunker made of aluminum these days than steel. Strange but true. Ride quality is a function of many things, including tire quality (severely underestimated!), frame geometry, the tube's wall thicknesses & diameters, and the use of carbon fiber in forks & chainstays (which many will debate here, but there's certainly a difference I can tell when I ride virtually identical bikes built either way). Ride quality is also a function of how well the bike fits you. If you ride a poor-fitting steel frame vs a properly-fit aluminum one, the aluminum bike is going to ride dramatically better. And vice-versa. Nevertheless, there are significant differences in the "feel" of aluminum, steel & carbon frames. Much of this is derived from auditory cues; the different materials sound very different when you ride over bumps etc. The way our minds are wired, I believe we often interpret this to believe that one is more comfortable or forgiving or smoother or more-dead than another one. There is room for personal preference, but I don't think that preference is often based in the reality of one bike being more comfortable than another (with the exception that I truly feel carbon has amazing abilities to dampen vibration). --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com "Chris Hansen" wrote in message om... Hello, I've heard that steel gives a nicer ride and I've also heard that a properly made aluminum frame is as nice as a steel frame. It seems that when I read reviews for steel bikes people praise the ride quality and when a bike is accused of having a harsh ride it's an aluminum one. Can anyone help clear this up for me? How did steel and aluminum get the reputations they have? Is it possible that aluminum can be as nice to ride as steel but often isn't? Does the price range affect it? Can you suggest some good aluuminum commuter bikes (maybe road bike or cyclocross with good tire clearance and is rack and fender compliant) for $1000 or less with the kind of ride quality steel is famous for? Thanks. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
Chris Hansen wrote:
Hello, I've heard that steel gives a nicer ride and I've also heard that a properly made aluminum frame is as nice as a steel frame. It seems that when I read reviews for steel bikes people praise the ride quality and when a bike is accused of having a harsh ride it's an aluminum one. Can anyone help clear this up for me? See http://sheldonbrown.com/frame-materials.html How did steel and aluminum get the reputations they have? Steel bike frames have been around since the 1880s. For most of that time, steel was the only reasonable choice. Any "reputation" was attached to different brands and qualities of steel tubing - and equipment snobs being what they are, a certain amount of that was nonsense. In the 1970s or thereabouts, aluminum frames appeared, along with a titanium frame or two. Anyone could tell after 1/4 mile that an aluminum frame, while light, was too limp to ride well. I remember sprinting on an Alan aluminum frame and seeing the chainrings scrape the left, then right, then left side of the derailleur. Tremendous flex. And very easy to explain: Aluminum's modulus of elasticity is about 1/3 that of steel, so if the tube dimensions are similar to steel, it's going to deflect about three times as much. Then somewhere around the late '70s, Gary Klein built an aluminum frame with oversized tubes, to compensate. Radical idea. Quite light, and quite stiff. In the early '80s, IIRC, Cannondale began mass producing similar frames. They were a bit odd looking at the time, but when you stomped the pedals, they accelerated in a very gratifying way. Very little flex. It must have been around that time that some hack writing for Buycycling magazine said "But it's harsh." Hey, they've got to say _something_ about each bike they test! And one of the rules is, say something positive, and say just a little something negative, to "prove" you're impartial. But it just won't do to admit the latest gimmick makes no difference at all! Of course, every "real" cyclist immediately memorizes whatever Buycycling says. Pretty soon, standing around examining equipment before the Saturday morning hammer-fest, everyone repeated the litany until the whole world "knew" that aluminum was stiff and harsh. If you asked one of those guys "But what about that noodly Alan aluminum frame?", they'd probably turn to their buddy and say "Um - so, how do you like that saddle? Man, I bet those titanium staples in the underside really smooth out the ride!" So there's your reputation. ... the kind of ride quality steel is famous for? ?? what kind is that? Personally, I think the great majority of "ride quality" statements are, at best, misinformed or misjudged. You can feel torsional stiffness in the bottom bracket. You can feel it if a touring frame of insufficient stiffness starts to shimmy under the influence of heavy packs. You can feel handling changes caused by different frame geometries - rake, trail, wheelbase, etc. But the nebulous "ride quality" that's supposed to somehow manifest itself through the squishing tires, the flexing spokes, the bending seatpost, the flexing, squishing saddle? The one caused by sub-microscopic deflections of a very rigid frame triangle? I don't believe it exists. I always hope somone will take a bunch of bikes, identical except for frame material, and let a bunch of riders test them. But have the frame tubes wrapped in cardboard. I'd love to see if anyone can really tell the difference. -- -------------+ Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"] |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
"Chris Hansen" wrote in message
om... Hello, I've heard that steel gives a nicer ride and I've also heard that a properly made aluminum frame is as nice as a steel frame. It seems that when I read reviews for steel bikes people praise the ride quality and when a bike is accused of having a harsh ride it's an aluminum one. Can anyone help clear this up for me? How did steel and aluminum get the reputations they have? Magazine writers. When they first came out, aluminum frames were supposed to be too soft/flexible, it was only after oversize tubes became common that the "harsh ride" fable appeared. Is it possible that aluminum can be as nice to ride as steel but often isn't? I can't feel (hear, taste or smell) any difference. It's pretty easy to scientifically prove that there is no difference to feel. Does the price range affect it? No. Price range gets you light weight and nicer finish. Can you suggest some good aluuminum commuter bikes (maybe road bike or cyclocross with good tire clearance and is rack and fender compliant) for $1000 or less with the kind of ride quality steel is famous for? You might look at touring bikes, they're a little harder to find, but have what you're looking for. Fuji, Cannondale, Trek, come to mind. I have a Cannondale (T-1000) that's very nice for all day riding, very light, and has plenty of room for tires, fenders and racks. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
