new steel

[Hobbscooley]

In the market for a new steel ride, torn between Peg Marcelo and IF 953. Currently riding Peg Love 3 and love it anyone with insight it would be helpful

thanks

[SoCalSteve]

In the market for a new steel ride, torn between Peg Marcelo and IF 953. Currently riding Peg Love 3 and love it anyone with insight it would be helpful

thanks

Get one of each, then you wont have to be torn...

Just sayin'

Steve

[Sandy]

No real insight but an opinon. I believe the Love #3 uses an aluminum scandium tubeset. You are now looking at buying a steel bike. You state that you love your Pegoretti Love #3, so I would suggest you stick with Pegoretti since you seem to like the Pegoretti you have, plus the fact the the Marcelo seems to receive only praise when cyclsts speak about it.

New material- steel. Stick with the builder you like so much.


Sandy

[Hobbscooley]

thanks for the input

[97CSI]

Buy American. Help the economy in any small way you can (like not shopping at WalMart).

[TimD]

You cannot go wrong with the Marcelo.

There might be a difference in paint durability, although Peg is said to have improved in that department. Obviously there's going to be a difference in corrosion resistance, but that probably doesn't really matter unless you live in the tropics or this is your foul weather bike.

[14max]

*****

[William]

Buy American. Help the economy in any small way you can (like not shopping at WalMart).

Mike Zanconato
Richard Sachs
Chris Bull - Circle A Cycles
Peter Mooney
Serotta
Indy Fab guys
Mike Flanigan - ANT
Tony Peiria
Vanilla
CoMotion
Ira Ryan
Ti Cycles
Brain Marcroft
DeSalvo
P. Weigle
Franklin Frames
Roark
Chris Kvale
Doug Fattic
Curt Goodrich.
Scott Quiring
Serotta
Harry Havnoonian
Bilenky
Spectrum
Quetzal Bicycles
Bill Holland
Ves Mandaric
Russ Denny
Jim Kish.
Andy Gilmour
David Bohm.
Hampsten/Tournesol
Capital
Bill Davidson
Glenn Erickson.
Curtlo
Ira Ryan
Strawberry
Pereira
Ahearne
Brian Baylis
Bill Stevenson
Bob Brown
Dave Anderson
Black Sheep
Primus Mootry
Ericksen
Moots
mariposa
Coho Cycles
Jeff Lyon
steve rex
eisentraut
litton
mikkelsen
potts
sycip
soulcraft
ibis
inglis
Nobilette
Anvil
Gangl
Kent Eriksen
slawta/landshark
Carl Strong
David Kirk
Bruce Gordon
SoloVelo
Brent Steelman
Rock Lobster
Waltworks
Zinn
Rivendell
Moyer
Hujsak Bicycles
Ted Wojcik
Seven
Hot Tubes
Hans Schneider
Alpine Design
Hairy Gary

http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=28034&page=1&pp=15&highlight=local

[tuscanyswe]

I have no experience with either.

But there have been question asked about the stiffness of 953 in larger sizes, so perhaps you may need to factor those opinons in if you are riding a larger frame.

On a side note im actually suprised how stiff my IF 853 is and how well it handles now that ive had a couple of days on it.

[palincss]

I think what's really needed here is not a shopping list of builders, American or otherwise, but rather a discussion of what this bike will be for, what qualities Hobbscooley values, how long he can wait in the queue and how much money he's willing to spend. Without knowing those things, how can anyone say how well any given design or builder would fit the bill?

[Hobbscooley]

i am looking for a steel rig to race crits and road races but mostly crits around here. i am riding a 59 cm right now but will drop to a 58 with the next one so i can run a set back post. not too concerned with paint durability (it is going to get scatched) i also commute daily so i will be used for that as well. riding will be split between the the love 3 and this new one. race cat 3 and consider myself more of a sprinter (moving to a 2 hopefully this year) time is not a concern i don't mind waiting for a frame

[97CSI]

Give Harry Havnoonian a call. He is known mostly for building racing bikes.
http://www.cyclesportmedia.com/

[moodster]

Nevermind???

[Wilkinson4]

Depends on what you want. What style, etc... And where you are located. Buy local if you can and go custom. There are so many great American builder's out there that I am sure you will find something close and spec.

Mike

[Jack Brunk]

In the market for a new steel ride, torn between Peg Marcelo and IF 953. Currently riding Peg Love 3 and love it anyone with insight it would be helpful

thanks
Hobbsman,

Go with a Pegoretti Big Leg Emma. It rides almost identical to the Love but has that oh so smooth road feel. The Marcelo is not quite as stiff as the love and you'll notice it very quickly. Not believe anything you read about Emma being too stiff. It is as smooth as silk. I'm doing a century on mine this weekend and I'm not the least bit concerned about being beat up. I love the BLE and the Love #3. Find an Emma in your size or call the JErk at International Bicycle Center and order one. There is no comparision with the IF 953 as there two completely different beasts.

