So, I've been riding a custom scandium / carbon frame for a few years, and love it. It was my first custom road frame and I've learnt just what I like, and also a few things I don't.

I'm also starting to wonder just how much longer I'm going to get out of the frame. Lots of travel / packing, and a whole load of thrashing. While it's got a life time guarantee, my eye is starting to wander, just a little.

I've been looking at Reynolds 953 and Columbus XCr tubesets. I'm a big fan of steel, and have a few other steel bikes that make me happy (531c, Slx, Verus/Ox Platinum steels), but really like the idea of a lower maintenance steel. It seems somehow more attractive to me that Ti (I just don't think I'm a Ti guy), and I've got the opportunity to get a high end custom stainless at a very good price.

So, my question is this: Is anyone riding a bike using 953 or XCr? I've done a lot of reading about the properties of these new steels, but it's only raw data. It seems it's very stiff, but does lack some of the steel "spring" effect.

With the ability of various builders to fabricate steel frames with sealed tubes, I guess I'm prepared to go for a non-stainless, if it rides better.

Apart from indie fab whos making 953 frames? My understanding is that due to its hardness its difficult to work with?

The Indie Fab SSR is ridiculosly hot (for a road bike at least) but at $3700 US for a frame/fork your well into (and above in most cases) custom ti territory.

Whats the advantage over ti?

Hi Musket,

I recently read a long article about XCr on an italian site, much of it was so technical that I struggled a bit to follow it. However the following quote should answer your question about it's springyness.

"Elevato modulo elastico (211.000 MPa), doppio rispetto a quello di un tubo in titanio e triplo rispetto a quello di un tubo in alluminio;"

My loose translation: High modulus of elasticity, (211.000 MPa), double that of titanium and triple that of aluminium tubing.

HTH(I'm a twerp)

Cycling Plus mag have a test of a Stainless steel frame in their mag from a couple of months ago (I have it here).
Don’t know what brand etc but one beautiful ride. The stainless is polish/clearcoated where it isn’t painted (the paint is red and cream) and it looks beautiful
It did everything good in the riding debt too.
The cost – about 3k UK pounds!

Siting the maintenance issue as a reason for buying one – is that by way of justification?

My steel framed bike is 15 years old, I’ve ridden it in all weathers etc and last year when I had the frame sandblasted there were only a few small lines of rust under the paint = nothing worth worrying about apart from the paint wasn’t perfect.

If you read the last sentence, you'll see it's not justification.

Steels have evolved hugely in the last few years, and so I think it's important to consider the modern materials when looking at a new steel frameset. £3000 is a lot, and well in excess of the price you actually need to pay for a well built custom stainless frame.

The strength numbers quoted are interesting (thanks Nige) - they'd suggest some ride quality may be lost, whereas I've seen articles by Dario Pegoretti claiming that for his frames the material makes no difference, rather the tube profile (which explains why Columbus make a specific tubeset that he and Richard Sachs use exclusively). The Ultrafoco stays were famously thin walled and strong, which explains the tear drop shape to them.

Of course if it's the strength (and corresponding lightening of tubes via decreased thickness and butt) that influences this in stainless, it's possibly something to beware of with many new steels - Columbus Spirit is .2mm.

One of the possible compromises is to look at a mixed tubeset (though as I understand it stainless / non stainless won't blend well) to provide a nice, firm front end, and still retain that lovely steel feel for the pedaling platform.

So, anyone ridden one?

FLATULENTFRIEND wrote:My steel framed bike is 15 years old, I’ve ridden it in all weathers etc and last year when I had the frame sandblasted there were only a few small lines of rust under the paint = nothing worth worrying about apart from the paint wasn’t perfect.

Have you seen inside the tubes? That's where rust is most destructive.

Only if you know it's there!

If I can hijack the thread a minute...

I noticed a bit of rust colour in the grease when I removed the seatpost. What should I be doing to protect my frame?

btw. I'm reading a couple of long threads about XCr at the Italian forum, http://www.bdc-forum.it (one of the contributors is Dario Pegoretti) but it's all technical stuff that you've probably read already. If I find and actual ride review I'll post it here.

napolinige wrote:If I can hijack the thread a minute...

I noticed a bit of rust colour in the grease when I removed the seatpost. What should I be doing to protect my frame?

btw. I'm reading a couple of long threads about XCr at the Italian forum, http://www.bdc-forum.it (one of the contributors is Dario Pegoretti) but it's all technical stuff that you've probably read already. If I find and actual ride review I'll post it here.

I used boiled linseed oil (it was stripped), as per this http://surlybikes.com/blog/spew/spew_9_ ... eel_frame/

^^^ That's a good one, as is odourless fish oil or a can of J.P. Weigle's Framesaver. Strip the frame right down, add the substance of your choice, plug all the holes, shake vigorously and leave for 24 hours, then open it back up, let it dry out a bit and rebuild your baby.

I've been told that LPS-3 is much better than the Weagle Frame Saver.

Only problem, is that I can't find anyone who knows what LPS3 is! Need to re=proof my Gazelle and Bosomworth, and also do some maintenance on the Soulcraft.

Weigles is pretty damn good - what degree of goodness do you need? Also, my favourite is the fish oil.

Sean at Soulcraft said that there's nothing better than LPS-3. He used to recommend Weigle for his frames, now he recommends LPS-3 - that's enough for me.

(edit - Dave - chur!)

Okay, that's good enough for me too!