My personal $.02 on frame stiffness is that it's way overrated.
The bike I personally spend most time on is a steel frame, but I've never once asked myself a question of "is this stiff / bouncy" enough. When I started having issues with too much road vibration giving me a mild case of cyclists palsy (temporary mild paralysis of ulnar nerve), it was due to the surface I was riding on (gravel) and the distances / times. Solution was adding suspension stem to the handlebar.
To me, the "steel is real" argument speaks about the general durability / repairability of the frame. But AFAIK, modern CroMoly steel butted tubes aren't "that" great for welding or cold setting either (to be debated). IMO the famous road repairs of 90's adventurers who had their cracked frames repaired by no matter what farmer with a stick welder in the midle of Kazakhstan are simply long gone now.
Personally, the thing I watch for in a bike frame first and foremost is the geometry and the actual personal fit (ideally by a professional fitter).
The number one issue I've seen most beginners have related to bike frames is simply being too optimistic on their abilities and spending thousands on frames that they simply don't have the mobility and flexibility for.
Perceptions on stiffness vary greatly with your inseam length, and I feel like it's fruitless to have conversations without stating what frame size you're looking at.
If you start with a bike model that is already known to be mushy and try to ride a 60 or 62cm size it's going to be even worse. When I still rode I chose a frame that some other club members characterized as 'harsh' but they were riding something more like a 56. Even a couple inches makes a huge difference in leverage.
Yeah, pretty much. Bicycle frames are basically completely rigid vertically, as far as the forces that are normally encountered is concerned. The only possible source of vertical compliance are the tires and the suspension, if there is any. Some frames may be more or less laterally or torsionally compliant, but I'm skeptic that either makes much of a difference while riding.
The bike I personally spend most time on is a steel frame, but I've never once asked myself a question of "is this stiff / bouncy" enough. When I started having issues with too much road vibration giving me a mild case of cyclists palsy (temporary mild paralysis of ulnar nerve), it was due to the surface I was riding on (gravel) and the distances / times. Solution was adding suspension stem to the handlebar.
To me, the "steel is real" argument speaks about the general durability / repairability of the frame. But AFAIK, modern CroMoly steel butted tubes aren't "that" great for welding or cold setting either (to be debated). IMO the famous road repairs of 90's adventurers who had their cracked frames repaired by no matter what farmer with a stick welder in the midle of Kazakhstan are simply long gone now.
Personally, the thing I watch for in a bike frame first and foremost is the geometry and the actual personal fit (ideally by a professional fitter).
The number one issue I've seen most beginners have related to bike frames is simply being too optimistic on their abilities and spending thousands on frames that they simply don't have the mobility and flexibility for.