Stainless steel seems over.

[Mikej]

I never got the ss frame, but it seems to be that it has tapered down and not many builders use it. Ti is just a better choice imo, is anybody still building with h it?

[FlashUNC]

Yes. People are.

[ltwtsculler91]

It's possible to get one, but I think it comes down more to cost. A nice stainless bike is about the same price as Ti with less availability as not all builders work with stainless, and I'd imagine less tubing options are out there versus Ti too.

[David Kirk]

The majority of my work right now is lugged stainless - no shortage of it.

dave

[eBAUMANN]

materials for a stainless frame are pricey (compared to "normal" steel) but i will say, i absolutely LOVE the way stainless rides...there is just something about it, a certain "crispness," that is just so unique.

also you can make a lugged frame out of it and skip the paint...cant do that with Ti ;)

[oldpotatoe]

materials for a stainless frame are pricey (compared to "normal" steel) but i will say, i absolutely LOVE the way stainless rides...there is just something about it, a certain "crispness," that is just so unique.

also you can make a lugged frame out of it and skip the paint...cant do that with Ti ;)

Really a question for a builder but same tube dimensions, SS and not, built by same builder, same frame dimensions, will ride the same.

[Blown Reek]

Really a question for a builder but same tube dimensions, SS and not, built by same builder, same frame dimensions, will ride the same.

How dare you provide facts.

[Clean39T]

also you can [...] skip the paint...


I thought that was true, but then was casually browsing a Cinelli XCR frame and saw it had what looked to be rust in its welds up near the ST. I don't think stainless is foolproof...although probably much moreso than regular steel that has its imperfections hidden by paint... DK would of course be the expert here.

[Bentley]

Really a question for a builder but same tube dimensions, SS and not, built by same builder, same frame dimensions, will ride the same.

The temper and properties of stainless steel are different from high tensile steel so that is not necessarily a "correct" statement. I have not looked at the properties of either Columbus or Reynolds stainless steel tubesets, but my guess is they are different than the high tensile carbon tubesets so ride quality may be different. if the tubes are of similar mechanical properties then I would agree they should ride "the same" but I think its likely that the mechanical properties are different so the same bike made with different tubes of different material likely will "feel" different.

My 2 cents

[eBAUMANN]

Really a question for a builder but same tube dimensions, SS and not, built by same builder, same frame dimensions, will ride the same.

different alloys have different tensile strengths, which translates into different ride characteristics. its not ONLY a matter of tube diameter and butt length/wall thickness.

I thought that was true, but then was casually browsing a Cinelli XCR frame and saw it had what looked to be rust in its welds up near the ST. I don't think stainless is foolproof...although probably much moreso than regular steel that has its imperfections hidden by paint... DK would of course be the expert here.

meh. i skipped the paint on my Life cx frame i built over a year ago now...its been through rain storms on my roof, 1.5 seasons of CX and still looks great...under the electrical tape I covered it with ;)
Most people dont even notice its not painted, pretty funny actually.

[Bob Ross]

saw it had what looked to be rust in its welds up near the ST. I don't think stainless is foolproof

One of my favorite aphorisms gleaned from an internet bike forum is "It's called 'stainless steel', not 'won't stain at all steel'."

[SPOKE]

I really enjoy my Kirk and Bedford stainless "blend" frames. They are just bit lighter weight and ride with a "brightness" that reminds me of my old Columbus SL steel frames but a bit stiffer.
Hopefully I'll get the Kirk Onesto built up for next year so I'll be able to see how a frame rides that is all stainless😉.

[Mark McM]

different alloys have different tensile strengths, which translates into different ride characteristics. its not ONLY a matter of tube diameter and butt length/wall thickness.

I don't see how that follows. Tensile strengths (yield and ultimate) affect how much stress it takes to make a permanent shape change (i.e., how much stress it takes to bend or break). Since bikes (should) never reach their tensile strength limits, these limits should have no direct affect on ride characteristics.

The only affect the metal strength should have is in allowing more variability for choosing tube shape/diameter/thickness.

[wallymann]

Really a question for a builder but same tube dimensions, SS and not, built by same builder, same frame dimensions, will ride the same.

agree. SS and high-strength steels used in bicycles have essentially the same density and modulus of elasticity, so given the same tubing dimensions and construction/geometry will ride identically.

different alloys have different tensile strengths, which translates into different ride characteristics. its not ONLY a matter of tube diameter and butt length/wall thickness.


incorrect. tensile strength doesnt matter in the normal usage-modes and stresses that bicycle tubing experiences. modulus of elasticity is what matters along with density.

