# Steel and Light. No, that's not an oxymoron.



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Hey Weenies,

What's the lightest steel XC frame you've ever come across?

I know, I know...steel is heavy and you'd rather ride something that pops out of a mold like Tupperware or Lego, but screw that! Steel is Real, everything else is fake, and we all know it!!!! :thumbsup: 

Okay, so what's the lightest steel frame you've ever seen? How light would it have to be before you traded in your Tupperware? :yesnod:


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

Well the lightest weight weenies knows about is 1780gr (a 1997 Scapin Blato), but surely there are steel frames lighter than that?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Some Guy said:


> Well the lightest weight weenies knows about is 1780gr (a 1997 Scapin Blato), but surely there are steel frames lighter than that?


Surely not! Surely 1780g is unblatable! *laugh*


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

Ritchey P-20?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Mattias_Hellöre said:


> Ritchey P-20?


I'm not sure they were that light. Although it seemed like a feat to get a bike down sub 20lbs 15 years ago, that's easily achievable these days, even with discs and suspension forks with a 4lb steel frame.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

Thylacine said:


> I'm not sure they were that light.


Actually they were quite light. I missed them when I checked the weight weenies list, but the 19" P-20 is listed as 1591gr.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Some Guy said:


> Actually they were quite light. I missed them when I checked the weight weenies list, but the 19" P-20 is listed as 1591gr.


1650-1700 for a Plexus with 1 1/8th HT isn't too shabby considering they're probably not disc compatible and they also use relatively undersized tubes for a modern steel frame.


----------



## snowdrifter (Aug 2, 2006)

Bontrager Race Lite, was about 3.5 - 3.7 pounds for a medium frame.

I had one built up sub 22lbs back in the early 90s.


----------



## aussie_yeti (Apr 27, 2004)

come on - show us erin's new frame already - did it go sub 1500g?


----------



## stig (Jan 20, 2004)

My custom built Peyto is around 3.3lbs with a 853/Columbus tube mix. I think custom builders can go a bit lighter if they build to a rider's weight & riding style. 

I also had a Sunn Exact Nivacrom frame that seemed pretty light. It was a beautiful riding bike!


----------



## mpap89 (Mar 10, 2005)

i heard the new reynolds 953 tubing is supposed to shave 1/2 a pound off of frames.
Michael


----------



## Manicmtbr (Jan 26, 2004)

My 18 inch Tom Teesdale Columbus Zona tubed frame is 1705 grams with powder coat finish. There are certainly lighter frames and lighter tubing that this, but it rides very nice.

It is V brake only.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

aussie_yeti said:


> come on - show us erin's new frame already - did it go sub 1500g?


I'd tell ya, but then I'd have ta kill ya.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Arrow Racing had an Aermet 100 front end / prestige chromoly rear end model in the mid 90s that was 3 pounds even. Reynolds 953 couldn't be any worse than the 853 is for frame weights. Reynolds just isn't the best tube choice for lightness and hasn't been for years. Its a shame Japanese made Tange steel became unavailable for a few years otherwise people today wouldn't have forgotten about it so much. I had a 21.5" Rocky Mountain Team Comp frame in 1992 that used Tange Ultimate Ultralight Prestige chromoly tubing, and weighed 3.75 Ibs. I've got a custom 1999 TrueNorth right now that's a 16" size in reynolds 853 that's the same weight.


----------



## EBG 18T (Dec 31, 2005)

DeeEight said:


> Reynolds 953 couldn't be any worse than the 853 is for frame weights. Reynolds just isn't the best tube choice for lightness and hasn't been for years.


The new 953 is pretty nice stuff. From talking to a few frame builders though, they are reserving it for road bike use as it doen't appear to take the impacts so well since it is so thin. So i looks like it will see very limited use for mtn bikes.

I remember that old Tange Ultimate. It was great riding steel and was quite light for the time. I had a Tom Teasdale frame that was perfect and that Tange Ultimate rode so nice. Too bad it got stolen and i couldn't get a replacement. 

I can't wait to see what my new steel frame weighs in at (3 more weeks). it should be respectable though. It was build using a blend of Columbus OX Platnium & S3 (front triangle) and Reynolds Life/Spirit (rear triangle).


----------



## royale_ (May 8, 2006)

Back when I was young.... I had a frame constructed from baked bean cans and gaffa tape and weighed in at 4.10123 pounds.

You should listen to you guys, you old buggers.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> Arrow Racing had an Aermet 100 front end / prestige chromoly rear end model in the mid 90s that was 3 pounds even. Reynolds 953 couldn't be any worse than the 853 is for frame weights. Reynolds just isn't the best tube choice for lightness and hasn't been for years. Its a shame Japanese made Tange steel became unavailable for a few years otherwise people today wouldn't have forgotten about it so much. I had a 21.5" Rocky Mountain Team Comp frame in 1992 that used Tange Ultimate Ultralight Prestige chromoly tubing, and weighed 3.75 Ibs. I've got a custom 1999 TrueNorth right now that's a 16" size in reynolds 853 that's the same weight.


Bonus points if you can direct me to which episode of MBA that Arrow vaporware appeared in, D8!

*edit* January 1995.  The AerMet 100 was 3.1lbs with a 1" head tube and undersize tubing. Impressive for the time.

I hear conflicting things about Tange. I have connections in Japan saying the steel tubes are no longer available, yet there is a website currently with a whole slew of what appears to be new Tange product on there. Who knows? Doesn't matter what might technically be available if you can't actually _get_ the stuff.

You're right about the Reynolds stuff. Even 853 hasn't been that light. The problem is with steel is that it all adds up very quickly, which means if you have three tubes out of spec, you could potentially end up with a frame 1/4lb heavier than you were thinking.

Still, I'm throwing the gauntlet. Steel has never been better, and it's certainly going to be year of the steel bikes.

Just watch :thumbsup:


----------



## elephant (Mar 21, 2006)

Paint.

Primer, paint, clear coat, and frame saver add up. You can save 200 grams or more right there. Stainless is good stuff. If 953 sticks around awhile I will get one. My steel frame weighs about 4.25 lbs and I am under the impression (spoke with the builder) a 953 frame in the same size would weigh about 3.5 lbs, maybe a little less. Some savings on tubes and some on paint, etc.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

elephant said:


> Paint.
> 
> Primer, paint, clear coat, and frame saver add up. You can save 200 grams or more right there.


Yes...........yes you can. :yesnod:


----------



## stig (Jan 20, 2004)

Tange:

http://www.tange-design.com/tange_2005/tubes.htm

I have no idea if this stuff is actually available.


----------



## Stradissimo (Jan 28, 2004)

p20 = light

Heck, Fisher made a steel Pro-caliber in the early '90's which was light as well.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Tange steel tubing IS available again. Soma uses Tange Prestige for many of their models, and my friends who own steelwool bicycles could have ordered their frames in Tange Prestige instead of just double-butted 4130 for only $50 more per frame (factory price mind you, not retail). Doesn't sound like a big investment until you consider the 50 unit minimum order though. There's no doubt another price hike to get new Tange Ultimate tubing over the price for Tange prestige but damn its so tempting. I wonder if I can get TrueNorth to build a frame with it for me.


----------



## wedge (Jun 24, 2006)

*fusion retro*

fusion Retro is said to be 1700grams in a 19" iirc.
Can't access their site yet, but it's fusionbikes.de

They use alu insert in their very thin HT and BB, which seems a clever solution...


----------



## Pooh Bear (May 25, 2006)

I have two Tange Ultimate Superlight MTB frames:
1. 18" in size for 1" steerer but a bit ovalized tubes at the bottom bracket. year 1994 thin main tubes. thick dropouts. 1998gr. - not really weight weenie but stiff and compliant - just as you like it. But: I analyzed a scratch: there is LOTS of paint in that frame! *WHEN some money comes around this is the frame Warwick should rebuild for me! (yes - you!)*

2. 18" in size 1 1/8" steerer. tange ultimate superlight MTB. a bit larger in diameters. no slope. from 1998 or 1999. fillet brazed with silver: 1870gr incl. light tioga headset cups (didn't take them out for weighing.) thick paint as well.

I had an 853 frame (Zion) with thin paint that weighed 1990gr. and rode like ****. It was vibrating all over. *The older Tange frames are superb!*


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

I had an 853 frame (Zion) with thin paint that weighed 1990gr. and rode like ****. It was vibrating all over. *The older Tange frames are superb!*[/QUOTE]

I agree totally. To date I have owned/own three Tange Prestige MTB bikes and my favorite riding bike at the moment is my Tange Prestige '92 Stumpjumper that I had dropout converted for SS use. Oh, I forgot to mention that I found the frameset in a dumpster.:thumbsup:


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Its because Tange draws thinner tubes and the transition zones for the butts are short on tange frames than reynolds. They can make all sorts of deal over the "air hardening" alloy they use and why its stronger than 4130 CrMo, but if its no lighter than regular DB 4130 can build and rides like crap, what's the big deal !? I've rarely ever seen a 4130 frame fail from anything other than serious fatigue (like 15 years of daily commuter use for example).


