# How does a lugged steel frame compared to weld?



## aclinjury

I've always wonder about this. See I have a '93 Casati and people tell me it's Columbus steel, and to be more specific, it's probably 4130 thin tube chromoly steel. But I notice that the joints are not welded at the bottom bracket area, but it's lugged.

And I see that custom bike builders today like to build frames that use lugs, and the bike style they build are similar to those classic Italian 80s & 90s steel frame. Aside, from nostalgia and the desire to ride something classic, is there an advantage or disadvantage of any sort in using lugs over welding? I would imagine quality lugs are more expensive to make than to just weld it?

I don't see the big names making lugged frames, only the custom ones. So I can only assume that lugged frames are either expensive to make or not as stiff or both? Would like to know a little more info.


----------



## bigbill

Welding of frames became popular with MTB's in the late 80's. Welding has a lower cost than lugs and brazing and tubesets were made for tig welding. There's nothing wrong with either method, both will produce a strong joint, a welded frame can be lighter, but it all comes down to the tubeset used and the construction. I have three steel frames, a welded Pegoretti, lugged Merckx, and a fillet brazed custom. All three have excellent rides. 

If you're a steel fan, check out R&A Cycles, they have a large inventory of NOS steel frames.


----------



## Cbookman

Lugged construction limits the geometries a bit. You can build a frame with either construction type and still get the same/similar ride qualities. It can be welded, fillet brazed, or brazed with lugs. Most custom builders do lugged or fillet brazed or welded. I suggest you do a little more looking around, as there is a wealth of information around about the various construction types. 

All tubing used in the construction of steel bikes (other than stainless) is a type of 4130 chromoly. 4130 is a general class of steels, based on the content of the alloying elements. The different types of alloys allow for higher strengths, allowing for thinner tubing and incrementally lighter frames in the right hands.


----------



## SilverStar

Lugged frames are more expensive to make -- a bit more labor intensive, but there is no inherent advantage to using them. It's primarily a way for a custom builder to express his/her artistic talents (carved and shaped lugwork).


----------



## Dereck

I've got one of each - an English built Bob Jackson, lugged, full custom geo in Reynolds 853 OS and a welded steel Gunnar - stock geo, tubing unknown.

The Gunnar is a softer, easier ride, which is hardly surprising, but it still handles very well. Have never bothered to weigh either, and the Gunnar tends to have 'stuff' hanging off it whereas the BJ is more 'delusionally' rigged.

Lugs can be 'fudged' a little - mine had the top tube raised one cm at the front and dropped one cm at its rear end. Which caused no eyebrow raising at BJ's.

Ultimately, go with a builder you like, who specialises in whichever technique you fancy. Despite fashion, I still have the odd urge for a Waterford RS33 in their lightest welded steel - painted black with minimal decals, it would look like a plastic frame in the right light . Getting your geometry right comes first, followed by your aesthetics needs.

Good luck with your choices

D


----------



## Scooper

Tom Kellogg on lugs.


----------



## Rum Runner

I prefer the look of lugged frames. However that's my humble opinion


----------



## Kontact

Cbookman said:


> All tubing used in the construction of steel bikes (other than stainless) is a type of 4130 chromoly. 4130 is a general class of steels, based on the content of the alloying elements. The different types of alloys allow for higher strengths, allowing for thinner tubing and incrementally lighter frames in the right hands.


This is simply not true. 4130 is a very specific alloy of steel, different from even 4140 and other chrome-moly steels. Reynolds 531 and 753 steels are manga-moly. And none of the air hardening steels (Ox, 853, S3, 631), nor the micro alloyed niobium or Nivachrom is chromoly. 

Lugs allow generally lighter tubing and lower temperatures to have less impact on heat treated tubing. Generally, a lugged frame of fairly normal gauge tubing will be slightly lighter than the equivalent frame of TIG'd steel. It is a more involved building process than TIG.

I think lugs and fillet brazing are more elegant ways to join steel.


----------



## Mike Overly

Save for the Pegs, it's much easier to market ye olde lugged construction for the retro crowd. Except for the negligible weight difference there's no other non-aesthetic difference that comes to mind.


----------



## terbennett

I think that lugged looks better but welded is usually a little lighter.... Not sure if it's that much lighter but it still is.


----------



## CleavesF

Infidels! 

The only thing you need to know is that lugged is BALLLLLLLERRRRRR


----------



## turbogrover

Bike frames used to be lugged because of the technology of the era. Tubesets were thin, and difficult to weld without compromising the heat treatment of the tube at the weld zone. It was easier to control the quality of the frame, and the builder made less scrap frames by using lugs and brazing the tubes together. The lug was a neccessity.

Modern tubesets, and modern tig welders offer more consistency than before, and frames can be produced more cost effectively by welding them together nowadays. You just put the tubeset in a frame jig, and hit the "go" button on the robotic welder, and a frame is welded when you come back from your coffee break. Custom builders can weld with much more reliabiltiy than before, with the improvements in modern tig welders too.
Some of the special steel alloys still require low-heat brazing to manufacture them, to insure the strength and quality of the tubeset. So, the lugs still have a legit purpose for some frames. Builders can create some awesome looking lugs these days with the popularity of waterjet cutting, and it creates a very distinctive look on the finished bike that sets it apart from all the clone looking welded frames. Fillet brazing looks sweet, because the frame looks naked, and the joints of the frame look seamless.

I still drool over a nice, Columbus SLX tubed frame, with chromed lugs and chainstays. My 1st couple of bikes were Italian Columbus SL and SLX frames, and I loved them.


----------



## terbennett

turbogrover said:


> Bike frames used to be lugged because of the technology of the era. Tubesets were thin, and difficult to weld without compromising the heat treatment of the tube at the weld zone. It was easier to control the quality of the frame, and the builder made less scrap frames by using lugs and brazing the tubes together. The lug was a neccessity.
> 
> Modern tubesets, and modern tig welders offer more consistency than before, and frames can be produced more cost effectively by welding them together nowadays. You just put the tubeset in a frame jig, and hit the "go" button on the robotic welder, and a frame is welded when you come back from your coffee break. Custom builders can weld with much more reliabiltiy than before, with the improvements in modern tig welders too.
> Some of the special steel alloys still require low-heat brazing to manufacture them, to insure the strength and quality of the tubeset. So, the lugs still have a legit purpose for some frames. Builders can create some awesome looking lugs these days with the popularity of waterjet cutting, and it creates a very distinctive look on the finished bike that sets it apart from all the clone looking welded frames. Fillet brazing looks sweet, because the frame looks naked, and the joints of the frame look seamless.
> 
> I still drool over a nice, Columbus SLX tubed frame, with chromed lugs and chainstays. My 1st couple of bikes were Italian Columbus SL and SLX frames, and I loved them.


+1......... I still drool over old steel De Rosas, Olmos, Benottos and of course, Nagos (to name a few) with their well-crafted lug work and superb tubing. Even the Japanese bike companies and many American companies (Paramount, Medici and Specialized come to mind) had some bikes with well-designed, sculpted lugwork. All were absolutely gorgeous no matter how you define beauty. The attention to detail that was given to those old steeds was second to none. While I love my modern carbon and aluminum bikes, they don't evoke the same feelings as those vintage steel racers from decades ago.


----------



## CippoForLife

Well, I just had a chat with a customer about this.
I think it is less about construction method than it is about geometry, tube selection and build quality.
But generally, lugs are a tad heavier, and (barely) stronger, and brazed can be built a bit lighter.
Looks are a personal thing...I really dig the new Fondriest we just got in, but the Alchemy steel project we are working on will be brazed, for light weight raciness


----------



## bicyclerepairman

Those lugs remind me of what you used the see on the 30+ year old Eisentrauts.


----------



## cry lion

Kontact said:


> This is simply not true. 4130 is a very specific alloy of steel, different from even 4140 and other chrome-moly steels. Reynolds 531 and 753 steels are manga-moly. *And none of the air hardening steels (Ox, 853, S3, 631), nor the micro alloyed niobium or Nivachrom is chromoly. *
> 
> Lugs allow generally lighter tubing and lower temperatures to have less impact on heat treated tubing. Generally, a lugged frame of fairly normal gauge tubing will be slightly lighter than the equivalent frame of TIG'd steel. It is a more involved building process than TIG.
> 
> I think lugs and fillet brazing are more elegant ways to join steel.


Ox platinum and 853 is 4340 (or very close to it its) . 631 is unhardened 853. This is a form of chromoly.

MatWeb - The Online Materials Information Resource


Carbon, C - 0.370 - 0.430 % 
Chromium, Cr - 0.700 - 0.900 %	
Iron, Fe - 95.195 - 96.33 % As remainder
Manganese, Mn - 0.600 - 0.800 %	
Molybdenum, Mo - 0.200 - 0.300 %	
Nickel, Ni - 1.65 - 2.00 %	
Phosphorous, P - <= 0.0350 %
Silicon, Si - 0.150 - 0.300 %
Sulfur, S - <= 0.0400 %

Nickel is the difference between 4130/40 and 4340. Nickel is used to form nickel-iron martensite (plus the regular carbon-iron martensite). Nickel martensite is not as strong and hard but much tougher than carbon-iron martensite.


----------



## terbennett

bicyclerepairman said:


> Those lugs remind me of what you used the see on the 30+ year old Eisentrauts.


True, but it's hard not to love such a nice bike.


----------



## Kontact

cry lion said:


> Ox platinum and 853 is 4340 (or very close to it its) . 631 is unhardened 853. This is a form of chromoly.
> 
> MatWeb - The Online Materials Information Resource
> 
> 
> Carbon, C - 0.370 - 0.430 %
> Chromium, Cr - 0.700 - 0.900 %
> Iron, Fe - 95.195 - 96.33 % As remainder
> Manganese, Mn - 0.600 - 0.800 %
> Molybdenum, Mo - 0.200 - 0.300 %
> Nickel, Ni - 1.65 - 2.00 %
> Phosphorous, P - <= 0.0350 %
> Silicon, Si - 0.150 - 0.300 %
> Sulfur, S - <= 0.0400 %
> 
> Nickel is the difference between 4130/40 and 4340. Nickel is used to form nickel-iron martensite (plus the regular carbon-iron martensite). Nickel martensite is not as strong and hard but much tougher than carbon-iron martensite.


If 4340 was "pretty much the same" as 853, it would be an air hardening steel, not an oil quenching steel. Many steels contain chrome and molybdenum, but that doesn't mean they get referred to as "chromoly". 4340 contains manganese, but that doens't make it manga-moly, either.

853 is more like A2 in the way the alloy dictates properties and hardening.


----------



## Phaedrus75

Drool........


----------



## froze

I love the look of lugs, I'm a sucker for lugs, therefore I really like lugs. 

I agree with Tom as well at: Spectrum Cycles | Materials

But this is more detailed, and if you read far enough it was proven at the University of Davis that lug constructed bikes were stronger then welded...universities can sometimes have their heads up their arses! But here's the site: A


----------



## maxxevv

I don't quite dig the Hetchins, but I do dig the Columbine's ....


----------



## cry lion

Kontact said:


> If 4340 was "pretty much the same" as 853, it would be an air hardening steel, not an oil quenching steel. Many steels contain chrome and molybdenum, but that doesn't mean they get referred to as "chromoly". 4340 contains manganese, but that doens't make it manga-moly, either.
> 
> 853 is more like A2 in the way the alloy dictates properties and hardening.


Is it? 

FYI air hardening means air quenching, oil quenching means oil hardening.
You don't really know what air hardening means.

Just for the record a real air hardening steel would get brittle as glass after welding.
A typical air hardening steel is HSS types of steel and stainless tool steels. Air hardening steels are not weldable at room temperature at all and they need tempering after welding. High speed steel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I suggest you pick up some books.

Amazon.com: ASM Handbook: volume 4: Heat Treating (Asm Handbook) (Asm Handbook) (9780871703798): Asm: Books

Amazon.com: ASM Handbook Volume 1: Properties and Selection: Irons, Steels, and High-Performance Alloys (06181) (9780871703774): ASM International: Books

Amazon.com: ASM Handbook: Volume 6: Welding, Brazing, and Soldering (Asm Handbook) (9780871703828): Kelly Ferjutz, Joseph R. Davis: Books

Amazon.com: Asm Handbook: Properties and Selection : Nonferrous Alloys and Special-Purpose Materials (Asm Handbook) VOL. 2 (9780871703781): Asm: Books

Amazon.com: Stainless Steels (Asm Specialty Handbook) (06398G) (Asm Specialty Handbook) (9780871705037): Joseph R. Davis: Books

Amazon.com: Carbon and Alloy Steels (Asm Specialty Handbook) (Asm Specialty Handbook) (9780871705570): Asm International Handbook Committee, Joseph R. Davis: Books

Amazon.com: Tool Materials (Asm Specialty Handbook) (#06506G) (Asm Specialty Handbook) (9780871705457): Joseph R. Davis: Books

These are good.


----------



## Kontact

cry lion said:


> Is it?
> 
> FYI air hardening means air quenching, oil quenching means oil hardening.
> You don't really know what air hardening means.
> 
> Just for the record a real air hardening steel would get brittle as glass after welding.
> A typical air hardening steel is HSS types of steel and stainless tool steels. Air hardening steels are not weldable at room temperature at all and they need tempering after welding. High speed steel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> I suggest you pick up some books.
> 
> Amazon.com: ASM Handbook: volume 4: Heat Treating (Asm Handbook) (Asm Handbook) (9780871703798): Asm: Books
> 
> Amazon.com: ASM Handbook Volume 1: Properties and Selection: Irons, Steels, and High-Performance Alloys (06181) (9780871703774): ASM International: Books
> 
> Amazon.com: ASM Handbook: Volume 6: Welding, Brazing, and Soldering (Asm Handbook) (9780871703828): Kelly Ferjutz, Joseph R. Davis: Books
> 
> Amazon.com: Asm Handbook: Properties and Selection : Nonferrous Alloys and Special-Purpose Materials (Asm Handbook) VOL. 2 (9780871703781): Asm: Books
> 
> Amazon.com: Stainless Steels (Asm Specialty Handbook) (06398G) (Asm Specialty Handbook) (9780871705037): Joseph R. Davis: Books
> 
> Amazon.com: Carbon and Alloy Steels (Asm Specialty Handbook) (Asm Specialty Handbook) (9780871705570): Asm International Handbook Committee, Joseph R. Davis: Books
> 
> Amazon.com: Tool Materials (Asm Specialty Handbook) (#06506G) (Asm Specialty Handbook) (9780871705457): Joseph R. Davis: Books
> 
> These are good.


Quenching and hardening are synonyms, and I used them interchangeably. As did you.

Air hardening steels are not the same as any of the steels in the 4130 series, which you should know from those books. 853 heat treats like A2 (hardens in an air quenchant) but is an extrudable steel, like 4130. It is not either one, but has properties similar to both - which is the point I was making.

I don't have all those books - the ones I use for my heat treating are more specific to black smithing. But it doesn't appear that your exposure to them is helping you. All of these steels are "tool steels", a label we use because it implies a range of hardenable structural steels without needing to confuse things by referring to the chemistry. Chromoly is short for a narrow range of tool steels, and it just confuses matters when someone tries to make that term inclusive to more steels, since so many of them have those alloying elements in them.