[jeffg]

Hobbsman,

Go with a Pegoretti Big Leg Emma. It rides almost identical to the Love but has that oh so smooth road feel. The Marcelo is not quite as stiff as the love and you'll notice it very quickly. Not believe anything you read about Emma being too stiff. It is as smooth as silk. I'm doing a century on mine this weekend and I'm not the least bit concerned about being beat up. I love the BLE and the Love #3. Find an Emma in your size or call the JErk at International Bicycle Center and order one. There is no comparision with the IF 953 as there two completely different beasts.

Jack,

I am always surprised at my own impressions since I think my custom Marcelo is stiffer than my Love#3 (stock Nerac NOS). Dario told me I did not need an Emma (nor a Love for that matter). The bike was built with the GF Pantani in mind at has the longest chainstays of any Peg I have ever seen ... I am quite enamored of the Love#3 (especially since I am awaiting a new part for the Marcelo) but just trusting Dario was one of the better decisions I ever made

[boltazz]

I have an IF Crown Jewel, love it. Best bike I have ever owned.

[AndrewS]

I've been researching 953 lately, and it doesn't sound like it is performing as advertised, at least in the weight department. If I was going to have the bike painted I wouldn't bother with 953 - 853 or S3 sounds like a better deal.

[oldpotatoe]

In the market for a new steel ride, torn between Peg Marcelo and IF 953. Currently riding Peg Love 3 and love it anyone with insight it would be helpful

thanks

Waterford R-33
Waterford R-32(stainless)
Cinelli Super Corsa(new manufacturer)
Pegoretti Responsorium or Luigino

953 is just stainless. If any frame maker is hyping it to be way lighter then hype it is.

"performing' in terms of weight implies lighter is better somehow but mostly it's just lighter.

[AndrewS]

Lighter is better for airplanes, submarines and sports cars. Why it shouldn't be for bicycles is beyond me.

If one steel bike rides as well as another, why choose the heavier one? To prove you're above such pettiness? ;)

[boltazz]

My crown jewel would be considered heavy for most road riders, but the ride is not comparable to any other type of material in my opinion. My IF CJ is about 19lbs built with Ultegra and HED wheels. I am not racing, so I do not need a super light bicycle. Steel gives me enjoyment and puts a smile on my face.

19lbs is pretty light for a steel bike with sub-top shelf components.
Reynolds 853 is perfectly fine for me, although the stainless steel sounds a lot more sexy.

Rock the Steel.

[dd74]

I've also heard of issues with 953's weight. I haven't heard it flexes, but have heard it's not as light as everyone once thought it would be. With that said, I'm sure you can mitigate the weight with a lighter set of wheels/lighter components, etc.

[dd74]

Then again, Dave Anderson has built some light bikes with standard (not 953) steel tubing. His site advertises one bike that is 16 lbs. Something that light with steel's reassuring communication has to be very nice.

[soulspinner]

Since you like your steel TIG'ed, go with Carl Strong or Mike DeSalvo. Zero disappointments with my Strong and I'm very confident that my DeSalvo is going to be a great ride.


+1

[fogrider]

I think there is something to be said about a certain builder with a certain material. and it seems Dario has worked with 953 a lot...I would love one myself.

[soulspinner]

Thought Dario worked with Columbus stainless XCR?

[Lionel]

Thought Dario worked with Columbus stainless XCR?
That's right. The Respo is XCr. I believe Dario never worked with 953.

[oldpotatoe]

Lighter is better for airplanes, submarines and sports cars. Why it shouldn't be for bicycles is beyond me.

If one steel bike rides as well as another, why choose the heavier one? To prove you're above such pettiness? ;)

Only 2 things that can be 'measured' in a bike shop, weight and price so therefor the clone will point at something and say how light it is, so how great it is also. Lighter 'can' be better but not always. Sometimes lighter is worse(as in reliability). I object to the whitewash that everything lighter is automatically better. Also the idea that something doesn't 'perform' well because it may be heavier than it is advertised to be...as if it's some sort of drastic show stopper, those 100 grams or so.

Would I ride a heavier Merckx rather than a light trekspecializedgiantcannondale? You bet, even if they ride equally well.

[Pete Serotta]

Only 2 things that can be 'measured' in a bike shop, weight and price so therefor the clone will point at something and say how light it is, so how great it is also. Lighter 'can' be better but not always. Sometimes lighter is worse(as in reliability). I object to the whitewash that everything lighter is automatically better. Also the idea that something doesn't 'perform' well because it may be heavier than it is advertised to be...as if it's some sort of drastic show stopper, those 100 grams or so.

Would I ride a heavier Merckx rather than a light trekspecializedgiantcannondale? You bet, even if they ride equally well.


Well said and very accurate in my opininion :) :)

[oldguy00]

If I were going 953, I'd go with Anderson. Check out some of the pics of his 953 road frames on his site, gorgeous.

