serotta stainless steel frame

[npla2112]

hello everyone,
any chance of serotta building a stainless steel frame? would like to know what people think of that idea?
thanks...

[Pete Serotta]

Do not think you will see it, at least not in 09. We can all debate the value of SS vs Steel but the question becomes whether there is a market that big for it.

[timto]

Not sure about the market either but when I saw an IF SSR in the flesh the other week I was blown away. There was no internal debate for me wrt cost/value/benefit of stainless over steel x. That frameset was pure hotness - logic excluded.

NO KIDDING - I immediately thought about how a serotta version with the hallmarks of 3d dropouts and sbends and baseball bat tubes would blow it out of the water.

imho

[Climb01742]

perhaps mr bedford would be the man to talk to about that.

[Ahneida Ride]

perhaps mr bedford would be the man to talk to about that.

I do believe that Mr. Bedford is in the process of building a Stainleess
Steel frame.

I would definitely talk to Kelly.

[Ahneida Ride]

Serotta would need more the just a handful of orders for Stainleess
to be profitable.

[Pete Serotta]

Timbto, they do look great BUT buyers are needed. I do not mean this personal, but I also like them but am not in a position to buy, PETE

Not sure about the market either but when I saw an IF SSR in the flesh the other week I was blown away. There was no internal debate for me wrt cost/value/benefit of stainless over steel x. That frameset was pure hotness - logic excluded.

NO KIDDING - I immediately thought about how a serotta version with the hallmarks of 3d dropouts and sbends and baseball bat tubes would blow it out of the water.

imho

[timto]

Timbto, they do look great BUT buyers are needed. I do not mean this personal, but I also like them but are not in a position to buy, PETE

Pete - but how does one demonstrate that they are a buyer for a product that doesn't exist? Do I send in a deposit for a virtual wait list? for a product that might not see the light of day?

So true - the count of potential stainless buyers is an unknown quantity. The OP and me make two I suppose. A guestimate of potential orders has to align with the risk Serotta would be willing to take ... but it's still a guestimate.

Typically one asses risk on a new product and if it passes whatever the company's internal hurdles are -a product is made. Only then do you ever KNOW the buyers based on sales. Products that don't succeed (bad estimation of demand/cost or whatever) get dropped from the line up. Atleast that's how I imagined things that are on the leading edge of the wedge materialize. But at some point it is always a risk is what I'm getting at.

Re: with greatest respects to Mr Bedford - I guess what I meant to say in my initial post is that a stainless SEROTTA (with the hallmark features) I feel, would be the cat's meow. I realize that there are many wonderful builders that have access to the stainless materials. But after only serotta can make a serotta.

[dekindy]

I could not relocate a technical discussion of 953 that I had read previously. I think it said to the effect that corrosion resistance was nice but it would not be stiffer and would not materially lower frame weight so it's incremental value was not significant. It seems like it also said it was more challenging to work with. But I am going by memory and I could be way off. I wish I could find the article. I thought it was on Strong's or Kirk's website but did not find it there.

Waterford is offering 953 and has a pretty picture on their website.

http://waterfordbikes.com/now/modelthis.php?blobid=510&bwid=130

[Sandy]

I think that long before Serotta goes for a stainless steel Serotta they should look good and hard at a more affordable carbon Serotta. That is if they want to sell more bikes to more people.



Sandy

[Pete Serotta]

You nor I bought or ordered one from IF, HAMPSTEN, BEDFORD, KIRK, etc,,,, and they do produce them. Why do they not sell more of them? No I do not know why :confused:

Yes it can be the case of the "chicken or egg" coming first BUT with a finite mft capacity and budget it becomes an order of priority and where to spend $$ (just as our everyday household budget dictates (or should dictate) :cool:


Pete - but how does one demonstrate that they are a buyer for a product that doesn't exist? Do I send in a deposit for a virtual wait list? for a product that might not see the light of day?

So true - the count of potential stainless buyers is an unknown quantity. The OP and me make two I suppose. A guestimate of potential orders has to align with the risk Serotta would be willing to take ... but it's still a guestimate.

Typically one asses risk on a new product and if it passes whatever the company's internal hurdles are -a product is made. Only then do you ever KNOW the buyers based on sales. Products that don't succeed (bad estimation of demand/cost or whatever) get dropped from the line up. Atleast that's how I imagined things that are on the leading edge of the wedge materialize. But at some point it is always a risk is what I'm getting at.

Re: with greatest respects to Mr Bedford - I guess what I meant to say in my initial post is that a stainless SEROTTA (with the hallmark features) I feel, would be the cat's meow. I realize that there are many wonderful builders that have access to the stainless materials. But after only serotta can make a serotta.

[timto]

I'll just have to be happy with staying at the first step!

