Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Any info relating to ride quality, durability and comfort of each would be greatly appreciated. Also, I am looking for recomendations regarding steel and aluminum hardtails for under $1,200. Thanks in advance.
 

·
Time is not a road.
Joined
·
4,150 Posts
I have limited experience with steel and Al, but I remember the rides between the day I sold my old steel HT and the day I rode my new Al HT. Night and day in ride experience. Steel is much more compliant and absorbs vibration better than Al. Al is generally stiffer and transfers power better.

I'd say that steel is more comfortable. It would make a better trail bike. Al is lighter and more rigid and would make a better race bike.

There are a lot of builders making frames of both materials, but Steel is harder to come by these days. Some mfrs might be Strong, Cove, Salsa, Canyon, Sycip, Surly, Kona and Jamis. Almost all other manufacturers make Al HT frames.

As far as value goes, you'll have more buying power with a complete bike than from a custom frame mfr but you also get a more "generic" bike.

Personally, I'd get a Cove...but that's just me. Steel is real!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
764 Posts
Steel is awfully nice for an HT. From what I understand, alu. has a definite life cycle. Take the same drop x times and alu will crack, even if each drop delivers less than the froce requied to break the tubing. Steel will not fatigue in the same way. Also, when it gives, alu snaps, steel bends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,381 Posts
Aluminum: lighter, stiffer, cheaper, less durable.
Steel: heavier, more supple, more expensive, more durable.

For a full suspension, I'd opt for aluminum, since you want a stiff platform for the shocks and springs to be anchored to. For a hardtail, I'd never look at anything but steel.
 

·
Fo' Bidniz in da haus
Joined
·
17,282 Posts
i think in general, steel or Ti is preferable for reasons others have noted. Having said that, on a 29er frame, given the bigger tires adding compliancy, aluminum is not a bad choice. I have a Scandium 29er and absolutely love it and not to mention, the weight savings on that bigger frame are welcomed but my 26" hartdail...steel for sure.

cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,812 Posts
both good

Steel: smoother riding, heavier and more repairable if you buy a good one.
Alu: lighter, stiffer
I have a cannondale 1fg SS and it's a great bike but it's stiiiiiiifffff, has great tire clearence (2.5") and can easily be built light. Cannondales have a lifetime warranty. I also have a Kelly that rides nicer but it's a bit of a boat anchor. There are several custom builders making frames for under $1000 including Curtlo. For just over that price retrotec builds some buitiful steel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
660 Posts
I prefer the ride of a steel hardtail, nice feel, more compliant. I have a Rocky Mountain Blizzard and have ridden aluminum hardtails. I agree with others regarding the difference.

I like the 29er idea, as I am looking into them (SS) now.
 

·
enlightened.
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
I ride a hardtail Stumpjumper (full bike ~1200 new). After a 12 hour race, I ditched the stock seattube and replaced it with a Easton EC70 carbon seat tube. It is a road seat tube, so you'll probably need to shim it. I highly recommend this if you decided to go with aluminum. As far as parts go, you get a lot of bang for the buck. Personally I don't like the head tube angle as it is really slack for Florida riding, but I have grown into it. Good luck with the hunt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
I've ridden both steel and aluminum, but since I ride XC mainly, aluminum is my kind of thing. If you're riding anything other i'd stick with steel, simply because XC is not very abusive so the frames don't need to be amazingly strong, weight is more of a problem for XC.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top