[excel1959]

Just completed a full season racing (mostly crits) on an IF SSR (xcr). I'm 6'3" and weigh 190lb. The bike is plenty stiff. Handling is amazing. The bike really becomes a part of me. I've been in several situations this season that in the past I would have been on the pavement but on this bike I stayed upright. The bike is built with campy chorus and with pedals and cages weighs in at 18-1/2lbs. It is an absolute joy to race this bike. Did I mention it handles amazing? Just about every Monday I've talked to my LBS that sold me the bike to say how much I love racing on the SSR. This past Sunday racing in the Portsmouth NH crit I was on the outside left of the pack, the rider on my right was leaning into me as the road narrowed, my left hip hit a hay bale attached to a pole. No problem, no shimmy, no nothin, just keep on heading up the road. Awesome bike.

[excel1959]

Forgot to mention I'm using a full steel IF fork on this bike. No carbon steerer tubes for me.

[soulspinner]

Just completed a full season racing (mostly crits) on an IF SSR (xcr). I'm 6'3" and weigh 190lb. The bike is plenty stiff. Handling is amazing. The bike really becomes a part of me. I've been in several situations this season that in the past I would have been on the pavement but on this bike I stayed upright. The bike is built with campy chorus and with pedals and cages weighs in at 18-1/2lbs. It is an absolute joy to race this bike. Did I mention it handles amazing? Just about every Monday I've talked to my LBS that sold me the bike to say how much I love racing on the SSR. This past Sunday racing in the Portsmouth NH crit I was on the outside left of the pack, the rider on my right was leaning into me as the road narrowed, my left hip hit a hay bale attached to a pole. No problem, no shimmy, no nothin, just keep on heading up the road. Awesome bike.

Same with my Strong lightweight steel. Pitched it twice(same corner) and it slid both wheels on the gravel and I came out of the corner upright at speed.
Stability and weight distribution matter sliding at 25 per........

[soul survivor]

More I read this blog, more I'm happy that my son and I decided to go with steel -- Serotta CDAs. Steel works for both joyriding and racing, at half the cost of carbon/titanium, although I'm sure there are advantages to c/t over steel. :beer:

[AndrewS]

Only 2 things that can be 'measured' in a bike shop, weight and price so therefor the clone will point at something and say how light it is, so how great it is also. Lighter 'can' be better but not always. Sometimes lighter is worse(as in reliability). I object to the whitewash that everything lighter is automatically better. Also the idea that something doesn't 'perform' well because it may be heavier than it is advertised to be...as if it's some sort of drastic show stopper, those 100 grams or so.

Would I ride a heavier Merckx rather than a light trekspecializedgiantcannondale? You bet, even if they ride equally well.
Well, I'm not in a bike shop, and you have called MY posts out for exactly this on more than one occasion.

I don't believe that weight is the end all, be all. But I also am able to read, and when a manufacturer of tubing announces that the ride characteristics you want is now available much lighter, and for a much greater price, I take notice. This isn't a Giant we're talking about. As far as I can tell, 953 is the MOST expensive steel tubing on the market (if not the most expensive material overall). They are charging based on lots of factors, and low frame weight is one.

I don't know if you noticed, but bicycles have kinda gotten a little pricey lately. weight, along with ride, handling, comfort and aesthetics is a metric to judge if you are getting something for the cash. With your philosophy, there is no reason to ever look beyond Columbus SL/SP and straight gauge Ti tubing, because both will deliver a superlative ride if built right. Virtually every other modern improvement to tubing has been done to lower weight while keeping good ride qualities. SLX/SPX, TSX, Nivachrom, 631, 753, 853, S3, OX, yada, yada.

953 is a very weird alloy designed SPECIFICALLY to produce very thin wall sections, like .3mm, and that is the reason for it's fanfare. NOT because it looks like a Swiss Army Knife blade.

As far as your example goes, we aren't comparing a Merckxx to a Giant or Specialized. We're comparing a Merckx to an Eisentraut. 953 frames aren't built by just anybody.

[Pete Serotta]

Personally I have not been able to tell the advantage of 953 over a good ti butted tubed frame. (as a seat of the pants comparison) (I have not tried a MOOTs or ERCIKSEN which have some none butted but are very nice and the folks on them kicked my butt everyday at Ride the Rockies.

Spokes would probably disagree with me on 953 but we are also very good friends.


Everyone, please do not get into a spat over the topic. There is good info by many and there are always differing opinions and that is good. Spokes has two 953s that I know of and he likes both. I have none and do not have a desire to have one.

Thanks


PETE

[danielpack22@ma]

I have an IF Crown Jewel (steel) that I've put over 20k miles on. I love it. It's geometry was based on my Cervelo Soloist. IF took into account my size, weight and riding preferences/style and built me exactly the bike I wanted.

