this site has a lot of info on tange, columbus and reynolds.
it shows what all of those little stickers mean.
http://www.equusbicycle.com/bike
Okay, I think I have a fair idea of what to look for. I’d love to build up an older frame, but I am liking the LHT too.
But would anyone be able to give like a summary of tubing in general? It’s something I don’t know about that I wish I did.
that link i just posted has a shitload of information about older tubing, although you might have to strain your eyes a little bit. i honestly doubt that you could really tell the difference between any of them besides how heavy it makes your bike feel when you lift it.
if you come across a frame that interests you, look up what kind of tubing it is made of and see if it will work for what you want.
I used to think tubing made far more of a difference than it actually does. I now think tubing mainly affects weight and stiffness, and that’s it. Mainly through the tube diameter and wall thickness. Ride characteristics come moreso from geometry and fit than anything else… so, if you’re going for a touring frame, you might as well get some thick tubes that’ll hold up to the weight and stress. Aren’t you building your own frame HC or do I have you confused?
There is no summary to be had. If you want to learn about tubing, do the research. In the last 30 years there’s been dozens of commonly used tube sets. Nobody is going to be able to summarize the material properties of each.
I’m happy with my crosscheck’s 4130 frame and fork. On a bumpy road you can see the “suspension” working as the front hub jiggles a lot more than the fork crown does. I think that more modern racing tubesets like the higher numbers of Reynolds tend to get stiffer so that you gain efficiency but perhaps lose some comfort. But I don’t really know too much about tubing–that’s just something i heard somewhere.
Touring tubesets are designed to take a load with less flexing and wobbling than lighter tubesets.
Oh, and this is OT but mountain bikes never had much to do with touring bikes.
[youtube]RiD8aBmYu_g[/youtube]
Exactly.
Make your bike choice based on features, not stickers.
[quote=“lot_22”]that link i just posted has a shitload of information about older tubing, although you might have to strain your eyes a little bit. i honestly doubt that you could really tell the difference between any of them besides how heavy it makes your bike feel when you lift it.
if you come across a frame that interests you, look up what kind of tubing it is made of and see if it will work for what you want.[/quote]
Thanks, that’s really helpful.
[quote=“bradencbc”]
Exactly.
Make your bike choice based on features, not stickers.[/quote]
For sure, I just don’t know how to tell what has what features, or even what features to look for. Lightness and stiffness, and ride quality, definitely, but I’m also looking at buying from ebay, where I probably can’t test ride.
Though knowing that the big names don’t mean that much is handy.
My Trek is Columbus SP, I think, and my Schwinn is bottom o’ the barrel heavy-duty hi-ten. I can definitely feel the difference in lightness/stiffness between the two, but the Trek has no eyelets, steeper geometry, and tight-ish clearances, therefore, the Schwinn sees more ride time, especially in the winter since I can fit knobbies and full fenders with ease.
The Trek is great on sunny days, but I guess I’m just echoing what Braden and BC have said- features, such as eyelets, and geometry make a helluva lot more difference than weight/stiffness, especially in the realm of commuting. I’ve noticed probably a minute or two difference between the two on my 4-5 mile commutes.
[quote=“Elderberry”]My Trek is Columbus SP, I think, and my Schwinn is bottom o’ the barrel heavy-duty hi-ten. I can definitely feel the difference in lightness/stiffness between the two, but the Trek has no eyelets, steeper geometry, and tight-ish clearances, therefore, the Schwinn sees more ride time, especially in the winter since I can fit knobbies and full fenders with ease.
The Trek is great on sunny days, but I guess I’m just echoing what Braden and BC have said- features, such as eyelets, and geometry make a helluva lot more difference than weight/stiffness, especially in the realm of commuting. I’ve noticed probably a minute or two difference between the two on my 4-5 mile commutes.[/quote]
Yeah I definitely am going features first, no question. I just also want to consider tubing.
Totally agree with Braden and Nickatina. However, on similarly appointed bikes, tubing can make a HELL of a difference in ride quality. I have 3 steel bikes: a 520, a Tange Prestige, and a Columbus SLX. The Columbus destroys the other two in terms of ride quality.
I have a SLX Rossin Ghibli and it is very comfortable, a noticeable difference to the Tange DB Nishiki I used to have. But it’s also really flexy. You can feel it flex out of the saddle. Vertically AND laterally compliant. 
Doesn’t bother me though.
heres what jm merz said on CR list recently
I have not been following every one of these emails, but my take on tubing
.