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> Tange steel tubing IS available again. Soma uses Tange Prestige for many of their models, and my friends who own steelwool bicycles could have ordered their frames in Tange Prestige instead of just double-butted 4130 for only $50 more per frame (factory price mind you, not retail). Doesn't sound like a big investment until you consider the 50 unit minimum order though. There's no doubt another price hike to get new Tange Ultimate tubing over the price for Tange prestige but damn its so tempting. I wonder if I can get TrueNorth to build a frame with it for me.


NOS Tange is available from a few places and has been for years. However, the Spec doesn't work for modern frames with long top tubes and 80-100mm suspension forks.

New Tange tubing might be available at a factory level, but if it's not available to the small builder, there's little point in me pursuing it. It's not like Tange is some miracle company with miracle material, it's just another option, and even then, it's only an option if you're a mass marketer looking to differentiate yourself or appeal to the retro market.

If you have a Prestige frame you like, it's more than likely because it was well designed, as opposed to not well designed, or because you have some nostalgia for it, or you're not comparing apples with apples.

You don't ride a tube, you ride a frame.


----------



## royale_ (May 8, 2006)

DeeEight said:


> Its because Tange draws thinner tubes and the transition zones for the butts are short on tange frames than reynolds. They can make all sorts of deal over the "air hardening" alloy they use and why its stronger than 4130 CrMo, but if its no lighter than regular DB 4130 can build and rides like crap, what's the big deal !? I've rarely ever seen a 4130 frame fail from anything other than serious fatigue (like 15 years of daily commuter use for example).


What are On One frames made out of? Generic 4130?
I've seen more of those things broken than not.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

You mean their DN6 tubing? Its just plain old non heat-treated double butted 4130. Tange Prestige and Ultimate tubes are heat-treated.


----------



## cogswell23 (Apr 24, 2006)

EBG 18T said:


> I can't wait to see what my new steel frame weighs in at (3 more weeks). it should be respectable though. It was build using a blend of Columbus OX Platnium & S3 (front triangle) and Reynolds Life/Spirit (rear triangle).


Ive got an anal-retentive but friendly correction to make here . . .

OX Platinum and S3 are made by True Temper not Columbus.
Life and Spirit are made by Columbus not Reynolds.

Sounds nice. Who's your builder?


----------



## CB2 (May 7, 2006)

Axis II said:


> I had an 853 frame (Zion) with thin paint that weighed 1990gr. and rode like ****. It was vibrating all over. *The older Tange frames are superb!*


I agree totally. To date I have owned/own three Tange Prestige MTB bikes and my favorite riding bike at the moment is my Tange Prestige '92 Stumpjumper that I had dropout converted for SS use. Oh, I forgot to mention that I found the frameset in a dumpster.:thumbsup:[/QUOTE]

My '96 Prestige tubed Stumpjumper is my favorite too (also a singlespeed).
My 853 tubed Salsa is a little lighter, and is a fine bike, but the ride of Ol' Stumpy is the benchmark of perfection.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Alright, I'll put everyone out of their misery.  

New model for 07.

Ether - 1580g for an XL.
Ether SL - 1495g for an XL.

No undersize tubes, no tricks, no carbon. Available in a couple of weeks.


----------



## mpap89 (Mar 10, 2005)

Thylacine said:


> Alright, I'll put everyone out of their misery.
> 
> New model for 07.
> 
> ...


wow, that's really quite good. not as light as carbon or alu, but it's steel. They say steel is real afterall.
Michael


----------



## JaLove (Dec 24, 2006)

Thylacine said:


> Alright, I'll put everyone out of their misery.
> 
> New model for 07.
> 
> ...


Pricing available yet?


----------



## EBG 18T (Dec 31, 2005)

cogswell23 said:


> Ive got an anal-retentive but friendly correction to make here . . .
> 
> OX Platinum and S3 are made by True Temper not Columbus.
> Life and Spirit are made by Columbus not Reynolds.
> ...


i made a huge typo. thanks for correcting it. I am not sure how i did that, i guess i was remenissing on the Tange Ultimate and brain farted.

It should be nice, and it should be in my hands in 3 weeks (hopefully)...


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

EBG 18T said:


> and it should be in my hands in 3 weeks (hopefully)...


Can't wait to see it.


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

Thylacine said:


> Alright, I'll put everyone out of their misery.
> 
> New model for 07.
> 
> ...


*SPAM **"This commercial break brought to you by Thylacine Cycles."*  I think I'll just wait to find another StumpJumper in the dumpster.


----------



## snowdrifter (Aug 2, 2006)

Thylacine said:


> Alright, I'll put everyone out of their misery.
> 
> New model for 07.
> 
> ...


I have to say, that top decal is butt ugly :ciappa:


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

downtube routed gear cables... oh people are gonna whine about that.  It'd be nice to know WHAT the steel is though.


----------



## erkan (Jan 18, 2004)

Frames have a big problem, they need three water bottle cage mounts. I read that in MTB mags in the 90'ies.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Axis II said:


> *SPAM **"This commercial break brought to you by Thylacine Cycles."*  I think I'll just wait to find another StumpJumper in the dumpster.


I just thought you'd enjoy the break!


----------



## snowdrifter (Aug 2, 2006)

Thylacine said:


> I just thought you'd enjoy a break from Francis' paid endorsement of Niner


Dude, keep Spamming, this Forum is dead, there's been no major Weight Weenie break throughs in years:skep:


----------



## Strong Ti (Jun 1, 2005)

*Nice!*

Sub 1400gm for a Med SL then


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

No interest in Niner but I am intrigued by this frame. I'll keep an eye on developments.


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

yep..subscribing to this too....

any thoughts on an SS-convertable version?


----------



## ThaFurnace (Jan 12, 2004)

No big surprise about the plug. Saw this coming from page 1 when I looked at his sig.

However, there's a whole heck of a lot more shameless spamming, especially in this forum. 

Also, at least he's not as bad as the wrenchscience guy, offering friendly advice on where to purchase certain brands of bikes.

Now to the frame:
1. Nice nostalgic color options. Great Execution. 
2. Question at hand - what tubing are you using?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Well, I've been on this forum since it had a chatroom, so I'm not a fly-by-nighter. I'm just an under capitalised one man show with a penchant for the guerilla.  Heck, I'd send everyone a 'press release' but then they only get published if I spent advertising dollars with the 'news service' or was about to send them on a junket to Nevada anyway. So there ya go, take it or leave it.

1) Thank you. The finish is a first for the bike industry and comes to us via the lovely people over there in the military-industrial complex. Tough as powder, weighs like anodising.
2) Tubing is.....steel. As I say, you don't ride a tube, you ride a frame, so you'll have to take our word that it's a combo of the best stuff we can buy that we're happy to whack our name on. Over the life of the model it's more than likely going to change anyway, depending on availability and available technology.
Anyone who has an Arete SL knows how much I like to mix it up, so no suprises there. Come to think of it, I've never done one with a straight tubeset out of someone's catalogue, and why should you?

This is custom, baby! 

--

Singlespeed version? Not terribly keen. Arete SL?.....yes.....Ether.....not yet.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

DeeEight said:


> downtube routed gear cables... oh people are gonna whine about that.


Lighter, more direct, less housing to gunk up. Where's the problem? I imagine if you asked nicely enough you might get top tube routed cabling... maybe. .


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

PS... FRANCOIS OWNS MTBR SO HE CAN SPAM Niner or anything else as much as he likes.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

ThaFurnace said:


> No big surprise about the plug. Saw this coming from page 1 when I looked at his sig.
> 
> However, there's a whole heck of a lot more shameless spamming, especially in this forum.


What I find amusing is the mods in most of the forums actually ENFORCE the rules on spam'ing except in this one. Hell, you can't even post a "what's this worth" question in the vintage forum without rumpfy being on it like white on rice. It is however nice to see it coming from someone in here other than nino for a change.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Here's my copy of the Stephen Glass Guide to Journalism.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

DeeEight said:


> PS... FRANCOIS OWNS MTBR SO HE CAN SPAM Niner or anything else as much as he likes.


Just like he can use irritatingly slow ad servers to server his ads, and sell the information we provide in our profiles. It doesn't mean we have to like it or keep quiet.

Now, on to the spam:










Mmm, pretuned .


----------



## elephant (Mar 21, 2006)

Thylacine said:


> 1) The finish is a first for the bike industry and comes to us via the lovely people over there in the military-industrial complex. Tough as powder, weighs like anodising.
> 
> 2) Tubing is.....steel. As I say, you don't ride a tube, you ride a frame, so you'll have to take our word that it's a combo of the best stuff we can buy that we're happy to whack our name on.
> 
> This is custom, baby!


For the record, I would buy a frame like this but only if I get full tubing specs and some more information about the coating process. I am big fan of steel and light - and willing to spend top dollar - but no information means no sale.

As a builder you surely understand that customers will require this information; I can determine if the frame will last more than one season and how the frame will ride based on my weight and riding style. This whole "mystery" bike thing is silly. You either tell people what they are buying or you should expect to remain a small, under-capitalized, one-man show.

Finally, there is nothing custom about a frame if you already know the tubeset and geometry, but you do not know my measurements and weight. Hand-made does not equal custom.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

THIS is a custom made steel frame...




