I spoke with IF a couple of years ago (when 953 was first available) about building me another bike. In their opinion, I would have been better off going with a ti frame rather than a 953 frame. They said that there simply weren't enough options in 953 tubing.

My advise is to call IF and see what they have to say. They may tell you that 953 is not your best option.

Hope this helps.

[bluesea]

Just completed a full season racing (mostly crits) on an IF SSR (xcr).


Columbus XCr. I read somewhere that they have a wider selection of tubing, that is more compatible for a high performance frame.

[AndrewS]

Pete,

Most ti bikes produced are still straight guage. If it doesn't say "butted", it isn't. IF, Seven, Lynskey, Litespeed, Merlin, Spectrum, Dean, Moots, etc. all still make straight gauge ti frames, and some of them ONLY make straight gauge (though the new Ti Factory Lightweight by IF signals a change for them).

Butted steel is so old school that we take it completely for granted. Steel has received a lot of upgrades over simple butting that you can't even do with any other material. Post build heat treating like the old Airmet has given way to self-heat treating air hardening steels (though, largely a waste when TIG'd). 953 is crazy expensive because of the alloy itself, not some fancy internal shape or anything like that. The use of that alloy is all about thinning the tubing. The stainless thing is a bonus. If all that was needed was a rust proof bike, I'm sure a more basic seamed stainless or near stainless could be formed into inexpensive seemed tubing, and make for a nice 5 pound frame.

When you're paying through the nose for the newest uber-material, it had better deliver what it promises. Compared to 853, OX, S3 and some others, 953 doesn't yet appear to do what it claims.

[Bob Ross]

weight, along with ride, handling, comfort and aesthetics is a metric to judge if you are getting something for the cash.

Arguably weight is the only "metric" that one can use "to judge if you are getting something for the cash" because it's the only parameter you cited that has an objective value...which one can then compare proportionately to cost, which also has an objective value.

But that would only be useful if material fabricators were claiming weight was a metric by which one could judge value. I don't see that happening. I see consumers -- specifically, cycling enthusiasts -- claiming weight is a metric by which one can judge value, and they're then extrapolating or projecting their personal values backwards onto the material.

It doesn't hold up.

[AndrewS]

Arguably weight is the only "metric" that one can use "to judge if you are getting something for the cash" because it's the only parameter you cited that has an objective value...which one can then compare proportionately to cost, which also has an objective value.

But that would only be useful if material fabricators were claiming weight was a metric by which one could judge value. I don't see that happening. I see consumers -- specifically, cycling enthusiasts -- claiming weight is a metric by which one can judge value, and they're then extrapolating or projecting their personal values backwards onto the material.

It doesn't hold up.Bob,

For your post to make any sense at all, I would have to be advocating 953. I'm not. I think it is too expensive to have a ride no different than other steels and a weight that is heavier.

Are you advocating for 953? Why?

If not, then you and I are talking about the exact same thing. If a material has NEITHER objective NOR subjective properties that appeal, why buy it??????

[AndrewS]

But that would only be useful if material fabricators were claiming weight was a metric by which one could judge value. I don't see that happening. I see consumers -- specifically, cycling enthusiasts -- claiming weight is a metric by which one can judge value, and they're then extrapolating or projecting their personal values backwards onto the material.

From Reynolds site:REYNOLDS 953 MARAGING STAINLESS STEEL

Reynold' latest innovation takes steel alloys into a new league. By utilising a specially developed martensitic-aging stainless steel alloy that can achieve tensile strength in excess of 2000 MPa, with a strength-to-weight ratio that can take on the best in the world. The resilient ride of steel, very high impact strength (similar to armour plating) and fatigue resistance combine to provide an extraordinary material that can now be used for tubing. Aside from the strenght-to-weight ratio bit, the "very high impact strength" part is an explanation about why the tube walls are as thin as .3mm without denting easily (beer can issue).

Do you think Reynolds is advertising on a weight issue, Bob? Or are they advertising armor plating?

[e-RICHIE]

Bob,


If a material doesn't have NEITHER objective NOR subjective properties that appeal, why buy it??????

i believe you mean EITHER atmo.

[oldpotatoe]

Well, I'm not in a bike shop, and you have called MY posts out for exactly this on more than one occasion.

I don't believe that weight is the end all, be all. But I also am able to read, and when a manufacturer of tubing announces that the ride characteristics you want is now available much lighter, and for a much greater price, I take notice. This isn't a Giant we're talking about. As far as I can tell, 953 is the MOST expensive steel tubing on the market (if not the most expensive material overall). They are charging based on lots of factors, and low frame weight is one.

I don't know if you noticed, but bicycles have kinda gotten a little pricey lately. weight, along with ride, handling, comfort and aesthetics is a metric to judge if you are getting something for the cash. With your philosophy, there is no reason to ever look beyond Columbus SL/SP and straight gauge Ti tubing, because both will deliver a superlative ride if built right. Virtually every other modern improvement to tubing has been done to lower weight while keeping good ride qualities. SLX/SPX, TSX, Nivachrom, 631, 753, 853, S3, OX, yada, yada.

