-
my bikes perhaps receive a little less stresses than some other folk's
Where's that gif...
-
And it doesn't ride differently to steel.
When I started speaking to Gaulzetti about my Seven last year he said (I italicised the important bit):
'Stainless is another $1000 due to material costs and increased labor time incurred. Again- it doesn’t make for a better bike. It just allows for an 1100 gram steel frame if that is desired. If I’m looking to build in the snap and rigidity and liveliness I like in a race bike- there is negligible weight savings as I generally end up speccing the same tubing profiles and diameters in both XCR and Columbus Spirit/Life/Niobium etc. If you truly want a frame that will have an infinite fatigue life and never corrode- I’d rather work with you on a titanium project. XCR isn’t truly stainless and is a bit on the brittle side compared to other materials. All stuff I account for with our heat treatment schedule, argon induced welding, and final finish work on stainless frames- but with Ti you can literally bury the frame under the ocean for a decade, dredge it up, and with some red scotch brite and elbow grease- the frame will be good as new! Not such an option with any modern steel- stainless or otherwise. '
Dave Kirk even advises people who live near the sea to not buy 953 frames because stainless reacts with salt air. Lol.
You are reading a single comment by @PhilDAS and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
BareNecessities
JB
@PhilDAS
Stainless is also prohibitively expensive. I'm only 65 kilos so my bikes perhaps receive a little less stresses than some other folk's