More test rides, and a steel option.

I've narrowed down my choices in the new bike search. Then today I remembered a little shop that opened very close to me. It's close to the university and they sell new and used bikes. Lots of beaters and 1970's and 80's steel 10-speeds. I tried a Bianchi and a Kona. Both frames were too big, so the idea was to just try the different components. Surprisingly, I liked the lower end Sora - I liked the separate thumb lever. And even though both bikes were big, I think the Kona had a better fit. The reach on the Bianchi was too long.

Then the salesman mentioned steel frames. I must have appeared a little hesitant and he tried to reassure me that it's different from the steel of yesteryear. I told him I think I'm spoiled by my carbon fork. He showed me a Bianchi that he thought would be perfect for what I need (didn't have my size). Carbon fork, SRAM, more than I wanted to spend, and one of my least favorite colors in the entire rainbow. Then he showed me a Surly Pacer frame. We talked about building a bike. Considering the components I think I like, he was confident we could do it in my price range.

So, steel. What kind of riding do steel lovers generally do? I'm not racing. I want to increase my speed a little so I can go a further distance without being on the bike all day. Comfort is important, and the roads around here can be more than a little rough. Thanks again - the knowledge I'm gaining from here is making me sound smart in the bike shop!

Steel is great for long rides, touring...because of weight it won't be as fast as carbon, but with a carbon fork can be a super-comfy ride and is repairable should something happen to the frame. Steel is real!

steel is great for riding on roads. short rides or long. STeel isn't for racing, it's for comfort and dependability

All my bikes are steel. I used to have a couple of aluminum ones. My next one will be steel and the one after that will be titanium.

I have 2 steel bikes (a hybrid and a folder) and both are super comfortable. The hybrid feels like I'm riding in a cadillac :)

My road bike is carbon and although I love it, it doesn't feel as "plush" as my steel bikes. As others mentioned, there are great benefits to having a steel bike (in fact I prefer steel to aluminum), especially if you use it for recreation, commuting and touring rather than racing.

Another vote for steel. I have an aluminum road bike with Tiagra components. I just bought a Surly Cross Check in steel. I love the feel of the steel bike. For me personally it would be a dream bike to have a steel bike with Tiagra components. (Mind you I have never tried 105 or higher! And my road bike has a triple but I rarely use the granny ring anymore I have improved my climbing strength in the three years I have had my bike.) I see you can put a little wider tire on the Pacer so if your roads are rough, a wider tire will also help to absorb bumps. I bought my Surly to go on dirt/gravel roads and the bike handles these roads well!

Steel is a good 'all day ride' type of bike. Like what was said already, not for speed, but for comfort and durability. Of all my road bikes, aluminum, carbon and steel, my steel commuter soaks up the potholes worry free. Yea, it weighs well north of 10 lbs more than my CF road bike as it is built up like a tank for rough commuting chores, but just soaks up the hits.

My last road bike, from the 80s, was Columbus SLX steel and nothing I have tried since can come close to it in comfort; I just wish it were a better fit (too big) or I would still be riding it.

By comparison, my current road bike, a Specialized Ruby Expert, does a good job dampening vibrations, but the larger pothole hits are no where near as deftly handled as they are on steel.

My aluminum Fuji, that I also use for commuting, even with its CF fork, is just horrible by comparison. I put larger 25c tires on it and that made little difference. When I hit something on it, I can feel it vibrate up my hands and posterior. It weighs maybe 4lbs less than the steel commuter, but I almost never ride it because it just rattles my teeth. If I could get really big tires on it (32c or 35c) it would probably help but they won't fit and clear the brakes.

So basically, CF will get the weight down, as low as the $$ you are willing to spend. Aluminum can be a decent ride, weigh a little more, but will transmit those road vibrations. Steel can be anything from a beater commuter bike that weighs 28 lbs unloaded like mine, or can be in the 20lb range if you are willing to spend the $$. If weight vs cost is part of the equation, CF rules. To get anywhere near the weight of a typical CF bike in steel, you will be spending much more and come nowhere close. But the ride will be magic.

I've done everything on my steel Bianchi roadie from relatively fast training rides to centuries to multi-day tours in the hills and mountains of Tennessee. It's super comfy. I'm not sure I agree that steel bikes aren't for racing and speed. It depends on the tubing and the geometry. The current market is such that most of the steel bikes on the market are touring or commuter bikes and are typically heavier. There are still a handful of off the rack steel roadies available though. Jamis and Bianchi come to mind. And used remains an option, too, if you know what you're looking for.