The first thing is that steel has the almost exactly the same modulus of elasticity no matter what the alloy. What this means is the mild steel or 4130 CrMo tubes made with the same wall thickness will be of equal stiffness. So the stiffness of the final frame depends on wall thickness
and tubing diameters along with frame geometry. The way to make a tube stiffer is to make the diameter larger, but of course this adds material so
it will add mass. If you then decrease the wall thickness you can make a
stiffer tube with less material. However, good practice dictates a ratio of around 50:1 diameter to wall thickness for a tube. If the tube gets too thin it can fail from a buckle or dent. This problem can be helped by using
steel with a higher yield, alloy 4130 is very good here. If the wall
thickness is very thin then heat treating the material helps. This allows
the frame to ride over bumps and take the input of a strong rider without
failure. All of these points have been gone over in the many years bike
frames were made from steel and are worked out mostly. Not much room for
improvement using steel. From the rule of 50:1 stated above one can see
that using a less dense material can allow a larger diameter with a thicker
wall to either make a stiffer tube or a tube of the same stillness but
lighter. This is why aluminum bike frames can be lighter than steel and
still be stiff and strong. Tensile and yield of aluminum is not very high
but density is so much less you can design around this. Note also that the
specific modulus of aluminum and steel is almost the same. Materials made
from neat metal of almost all sorts keep nearly the same specific modulus.
Carbon fiber has a much better specific modulus than steel and is very low
density. Nicely designed structures of this material can be very light and
incredibly strong. This is why for instance aircraft in the past have been
made with 4130 tubing in the 1930’s, changing to stressed skin aluminum up
to the presnt, now carbon fiber skin for some surfaces or the whole
structure in some cases.
I was the first certified 753 frame builder in the USA and have some
comments about the tubing. This is the same alloy as 531 but heat treated
to improve the tensile by 50%, to around 150,000. It has very thin walls,
so thin a frame made using 531 would fail without a doubt. The drawback =is
this heat treating will be compromised if the brazing temperature in higher
than 1200f. Silver braze Easyflow45 (with cadmium) melts at 1150f or so, so
this safety range of 50f is a challenge for the best craftsmen. Reynolds
required a finished frame to be sent to England where they cut it apart and
tested the tensile strength of the brazed areas. I can assure you this was
no marketing hype, very few people could pass this test. If the tube was
hotter than this limit the frame would fail. I personally think a properly
made frame of 753 was the very best steel frame, (for racing). One side
note, I was so smitten with this material I talked Hero Tange into taking =a
set of 753 and seeing if he could duplicate the results. He did, and the
resultant product was Prestige. This is a different alloy and the
temperature limit is not so tight, so is easier to build with.
Jim Merz
then someone else chimed in
Have built frames from both 753 and Prestige, I have to admit that the
finish on Prestige tubing is about the best I’ve ever seen and it
doesn’t burn through files as quickly as 753!
Yeah, that’s about what Sheldon has to say. The first time I read his thing it took me a little while to get the idea of diameter/wall thickness making much more of a difference than the particular type of steel being used, but now it makes sense, and this Merz guy’s comments reinforce this.
I have 2 bikes in similar sizes from a similar era. The Paramount has Columbus SLX and the Colnago has Columbus SP. The Paramount is stiffer in the bottom bracket, faster handling and a more comfortable ride. There are differences in geometry but tubing plays a noticeable part in the equation.
I agree with Merz, I love my Reynolds 753r tubed bike, it’s a shame it is so easily dented.
tarckbike is way more awzum than brian forums.
we have this thread, they have http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=513470
wow.
[quote=“Elderberry”]My Trek is Columbus SP, I think, and my Schwinn is bottom o’ the barrel heavy-duty hi-ten. I can definitely feel the difference in lightness/stiffness between the two, but the Trek has no eyelets, steeper geometry, and tight-ish clearances, therefore, the Schwinn sees more ride time, especially in the winter since I can fit knobbies and full fenders with ease.
The Trek is great on sunny days, but I guess I’m just echoing what Braden and BC have said- features, such as eyelets, and geometry make a helluva lot more difference than weight/stiffness, especially in the realm of commuting. I’ve noticed probably a minute or two difference between the two on my 4-5 mile commutes.[/quote]
I want the best of both worlds, tight geometry and lightweight with full fenders and rack mounts.
Kilo TT/KHS does that fairly well. The geometry isn’t the tightest in terms of track bikes, but it is still pretty good and you can get full fenders on there.
But you’re never going to find a bike steep like the Italian/keirin stuff with full fender capacity unless you go custom, obviously.
Where’s Sheldon’s stuff on tubing? I was on his site for like an hour looking for it before I made this thread.