[eBAUMANN]

ok, you guys got me, im not a material scientist. im a photographer. :)

all i know is that there is SOMETHING about the different alloys/grades of steel used in the production of tubing that creates an appreciable difference in ride quality/characteristics when i am pedaling my bicycle.

so i leave it to you, experts, to tell me why that is.
because it IS, whether I can explain why or not ;)

perhaps the differences i noticed were just a function of butting and method of construction...or SOMETHING, i dunno.
what i do know is that i absolutely loved the way the 2 stainless frames ive owned rode and would not hesitate to buy another or build one myself.

[Blown Reek]

so i leave it to you, experts, to tell me why that is. because it IS, whether I can explain why or not ;)

Because you're stoked to ride that bike, for whatever reason.

[NHAero]

Stainless is totally over. As a matter of fact, I just tossed my Anderson in the metals recycling last week.

[sales guy]

Really a question for a builder but same tube dimensions, SS and not, built by same builder, same frame dimensions, will ride the same.

I disagree. I've ridden three identical frames by us and they ride differently. Granted, they were not in MY size, all three were the exact same dimensions, angles, kit and tubing sizes. The stainless frame road slightly stiffer, harsher. We've had other say the same thing. The owner of Enigma has said the same thing.

On a side not to people asking if it's over ,nope. It's not. Just tougher to work with. It's very thin depending on the tubing you use. Easy to burn thru. And Yes, you can run out. Columbus did earlier this year. We had a 3 month wait till they made more. They don't make a lot of it. We only sell 1 stainless XCr frame to every 50 other material frames. So not a huge demand, but as David Kirk has said, he's building with it all the time.

[false_Aest]

Really a question for a builder but same tube dimensions, SS and not, built by same builder, same frame dimensions, will ride the same.

unless its thin tubes and then you're subject to planing.

:P

[Bentley]

agree. SS and high-strength steels used in bicycles have essentially the same density and modulus of elasticity, so given the same tubing dimensions and construction/geometry will ride identically.



incorrect. tensile strength doesnt matter in the normal usage-modes and stresses that bicycle tubing experiences. modulus of elasticity is what matters along with density.

So I am not sure its as absolute as you are making your point here. I agree that the characteristics of the tube, shape, wall thickness, are all likely the dominant contributors to the ride "feel", but at a gross level there is about a 6% difference in Modulus of Elasticity, which is not insignificant and there is a difference in tensile strength which again cannot be totally ignored. I would argue that "softer" tempers of steel likely have a "softer" ride. Clearly, we are no where near the yield strength of the material, but my guess is that we are likely very much in the elastic region of the material and my guess is that this may be something that can be felt. I think its far to simplistic to say that since its "steel" its the same.

[FriarQuade]

I thought that was true, but then was casually browsing a Cinelli XCR frame and saw it had what looked to be rust in its welds up near the ST. I don't think stainless is foolproof...although probably much moreso than regular steel that has its imperfections hidden by paint... DK would of course be the expert here.

It's called stainLESS not stainproof for a reason. On top of that stainless bike frame tubing does contain iron and is reasonably magnetic. While it is corrosion resistant it can and will rust.

[BikeNY]

Maybe the extra coating of paint on the non-stainless frames is effecting the flex characteristics?;)

Concerning the resistance to rust, I think it varies depending on what kind of stainless you are talking about. I think there are 3 main types used on bike frames currently, and I'll bet they all have different properties related to rust formation.

[Mark McM]

I disagree. I've ridden three identical frames by us and they ride differently. Granted, they were not in MY size, all three were the exact same dimensions, angles, kit and tubing sizes. The stainless frame road slightly stiffer, harsher. We've had other say the same thing. The owner of Enigma has said the same thing.

Perhaps you are not aware of the occasional control blinded tests that are performed to see how well riders can feel differences in ride quality between different frame tubes/materials. Typically, these tests show that if riders are not aware of which frame they are riding, they can not reliable distinguish differences in ride quality.

Here is one classic example, of 7 different frames, made by the same builder, with the same dimensions and geometry, painted identically, and with the same wheels/components, but made with 7 different Columbus tube sets (standard and oversized, thin and thick walled, etc.). The test rider not could not reliably tell the difference between them, and even said that, "If the numbers on the bikes were switched around and I were to test each bike again, my guess is that I'd come up with different tubing preferences. I think my ride impressions were essentially random."

https://www.habcycles.com/m7.html


Josh Poertner has remarked on Zipp's testing of frames that were covered in fabric panels to disguise them, were they found that pro racers and other industry experts also were unable to reliably discern differences between frames.


So I guess that question is: Since you are so easily able to tell the difference between stainless and non-stainless tubed frames, what makes you so special?

