they use steel for the seat area and the hole rear swing arm area. so pretty much the stuff that isn't shiny. it isn't going to go anywhere.

awesome thats good news
but what about rust long term
would of bin nicer in titanium though

i think the chainstays on this one are actually painted or else you would most likely see metal discoloration (happens to steel when its welded) and is fairly noticeable. if you look in the background you can see another one with a red colored seat tube area.

Ti wouldn't be a good choice. at least for the chain/seat stays anyway. steel is stiffer then Ti and the hole reason for using steel is to have a super stiff rear end. Ti would just be like running aluminum, just lighter and more expensive. for the seat section it would be a good idea. since flex does not matter at all really there.

totaly true !!!!
but steel rusts from the inside out if not coated on the inside by a rust coat
i bet right now that bike rocks but
in 2-3 years, i wonder, under wet conditions, just at the seat stay.

if i had the cash i would buy one. its still a very nice bike. im not knocking it, i'm just wondering long term thats all

most people that can buy bikes like these have a new one in 2 years anyways

ODIN... If they wanted a stiffer rear end, they'd have used aluminum. Steel is far flexier than aluminum (in a bicycle application). They probably used steel for strength (not stiffness) reasons. Oh, and it's whole, not hole. Ti would NOT be just like running aluminum, it would give the bike a rear end as noodly as an Intense. Aluminum would make it stiffer than it is right now.

i am just going by what the representative said. i was talking to him at the Blue Mountain O-cup race. He said that the bike was super stiff in the rear end because they used Steel and it reduced the side to side flex dramatically when they were testing the bikes.

I think i will take you up on your offer of a negative prop