953 is a very weird alloy designed SPECIFICALLY to produce very thin wall sections, like .3mm, and that is the reason for it's fanfare. NOT because it looks like a Swiss Army Knife blade.

As far as your example goes, we aren't comparing a Merckxx to a Giant or Specialized. We're comparing a Merckx to an Eisentraut. 953 frames aren't built by just anybody.

From Waterford's website-

* High Strength
* Corrosion Resistance
* Both weldable and brazeable with air-hardening characteristics
* High elongation for long life and a great ride.
* Customizability
* High quality control

Hmm...not much about weight...


Agree but the post I was referring to was how 953 isn't 'performing' up to spec, weight wise. If it's 200 grams heavier than advertised I doubt the cyclist's performance will be adversely effected, the ride won't be bad, compromised, whatever. I think the 'performance' will be unaffected, in spite of the weight. BTW, if MSRP is any indication, Columbus stainless is as expensive as 953(Cinelli vs Waterford R-32). Should a tubeset weight be accurate, sure but if it isn't, it still will ride well, my 953 Waterford does.

BTW-bicycles are sold everyday based on how much they weigh. Not a single customer goes into a bike shop w/o grabbing the bike and lifting it, happens everytime.

BUT I sell bicycles all the time that are heavier than carbon bicycles. Why? Because they really ride well, are custom, fit well. All are subjective. Some want a stainless frame because they can, just like a $8000 carbon or whatever a Mevici is these days. BUT the worth of so much 'bicycle' these days are reduced to 'how much does it weigh?'. Gets tiresome.

[dd74]

953 is coming down to earth. Again, Dave Anderson is an example, where he sells a butted 953 steel frame for $2800. Enigma, out of the UK, is another 953 builder. I think their frames are around $2600.

953 = light? Who knows? The last 953 test I saw, the bike weighed 18 lbs. It's the frame size, the components, and in particular, wheels, which seems to raise the overall bike weight.

I have a Columbus SL frame built up with minimal parts (DT shifters, Ultegra brakes, 7400 Dura Ace crank, hubs, 105 pedals and CXP wheels), and that bike, with a Goodrich steel fork, weighs 19 lbs.

Heavy? Yes, compared to my Ridley with DA and DT Swiss rims. But just by 2 lbs.

Rides nice? Yes, very nice.

I've concluded steel and Ti are for the enthusiasts who do more with cycling than just beat up the bike (and themselves) for an eventual podium. This is a place where weight and "newest" has a lesser place in comparison to ride and longevity.

I like the word Serotta uses in its description of the Classique: "versatile." That to me is what steel and Ti should be. Carbon, conversely, seems disposable.

[AndrewS]

From Waterford's website-

* High Strength
* Corrosion Resistance
* Both weldable and brazeable with air-hardening characteristics
* High elongation for long life and a great ride.
* Customizability
* High quality control

Hmm...not much about weight...


Agree but the post I was referring to was how 953 isn't 'performing' up to spec, weight wise. If it's 200 grams heavier than advertised I doubt the cyclist's performance will be adversely effected, the ride won't be bad, compromised, whatever. I think the 'performance' will be unaffected, in spite of the weight. BTW, if MSRP is any indication, Columbus stainless is as expensive as 953(Cinelli vs Waterford R-32). Should a tubeset weight be accurate, sure but if it isn't, it still will ride well, my 953 Waterford does.

BTW-bicycles are sold everyday based on how much they weigh. Not a single customer goes into a bike shop w/o grabbing the bike and lifting it, happens everytime.

BUT I sell bicycles all the time that are heavier than carbon bicycles. Why? Because they really ride well, are custom, fit well. All are subjective. Some want a stainless frame because they can, just like a $8000 carbon or whatever a Mevici is these days. BUT the worth of so much 'bicycle' these days are reduced to 'how much does it weigh?'. Gets tiresome.

What also gets tiresome is someone taking your comments out of context to use as fodder for their own personal crusade. I didn't say Waterford, or any other builder, was making claims about the advantages of 953 vis weight. I said that the material was being billed as a very light weight choice, and not really meeting that goal in the hands of builders, like Waterford.

Frame performance: The measurable static and dynamic qualities of a finished frame, sans rider. While no one is doing it in toto, it is not inconceivable that everything you ever wanted to know about a frameset could be figured out in a lab. That includes stiffness, ride characteristics, frequency dampening and weight. It might not tell the whole story, but it wouldn't run completely opposite of a road test. Those are performance characteristics, and the tubeset is one of major contributors.

We give framebuilders great credit for understanding so much about all those metrics that they can build bikes that have specific goals in all categories, and meet those goals. So it isn't hoodoo that makes a bike ride, and weigh, like it does - just an understanding of what different tubes and methods can do.

