Steel Rules!

Why steel? There's more to it than the sad cliche "steel is real" - steel bikes are, in my opinion, the best combination of performance, durability, and value available. Want to hear more? If so, you're either a smart cookie or an incurable bike nerd.

Steel is heavier than either titanium or aluminum. Note that I'm talking about the MATERIAL ITSELF, not about the end weight of a bike made from these materials. Because steel is also a lot stronger than aluminum or ti, you can use less of it to build a bike frame that has acceptable characteristics. The thinner sections of tube walls I use for steel bike frames are half a millimeter thick! That's not something you can do with other materials. The result is that I can produce a lively, strong, and lightweight frame at a reasonable price. The weight penalty for using steel is less than half a pound versus aluminum, and there are considerable non-weight advantages.

Titanium and aluminum DO have redeeming features, of course.

Aluminum frames can be built about half a pound lighter (for a fairly large frame) than steel. This could be significant to you - but you can save that weight with parts pretty easily. Also keep in mind that sub-3 pound aluminum frames simply will NOT last - they will crack and fail, the lighter the frame the shorter its intended lifespan. Aluminum is also VERY stiff - to the point of being uncomfortable (especially on road bikes) to ride for long periods of time. This characteristic DOES make it excellent for building full suspension bikes (which I don't do, but it's still worth mentioning). Basically, I don't work with aluminum because my years of riding for Schwinn (and breaking various styles and shapes of aluminum frame, especially the notorious "tin can" Homegrown models) taught me that aluminum bikes are fine if you want to throw them away every few years. That's not the kind of bike I want to make. If you like aluminum, I can refer you to some great builders who work with it.

Titanium is a great material. Much better than aluminum. For the record, I have NO PROBLEM with titanium frames. Ti is strong, light, and rides well. Best of all, it doesn't corrode. But there's a downside, of course, and that downside (and the reason I don't work with titanium) is cost. First of all, titanium is a much more difficult material to extract and manufacture (especially if you want butted tubes), so the cost of the material for a single frame runs from $700 or so up. Second, ti is a pain in the butt to work with - it's harder to machine and requires *perfect* cleanliness and backpurging (both of which take time and thus money to accomplish) to weld. If I were to build ti bikes, I'd have to charge upwards of $1,200 to make ANY money. And those ti frames would not be any lighter or ride any better than a steel frame I can build at around half the cost to the customer. The only real advantage of ti is its corrosion resistance - but if you take decent care of your steel bike (and I apply a liberal amount of rustproofing before it goes out the door) it'll last you 30 years. And it is true that truly high-zoot titanium framesets can be built 1/3 of a pound or so lighter than normal steel frames - but the butted ti tubes required mean that the frame alone is going to cost $2,000+. If you have infinite money to spend, great. But I can build you a pretty sick steel bike COMPLETE for well under that price. If you have $3000 to spend, a super tricked out steel rig (full XTR/King/etc) will be lighter and ride better than a fancy ti frame mated to cheaper (XT) components. Ranting aside, ti bikes rule. But they don't make financial sense to me - or to most other people. Steel bikes rule just as much and cost less.

Finally, a few people occasionally ask me about carbon as a frame material. I've had several carbon bikes over the years (and broke most of them, more through abuse than actual design flaws or material problems). Carbon is cool. I ride carbon handlebars. But carbon frames pretty much only come in stock sizes - a single mold costs like $500,000 or something dumb like that. So Trek can make 3 sizes of carbon bike, and you can try to fit on one of them. And the frame will be reasonably light and reasonably strong. But carbon ain't cheap, and to me, proper fit (meaning, a bike built for YOU and YOUR terrain) is way more important than a couple of ounces of weight. If you don't fit on your bike, or it's not designed for the kind of riding you do, you'll be way slower no matter how light your frame is. Seriously.

The final word: I build steel bikes because I believe in them. I build them, and I ride and race them too. I want to build something that will be around in a decade, still providing transportation, fun, and hopefully big smiles. And I don't think nice bikes should require a second mortgage. So steel is it, for me.

I've compiled a few links to other sites of interest where you can hear some more of various sides of the frame materials debate. Check it out:
Don Ferris' take
The HJ (these guys like lugs, which I don't do) rant
Sheldon Brown weighs in
A view from across the pond at WhyCycle UK
And finally, Torelli