Where are the inexpensive steel bikes?

On 19 Jun 2004 09:52:03 -0700, (Tai) wrote:

I bought a Marin steel - ok, Thron cro-mo - road bike a few years ago
and notice Marin now have aluminum road bikes, at least at the
low-end. Looking at other bike makes, the selection of cro-mo road
bikes under $1K is getting smaller. I know aluminum bikes are a
little lighter, but are consumers making the choice to go to alum
and/or the makers finding alum bikes more profitable?

Wondering where steel bikes are going,

It's important to note that the mass market is concentrating on the
mountain bike, cruiser, youth and comfort segments today. Road bikes
are entirely absent from the selections at many major
non-bike-centered retailers. Even some sporting goods stores have
stopped carrying them. As a result, there are few road bikes in the
low-end segment; for a limited market that's perceived as being
esoteric, the selections of materials tends to edge away from what's
regarded as less desirable...and steel is out of fashion for most
types of "real" bikes. It's largely relegated to tandems and the
lowest-end units at Wal-Mart and similar places. Many custom frame
builders still make excellent steel frames, though, and in my opinion,
steel is still the material of choice for a long-term durable bike.

On 19 Jun 2004 09:52:03 -0700, (Tai) wrote:

I bought a Marin steel - ok, Thron cro-mo - road bike a few years ago
and notice Marin now have aluminum road bikes, at least at the
low-end. Looking at other bike makes, the selection of cro-mo road
bikes under $1K is getting smaller. I know aluminum bikes are a
little lighter, but are consumers making the choice to go to alum
and/or the makers finding alum bikes more profitable?

Wondering where steel bikes are going,
Tai

P.S. I wasn't really asking for the pros and cons of steel vs.
aluminum, but more about market and consumer, um, dynamics at the
low-end of bike sales. :-)

Surly
Soma
Interloc/IRD
Jamis?
Fuji?

Steel isn't common in the mainstream, but on the edges there are
low(er) priced steel frames and complete bicycles which aren't custom.
If these companies grow, you can be sure the large ones will notice
and make steel frames at the low end.

Not a road bike, but...

http://www.marinbikes.com/html/spec_04_muirwoods.html

Others like that scattered around.

By the way, why the 'ok, Thron cro-mo' aside? Something about Thron I
should know? I picked up a DeBernardi Thron frame last winter for
almost nothing and am enjoying it. Is it not real steel or something?

taimorris- I know aluminum bikes are a
little lighter, but are consumers making the choice to go to alum
and/or the makers finding alum bikes more profitable? BRBR

Aluminum, when compared to steel, is cheaper and easier to weld together, hence
the proliferation of aluminum.

Specialized has a Foco frameset/fork for about $500..look for that.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

Aluminum, when compared to steel, is cheaper and easier to weld together,
hence
the proliferation of aluminum.

Specialized has a Foco frameset/fork for about $500..look for that.

To expand on Peter's post-wasn't he a bike rider?-you can buy an aluminium
frame and fork from China for about $25. That's why there are no new
inexpensive steel bikes. But the used bike market is full of very nice steel
bikes at reasonable prices. And there are builders who make custom steel frames
for $600 or $700 dollars as long as you don't want lugs or fancy paint.
Phil Brown

In article ,
(Tai) wrote:

I bought a Marin steel - ok, Thron cro-mo - road bike a few years ago
and notice Marin now have aluminum road bikes, at least at the
low-end. Looking at other bike makes, the selection of cro-mo road
bikes under $1K is getting smaller. I know aluminum bikes are a
little lighter, but are consumers making the choice to go to alum
and/or the makers finding alum bikes more profitable?

Aluminum has almost no price disadvantage over steel now, for various
mass-production reasons. Since an Al frame can usually be made a little
lighter*, all but the very cheapest new bicycles default to Aluminum.
And since some of the most expensive and lightest bikes are also made of
Al, you get some cachet rubbing off on your "7005 ALUMINUM" Wal-bike.

Wondering where steel bikes are going,
Tai

They're just resting. I have been known to pay as much as $10 for a
complete lugged road bike at a garage sale. I grabbed a half-decent 70s
vintage Italian lugged frame out of a pile of garbage last week; I don't
even know what I'm going to do with it, since it's pretty but I have
lots of steel frames already.