I don't care that your customers tend to heft bicycles. They also tend to play with the brake levers, I'll bet. That has nothing to do with a conversation about whether the newest uber-steel does what people expect it to do. And yes, one of the things many have come to expect from this Reynolds product is very low weight. When you're paying a mint, you have a right to nit pick about every little thing the about the frame. And there's nothing wrong - especially at this level - to ask "What does it weigh?", along with all the other good questions one should ask when buying a custom. So, to quote myself again, with added details to help you out:
I've been researching 953 [the tubing] lately, and it doesn't sound like it [953 tubing] is performing as advertised, at least in the weight department. If I was going to have the bike painted [where the stainless part doesn't do much] I wouldn't bother with 953 - 853 or S3 sounds like a better deal.

Still nothing in there about Giant carbon fiber, but have at it.

[pdmtong]

My SSR is 17.2# complete with OP, 2010 force, ksyriums, cages and DA-7810s. this is by no means a bling build. lovely steel ride, weight comparable to my ottrott

[93legendti]

953 is coming down to earth. Again, Dave Anderson is an example, where he sells a butted 953 steel frame for $2800. Enigma, out of the UK, is another 953 builder. I think their frames are around $2600.

953 = light? Who knows? The last 953 test I saw, the bike weighed 18 lbs. It's the frame size, the components, and in particular, wheels, which seems to raise the overall bike weight.

I have a Columbus SL frame built up with minimal parts (DT shifters, Ultegra brakes, 7400 Dura Ace crank, hubs, 105 pedals and CXP wheels), and that bike, with a Goodrich steel fork, weighs 19 lbs.

Heavy? Yes, compared to my Ridley with DA and DT Swiss rims. But just by 2 lbs.

Rides nice? Yes, very nice.

I've concluded steel and Ti are for the enthusiasts who do more with cycling than just beat up the bike (and themselves) for an eventual podium. This is a place where weight and "newest" has a lesser place in comparison to ride and longevity.

I like the word Serotta uses in its description of the Classique: "versatile." That to me is what steel and Ti should be. Carbon, conversely, seems disposable.
Scott Quiring: $1800, $2000 painted
("Made from proprietary Columbus XCr tubing")

[dd74]

Scott Quiring: $1800, $2000 painted
("Made from proprietary Columbus XCr tubing")
...and the hits keep coming.

At this rate, there's really no reason not to get a custom build -- unless someone simply doesn't want to spend the money...for whatever reason.

[fishbolish]

scott is building me a columbus xcr road frame...

[AndrewS]

I stopped by a bike shop today (looking for Spokey wrench "We can order it!" "So can I") and they had an IF SSR 953 frame on the wall.

The welds were some of the nicest I had seen on a steel frame. They were still ugly compared to the Ti IF hanging next to it - especially where the little reinforcement piece (can't remember word)on the downtube met the head tube weld.

After looking at it for awhile, I'd say get a lugged frame if you want to get the most out of 953's aesthetics.

[93legendti]

scott is building me a columbus xcr road frame...
jealous!!

[pbjbike]

I stopped by a bike shop today (looking for Spokey wrench "We can order it!" "So can I") and they had an IF SSR 953 frame on the wall.

The welds were some of the nicest I had seen on a steel frame. They were still ugly compared to the Ti IF hanging next to it - especially where the little reinforcement piece (can't remember word)on the downtube met the head tube weld.

After looking at it for awhile, I'd say get a lugged frame if you want to get the most out of 953's aesthetics.

It's called a gusset. How many races have you lost because your frame wasn't light enough? Just wondering.

[AndrewS]

None. Should I ask a similar question about reading comprehension?

[pbjbike]

Rant on. :fight:

[Bob Ross]

Bob,

For your post to make any sense at all, I would have to be advocating 953.

No, all it takes for my post to make any sense at all is for one to see that referring to variables as "metrics" only works when the variables can actually be measured. Pretty much by definition, in fact.

Are you advocating for 953?

I'm advocating for more defensible arguments on the internet. I know, uphill battle, right?

[Bob Ross]

From Reynolds site: [snip]
Do you think Reynolds is advertising on a weight issue, Bob? Or are they advertising armor plating?

Re-read the ad copy you posted. They don't claim it's lighter, they don't claim it's stronger...they just claim it's light and strong.

[learlove]

In the market for a new steel ride, torn between Peg Marcelo and IF 953. Currently riding Peg Love 3 and love it anyone with insight it would be helpful

thanks

Give this guy a call/; Peter Dreesens

http://dreesens.wordpress.com/

[AndrewS]

Re-read the ad copy you posted. They don't claim it's lighter, they don't claim it's stronger...they just claim it's light and strong.
Bob, the articles that came out when 953 was announced point out that the wall thicknesses run down to .3mm for super low weight. And they are claiming it's stronger - significantly. Pull up the PDF comparison.