It was made for a very specific owner (of a bike shop in southern ontario as it happens, and yes his first name is Ed) and originally included at his request a rather under-spec (for his weight and riding style) seattube, which failed at some just above the BB shell and had to be repaired and reinforced by TrueNorth, and then the whole frame repainted again. It was probably lighter before but right now its 1.65kg with bottle cage bolts but without seatclamp.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

elephant said:


> For the record, I would buy a frame like this but only if I get full tubing specs and some more information about the coating process. I am big fan of steel and light - and willing to spend top dollar - but no information means no sale.


The tubes are ultra thin wall (.6-.4-.6 in places), Yield is at least 185 - that's our requirement for all Ethers. People seem to buy plenty of Sevens despite their made up name for their tubing, and IF only recently discovered Columbus for their stays while the rest of us have been using the stuff for years, and both don't seem to have trouble selling frames.

The finish on the frames is proprietary, so we're not going to tell you what it is. It's easy to find out with a bit of research anyway, and I don't see the point in giving away all our hard earned trade secrets just for the sake of one sale. If you're not impressed by a rustproof finish on a steel frame that weighs as much as anodising and think someone has something better, send the frame back and we'll give you a refund.



elephant said:


> As a builder you surely understand that customers will require this information; I can determine if the frame will last more than one season and how the frame will ride based on my weight and riding style. This whole "mystery" bike thing is silly. You either tell people what they are buying or you should expect to remain a small, under-capitalized, one-man show.


99% of customers cannot make an informed enough decision about tubing selection. I have an ongoing dialogue with a metalurgist from Cambridge and even I know bugger-all, but if you are a metalurgist with a history of fabricating steel structures out of everything from Mild steel to 455, I'll tell you all about our tubing.

There's a fine balance between handing over Intellectual Property to customers (and therefore the public and your competitors) and informing them adequately. This frame is special enough for us that we decided to protect some of the elements in it that give us competitive advantage and are firsts for the bike industry. It's not silly, it's smart.



elephant said:


> Finally, there is nothing custom about a frame if you already know the tubeset and geometry, but you do not know my measurements and weight. Hand-made does not equal custom.


All our frames except the 221's are fully custom, fully handmade. The Ether will have a stock chart you can simply pick from, or for USD200 extra you can customise. As with all our builds, we pick the tubing appropriate for the customers physiology, riding style, and type.

I hope that clears things up. More info will be available once this first lot are back from the finishers. In the interim, I'm sure some-guy will tease you with some build shots :thumbsup:


----------



## EBG 18T (Dec 31, 2005)

thylacine - i think you can keep many of your trade secrets to yourself. Most of us don't have metalurgy degrees and put trust in our frame builders to design it for us correctly. But sometimes it is nice to know what your frame is really going to be made of.

My frame that i am currently waiting on went thru 3 design revisions based of my spec's (body measurements, weight, etc.) , riding style, what the bike was going to be used for (XC, 24hr, etc.) before we mutually aggreed that the design was just right for me. After that the builder discussed with me tubesets and pros/cons of different tubes.

He then spec'd out tubes to meet the needs that we discussed. Laterally stiff, and vertically compliant. I 'trust' him in choosing the tubes that he did based on our conversations, and i trust that he used the tubes he told me he did. I have NO way of knowing other than his word. 

The process took a while, but the communication and dedication to my needs has kept me going back to this builder for bikes for years.

All i am really saying is i don't think telling people what tubes you use or your paint process hurts you biz at all. If anything the consumer feels like he/she knows more about what they are really getting. Many of us like the communication and the involvement in the process. Again i am just your everyday bike consumer..


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

EBG, we do all that and more. The drawing on page two is almost _exactly_ like the design revisions we send our customers - full scale, to scale, and the most exact representation of what your frame is going to look like when you pull it out of the box.

We're not short on information here. Infact, we give more information than _any_ other custom bike company. Find another company that does such finely detailed design drawings - most companies are only capable of spitting out a CAD screen dump.

Having said that, anyone truly interested can easily figure out what the Ethers are made from just by looking at the drawing, and what this new finish is we're using. Only thing is, we're not going to advertise it and watch 12 months of our research get 'homaged' by someone else.

As you say, you put your faith in the builder, and we're solely reliant on the quality of our work and our customer service to build our reputation. We're not going to announce the World's lightest steel frame with a groundbreaking new finish just on a whim and ask you to take our word for it.

Proof is in the Puddin' and the Puddin' is about to come out' the oven!

Literally.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

Thylacine said:


> In the interim, I'm sure some-guy will tease you with some build shots :thumbsup:


You mean like this?


----------



## EBG 18T (Dec 31, 2005)

Thylacine said:


> EBG, we do all that and more. .


I think you try to and mean good by saying that. But when i was trying to buy a custom frame i made 2 e-mail based inquiries in November and never heard back. Now this could have happened at any company so i don't blame you personally. I think Thylacine has alot of good things going for it, thus the reason i made the inquiry. But in the end I ended up going with a different frame builder who spent alot of time helping me decide what i needed for my new frame.



Thylacine said:


> We're not short on information here. Infact, we give more information than _any_ other custom bike company. Find another company that does such finely detailed design drawings - most companies are only capable of spitting out a CAD screen dump.


I really like the color drawing that you provided above, but some us actually like the 'CAD Screen Dumps' are you refer to them. It was thru these 'CAD Screen Dumps' that i was able to see the changes i wanted made in the underlying design. While the color drawing shows me what i am going to get, i sometimes could careless about the paint. I looked to a frame builder for the frame construction and look to companies like Spectrum Powderworks for paintwork. Now maybe in your book that doesn't make sense. But i am sure i am not the only buyer with this train of thought.



Thylacine said:


> We're not going to announce the World's lightest steel frame with a groundbreaking new finish just on a whim and ask you to take our word for it.


I realize you are trying to market the worlds lightest steel frame w/ this new finish, but i still won't buy the bike without knowing what tubeset is being used. I shouldn't have to spend time 'guessing' what the tubeset is. It seems like the propriatary thing is the finish not the tubes. The finish doesn't make the bike have ride quality, it makes it look good and in your situation save weight. Your defining difference should be the quality of the bike you build, the customization/mix of tubesets for situations and the customer service you provide. Not just a bike w/ pretty paint.



Thylacine said:


> anyone truly interested can easily figure out what the Ethers are made from just by looking at the drawing,


I personally can't tell what tubes are being used by the drawing. I guess in the companies mind that mades me an un-educated buyer. Just that one statement makes me happy that the company did not e-mail me back.

Thylacine - Please do not take my comments as anything other than constructive critisim. :thumbsup: I am just a basic consumer with decent size discretionary budget...


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

You're glad you didn't hear back from us because on this one particular model which you're patently not interested in anyway, we're keeping our tube selection an industry secret? Man, that's some grudge! :skep:

I'm sorry if I didn't reply to your e-mail. In November I was renovating one house to sell, buying a shop, and renovating that too, doing frames for people and also a whole slew of freelance product design work.

Also, you could've tried Skype, AIM, iChat or Yahoo or even that old technology, the telephone, if e-mail didn't happen. It's not like we're uncontactable!

Please drop me another e-mail so I can see when you e-mailled and try and figure out how you slipped through the web. It's not something that normally happens.....I mean, it's 11:33 Saturday morning and I've already replied to half a dozen e-mail enquiries. That's situation normal around here.


----------



## EBG 18T (Dec 31, 2005)

Thylacine said:


> You're glad you didn't hear back from us because on this one particular model which you're patently not interested in anyway, we're keeping our tube selection an industry secret? Man, that's some grudge! :skep:


Thylacine - I think my remark was uncalled for, and i do apologize for that remark.I know the frame you are talking about wasn't avaliable when i was looking. I don't mean to sound like i am holding a grudge, i will definitly keep you in mind for my next frame. :thumbsup:


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

I strongly considered having Thylacine make my new frame- he and I emailed a few times about it. My impression is that he is committed to his craft, and I applaud him for that.
Ultimately, I chose to go with another builder who has made me two frames in the past (one of which is the finest riding bike I have ever owned). I am sure, though, that I would have gotten a superb bike from Thylacine if that is the direction I'd gone in.

When I ordered my new frame, I didn't (and still don't) care at all what tubing it is made from. I trust the builder to select that which is best for the application- he's the expert, not me. Just as I wouldn't tell the chef at the restaurant what spices to use, I wouldn't presume to know best about how to make a bike. I'll know if it is well made by riding it, not by looking at the tubing decal on the seat tube.

I applaud anybody who is willing to put so much of their time and effort into crafting the best product they can- I am very pleased that innovation and creativity still count for something.


On a different note, the lightest steel mountain bike I ever threw a leg over was back in the late '80s. It was a custom Davidson (out of Seattle) made with road-gauge 753 and minimalist lugs. A beautiful bike, to be sure, but too light and whippy for most riders.


miles


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Yeah, that's the problem with comparing old light steel bikes and new ones.

Bikes of 10+ years ago often used thin 31.8 downtubes and 1" head tubes, and weren't reinforced for disc brakes or long suspension forks.

I'm pretty sure today it would be easy to make a frame like that sub 3lbs, but the ride would be utter rubbish.