Unless you have some very specific reasons for it (you want a special
geometry or it's the cheapest way to get the components you want), I
don't see a keen need to buy a new steel frame. If I was willing to
spend a few hours looking, I could probably bring home a decent-quality
lugged steel road frame every weekend, in most cases as complete 25-year
old bike, for $10 or less. Modern steel, especially in welded,
non-lugged frames, might have a slight weight advantage, but it's on the
order of a pound at most. I ride a mid-range Pinarello with indifferent
(105, Sora) componentry, and it weighs only 22 pounds all in.

P.S. I wasn't really asking for the pros and cons of steel vs.
aluminum, but more about market and consumer, um, dynamics at the
low-end of bike sales. :-)

The Taiwanese factories are very good at aluminum fabrication, and the
price difference between raw steel and raw Al is not high. All the
economic forces push towards defaulting to Al. Only very cheap (and
mostly children's) bikes now use steel on the low end of the market. At
the high end, you get into custom fabrication or companies marketing the
cachet and positive attributes (repairability, beauty, magnets stick to
it, etc.) of high-end steel construction. The middle is owned by Al.

*I have a theory that whatever the relative merits of steel and Al for
road frames, mountain bikes have a heavy natural bias towards aluminum
because an Al frame built strongly enough to have a reasonable fatigue
life will also be able to take relatively high one-time loads. By
comparison, steel construction means not worrying about the fatigue life
(which can be assumed to be nearly infinite if you don't exceed the
yield strength), but that means you are building a bike with a lower
ultimate tensile strength in the places where bike frames can fail. Road
bikes don't get into a lot of super-high-load situations unless they're
being crashed, but mountain bikes tend to get jumped, crashed, and
dropped routinely. Does that make sense?

--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

"Tai" wrote
I know aluminum bikes are a
little lighter, but are consumers making the choice to go to alum
and/or the makers finding alum bikes more profitable?

Since weight is an important issue in bicycles, it's obvious to even the
unsophisticated buyer that aluminum is a better material for bike frames than
steel. Steel only continues to appeal to traditionalists.

Wondering where steel bikes are going,

Away.

Peter- Since weight is an important issue in bicycles, it's obvious to even
the
unsophisticated buyer that aluminum is a better material for bike frames than
steel. Steel only continues to appeal to traditionalists. BRBR

"Better' is a big word. If a frameset is lighter..it is just 'lighter', not
better. Thery are more than a few drawbacks to really light aluminum, just like
light steel, like longevity.

An aluminum frameset that is made to last weighs about the same as a steel
frameset that is built to last. All from 3.2 to about 3.6 pounds for the
frameset. Is there sub 3 pound aluminum framesets out there? Sure, at $2500 per
that will not last 3 years.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

Peter Cole wrote:
Since weight is an important issue in bicycles, it's obvious to even the
unsophisticated buyer that aluminum is a better material for bike frames
than steel.
I completely disagree. There are also lightweight steel frames btw.

Steel only continues to appeal to traditionalists.
Yeah, right.......................some pro riders also want to ride steel
frames. I saw some frames of Tour de France bikes that were stell frames
painted in the same colours as the alu bikes of their teammates.

Greets, Derk

If you like Thron you should really try Navicrome !!!! Who says steel
bikes can't be light. A Navicrome frame weighs less then a low end
Aluminum frame and only a few ounces more then a high end Aluminum
frame. With its ovalized down tube its both stiff a forgiving.

I got my frame from vailcycleworks.com
I bought a full blown custom MTB for less then a off the rack upper end
bike--JJ

"Peter Cole" wrote in message
newsjABc.89731$Sw.66939@attbi_s51...
"Tai" wrote
I know aluminum bikes are a
little lighter, but are consumers making the choice to go to alum
and/or the makers finding alum bikes more profitable?

Since weight is an important issue in bicycles, it's obvious to even the
unsophisticated buyer that aluminum is a better material for bike frames
than
steel. Steel only continues to appeal to traditionalists.

Wondering where steel bikes are going,

Away.



Troll...