How much is a steel frame worth in scrap value?

[CycleTourer]

I am preparing to upgrade my Nomad Mk 2 frame to a Mk 3 frame. This is partly to run a belt drive, and partly because I consider the Mk 2's elliptical bottom bracket design to be fatally flawed. That BB design makes it even more unlikely I could sell the old Mk 2 frame in my country – buyers won't want to be dependent on a shop in the faraway UK for a new BB shell, with all the customs bother that that entails.

If I simply dispose of the Mk 2 frame, what would this be worth in scrap metal? Or would the amount be so ridiculously low that I shouldn’t even try to sell it for value, and should simply drop it off at an oversized-goods recycling center without expectation of monetary reward?

[mickeg]

I think you will find that scrap value is nil.  But value as a frame and fork should still be something, even if it is specific only to a internally geared rear hub.  Someone that wanted to build up a bike with a single speed or fixed gear could use that frame.

Although I do not like the two set screw design of the bottom bracket, it is far from fatally flawed in my opinion.

[PH]

It should be easy to find the scrap rates on whatever country you're in, though most merchants are not interested in quantities less than .25 ton.  In the UK current price for mild steel is £230 a ton, so about 40p for a frame.
The set screw type EBB has been around for over a hundred years, if there was a fatal flaw I think it'd be known by now, what's your problem with it?
Here's Sheldon Brown's description of the EBB types, they all have pros and cons, but none of them are prone to failure.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/synchain.html

If someone really was that bothered, having a set screw type cut and converted to a pinch bolt type would be a simple job for any frame builder or welding shop.  The idea that someone would scrap a frame because they don't like it I find absurd.

[CycleTourer]

Thanks for the insight re: the value of the scrap frame.

Switching to a new frame due to drawbacks in the old frame isn’t unusual. Many Rohloff owners switch from a non-Rohloff-ready frame like the Surly LHT/Disc Trucker to a Rohloff-ready frame like the Nomad so that they can get rid of the awkward compatibility attachments (chain tensioner, torque arm). In that case, one can still build up another, derailleur-based bike with the old frame, but I just don’t see any place for a leftover Nomad Mk2 frame in my stable, nor do I think I could easily sell it in my local market.

But especially as one wanting to start running a belt drive, purchasing the Mk3 frame which has everything I want and is warrantied, feels like a better option than turning to a local shop to make multiple alterations to the Mk2 frame. I’d also like to run Thorn’s new bikepacking fork, which will not fit the Mk2 Nomad.

[PH]

Switching to a new frame due to drawbacks in the old frame isn’t unusual.

Not unusual at all, I've done so myself.
Scrapping a frame, because of some erroneous idea about one element is something else, not usual at all.  It's a quality frame, I'd be shocked if you couldn't find someone with a use for it.  When I moved on from my Raven, I sold the well used frame and some other bits for £200 and that was over ten years ago.

[CycleTourer]

Where I live on the continent, I just don’t think anyone is going to pay 200 quid for a well-used frame with an unusual, foreign EBB shell, with an already-cut steerer tube, and not even a headset (since I am removing the Chris King headset I installed in it – I can definitely use that part elsewhere). If people here look out for sales – well, at least once supply chains recover – they could pick up a new Rohloff-ready frame for perhaps no more than twice that amount. Plus, I would have to invest time in cleaning and repainting the frame, listing it and possibly packaging it for dispatch. It just doesn’t seem worth my while.

[mickeg]

Post the frame for sale on this forum with photos.  You should assume a buyer will want to know the serial number on the frame.  But first you should figure out how you would ship it, as shipping costs are something that a buyer would want to know.

There is a half meg limit to photo size on this forum.  I usually post photos that are 922 X 691 pixels.  Much bigger and it will not accept it.

I am keeping my Nomad Mk II, I have had it nine years and I do not see any advantage to getting the Mk III.  But, I would stick with chain drive because I use a smaller chainring for touring than I use for general riding near home.  And sometimes I put a suspension fork on it and the Mk III is not compatible with suspension forks.  And, my Mk II has S&S couplers, I think they are not available on the Mk III.  So, for me a Mk III has no advantages.

[martinf]

Depends on the size and where you are on the Continent, but I might be interested.

