Re: [CR]Oversize top-tube v. oversize down tube

(Example: Framebuilders:Chris Pauley)

In-Reply-To: <000b01c6912f$2e3a7030$3d244154@049306920171>
References: <000b01c6912f$2e3a7030$3d244154@049306920171>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:33:45 -0700
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
From: "Jan Heine" <heine94@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]Oversize top-tube v. oversize down tube


At 11:25 AM +0100 6/16/06, Norris Lockley wrote:
>
>equally arguably no frame-builder coulod ever produce two "identical"
>frames ie materials, sizes etc that turned out to be identical in their
>ride qualities and response. in the cyclists' tea-rooms of Yorkshire, a
>region where you are likely, or were likely some years ago, to find an
>abundance of Bob Jackson frames, a regular topic of conversation was
>whether one had a "good Jackson " or one of the "poor Jacksons". These
>discussions had nothing to do with appearance or even external signs of
>build-quality...just about how the frames rode. I have heard similar
>discussions about Mercians too.

If one had three identical frames, one also would have to be careful not to ride them over different distances, lest one got more "soft" with age than the others ;-)

I remember the days when riders on my team even had their aluminum frames go soft, yet their aluminum handlebars remained stiff as they were switched from frame to frame. The "tea-room" discussions can be interesting, but the opinions proposed should not always be taken as fact. Just recently, a rider explained to me how replacing his waterbottle cages with a lighter model has transformed the climbing of his bike.

From my experience with similar bikes, from the same makers, it appears that once you have the same tubes and same geometry, barring any very serious flaws in workmanship or alignment, the frames ride very similarly. For example, I think it is safe to generalize about the ride of a 58 cm 1973 Cinelli Supercorsa...

Of course, there are variabilities in the tube tolerances, so one Columbus SL tube might measure 0.95-0.55-0.95 mm, while another might measure 0.85-0.65-0.85... but one could measure and weigh the tubes before building the frames to ensure they are similar enough.

I feel that most modern American builders have both the brazing skills and enough control over the alignment and geometry to make three identical frames.

I agree that it is possible that things like choice of lugs, fork crowns, stay attachments, chainstay shape, etc., could influence a bike's ride, so the three bikes should be from the same maker. When I spoke of a collaborative effort, I though of the finances. If builders had money to spare (now here is a thought), they could chip in, and subsidize one deserving, underemployed builder who could make the frames. If we have 10 builders each chip in $ 100, we get $ 1000. Maybe we should have a collection among the general public as well. We might be able to pull it off...

The alternative is going with Tawainese TIG-welded frames, as we did for the geometry experiment. That was "sponsored" by Kogswell, who supplied three identical frames with three different forks. It certainly is cheaper, but while geometry is an easy thing to test, the "feel" and "responsiveness" of a frame is more difficult. I would want an experienced builder to make the frames, lest they all turn out to be duds. -- Jan Heine Editor/Publisher Vintage Bicycle Quarterly c/o Il Vecchio Bicycles 140 Lakeside Ave, Ste. C Seattle WA 98122 http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com