----------



## froze

maxxevv said:


> I don't quite dig the Hetchins, but I do dig the Columbine's ....


I agree, the Hetchins lugs, though very artistic, is just too much...too pretty for my taste.


----------



## Phaedrus75

froze said:


> I agree, the Hetchins lugs, though very artistic, is just too much...too pretty for my taste.


......Wow, I'm surprised to hear that compared to the Columbine, the Hetchins appears too artistic, too much, too pretty............But to each his own...........Personally I would be content to own a bike from either company, and a lugged steel frame will more than likely be my next purchase........


----------



## Touch0Gray

I think that on the Hetchins, the lug lining is too much, if the lugs were one color whether it be the same as base paint or a compatible color it would look better.


----------



## froze

Phaedrus75 said:


> ......Wow, I'm surprised to hear that compared to the Columbine, the Hetchins appears too artistic, too much, too pretty............But to each his own...........Personally I would be content to own a bike from either company, and a lugged steel frame will more than likely be my next purchase........


I wasn't comparing one to the other, I was simply saying lugs designed like that are too pretty for my taste. I like lugs, don't get me wrong, in fact all my bikes have lugs and I'm a sucker for lugs, and I even like fancy ones like the Nervex lugs or the spear point lugs like I have on a Mercian, but anything beyond that type of thing and it's just too "pretty" for my taste. I'm going to say this in a way that I hope you don't take the wrong way, but I would expect to see a Hetchins lug or the Columbine lug on a womans bike. Again, like you said, to each their own.


----------



## Scooper

froze said:


> I wasn't comparing one to the other, I was simply saying lugs designed like that are too pretty for my taste. I like lugs, don't get me wrong, in fact all my bikes have lugs and I'm a sucker for lugs, and I even like fancy ones like the Nervex lugs or the spear point lugs like I have on a Mercian, but anything beyond that type of thing and it's just too "pretty" for my taste. I'm going to say this in a way that I hope you don't take the wrong way, but I would expect to see a Hetchins lug or the Columbine lug on a womans bike. Again, like you said, to each their own.


I tend to agree. I have Nervex Professional lugs on one bike and e-RICHIE's "Nexvex" lugs on another. I love them both, but they're about as fancy as I'm comfortable with. To me, there's great beauty in simple, functional lugs like those on Cinelli Supercorsas










...and the keyhole lugs found on Wastyn built Paramounts








.


----------



## Phaedrus75

While we are on the subject, has anyone here ever dealt with Rivendell Bicycle Works ?........I'm aware of Grant's history with Bridgestone, etc. but was wondering more about customer service/satisfaction.........Not that I could afford one at the moment, and I am certainly considering alot of different bikes, but I've always been curious about Riv bikes.........


----------



## Scooper

Phaedrus75 said:


> While we are on the subject, has anyone here ever dealt with Rivendell Bicycle Works ?........I'm aware of Grant's history with Bridgestone, etc. but was wondering more about customer service/satisfaction.........Not that I could afford one at the moment, and I am certainly considering alot of different bikes, but I've always been curious about Riv bikes.........


Rivendell is local, and Grant has lots of fans around here. Although I've never owned one, I've never heard anything but good things about the quality of Rivendell products and customer service. I'm sure there are dissatisfied customers somewhere, though; you can't please everybody. Grant is opinionated and gets flack for some of his opinions, but he usually has persuasive arguments to defend his points of view.


----------



## Kontact

Rivendell has their current bikes built for them by Waterford. The tubing seems to be selected for durability rather than ride qualities, which may explain their love of enormous tires.


----------



## froze

I have a friend who weighs 240 pounds of muscle. Back in the 80's he bought a Vitus AL and broke 2 of those frames in 2 or 3 years, then he bought a Klien and broke 2 of those within 4 years, then a Cannondale and broke broke 1 of those in 5 years. Then he decided to try steel so he bought a Rivendell. My friend explained his weight and he had broke those bikes frames and he wanted to tour across the US on a bike. Grant listened, had a Rivendell built and after 9 years of touring every year for 3 to 4 months at a time the bike is still going strong. 9 years is the longest my friend ever had a bike last! That bike is an actual Rivendell not a Atlantis or whatever other names they carry. 

I almost bought an Atlantis 4 years ago but decided instead on a Mercian because they had a lot more options I could have done to the frame that Grant couldn't do; plus I was taking a trip to England that year anyway so went to Derby and they custom measured me and built it and sent to my home 3 months later. Mercian builds their frames the real old school way, they heat the frame tubes in hearths before silver brazing them supposedly maintains the steels strength better along the whole tube. I don't much about that stuff but it sounded cool!!

I think there were lots of old school production bikes made in the late 70's and through the 80's that are every equal to a Rivendell frame or probably even the Mercian. I bought a 85 Schwinn LeTour Luxe for $100 used with only 250 miles on it in 2010 and that bike is every much the equal to the Mercian except the Schwinn weighs 3 pounds more, but when loaded for touring the Schwinn rides a bit better. Schwinn made a Voyager too that was fantastic; Trek 620 and 720 were fantastic; Bridgestone RB1 (a Grant design), Miyata 1000 and others were great bikes that one could find use today for a lot less money then Rivendell or Mercian, and those bikes were very well known reliable world travelers.


----------



## cry lion

Kontact said:


> Quenching and hardening are synonyms, and I used them interchangeably. As did you.
> 
> Air hardening steels are not the same as any of the steels in the 4130 series, which you should know from those books. 853 heat treats like A2 (hardens in an air quenchant) but is an extrudable steel, like 4130. It is not either one, but has properties similar to both - which is the point I was making.
> 
> I don't have all those books - the ones I use for my heat treating are more specific to black smithing. But it doesn't appear that your exposure to them is helping you. All of these steels are "tool steels", a label we use because it implies a range of hardenable structural steels without needing to confuse things by referring to the chemistry. Chromoly is short for a narrow range of tool steels, and it just confuses matters when someone tries to make that term inclusive to more steels, since so many of them have those alloying elements in them.


Seriously dude 4340 and A2 has nothing, I repeat, NOTHING in common! the only thing they have in commen is that they in majority both consist of iron. And thats it.

853 and OX platinum is 4340. 

A2 needs tempering and 4340 does not after "hardening", A2 is totally unusable in the untempered state (as are *all hardening steels*, this comes with the territory of all fully hardenable steels) while 4340 is quite usable, not optimal but usable and quite strong. One NEEDS tempering and the other one does not and there are different mechanisms at work here, yeah sure they both get harder but one needs tempering the other one don't. These steels are not even remotely similar in any way.

4340 is not air hardening, and not 4130 or any similar steel either, ALL real air hardening steels are VERY inapropriate for frames on all levels, its so stupid I can't I don't even know where to start.

Air hardening means you reach full martensite transformation with only non forced air, 4340 can never reach full martensite transformation at all, there is not enough carbon in there. Its hypoeutetctic which means its depraved of carbon so full martensite is impossible.

A2 is a hypereutectic steel which means all carbon is dissolved in the matrix and then after hardening you have a surplus which goes into carbides, in this case Mo-C and Cr-C.
Martensite is a combination of C and Fe.

The limit is 0.73% for a straight carbon-iron alloy.

And since 4340 can't even reach full hardness it can't possibly be air hardening, its physically impossible. Instead what happens is this. When you weld it *some of it *austenize and then you _quench it really slow, for this type of steel _(since you just leave it out in the air) and you get a *partial* martensite transformation. there is only enough carbon to harden some of it, and since not all of the material is transformed into martensite (which is 64hrc hardness as quenched is brittle as glass) you can get away with not tempering it since there is very much relatively soft material supporting it (the material which is depraved of carbon), but all in all you get a stength increase, or should I say an increase in hardness. 

An increase in overall toughness and usability is highly questionable, since you are having UNTEMPERED martensite in there (which is very bad in all constructions including bikes) and *not even tolerated in most parts at all*.

So infact you have 2 types of material, first you have untempered martensite and then an alloy which does not even have enough carbon to go hard at all in a mixture (but there is still a few fractions of a % C in there, nothing is ever absolute), basically you have mild steel.

If you were to weld A2 or any other air hardening steel you would have almost full martensite transformation (this is what makes steel strong) and this would be brittle, and about 95+% or so of the material would undergo this transformation, and you would need to temper it to lower the tension/pressure in the lattice. If you were to drop this on the floor before tempering it would shatter like glass.

For you who dont know what hardening means it means this:

When you heat up steel the iron atoms in the lattice/crystal expand from each other and if you heat it enough you can fit a carbon atom in there (and most gasses) and when you have lured that carbon atom in between the iron atoms (actually there is no need to lure it in there, this happens by a mechainsm called diffusion) you cool it really fast and by doing so you trap that cabon atom in between iron atoms, if you cool it slow the carbon atom escapes but if you cool it fast, its trapped. But since there is only room for the iron atoms that were there from the beginning that crystal is expanded by the extra carbon and becomes more incompressible, its hard, hardened. 

But its too hard to be usable so you need to heat it again at a lower temperature letting some of the carbon atoms out again. They escape better at higher temperature (the crystal expands with temperature), but they will escape with age too (several 1000 years). This is called *tempering*, and depending on alloy composition this has to be done several times, otherwise the steel will be brittle as glass. Its overpressurized from the inside in a kind of way.

A2 and similar steels has nothing to do with bike frames, A2 is used in tools for lathes (not the cutting parts), and other hard wear machines, where low distortion at quenching is required because the more aggressive you quench the more the part distorts. Thats why its called a tool steel, used for tools, not constructions, you can't HT constructions, they're too large. 

4340 is a construction steel, and its used in cases where 4130 is not strong enough but the part is too big to heat treat after welding, such as roll cages, airplanes etc. If you can HT it you can just as well save the money and use 4130 since its cheaper and more easily machined. If you weld HT'ed 4130 you have lowered the mechical properties. 

Same with 4340 except another property of the material makes up. In short you can get away with not tempering 4340 since its strong and durable enough as quenched (in air, slooow). The best is always fully hardened oil/aggressively quenched 4340 and then properly tempered (depending on application, part complexity, cost, big batch or one part, cost, performance/weight ratio, knowledge, etc etc).

But then again I don't work with this so what do I know really, maybe you could explain why 4340 (or a very similar alloy) is not 853/OX platinum and a similar alloy to A2 is for us contact.

I'm quite certain 4340 or something very very similar is it because its the only way the equation works out, easy as that.

(you actually have to read the books)


----------



## Kontact

cry lion,

That's a lot of information. Here's what I attempted to reduce it to:

The "stupidity" here is that 853 and Ox are advertised as "air hardening" as are other steels, like A series. But you are saying that True Temper and Reynolds are actually selling a steel well known as an oil hardening steel, and labeling it "air hardening". Is that correct?

A9 is a medium carbon steel that can be used without tempering. Does that also shatter like glass?

I also have a knife made of A2. Did the companies that make such knives do something wrong using A2 for a cutting blade?

Where can I also view the alloys of 853 and Ox Plat? Or read where Reynolds and True Temper refer to 4340?

Can we successfully sue both companies for claiming to have modified an aerospace steel grade, when they are secretly selling common 4340 oil quenching steel?


----------



## Ride-Fly

CippoForLife said:


> I really dig the new Fondriest we just got in, but the Alchemy steel project we are working on will be brazed, for light weight raciness


Is that from the new Fondriest company? I never saw a lugged frame from the original Fondriest. Man, that is nice looking! What steel and how much? Paint options?


----------



## cry lion

Kontact said:


> cry lion,
> 
> That's a lot of information. Here's what I attempted to reduce it to:
> 
> The "stupidity" here is that 853 and Ox are advertised as "air hardening" as are other steels, like A series. But you are saying that True Temper and Reynolds are actually selling a steel well known as an oil hardening steel, and labeling it "air hardening". Is that correct?
> 
> A9 is a medium carbon steel that can be used without tempering. Does that also shatter like glass?
> 
> I also have a knife made of A2. Did the companies that make such knives do something wrong using A2 for a cutting blade?
> 
> Where can I also view the alloys of 853 and Ox Plat? Or read where Reynolds and True Temper refer to 4340?
> 
> Can we successfully sue both companies for claiming to have modified an aerospace steel grade, when they are secretly selling common 4340 oil quenching steel?


Lets just say they have a different definition of what air hardening really is.
As you plobably know A2 stands for Air2 and all O-series oil, W-series water, but this all depends on thickness, preferably you cool all steels as aggressive as possible without it cracking in the process. So A, W, O are only "guidelines" and those definitions were implemented at least 50 years ago.

Many steels can be used without tempering. It depends on carbon content, quench method, 'alloy content, what alloying elements and hardenability.

If you were to take a steel like 1084 or something similar thats regarded as a waterhardening steel because you would need to get under the Ms (where martensite formations starts) line within 7 or 8 seconds or so, sure you could quench in oil, but then you would not get full hardness, forced air could do that too, now it goes even softer "as quenched". Now _maybe_ you can get away without tempering it, maybe. Suboptimal yes, in many ways but yeah you can do it. Doesn't mean you should though, it means there are better alternatives for this type of use and you should use that instead.

A2 would make a very good blade, very tough (only compared to most other steels used in knives, including all hardenable stainless steels) and can reach 60hrc, whats not to like. If you have a knife made out of this steel it was tempered after hardening, probably twice, so its not brittle as glass any longer. 

But making a bike out of A2, thats well, I wont say impossible but its kind of stupid, first its not even weldable at room temp, then after welding at extremely elevated temperature it would need normalizing, austenizing, and tempering (twice). And the end result would be worse than 4340/4130 because those 2 are much tougher (and weaker), I don't know but possibly 10 times as tough and half only as strong, just as stiff. Not a good tradeoff.

A9 contains *0.5% C,* (this is very low carbon content for hardenable steels) 0.5% Mn, 0.95–1.15% Si, 4.75–5.00% Cr, 1.25–1.75% Ni, 1.3–1.8% Mo, 0.8–1.4% V

So its almost weldable at room temp had it not been for the extremely high alloying content.. You could probably get away with not tempering it (for a comparatively really shitty and very expensive result no matter what it was supposed to do in the end), but what a waste when you can insted just ditch the 4% Cr, all Si, most of the Mo, and all but 0.2% V (for grain refinement), and have something more suitable for a bike that is. 

What would you sue them for? They are selling a product, tubes which they have welded and butted and whatever they do, they can call it whatever they want. Doesn't change the fact though. Do you know what it takes to develop custom non standardized alloys? I do.

And I'd say the chance is very slim this is the case, its much easier to just go with the best you can find and then maybe add 1 element which you know wont do anything but good, for example Vanadium or Niobium, no risk involved at all but it will be better, and more expensive.


----------



## cry lion

When you are making something out of steel, you never use more expensive steel than necessary, the things that cost money is alloying content and the heat treatment.

Lets say you need a tool that only needs be hard (resist compression) lets say 40hrc, there are many ways to get there, at least 500 alloys will get there and you can heat treat them all in several different ways to get there, however this does not say anything about stain resistance, toughness, creep resistance etc etc.

