RiddleOfSteel

I cannot speak for pre-1980's Japanese steel bikes as I have neither owned nor ridden any (though not opposed to it!). From the Bike Boom to, say, 1990, in reading and in anecdote, so much changed so fast, and largely for the better. All that to say that sure some of those earlier and/or lower-end frames very well could have deserved that characteristic.

None of the '80s frames of Japanese origin that I own feel dead--seems more of a carbon thing to me (I rode an '09 Felt F5 for a year or so--great bike, soaked up bumps well).

As some have mentioned earlier, tires make a difference. I would add that rims, or more importantly, rim section (plus weight) impact ride quality, too. My '85 Schwinn Peloton felt effortless and light with a full 1989-era 105 groupset, including box-sectioned Wolber rims. I changed everything out to 7400 DA with the hubs laced to 700g boat anchor Weinmann DP-18 rims. Still rode great, felt very solid and secure at any speed with a big flywheel feel because of those hoops. I am nearly done changing it from 7-speed to 10-speed DA with Vuelta Corsa Lite wheels (23C tires, like the previous wheelsets). We shall see how it goes, but I am looking forward to it!

My straight-gauge tubed 1983 Nishiki Olympic 12 is a 27" frame (my other frames are 25" so that is a consideration) and built up for all weather riding/commuting/touring. 35C tires, triple Biopace, 11-34 9S through a Rapid-Rise XTR RD, and nice level-to-the-saddle bar height. So much fun to ride and so comfortable. Steering is wonderfully light and easy. Very not dead.

Just put together a steel blue '83 Fuji Supreme with DB Valite 212 tubing. 600 components. Will need to test ride as well (been raining like crazy here in Seattle. Today is dry and very cold. Time to capitalize!).

Steve Whitlatch 

I think it comes down to a war between those than can afford or those who save to own the exotic racing bike that was ridden by so and so from team whatever verses those who can`t. The term better bike, to many, seems to me has become the one with the highest value. The racers back in the day used Campagnolo and rode exotic Italian bikes given to them by team sponsors. The goal for many is to obtain that glory, a link to the past. Is there an edge to an Italian racing bike over a Japan built one? Maybe, but only the top fit racers would be able to utilize it. They do have a beauty, that is for sure. There will always be the flame wars between the country of origin of the bikes we ride. It may not always be out in the open, but it is there in the shadows of posts all over the forum. Was Mopar better than Chevy in the 60`s? Yes. But someone with no brain will definitely disagree. Same thing different subject. The best thing to do is ride it yourself and find out. '

oddjob2

This compliment from a guy who had the hardest time selling a 1987 Miami Vice Ironman.

Steve Whitlatch 

But you need a certain yellow suit jacket and dress shoes to go with that Miami Vice bike. It limits the market.

jetboy 

Hey- tubbs looked good- it was that other guy...

mstateglfr 

Japanese bike manufacturing was still going really strong in the early 80s.

Salamandrine 

All the amateur racers rode italian bikes that were all campy too. They saved and scrounged and bought them with their own money. It had nothing to do with glory and was entirely pragmatic. The main thing was campagnolo worked well, was reliable and didn't break when subjected to long training miles and lots of racing. Early shimano stuff did.

There were virtually no american pros until the mid to late 80s.

Steve Whitlatch 

Yes I agree. My point was about today. The value of the old Italian racing bikes is high based on the glory of the past and the famous racers that won on them in part. High quality bikes yes. The Japanese racing bikes came along well later.

Salamandrine 

OK, I understand your point now.

Even by 1982 or 83, there were some good Japanese bikes. Team Miyata for example, and of course 3Rensho (which were near unobtanium). But most weren't quite there yet until the late 80s, which is about when production for all the big companies started shifting to Taiwan...

Vieux chnoque

Besides tubing there is the psychology of colour, everyone knows that red bikes are fastest

look171

I am taking about racing bikes only here. I think this philosophy still hold true. The French have always built their rode bike to be stage racing bikes. Ride all day in comfort, but fast and stable. Where as American bikes (starting from those early days) tend to be super stiff and fast like a Cannondale or Klein. I think that's one of the reason Time still lugged their carbon frames. I am told by the sales rep that this is where it makes a difference. I can't feel the bumps on the road even if I hit them hard. I am known to be pretty hard on equip. The Ridley is a different animal. the frontal stiffness is immediately when you hit the first big dip on the road. Still, its a lot more comfortable then all my steel bikes I have ridden over the years.

look171

So much of this "feel" depends on so many factors. Like I said earlier, tires. On the same frame, lets say my old Casati or Medici that I did lots of miles with heavier clinchers But on occasions, my beloved Clement Criterium Setas (for races too) on my GL330s. Those tires alone transformed that bike's feel. I also had a set of GP4 with 260g. Vittoria sew-up that also did the same thing. Fast forward some years later, I picked up cycling again. This time was comparing the old G40 36 spokes wheel I built to a new set of Ksyrium SSCs on Grand Prix 3000 tires. The Ksyrium wheels were so much more responsive again, making my old Torelli Alum./carbon bike feel so much more "alive". That "spring back" from the BB was there again. Not only do tires make a difference, but a light, tighter, wheel will transform the feel also. Now, wider handle bar will create more torque off the saddle, also making the bike feel a little easier to pedal.

kunsunoke 

Certainly, some Japan-built frames have/had a dead ride quality - but that's true for bikes built anywhere in the world. Not every company can produce a Peugeot quality ride from gas-pipe.

Anyone who has ever owned a Bridgestone RB-1/RB-2/RB-T/XO-1, or a 3Rensho, or Nagasawa, or '80s era Panasonic, or one of the Konno brothers' masterworks (Cherubim) can attest to the ride quality. Ishiwata 022 and Tange #2 are world-class tubesets, giving up little to nothing in terms of ride to anything Columbus or Reynolds ever produced. So it's pretty safe to say that Japan-built doesn't mean dead.

