On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 10:58 AM Ben Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've seen a few of these "X Reasons to buy a steel bike" article over the > years. But more and more they seem to suffer the same issue that I think > befalls the current Bike Radar one: All the bike examples are of steel > frames with carbon forks. I hate this. The weight of a carbon fork is around 300g. It's really an obvious place to save weight. My wife's Ritchey Road Logic handles off pavement very well (she prefers it to her gravel ti bike with a steel fork even when that gravel bike has much wider tires!), and the reality is that unless you buy a custom frame + fork (and sometimes not even then --- many custom frame builders won't build you a steel fork), it's really hard to get away from the carbon fork. Having said that when my brother and I bought our youngest brother his custom frame I did specify a steel fork with a 1" steerer. > Now personally I have never ridden a steel frame with a carbon fork, and > its been over a decade since I rode a carbon bike. But I do know that a > steal frame with a 1" steerer feels different than a 1-1/8" steerer. I can > only imagine that the oversized tapered HT needed for carbon forks is much > more different still. But they still offer up a "steel bike" with a carbon > frame and OS HT as giving that "steel" ride quality. In general, I think > the whole "this material has this ride quality vs that" is a bit over > blown, but if there is anything at all to it, surely a steel frame with a > carbon fork has to be different than a steel FF with 1" steerer?!? > It's still miles better than any bike built with disc brakes in mind. :-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CAPh0EZ6f4kzH-SLhwYofDbAGx%3DuuLHLrK3mH4ad8Utc39Kns%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.