[oldpotatoe]

ok, you guys got me, im not a material scientist. im a photographer. :)

all i know is that there is SOMETHING about the different alloys/grades of steel used in the production of tubing that creates an appreciable difference in ride quality/characteristics when i am pedaling my bicycle.

so i leave it to you, experts, to tell me why that is.
because it IS, whether I can explain why or not ;)

perhaps the differences i noticed were just a function of butting and method of construction...or SOMETHING, i dunno.
what i do know is that i absolutely loved the way the 2 stainless frames ive owned rode and would not hesitate to buy another or build one myself.

Not trying to argue...I had a Waterford stainless and non stainless, both lugged, same dimension and they rode the same...is all. Same general weight also. They also rode really, really well.

The 7 bike test mentioned were from Torelli, and if memory serves, the testers preferred the Thron tubed ones....doh!

[pncguy]

I never got the ss frame, but it seems to be that it has tapered down and not many builders use it. Ti is just a better choice imo, is anybody still building with h it?

I guess Dave will just have to send me all the dead frames he's not finished building. :banana: I'd be happy to have an Onesto next to my Ti Strong! ;)

[572cv]

...
Concerning the resistance to rust, I think it varies depending on what kind of stainless you are talking about. I think there are 3 main types used on bike frames currently, and I'll bet they all have different properties related to rust formation.

Hmmm. Could you make unpaintable highly patina-ed urban commuters with Corten? :)

[David Kirk]

I would caution against making direct ride quality comparisons being stainless and non-stainless because no builder worth their salt would use stainless tubes that have as heavy a wall as would be typical of a non-stainless tube.

I use 953 tubing and the main tubes are very thin - .5/.3/.5 and to my knowledge no one makes ferrous tubes that are that thin. Most ferrous main tubes are in the .8/.6/.8 range.

So the point is that if a builder were to build a stainless frame with very heavy walls it would ride much more like its ferrous cousin but why would anyone do that?

I started using stainless 953 main tubes more than 10 years ago in my JK Special framesets not because it was stainless but because the material is so strong that it can be made very thin which in turn makes it lighter and have a nicer ride. it rides very well I must say. Does it have a "stainless ride"? I don't know. But it does ride like the tubes are very light and thin and that is a very good thing.

Back to the bench for me where I'm currently finishing up another Onesto.

Dave

[MesiJezi]

It's called stainLESS not stainproof for a reason. On top of that stainless bike frame tubing does contain iron and is reasonably magnetic. While it is corrosion resistant it can and will rust.

What grade is typically used in the tubing that frames are built with? In the mechanical industry, 304 and 316 are pretty common. 304 has some rust resistance, but it will rust when exposed to harsh environments (salts, chemicals) 316 seems to resist staining under most conditions. Welds can rust, and there are chemical passivation treatments available that remove iron from the surface of the metal so that it won't rust.

Are there any metallurgists in here that want to give us a proper lesson in SS corrosion resistance and passivation?

[cadence90]

I use 953 tubing and the main tubes are very thin - .5/.3/.5 and to my knowledge no one makes ferrous tubes that are that thin. Most ferrous main tubes are in the .8/.6/.8 range.

I started using stainless 953 main tubes more than 10 years ago in my JK Special framesets not because it was stainless but because the material is so strong that it can be made very thin....
DaveDave, what, if any, is the "dent resistance strength difference" between 5/.3/.5 stainless and .8/.6/.8 ferrous?
.
.

[OtayBW]

For my taste, even an average lugged SS looks nicer than the best tig welded Ti. So, for my $$, SS sure ain't dead or dying.

[BikeNY]

What grade is typically used in the tubing that frames are built with? In the mechanical industry, 304 and 316 are pretty common. 304 has some rust resistance, but it will rust when exposed to harsh environments (salts, chemicals) 316 seems to resist staining under most conditions. Welds can rust, and there are chemical passivation treatments available that remove iron from the surface of the metal so that it won't rust.

Are there any metallurgists in here that want to give us a proper lesson in SS corrosion resistance and passivation?

I'm no metallurgist unfortunately. The three common bike tubes used are KVA MS3, Reynolds 953, and Columbus XCR. That's about all I can tell you!

[David Kirk]

Dave, what, if any, is the "dent resistance strength difference" between 5/.3/.5 stainless and .8/.6/.8 ferrous?
.
.