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

Well, I would never say the ride on that Davidson was utter rubbish- I actually enjoyed riding it quite a bit. I have always preferred a supple bike. However, a heavier rider than me might not have cared for it. I think that Davidson was a perfect example of a bike well-designed specifically for the owner (sadly, it wasn't me). 

A bike like that could be built now, and probably has been at some point recently. Again, for the right rider, it would be outstanding, but most would not appreciate its qualities.


miles


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

While bikes of 20 years ago used 1" headtubes, 10 years ago it was ultra-RARE to find a 1" headtube on any brand of mountain bike other than Ritchey. As for 31.8 downtubes... steel frames today still use them quite successfully from many brands with better reps and more experience than thylacine.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

DeeEight said:


> While bikes of 20 years ago used 1" headtubes, 10 years ago it was ultra-RARE to find a 1" headtube on any brand of mountain bike other than Ritchey. As for 31.8 downtubes... steel frames today still use them quite successfully from many brands with better reps and more experience than thylacine.


The key word was probably thin. I think what Thylacine is trying to illustrate is the fact that in these days of disc brakes and suspension forks frames need to be stronger than in the past. Given the advances that have been made in steel tubing since these frames were designed, logically they _must_ be weaker than frames of similar weight and quality made today. Hence the "I'm pretty sure today it would be easy to make a frame like that sub 3lbs, but the ride would be utter rubbish" comment. Not that these frames are unsuitable for what they were designed for, but that they are not suitable for what your average MTBer wants today.

Correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> As for 31.8 downtubes... steel frames today still use them quite successfully from many brands with better reps and more experience than thylacine.


And progress happens from those that do not accept the status quo but instead try different things, push boundaries, and ask the big questions. Those people often don't work for established companies, or like me, have done their time and are now doing their own thing.

With your logic, progress would never happen. We'd all be living in caves, throwing rocks at deer. Have you ever considered the fact that that philosophy of yours is kinda ironic considering your advocating it......on a computer......in an Internet forum?

We're all free to ride what we want, but claiming that other companies use something successfully in no way infers that it is correct or even the final word in the evolution of something. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Some Guy said:


> The key word was probably thin. I think what Thylacine is trying to illustrate is the fact that in these days of disc brakes and suspension forks frames need to be stronger than in the past.


Except disc brakes aren't that new, and the forces involved don't require these magical amounts of reinforcing. As to suspension forks, again, as far as XC frames go, most manufactuers are designing today around 80-100mm travel just as many were a decade ago. And the density of steel alloys used in bike frames haven't changed in the past hundred years to any meaningful degree, so if thylacine is claiming 1.5kg range for his frames, he's using downtubes which aren't significantly thicker than what was used 10+ years ago. Of course since he refuses to give tubeset details unlike every other custom framebuilder... its a wonder to a lot of us how anyone believes he's anything more than a hack. The ability to weld a frame doesn't automatically equate to having actual knowledge about engineering and metallurgy (or vice versa, I've met engineers who swore blind you couldn't braze or weld aluminium).



> Given the advances that have been made in steel tubing since these frames were designed, logically they _must_ be weaker than frames of similar weight and quality made today.


What advances? Other than 953, there's been nothing that new in steel in the past decade, and certainly very little as good as was available 10+ years ago. We discussed this earlier in the thread... Reynolds 853 and 631 are crap compared to what Tange offered
in their Ultimate Prestige tubesets (ultimate ultrastrong, ultimate superlight and ultimate ultralight) or what other company had. 12 years ago Giant went so far as to custom draw their own quad-butted heat-treated 4130CrMo tubesets (they owned a foundry and tube-mill) for the 8xx series ATX frames and were in the 3-3.5 pound weight range, but the models sold poorly because they were spec'ed the same as their Al framed ATX 9xx models at a time the market perception had become that Al was better than steel (so the frame and tubesets were dropped after only 2 model years). Then there was Aermet 100 steel from Carpenter technologies (the same company that reynolds went shopping to for their 953 tubes) which is still available, and now even in seamless tubing direct from carpenter.



> Hence the "I'm pretty sure today it would be easy to make a frame like that sub 3lbs, but the ride would be utter rubbish" comment. Not that these frames are unsuitable for what they were designed for, but that they are not suitable for what your average MTBer wants today.


And what does an "average" MTBer who's buying a steel frame today want exactly that thylacine can deliver that other less pessimistic and egotistical framebuilders apparently cannot offer ?

Correct me if I'm wrong.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> Except disc brakes aren't that new, and the forces involved don't require these magical amounts of reinforcing. As to suspension forks, again, as far as XC frames go, most manufactuers are designing today around 80-100mm travel just as many were a decade ago.


Nobody is claiming any magic. It's patently obvious that if you made a lugged MTB frame to todays specifications out of Columbus SL it would fail under a hard charging expert I'd hazard to guess within months. I'm not interested in getting into a pissing match with you about this because it's all really a matter of opinion, so if you don't agree, that's fine. You're free to ride whatever you like.



DeeEight said:


> And the density of steel alloys used in bike frames haven't changed in the past hundred years to any meaningful degree, so if thylacine is claiming 1.5kg range for his frames, he's using downtubes which aren't significantly thicker than what was used 10+ years ago.


How do you keep a D8 in suspense? I'll tell you tomorrow.



DeeEight said:


> Of course since he refuses to give tubeset details unlike every other custom framebuilder


Ask Seven what their tubesets are, who makes them and what their butting profiles are. They won't tell you. Also, this is the first frame we've decided to keep things proprietary on, all our others it's clearly written on the design drawings and the website.



DeeEight said:


> ... its a wonder to a lot of us how anyone believes he's anything more than a hack.


Well, it's a wonder to a lot of us how anyone believes you're anything but a boring old Luddite who hasn't got laid since 1979, but I'm not the one who insists on the personal attacks at the end of every 'contribution'.



DeeEight said:


> What advances? Other than 953, there's been nothing that new in steel in the past decade, and certainly very little as good as was available 10+ years ago.


This is utter rubbish. We had this discussion over at the FB's list last month, and not a single builder there agreed that current tubing is not lightyears better than it was. It's straighter, it's stronger, it has better properties in the HAZ after welding....the list goes on.



DeeEight said:


> And what does an "average" MTBer who's buying a steel frame today want exactly that thylacine can deliver that other less pessimistic and egotistical framebuilders apparently cannot offer ?


We sell custom frames, so the 'average' MTBer would probably not be in the market for a custom frame and might be better served by something else.

I could spend all day extolling how we do things differently here at Thylacine. However, all that information is on the website and I don't want to turn this into a "D8 flame war because he's bored" thread. People can make up their own minds with information already provided.

I started this thread because I wanted to tap into the collective knowledge about light steel bikes and see how we were faring with our new model, as well as get feedback from the knowledgeable mtbr folk.

Personally, I'd like this thread to say on-topic, because I love steel bikes, I love to talk about steel bikes, and I think they have a good future within the custom bike biz and I'd like to see this continue.

They're only going to get lighter and stronger, and I can only hope we can make some contribution towards that end.


----------



## royale_ (May 8, 2006)

DeeEight said:


> Except disc brakes aren't that new, and the forces involved don't require these magical amounts of reinforcing.


Really. What makes you think it doesn't need reinforcing? Have you measured the forces? Have you ridden one frame with bracing and one without to compare?



DeeEight said:


> Of course since he refuses to give tubeset details unlike every other custom framebuilder... its a wonder to a lot of us how anyone believes he's anything more than a hack. The ability to weld a frame doesn't automatically equate to having actual knowledge about engineering and metallurgy (or vice versa, I've met engineers who swore blind you couldn't braze or weld aluminium).


It's not that he refuses to give the tube spec, you just have to act a little more interested than demanding that he post it on a public forum. If you really wanted to know, and there was a chance you might want to buy a thylacine frame, you'd make an actual inquiry rather than attacking him.



DeeEight said:


> What advances? Other than 953, there's been nothing that new in steel in the past decade, and certainly very little as good as was available 10+ years ago. We discussed this earlier in the thread... Reynolds 853 and 631 are crap compared to what Tange offered
> in their Ultimate Prestige tubesets (ultimate ultrastrong, ultimate superlight and ultimate ultralight) or what other company had. 12 years ago Giant went so far as to custom draw their own quad-butted heat-treated 4130CrMo tubesets (they owned a foundry and tube-mill) for the 8xx series ATX frames and were in the 3-3.5 pound weight range, but the models sold poorly because they were spec'ed the same as their Al framed ATX 9xx models at a time the market perception had become that Al was better than steel (so the frame and tubesets were dropped after only 2 model years). Then there was Aermet 100 steel from Carpenter technologies (the same company that reynolds went shopping to for their 953 tubes) which is still available, and now even in seamless tubing direct from carpenter.


What the hell is Columbus been doing in the past 10 years then? Surly they've tweaked their alloys to work better in bike applications than 10 years ago.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Steel tubing nowadays is indeed superior to tubing from a decade or two ago. It's only now that I'd really be interested in a steel bike that can not only ride fast but take a few hits and keep on ticking. I like high-end builders who (regardless of ego) stand behind their products. Maybe we should have a FAQ that goes over:

Different types of steel used in bikes nowadays
Their respective properties
The "feel" of the different types (ride-perspective)
Typical cost comparison (per frame)
Ease of welding/repairing
Weight comparisons (for a typical 26" Medium/Large frame)

Is there something like this already out there?


