Re: [CR]re: eisentraut frames

(Example: Framebuilders)

From: Jerry & Liz Moos <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net>
To: "Aldo Ross" <swampmtn@siscom.net>, <WTrikerider@cs.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <64.18d4cceb.29756dc2@cs.com> <006b01c19dc4$bc46ec40$6cf9fea9@j4g1x1>
Subject: Re: [CR]re: eisentraut frames
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 19:01:57 -0600


I think this is a myth believed even by some frame builders who should know better (of course it also encourages people to buy new frames). Everything I have read indicates that steel frames, unlike aluminum, should not fail from metal fatigue, even after several human lifetimes, although steel can always rust if not properly protected. I have read somewhere that much of the "tiredness" of steel frames is due to loss of alignment, and that when properly realigned, they miraculously regain their "youthful vigor".

Regards,

Jerry Moos
Houston, TX


----- Original Message -----
From: Aldo Ross
To: WTrikerider@cs.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 7:01 AM
Subject: Re: [CR]re: eisentraut frames



> Back in the 1980s, Mike Melton recommended replacing a steel frameset every
> two or three years, depending on mileage. "They just get worn out after
> awhile." LOL
>
> Aldo Ross
> "If I'd followed Mike's rule, I'd have had 12 Melton framesets by now!"
> Monroe, Ohio
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <WTrikerider@cs.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 6:34 AM
> Subject: [CR]re: eisentraut frames
>
>
> > You can add Colin Laing to your short list. He told me that steel frames
> got
> > "tired" and should be retired for optimal performance. Hence my '72
> Mercian
> > was past it's prime and I deserved a new frame.
> >
> > Paul Patzkowsky, Longmont, Colorado