It's crazy high as the material is so very hard. I've been using it for more than 10 years on my personal bikes on nasty gravel and not one ding on the DT. I've also never had a customer report that a 953 tube has dented in the many hundreds of these out there.

dave

[FriarQuade]

What grade is typically used in the tubing that frames are built with? In the mechanical industry, 304 and 316 are pretty common. 304 has some rust resistance, but it will rust when exposed to harsh environments (salts, chemicals) 316 seems to resist staining under most conditions. Welds can rust, and there are chemical passivation treatments available that remove iron from the surface of the metal so that it won't rust.

Are there any metallurgists in here that want to give us a proper lesson in SS corrosion resistance and passivation?

The bike tubing is proprietary but it's pretty close to 17-4 mechanically, iirc. 304,316 and the rest of the 300 series alloys are too soft to make frames from.

Welds can rust regardless of what alloy filler is used, where corrosion resistance is a priority they are passivated or pickled to remove the free iron. Cross contamination is another reason that you could see rust on a stainless (or aluminum or titanium) frame in the weld zone or mid tube. The easiest way for this to happen is abrasives that are used on steel and then on other materials leaving little flakes of iron embedded in them that will later rust.

[sokyroadie]

I've had (2) SS frames one KVA one XCr - key word HAD - I personally much prefer Ti - just my opinion.

[jumphigher]

Are stainless frames lighter than cro-mo steel frames assuming geo and size is the same on both? Just curious.

[oldpotatoe]

Are stainless frames lighter than cro-mo steel frames assuming geo and size is the same on both? Just curious.

No if the tubes are the same wall thickness/butting.

[makoti]

It's crazy high as the material is so very hard. I've been using it for more than 10 years on my personal bikes on nasty gravel and not one ding on the DT. I've also never had a customer report that a 953 tube has dented in the many hundreds of these out there.

dave

John Hollands (who built my frame using KVA tubing, Reynolds was not available) told me he dulled two drill bits cutting in the water bottle bosses. And when I hit the back of a Toyota (don't ask), the fork got pushed back into the frame square & I rode another 25 miles before I realized it was bent. The stuff is strong!

[PaMtbRider]

No if the tubes are the same wall thickness/butting.



But as Dave mentioned above, a good builder is going to use thinner walled stainless and will have a lighter, but still tough frame.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pdmtong]

saying "stainless" is insufficient as the comparison basis...it has to do with the tube diameter, thickness and placement too.

the IF SSR 953 I had rode harshly. The Peg I now have made out of XcR is really plush yet goes when i stand on it.

Very different rides XcR versus 953 in these two incarnations. And, both different from my steel and my ti bike.

[SlowPokePete]

Waterford builds bikes with some stainless tubes or all if you wish, lugs too!

Mine has a stainless head tube and chain stays...rides very nice!

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4395/37278605835_eb71703168_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/YNbAKn)August 16, 2017 (https://flic.kr/p/YNbAKn) by SlowPoke Pete (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156678813@N02/), on Flickr

SPP

[mkbk]

In our household honey is waiting for an Xcr stainless road frame, so stainless is just beginning. She has to finalize paint this week! A 50/50 mix of either midnight blue or metallic black with the rest polished.

[BikeNY]

In our household honey is waiting for an Xcr stainless road frame, so stainless is just beginning. She has to finalize paint this week! A 50/50 mix of either midnight blue or metallic black with the rest polished.

To each his own, but I don't understand painting a stainless frame, or a titanium frame for that matter. To me, that's one of the big advantages, no paint to scratch or chip.

[oldpotatoe]

But as Dave mentioned above, a good builder is going to use thinner walled stainless and will have a lighter, but still tough frame.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely true but identical tubes weigh the same, 'stainless' doesn't make them lighter. Same gig with aluminum tubes with 'scandium' in them..or NivaChrome VS just Chromoly..etc...

[bobswire]

different alloys have different tensile strengths, which translates into different ride characteristics. its not ONLY a matter of tube diameter and butt length/wall thickness.



meh. i skipped the paint on my Life cx frame i built over a year ago now...its been through rain storms on my roof, 1.5 seasons of CX and still looks great...under the electrical tape I covered it with ;)
Most people dont even notice its not painted, pretty funny actually.

Photo please. :)

[soulspinner]

I would caution against making direct ride quality comparisons being stainless and non-stainless because no builder worth their salt would use stainless tubes that have as heavy a wall as would be typical of a non-stainless tube.

I use 953 tubing and the main tubes are very thin - .5/.3/.5 and to my knowledge no one makes ferrous tubes that are that thin. Most ferrous main tubes are in the .8/.6/.8 range.

So the point is that if a builder were to build a stainless frame with very heavy walls it would ride much more like its ferrous cousin but why would anyone do that?