I was simply trying to compliment the serotta brand and those features that make a serotta so special IMHO by saying that a stainless one would be awesome. :bike:

[benb]

Would it be "so bad" to settle for Ti?

At least if this stuff costs more then Ti?

[Pete Serotta]

Spokes and I have had this debate for a while now. I like my ti.. When at Finger Lakes, I am going to ask David Kirk and Steve Hampsten the differences that they have noticed in RIDE and in other aspects.... I think DBRK has one also.

Would it be "so bad" to settle for Ti?

At least if this stuff costs more then Ti?

[MilanoTom]

I was always sort of intrigued by stainless steel, back to the days of Columbus Metax and Rhygin bicycles. It always seemed like the best of both worlds - the ride of steel with no rust worries.

The thing I don't understand is why a TIG'ed 953 or XCr frame costs so much more than a TIG'ed frame frome more commonplace steel. Is the tubeset that much more expensive, does it require that much more labor, or is there really no good reason for it? If I could have found a Responsorium in my size, I'd have probably bought it in spite of the cost (it would, however be a purchase based, at least in part, on emotion). Otherwise, it would take something a little more reasonably priced to get me to try one.

Regards.
Tom

[David Kirk]

The thing I don't understand is why a TIG'ed 953 or XCr frame costs so much more than a TIG'ed frame frome more commonplace steel. Is the tubeset that much more expensive, does it require that much more labor, or is there really no good reason for it?
Regards.
Tom

Well you hit the nail on the head. It costs MUCH more (depending on the tube it's being compared to it's twice to 3 times the cost) and it takes more man-hours to work with................ not to mention the high wear rates on tooling. So in my mind it should be pretty darn expensive if the builder is to make fair money working with it. Most of us on this side of the wall think that the cost is not performance justified.

dave

[timto]

Most of us on this side of the wall think that the cost is not performance justified.

dave

For me - at the level you and your peers produce at - it's ALL about emotion!

[David Kirk]

For me - at the level you and your peers produce at - it's ALL about emotion!


I recognize that. But, and I can only speak for myself here, there is no way I'll build and sell anything that disappoints in it's ride and that I'm not 100% proud to have my name on for the sake of being shiny.

I think in the future we will see stainless tubes that I'd personally be excited about using but until that happens I won't be going there. I'd guess that Serotta feels the same way.

Dave

[MilanoTom]

For me - at the level you and your peers produce at - it's ALL about emotion!

Very well put. Does anybody really think that a Vanilla rear dropout functions any better than anybody else's? It's all about emotion and desire.

After owning and riding my share of very good steel, I'm pretty well convinced that there's a lot of smoke and mirrors (and trendiness) when it comes to higher-end frames. If you took a moderately priced but well-made frame, put a Joe Bell paint job and a desirable name on it, a fair number of people would lust after it as though it was the paramount of the framebuilder's art.

I don't need a stainless steel bicycle, and any improvement in performace might well be lost on me. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't buy one.

I don't know that I've ever seen a price for a 953 tubeset. How much does a tubeset cost vs. something like 853?

Regards.
Tom

[Mike748]

My recollection from engineering school is that stainless steels have some unique properties that make them hard to work with. For a bike frame I think you'd want to use 300 series, which doesn't heat treat but is more corrosion resistant than 400 series. Hydrogen embrittlement and stress corrosion cracking come to mind as issues. This is after you wear out your machine tools prepping the stuff as Dave mentioned. A quick google yielded this article which makes these points in a more technical fashion:

http://www.brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue2.6/palmer.html

Beyond the shiny factor, I think its not a good material choice for bike frame material.

[Pete Serotta]

Dave, thanks.....Pete

I recognize that. But, and I can only speak for myself here, there is no way I'll build and sell anything that disappoints in it's ride and that I'm not 100% proud to have my name on for the sake of being shiny.

I think in the future we will see stainless tubes that I'd personally be excited about using but until that happens I won't be going there. I'd guess that Serotta feels the same way.

Dave

[Jeff N.]

I think that long before Serotta goes for a stainless steel Serotta they should look good and hard at a more affordable carbon Serotta. That is if they want to sell more bikes to more people.



SandyI've never seen a Meivici on the road. Never. Jeff N.

[PacNW2Ford]

My recollection from engineering school is that stainless steels have some unique properties that make them hard to work with. For a bike frame I think you'd want to use 300 series, which doesn't heat treat but is more corrosion resistant than 400 series. Hydrogen embrittlement and stress corrosion cracking come to mind as issues. This is after you wear out your machine tools prepping the stuff as Dave mentioned. A quick google yielded this article which makes these points in a more technical fashion:

http://www.brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue2.6/palmer.html

Beyond the shiny factor, I think its not a good material choice for bike frame material.