[CycleTourer]

It’s a size 540L, and it’s in Warsaw.

[martinf]

Unfortunately a bit too small for me.

But as Mickeg has already said, it is probably worth a try posting it here. There are some other forum members in continental Europe.

[Moronic]

Let's get straight to the point here.

You don't like your frame and you don't want to sell it as a frame. You've not expressed any doubt about the scrap value proposed by PH, which was 40p IFF someone were interested in such a small quantity of scrap.

So you have all the information you need. The only remaining question for you is the method of disposal.

You could throw it on a rubbish dump somewhere (which might come with costs). You could store it at home somewhere (might be costs of a different kind). Or you could offer it on this forum or eBay for free, with postage paid by the recieiver.

It really is that simple. Of course packing it up for a receiver who was paying postage might be a chore. In which case you have the other two options.

What am I missing, and what was it that led you to post here rather than researching the scrap value yourself?

[JohnR]

This discussion has highlighted that the frame shouldn't be considered as scrap metal. It will be worth something to someone somewhere. Yes, the EBB design has been superseded (but parts available subject to purchase and shipping charges) and it's not beyond the capability of someone with some metal-working skills to make a modification to the BB. The same must also apply to the fitting of a chain tensioner. The latter option should be quite easy: Cut and drill a piece of metal plate so it can be bolted to the two mounting holes and provides a place for fitting a chain tensioner.

I've got a redundant aluminium frame in my garage which I wasn't considering recycling as scrap. It's probable destination is a local charity which specialises in bike rebuilding and, most likely, could combined the frame with other donated components to create a usable bicycle. Does Warsaw have such charities?

[Bill C]

although i agree the ebb is a poor design and not fitting a mech hanger when designing the frame wasn't a great choice either scrapping it seems a bit extreme,
if it was mine (not that i'd ever buy into rohloff or a rohloff specific frame) i would place it on ebay buyer collects and cash on collection,
start it at 40p (the scrap value mentioned up thread) or what ever that is in euro's and anything over the starting price is a bonus,
if the hype is to be believed their are plenty of rohloff users gagging for decent frame or maybe an alfine user

good luck finding it a deserving home

[PH]

although i agree the ebb is a poor design ....
not that i'd ever buy into rohloff or a rohloff specific frame

It's hard to reconcile those two statements, what leads you to that opinion if you have no experience?
It's a design which is common enough, often found on budget tandems.  The only issues I've heard of have been user error, either overtightening or misunderstanding how frequently the chain needs adjusting, in neither case have I ever known it to be fatal. As Sheldon says in the link above:

This system does have a couple of drawbacks: The ends of the set screws can dent the outer surface of the eccentric, making very fine adjustment a bit difficult. Since it relies on threads cut into the frame, if these threads get damaged, you could be in big trouble. This is rarely a problem in practice.

[Bill C]

although i agree the ebb is a poor design ....
not that i'd ever buy into rohloff or a rohloff specific frame

It's hard to reconcile those two statements, what leads you to that opinion if you have no experience?
It's a design which is common enough, often found on budget tandems.  The only issues I've heard of have been user error, either overtightening or misunderstanding how frequently the chain needs adjusting, in neither case have I ever known it to be fatal. As Sheldon says in the link above:

This system does have a couple of drawbacks: The ends of the set screws can dent the outer surface of the eccentric, making very fine adjustment a bit difficult. Since it relies on threads cut into the frame, if these threads get damaged, you could be in big trouble. This is rarely a problem in practice.

Hi PH
i don't need to buy a rohloff to know its not for me, same as i don't need to buy a humvee to know it isn't for me i read up on them and made an informed decision that i'm much better served with a derailleur bike
i also don't need a rohloff to know an ebb has faults, i have had a scott sub35 with an ebb
the fault i found was that if i adjusted the ebb to remove the slack in the chain then the pedals moved and where no longer comfortable for me i have arthritis in both knee's and they are sensitive to saddle height/pedal position
as for rohloffs i'm not going to go into why i don't want one as people who have bought into them seem to have thin skins and are easily offended by an unbeliever 
i rarely come here these days as when i do 9 times out of 10 some one gets the hump,
i do try to refrain from posting on the forum but sometimes i i get the urge to read/talk Thorn