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

Thylacine said:


> Personally, I'd like this thread to say on-topic, because I love steel bikes, I love to talk about steel bikes, and I think they have a good future within the custom bike biz and I'd like to see this continue.












Shiney .


----------



## EBG 18T (Dec 31, 2005)

Thylacine said:


> Personally, I'd like this thread to say on-topic, because I love steel bikes, I love to talk about steel bikes, and I think they have a good future within the custom bike biz and I'd like to see this continue.


Lets get it back on track then. What makes the special steel tubes you are using and this bike you are building better than the other steel bikes on the market? And there needs to more to it than just weight.:thumbsup:


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Thylacine said:


> Nobody is claiming any magic. It's patently obvious that if you made a lugged MTB frame to todays specifications out of Columbus SL it would fail under a hard charging expert I'd hazard to guess within months.


Lugged ?!? Columbus SL ?!? What the hell brand did you use for "research" into what tubing was used and how they were made for MTB steel frames a decade ago? Lugs were a 70s thing. MTB frames from the 80s forwards were for the most part brazed or tig-welded without lugs other than super high end custom order flagship models, and then only for aesthetic reasons.



> Ask Seven what their tubesets are, who makes them and what their butting profiles are. They won't tell you. Also, this is the first frame we've decided to keep things proprietary on, all our others it's clearly written on the design drawings and the website.


Seamless Ti 3Al-2.5V tubing, it says so right on their website.



> This is utter rubbish. We had this discussion over at the FB's list last month, and not a single builder there agreed that current tubing is not lightyears better than it was. It's straighter, it's stronger, it has better properties in the HAZ after welding....the list goes on.


And who exactly participated in the discussion? More hacks like yourself?



> I started this thread because I wanted to tap into the collective knowledge about light steel bikes and see how we were faring with our new model, as well as get feedback from the knowledgeable mtbr folk.


********, you started this thread because you wanted to plug your new model, just like nino starts a thread for some new lightweight part he just got because he just happens to be a dealer for it.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Flyer said:


> Different types of steel used in bikes nowadays [//quote]
> 
> As I said, except for reynolds 953, which is a high-nickel content steel just like Aermet 100 was (and comes from the same company) there hasn't been anything new in the past ten years when it comes to steel alloys used in bicycle frames.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

The discussion was between myself, Dave Fenn from Saint-Gobain, and a couple of dozen framebuilders you have and haven't heard of. Topics on and off-list included emerging Bainite steels, the work currently being done at EWI and Cambridge, as well as why Reynolds insists on the wrong welding wire for 953 (probably a contributing factor to why it's been a slow take-off), and how we'd really like a tube with Columbus' alloying, Dedas heat treating, and TiN to improve grain structure in the HAZ.

I was way out of my depth, but hey, I didn't call any of them a hack, especially if they reasonably sounded knowledgeable.

Back to our scheduled discussion.

---



EBG said:


> Lets get it back on track then. What makes the special steel tubes you are using and this bike you are building better than the other steel bikes on the market? And there needs to more to it than just weight.


I'll talk in general terms here, but the key is analysing where the forces are and putting material where it needs to be, and also having a reductionist policy and knowing where dead weight can be removed.

The prime examples for us are using an oversize downtube to counter the main torsional forces, using a stronger drive side chainstay, and conversely downspecing the non-disc side seatstay as the force there is much less than on the disc side.

There's more weight to be lost on the hardpoints than there is the actual tubing, so we have milled and hand finished the dropouts, use a custom relieved BB, and rationalised the cable stops - very extreme on the Ether SL where all the cable stops add less than 20g to the weight of the frame.

Also, we're using a special finish on the frames that weighs only 20-40 odd grams, yet gives the frames a corrosion resistant finish. Originally it was developed for the US Navy Seals, but it's since been commercialised. It saves 75-100g over paint and 150g over powdercoat and as far as we know we're the first company to use it.

Tubing companies like when frame companies promote their tubing, but the stark reality is that it's the design of the frame that makes exponentially more changes to the characteristics of the ride than only choice of tubing brand will.

The perfect steel frame is a long way off, but it's been stuck in limbo for quite a long while and there will hopefully be some good inroads this year as information about processing and fabricating 953 gets more concrete, Columbus XCR gets released, and Deda Zero Replica gets out there, too.

I have a feeling the reliable, race-ready 3lb steel frame is just around the corner.


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

May I ask you what you think about this frame :

https://www.scapin.com/inglese/prod07/big/104.jpg
https://www.bikemagic.com/news/article.asp?SP=&v=2&UAN=4893

This was until now IMO the best steel disc specific mountain-bike frame available on the market. Can you give us a little head-to-head between the concept of your frame and the Scapin ?

Thanks in advance


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

I've always thought the Scapins were really nice frames and the Nope is an exception?

Well....nope!

The geometry on the Ethers are much different, and custom is a no cost option, so there's big differences there.

Availability is also a point of difference. We ship Worldwide within 7-10 days, and freight is included in the RRP. We've shipped frames literally all over the world, so no matter where you live, you can get your hands on one of our frames very easily.

Also, before the first batch of stock sizes went off to the finisher, an 18" equivalent weighed 1520g _actual._ One trip over to WW will show you how inaccurate claimed weights are.

Also, we're not using any carbon. Our seat tube and head tube is steel, as is everything else on the frame, so it rides like a steel frame.


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

Somehow this commercial break has grown into a very E-X-T-E-N-D-E-D infomercial. If these frames are the greatest and everyone is buying them up from all corners of the globe then why the need for the endless SPAMing we see here? IMO, this spaming doesn't speak well to this builder's grip on responsible business practices and it leads me to wonder about what kinda personality this person would be to do business with? Let the endorsements commence..................


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Should the rudeness of not answering people's questions start with you, or does that just apply to everyone else?

You can PM me for a list of referrees, or if you're wondering about my 'personality' give me a call here at Thylacine HQ

+61 0425 742 427

(Thanks to everyone who PM'd me about the website being down. It's hosted in a part of the US that has recently been hit hard by ice storms, so unfortunately I have to sit this one out until the infrastructure has been repaired. Anyone with questions in the interim can email me at [email protected])


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

Axis II said:


> Somehow this commercial break has grown into a very E-X-T-E-N-D-E-D infomercial. If these frames are the greatest and everyone is buying them up from all corners of the globe then why the need for the endless SPAMing we see here? IMO, this spaming doesn't speak well to this builder's grip on responsible business practices and it leads me to wonder about what kinda personality this person would be to do business with? Let the endorsements commence..................


 It seems that the info being provided is relevant to the WW forum. If this forum were anything like the 29'er forum there would be a nice sub-forum for manufacturer news (like here: http://forums.mtbr.com/forumdisplay.php?f=114), but there isn't. Warwick has enough friends that he coulda just did the "sneaky thing" and had someone else make the original post, but he didn't. 
Over in the 29'er forum a guy can post a link to a $2 add selling 100 (hard to get) tires and everyone thanks him. Here if Nino or Dirt Boy post something about an obscure part that the rest of us might want to know about they are lambasted because they also happen to be a source for the part. How are we supposed to find out about it if we have to wait until someone who won't profit from it's existence posts about it?
I might have a problem with a huge company like Specialized or Trek posting about some new lightweight technology here, but they have a monster advertising budget that can afford some glossy pages in a magazine. 
So how 'bout it? Why not a "Manufacturer's News" sub-forum here? Then there would be an agreed upon place where all this info could be discussed, and nobody would get their feathers ruffled over it.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Maybe its because for some reason they don't feel they have to buy the $2 add links in here, and its probably because the forum has no moderators to speak of (and if it does, they sure don't seem to care to enforce mtbr's strict policy on spam that the other forum mods DO enforce). Instead they announce some new uber part and of course, when someone asks where to get them, you see the standard "oh I sell them, PM me" crap. Like somehow this makes it alright that they've spammed the thread, used mtbr's server space and bandwidth, and so on.


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

Thylacine said:


> Should the rudeness of not answering people's questions start with you, or does that just apply to everyone else?
> 
> You can PM me for a list of referrees, or if you're wondering about my 'personality' give me a call here at Thylacine HQ
> 
> ...


Why bother with your own website, or even email account for that matter, when you can use the MTBR forums to make yer sales; see, now that's just good business sense.:thumbsup: You limit your overhead costs and increase your bottom line at the expense of MTBR and it's patrons........SWEET.


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> Maybe its because for some reason they don't feel they have to buy the $2 add links in here, and its probably because the forum has no moderators to speak of (and if it does, they sure don't seem to care to enforce mtbr's strict policy on spam that the other forum mods DO enforce). Instead they announce some new uber part and of course, when someone asks where to get them, you see the standard "oh I sell them, PM me" crap. Like somehow this makes it alright that they've spammed the thread, used mtbr's server space and bandwidth, and so on.


