Is this common (steel bike question)

[Nooch]

Is it common after coming off another frame material to keep wondering if you have a slow leak, feeling like your tires are getting soft, when you start riding your steel frame?

I checked my tires at least four times this weekend while riding my lugged bedford -- freaking remarkable how smooth that thing rides.

And go figure, on a steel bike with 32h clinchers, i moved up to third on a popular strava segment :)

still waiting for my pronto to be finished up -- hopefully SOON!

[rustychisel]

dunno about common, but it happens.

I tend to check my rear wheel when I switch on to the Scandium bike, the steel bike feels completely different.

[oliver1850]

I find myself looking back at the rear tire when I ride my old steel Allez. I always assumed it was a tubular thing.

[christian]

Only had this happen on my full-squish.

[martinez]

i've noticed this as well. i do feel my tires but they always seem to be fine :confused:

[martl]

I find myself looking back at the rear tire when I ride my old steel Allez. I always assumed it was a tubular thing.

put the tubulars in your other bike and check. I know the phenomenon "inflate tires, get in the saddle, ride 5m, get off the bike, check for a flat tire" when i swapped my clincher Shamals for (good) tubulars (with Latex inner tube) - on the same frame, and an ultra-stiff 1996 aluminium one, too.

I know this is not the mainstream opinion, but as far as "ride comfort" goes, the cyclist sits on a system of a series of springs. tire - wheel - fork - frame - stem - seatpin - handlebar - saddle. All these have a spring constant attached to them, with the frame being the hardest one by an order of magnitude.

Standard physics say: in a series of springs, the softest one dominates the spring constant of the whole system.
Thought experiment: tie a rubber band to a big fat lorry suspension spring. Pull on it. What does extend, the rubber band or the fat coil?

(Of course, as we know, the laws of physics don't apply to cycling - steel frames getting soft etc..)

To my boring, dull, stupid engineer brain, the flexibility of a standard diamond shaped bicycle frame can not do anything to or against ride comfort, because its effect is completely overlayed by all the "softer" parts in the equation.

0.2 bar more or less in your tires -that is less than the typical pump pressure gauge will show- have a much more noticeable effect on the ride than changing your SLX frame for a Klein Quantum Pro. Or using a different make seatpost. Or changing your 31.8 oversized bars for 26.4 standard ones.

*If* the stiffness of the frame had a noticeable effect on ride comfort, it should be much more noticeable when eliminating some of the other springy bits - so please remove the tires from both test bikes and ride them on the rim, the "noticeable better comfort" should now be even more noticeable :D

I offer a challenge to all who mumbled "bullsh*t" while reading this: Bring me the most "comfortable" and the most "harsh" frame you can find, and with my choice of (standard) equipment i'll make the "harsh" one into a sedan chair and the "comfy" one into a torture instrument.

martl,
whose most comfortable ride is a Principia REX with CFK wheels and Veloflexes.

[Germany_chris]

put the tubulars in your other bike and check. I know the phenomenon "inflate tires, get in the saddle, ride 5m, get off the bike, check for a flat tire" when i swapped my clincher Shamals for (good) tubulars (with Latex inner tube) - on the same frame, and an ultra-stiff 1996 aluminium one, too.

I know this is not the mainstream opinion, but as far as "ride comfort" goes, the cyclist sits on a system of a series of springs. tire - wheel - fork - frame - stem - seatpin - handlebar - saddle. All these have a spring constant attached to them, with the frame being the hardest one by an order of magnitude.

Standard physics say: in a series of springs, the softest one dominates the spring constant of the whole system.
Thought experiment: tie a rubber band to a big fat lorry suspension spring. Pull on it. What does extend, the rubber band or the fat coil?

(Of course, as we know, the laws of physics don't apply to cycling - steel frames getting soft etc..)

To my boring, dull, stupid engineer brain, the flexibility of a standard diamond shaped bicycle frame can not do anything to or against ride comfort, because its effect is completely overlayed by all the "softer" parts in the equation.

0.2 bar more or less in your tires -that is less than the typical pump pressure gauge will show- have a much more noticeable effect on the ride than changing your SLX frame for a Klein Quantum Pro. Or using a different make seatpost. Or changing your 31.8 oversized bars for 26.4 standard ones.

