> They are made with Columbus Chromor. From > discussions here on the list. I was informed > that this material is bunk. But why would a > frame manufacturer go out of their way to > make such beautiful frames using such "lower-end" > material? Did someone in this list really make such calumnious statements about Cromor tubing? Such a pity... In fact, a full Cromor tubeset is only marginally heavier than an SL tubeset of similar dimensions.
The problem is that many frames made from Cromor only use it for the main triangle and use more ordinary tubing for the remainder of the frame. But a full Cromor frame, built by a skilled framebuilding shop can be a beautiful thing. Granted it is a seamed tube but it's still a high quality material. Now, there are people who refuse to accept any seamed tube as being decent - but bear in mind that the current True Temper stuff is seamed material and it's among the best bicycle tubing available.
By the way, the above also applies to Reynolds 501. Neither is the best material available from their respective manufacturers but both can be used to make a nice bicycle frame.
Also, from what I've seen, many Italian framebuilders in what we are considering the classic period did not suffer from "tubing decal envy". Therefore they did not mark their frames at all - even those built from seamless Columbus tubing. They simply expected the customer to trust them to use good materials and for the frame to be judged on it's ride characteristics, weight and appearance. Such is the case with many modern frames, as well. For example, my Richard Sachs has no tubing decals. Best regards, Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/