Selecting the right steel for the application is the game, if you need medium stain resistance and only 40hrc there are many steel to choose from, usually you choose the toughest one (lowest carbon content) and one that only has enough Cr to make it somewhat resistant to rust. Done, best choice. In this case you are aiming for a steel that is 45hrc as quenched (the most aggressive quench) and then taken it down to 40 with the tempering, this will give you a much better product than a steel that is 60hrc quenched which you need to temper down to 40, its rediculous to do that, and its cost much more money, and the HT is much more complex. AND its not even needed, its actually really stupid. AND will give you a worse over all product in the end, you just don't do it. 

If you need 2hrc more you choose a higher alloyed steel and HT that as good as you can, or push the limits (but this takes extensive knowledge and you can not mass produce these parts in a very rapid pace) with the one you have. If you need 2 hrc lower, then you choose a lower carbon lower alloyed steel and save money and energy while HT'ing it. Thats the wiggle room. No one in the entire world would choose something thats designed for 60hrc and use it at 40 because you can get a much tougher (higher performing) steel if you only need 40 to being with. The higher the carbon content the more brittle, the higher the alloying content the more brittle. And thats it. This is how it works.

At a certain temperature all steels becomes brittle. High alloys steel might have this point at 0C and low alloys ones at -40C but there always somewhere where the steel becomes significally more berittle so low carbon content is highest priority for almost everything. Up the carbon = more brittle (and extreme brittleness starts at a higher temp), up the alloys over a certain point (element dependent) = more brittle (and extreme brittleness starts at a higher temp).

There is no sane reason why one would choose any of the A-series of steels for a frame, they are all very inappropriate for this application, *and expensive* both in purchase and HT. However 41/43-series, yes sir, very good and very appropriate, very cheap too, high workabilty/plastic deformation due to low carbon and alloying content, and weldable!

I strongly suggest you start working on those books, they contain this type of info and much much more. And I wouldn't have to write all this crap saving me lots of time. Win-win!


----------



## Bridgestone

Start a new thread this on is about lugs, welding not steel types.


----------



## PlatyPius

Phaedrus75 said:


> ......Wow, I'm surprised to hear that compared to the Columbine, the Hetchins appears too artistic, too much, too pretty............But to each his own...........Personally I would be content to own a bike from either company, and a lugged steel frame will more than likely be my next purchase........


I have lust in my heart....


----------



## froze

cry lion said:


> When you are making something out of steel, you never use more expensive steel than necessary, the things that cost money is alloying content and the heat treatment.
> 
> Lets say you need a tool that only needs be hard (resist compression) lets say 40hrc, there are many ways to get there, at least 500 alloys will get there and you can heat treat them all in several different ways to get there, however this does not say anything about stain resistance, toughness, creep resistance etc etc.
> 
> Selecting the right steel for the application is the game, if you need medium stain resistance and only 40hrc there are many steel to choose from, usually you choose the toughest one (lowest carbon content) and one that only has enough Cr to make it somewhat resistant to rust. Done, best choice. In this case you are aiming for a steel that is 45hrc as quenched (the most aggressive quench) and then taken it down to 40 with the tempering, this will give you a much better product than a steel that is 60hrc quenched which you need to temper down to 40, its rediculous to do that, and its cost much more money, and the HT is much more complex. AND its not even needed, its actually really stupid. AND will give you a worse over all product in the end, you just don't do it.
> 
> If you need 2hrc more you choose a higher alloyed steel and HT that as good as you can, or push the limits (but this takes extensive knowledge and you can not mass produce these parts in a very rapid pace) with the one you have. If you need 2 hrc lower, then you choose a lower carbon lower alloyed steel and save money and energy while HT'ing it. Thats the wiggle room. No one in the entire world would choose something thats designed for 60hrc and use it at 40 because you can get a much tougher (higher performing) steel if you only need 40 to being with. The higher the carbon content the more brittle, the higher the alloying content the more brittle. And thats it. This is how it works.
> 
> At a certain temperature all steels becomes brittle. High alloys steel might have this point at 0C and low alloys ones at -40C but there always somewhere where the steel becomes significally more berittle so low carbon content is highest priority for almost everything. Up the carbon = more brittle (and extreme brittleness starts at a higher temp), up the alloys over a certain point (element dependent) = more brittle (and extreme brittleness starts at a higher temp).
> 
> There is no sane reason why one would choose any of the A-series of steels for a frame, they are all very inappropriate for this application, *and expensive* both in purchase and HT. However 41/43-series, yes sir, very good and very appropriate, very cheap too, high workabilty/plastic deformation due to low carbon and alloying content, and weldable!
> 
> I strongly suggest you start working on those books, they contain this type of info and much much more. And I wouldn't have to write all this crap saving me lots of time. Win-win!


This has been extremely enlightening, absolutely the most knowledgeable series of posts I've ever read, thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. It may not be directly related to lugs but I thought that was ok, so lets try to redirect back to lugs.

So if you put all this info together, would assembling steel bikes be better using lugs or welding? I know some steels either cannot be lugged and must be welded to gain strength...at least that's what we're told. What is your opinion on using lugs?

Also a fun question, is your forum handle Cryon stand for Cryogenic's? If so, I assume you're involved in cryo processing of steel. How would this sort of treatment if done to steel used in a bike effect the durability? and would it enable lighter steel bikes to be made?


----------



## 74extiger

My custom road bike was built lugless. Got it in 1998, in England. The builder has to be exceptionally skillful to braze the tubes w/o lugs. This configuration offers a slight weight reduction, but the big advantage is that the frame is more lively. It absorbs road shock better.

Stiffness at the crank is largely a function of the bottom bracket, so having lugs has little effect on the power transmission. I'm an old guy, so I like the soft ride and didn't want to get a Titanium frame. My tubing set is Columbus EL OS. Superb metallurgy. Maker was Charles Roberts of London.


----------



## Kontact

cry lion said:


> Lets just say they have a different definition of what air hardening really is.
> As you plobably know A2 stands for Air2 and all O-series oil, W-series water, but this all depends on thickness, preferably you cool all steels as aggressive as possible without it cracking in the process. So A, W, O are only "guidelines" and those definitions were implemented at least 50 years ago.
> 
> Many steels can be used without tempering. It depends on carbon content, quench method, 'alloy content, what alloying elements and hardenability.
> 
> If you were to take a steel like 1084 or something similar thats regarded as a waterhardening steel because you would need to get under the Ms (where martensite formations starts) line within 7 or 8 seconds or so, sure you could quench in oil, but then you would not get full hardness, forced air could do that too, now it goes even softer "as quenched". Now _maybe_ you can get away without tempering it, maybe. Suboptimal yes, in many ways but yeah you can do it. Doesn't mean you should though, it means there are better alternatives for this type of use and you should use that instead.
> 
> A2 would make a very good blade, very tough (only compared to most other steels used in knives, including all hardenable stainless steels) and can reach 60hrc, whats not to like. If you have a knife made out of this steel it was tempered after hardening, probably twice, so its not brittle as glass any longer.
> 
> But making a bike out of A2, thats well, I wont say impossible but its kind of stupid, first its not even weldable at room temp, then after welding at extremely elevated temperature it would need normalizing, austenizing, and tempering (twice). And the end result would be worse than 4340/4130 because those 2 are much tougher (and weaker), I don't know but possibly 10 times as tough and half only as strong, just as stiff. Not a good tradeoff.
> 
> A9 contains *0.5% C,* (this is very low carbon content for hardenable steels) 0.5% Mn, 0.95–1.15% Si, 4.75–5.00% Cr, 1.25–1.75% Ni, 1.3–1.8% Mo, 0.8–1.4% V
> 
> So its almost weldable at room temp had it not been for the extremely high alloying content.. You could probably get away with not tempering it (for a comparatively really shitty and very expensive result no matter what it was supposed to do in the end), but what a waste when you can insted just ditch the 4% Cr, all Si, most of the Mo, and all but 0.2% V (for grain refinement), and have something more suitable for a bike that is.
> 
> What would you sue them for? They are selling a product, tubes which they have welded and butted and whatever they do, they can call it whatever they want. Doesn't change the fact though. Do you know what it takes to develop custom non standardized alloys? I do.
> 
> And I'd say the chance is very slim this is the case, its much easier to just go with the best you can find and then maybe add 1 element which you know wont do anything but good, for example Vanadium or Niobium, no risk involved at all but it will be better, and more expensive.


A9 .5% is .1% more carbon than 4340, which is what you're saying (but apparently don't know) that 853 is. Both are hardenable, A9 more so. So what is your point?

I really don't disagree with anything you have to say about metalurgy, but I do disagree with your presumption that bicycle "air hardening steels" are a fraud, and really just the same alloy as old Columbus SL. You aren't basing this on any intimate knowledge of the tubing itself, but based on your biases from your field.

Air hardening or not, heat treated 853 has a much higher ultimate tensile strength than 725, a heat treated chromoly. That isn't going to happen if they are "pretty much" the same alloy. Reynolds and True Temper make very specific claims for the kind of hardenabilit, the UTS and their roles in developing air hardening products. Claims that would be easy to disprove with a simple Rc test or chemical analysis if you were correct. Yet no tube maker - Columbus, Tange, Dedachi - seems interested in exposing what you insist is happening.

S3 has tube walls as thin as .3mm. I would very much doubt you can do that with 4340, 4130 or any of the chromoly series. Those alloys are not strong enough.


BTW, I have learned a lot over the years by simply being shown how I am wrong. So please feel free to post ANY data that demonstrates that 853, S3, Ox Platinum are not exactly what the tube makers say they are. I am very happy to change my tune, but not when the published data doesn't fit the claims.


----------



## aclinjury

Crylion,
I gotta say I'm liking your divulge of info. I've only had 1 year of college general chemistry (a requirement for me to take), and while I don't understand know most of the types of metal & their associated manipulation methods, I do understand most of what you said conceptually. All your info on atomic structure, alloying, heating & cooling, expansion... all do make sense to me!

Sadly I'm in computer science now!


----------



## aclinjury

And now that I examined my bike (1993 Casati with Columbus steel) closer, due to this thread,
it appears that my bike has braze at 2 points
1) the head tube aread
2) where the seat tube, top tube, & seat stays meet

It has lugs at 1 point: where the down tube & seat tube meet (at the bottom bracket shell area).

So it appears my bike is not fully lugged, but it's a combo of lugs and braze. It's a piece of art. Shame that it was crashed and had to be repaired with a plate (


----------



## froze

74extiger said:


> My custom road bike was built lugless. Got it in 1998, in England. The builder has to be exceptionally skillful to braze the tubes w/o lugs. This configuration offers a slight weight reduction, but the big advantage is that the frame is more lively. It absorbs road shock better.
> 
> Stiffness at the crank is largely a function of the bottom bracket, so having lugs has little effect on the power transmission. I'm an old guy, so I like the soft ride and didn't want to get a Titanium frame. My tubing set is Columbus EL OS. Superb metallurgy. Maker was Charles Roberts of London.


I am far from an expert in frame building so I'm not saying something I think I know a lot about! But I read somewhere that lug constructed frames vs filet brazed frames of equal dimensions and tube material like 531c for example, the weight is the same, because they have to use thicker butts in a filet brazed tubeset so the frame will be strong enough at the unions, vs using thinner butts and joining them with lugs. But the lugs makes for a stronger frame due to lugs being one piece. Any thoughts on this?

By the way, an older guy too, 58 years old to be exact, all I own is steel lugged bikes but my next new bike will be a TI frame because they absorb road shock better the CF or steel, and it plenty light enough, plus TI is almost indestructible both in impact and rust or corrosion...except the CF fork is not! but I would rather replace a fork then a frame in the unlikely event of an accident.


----------



## 74extiger

Nope, lugless is slightly lighter. My builder put one of each (same tubing, same size) on a digital scale in his shop in South Croydon, London. 

I just read through the entire thread here and was impressed with the depth of knowledge here. Really, shouldn't you guys spend more time out chasing girls or doing naughty things.

Back to the topic. I never was a 'gram head', so I don't care about weight. But the last part of my career was working in aviation so I learned a bit about metals. And some bikes just seem to come alive when you mount them. Lugless frames exhibit those features. I can really notice in quick acceleration or when I'm out of the seat on a steep hill. Lugless brazing is more about the personality of the frame, than weight or appearance. It only takes a short ride to notice. 

Thinking I needed a serious upgrade on the newer bike technology ( and wanting to avoid a $4000 bump to get a hi-tech new frame) I went to the Columbus website to see if my tubing set is still offered. (EL OS— which stands for Extra Light Over Sized). It is still made. I was surprised that in the 15 years since I got it, there haven't been colossal strides in steel tubing sets. At least not at Columbus. So, it would seem the high tech strides have been made in materials other than steel.


----------



## Hiro11

I'm as much of a fan as the next man of beautiful bikes, but those filigreed and silvered lugs look absurd. Imagine showing up with something like that at a race or a group ride. It's a bike, not jewelry.


----------



## cry lion

aclinjury said:


> Crylion,
> I gotta say I'm liking your divulge of info. I've only had 1 year of college general chemistry (a requirement for me to take), and while I don't understand know most of the types of metal & their associated manipulation methods, I do understand most of what you said conceptually. All your info on atomic structure, alloying, heating & cooling, expansion... all do make sense to me!
> 
> Sadly I'm in computer science now!


I'm glad you liked and understood it. To understand most things you really have to go down to the deepest level, to really understand the mechanisms at work, then its all easy. I try to explain things so even 5 year olds understand. The mechanisms are not hard to understand if someone can distill and explain them properly. Now you're a bit smarter and know quite a lot (at least more than 99.99% of all people) about high performance steel and it heat treatment, because the high performance part usually comes from the heat treatment, not the material per se. Well to an extent.



froze said:


> This has been extremely enlightening, absolutely the most knowledgeable series of posts I've ever read, thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. It may not be directly related to lugs but I thought that was ok, so lets try to redirect back to lugs.
> 
> So if you put all this info together, would assembling steel bikes be better using lugs or welding? I know some steels either cannot be lugged and must be welded to gain strength...at least that's what we're told. What is your opinion on using lugs?
> 
> Also a fun question, is your forum handle Cryon stand for Cryogenic's? If so, I assume you're involved in cryo processing of steel. How would this sort of treatment if done to steel used in a bike effect the durability? and would it enable lighter steel bikes to be made?


Personally lugs makes sense to me, its thick at the joints and thin in the middle of the tube. But I'm no weight weenie, I'm more like a durability weenie, but I don't like stuff that is heavy but offer no extra durability/strength/stiffness whatsoever, that just bad engineering and bad design imo.

However like most things in life there is a difference between a conceptual idea and the actual manufactured part/frame. I mean the execution of the concept, or the skill and knowledge of the maker if you like. I have a feeling this is what it all boils down to. A really good welder/frame builder can probably TIG weld a stronger and more durable frame than 90% of all lugged and fillet brazed ones out there. If I'm getting a custom steel frame my least favorite option would be TIG welded (too abrupt interface between the tubes imo), followed by fillet brazed and the most desired would be lugged, if the lugging is good that is, otherwise the order will be different of course.