Not trying to start an argument here, but I think it is inferred that we are talking about Reynolds 953, which is barely related to the common stainless steel alloys that you'll find in your (and my) college textbooks. Many people never thought they would see titanium bikes either.

[MilanoTom]

I recognize that. But, and I can only speak for myself here, there is no way I'll build and sell anything that disappoints in it's ride and that I'm not 100% proud to have my name on for the sake of being shiny.

I think in the future we will see stainless tubes that I'd personally be excited about using but until that happens I won't be going there. I'd guess that Serotta feels the same way.

Dave

I haven't heard much by way of disappointment with the Responsorium's ride.

I hate to say this, but your statements seem somewhat disparaging of the people who are going out on a limb to a degree and and using 953 or XCr (and I couldn't tell you which one is supposed to be better). For example, following the logic highlighted above, Dario Pegoretti would have to be either a) not 100% proud of having his name on a stainless steel frame, since he's building them, or b) somehow not as savvy as you when it comes to getting excited about the option of using stainless steel. After all, you didn't get too excited about it, and he apparently did.

If it's too much trouble to work with stainless steel, that's an understandable reason not to work with it. You and many other high-end builders have enough orders to keep you busy for quite a while, and there's really no point to spending valuable time getting up to speed with something that will, for the foreseeable future, only cater to a very select market. On the other hand, if there's something that know about stainless that Dario, IF, Waterford, Strong Frames and a few others don't, please share it.

Regards.
Tom

[johnnymossville]

Would it be "so bad" to settle for Ti?

At least if this stuff costs more then Ti?

I was thinking the same thing. I think Ti and Stainless are more similar than different anyway.

Weight Differences?
Price Difference?
Ride Quality?

Those are my questions.

[Pete Serotta]

Tom, I think you have taken Dave out of context. THat was his personal view of what his customers want and how he can meet their desires.

Variety makes the world go round.....I do not see any disparagement here against anyone by Dave. (and I ask that you not disparage Dave)

While the brands you mention do 953 there are an equal or greater number that do not. It is great that we the customer have so many choices.

Please lets not get this into negative territory. The customer has a choice and that is wonderful!

I haven't heard much by way of disappointment with the Responsorium's ride.

I hate to say this, but your statements seem somewhat disparaging of the people who are going out on a limb to a degree and and using 953 or XCr (and I couldn't tell you which one is supposed to be better). For example, following the logic highlighted above, Dario Pegoretti would have to be either a) not 100% proud of having his name on a stainless steel frame, since he's building them, or b) somehow not as savvy as you when it comes to getting excited about the option of using stainless steel. After all, you didn't get too excited about it, and he apparently did.

If it's too much trouble to work with stainless steel, that's an understandable reason not to work with it. You and many other high-end builders have enough orders to keep you busy for quite a while, and there's really no point to spending valuable time getting up to speed with something that will, for the foreseeable future, only cater to a very select market. On the other hand, if there's something that know about stainless that Dario, IF, Waterford, Strong Frames and a few others don't, please share it.

Regards.
Tom

[johnnymossville]

I just like the look of the Reynolds 953 Sticker. I'd buy a frame just based on that. :p

[benb]

I was thinking the same thing. I think Ti and Stainless are more similar than different anyway.

Weight Differences?
Price Difference?
Ride Quality?

Those are my questions.

Weight - Isn't the Ti lighter?

Price difference - if you look at IF for example, their Ti crown jewel is $250 more then the Stainless frame.. but the Ti Crown jewel is custom butted and shot peened, and the 953 frame is not.

Ride Quality - who knows?

Not everybody makes Bamboo frames either.

[MilanoTom]

Tom, I think you have taken Dave out of context. THat was his personal view of what his customers want and how he can meet their desires.

Variety makes the world go round.....I do not see any disparagement here against anyone by Dave. (and I ask that you not disparage Dave)

While the brands you mention do 953 there are an equal or greater number that do not. It is great that we the customer have so many choices.

Please lets not get this into negative territory. The customer has a choice and that is wonderful!

Agreed.

Regards.
Tom

[palincss]

I could not relocate a technical discussion of 953 that I had read previously. I think it said to the effect that corrosion resistance was nice but it would not be stiffer and would not materially lower frame weight so it's incremental value was not significant.

I think the point of 953 is the appearance, not stiffness or frame weight. In those respects, steel is steel, atmo. But let's not discount the value of appearance, especially if it's the sort of appearance that takes your breath away.

[David Kirk]

I haven't heard much by way of disappointment with the Responsorium's ride.