Have you followed 953's introduction over the past couple of years or not?

And, as I already explained, you CAN measure stiffness, fatigue strength, damping, torsional rigidity and all the other mechanical features of a material that, along with geometry and shape, produce the characteristics of the final product. These magic people that do such calculations are called engineers, and they would rather insist that there is more than one measurable metric to a bicycle frame, bridge, wing, etc.


Regardless of whether Reynolds made a weight issue of 953 or not (they did), there is perception amongst some consumers that it IS intended to make a super light frame, among other characteristics. I posted simply to point out that this perception, intended by Reynolds or not, doesn't seem to pan out. So here's the new Bob Ross version of my first post:

"Some of you may be thinking, mistakenly or not, that 953 will build frames in the same weight class as S3. It won't, and that's okay." Is that wishy washy enough to be defensible?

[TMB]

I don't know why it is that some people enter discussion forums when it seems all they really want is to pick fights and arguments.

Seems silly.

This thread has become pretty painful to read in parts.

There are so many reasonable people around here, it doesn't take much to change the dynamic.

[AndrewS]

I have to say that this thread really pisses me off.

I threw out that 953 isn't very light, and that statement seems to bring every kook out of the woodwork. Next I'm getting lectured on whether bikes should be light, if I personally have been the victim of a non-light bike, if Giants are as good as Merckx frames and whether I read ad copy like a lawyer or consumer.

GET A GRIP! There's nothing wrong with bike crap being light, especially when it costs a year's rent.

If the weight of 953 doesn't bother you, cool. I don't care - it doesn't bother me, either. But I would like to be able to make a simple statement about whether something is light or not without it seeming like I blasphemed in a Baptist church.

I don't ride super light stuff, I don't buy the newest junk, I don't own a scale and I don't need anyone to like what I ride. I come to this forum to exchange ideas about real bicycle stuff, because it interests me. Not to be lectured about my underlying and evil motivations in referring to the weight of frame. Dump your philoshophical musings on someone who cares.

[e-RICHIE]

you have to understand that 953 is a material and not a tube set atmo.
its weight depends on what parts a framebuilder selects from the vendor.





I have to say that this thread really pisses me off.

I threw out that 953 isn't very light, and that statement seems to bring every kook out of the woodwork. Next I'm getting lectured on whether bikes should be light, if I personally have been the victim of a non-light bike, if Giants are as good as Merckx frames and whether I read ad copy like a lawyer or consumer.

GET A GRIP! There's nothing wrong with bike crap being light, especially when it costs a year's rent.

If the weight of 953 doesn't bother you, cool. I don't care - it doesn't bother me, either. But I would like to be able to make a simple statement about whether something is light or not without it seeming like I blasphemed in a Baptist church.

I don't ride super light stuff, I don't buy the newest junk, I don't own a scale and I don't need anyone to like what I ride. I come to this forum to exchange ideas about real bicycle stuff, because it interests me. Not to be lectured about my underlying and evil motivations in referring to the weight of frame. Dump your philoshophical musings on someone who cares.

[Pete Serotta]

Not closing because of any single person - PETE

[Pete Serotta]

Pete

[Pete Serotta]

I don't know why it is that some people enter discussion forums when it seems all they really want is to pick fights and arguments.

Seems silly.

This thread has become pretty painful to read in parts.

There are so many reasonable people around here, it doesn't take much to change the dynamic.


Please no fights nor arguments,,,,I am Irish and not drinking at this time so I can really be a pain...... :butt:


SO please as TooMany asks....PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL AND POLITE<

THANKS

[acorn_user]

This is a late contribution, but if the bike is for racing, my I suggest a Marinoni? I have a very old one, and it is a wonderful bike. I imagine that a new Piuma would be great too, and they'll do custom for a little more. If it's for racing crits, the bike is going to get dinged up. Might as well be a cheaper frame in that case :)

[dd74]

I understand that Columbus SL has been around at least 25 years. I've ridden Reynolds and a few other steels, including Columbus Spirit. But it always feels to me that SL has the best ride and response.

I wonder if there is a difference between Columbus SL of 25 years ago and Columbus SL today. Is Columbus SL even produced today?

[AndrewS]

Apparently it's recently come back.

http://www.columbustubi.com/eng/4_4_4.htm

I think Reynolds recently did an old school run of 531, too.



And in reference to E-Ritchies post - 953 is indeed a material, but it is currently made into only so many tube thicknesses and sizes. And it doesn't appear that any of the really thin stuff has been made available, yet. That's what I was trying to get at.

[dd74]

To be honest, I don't trust the thin stuff. I can't feel, therefore cannot see the immediate benefit, particularly in ride. It's definitely as robust than the heavier stuff.