I know I said I wasn't interested in speed, but now I'm not sure what I want. I'm not interested in racing, but I would like to increase my speed. It would be nice to put on a few extra miles in the same time frame. I can see getting a steel bike for when I retire (2 years, 2 weeks) and have all day to ride :)

The LBS guy said I would increase speed just by improving my aerodynamics with a drop bar (I have a straight bar now). My current ride is aluminum w/carbon fork and I like the ride. I guess I do feel the road but it's a nice tight feel, not usually jarring. I want to put slightly wider tires on that bike and make it my all around, errand running transportation, and the new one will be my fitness/training ride.

I hope this makes sense. I worked a midnight shift and I'm a little groggy. Thanks (again and again) for the replies. The information is great.

Again, I'd look at Jamis, the Quest to be exact, for a nice steel road bike. It'll go as fast as your legs will take you and likely ride far nicer than a comparably price aluminum bike. I strongly disagree with the assumption that all steel bikes are slow. Again, it depends on the bike and its intended purpose.

My steel bikes are certainly not light as compared to my friends' carbon race bikes, but are crazy comfortable and I can keep up just fine on long rides with them. When you say you want to increase your speed, how fast are you averaging now? I have no problem maintaining 20-22 mph on the flats on my steel bikes. Hills, I'm slow, but that's really less the bike weight and more just me not being a great hill climber.

The nearest Jamis dealer is about 60 miles away, and it's not actually on the way to anywhere, so I would have to make a special trip.

My current speed? It's hard to say. I work in the afternoon, so I like to do morning rides and not have to rush to get to work. I try to average about 12 mph on the hilly route, and of course faster on the flatter route. Both routes involve some neighborhood riding and I really do slow down for stop signs. I just think of how much time I have to ride, and let's go!

My son did just fine racing on his steel Serotta... since he was ranked the #5 junior in the USA that year, I think one needs to be careful you are comparing apples to apples. A steel road bike, with road bike geometry is probably not the same as a steel Surley that is more relaxed, etc. I had a steel Jamis Coda, which was awesome, but it was not the same as my road bikes, and it felt like a tank, though plush.
My other son is now riding the Serotta, and he is fast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indysteel

Again, I'd look at Jamis, the Quest to be exact, for a nice steel road bike. It'll go as fast as your legs will take you and likely ride far nicer than a comparably price aluminum bike. I strongly disagree with the assumption that all steel bikes are slow. Again, it depends on the bike and its intended purpose.

---

I just looked up the Jamis Quest Femme, and the stated weight is just 18.75 lbs, so I can certainly see that being a plenty fast bike! Wish the smallest size didn't have such a high standover (29.1") -- I'd be interested myself! It's a really pretty bike!

http://www.jamisbikes.com/usa/thebik...estf_spec.html

I'd be willing to make a 60-mile special trip for a bike. That's nothing in the grand scheme of a bike's life. I'm just sayin'.....

Jamis or not, you asked about steel bikes and I felt the need to disabuse you of the notion that they're all heavy clunkers. As Crankin said, compare apples to apples.

I don't think people meant that you can't go fast on a steel bike. You definitely can as evidenced by Crankin's son. Steel won't prevent you from going faster, you definitely can as you improve. It's just known for comfort and durability instead of speed but plenty of people in steel bikes can probably run circles around people on carbon bikes - its more dependent on body condition then the type of material the bike is made of :)

Getting faster is up to you. Riding more, riding smart, riding intervals, and riding with people who are (slightly) faster than you will make you faster. A carbon bike that is 3lbs lighter than a steel bike will not do that all by itself. Nothing against carbon, just be cautious of believing that the minute you get a carbon bike that you will be fast automatically.

That being said, when I bought my steel Jams Coda Comp with 700x28 tires bike for commuting in 2003 to replace my 1986 steel Specialized Stumpjumper with knobby 26x1.5 tires, yeah, I cut 10 minutes off my 10-mile commute the first day I rode it. But that's a pretty extreme upgrade, and mostly had to do with the wheels, I suspect.

I do get a kick out of people who are sooooo concerned with having the lightest bike, the lightest components, even the lightest shoes...when really just losing 5-10-15 pounds, whatever, will make them much faster than a lower spoke count.

Ride lots of bikes and then make your decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emily_in_nc

I just looked up the Jamis Quest Femme, and the stated weight is just 18.75 lbs, so I can certainly see that being a plenty fast bike! Wish the smallest size didn't have such a high standover (29.1") -- I'd be interested myself! It's a really pretty bike!

http://www.jamisbikes.com/usa/thebik...estf_spec.html

---

That is a high standover. I'm 5'0" with short legs. I have to shorten my petite pants :mad: I agree, though, it's a good looking bike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indysteel

I'd be willing to make a 60-mile special trip for a bike. That's nothing in the grand scheme of a bike's life. I'm just sayin'.....

Jamis or not, you asked about steel bikes and I felt the need to disabuse you of the notion that they're all heavy clunkers. As Crankin said, compare apples to apples.