I hate to say this, but your statements seem somewhat disparaging of the people who are going out on a limb to a degree and and using 953 or XCr (and I couldn't tell you which one is supposed to be better). For example, following the logic highlighted above, Dario Pegoretti would have to be either a) not 100% proud of having his name on a stainless steel frame, since he's building them, or b) somehow not as savvy as you when it comes to getting excited about the option of using stainless steel. After all, you didn't get too excited about it, and he apparently did.

If it's too much trouble to work with stainless steel, that's an understandable reason not to work with it. You and many other high-end builders have enough orders to keep you busy for quite a while, and there's really no point to spending valuable time getting up to speed with something that will, for the foreseeable future, only cater to a very select market. On the other hand, if there's something that know about stainless that Dario, IF, Waterford, Strong Frames and a few others don't, please share it.

Regards.
Tom




Good Morning Tom,

I, in no way whatsoever, mean to disparage anyone else's work. I too have heard very good things about Dario's stainless bike as well as others.


Here's where I'm coming from -

* 953 - IMO the current 953 tubeset as a whole is lacking. The seat tube has odd spec's (weird seatpost sizing and fit) and the chainstays are not as stiff as I personally would like. This is the core reason that I personally don't offer a full 953 bike. I do offer a model that uses some 953 along with a mix of other tubes that give good weight savings without sacrificing the drivetrain stiffness I'm personally looking for. My bikes have a certain ride that they are known for and I do not feel I can give that ride with a full 953 set. IMO it has nothing whatsoever to do with the stainless-ness of the tube but it's a simple matter of diameter and wall thickness.

* XCR - while the XCR tubes have some promising attributes they don't fit into my scheme. I personally build with lugs or fillets. One can not realistically fillet stainless and lugs require that the tubes be certain diameter. XCR isn't available in the diameters that I need to build what I want to build so I don't use it. I have nothing against XCR but it doesn't fit my needs. Dario's bike is tig welded as I recall and while I have nothing against a tigged bikes it's not what I do, nor do my customers ask for it.





I am currently offering bikes that have some 953 in them. I mix the 953 with some True Temper S3 and some Reynolds 725 drawn to my spec's to get the ride I'm looking for while at the same time being able to build with the construction methods I enjoy and that my customers ask for. I don't use the 953 for it's stainless qualities but because it comes in the diameters and wall thicknesses I'm looking for. The fact that it is stainless is a side issue for me. And while stainless can be a bit fussier to work with it's by no means difficult to do. It's takes a bit more time and patience is all and your files wear out faster but it's not hard to do nor does it require a unique skill set. I have spoken with Reynolds about making changes to the 953 set to make it more attractive as a whole to me and I'm told that some of these things might be coming down the line in time but I have no idea if or when that might be.


Please note that I have not said much about the fact that the tubes are stainless. I have no issue at all with stainless as a material. For me it's the size of the tube and it's wall thickness that matters. If, in the future, stainless tubes are made that will allow me to do what I do, the way I enjoy doing it while at the same time allowing me to make the bike ride like I feel my bikes should ride then I will be happy to offer a full stainless bike. Until then I will do what I do and pick and choose the best tubes for me and my customer's needs.


There are folks out there that offer 953 and XCR bikes and some of them look very good to me, Dario's in particular. I feel he he has good reason to be proud of his work. I have read many reports online about how folks like their XYZ stainless bike. I think we would agree that that is cool. At the same time I have a certain ride and look that I am looking for that makes a Kirk a Kirk. I don't feel that it makes them necessarily better than any other bike out there made by someone else, it just makes them behave and look like I want them to. So in that way I am proud of them and the way they look and ride. I do not feel that if the bike looks or rides another way that the builder should not be proud of their work............ on the contrary. All us builders have our own feelings about how these things should ride and look and I'll bet that there are as many different opinions on this as there are builders. A good thing in my book. This variety is good for the market in general as well as good for the customers who have choices and good for the builders who want work that they feel is unique to them and something to be proud of.


I hope that better makes my point about stainless tubing.

Thanks for asking and reading.

dave

[stackie]

Well put, as usual, Dave.

Jon

[MilanoTom]

Very well put. Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed and thoughtful explanation.

Kindest regards.
Tom

[Ahneida Ride]

Let's not forget that guys like Kirk and Bedford are perfectionists.

If the frame has one tiny flaw. It will not be delivered and the builder
eats the mistake. SS is difficult to work with. Hence even extra time
effort and diligence is required with SS.

So not only are the tubes in the Ti price range, the labor involved is
intense.

[David Kirk]

Very well put. Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed and thoughtful explanation.

Kindest regards.
Tom

I'm glad you asked.

You know you can put your words out there and feel you mean something with them but once out there they have a life of their own. It's very easy to be misunderstood.

My fear on things like this is that I (or others) put the words out there, they are misunderstood and and no one says anything. It's good to ask questions and confirm.

Thanks for your time.

dave