No i don't work with crying of steel but I know "enough" about it. Basically cry works like this: In high alloyed steel the martensite finish point MS (the temperature when all steel is turned into martensite) is way below 0 deg C like -150C or similar, then you have to freeze the steel to get a full transformation, otherwise you will something called retained austenite in the steel, and this in not especially strong nor hard. 

Usually with high alloyed steel like hss and stainless tool steels you harden them at very high temp, and high temp automatically gives you lots and lots of retained austenite, like 30-40% in some cases. Most high alloyed steels require a high temperature (550+ C degrees) tempering to convert the retained austenite to hard carbides and untempered martensite. and you need to do it several times. At least twice. Long soak time too.

So for most high alloyed steels cryo doesn't matter since they are going to be tempered in a high temperature anyway afterwards. 

Also a cryo treatment needs to be done pretty much immediately when the steel has reached room temperature after hardening otherwise the phases stabilize and then it doesn't matter anyway since you can't affect it anymore. Cryo also needs be done immediately after the first tempering cycle. After that treatment you have a substantially better steel, since you can harden it much harder from the get go (like 3 hrc points, which would only be wasted if the result would be 10% more retained austenite in the end product), and temper it in a higher temperature (but lower than 550 degrees) so it gets tougher (you release more internal stress).

Basically you can either get harder and stronger steel, or tougher steel with no negative effects, in the order of 3 hrc both ways. But only some steels can benefit from this treatment. 

However some rifle barrels are cryoed, long time after production too, and users report double and better life out of those. But this in only anecdotal at best. Good rifle barrels are usually made from 4130. However rifle barrels are not hardened at all, instead they are stress relieved and annealed in many cycles throughout production to eliminate any stress or tension that might warp or slightly bend the barrel when it heats up with use. 
I think it has some effect on barrel life. Why it works is not currently known, scientifically.
This is a material that shouldn't be affected by this treatment whatsoever, but still many people report benefits.

But on a bike? Well I'm not spending a dime on it at least so thats my stance on cryo for bikes, the result if any would be microscopic.



I see that I wrote that the eutectic point for a carbon/iron material is 0.73%, this is wrong, its of course 0.83%, sorry. I was probaably a little drunk or something when I wrote that 

Also I would like to thank those that enjoyed the read and gave me good feedback.


----------



## cry lion

74extiger said:


> I just read through the entire thread here and was impressed with the depth of knowledge here. Really, shouldn't you guys spend more time out chasing girls or doing naughty things.


In soviet russia girls chase you!


----------



## 74extiger

To get a readable yet deep explanation of metals read The Perfect Edge, by Ron Hock. The subject is really about cutting tools and sharpening as they relate to woodworking. But it explains the behavior of metals as they are formed and alloyed. 

Hard to put down this book. And things such as cool-down periods and annealing of special metals are revealed.


----------



## cry lion

74extiger said:


> To get a readable yet deep explanation of metals read The Perfect Edge, by Ron Hock. The subject is really about cutting tools and sharpening as they relate to woodworking. But it explains the behavior of metals as they are formed and alloyed.
> 
> Hard to put down this book. And things such as cool-down periods and annealing of special metals are revealed.


The ASM books are very good supposedly. Try to find one thats named "heat treating steel" or similar, this will probably give you 95% of all you need to know about steel, and the rest you find by motivation and interest. You can most likely lend these books at a library.

Knowledge is always the lightest burden to carry.


----------



## cry lion

Kontact said:


> A9 .5% is .1% more carbon than 4340, which is what you're saying (but apparently don't know) that 853 is. Both are hardenable, A9 more so. So what is your point?
> 
> I really don't disagree with anything you have to say about metalurgy, but I do disagree with your presumption that bicycle "air hardening steels" are a fraud, and really just the same alloy as old Columbus SL. You aren't basing this on any intimate knowledge of the tubing itself, but based on your biases from your field.
> 
> Air hardening or not, heat treated 853 has a much higher ultimate tensile strength than 725, a heat treated chromoly. That isn't going to happen if they are "pretty much" the same alloy. Reynolds and True Temper make very specific claims for the kind of hardenabilit, the UTS and their roles in developing air hardening products. Claims that would be easy to disprove with a simple Rc test or chemical analysis if you were correct. Yet no tube maker - Columbus, Tange, Dedachi - seems interested in exposing what you insist is happening.
> 
> S3 has tube walls as thin as .3mm. I would very much doubt you can do that with 4340, 4130 or any of the chromoly series. Those alloys are not strong enough.
> 
> 
> BTW, I have learned a lot over the years by simply being shown how I am wrong. So please feel free to post ANY data that demonstrates that 853, S3, Ox Platinum are not exactly what the tube makers say they are. I am very happy to change my tune, but not when the published data doesn't fit the claims.


Ok mr contact this will be my final reponse to you. 1; you don't know wtf you are talking about and 2; you somethow think you do.

You do realize that about 0.4C is the limit for welding in room temperature right, wait you don't, otherwise you wouldn't have pushed the question. Sorry. 0.1 is a lot when you cross a limit. I mean 0.0% oxygen is only 0.1 less than 0.1 right. What would you rather breathe?

You don't disagree because you need knowledge to be able to disagree, and you don't have that so you cannot per definition neither agree nor disagree, the conversation is moot.

The definition "air hardening" is not techically what you think it is, its what I have explained it is. And that it. Just beacuse you weld something and its gets harder on a hardness meter doesn't mean its air hardening, this is merely a function of the amount of alloying elements that the steel consists of, but with this definition almost all steel qualities in the entire world would be air hardening. Which they are not. The only steels not being air hardening would be "waterhardening steel" or technically steels that need to be quenched in brine or water (or liquid salt if you have that at hand) these are steels that you need to get from 8-900 deg C to room temp within lets say ~8 seconds. Otherwise its technically an annealing.

Hardenabilty. Do you even know what that means, technically speaking? I assume you don't.

What you don't undestand is that I can buy 4130 tubes, machine them, butt them, heat treat them however I want (maybe the cheapest possible way to achive a certain hardness, or toughness per hardness for that matter, or the fastest way to achieve whatever, or the way that requires the least skill from the operators/most tolerant to operator error and still get a so so result) or do whatever I want with them, and sell them as "Unicorn Ultra". And now I can label them as whatever I want since its a product, and even if I did nothing to them I could still call them "Unicorn Ultra".

What makes you think all heat treatments are the same? This is what separates **** from good, cheap from expensive.
Just because something is heat treated doesn't mean **** to be honest. An annealing is a heat treatment, it makes steel softer and weaker for the purpose of machining it. Is that a heat treatment you want?

Also 0.3mm whats wrong with that? All steels has the same modulus of elasticity, ie the same "stiffness" in a way. The only difference between steels and even commercially pure iron is the load it takes to permanently deform it when you exceed the yeild strength. Some steels deform at 5000MPa (5000 newton per square mm) and some at 200, and carbon at about 5-600 (in real world constructions). 4340 at about I don't know roughly 13-1700MPa and correctly hardened 4130 at about 900-1200 or so, and unhardened but hot or cold worked at 5-800MPa. 6061 aluminum yeild 250-300MPa, 7075 roughly 500 or so.

You can probably make frames out of 0.1mm tubes if you want to, you just need skilled craftsmen welding them, I know people that can weld two halves of an aluminum beer can together, and welding the back side of it while looking through a mirror, your average taiwanese worker cannot do that, and not their welding robots either, I know because we had robots like that on my old job, the best ones you could buy for money on this particular planet. 

Hardness which for these low alloyed steels are 100% related to strength has nothing to do with its stiffness or impact resistance, it has more to do with resistance to scratches.

Impact resistance is on the other hand very closely related to material thickness, whichever material it might be. And the stiffness and strength of the frame has_ almost_ nothing to do with the material, and even less the ultimate or yeild stength of the material, it has to do with at what distances and and angles you asseble the tubes and what the lenght of the tubes are. And the diameter of the tubes and then less the stock thickness. If you don't go to extremes thast is, such as lets say tubes the diameter of human hair.

Your doubts are not related to facts here. So you can keep doubting, doesn't change anything though.

That being said, if you make something really thin, like 0.1mm then it doesn't really matter what material you make it of, nor the strength, nor the stiffness. It will deform when you push it with your thumb! You have to approach infinite strength and infinite stiffness for this not to happen, and that yeilds you infinitely low impact toughness and an infinitely fragile and brittle material, because there is no free lunch in physics nor material science for that matter.

So no there is nothing to it that they make tubes with 0.3mm tickness out of any iron based material. All iron based metals can be used to do this and are just as suitable, or imo unsuitable for this application. No magic, no nothing.

Hit the books. And this is my advice because you seems to want to learn, and then books is the right way.


----------



## jr59

Hey Cry Lion,

Why don't you tells us how you really feel?


----------



## gordy748

74extiger said:


> Nope, lugless is slightly lighter. My builder put one of each (same tubing, same size) on a digital scale in his shop in South Croydon, London.
> 
> ... some bikes just seem to come alive when you mount them. Lugless frames exhibit those features. I can really notice in quick acceleration or when I'm out of the seat on a steep hill. Lugless brazing is more about the personality of the frame, than weight or appearance. It only takes a short ride to notice.


This is interesting, did Chas Roberts actually say that? He is a wonderfully good frame builder, you're lucky to have one of his frames.


----------



## froze

What it is: Understanding Bike Frame Materials - Brightspoke
What strengths they possess: Strong Frames | More Stuff | Tube Descriptions


----------



## froze

74extiger said:


> Nope, lugless is slightly lighter. My builder put one of each (same tubing, same size) on a digital scale in his shop in South Croydon, London.
> 
> I just read through the entire thread here and was impressed with the depth of knowledge here. Really, shouldn't you guys spend more time out chasing girls or doing naughty things.
> 
> .


Actually this site says fillet brazed frames are heavier then lugs: Fillet Brazed Bicycle Frames - Peyto - Custom, Fillet, Brazed, Bikes, Bicycle, Frames, Welding, Brass, Silver

This site says the differences are minimal: Construction Techniques « Kiwibikes - Custom handmade bikes from Rotorua, New Zealand

And this site says lugs are a bit heavier: Spectrum Cycles | Materials

So I guess no one really knows, so just take your pick in philosophy. I'm settling for the middle of the road, I think they weigh the same due to lugs weighing as much as thicker butts. And big butts weigh more then small butts.

Now I'm going back to chasing girls and acting naughty.


----------



## Ride-Fly

cry lion said:


> Ok mr contact this will be my final reponse to you. 1; you don't know wtf you are talking about and 2; you somethow think you do.
> 
> You do realize that about 0.4C is the limit for welding in room temperature right, wait you don't, otherwise you wouldn't have pushed the question. Sorry. 0.1 is a lot when you cross a limit. I mean 0.0% oxygen is only 0.1 less than 0.1 right. What would you rather breathe?
> 
> You don't disagree because you need knowledge to be able to disagree, and you don't have that so you cannot per definition neither agree nor disagree, the conversation is moot.
> 
> The definition "air hardening" is not techically what you think it is, its what I have explained it is. And that it. Just beacuse you weld something and its gets harder on a hardness meter doesn't mean its air hardening, this is merely a function of the amount of alloying elements that the steel consists of, but with this definition almost all steel qualities in the entire world would be air hardening. Which they are not. The only steels not being air hardening would be "waterhardening steel" or technically steels that need to be quenched in brine or water (or liquid salt if you have that at hand) these are steels that you need to get from 8-900 deg C to room temp within lets say ~8 seconds. Otherwise its technically an annealing.
> 
> Hardenabilty. Do you even know what that means, technically speaking? I assume you don't.
> 
> What you don't undestand is that I can buy 4130 tubes, machine them, butt them, heat treat them however I want (maybe the cheapest possible way to achive a certain hardness, or toughness per hardness for that matter, or the fastest way to achieve whatever, or the way that requires the least skill from the operators/most tolerant to operator error and still get a so so result) or do whatever I want with them, and sell them as "Unicorn Ultra". And now I can label them as whatever I want since its a product, and even if I did nothing to them I could still call them "Unicorn Ultra".
> 
> What makes you think all heat treatments are the same? This is what separates **** from good, cheap from expensive.
> Just because something is heat treated doesn't mean **** to be honest. An annealing is a heat treatment, it makes steel softer and weaker for the purpose of machining it. Is that a heat treatment you want?
> 
> Also 0.3mm whats wrong with that? All steels has the same modulus of elasticity, ie the same "stiffness" in a way. The only difference between steels and even commercially pure iron is the load it takes to permanently deform it when you exceed the yeild strength. Some steels deform at 5000MPa (5000 newton per square mm) and some at 200, and carbon at about 5-600 (in real world constructions). 4340 at about I don't know roughly 13-1700MPa and correctly hardened 4130 at about 900-1200 or so, and unhardened but hot or cold worked at 5-800MPa. 6061 aluminum yeild 250-300MPa, 7075 roughly 500 or so.
> 
> You can probably make frames out of 0.1mm tubes if you want to, you just need skilled craftsmen welding them, I know people that can weld two halves of an aluminum beer can together, and welding the back side of it while looking through a mirror, your average taiwanese worker cannot do that, and not their welding robots either, I know because we had robots like that on my old job, the best ones you could buy for money on this particular planet.
> 
> Hardness which for these low alloyed steels are 100% related to strength has nothing to do with its stiffness or impact resistance, it has more to do with resistance to scratches.
> 
> Impact resistance is on the other hand very closely related to material thickness, whichever material it might be. And the stiffness and strength of the frame has_ almost_ nothing to do with the material, and even less the ultimate or yeild stength of the material, it has to do with at what distances and and angles you asseble the tubes and what the lenght of the tubes are. And the diameter of the tubes and then less the stock thickness. If you don't go to extremes thast is, such as lets say tubes the diameter of human hair.
> 
> Your doubts are not related to facts here. So you can keep doubting, doesn't change anything though.
> 
> That being said, if you make something really thin, like 0.1mm then it doesn't really matter what material you make it of, nor the strength, nor the stiffness. It will deform when you push it with your thumb! You have to approach infinite strength and infinite stiffness for this not to happen, and that yeilds you infinitely low impact toughness and an infinitely fragile and brittle material, because there is no free lunch in physics nor material science for that matter.
> 
> So no there is nothing to it that they make tubes with 0.3mm tickness out of any iron based material. All iron based metals can be used to do this and are just as suitable, or imo unsuitable for this application. No magic, no nothing.
> 
> Hit the books. And this is my advice because you seems to want to learn, and then books is the right way.



+1!

Thanks for enlightening us (including the hard-headed Kontact. I'm sure he is nice guy in person, but a lot times in threads, he comes off as if he knows more than the next guy in just about every topic). Cry Lion, you are the man of steel! :thumbsup:


----------



## joelk

I am riding a carbon bike but and it's light and nice but the ride is rough. Is it true an old steel bike would ride better


----------



## orange_julius

joelk said:


> I am riding a carbon bike but and it's light and nice but the ride is rough. Is it true an old steel bike would ride better


What will make a bike ride "better" in your mind? If your bike is too stiff, one of the cheapest ways to get some comfort is to get a larger tire and to run them at lower pressure.

What bike/tire/setup do you have?