I see your point. 
The 29'er forum is much more actively policed, and any threads that are considered "manufacturer news" are moved quickly tp the appropriate forum. True spam threads (even with a link to an add) are locked down in less than an hour most times.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

Axis II said:


> You limit your overhead costs and increase your bottom line at the expense of MTBR and it's patrons........SWEET.


Actually it would be to the fiancial benefit of MTBR.com. They make their money from ad revenue, so more page views equals more profits. As for the patrons, if you aren't interested don't click. The fact that this thread has 80+ replies and 3000+ views implies that there is plenty of interest in this topic, so where is the problem?

You'll also notice that Thylacine isn't just shamelessly plugging their frame, rather than are trying to intiate discussion and comments on the lightweight steel frame market. I honestly don't see how this differs from what this forum should be about.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 1, 2004)

*what is this 1984??? keep posting the news Thy*

as any relevant information only benefits the riders...we get enough hype from the big 3 to last a lifetime...i applaud the little guy who can survive in this era of slave labor and outsourcing and still build a fantastic product at a good price and still make a living..
some of you people are scarier than the THOUGHT POLICE......
steel still has its place in cycling and you dont have to throw it in the landfill at the end of the day, whereas millions upon millions of aluminum frames find there home there everyday...not talking about walfart low grade bikes.....


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Good God, can we just chill out and get laid or go for a ride- or all of these! Man, like we don't have enough naggers and post police on here already!!!

I don't support the "big guys" and do support the small builders so I am interested in finding out about these developments, even though some consider it "shameless" advertising. Anyhoo, give the small builders a break- they all differ in personalities and are trying hard to build great frames and make a living. I see enough CannonTrekSpecs out there.


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> as any relevant information only benefits the riders...we get enough hype from the big 3 to last a lifetime...i applaud the little guy who can survive in this era of slave labor and outsourcing and still build a fantastic product at a good price and still make a living..
> some of you people are scarier than the THOUGHT POLICE......
> steel still has its place in cycling and you dont have to throw it in the landfill at the end of the day, whereas millions upon millions of aluminum frames find there home there everyday...not talking about walfart low grade bikes.....


Little brother says people wouldn't have to play the role of "Big Brother" if Big Brother weren't asleep at the wheel. Who is that Cloxxi guy anyway???........:skep:


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

teamdicky said:


> I see your point.
> The 29'er forum is much more actively policed, and any threads that are considered "manufacturer news" are moved quickly tp the appropriate forum. True spam threads (even with a link to an add) are locked down in less than an hour most times.


We have two listed mods for this forum... cloxxi who's a "co-mod" here but a primary mod in the 29er forum, and evidently spends most of his time there now, and Trevor who's listed as a full mod for here and super-mod as well and who isn't even active on the site very often (when I checked 5 hours ago the last time he'd been on was 4 days ago). Rumpfy's active on the vintage forum and he moves in to mod the spam faster than white on rice (as I've said before) so much that makes me wonder if he's an insomniac also who uses counting vintage bikes threads as a sleep aid.


----------



## useyourdagger (Jan 9, 2004)

*My Bizango is 3.53 pounds*

My '97 Voodoo Bizango, Tange Ultimate Superlight, size 17.25, is 1,602 grams on the digital scale. It was lighter than the Litespeed Obed, and rode better, so I kept it and sold the ti.


----------



## Overkill (Mar 28, 2004)

I have mixed feeling about the spamming in this particular thread. There are certainly varying degrees of spamming, and I feel this is on the lighter side - At least there is SOME valuable information coming from the OP. I've read others that are just plain shameless. I guess it's difficult to draw the line, and is further complicated by different mods having different definitions, or in this case, no mod really present at all. 

I just recently received my new steel waltworks frame a few weeks ago and it came in at 1,740grams. Had I known the information from the OP, I may have considered him for the build. I haven't even had a chance to ride the bike yet, due to the crappy conditions up in Ottawa, so I'm in no way saying I am displeased with my purchase. There is so many of these small frame builders around, so it proves to be very difficult for consumers to know anything about their products. 

I'm certainly not condoning spamming, but maybe this site does need a section for this type of posting.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Has anyone got any pix, or know anything about Don Myrah era Ritcheys and Steelmans?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

teamdicky said:


> So how 'bout it? Why not a "Manufacturer's News" sub-forum here? Then there would be an agreed upon place where all this info could be discussed, and nobody would get their feathers ruffled over it.


I'd be fine with it.

I think the mtbr owners should also be fine with it, because when small companies innovate and tell people about it, that equals more traffic which equals more ad revenue which equals us someday becoming big enough to actually have an advertising budget *and* if we get the support that we need, _today,_ I'm personally more likely to spend that budget with people who supported us when we were new and underground.

Win, win, win.


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

Thylacine said:


> Win, win, win.


You get "The Office" down there??


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

I forgot to mention that not everybody is happy with having the separate manufacturer sub-forum.

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=231134

I forget that it's even there, and only the most recent post shows up on the front page.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

teamdicky said:


> You get "The Office" down there??


Yeah man, we get both flavours, even the one with the subtitles.


----------



## drunkle (Nov 11, 2005)

DeeEight said:


> What advances? Other than 953, there's been nothing that new in steel in the past decade,


http://users.ntsource.com/~bluedevil/ Tribune_damascus_steel.htm

your response:

oh right, african steel, but not european steel!


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Overkill said:


> I just recently received my new steel waltworks frame a few weeks ago and it came in at 1,740grams. Had I known the information from the OP, I may have considered him for the build. I haven't even had a chance to ride the bike yet, due to the crappy conditions up in Ottawa, so I'm in no way saying I am displeased with my purchase. There is so many of these small frame builders around, so it proves to be very difficult for consumers to know anything about their products.


The weather's been good this week. The salt dust on the road on the other hand... 

But really... how can you call yourself canadian and not order a DeKerf, TrueNorth, Brodie or Peyto ?!


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

drunkle said:


> http://users.ntsource.com/~bluedevil/ Tribune_damascus_steel.htm
> 
> your response:
> 
> oh right, african steel, but not european steel!


I was referring to steel used in bicycle frames, the point of this thread afterall being steel bike frames. Of course some people obviously need a 2x4 to the cranium to get that info to filter past their eyeballs.


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

D8, your arguments would carry more weight if you would simply lay off the personal jibes. They don't help your case any- they simply cause people to tune what you may have to say right out.



miles


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

miles said:


> D8, your arguments would carry more weight if you would simply lay off the personal jibes. They don't help your case any- they simply cause people to tune what you may have to say right out.
> 
> miles


what does it say under my username (and has said for many years now) ?


----------



## Overkill (Mar 28, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> The weather's been good this week. The salt dust on the road on the other hand...
> 
> But really... how can you call yourself canadian and not order a DeKerf, TrueNorth, Brodie or Peyto ?!


Yeah, the weather has definitely improved this week - I did manage to get on the road bike a couple of times, and as you mentioned there is A LOT of salt everywhere. We need some heavy rain.

I hate to say it, but the prices from Dekerf and TrueNorth were a little high compared with the US companies. I didn't even know Brodie did custom Steel and I've never heard of Peyto. Maybe Peyto needs to do some spamming on the eastern canada forum 

In addition to the frames being cheaper, walt (walworks) offers amazing prices on components when you order one of his frames (below Canadian retailer cost in most cases). I always did love the look of the TrueNorth frames though...

I don't think the snow will be around long this spring when it gets warm. I went skiing yesterday from P16 to Lac Taylor and back, and there were already bare patches. We don't have a lot of base this year.


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> what does it say under my username (and has said for many years now) ?


You certainly do seem to have labeled yourself "Arrogant Pr!ck" but there really is no need to confirm it to the world. There are many on this board whose breadth and scope of knowledge exceeds yours, as painful as it may be to you to admit it. From what I have seen as often as not your posts display a certain level of understanding greatly exceeded by your estimation of that level.

miles


----------



## hamachi (May 9, 2006)

"Steel and Light. No, that's not an oxymoron. It's SPAM!"


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

hamachi said:


> "Steel and Light. No, that's not an oxymoron. It's SPAM!"


No, Spam and Lite is an oxymoron.


----------



## Jamdel (Apr 28, 2005)

*Anchor(Bridgestone)*

I know my Anchor frame(Tange) is not the lightest around, but it sure does gives a hell of a ride.










More pictures :

https://s18.photobucket.com/albums/b142/jamdel007/Anchor 8490g/

Weight of frame is 1770g(Medium)
Weight of bike is 8380g.



Thylacine said:


> Hey Weenies,
> 
> What's the lightest steel XC frame you've ever come across?
> 
> ...


----------



## drunkle (Nov 11, 2005)

DeeEight said:


> I was referring to steel used in bicycle frames, the point of this thread afterall being steel bike frames. Of course some people obviously need a 2x4 to the cranium to get that info to filter past their eyeballs.


oh yeah? well... your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!


----------



## Jamdel (Apr 28, 2005)

*Anchor(Bridgestone) Tange*

I know my Anchor frame(Tange) is not the lightest around, but it sure does gives a hell of a ride.










More pictures :

https://s18.photobucket.com/albums/b142/jamdel007/Anchor 8380g/

Weight of frame is 1770g(Medium)
Weight of bike is 8380g.