"Peter Cole" wrote:
"Chris Hansen" wrote in message . com... Hello, I've heard that steel gives a nicer ride and I've also heard that a properly made aluminum frame is as nice as a steel frame. It seems that when I read reviews for steel bikes people praise the ride quality and when a bike is accused of having a harsh ride it's an aluminum one. Can anyone help clear this up for me? How did steel and aluminum get the reputations they have? Magazine writers. When they first came out, aluminum frames were supposed to be too soft/flexible, it was only after oversize tubes became common that the "harsh ride" fable appeared. Funny though, even after the big-tube craze hit, many magazine "experts" were still "feeling" the "soft ride" in those bikes. It took a while for them to read opinions to the contrary so their butt would recalibrate, apparently. Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
Chris Hansen wrote:
Can you suggest some good aluuminum commuter bikes (maybe road bike or cyclocross with good tire clearance and is rack and fender compliant) for $1000 or less with the kind of ride quality steel is famous for? IMO, the best aluminum touring bike is (was) the Klein Navigator. Strong, stiff, reasonably light, with a nice geometry. They're a little hard to find these days, though. Chain Reaction has a frameset on sale for $350: http://www.chainreaction.com/klein.htm This store has a 60 cm frameset for $499: http://www.leucadiabikes.com/Specials.html Or you could consider the Trek 540, which is very similar to the Navigator (Trek bought Klein in or around 1999): http://www.paloaltobicycles.com/product_specials.html -- terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
Chris Hansen wrote:
Hello, I've heard that steel gives a nicer ride and I've also heard that a properly made aluminum frame is as nice as a steel frame. It seems that when I read reviews for steel bikes people praise the ride quality and when a bike is accused of having a harsh ride it's an aluminum one. Can anyone help clear this up for me? How did steel and aluminum get the reputations they have? Is it possible that aluminum can be as nice to ride as steel but often isn't? Does the price range affect it? Can you suggest some good aluuminum commuter bikes (maybe road bike or cyclocross with good tire clearance and is rack and fender compliant) for $1000 or less with the kind of ride quality steel is famous for? Thanks. As far as commuter bikes go, there is a valid reason to look at steel aluminum bikes will dent much easier than steel, so if you're alway bumping the frame with parking meters, bike racks, and U-locks, stee will hold up better. If you frequently slog through salted snowmel sludge you *might* be concerned about steel corroding and take som preventative measures Although the super cheapo bikes aren't steel anymore, there are plent of affordable ones that make excellent commuters - the Trek 540 (alread mentioned) being one of them - |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
DiabloScott wrote:
As far as commuter bikes go, there is a valid reason to look at steel: aluminum bikes will dent much easier than steel, so if you're always bumping the frame with parking meters, bike racks, and U-locks, steel will hold up better. That too is specific to the bike in question. A thick-walled, straight gauge aluminum frame like an '80s Cannondale, Caloi, or bonded Trek will be more resistant to denting than any .7/.4/.7 double butted steel frame. They will hold up better if dented than the steel bike, too. Chalo Colina |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ride quality: Aluminum vs steel
frkrygow wrote:
It must have been around that time that some hack writing for Buycycling magazine said "But it's harsh." Hey, they've got to say _something_ about each bike they test! And one of the rules is, say something positive, and say just a little something negative, to "prove" you're impartial. But it just won't do to admit the latest gimmick makes no difference at all! ... Personally, I think the great majority of "ride quality" statements are, at best, misinformed or misjudged. You can feel torsional stiffness in the bottom bracket. You can feel it if a touring frame of insufficient stiffness starts to shimmy under the influence of heavy packs. You can feel handling changes caused by different frame geometries - rake, trail, wheelbase, etc. In partial defense of Bicycling hacks and people who talk about ride quality, I think possibly what happened is that people tried the early Cannondale criterium frames. These had steep angles, ridiculously short chainstays (40cm), short wheelbases, and probably high BBs, but I don't recall. Of course they had skinny tires too, since you couldn't fit anything else in. These traits make for twitchy-handling bikes that transmit bumps directly to the rider. I'll bet that many people attributed these qualities to the aluminum frame, although it has nothing to do with aluminum per se. OTOH I, like you, have an old Cannondale touring frame, which rides very smoothly and is easy to ride no-hands. IMO, there may be differences in "ride quality" which are not just fiction, but are a consequence of bike handling. Riding a twitchy bike for a long distance could be fatiguing and contribute to the "My bike beats me up on long rides" complaint. If so, it doesn't have anything to do with frame stiffness or material, though. ------------ And now a word from our sponsor --------------------- For a secure high performance FTP using SSL/TLS encryption upgrade to SurgeFTP ---- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_surgeftp.htm ---- |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
lacking in leg strength and stamina exercises? | Yuri Budilov | General | 18 | March 23rd 04 02:42 PM |
Mayors' Ride Celebrities, Webcasts and Imovies, etc!! | National Bicycle Greenway | General | 0 | February 26th 04 08:58 PM |
65 mile ride, my problems, etc. [long, you probably don't care, etc] | Rick Onanian | General | 46 | August 21st 03 12:53 PM |
Bonking and food for a ride | Sandy Christmus | General | 38 | August 9th 03 08:44 PM |
Group ride questions | Ken | General | 4 | July 24th 03 01:05 AM |