----------



## froze

orange_julius said:


> What will make a bike ride "better" in your mind? If your bike is too stiff, one of the cheapest ways to get some comfort is to get a larger tire and to run them at lower pressure.
> 
> What bike/tire/setup do you have?


Good idea...except a lot of CF bike frames will not accept anything larger then 23c.


----------



## Kontact

cry lion said:


> Ok mr contact this will be my final reponse to you. 1; you don't know wtf you are talking about and 2; you somethow think you do.


I wrote a longer answer, but I realized this is a very simple argument:

*Where did you get your specific knowledge about True Temper and Reynolds products to refute the claims those companies make about their tube alloys?*


I left the part of your last post that has the most applicability to this argument. Because I don't claim to have a PhD in materials science - I just think it is unlikely Reynolds and True Temper are committing fraud and false advertising, and their competitors Dedacci, Columbus and Tange are letting them get away with it.


Any of number of people on any given day can show me up with their knowledge of minutia. But that doesn't mean that your right when you say that Reynolds 525 is the same alloy as 853, it just means you have more tools to be belligerent with.


----------



## gordy748

Hiro11 said:


> I'm as much of a fan as the next man of beautiful bikes, but those filigreed and silvered lugs look absurd. Imagine showing up with something like that at a race or a group ride. It's a bike, not jewelry.


? So you'd be happy to pay $3 grand for a piece of carbon mass-made in Taiwan as opposed to $2 grand for a piece of art hand made in America/ Italy/ UK/ etc?

I'd go for the genuine jewelry over the plastic marketing hyperbole, myself.


----------



## foto

Phaedrus75 said:


> ......Wow, I'm surprised to hear that compared to the Columbine, the Hetchins appears too artistic, too much, too pretty............But to each his own...........Personally I would be content to own a bike from either company, and a lugged steel frame will more than likely be my next purchase........


I could never ride something like that. I don't know about you guys, but my bikes get dirt, ****, and crap on them. Scratches, and sometimes even dents. They are machines designed to be ridden. It is about the experience you have on the bike, not a fetish to polish and drooled over.


----------



## Kontact

gordy748 said:


> ? So you'd be happy to pay $3 grand for a piece of carbon mass-made in Taiwan as opposed to $2 grand for a piece of art hand made in America/ Italy/ UK/ etc?
> 
> I'd go for the genuine jewelry over the plastic marketing hyperbole, myself.


Just because someone finds that bike ostentatious, it doesn't mean they only prefer the polar opposite of it.

I like lugs, but think that thing is a little much, too. It is the equivalent of a completely engraved firearm or a wallet covered in leatherwork - sometimes too much is too much.


----------



## froze

Kontact said:


> Any of number of people on any given day can show me up with their knowledge of minutia. But that doesn't mean that your right when you say that Reynolds 525 is the same alloy as 853, it just means you have more tools to be belligerent with.


CroMo and CroMag tubing is SAE 4130 steel which is a iron/carbon alloy with added elements of either Chrome to make Chrome Molybdenum 525 (or 520); or add elements of manganese to make manganese molybdenum with the addition of heat treated air hardened to make 853 (and the older 531). Reynolds 725 is the same as 525, a CroMo tubing, except the only difference is the 725 is heat treated and 525 is cold drawn.

What some of you are missing is that all steel is iron/carbon alloy with added elements of chrome, nickel, manganese, molybdenum, vanadium, etc., develops specific characteristics of .30% carbon steel such as tenacity, fatigue resistance, workability and insensitivity to overheating.

See this for more detail: http://www.worldclasscycles.com/JACKSON-HOME.htm
And: http://reynoldstechnology.biz/our_materials_525.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_Cycle_Technology


Now off to a side journey. Some people don't prefer 853 over 725 due to the 853 while having higher tensile strength doesn't have as high elongation and ductility as 531 and 753 or 725. When I bought my Mercian Vincitore Special, the people at Mercian recommended 725 over 853 even though 853 was more expensive and lighter, the reason was because I was going to use it for touring and the 725 would be more comfortable and last a lifetime of heavy touring. The 853 tube set is designed for racing and it is lighter as mentioned earlier, and stiffer which translates harsher riding. And this information given to me by the fine people at Mercian agreed with the Bob Jackson site and others I've read.


----------



## Touch0Gray

gordy748 said:


> ? So you'd be happy to pay $3 grand for a piece of carbon mass-made in Taiwan as opposed to $2 grand for a piece of art hand made in America/ Italy/ UK/ etc?
> 
> I'd go for the genuine jewelry over the plastic marketing hyperbole, myself.


as a master jeweler by trade...... guess where I stand!


----------



## Kontact

froze said:


> CroMo and CroMag tubing is SAE 4130 steel which is a iron/carbon alloy with added elements of either Chrome to make Chrome Molybdenum 525 (or 520); or add elements of manganese to make manganese molybdenum with the addition of heat treated air hardened to make 853 (and the older 531). Reynolds 725 is the same as 525, a CroMo tubing, except the only difference is the 725 is heat treated and 525 is cold drawn.
> 
> What some of you are missing is that all steel is iron/carbon alloy with added elements of chrome, nickel, manganese, molybdenum, vanadium, etc., develops specific characteristics of .30% carbon steel such as tenacity, fatigue resistance, workability and insensitivity to overheating.
> 
> See this for more detail: BOB-JACKSON-HOME
> And: Reynolds Technology
> Reynolds Cycle Technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> Now off to a side journey. Some people don't prefer 853 over 725 due to the 853 while having higher tensile strength doesn't have as high elongation and ductility as 531 and 753 or 725. When I bought my Mercian Vincitore Special, the people at Mercian recommended 725 over 853 even though 853 was more expensive and lighter, the reason was because I was going to use it for touring and the 725 would be more comfortable and last a lifetime of heavy touring. The 853 tube set is designed for racing and it is lighter as mentioned earlier, and stiffer which translates harsher riding. And this information given to me by the fine people at Mercian agreed with the Bob Jackson site and others I've read.


I am well aware of all of that. I don't personally favor any particular steel - this whole thing is just the result of Cry Lion's rather extraordinary claim that Reynolds is lying when they say that 853 is markedly different alloy with different properties than 4130. My attempt to relate why that is unlikely from a metallurgical standpoint turned into a bunch of unfortunate oneupmanship, but the only question in anyone's mind should be where Cry Lion is getting his information about the specific tube alloys, not about the veracity of metallurgical information anyone can look up.


----------



## froze

gordy748 said:


> ? So you'd be happy to pay $3 grand for a piece of carbon mass-made in Taiwan as opposed to $2 grand for a piece of art hand made in America/ Italy/ UK/ etc?
> 
> I'd go for the genuine jewelry over the plastic marketing hyperbole, myself.


Problem is your not going to find a piece of art (bicycle) hand made in America/Italy/UK/etc for under $3,000 by the time you add in the components and wheels. I understand what you were trying to say, but the example was a bad one. 

Back in 07 I bought a Mercian Vincitore Special for $3500 which included wheels and Campy Athena group, today it's on the high side of $4,000 for the same bike and set up. But that was about on par with Atlantis back then except the Atlantis was made in Taiwan at the time (now their made in Waterford WI) and I couldn't get any special custom features I wanted that I got with the Mercian. The art hand work of the Mercian is far superior to the Atlantis. But these are custom steel lugged frame bikes. When it comes to CF bikes, of course not much art work with those, but CF is way cheaper to get coming out of China or Taiwan then America, America CF will cost you easily another $1500 more, and for most people that puts the bike out of their reach. Even TI bikes made in Taiwan like the Motobecane you have to pay twice as much for a similar equipped TI bike from Lynsky and their the lowest American made TI bikes; again pushing the price out of reach for most people to buy.

Don't get me wrong, I do my best to try to buy as much stuff as I can made in America, but that gets more and more difficult as time goes on. I especially try to stay away from Chinese made stuff, but Taiwan is ok because their more western in their thinking and work habits. But again trying not to buy something you need not made in China is becoming increasingly more difficult. There are some things China makes that are the best in the world or darn near the best, in particular tube amplifiers and tubes.


----------



## atpjunkie

*lugs*

are heavier than brazing or Tigging the joint
but lug tubes can be made lighter as they don't need as much butting in the joint areas

Tubing made for Tig needs to be thicker because of the higher heat

lugs are silly and out of date of course, unless you are building CF frames


----------



## cry lion

jr59 said:


> Hey Cry Lion,
> 
> Why don't you tells us how you really feel?


I thought I did there for a while 



Kontact said:


> I am well aware of all of that. I don't personally favor any particular steel - this whole thing is just the result of Cry Lion's rather extraordinary claim that Reynolds is lying when they say that 853 is markedly different alloy with different properties than 4130. My attempt to relate why that is unlikely from a metallurgical standpoint turned into a bunch of unfortunate oneupmanship, but the only question in anyone's mind should be where Cry Lion is getting his information about the specific tube alloys, not about the veracity of metallurgical information anyone can look up.


Say what? I get all my information from real books, hunders of years of knowledge distilled into one 500 page bokk or similar, and you don't really need to be some kind of rocket scientist to figure **** out when youy have read them. and yes 853 is a different alloy than 4130, 853 is 4340 and 631 iirc is 4340 too. In a different condition.

Also there is matweb.com

As to your other claims and comments I didn't actually read them. But judging by your track record I know I didn't miss anything. Why are you arguing? Is there anything in what I have said that leads you to believe I am in any way lying or trying to twist the thruth. I have no motivation whatsoever for this, and definitely no economic reasons either. I actually don't give a **** what you think 853 is, I know what it is, and its the same as many "tubes made for bikes with exotic names". Personally I wouldn't even care if my next bike was made from unhardened 4130, its good enough. Its the maker not the material...


----------



## cry lion

Yeah I'm kinda done here (this **** will never end) but there is some good info in this thread so everybody, enjoy it!


----------



## davidka

gordy748 said:


> ? So you'd be happy to pay $3 grand for a piece of carbon mass-made in Taiwan as opposed to $2 grand for a piece of art hand made in America/ Italy/ UK/ etc?
> 
> I'd go for the genuine jewelry over the plastic marketing hyperbole, myself.


I like steel as much as the next guy (Ti too) but you'd do well to learn more about what goes into making a decent carbon frame. It's not the cookie cutter exercise you'd think.


----------



## froze

atpjunkie said:


> are heavier than brazing or Tigging the joint
> but lug tubes can be made lighter as they don't need as much butting in the joint areas
> 
> Tubing made for Tig needs to be thicker because of the higher heat
> 
> lugs are silly and out of date of course, unless you are building CF frames


That's what my web sites I posted said.

Lugs are not silly and out of date, they were and still are a work of art and shows how beautiful a bike can look unlike today's industrial looking plastic jobs. And not all CF frames have lugs, and most that do are internal so it does nothing for looks. There are a lot of people buying custom built steel bikes with lugs because they just look better and they look classic. There are way too many custom builders building lugged steel bikes, but take a gander at this Classic model of a Formigliusa bike as one example; the home page moves through a series of images of the bike being presented, and you can hit the tabs to see others; those lugs are basic lugs without the fancy carvings and cutouts some lugs have, some get too fancy from one particular maker and looks to girly for my taste: Lugged Steel Bicycle Frames Road Bike Sizing Custom Italian Road Bike That same company also makes carbon, but not in my taste.

Then here's a guy that lugs both carbon and steel, these are a bit more fancy then Formigliusa; see: Bruce Gordon Cycles | Custom Bikes Gallery page

And Mercian: Vincitore & Vincitore Special These are probably the lowest cost custom builder of lug steel bikes beside Shamrock Cycles out of Indianapolis IN.

Sorry for boring you, can you tell that I like lugs? All my road bikes are currently lugged, although I am considering getting TI bike that won't be, so I'll have to come up with an idea to give it some small degree of artistry, perhaps contrasting the TI look with gold colored wheels and gold colored cables?


----------



## davidka

What is "artistry"? A perfect Tig weld takes more skill than brazing a lug and yields a lighter, stronger joint. Lugs are pretty but functionally inferior.

Playing devil's advocate here. I was gushing over a DeRosa Neo Primato from my carbon bike after yesterday's race.


----------



## froze

davidka said:


> What is "artistry"? A perfect Tig weld takes more skill than brazing a lug and yields a lighter, stronger joint. Lugs are pretty but functionally inferior.
> 
> Playing devil's advocate here. I was gushing over a DeRosa Neo Primato from my carbon bike after yesterday's race.


My remarks are base on my opinion, your's is different then mine, that's what makes this world so interesting. 

I know a perfect tig weld takes skill but not more then brazing, and tig welding is not as good as Fillet brazed, tig welding is faster, takes less skill, and weaker then fillet brazes if you really want to get picky, but nether looks better...in my opinion; See: Fillet brazing vs. TIG welding And lugs do require more work and skill then tig welding; see: Henry James Investment Cast frame Components

An Introduction to Bicycle Frame Construction - Bloom Bike Shop

And the one thing your missing is that the skill it takes to make beautiful lugs takes far superior skills then either a welder or a brazer! Your wrong about the joint being stronger, it's been well proven that lugs are actually stronger if done right, which applies to tig welding too. Read the sites I gave earlier. You should also read what Richard Sachs says about lugs: Tim Isaac Interview in RR The question concerning lugs is about half way down the page.

Spectrum Cycles agrees, see: Spectrum Cycles | Materials just a little bit past half way.

And Wkipedia; scan down just over half way to the STEEL category: Bicycle frame - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Kontact

davidka said:


> What is "artistry"? A perfect Tig weld takes more skill than brazing a lug and yields a lighter, stronger joint. Lugs are pretty but functionally inferior.
> 
> Playing devil's advocate here. I was gushing over a DeRosa Neo Primato from my carbon bike after yesterday's race.


I know people who do both, and they universally say the Tig joint is much faster and easier than a lug or fillet braze.

If you like them, cool.


----------



## Kontact

cry lion said:


> I thought I did there for a while
> 
> 
> 
> Say what? I get all my information from real books, hunders of years of knowledge distilled into one 500 page bokk or similar, and you don't really need to be some kind of rocket scientist to figure **** out when youy have read them. and yes 853 is a different alloy than 4130, 853 is 4340 and 631 iirc is 4340 too. In a different condition.
> 
> Also there is matweb.com
> 
> As to your other claims and comments I didn't actually read them. But judging by your track record I know I didn't miss anything. Why are you arguing? Is there anything in what I have said that leads you to believe I am in any way lying or trying to twist the thruth. I have no motivation whatsoever for this, and definitely no economic reasons either. I actually don't give a **** what you think 853 is, I know what it is, and its the same as many "tubes made for bikes with exotic names". Personally I wouldn't even care if my next bike was made from unhardened 4130, its good enough. Its the maker not the material...


Please site your source for 853 and 631 being 4340.

Yes, I think that saying that a company is advertising a product as having specs and heat treatment profiles that are different than oil quench 4340 is a bold claim and worth backing up with more than "because I say so."

I don't care either about what MY steel bike is made of, but I am very interested in the claims and counter claims of product designers and internet pundits.