I had a Columbus Spirit frame with Carve fork and stays. Crashed the thing, and the bottom tube bent at the head tube. I'm not saying that wouldn't happen with a heavier tube set, but how it bent - sort of tin can-like - made me wonder how strong the newer metals really are.

The weight issue is, IMO, not a big enough issue to merit the $$$ increase. Wheels, if one wants to lighten their rig, is much more effective...again IMO.

Then again, there are those who rave about their CDAs with newer Columbus tubing, and I have no grounds to second guess them -- mostly because I've never ridden a CDA.

[SPOKE]

My Dave Kirk JK Special & Kelly Bedford have the 953 in the main triangle and both are lugged construction. The JK only has 953 in the tt & dt. Balance is true temper S3. The Bedford has 953 in the entire main triangle and Columbus spirit chain & seat stays.
They do ride differently. I don't think one is better than the other. The Bedford is the stiffer of the two vertically and might feel a little stiffer in the BB.
I still would like to have a full stainless frame made from either 953 or XCr. Just think it would be nice to be able to apperciate the subtle differences for myself. :beer:

[oldpotatoe]

My Dave Kirk JK Special & Kelly Bedford have the 953 in the main triangle and both are lugged construction. The JK only has 953 in the tt & dt. Balance is true temper S3. The Bedford has 953 in the entire main triangle and Columbus spirit chain & seat stays.
They do ride differently. I don't think one is better than the other. The Bedford is the stiffer of the two vertically and might feel a little stiffer in the BB.
I still would like to have a full stainless frame made from either 953 or XCr. Just think it would be nice to be able to apperciate the subtle differences for myself. :beer:

I have an all 953 Waterford, lugged, seen here-

http://waterfordbikes.com/now/modelthis.php?blobid=595&bwid=199

I like it cuz it's beautiful but my subjective ride eval is that it rides like a lot of nice steel frames, not as 'nice' as my Merckx Corsa Extra, better than a Merckx Corsa 01, not as nice as my Ciocc SL, so it goes. WAY too expensive at retail tho..more than a most ti frames but there has to be a reason to own a bike shop...out there somewhere....

[SEABREEZE]

Nevermind???


With all those bikes, you could cash them in and RETIRE ;) ;) ;)

[SEABREEZE]

Hobbsman,

Go with a Pegoretti Big Leg Emma. It rides almost identical to the Love but has that oh so smooth road feel. The Marcelo is not quite as stiff as the love and you'll notice it very quickly. Not believe anything you read about Emma being too stiff. It is as smooth as silk. I'm doing a century on mine this weekend and I'm not the least bit concerned about being beat up. I love the BLE and the Love #3. Find an Emma in your size or call the JErk at International Bicycle Center and order one. There is no comparision with the IF 953 as there two completely different beasts.


When Jack talks bikes I listen... He probaly single handily road ever bike there is to ride.

[SEABREEZE]

In the market for a new steel ride, torn between Peg Marcelo and IF 953. Currently riding Peg Love 3 and love it anyone with insight it would be helpful

thanks


Know what I would do, talk to distributor of peg here in usa and If up in Mass, see if you can arrange test rides of each. You and your butt will know which one to buy, that gives you what you are looking for..

The rep for peg and IF may ask you were you live, see who they sold to in your area, and arrange for a ride of something close to your geometry.

Forget about what everyone says....

[Ahneida Ride]

Mr. Bedford has built a few SS bikes, lugged and Tig.

What I gather is:

SS tubes are NOT forgiving ... One must work carefully and deliberately.
SS is tough on machine tools. Brazing SS has little room for error.

One can't rush build a SS bike.

[Pete Serotta]

When Jack talks bikes I listen... He probaly single handily road ever bike there is to ride.


who puts the frames thru the paces.....

[rustychain]

I ride an IF 953 sr with Campag SR. I'm a big guy at 95 kilos and had the bike built to be a stiff responsive race bike. Total weight is spot on 15 lbs less water bottles. I ride around 12000+ miles a year. Race a bit locally but mostly just enjoy hammering it. I have two years on the frame. I have had three crashes. One, I had a deer jump in front of me while doing 25mph. No chance to touch the brakes. Left the scene strapped to a body board. Was side swiped by a car and was removed on a body board as well. Was hit by a fellow racer in a freak accident that thankfully resulted in no injuries. Dispite having the carbon bars splinter, seat and front brake lever distroyed the frame only had a few scratches in the paint. 953 is tuff stuff. Construction was amazing with stunning welds. Bike is the overall best bike I've had ( I've been racing on and off from early 1970's). On a recent trip to Vermont a policemen claimed to clock me doing 64mph down a mountain (I admit to being skeptical but it was damn fast). All in all I've put this bike to the test and it's always delivered. Real world, 953 rocks in my book. I like bikes made out of jut about everything but I suspect my next purchase to be a 953 cross bike. I have owned ti and it scratched more the 953. IMO those looking at ti should consider steel. It's got something going for it