Re: Debunking time again (Re: [CR]1962 Raleigh Gran Sport)

Example: Framebuilders:Norman Taylor
From: <>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:41:24 EDT
Subject: Re: Debunking time again (Re: [CR]1962 Raleigh Gran Sport)

In a message dated 5/30/02 7:07:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time, writes:

<< I'm sure most people will chime in that I'm just full of it. Before you react look for the article in Bicycle Guide and look at the materials used in bike construction 40 years ago. Also note that we're talking about ride and not weight, longevity, ETC. . . Like everyone I want to believe that it really does matter since I'm paying extra for quality tubing, but when it comes to ride it just doesn't matter. I'm now off to put on my asbestos underwear. >>

Have to disagree. Magazines publish articles to fill space and sell magazines. I've said this before and I'll say it again, Albert Eisentraut was one of the first American builders to vary the tubing gauges in a frame, not just using the standard "tube set". It made a HUGE difference in ride quality and a minuscule difference in weight. If what you are saying is that you can get a similar ride quality from cheap tubing (with a weight penalty), that's a somewhat fair statement. However, the cheaper, heavier steel tubing doesn't allow the artistic and talented frame builder to design in the subtleties that varying the best quality of tubes allows. Your statement would be fully true if subtlety did not exist in the universe. The smartest article I remember reading on the subject had to do with telling riders it's not the "steel" that matters, it's the "tubing". Tube configuration, wall thickness, taper, etc. matters more to a finished frame than "what steel is it?" Caeterus paribas, assuming first class workmanship.
Stevan Thomas
Alameda, CA