*If* the stiffness of the frame had a noticeable effect on ride comfort, it should be much more noticeable when eliminating some of the other springy bits - so please remove the tires from both test bikes and ride them on the rim, the "noticeable better comfort" should now be even more noticeable :D

I offer a challenge to all who mumbled "bullsh*t" while reading this: Bring me the most "comfortable" and the most "harsh" frame you can find, and with my choice of (standard) equipment i'll make the "harsh" one into a sedan chair and the "comfy" one into a torture instrument.

martl,
whose most comfortable ride is a Principia REX with CFK wheels and Veloflexes.

No, you're right but I'd argue the saddle is more important than the tires. Saddle>Tires>everything else


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[martl]

No, you're right bug I'd argue the saddle is more important than the tires. Saddle>Tires>everything else


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The harshest bike of all my 30+ is my Mike Appel Columbus SL with a not-broken-in Brooks new swallow, so you might be right :)

[Germany_chris]

The harshest bike of all my 30+ is my Mike Appel Columbus SL with a not-broken-in Brooks new swallow, so you might be right :)

And my broken in B17's make every bike comfy. Tubies, clinchers, and cross tires.

[fuzzalow]

Riding like a tire going soft just because the frame is steel? No, not to that extreme but different frame materials each have a different feel back to the rider.

If a smooth ride is what is sought after, there are only 2 areas to look at: on the mechanical front is tire pressure and on the bio-mechanical front is the fit & position which allows a rider to lay relaxed on the bike.

Any other hugely influential components to ride quality as claimed in marketing copy I just don't believe. For example I am interested in a Moots RSL and Moots claims the 30.9 seat post size makes for a higher performance bike. (Scratches head in bewilderment) um, OK if Moots says so (resigned). To me it doesn't really matter what ad copy says about the RSL because I still want one.

[Nooch]

eh, i suppose it was more of a rhetorical, 'oh my god my eyes are now open to how amazing my steel bike rides that i think my tires are going soft' kind of question than anything else :)

(from coming off a caad9)

[fuzzalow]

eh, i suppose it was more of a rhetorical, 'oh my god my eyes are now open to how amazing my steel bike rides that i think my tires are going soft' kind of question than anything else :)

(from coming off a caad9)

That's great and as a steel bike repatriate, it is a delightful experience to ride a good steel bike. I suspect that any number of cyclists that discover, or rediscover, steel bikes will find an experience similar to yours. Losing the bug for carbon bikes is a revelation every cyclist should favor to themselves at least once. The journey is the reward.

[oldpotatoe]

Is it common after coming off another frame material to keep wondering if you have a slow leak, feeling like your tires are getting soft, when you start riding your steel frame?

I checked my tires at least four times this weekend while riding my lugged bedford -- freaking remarkable how smooth that thing rides.

And go figure, on a steel bike with 32h clinchers, i moved up to third on a popular strava segment :)

still waiting for my pronto to be finished up -- hopefully SOON!

When I go from clinchers to tubulars, I 'feel' added comfort..not soft, vague-ness at all. My 'standard' is the tubular ride..when I ride the clinchers, I wonder if I have too much air in them.

[avalonracing]

Is it common after coming off another frame material to keep wondering if you have a slow leak, feeling like your tires are getting soft, when you start riding your steel frame?


Funny you mentioned this. I had the same issue when I got back on a good Ti frame after exclusively riding an aluminum Klein for years.

[Mark McM]

No, you're right but I'd argue the saddle is more important than the tires. Saddle>Tires>everything else

I think there can also be an added factor of how our brain mixes different sensory perceptions. Specifically, how the feeling of harshness or smoothness is affected by auditory input - a bike which is quieter will feel "smoother", regardless of the actual mechanical compliance. For example, a freshly cleaned and lubricated chain will always make my bike more comfortable and compliant.

I often wonder if auditory properties are what has led to the common perceptions of frame material compliance. When hitting a bump, an aluminum bike will make a different sound than a steel bike, which in turn makes a different sound than carbon bike, etc. Is the aluminum bike really passing more shock to the rider, or does it just sound different, leading to the perception of "harshness"?