----------



## orange_julius

Kontact said:


> Please site your source for 853 and 631 being 4340.
> 
> Yes, I think that saying that a company is advertising a product as having specs and heat treatment profiles that are different than oil quench 4340 is a bold claim and worth backing up with more than "because I say so."
> 
> I don't care either about what MY steel bike is made of, but I am very interested in the claims and counter claims of product designers and internet pundits.


This is really a fascinating discussion to me, even though I know nothing about steel nor frame construction. 

Out of curiosity, I simply googled "853 4340" and lo and behold, Cry Lion's claim that they are the same is not novel.

http://forums.mtbr.com/vintage-retro-classic/nashbar-853-frame-193169.html

The post by pmiska, from Dec 28 2006 11:57pm seems to be similar:
MMBA • View topic - Steel hardtails - experiences?

This one has a bold post, too:
29er frame | Retrobike



> Pretty much all chromoly bike tubes are either 4130 or the air hardening 4340 chromoly. The higher end tubesets are heat treated for additional strength allowing less metal to be used thus making them lighter.
> 
> In short Tange Prestige is 4130 and 853 is 4340.
> 
> If you tig weld Prestige the heat from the welding when allowed to dissapate naturally reverses the effect of the original heat treatment. This is why fillet brazing is preferential here as it's a much cooler process than tig welding. This isn't the case with 853 however, as it's an air hardening steel it actually gets stronger when allowed to cool naturaly. So it gains strength at the welds.
> 
> And for reference:
> 
> Reynolds 520/525, Tange MTB/Infinity etc. are non heat treated 4130.
> Reynolds 725 and Tange Prestige are heat treated 4130.
> Reynolds 631 is non heat treated 4340.
> Reynolds 853 is heat treated 4340.


Finally, I'm not sure if this is worth noting but all the above are from MTB forums.


----------



## gordy748

A perfect tig weld is very hard to do, but the act of tig welding itself if pretty straightforward. So you're all right. And alright too.

Personally, I really love what Eric Estlund at Winter is doing with bilaminate construction, see here. 

Bi-laminate | | Winter Bicycles

Mixed with fillet brazing, it makes his bikes look stunning.


----------



## Kontact

orange_julius said:


> This is really a fascinating discussion to me, even though I know nothing about steel nor frame construction.
> 
> Out of curiosity, I simply googled "853 4340" and lo and behold, Cry Lion's claim that they are the same is not novel.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/vintage-retro-classic/nashbar-853-frame-193169.html
> 
> The post by pmiska, from Dec 28 2006 11:57pm seems to be similar:
> MMBA • View topic - Steel hardtails - experiences?
> 
> This one has a bold post, too:
> 29er frame | Retrobike
> 
> 
> 
> Finally, I'm not sure if this is worth noting but all the above are from MTB forums.


I did some more searching and finally found a reference in a 4340 data chart about the dangers of air hardening after welding. 4340 is not designed for air hardening, being a through hardening oil quench steel, but it will harden by the weld where the steel is close to air. For thin tubing this could harden quite a bit of the tube.

However, 4340 has a broader UTS range than 853 and doesn't contain the copper that Reynolds lists as an ingredient in 853. Is the inclusion of copper "pretty much the same" as an alloy that doesn't contain copper? Again, we're back to where Cry Lion got his information from.


----------



## froze

Kontact said:


> Please site your source for 853 and 631 being 4340.
> 
> Yes, I think that saying that a company is advertising a product as having specs and heat treatment profiles that are different than oil quench 4340 is a bold claim and worth backing up with more than "because I say so."
> 
> I don't care either about what MY steel bike is made of, but I am very interested in the claims and counter claims of product designers and internet pundits.


It's not a bold claim at all, I see no one read the sites I gave earlier, so here they are again.

See this for more detail: BOB-JACKSON-HOME
And: Reynolds Technology And click on the section that says: "click here to download a metal alloys comparison...PDF..." AND READ.
Reynolds Cycle Technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## sir duke

PlatyPius said:


> I have lust in my heart....



View attachment 256210


Me too!


----------



## orange_julius

froze said:


> It's not a bold claim at all, I see no one read the sites I gave earlier, so here they are again.
> 
> See this for more detail: BOB-JACKSON-HOME
> And: Reynolds Technology And click on the section that says: "click here to download a metal alloys comparison...PDF..." AND READ.
> Reynolds Cycle Technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Bob Jackson page says, "The primary difference between 853 and 631 is the lack of heat treating applied to the an 853 tubeset, thus producing 631 tubing." Is this the same as saying, they both use the same material, and the only difference being that one is heat-treated but not the other? 

I don't see where it says 853 and 631 come from the same material. Isn't that what we are trying to find out? Thanks.


----------



## atpjunkie

*I always found it funny*



froze said:


> That's what my web sites I posted said.
> 
> Lugs are not silly and out of date, they were and still are a work of art and shows how beautiful a bike can look unlike today's industrial looking plastic jobs. And not all CF frames have lugs, and most that do are internal so it does nothing for looks. There are a lot of people buying custom built steel bikes with lugs because they just look better and they look classic. There are way too many custom builders building lugged steel bikes, but take a gander at this Classic model of a Formigliusa bike as one example; the home page moves through a series of images of the bike being presented, and you can hit the tabs to see others; those lugs are basic lugs without the fancy carvings and cutouts some lugs have, some get too fancy from one particular maker and looks to girly for my taste: Lugged Steel Bicycle Frames Road Bike Sizing Custom Italian Road Bike That same company also makes carbon, but not in my taste.
> 
> Then here's a guy that lugs both carbon and steel, these are a bit more fancy then Formigliusa; see: Bruce Gordon Cycles | Custom Bikes Gallery page
> 
> And Mercian: Vincitore & Vincitore Special These are probably the lowest cost custom builder of lug steel bikes beside Shamrock Cycles out of Indianapolis IN.
> 
> Sorry for boring you, can you tell that I like lugs? All my road bikes are currently lugged, although I am considering getting TI bike that won't be, so I'll have to come up with an idea to give it some small degree of artistry, perhaps contrasting the TI look with gold colored wheels and gold colored cables?



Lugs on steel bike = outdated technology
Lugs on a C-50 = state of the art

all marketing and sales pitch

Lugged Steel = expensive, need a trained craftsman
Lugged CF = cost savings, you don't need monocoque molds

Lugged steel went to Tig because they could be mass produced

I have 1 lugged, 3 Tig and 1 Brazed steel bikes

I love them all but agree, the lugs are far sweeter


----------



## vettracer

orange_julius said:


> I don't see where it says 853 and 631 come from the same material. Isn't that what we are trying to find out? Thanks.


From the Reynolds Website for 631 Reynolds Technology

"Utilising the same chemistry as 853, this product is cold-worked and also has the advantages of air-hardening after welding"

The other question that has been raised is whether 853/631 is the same as SAE 4340. 
The chemical composition of 853 contains Copper and Silicon which is not present in SAE 4340. SAE 4340 contains nickle which is not present in 853/631. 
Clearly SAE 4340 is not the same as 853/631


----------



## orange_julius

vettracer said:


> From the Reynolds Website for 631 Reynolds Technology
> 
> "Utilising the same chemistry as 853, this product is cold-worked and also has the advantages of air-hardening after welding"
> 
> The other question that has been raised is whether 853/631 is the same as SAE 4340.
> The chemical composition of 853 contains Copper and Silicon which is not present in SAE 4340. SAE 4340 contains nickle which is not present in 853/631.
> Clearly SAE 4340 is not the same as 853/631


Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## foto

atpjunkie said:


> Lugs on steel bike = outdated technology
> Lugs on a C-50 = state of the art
> 
> all marketing and sales pitch
> 
> Lugged Steel = expensive, need a trained craftsman
> Lugged CF = cost savings, you don't need monocoque molds
> 
> Lugged steel went to Tig because they could be mass produced
> 
> I have 1 lugged, 3 Tig and 1 Brazed steel bikes
> 
> I love them all but agree, the lugs are far sweeter


I take it you have never heard of a little company called Raleigh?


----------



## Kontact

froze said:


> It's not a bold claim at all, I see no one read the sites I gave earlier, so here they are again.
> 
> See this for more detail: BOB-JACKSON-HOME
> And: Reynolds Technology And click on the section that says: "click here to download a metal alloys comparison...PDF..." AND READ.
> Reynolds Cycle Technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


None of the links you posted contain the word "4340", so there is still absolutely no documented connection between air hardening bike steels and the 4340 that Cry Lion said they are. What kind of point did you think you were making? 



atpjunkie said:


> Lugged Steel = expensive, need a trained craftsman


Trek's lugged bikes were eventually made completely by machines, with electrical heating fixtures for the silver braze. No craftsmen needed at all.


----------



## froze

sir duke said:


> View attachment 256210
> 
> 
> Me too!


 I'm lusting for that hair.


----------



## foto

Kontact said:


> Trek's lugged bikes were eventually made completely by machines, with electrical heating fixtures for the silver braze. No craftsmen needed at all.


All the old raleigh's below the competition (or international?) were made by pinning the frames together, and brazing them whole rackloads at a time in an oven.


----------



## atpjunkie

*oh I'm quite aware*



foto said:


> I take it you have never heard of a little company called Raleigh?


and those are bygone days


----------



## Kontact

atpjunkie said:


> and those are bygone days


Trek had its automated lugged frame system into the mid '90s. It was retired because the demand for US made steel frames dropped, not because the process wasn't as technological as third world workers laying pre-cut strips of fabric in a mold. In fact, it was considerably more automated, and the carbon industry depends majorly on hand work.

What is "advanced" about carbon fiber frames is the somewhat modern material combined with a lot of design work. But the basic technology of making sporting goods out of laminates is a century old.

As you can currently build a frame out of any material that is under the UCI weight limit, so calling any particular nice riding bike "out dated" is a bit close minded. Do enough racing and you'll eventually get your clock cleaned by someone riding a lugged steel bike. The way some people talk, that's like a Model T winning Indy. But it's actually like last year's Indy winning car winning again.


----------



## foto

There is one steel bike I really pine for right now. But it aint lugged.


----------



## froze

orange_julius said:


> The Bob Jackson page says, "The primary difference between 853 and 631 is the lack of heat treating applied to the an 853 tubeset, thus producing 631 tubing." Is this the same as saying, they both use the same material, and the only difference being that one is heat-treated but not the other?
> 
> I don't see where it says 853 and 631 come from the same material. Isn't that what we are trying to find out? Thanks.



Go back and reread Jackson's site in the Material section.


----------



## froze

By the way, when Trek went to machines to assemble lugged steel frames they stopped using silver and went to brass brazing.


----------



## Kontact

Is their anyone reading this that still believes that 853, 631, Ox Platinum and S3 are 4340, despite the different alloy ingredients?


----------



## laffeaux

Kontact said:


> Is their anyone reading this that still believes that 853, 631, Ox Platinum and S3 are 4340, despite the different alloy ingredients?


True Temper uses 41xx series steel for tubing, not 43xx series. So, no.


----------



## Kontact

laffeaux said:


> True Temper uses 41xx series steel for tubing, not 43xx series. So, no.


Which TT tubing? Chromoly tubing is 4130, but Ox and S3 is not the same as Versus 4130.


----------



## laffeaux

From: True Temper Bicycle Tubing - Peyto - Platinum, OX, Supertherm, Versus, True Temper, Steel, Bicycle, Tubing

"OX Platinum is a proprietary superthermophillic (heat-loving) alloy, developed in partnership with the U.S. Steel Alliance. The composition of Chromium, Molybdenum, and Vanadium with an unprecedented 217 ksi ultimate tensile strength..."

The Cr and Mo sure sounds like 41xx steel to me.

I'm not sure why it matters though. Each company has their own "secret recipe" of alloys which have made steel frames lighter as time has passed. How a builder chooses to use these tubes is a lot more important than if there's n% of a given element. While the exact composition of the alloy important to the companies making the tube sets (and to some degree those who build frames), as a rider it's about as important as the chemical composition of the paint on my bike - yes, it does need to be correct, but how the bike rides is what matters.


----------



## Kontact

laffeaux said:


> From: True Temper Bicycle Tubing - Peyto - Platinum, OX, Supertherm, Versus, True Temper, Steel, Bicycle, Tubing
> 
> "OX Platinum is a proprietary superthermophillic (heat-loving) alloy, developed in partnership with the U.S. Steel Alliance. The composition of Chromium, Molybdenum, and Vanadium with an unprecedented 217 ksi ultimate tensile strength..."
> 
> The Cr and Mo sure sounds like 41xx steel to me.
> 
> I'm not sure why it matters though. Each company has their own "secret recipe" of alloys which have made steel frames lighter as time has passed. How a builder chooses to use these tubes is a lot more important than if there's n% of a given element. While the exact composition of the alloy important to the companies making the tube sets (and to some degree those who build frames), as a rider it's about as important as the chemical composition of the paint on my bike - yes, it does need to be correct, but how the bike rides is what matters.


Except that 4130 doesn't have Vanadium.

All the high alloy steels have a lot of the same ingredients. But it is the proportions and actual composition that make two different steels two different steels.


----------



## laffeaux

In somewhat of an attempt to bring this back toward the original question...

I have several steel frames. I recently picked-up an old frame that had been in the shop having a drop-out replaced and getting a new coat of paint. I "think" that the frame is made from Reynolds 531, is lugged, and was built in '74 or '75. The 60cm frame (c-t-t) weighs 1,973 grams.

My "modern" steel bike is the same size (58.8cm c-t-c), TIG welded, made from Columbus Life tubes, and built somewhere around 2005. The frame is around 1,670 grams (going from memory as it's been built up for a while).

When I weighted the new fame I was surprised that after 30 years, bike frames (both relatively cutting edge steel frames of their time) have only lost about 300 grams of weight. Not that that is insignificant, but my body weight varies by more than 300g pretty regularly, and while we all want light weight bikes I'm not sure that I'd really notice the extra weight on the frame. (However, once I add components the older frame will by closer to 4 pounds heavier - which is a pretty big difference.)

So, when you start with a 3.5 - 4.5 pound hunk of steel and you add 13 - 16 pounds of components on it, there's a lot more weigh to worry about with the components than the frame. And the geometry of every frame varies the ride enough that TIG vs. lugged vs. fillet won't be a factor in if you like how the bike rides - but maybe it will affect how you look at your bike.


----------



## foto

laffeaux said:


> In somewhat of an attempt to bring this back toward the original question...
> 
> I have several steel frames. I recently picked-up an old frame that had been in the shop having a drop-out replaced and getting a new coat of paint. I "think" that the frame is made from Reynolds 531, is lugged, and was built in '74 or '75. The 60cm frame (c-t-t) weighs 1,973 grams.
> 
> My "modern" steel bike is the same size (58.8cm c-t-c), TIG welded, made from Columbus Life tubes, and built somewhere around 2005. The frame is around 1,670 grams (going from memory as it's been built up for a while).
> 
> When I weighted the new fame I was surprised that after 30 years, bike frames (both relatively cutting edge steel frames of their time) have only lost about 300 grams of weight. Not that that is insignificant, but my body weight varies by more than 300g pretty regularly, and while we all want light weight bikes I'm not sure that I'd really notice the extra weight on the frame. (However, once I add components the older frame will by closer to 4 pounds heavier - which is a pretty big difference.)
> 
> So, when you start with a 3.5 - 4.5 pound hunk of steel and you add 13 - 16 pounds of components on it, there's a lot more weigh to worry about with the components than the frame. And the geometry of every frame varies the ride enough that TIG vs. lugged vs. fillet won't be a factor in if you like how the bike rides - but maybe it will affect how you look at your bike.


