> Kevin wrote:
>
> Hi Joe,
> My 1984 Masi by Rob Roberson is the BEST RIDING BIKE
> I
> have ever owned. With the recent discussion about
> "BALANCE" and riding "NO HANDS", I can't stress how
> straight and true my 1984 MASI rides --- never had a
> bike feel so stable!!!
> As for the desire for visible file marks and thin
> paint on the early CA Masis,,,,,I've always
> considered
> these to be detractions from a frame, not a bonus.
> If
> folks really want these on a frame, then they would
> love and highly value the Mexican Raysport
> Cinelli-copy that I just purchased on eBay. It
> looks
> like a Cinelli, with Reynolds tubes and Campy rear
> vertical dropouts. And oh my,,,,very visible FILE
> MARKS on the drilled-out head lugs. Does this
> diminish the "ICK" factor???
> In closing, BRAVO to your group of builders!!! I
> love
> my 1984 MASI, and never plan on selling it. I have
> to
> force myself to ride one of my many other classics
> over it.
> Highest Regards,
> Kevin Kruger - Grantville, PA
>
> *******
>
> Been awhile since I read a post full of this many
> straw men,
Charles,
Creating a "straw man or straw men," is a literary technique emplowed by a single author, who both creates the straw-man and blows it away; it's not a two-author activity.
all of
> which have nothing to do with why some of us like
> the early Masis best.
>
> First, a Masi made in 1984, and a Masi made in 1974
> are not
> the same. They have different geometries.
Be specific. Howza 'bout you tell me the specs on 74s, and I'll tell you the specs on the 84s?
> Different forks,
> different lugs.. higher bottom-brackets on the
> later frames, but I have not
> measured same and could be wrong there.
84s: 7cm drop, and the 74s?
>
> 1) the fork bends on early Masis are a thing of
> beauty unmatched
> in vintage lightweights. The radius begins right at
> the crown and continues
> in a lovely arc right to the drop-outs.
I can't agree that the older ones are all this way. I've seen more than a few. I've heard before, I think, that some appear to be, or actually are, bent at the crown or even the steerer. Either way, not acceptable building practices in more than one book of frame-building or metallurgy. It's very difficult to put much bend that high in the blade, but yes, some have a slight inckling of beginning to bend there, more likely though, some canting of the blades and the bending of the blades as high as possible combine to create more a visual effect than actual bend. So other than putting bends in crowns and steerers, which are no-nos, I too like the look you so describe.
An
> aesthetic feature only, perhaps,
> but one that is very, very pretty. This fork-bend
> disappeared by the late 70s.
I don't know what the handful or two Masi builders
"after the late 70s" did before me, but from '84 and
on, I formed blades over a 16" mandrel, chopped the
straight part, and all those blades did result in a
curve through to the dropout. Although the radius
wasn't as tight down below as you describe, I felt the
result had a very apt look for a racing frame. Tubing
changes too through the years ya know, I may have had
to work with a larger diameter, thinner blade at the
dropout end than precursers, and those specs just
can't be bent as tight.
>
> 2) I dunno where this silliness about file-marks
> came from, and it has nothing
> to do with why the pressed-lug Masis are
> nicer-looking. The reason the pressed-lug
> Masis are nicer-looking is because the lugs are
> hand-worked, and show it. Not
> with file-marks (although there might be a few), but
> with lovely shaping that
> is not matched by the later cast-lugs.
I don't know, all too often they weren't shaped very well, for example, throughout the seat lug "tang" at the front of the seat tube. In a brochure I have, Faliero is posing next to an example of this common gack-in-the-transition-flaw.
Some of the
> cast-lug bikes had lots of hand
> working of the lugs (the Confente Masi mentioned in
> a previous post comes to mind,
> and you can see similar hand-working on Mr. Sachs'
> Nagasawa...