*Check out this webs :*

https://www.anchor-bikes.com/

https://translate.google.com/transl...http://www.anchor-bikes.com/bikes/xnc7el.html



Thylacine said:


> Hey Weenies,
> 
> What's the lightest steel XC frame you've ever come across?
> 
> ...


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

Very nice! I love the color. Nicely built. Superbe:thumbsup:


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

I think a light bike called Anchor is superb. I shoulda named the Ether something a bit heavier than, well, a gas.


----------



## milehi (Nov 2, 1997)

The lightest steel frame I know of is the Trillium Outlaw from Rodriguez Bikes. It's a road frame, but they do mountain frames too and they can't weigh much more than this. It's made from True Temper S3, and a 54cm frame with paint comes in at 1203 grams/2.6lbs. Complete bike weight is 14.75lbs with Campy Record.

http://www.rodcycle.com/


----------



## Pooh Bear (May 25, 2006)

Vader said:


> The lightest steel frame I know of is the Trillium Outlaw from Rodriguez Bikes. It's a road frame, but they do mountain frames too and they can't weigh much more than this. It's made from True Temper S3, and a 54cm frame with paint comes in at 1203 grams/2.6lbs. Complete bike weight is 14.75lbs with Campy Record.
> 
> http://www.rodcycle.com/


Okay, it's possible to build a bike frame that light, but will it be strong enough? Ultralight steel frames could be quite flexy around the bb or something like that. Or maybe the walls are so thin that light shines through them? :skep:

I think a 1500gr steel frame will be the lightest I would ride offroad with little jumps and drops.

And since everybody seems to talk about SPAM. If this is spam, so what? If someone posts pix of their bikes just to say: "Look! I've built another ultra bling (garage) queen!" It's spam as well - not as direct, but still.


----------



## milehi (Nov 2, 1997)

Pooh Bear said:


> Okay, it's possible to build a bike frame that light, but will it be strong enough? Ultralight steel frames could be quite flexy around the bb or something like that. Or maybe the walls are so thin that light shines through them? :skep:
> 
> I think a 1500gr steel frame will be the lightest I would ride offroad with little jumps and drops.
> 
> And since everybody seems to talk about SPAM. If this is spam, so what? If someone posts pix of their bikes just to say: "Look! I've built another ultra bling (garage) queen!" It's spam as well - not as direct, but still.


 I'm certainly no expert on tubing but found this in the Henry James wep page

TRUE TEMPER'S S3 Super Strength Steel Series is based on state of the art steel metallurgy. The metallurgists at True Temper developed this alloy and a special heat treatment for it to optimize the steel for the construction of minimum weight frames. The ultimate tensile strength exceeds 195,000 psi.

I was not allowed to ride the Trillium Outlaw pictured on their site. I just sat on it(a bit small at 54cm) and checked the BB for deflection, which there was very little of.


----------



## Pooh Bear (May 25, 2006)

Vader said:


> TRUE TEMPER'S S3 Super Strength Steel Series [...] The ultimate tensile strength exceeds 195,000 psi.


PSI is pounds per square inch right? There won't be too many square inches with ultra thin tubing. :thumbsup: 
But anyways, if one can build it one should ride it.


----------



## EBG 18T (Dec 31, 2005)

Thyacine - one thing i havent seen discussed and to me is the important reason to buy a steel frame is the actual ride quality. How does this frame ride? Please don't tell me it's good. Compare it to something else out there for a ride quality comparison.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

EBG 18T said:


> Thyacine - one thing i havent seen discussed and to me is the important reason to buy a steel frame is the actual ride quality. How does this frame ride? Please don't tell me it's good. Compare it to something else out there for a ride quality comparison.


Tell ya what, I'll let my sponsored guys get more miles under their belts, and then they can swap stories for.....oh, I dunno.....a box or two of Hammer gels.

:thumbsup:


----------



## aussie_yeti (Apr 27, 2004)

more miles? does that mean erin and brett have theirs? if so, damn, i should have raced today, i can't wait to see these things. heard erin won though so thylacine on the box again, sounds like it didn't take him long to get used to it.


----------



## royale_ (May 8, 2006)

aussie_yeti said:


> more miles? does that mean erin and brett have theirs? if so, damn, i should have raced today, i can't wait to see these things. heard erin won though so thylacine on the box again, sounds like it didn't take him long to get used to it.


It was a 1,2 finish for thylacine today at the XC race, with Erin finishing in the top spot (and me in second).

I race an Arete Ti currently and won't be getting one of the Ethers at this point because I'm still in love with Ti. So I won't be able to comment on the Ether ride quality, but I'm sure Erin will have plenty to say when he gets his.

However, I have been racing my new single speed Arete on Thursday nights and its proving to be a very worthy race machine (although it wasn't build for racing).


----------



## xc-ss'er (Jul 11, 2006)

Pooh Bear said:


> PSI is pounds per square inch right? There won't be too many square inches with ultra thin tubing. :thumbsup:
> But anyways, if one can build it one should ride it.


square inch refers to 2 dimensions...flatness...surface area.

depth, or thickness, has nothing to do with it.

this thread is non-sense.

You hard-asses out there need to find something better to do. Let this guy introduce his product and keep what he wants to himself. If you don't like it, tough luck. He didn't ask you to. Just end it there.


----------



## Pooh Bear (May 25, 2006)

xc-ss'er said:


> square inch refers to 2 dimensions...flatness...surface area.
> 
> depth, or thickness, has nothing to do with it.
> 
> ...


Yep, surface area! now think of thin tubes with thin walls. Cut through them and tell me about the surface that's still there. We're talking wall thickness and the surface of that ring you can see when you look at a cut tube. 
Remember: the last thing you see before you die is the ring! 

BTW: I really like thylacine telling us about this frame.


----------



## chuggboy (Jan 10, 2005)

*Baum Espresso...*

Hi,

my current (hopefully everlasting) ride is a steel Baum Espresso. 19.25' c-c and weighs 1750gms.

As all good steel frames do, rides perfectly for me. forgiving, but still hauls.

CJ

www.baumcycles.com


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Sneak Peek


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

Thylacine said:


> Sneak Peek


Sneak peak.
How 'bout the Full Monty?
I want a Seal finish on mine.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

The Seal finish is awesome. It allows you to be a fatty but still fast as hell.

arf arf!


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

Enough with the foreplay already Warwick!  

I demand a full body shot ASAP!

Dave.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Ooorite, oorite, keep yer knickers on!

Here are our latest babies, straight back from the finisher. These are both a Large, sized to suite a rider 5ft 8 to 5ft 11-ish. Weight without decals, headbadge or binder bolt is 1560g.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

And here is the Antique Bronze.

*Bling-o-rama!*


----------



## royale_ (May 8, 2006)

Thylacine said:


> And here is the Antique Bronze.
> 
> *Bling-o-rama!*


Dude!
Thats looks farking HOT!!!!

Maybe when I get a roadie I'll go for that finish..... 

The welds look awesome, it doesn't look like the finish added any material to the frame.

What was the pre-finish weight vs post finish weight? aka. how much weight did the finish actually add?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Not 100% sure because the first time it was weighed without any hydro guides as we were still waiting for them.

Looks like about 30g or so.

I have to say though, it's a bit like running down the street naked, because the finish is so thin you can see every little bead, every little nuance, and that's after two rounds of hand finishing and bead blasting.


----------



## smudge (Jan 12, 2004)

Did Chris weld those up for you? Looking good.


----------



## Strong Ti (Jun 1, 2005)

*Looks a bit like a road frame*

With the HT cable guides and the integrated seat collar.

Would a separate seat collar have been lighter?

All up a great effort in steel, 3.44lb for a large is similar to what can be achieved in Ti.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

We kinda forget that MTB's were cabled up like that for years before we were bewitched with running them on the top tube. However, outer is heavy, and if you run a liner the entire length, how is that not just as impervious to the elements and low maintenance as running them along the top tube?

A seperate seat colar would've been lighter, but the seat tube is so thin we wanted to make sure the seat tube didn't crack at the base of the slot, which is way too common. That LS collar has built in reinforcement, which is an ounce of security in our book.

That was the whole deal with this new model - build it light, but don't cut corners. We probably could've lopped another 50g off without too much trouble, but It's not something I'd want to put our stickers on.

Well, we can lop more than 50g off. That's where the Ether SL comes in.

When I have time.:crazy:


----------



## floibex (Feb 7, 2004)

... german made wiesmann thurot III, built from a mix of dedaccai eom & sat, columbus nemo tubes, special steerer (os deda eom downtube with internally brazed rings), bb shell milled down internally and outside, etc.. below 1500 gr. im sizes s to m.



















in every size aprox. 200gr. lighter than the thurot II "standard" custom model.

ciao
flo


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

floibex said:


> ... german made wiesmann thurot III, built from a mix of dedaccai eom & sat, columbus nemo tubes, special steerer (os deda eom downtube with internally brazed rings), bb shell milled down internally and outside, etc.. below 1500 gr. im sizes s to m.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


wow.. and prices starting at 1900 EUR :yikes:


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

That's USD500 more than the Ether. USD700 if you add freight, which is included in the Ethers price in the US of USD1995.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

And it doesn't look half as good


----------



## sever (Apr 20, 2007)

*in the red corner, wearing his mother's pajamas, deeeeeeee....*



Thylacine said:


> We probably could've lopped another 50g off without too much trouble, but It's not something I'd want to put our stickers on.


