Ted,
Just let me interject one thing regarding frames using a mixture of Reynolds and Columbus tubing. It is a common thing on many older classic Italian bikes from the 50's and 60's, primarily. Reynolds tubing was sort of the standard of steel bicycle tubing at that time, and because of it's composition it made for a durable and comfortable frame. The reason a builder would choose to use Columbus tubing in the forks and stays is because Columbus forks and stays are "taper gauge" tubes, meaning that the wall thickness of the fork blade is a consistant thickness throughout the length of the tube. The way Reynolds tapered their stays resulted in a tube with a thin wall at the larger end and a very thick wall at the bottom end. The result is a heavier and less resiliant fork blade for racing bikes. The Reynolds method was OK for non-racing bikes, generally speaking.
With all due respect to you, your epic expierences, and volumes of knowledge, and eons on the bike; I have to humbley say that a certain amount of what you said about tubing and how it reacts to construction techniques and use are typical of many racer's beliefs on these topics. As with the explaination above, some of it is not completely accurate. Suffice it to say that it's certainly close enough for government work, but technically as a framebuilder one has slightly different perspectives and understanding of what tubing is like what and why bike frames are designed as they are and behave as they do.
The "riders point of view" and the general impressions of consumers and fans of the high end bicycle are valid and interesting. Ted's account is priceless in that way. Also, his impressions come from partly before my time, and public (rider) opinion are probably exactly as he says, giving it historical value. Perhaps in the early days of lightweight tubing and construction methods there were more pitfalls. Also, bikes built just for racing are rough and tumble, but only a small segment of bicycles within our topic. Constructuer type framebuilders and certain British framemakers made frames for performance AND pride of ownership, and intended that these machines last a long time while still being as light as possible. During these times builders even had special tubes made by Reynolds or Vitus,(which by the way did make a high quality tube, Cro-Mo, and I've seen Cinillis built with it, not to mention all the exotic Frenchies) and the builders took full advantage of the charactistics of these tubes.
Anyway, not to critize, but only to tidy up a few things about tubing and frames. Thanks Ted for the original post and the great insight from your perspective.
Brian Baylis La Mesa, CA Speaking of FORK BLADES!! I need a never ending supply of the Columbus cross-section (can be Reynolds or Columbus) fork blades for fork repairs and building spare forks. Anyone know of a stash of (old useless, antique, CHEAP) fork blades? Everyone seems to be chaseing parked cars or riding their bike into a well. I need fork blades.
Allow me to ding your tubes a little and see / hear if it resonates. I'll relate what was talked about years ago in the trade If you know / heard different please chime in and we'll see if we can harmonize and not get sharp. I'll try to economize on diatribe and give measure, cut, braze. Let me first preface that ALL the pro bikes were really only meant to last a season at best. They were ridden so hard in such conditions that the pros felt and knew they were not up to demands they needed. I'm also mindful that we're talking older vintage steel production and some classic makes, collected, revered and in the proper timeline. Remember also that the old steel tubes looked alike when painted, and they put on what they needed to do the job and covered it with paint and lied like hell in the advertising. Who of you will strip a classic frame of '60's to see if you can identify the tubing and then repaint? Once shaped tubes and old Zeros were sent back to the US for frames and then cans were recycled and sent back over the international date line was it more difficult to disguise the original maker as the metallurgy shapes determined brands easy to identify. Vitus: Top French tubing. Best DB on par with Reynolds, but 'fatigued' much sooner, and therefore was used mostly on French bikes some first line or some second line after same company used Reynolds as first line. Heard of some fork blades 'softening' and bent away towards front as they weakened. Reynolds: Tubing of choice for many years. The manganese moly made it tough,durable, and more shock absorbing. Many builders used Reynolds 3 main tubes and Columbus forks and stays for stiffness. Some preferred Reynolds forks and stays in different gauges but it got heavier for same stiffness. Frejus is a good example of known and decal shown three main tubes Reynolds frames. Keep in mind we're talking pro use, and weight and strength were considered for a season only, not us on timeline. Libelulla / Columbus: Chrome moly. Stiffer but more brittle. It fatigued sooner and had a harsher ride. Thus the blend of tubes on the bikes.At first, Columbus had a hell of a time competing with Reynolds. Too light, it broke , too heavy , not competitive. Many were the reports of early light Columbus tubes silver brazed and coming apart on the rough roads. They worked like hell to get the rifling, gauges, and metallurgy correct. But it still rode somewhat harder and it could be felt by riders, making the choice definitive, and the subterfuge a predictable happening. Once they got back to better reinforced tubes and harder brass the difficulty was overcome. Then with the advent of the Swiss Eutectic silver / brass composition, lower heat, etc., all the steel tubes got happier and longer lives. I've pulled the field long enough now, it's your turn to keep the jam going while I sit in. But be on guard, I might jump you when you least expect it. Jump being the vintage word of the week. Meaning to attack to get away off he front when it's unsuspected, catching the field by surprise while 'breaking away'. Ted Ernst Palos Verdes Estates, CA
.
> Peter Kohler wrote:
>>
> (snip)
>> Of course some Italian machines did have Reynolds tubing. But how many??
>> Cinellis with Reynolds are considered unusual if not exceptional are they
>> not?
>
>
> Yes, some Italians used Reynolds. How many bikes? That would be
> impossible to say.
>
> Cinellis built with Reynolds being inusual and exceptional? I don't
> believe so. My 1960 Cinelli SC (thanx Brian B) is made from Reynolds.
> Also my early '60s Masi Special is made with Reynolds, along with my '71
> (Milano) and '73 (Verona) Masi GC's.
>
> Years ago I asked a couple of Italian frame builders why they used
> Reynolds back then and they said the concentricity of the tubes
> (consistent wall thickness) and quality control (tubes without external
> flaws when delivered) was why they preferred it over Columbus tubing. I
> think this was only true before Antonio Columbo revitalized his father's
> company in the late 1960s - early 1970s. Can anyone confirm?
>
> Chuck Schmidt
> South Pasadena, Southern California
>
> .