The Nagasawa lugs are cast. Was the shoreline changed? Richard? As for hand-working, I see lots of file marks. Every GC that passed through me and my assistant's hands were finished better than Richard's Nagasawa. Fact. Hold on though, I give the Nag' a top grade though, for the clean shorelines and a buncha other stuff. (I think the lower head lug wrap-around is too narrow though.)
tough work, since those
> lugs are HARD), but usually, from what I've seen,
> the cast-lug masis were brazed up, cleaned
> up, and that was that.
All the lug shorelines were hand-profiled with a 6" smooth file, inspected, brazed, and then hand finished again. "That was that" is but phrasing meant to diminish where you have no call to diminish.
After all, that was the
> whole point of the cast lugs: to speed up
> the process of building, and make that process a
> little easier.
A little easier.
The charm of a hand-worked
> frame is largely gone though.
>
I only value a hand-worked frame if it's finished well. Gacky contours, file marks and brazing goobers are like a crooked wood object that wasn't sanded and shows glue comin' outta the seams. Oooh, hand-made. Nice. And "silliness of file marks" comes from the many misguided on this list who actually equate file marks with "charm." File marks are marks of laziness and a measure of the maker's craftsmanship integrity.
> 3) Geometry: 80s Masis and early 70s Masis ride
> differently. The earlier frames
> are plushier, due to more slack geometry, lower bb
> shells, and longer wheelbases.
Specifics or nothing! "Plushier...slacker...lower...longer?" By how much, exactly?
> The 80s frames are more typical of that period.
> More upright, quicker-handling.
So says you. Others say nay.
>
> 3) Thin paint is FAR prettier than thick paint, on
> a well-made frame.
A well-made frame is far prettier than an unwell-made frame.
The difference is
> so obvious and so incontrovertible, I can't imagine
> even arguing about it. Thin paint shows
> the frame-maker's art to best advantage.
There really isn't a whole lotta "art" in ANY Masis. But the problem area for "thick" vs. "thin" paint is at the lug shoreline, mostly. And fancier frames will get fancier paint, SO WHAT?
Thick
> paint just hides everything, and it's
> rather ugly to boot.
You make it sound like you're comparing microns to velveeta cheese. Hides what? Everybody makes mistakes and rolls with it, if proper. There's nothing fancy about a Masi, and you know, bondo is the more apt miracle drug for shoddy framebuilding than paint. And then there's durability. What's the rate of repaint on 80s GCs? I don't know. 70s GCs? (I'm not equating thicker to more durable, for I'm told it's the opposite. Or is it? There's frame preparation and all, and whatever else contributes to a lasting finish.)
> I owned one of the 80s Masis for awhile, and it was
> a very nice bike, of its kind. I
> am not slamming those bikes at all.
"Owned ONE! And see your"Ugly" above?
To the
> contrary, they were very fine, and
> quite competitive compared to what else you could
> get then.
"Quite competitive," a rather milquetoast summation.
> But let's stop with the straw-man
See above again.
of comparing the
> 80s frames to the 70s frames.
> Each may say Masi on them, but that's about where
> the similarity ends.
You don't have enough here to back up your snide statements above and below, Charles. If you hadn't hacked up so much harumph! hyperbole, I'd think you knew more about framebuilding, but you hacked and so you don't. But hey man, forgive the testiness from the man who pulled a seven-year stretch at Masi San Marcos; that's alot of frames, and if you could find a room big enough to hold all of them -- then maybe -- you'd see what I see. Joe Starck, masidon, wi
> In all humility, get your facts straight Kevin,
> before making assumptions like those
> above. And, btw, if I'm wrong in any of my
> particulars above, someone please
> correct me.
>
> And, of course, if you really don't want that early
> Gran Criterium in a 56cm when you find
> it, Kevin, I'll be more than happy to take that
> crappy frame off your hands.
>
> Charles Andrews
> SoCal
>
> _______________________________________________
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
http://www.bikelist.org/
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/