Hmm..makes me wonder what those stickers weigh?

For me, a head badge is more than enough branding. And if you're really a weenie, even that has to go.
I wonder why nobody's tried to stamp their logo onto the headtube, the way you put a serial number on the bottom bracket?
oh, and personally, I find that golden finish abhorrent. You'd have to really love the light weight thing to stomach that. Hope the other colors look better!

Props to thylacine for a truly innovative new bike. And thank you for showing these mugs what a true custom framebuilder is. Whenever I see a new custom bike with a tubing sticker on the seat tube I'm dissapointed. To me, that stuff is for the big manufacturers, and it's half marketing. Like a nike swoosh or something. Just there to make the bike look fancy or provide a pedigree. If you really want to build the best bikes you need to examine the properties in each individual tube and correlate that against the intended use. 
The whole tubing craze goes back to the reynolds guys, with their 531. Half a century ago it was the only thing worth building a high end bike out of, and everybody expected to see that effin logo on the seat tube.
And demanding that thylacine reveal the make and model of each individual tube _of each size_ is like asking the gourmet chef who made your dinner where he buys each ingredient.
A) You don't need to know, because it's meaningless to you. 
B) It doesn't matter, because it's all about the finished product.

I see Strong chimed in, and that reminded me this section of his site. Check out the tube descriptions section for some broad generalizations about different tubesets. If nothing else this should inform you of how worthless it is to judge a frame by its tubing manufacturer. If you really are interested in the physics of the metals, read the 7-part deal on mettalurgy there. But that's only part of it, as a frame is an engineered structural member, dealing with all kinds of forces.

Oh thylacine, your welds look fine from a structural sense, but they stick out in a sorta ugly way. Is that from the really light finish? Or does the stainless wire have something to do with it?

Oh, and on the topic in general, I really wonder what these ultralight steel bikes ride like. I have a team marin frame built outta that tange ultimate stuff, and you guys seem to say it rides nice. It's so light, I had been afraid to build it up until now, for fear of it being too stiff. But then again, I've been suprised by lighter aluminum frames being sufficiently compliant, and I've ridden heavy steel bikes that rode like crap. we'll see.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Hi Sever,

Well, I've never weighed the stickers to be honest. I know the headbadge weighs just this side of 20g (Pewter is heavy). On the Ether SL that we will probably release next year we are looking at putting the 'headbadge' straight into the headtube, which will actually save us 25-30g.

What we're doing is getting the Ethers rolling and really using that model as our ultimate steel frame and using the development of that to drive our other models. Also, we're totally over-committed to new models this year and with a new baby on the way, I've been told by the boss not to get too excited!

The deal with the finish is that it's essentially a raw finish, so absolutely everything shows through it. With paint you can smooth things out, but with this finish every single microscopic blip shows. I know that won't be to everyones' liking, but it's just the way things have to be if you want this type of frame.

As for the bronze looking ugly, here's what it looks like shot with a more decent camera. It's actually much greener than the above photos and frankly, it's my fave.


----------



## Toff (Sep 11, 2004)

If you don't mind giving up a trade secret, whats the best way to clean up an old/scratched up Ti frame.

I love my old frame but it is looking a bit beat up and I would like to freshen it up a bit if i can.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

sever said:


> oh, and personally, I find that golden finish abhorrent. You'd have to really love the light weight thing to stomach that. Hope the other colors look better!


I prefer my silver/grey frame, but I have to admit the bronze looks pretty damn nice in the flesh.

Mine came in at 1538gr:









And the the full bike, at 9260gr









Who ever said a steel bike was heavier?



> Oh, and on the topic in general, I really wonder what these ultralight steel bikes ride like. I have a team marin frame built outta that tange ultimate stuff, and you guys seem to say it rides nice.


The ride of my Ether is just sublime. Rutted out corners, railway sleepers, it's like they don't even exist. It smooths out the trail and at the same time its much livelier than my old frame. I'd heard from a few people that the ride was different, but I didn't expect it to make such a big difference. Now I just need to get a steel roady too .


----------



## sever (Apr 20, 2007)

yeah, that looks a lot better. good even.

I forgot to mention, it's really nice to see downtube cable routing on a production frame again. 

what do the stripes signify?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Google "Thylacine"


----------



## sever (Apr 20, 2007)

*i figured it was a hallucinogen*









man that is one ugly cat.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

sever said:


> man that is one ugly cat.


I doubt being killed and stuffed does much for their looks.


----------



## EuroMack (Jan 15, 2007)

I like the top tube sticker, but think it cheapens an otherwise beautiful frame. You should find a skilled painter to airbrush the stripes, at least for one demo frame. Maybe with a bit less contrast, like a real Thylacine, instead of black and white. Can anyone photoshop some dark gray 'shadow' stripes on that gray frame?

I second the opinion that downtube cable routing is both lighter and shifts better than top tube.

Would V-brake bosses weigh less than IS disc mount plus brace?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Yeah, marginally.

Decals are just a matter of personal opinion. There's nothing stopping anyone taking the top tube panel off if they wanted to be more stealth.

Yeah, if you were stuffed you'd look like crap too. Here's an actual photo of live ones. A slightly more accurate representation.


----------



## sever (Apr 20, 2007)

didn't mean anything by it. just think stuffed animals are funny.

I really like someguy's bike and the seal finish.

mack hit the nail on the head. you could try making a template and just painting the stripes on, whatever color you like. nothing fancy. maybe you'll save weight. ha!

don't make me rattlecan an old steel frame just to prove how good it looks.


----------



## xc-rider (Jan 16, 2004)

Hey guys,

Since we are talking about steel bikes... here is another one that's light, but not an oxymoron 

http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1010106vz1.jpg

http://img245.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1010107bg8.jpg

http://img245.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1010108ye0.jpg

The way it's built really is just for training, but since I really like how the frames rides and feels, I think I'll build the bike with my race setup (this is me an my usual race bike : http://seaotter.mtbr.com/2007/04/28/look-introduces-the-986-mountain-bike/dsc04635jpg/ ) and see how good it is when built superlight...

Thylacine, hope you don't mind me showing a steel frame that's not one of yours in this thread... I really like to try one of yours though, as I think the paint of my frame really add some useless weight and your design really is nice !!! :thumbsup:


----------



## tl1 (Dec 21, 2003)

xc-rider said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Since we are talking about steel bikes... here is another one that's light, but not an oxymoron


Your bike looks great. I always admired the Scapins and now they're doing very cool looking carbon+steel frames. Apparently they don't want DeeEight riding one though.


----------



## EuroMack (Jan 15, 2007)

What is the short piece of carbon seat tube supposed to do?


----------



## Hud (Jun 22, 2004)

I think the carbon seat tube/post is one piece.
Imagine walking out of a shop with a seat post that was over a metre long.


----------



## xmessenger (Aug 13, 2010)

*Waaaaay too late to ask.*



DeeEight said:


> Arrow Racing had an Aermet 100 front end / prestige chromoly rear end model in the mid 90s that was 3 pounds even. Reynolds 953 couldn't be any worse than the 853 is for frame weights. Reynolds just isn't the best tube choice for lightness and hasn't been for years. Its a shame Japanese made Tange steel became unavailable for a few years otherwise people today wouldn't have forgotten about it so much. I had a 21.5" Rocky Mountain Team Comp frame in 1992 that used Tange Ultimate Ultralight Prestige chromoly tubing, and weighed 3.75 Ibs. I've got a custom 1999 TrueNorth right now that's a 16" size in reynolds 853 that's the same weight.


Just been checkin out old threads and came across mention of the Rocky Team Comp. I claimed an abandoned one in my building awhile back and turned it into my all purpose street machine(live in a city). There is little info on this bike. Mines silver, a 92, 17". I put a little cash into it and love it as its the only bike I have/ can afford.I wonder how light my frame is? I know that its sitting at about 21-22lbs complete with a 96 TB Project 2. Not too shabby concidering theres really no uber pricey parts but then narrow slicks help. What I most enjoy is the look of shock when some kid on a fixie picks up my fully geared mountain bike that weighs near what his ride weighs. She's a sleeper and makes for an excellent traffic bike...very flickable...and smooth.:thumbsup:


----------



## nspace (May 25, 2006)

Has anyone mentioned English Cycles? He'd be my first choice for lightweight steel. I think he has some road frames weighing in around 1300g ~ with integrated seat masts (so if you factor in not needing a standard seatpost), that is a pretty light frame. Not sure what the MTB frames weigh in at though.
mountain bikes | English Cycles

True North cycles would be the absolute last frame builder I would get to build me a lightweight frame.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

There's been a sub kilo steel road frame built, but that doesn't mean anyone should ride it.


----------



## nspace (May 25, 2006)

Huh?


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Wuh?


----------



## nspace (May 25, 2006)

Didnt realize how old this thread was. Was your comment in response to me? If so, not sure why the snarky response? I posted a link to a steel frame builder known for doing lightweight steel frames in a thread about lightweight steel frames...


----------