---

And I appreciate everything you had to say. It turns out there is a shop only 45 miles away so I'm planning a little road trip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tulip

Getting faster is up to you. Riding more, riding smart, riding intervals, and riding with people who are (slightly) faster than you will make you faster. A carbon bike that is 3lbs lighter than a steel bike will not do that all by itself. Nothing against carbon, just be cautious of believing that the minute you get a carbon bike that you will be fast automatically.

That being said, when I bought my steel Jams Coda Comp with 700x28 tires bike for commuting in 2003 to replace my 1986 steel Specialized Stumpjumper with knobby 26x1.5 tires, yeah, I cut 10 minutes off my 10-mile commute the first day I rode it. But that's a pretty extreme upgrade, and mostly had to do with the wheels, I suspect.

I do get a kick out of people who are sooooo concerned with having the lightest bike, the lightest components, even the lightest shoes...when really just losing 5-10-15 pounds, whatever, will make them much faster than a lower spoke count.

Ride lots of bikes and then make your decision.

---

I'm not looking at a carbon frame bike. Just the fork. I am not one of those people that runs out to buy the latest and greatest (or what the advertisers tell us we "need"). As a matter of fact, I'm a little rebellious in that sense. My cell phone is years old, and if they'd let me, I would still use my 35mm camera. I can usually see past gimmicks. If it's a "trend", I stay away ;) This is why I'm doing all this research, so I make the right decision for me. And it's also why I sincerely appreciate everyone's input. I know "lighter" doesn't mean better or faster - that's up to me.

So, really, thank you. I'm finding the research fascinating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IBrakeforPastry

I'm not looking at a carbon frame bike. Just the fork. I am not one of those people that runs out to buy the latest and greatest (or what the advertisers tell us we "need"). As a matter of fact, I'm a little rebellious in that sense. My cell phone is years old, and if they'd let me, I would still use my 35mm camera. I can usually see past gimmicks. If it's a "trend", I stay away ;) This is why I'm doing all this research, so I make the right decision for me. And it's also why I sincerely appreciate everyone's input. I know "lighter" doesn't mean better or faster - that's up to me.

---

You can definitely do a steel frame with a carbon fork! That's what I have on my cross bike. :)

I know, I know! I'm concerned about the fit. The Dolce fits so well. How do you test ride something that's not yet built? What happens if the geometry is just not right? The guy in the store seemed so willing to help, and I would love to work with him and have him build something just right.

I have to get through these midnight shifts, then I'll get off the computer and back into the store ;)

Ah, your inseam complicates things, as you probably already know. I didn't realize that was an issue, too. I assume the Pacer comes in some smaller sizes. Perhaps that's the option to consider, then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indysteel

Ah, your inseam complicates things, as you probably already know. I didn't realize that was an issue, too. I assume the Pacer comes in some smaller sizes. Perhaps that's the option to consider, then.

---

I didn't realize it would be an issue, either. I thought I would just need a smaller size. But, yup, I noticed the top tubes on the steel bikes don't seem to slope much.

the Surly long haul does come with 26" tires and 42cm; that ought to work for someone 5 feet tall.

I am just short of 4'11" and rode a Salsa Vaya a few days ago in their smallest size. It seemed pretty comfortable, except for the fact that the handbars were hugely wide. I could standover the top bar without a problem.

And the new red color is striking.

I rode a Surly Pacer for a few years, the smallest, 42cm size. I used it for long road rides, often on rough roads. It's not light and fast but it's extremely comfortable and stable. Great little frame. I only moved on from it when I found a steel Gunnar Sport frame in my size on ebay. I tried a carbon fork on the Pacer, but I liked the steel fork it came with better. I now have that Surly Pacer steel fork on the Gunnar.

The Gunnar is a real luxo sport touring bike. Dreamy ride. I did a 110 mile day on it once, over a 11,500' pass, and I was tired but not beat up at the end of the day. For comparison, I also have a nice carbon fiber road bike, a 2007 Specialized Ruby. Both my Ruby and my Gunnar have Mavic Open Pro wheels, so I can directly compare the frames here. The Ruby is quite a nice ride, but I think the steel is a little nicer. My bf also rides steel. He recently got a IF Steel Crown Jewel and he says it has an amazing ride.

I'm exploring getting a ti road bike frame but I'm worried that it won't ride as nice as a steel bike.

Yeah, I highly recommend a steel bike, especially for a small rider.

I will also argue that wheels and tires, especially tires are going to make a huge difference in how any bike performs and I am not talking going narrow on the tire either. Schwalbe has a great page about tires and rolling resistance on their website. I encourage everyone to read it.

You won't go wrong with a ti road bike. I love mine. And I love my carbon bike.