I think a big difference between old steel and new steel is the ride quality. You can get a light, _and stiff_, frame that doesn't ride like a boat anchor now. Back in the day, you got either a light flexy flyer, or a stiff boat anchor. You can definitely corner those old frames, but "whippy" is not always a desirable quality when trying to keep up with a field of strong dudes on modern bikes. I am not a metallurgist, but the new OS draws and tubesets make a much nicer frame that you can really crank on.


----------



## Kontact

foto said:


> I think a big difference between old steel and new steel is the ride quality. You can get a light, _and stiff_, frame that doesn't ride like a boat anchor now. Back in the day, you got either a light flexy flyer, or a stiff boat anchor. You can definitely corner those old frames, but "whippy" is not always a desirable quality when trying to keep up with a field of strong dudes on modern bikes. I am not a metallurgist, but the new OS draws and tubesets make a much nicer frame that you can really crank on.


Tubesets used to be limited by lugs - the only way to change the ride was to change the wall, not the diameter. I don't know how old Serotta's Colorado tubing is, but that had to be one of the earlier OS tubesets - with lugs.


----------



## froze

Kontact said:


> Tubesets used to be limited by lugs - the only way to change the ride was to change the wall, not the diameter. I don't know how old Serotta's Colorado tubing is, but that had to be one of the earlier OS tubesets - with lugs.


Not sure when Serotta started doing that, but usually one tubing manufacture makes something and then others follow suit, because both Reynolds and Columbus had OS tubing that had lugs for them. But I think, not sure though, that Columbus was the first to have an OS tubeset with lugs called the Max tubes that used Max lugs in 1987.


----------



## Camilo

[Sorry double post]


----------



## Camilo

laffeaux said:


> In somewhat of an attempt to bring this back toward the original question...
> 
> I have several steel frames. I recently picked-up an old frame that had been in the shop having a drop-out replaced and getting a new coat of paint. I "think" that the frame is made from Reynolds 531, is lugged, and was built in '74 or '75. The 60cm frame (c-t-t) weighs 1,973 grams.
> 
> My "modern" steel bike is the same size (58.8cm c-t-c), TIG welded, made from Columbus Life tubes, and built somewhere around 2005. The frame is around 1,670 grams (going from memory as it's been built up for a while).
> 
> When I weighted the new fame I was surprised that after 30 years, bike frames (both relatively cutting edge steel frames of their time) have only lost about 300 grams of weight. Not that that is insignificant, but my body weight varies by more than 300g pretty regularly, and while we all want light weight bikes I'm not sure that I'd really notice the extra weight on the frame. (However, once I add components the older frame will by closer to 4 pounds heavier - which is a pretty big difference.)
> 
> So, when you start with a 3.5 - 4.5 pound hunk of steel and you add 13 - 16 pounds of components on it, there's a lot more weigh to worry about with the components than the frame. And the geometry of every frame varies the ride enough that TIG vs. lugged vs. fillet won't be a factor in if you like how the bike rides - but maybe it will affect how you look at your bike.


I'm no steel guy, and love my <16 lb CF bike and have loved every well-fitting aluminum bike more than a poorly fitted steel bike. But the reality is that the difference between a typical modern CF frame and a good steel frame -old or new - is probably less than a KG (~1,000 g. vs. 2,000 g). If you put great fork, wheels and components on a new steel, aluminum, or CF frame vs. a classic or new steel frame, it will probably be 14-16 lbs vs. 16 - 18 lbs. Both will be quick and (assuming good fit) really, really fun to ride.

Oh, and the big epiphany for 99.9% of cyclists, even the most serious amateurs: the more comfortable bike will get you through 30-50 miles faster and happier than the lighter one. If that bike is beautiful and of the materials that grabs your heart, all the better.
It's all good!


----------



## cry lion

Yeah I had 5 good answers to you guys regarding the alloying elements and what not but it just disappeared and I spent a whole ****ing hour writing it and now its gone. MOTHER****er! Yeah so you get nothing. But just beacuse you add vanadium or columbium or whatever the **** you want in minute amounts doesn't make it something special, its done all the time, its called micro alloying. You can add vanadium to any steel and it becomes "better" because its a grain refiner, the finer the grain the more isotropic=better in all ways. Or nickel and it becomes tougher. Custom blends can be ordered in as little as 25kg, its nothing special. And now I suddenly lost all my f*cking will to write anything unfortunately. But its still the same ****. Now called unicorn ultra 8534340. I wish I still had access to free testing of chemicals in a lab and I would have filed some shavings of my frames to prove it to you. But instead I'm gonna drink a beer and not being sorry for that decision at all. 1 ****ing hour!! I can't ****ing believe it. "Darn" I guess.

Take care all you steel junkies.


----------



## Kontact

cry lion said:


> Yeah I had 5 good answers to you guys regarding the alloying elements and what not but it just disappeared and I spent a whole ****ing hour writing it and now its gone. MOTHER****er! Yeah so you get nothing. But just beacuse you add vanadium or columbium or whatever the **** you want in minute amounts doesn't make it something special, its done all the time, its called micro alloying. You can add vanadium to any steel and it becomes "better" because its a grain refiner, the finer the grain the more isotropic=better in all ways. Or nickel and it becomes tougher. Custom blends can be ordered in as little as 25kg, its nothing special. And now I suddenly lost all my f*cking will to write anything unfortunately. But its still the same ****. Now called unicorn ultra 8534340. I wish I still had access to free testing of chemicals in a lab and I would have filed some shavings of my frames to prove it to you. But instead I'm gonna drink a beer and not being sorry for that decision at all. 1 ****ing hour!! I can't ****ing believe it. "Darn" I guess.
> 
> Take care all you steel junkies.


Yeah, sure.

Hey Cry Lion, where did you get your information about Reynolds and True Temper product alloys?


----------



## cry lion

From mr reynold himself!! No just kidding. But seriously why don't you see furniture made of reynolds 831 or boats, or airplanes since it so damn good? They made up a name for an existing alloy. I'm not in any way saying the _product_ existed before. They sell a product, and neither one of us will never ever get a straigth answer out of them. But if you think about it for a while its only one real contender off the shelf, and they definitely buy their **** off the shelf for all prectical purposes, or on the open market at leaast, that leaves you hmm what does that leave you? 4340. Could be VIM/VAR/ESR/powder but its still 4340. And 4340 is only the AISI designation, it has several other namnes.

If you think its magic pixie dust in the steel thats up to you, I'm very very certain its just run off the mill 4340. Since there is no reason to go further. Yeah you have the stainless crap and that has proven to be crap. Too much Cr, surprise surprise.

Kontact you can believe exactly what you want, and you will keep beleiving for a long time, since you will never ever get a straigth answer, you wuil at best get "we use raynolds "customalloy" (Reynobtanium) x95cv85 which is their grain refined version of 4340. As always.

you gotta ask yourself in the morning rain getting ready for the daily swiming pool ride to work, is it air that I'm breathing or is it helium. Or hydrogen, or possibly pure nitrogen, you can speculate a whole lot, but the most logical answer is usually the most correct and true. And its just the same here. Personally I'd like to see reynoilds 853 turn up in other industries such as the mighty steel industry, if this is so good why haven't any other metallrist invented it, because its a ****ing pipe dream, first and foremost its not that good, even compared to the 4340 material matweb lists which is thick stock and the cooling and therefore hardening/strength will be much lower and second it has already been invented, like 50 years ago. If this was so special it would be all over the place, wait it is, its called 4340. How could I forget. Don't fool yourself thinking they are inventing the wheel once again, its not happening. Its been here for ages.


----------



## foto

cry lion said:


> From mr reynold himself!! No just kidding. But seriously why don't you see furniture made of reynolds 831 or boats, or airplanes since it so damn good? They made up a name for an existing alloy. I'm not in any way saying the _product_ existed before. They sell a product, and neither one of us will never ever get a straigth answer out of them.* But if you think about it for a while its only one real contender off the shelf, and they definitely buy their **** off the shelf for all prectical purposes, or on the open market at leaast,* that leaves you hmm what does that leave you? 4340. Could be VIM/VAR/ESR/powder but its still 4340. And 4340 is only the AISI designation, it has several other namnes.
> 
> If you think its magic pixie dust in the steel thats up to you, I'm very very certain its just run off the mill 4340. Since there is no reason to go further. Yeah you have the stainless crap and that has proven to be crap. Too much Cr, surprise surprise.
> 
> Kontact you can believe exactly what you want, and you will keep beleiving for a long time, since you will never ever get a straigth answer, you wuil at best get "we use raynolds "customalloy" (Reynobtanium) x95cv85 which is their grain refined version of 4340. As always.
> 
> you gotta ask yourself in the morning rain getting ready for the daily swiming pool ride to work, is it air that I'm breathing or is it helium. Or hydrogen, or possibly pure nitrogen, you can speculate a whole lot, but the most logical answer is usually the most correct and true. And its just the same here. Personally I'd like to see reynoilds 853 turn up in other industries such as the mighty steel industry, if this is so good why haven't any other metallrist invented it, because its a ****ing pipe dream, first and foremost its not that good, even compared to the 4340 material matweb lists which is thick stock and the cooling and therefore hardening/strength will be much lower and second it has already been invented, like 50 years ago. If this was so special it would be all over the place, wait it is, its called 4340. How could I forget. Don't fool yourself thinking they are inventing the wheel once again, its not happening. Its been here for ages.


True temper buys theirs steel off the shelf? I thought they made the steel.


----------



## froze

cry lion said:


> Yeah I had 5 good answers to you guys regarding the alloying elements and what not but it just disappeared and I spent a whole ****ing hour writing it and now its gone. MOTHER****er! Yeah so you get nothing. But just beacuse you add vanadium or columbium or whatever the **** you want in minute amounts doesn't make it something special, its done all the time, its called micro alloying. You can add vanadium to any steel and it becomes "better" because its a grain refiner, the finer the grain the more isotropic=better in all ways. Or nickel and it becomes tougher. Custom blends can be ordered in as little as 25kg, its nothing special. And now I suddenly lost all my f*cking will to write anything unfortunately. But its still the same ****. Now called unicorn ultra 8534340. I wish I still had access to free testing of chemicals in a lab and I would have filed some shavings of my frames to prove it to you. But instead I'm gonna drink a beer and not being sorry for that decision at all. 1 ****ing hour!! I can't ****ing believe it. "Darn" I guess.
> 
> Take care all you steel junkies.


Actually I showed a web site that mentioned what you were trying to say, but it was blown away as just pure nonsense. Count your blessings and move on.


----------



## Kontact

froze said:


> Actually I showed a web site that mentioned what you were trying to say, but it was blown away as just pure nonsense. Count your blessings and move on.


This is the reason I think you are such a flake. You posted several links to several sites, none of which mentioned anything about the alloy in question. I asked you about it, you didn't answer. And now you're playing hurt because you're being ignored.

Grow up. If you want to have a conversation, don't post, disappear, then act like a martyr.


----------



## Kontact

cry lion said:


> From mr reynold himself!! No just kidding. But seriously why don't you see furniture made of reynolds 831 or boats, or airplanes since it so damn good? They made up a name for an existing alloy. I'm not in any way saying the _product_ existed before. They sell a product, and neither one of us will never ever get a straigth answer out of them. But if you think about it for a while its only one real contender off the shelf, and they definitely buy their **** off the shelf for all prectical purposes, or on the open market at leaast, that leaves you hmm what does that leave you? 4340. Could be VIM/VAR/ESR/powder but its still 4340. And 4340 is only the AISI designation, it has several other namnes.


You're not getting this. Seriously.

853 may a 4340 derivative (since the alloy is different than 4340). Or it might be some other commercially available tube steel, like Domex 100 XF, Flexor or 300M, for instance. 

But you said it is 4340. How do you know it isn't 300M?


----------



## froze

Kontact said:


> This is the reason I think you are such a flake. You posted several links to several sites, none of which mentioned anything about the alloy in question. I asked you about it, you didn't answer. And now you're playing hurt because you're being ignored.
> 
> Grow up. If you want to have a conversation, don't post, disappear, then act like a martyr.


I'm a flake, thanks for noticing.


----------



## froze

The Lowdown on Bicycle Tubing Go to table two.


----------



## Kontact

froze said:


> The Lowdown on Bicycle Tubing Go to table two.


I'll give you credit: You managed to find the single flakiest source of "information" on earth to reference.

Were you unaware of this?
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/bikes-frames-forks/beware-desperado-250560.html



May Jalon Hawk be with you.


----------



## Kontact

froze said:


> The Lowdown on Bicycle Tubing Go to table two.


And just to make sure you understand that you aren't being ignored:

Table 2 contains no information about S3, 853, Ox Plat, 631 or any other "air hardening steel". There is a separate S3 table, but it also contains no alloy information.



So this serves as another clear reminder why I don't want to be your buddy - you posted a link to a crazy man's website that has outdated tubing information to make a mysterious point that you can't or won't explain. Probably time to disappear again.

I imagine this thread is about to be locked, too. Congrats.


----------



## rkdvsm

Kontact said:


> I'll give you credit: You managed to find the single flakiest source of "information" on earth to reference.
> 
> Were you unaware of this?
> http://forums.roadbikereview.com/bikes-frames-forks/beware-desperado-250560.html
> 
> 
> 
> May Jalon Hawk be with you.


Point scored! Anyway, I just spent a good deal of time reading that thread. Crazy stuff!


----------



## froze

rkdvsm said:


> Point scored! Anyway, I just spent a good deal of time reading that thread. Crazy stuff!


I read that, it is crazy stuff, but that doesn't necessarily mean the guy doesn't know his facts. There are criminals in prison for all sorts of big time financial scams, yet their very knowledgeable in their industry...just crooked, which doesn't make them unknowledgeable. 

I now know that no matter what I come up with as proof it won't be any good. So you believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want. And with that this discussion on my part is closed.


----------



## foto

froze said:


> I read that, it is crazy stuff, but that doesn't necessarily mean the guy doesn't know his facts. There are criminals in prison for all sorts of big time financial scams, yet their very knowledgeable in their industry...just crooked, which doesn't make them unknowledgeable.
> 
> I now know that no matter what I come up with as proof it won't be any good. So you believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want. *And with that this discussion on my part is closed.*


Hmm..I'll believe that when I see it.


----------



## Kontact

froze said:


> I read that, it is crazy stuff, but that doesn't necessarily mean the guy doesn't know his facts. There are criminals in prison for all sorts of big time financial scams, yet their very knowledgeable in their industry...just crooked, which doesn't make them unknowledgeable.
> 
> I now know that no matter what I come up with as proof it won't be any good. So you believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want. And with that this discussion on my part is closed.


Believe about what, exactly?

You still haven't said what point you're making by posting a link to an pre-853 tubing chart, or any of the other links you posted.