I started using stainless 953 main tubes more than 10 years ago in my JK Special framesets not because it was stainless but because the material is so strong that it can be made very thin which in turn makes it lighter and have a nicer ride. it rides very well I must say. Does it have a "stainless ride"? I don't know. But it does ride like the tubes are very light and thin and that is a very good thing.

Back to the bench for me where I'm currently finishing up another Onesto.

Dave

cool info

[chiasticon]

To each his own, but I don't understand painting a stainless frame, or a titanium frame for that matter. To me, that's one of the big advantages, no paint to scratch or chip.couldn't agree more. own five bikes, only one of them is painted. and that one has full fenders. the rest are either Ti or raw aluminum. love the industrial vibe, plus they always look great and are easy to keep clean. :cool:

[wallymann]

fair point. 6% is meaningful. i didnt realize the elasticity figures were that far apart.

So I am not sure its as absolute as you are making your point here. I agree that the characteristics of the tube, shape, wall thickness, are all likely the dominant contributors to the ride "feel", but at a gross level there is about a 6% difference in Modulus of Elasticity, which is not insignificant and there is a difference in tensile strength which again cannot be totally ignored. I would argue that "softer" tempers of steel likely have a "softer" ride. Clearly, we are no where near the yield strength of the material, but my guess is that we are likely very much in the elastic region of the material and my guess is that this may be something that can be felt. I think its far to simplistic to say that since its "steel" its the same.

[Pi Guy]

fair point. 6% is meaningful. i didnt realize the elasticity figures were that far apart.

I was curious about this, does anyone actually have the modulus of elasticity (stiffness) numbers? Columbus publishes yield strength, tensile strength, and elongation but not stiffness. I haven't looked into other companies...

[sales guy]

Perhaps you are not aware of the occasional control blinded tests that are performed to see how well riders can feel differences in ride quality between different frame tubes/materials. Typically, these tests show that if riders are not aware of which frame they are riding, they can not reliable distinguish differences in ride quality.

Here is one classic example, of 7 different frames, made by the same builder, with the same dimensions and geometry, painted identically, and with the same wheels/components, but made with 7 different Columbus tube sets (standard and oversized, thin and thick walled, etc.). The test rider not could not reliably tell the difference between them, and even said that, "If the numbers on the bikes were switched around and I were to test each bike again, my guess is that I'd come up with different tubing preferences. I think my ride impressions were essentially random."

https://www.habcycles.com/m7.html


Josh Poertner has remarked on Zipp's testing of frames that were covered in fabric panels to disguise them, were they found that pro racers and other industry experts also were unable to reliably discern differences between frames.


So I guess that question is: Since you are so easily able to tell the difference between stainless and non-stainless tubed frames, what makes you so special?


Not sure. But I can. I have 3 frames made by the same company, exact same geometry. And I can tell the differences in them. And all 3 are carbon. I have a custom carbon and a custom ti frame, exact same kit and geometry and can tell the differences. I have a stock Bianchi EL/OS and a custom steel frame with Genius tubing. I can tell the differences there too. I also notice stem, bar, saddle and seatpost changes even in the slightest. I guess I am just more prone to noticing differences.

I am very familiar with the Mondonico blind testing. I sold Torelli and Mondonico when that testing happened. I own two from them, a Mondonico Anniversario and a Torelli. Both made by Antonio Mondonico. I can tell the differences in them also. Both are the same geometry, one is EL/OS, one is Brain tubing. One has a wishbone seat stay and one has dual stays. Both lugged. Same lugs in fact. Both with Campagnolo. Everything is the same. But I can tell. I guess it's just me. Or chalk it up to my CYP2D6 gene issue.

[oldguy00]

Stainless is totally over. As a matter of fact, I just tossed my Anderson in the metals recycling last week.

Dave Anderson makes gorgeous lugged SS frames. If I ever have 3500 to drop on a custom frame, he'll be getting my business!

[cadence90]

To each his own, but I don't understand painting a stainless frame, or a titanium frame for that matter. To me, that's one of the big advantages, no paint to scratch or chip.

Completely agree. While great paint schemes are beautiful I really do not understand the "Baumification" (Sean Kelly said that) of ss/ti frames. To me, paint actually detracts from the beauty of these frames. If I really want "Ciavete", it looks just as good on a Marcelo as it does on a Respo.
.
.

[NHAero]

That's about the right price. After I saw his weekly updates of the step-by-step process he undertakes to build the frame, I actually felt I paid him too little!

Dave Anderson makes gorgeous lugged SS frames. If I ever have 3500 to drop on a custom frame, he'll be getting my business!

[Istone]

Titanium > Stainless

[Tickdoc]

post apocalyptic scenario: toilet bowls, roaches, titanium and stainless bikes are all that is left.:banana: