Fred started in on one of the great misconceptions around bicycle tubing; seamless is better than seamed tubing. This is really myth and advertising hype. It is true that seamed tubing is "easier" to make, costs less, and was used on more lower end bikes than seamless, but this doesn't make it better. Seamed tubing if produced correctly like True Temper is actually "better" than the best seamless tubing. Seamed tubing is generally more accurate in tubing diameter, wall thickness, and butt length. Sure, many seamed tubes are total crap, but that's not all seamed tubing. Don't believe my words, look at the archives of the framebuilders listserve since we covered this topic in depth a few months back. Or even better give Hank Folsom (Henry James Lugs<http://www.henryjames.com/>) a call and ask him about what he thinks. I've worked on and ridden more bikes than I want to think about and the only thing I can say is ride quality has very , very, very little do do with the tubing. Things like fit, design, seat, and tires have more to do with ride quality than 501 vs. 753.
enjoy,
Brandon"monkeyman"Ives
> Basically, Cromor was similar to Reynolds 501; i.e. seamed
>tubing that has been chemically treated to restore strength
>at the seam, so that it is close in quality to a seamless
>tube. Anyway, that's the theory. Many people depricate this
>tubing, although I wonder if these folks have ever ridden on
>the stuff.
> I put many miles on both Cromor and 501 bikes and found
>them acceptable and only slightly heavier than SL or 531 -
>at least in my frame size (52cm). The differences might
>be magnified as the frame size increases, though.
> As for Columbus Matrix, I'll have to defer to someone
>with actual riding experience...
> Cheers,
> Fred
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nobody can do everything,
but if everybody did something
everything would get done.
-Gil Scott Heron-
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!