----------



## AndyMc2006

Since John Slawta at Landshark has switched to Carbon, my favorite steel builder is now Carl Strong


----------



## froze

Kontact said:


> Believe about what, exactly?
> 
> You still haven't said what point you're making by posting a link to an pre-853 tubing chart, or any of the other links you posted.


Kontact; I was going to close this discussion to prevent further hassles from you or others. I sent e-mails to 3 different tube manufactures in regard to this conversation an attempt to find out the truth about 2 weeks ago, I never heard anything back till today thus the reason I reopened the discussion on my part. So what follows is an e-mail in it's entirety directly from Keith Noronha managing director for Reynolds. From this letter you will see that Reynolds claims are more aligned with what YOU were saying. Kontact; I searched and searched the internet for information on this stuff and all I could find was what I reported. You on the other hand never reported any web sites, so it's difficult to understand who is telling the facts when one is just talking and others are what web sites report. 

When I'm wrong Kontact I will admit it, it's not about you vs me much to your surprise, it was in regards to facts discovered vs no facts presented. So assuming Reynolds is telling the absolute truth and not hiding anything or trying to cover up the real information, I will take what Reynolds says to be true. 

I'm reporting this e-mail because I'm honest, I could have easily not reviewed here so as not be made out as being wrong. Nothing has been altered in the e-mail.

I'm am still waiting to hear from True Temper and Columbus.

Here's the letter:

Hello,
Thank you for your email.

To achieve the final properties for any steel alloy, the chemical
composition is altered depending on the design requirements. This includes
tensile strength, corrosion resistance, fracture toughness, impact strength,
cold-formability etc. The SAE 4130 is a one designation used for a
particular composition of steel alloy only, there are many
hundreds/thousands in existence around the world.

Reynolds 525 and 725 are based on the SAE 4130 designation but our 631 and
853 use another class of low carbon steel alloy (under the class heading "
air-hardening steel") which has a different chemistry aimed at providing the
very important weld zone strength that is a key feature for this class of
steel which cannot be achieved using 4130. There is no SAE classification
for this particular alloy as there are few steel manufacturers making this
grade of steel.

Regards
Keith Noronha
Managing Director
Reynolds Technology Ltd
Reynolds Technology


----------



## Kontact

froze said:


> You on the other hand never reported any web sites, so it's difficult to understand who is telling the facts when one is just talking and others are what web sites report.


I'm not sure what website I could post to negate a falsehood, and you had already posted the link to Reynolds' website where the alloy composition of 853 is posted and different than 4340, so I didn't post it again.

Thank you for hunting down and posting this very relevant information from Reynolds.


----------



## aclinjury

Here is the chemical compositions of all the different Reynolds steel brands.

853 and 631 have the exact same chemical compositions. The difference between 853 and 631 is that 853 is heat-treated.

BTW, I got this by emailing Reynolds directly. This is just 1 page of the PDF file that I got from Reynolds.


----------



## Kontact

aclinjury said:


> Here is the chemical compositions of all the different Reynolds steel brands.
> 
> 853 and 631 have the exact same chemical compositions. The difference between 853 and 631 is that 853 is heat-treated.
> 
> BTW, I got this by emailing Reynolds directly. This is just 1 page of the PDF file that I got from Reynolds.


Wow, that's great! I'm fascinated by how little carbon is in 853/631 - 0.16% is really low for a hardenable non-stainless steel. There must be some neat stuff going on in that alloy.

It is also neat to see the Ti used in their stainless alloys.


----------



## froze

Kontact said:


> I'm not sure what website I could post to negate a falsehood, and you had already posted the link to Reynolds' website where the alloy composition of 853 is posted and different than 4340, so I didn't post it again.
> 
> Thank you for hunting down and posting this very relevant information from Reynolds.


The Reynolds site wasn't clear...at least to me, it didn't say what 853 was, they could have been using 4340 steel and mixing other alloys into it to get the 853 due to their lack of information. The letter details that this isn't the case, and probably the reason they don't say what it is exactly is a trade secret.

I still would like to hear what True Temper says, but I'm leaning toward their top of the line stuff not being 4340 either, but probably something closely akin to 843.


----------



## Kontact

froze said:


> The Reynolds site wasn't clear...at least to me, it didn't say what 853 was, they could have been using 4340 steel and mixing other alloys into it to get the 853 due to their lack of information. The letter details that this isn't the case, and probably the reason they don't say what it is exactly is a trade secret.
> 
> I still would like to hear what True Temper says, but I'm leaning toward their top of the line stuff not being 4340 either, but probably something closely akin to 843.


I agree that it wasn't definitive, but that was the closest to a rebuttal of Cry Lion's claim that it was possible to find on the open net. But Reynolds is much happier sharing information than I expected, and now we know much more about it.

After making knives for several years, my main impression is that the most radical steels are often of unexpected composition, often because there are things going on in the steel when formed and treated that are different than the usual expectations of carbon steel.


----------



## cry lion

"after making knives for several years".. lol you must have dreamt that Kontact, was it a nightmare? And still you next to nothing about steel?

And thanks for the red reputation kontact


> Isn't there enough crap information on the net?


 But in this case I'd say you're the one spreading it. However giving you some back is against my philosophy. You say you're making knives right, ok tell me what Case "CV" is, or "surgical stainless" or maybe Cold steel "Carbon V" or maybe what carbon steel camillus used back a few years ago. The answer is: it depends on what they have in stock!! Surprise surprise. 

And regarding that chem composition spec I find it funny. Because just now a few minutes ago I read on Reynolds site it was 1250-1400MPa UTS (and several non updated sites report 1250-1450UTS. Figures that definitely came from reynolds themselves, 4340 figures). So what, they can only guarantee 1200 now? Also 0.18C steel is not very likely to reach 1200MPa UTS, at least not without a grain refiner such as colubium/niobium or vanadium, Sure its doable but this is mass produced crap so I'm kind of excluding exotic heat treatments. 

Maybe they got too many complaints regarding 853 being brittle towards
impacts and thats why they changed it? Lowering the carbon would be my first priority then. And I'm not sure the dislocations they produce in the steel is over the top or manageble, since I don't work there. But it might very well be so that they butted the **** too hard for the alloy, scientifically speaking, so they changed it. Not knowing their HT standards and such..

But still the specs differ, 1450 and 1200 is not the same so Reynolds themselves don't even know wtf they are delivering. Or is the current steel stronger? Or is it weaker? Or is it the same? What steel is the site referring to and what steel is the chart referring to? Timeline? Whos pulling **** out of their ass here? Me or reynolds?

Or is it just the same as everybody else, they just change it depending on whats cheapest? Yup.

And since I have a special interest in hardenable steels I might add that setting a tolerance of 1250-1450 is so ****ing sloppy I can't really believe it, usually you know god damn straight on the money what its gonna be, like 1350-1360. This is mass produced crap and they have a standardized process for it, it turns out the same every ****ing time. UNLESS you change what steel you are working with. 1250 to 1450 is a big leap imo. Too big to just let it slide. Heads would roll... But hey I'm not working there.


Hehe I like that they now post on their site what 931 is, its straight 17-4 ph. WHO THE **** WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT?? At least I didn't when they introduced that crap a few years ago... I mean who would have thought they just took something standardized off the shelf and put their own mystical name on it?? But everybody said its magic super duper stainless steel. I guess I was right there too.

But go ahead Kontact, what really matters is that you are right, which you have never been, but whatever makes you feel happy I guess. Reynold change steel according to whats available just as everybody else that makes up their own silly names for long standardized products, and what you get is a mystery steel stronger than whatever it says on the site, and thats it.

And to be honest I'd much prefer 4340 to whatever 853 is now (for many rerasons, too many to list here) if thats really what they are using currently, (which potentially could be true, potantially).


----------



## froze

Cry Lion, stop your crying, it's getting you no where in a post that has been dead since 5/14/13! If you recall I was against Kontact's view as well, but I dug and dug and dug, then wrote e-mails to Reynolds, Columbus and True Temper (the last two never responded) and found out he was much closer to right then we were, that's you and I. Go back and read my post #123, then go and dig for yourself perhaps write your own e-mails inquiring to Columbus and True Temper since I didn't get a response from them, and see what they say. But as far as I'm concerned, the e-mail I got from Reynolds is the definitive word on the subject.

And there's no need for personal attacks against Kontact either CryLion, or probably me next since I dared to come out against you. Your living up to your forum handle, and that's not a good thing.


----------



## 74extiger

I'm ready. Wearing my kevlar underwear so the bullets won't kill me.

I come from the world of aviation. And my father was a machinist. He taught me to weld when I was 8 or 9. And I have a steel bike (Columbus EL OS tubing). It is also lugless. Silver soldered with bronze fillet for appearance.

The maker in London ( robertscycles - Robertscycles ) took me on a tour of their workshop when I was measured for the bike. Most interesting of all was what they told me about metallurgy. Oh, and they are licensed by Reynolds for the 8xx tubing.

They prefer the silver solder method of joining tubes because the bond is made at 580°. We looked at lots of frame sets. When on the subject of weld temperatures, he pointed the repairs they were making. He grabbed a Fisher mountain bike with a destroyed downtube. Prior to the serious crash in England, he said the frame was destined for failure at the Fisher factory. Overheated tube during welding. A very familiar story, to him. Then he showed me another bike mangled in a crash. Tube failure caused by overheating. With the steel sandblasted clean, you could the bands of color changes near the joints. 

Some of the tell-tail overheat color bands weren't at joints, but at attachment points for water bottle holders, brake bosses or gear changer mounts nearer the middle of the tube length.

About lugless construction. I must admit it is a bit unnerving to see 2 flared mouths of tubes being soldered together. It certainly doesn't seem like enough meat to support my weight. But the joining along the circumference of each tube, exquisitely mated with its neighbor, has surprising strength. In theory, a lug may provide strength. But the applied heat during welding compromises that strength. That's what I learned at the bike factory.


----------



## Scooper

74extiger said:


> In theory, a lug may provide strength. But the applied heat during welding compromises that strength. That's what I learned at the bike factory.


Sorry, but I'm puzzled by this comment.

Lugged frames aren't welded, they're brazed at the same temperatures as lugless fillet brazed joints assuming both the lugs and the fillets use similar brazing filler (like high silver content filler), so if the applied heat for the lugless fillet brazed joint doesn't compromise the strength of the tubes, neither will the applied heat used to braze the lugged joint.

Also, the newer air hardening steels actually get stronger from the high temperatures used in TIG welding.


----------



## 74extiger

Keep in mind that I don't work with metals. My knowledge is second hand, but the sources were unusual. Our weldshop at FedEx (hangar at LAX airport) won industry awards and they would tell me things.

The key to lugless strength is the low melting point of silver solder. They only heat the tubes to the temp of the solder. Brazing (ergo, Brass) flows at a hotter temperature. And of course steel is hottest of all. And much of the skill of the frame builder rests in his talent at recognizing temperatures of heated tubing. It takes a few years to get there. 

Some joints are formed by forming a bond which laminates the two surfaces. Others, such as TIG or welds cause the tubes to melt into one another. TIG is hot weld, but by design is confined to a small area. Lugs are a good concept but can hide places starved of brass or solder and cause surprising failure when stressed. 

If the apparent skimpiness of lugless joints scares you, think of the tubes themselves. Mine are steel oversized. The metal is virtually paper thin, but gains strength from the shape and the diameter of the tubing. With your bare hand, try to crush a paper cup down into the floor. The shape yields the strength.

This carries over to the joint at the fish-mouth joints, by virtue of their diameter. The bond strength per millimeter can exceed a joint formed with a fat weld bead. Fat tubes have a wider circumference. Thus, more linear length for the joint.

In many types of welds (not silver soldering , most of the metal doesn't add strength. It's the weld metal sandwiched between the surfaces which holds them together.

TIG welding seen on trailer hitches will have a bead resembling hardened toothpaste. The real bond is beneath that bead, so layered on metal is partially for show.

At the shop which made my lugless bike, most of the work was in carefully shaping and extruding the tubing. And then hand filing the fish-mouth ends. The soldering was a less involved part of the process. Or, so they told me.


----------



## dysfunction

I've never seen a tig bead on a trailer hitch. The deposition rate is too low compared to mig. I'd normally have spray arc'd those, sine they're small and in position is easy to achieve.


----------



## froze

74extiger said:


> Keep in mind that I don't work with metals. My knowledge is second hand, but the sources were unusual. Our weldshop at FedEx (hangar at LAX airport) won industry awards and they would tell me things.
> 
> The key to lugless strength is the low melting point of silver solder. They only heat the tubes to the temp of the solder. Brazing (ergo, Brass) flows at a hotter temperature. And of course steel is hottest of all. And much of the skill of the frame builder rests in his talent at recognizing temperatures of heated tubing. It takes a few years to get there.
> 
> Some joints are formed by forming a bond which laminates the two surfaces. Others, such as TIG or welds cause the tubes to melt into one another. TIG is hot weld, but by design is confined to a small area. Lugs are a good concept but can hide places starved of brass or solder and cause surprising failure when stressed.
> 
> If the apparent skimpiness of lugless joints scares you, think of the tubes themselves. Mine are steel oversized. The metal is virtually paper thin, but gains strength from the shape and the diameter of the tubing. With your bare hand, try to crush a paper cup down into the floor. The shape yields the strength.
> 
> This carries over to the joint at the fish-mouth joints, by virtue of their diameter. The bond strength per millimeter can exceed a joint formed with a fat weld bead. Fat tubes have a wider circumference. Thus, more linear length for the joint.
> 
> In many types of welds (not silver soldering , most of the metal doesn't add strength. It's the weld metal sandwiched between the surfaces which holds them together.
> 
> TIG welding seen on trailer hitches will have a bead resembling hardened toothpaste. The real bond is beneath that bead, so layered on metal is partially for show.
> 
> At the shop which made my lugless bike, most of the work was in carefully shaping and extruding the tubing. And then hand filing the fish-mouth ends. The soldering was a less involved part of the process. Or, so they told me.



Lugs use to be the strongest way to join steel tubes to make frames, but due to modern steel actually getting stronger when heat is applied it's no longer an issue, but some feel lugs are still stronger. The weight is the same because the they have to use thicker butts when filleting a frame for support, which is what the lugs do, tig builders often (not always) use tubes that are thicker at the top of the seat tube and/or with the head tube. This thicker tube helps keep weld distortion to a minimum and has better fatigue resistance in the long term; so strength wise it's a wash. It takes greater skill to fillet braze. Errors can be made when filleting too, the builder makes a mistake, if he's a shady builder will simply fill in the errors, smooth it out and paint over it and you would never be the wiser. Cost is the same because of a trade off in material vs labor, lugs cost money to buy and some more then others like Sachs lugs, fillet braze cost more in labor, in the end it's a wash cost wise. Tig welding is the cheapest way to join tubes but the tubes cannot be repaired, you can repair with fillet brazed tube but the labor is very intensive, lugged tubes are simpler to repair.

See: Kirk Frameworks Custom Bicycles - Bicycle design and construction
(Cog)nitive Dissonance: TIG welding vs. Fillet/Lug Brazing
Bicycle frame - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So today it boils down to what you like in the way a bike looks. I happen to like lugs, it adds a element of artistry not found in any other method..l.but that's just my opinion.


----------