A further tidbit that makes me wonder is vibration response graphs published by Specialized for their bikes with Zertz inserts. Looking at the graphs, it can be seen there is little attenuation from the Zertz inserts in the lower frequencies (where most of the "shock" energy is transmitted), and that most of the attenuation is in the higher frequencies (auditory frequencies which can be heard more than they can be felt). Are these frames perceived to be more comfortable because of how they sound, rather than how they actually feel?

[Ken Robb]

I also think longer chainstays ride better than short ones when all else is equal.

[Mark McM]

I also think longer chainstays ride better than short ones when all else is equal.

Would this be because the frame with longer chainstays is more compliant, or simply because the shorter chainstays tuck the wheel more under the saddle, putting the rider in a more direct path of the bump shock? (As an extreme example, consider a tandem: When the rear wheel hits a bump, the stoker, who is in a more direct line with the rear wheel, gets a large shock load; whereas the captain, who is much further from the rear wheel, feels very little.)

[Pete Mckeon]

Seats, wheels, tire pressure, and fork rake all go into soup for a ride.

I find my bike with lonnger chainstay is cushier and both Bedford and Kirk have it dialed in well on the ones I have ridden that they made.:) while they might not put a smile for a crit racer - they put a smile on me everytime I ride them. Spectrum is a racer bike and is Sachs, BOTH GOOD), ELLIS IS ALSO ONE I LIKE BUT HAVE NEVER RIDDEN<:( maybe he will forget one here.

I also think longer chainstays ride better than short ones when all else is equal.

[jordo_99]

Just my 2 cents...but when I ride my carbon race bike and then go to my steel bike the next day I find myself doing that a lot. The majority of this difference is geometry and wheel differences...my race bike is compact and very stiff with 50mm carbon rims and latex tubes. My steel bike is a "classic" geometry with the bombproof Ultegra/Open Pro mix and butyl tubes.

[Chance]

Riding like a tire going soft just because the frame is steel? No, not to that extreme but different frame materials each have a different feel back to the rider.

If a smooth ride is what is sought after, there are only 2 areas to look at: on the mechanical front is tire pressure and on the bio-mechanical front is the fit & position which allows a rider to lay relaxed on the bike.

Any other hugely influential components to ride quality as claimed in marketing copy I just don't believe. For example I am interested in a Moots RSL and Moots claims the 30.9 seat post size makes for a higher performance bike. (Scratches head in bewilderment) um, OK if Moots says so (resigned). To me it doesn't really matter what ad copy says about the RSL because I still want one.

Frames can be configured to provide more ride compliance than lower tire pressure, so limiting “mechanical” differences to tire pressure seems shortsighted.

Personally tested a steel frame with so much compliance that the real problem wasn’t thinking an inflated tire may be flat, but rather not being able to tell a tire was actually going flat when riding in a straight line. Losing air pressure made so little difference in ride quality that it made a slow leak much more difficult to notice until cornering. Only when cornering was the squishiness of an underinflated tire instantly noticeable. And that can be a disadvantage.

May seem counterintuitive, but not being able to detect a tire going soft is a better measure of a really smooth riding frame. With a harsh frame the minute tire pressure goes low the rider senses a significant “relative” improvement in ride quality. Not so with a very compliant frame.

[pbarry]

Had many many miles on an SL tubed Bilato frame, then got my Merlin. First ride, I must have looked down 50 times looking for a rear flat. The feel was similar to the steel frame, but tiny imperfections in road surface, like crack patches, were transmitted very subtly on the ti bike. Same group and wheels. Didn't notice this after the second ride.

[fuzzalow]

Bike frames are simple structures. Pretty much all that is required of them is that they have structural integrity and that they are straight. So if the tubes don't become unjoined and the alignment is good, everything else is icing on the cake.

Frames can be configured to provide more ride compliance than lower tire pressure, so limiting “mechanical” differences to tire pressure seems shortsighted.

I would agree with you that riders can be very sensitive to feel and some of this feel can be interpreted as compliance. I am not sure that there is a actual flexing and movement of seat & chain stays to make this movement real, if that is what you are referring to.

I recall the Ibis Bow-Ti MTB having a springy rear triangle but on a steel road bike? No way - kinda violates the structural integrity requirement. What bike did you test that had this level of compliance? Some carbon bikes had the fashion of putting tiny capellini-like seatstays on, suggestive of a more compliant ride. Dunno if that really works but it might. And coupled with the power of marketing, the buyer will be convinced it works.