By contrast, there are a number of carbon bikes that feel/felt dead. Early Kestrels and Trek carbon specials come to mind.

crank_addict

Weird thread. Fan of 80's/90 classic lugged w/ Tange Champion incl. 2. Also, had time on a 90's Specialized Allez of which might have been made under the watch of Yoshi Konno. Fine machines.

RobbieTunes

Noble gesture.

RobbieTunes

I ain't got no rhythm.

RobbieTunes

My one complaint about a Y-Foil. The looks darn near overcome it.

vendorz

There ya go!!! I always likened the ride of my too-big Nishiki Seral to the ride of a cruise ship.

John E

OK, personal anecdote, for what it's worth.

My first road bike was a low-end 1962 Bianchi Corsa, with 26" tires and steel cranks, rims, and brake calipers.

In 1971 I upgraded to an American Eagle Semi-Pro (Nishiki Competition), which was before Japanese bicycles became fashionable in the US. I put 40K miles on it (including three centuries, a couple of double metrics, and a double century) over the next 20 years, until the frame broke, and I always defended it against those who claimed Semi-Pros were spongy, dead, and heavy, despite their double-butted Ishiwata CrMo tubing. It was not a bad frame, particularly when I put tubulars on it, but my subsequent mixed tubeset road bikes (1980 Peugeot PKN10 and 1981 Bianchi Campione d'Italia) were much more lively, responsive, and fun to ride, so I would have to say that my Nishiki indeed had a "dead" ride quality.

I concur with others who have noted that by the late 1970s the Japanese manufacturers were turning out some world class frames, and I had always liked the SunTour derailleurs and freewheels, Sugino cranksets, and DiaCompe brakes. A modest Nishiki Olympic from the early 1980s is arguably a much better frame my old Semi-Pro.

T-Mar

Since a previous post of mine seems to have triggered this thread, perhaps I should respond. Yes, many of the early boom era Japanese models did have a "dead" ride quality. Personally, I have always thought this was intentional. In the aftermath of World war II, anything with a Made in Japan label was viewed as inferior. The Japanese knew that in order conquer foreign markets they would have to offer superior value. They had the low labour costs but needed to improve the quality. Consequently they brought in Quality experts like Juran and Demming, who were being ignored in their native America. Japan took their quality philosophies to heart and began rebuilding their industries.

The Japanese also realized that Americans had been brought up on the single speed roadsters (and later, hi-risers) and were quite abusive with their bicycles, as they were primarily used by children. In order to successfully build their reputation, the Japanese over engineered their bicycles. The easiest way to do this and maintain cost effectiveness, is to use more material, which results in a stronger but heavier bicycle.

The chief competition during the early days of the boom were the French. Unlike America, France (and Europe in general) still had a large adult population riding bicycles and children were brought up to respect their bicycles and care for them properly. Consequently, these bicyc les tended not to be over designed and the racing models, particularly the French, favoured lightness over long term durability. The French were the original weight weenies.

Boom era, entry level models like the Peugeot U08 and Gitane Gran Sport were 28 lb bicycles while models like the Fuji S-10-S and Nishiki Olympic could not break 30 lbs. Move up the scale and you could get 21 lb bicycles like a Peugeot PX 10 or Gitane de France, while the Fuji Newest tipped the scales at 23 lbs and the Nishik Pro was 24 lbs. However, both these models were more expensive than the French models. Limit yourself to the PX10 and TdF price range and you got a 25 lb Nishiki Road Compe! Any rider knew that a lighter bicycle was more lively.

Furthermore, the French trimmed the weight were it was critical, in the rims and tires, particularly on the better models. The standard Mavic Montherly was 40g lighter than the Araya or Ukai 16B. I recall their being even bigger difference in the tires and the French typically had about a 1/2 lb advantage in wheel weight. The resulting improvement in acceleration and climbing was notable.

The French also utilized metric sized tubing which was typically a smaller diameter. Thus, for a given wall thickness, the French frame would automatically have a small weight advantage. More critically, the tubes and resulting frame were not as stiff, resulting in a more resilient and lively feel.

The increased resiliency was often exploited by tightening of the rear triangle to increase responsiveness without impacting the comfort. The PX10 and TdF both had 16.75" chainstays while the Newest and Road Compe were 1/4" and 1/2" longer respectively. The Newest and Road Compe also had combinations of wheelbase and rake that led to more stability over the PX 10 and TdF. Stability, while desirable in some aspects, is generally considered to be less lively.

The weight advantage, increased tubing resiliency and tighter geometry of French bicycles all added up to a lively feel. Thus, compared to the French, which were the standard at the time, the Japanese bicycle did feel relatively dead.

However, the conservative design approach and excellent workmanship, allowed the Japanese to get a toehold in the American entry level market. Once this was secured, they never looked back. As the American public became more educated about cycling, the Japanese started improving their product, moving towards the sate of the art. By the end of the decade, the Japanese bicycle was far removed form the early boom era offerings.

leicanthrope

"...but it's harder to immerse myself into the fantasy of being [insert favorite European pro] on the [insert storied climb] on a Japanese bike..."

D1andonlyDman

It may feel dead, but there's no denying that it climbs close to 10% faster than my steel bikes.

gugie 

I had a Ciocc years back. Rode like an oxcart. So did a first year Cannondale. Neither were Japanese. My Lotus Classique is pretty lively, however.

All were within a cm of the same frame size.

bikemig 

lol, trouble maker might be more accurate.

bikemig 

So when I first got into riding in the early 80s, everyone *knew* that European bikes were better than Japanese bikes and most people I knew thought that Italian bikes were *better* than French ones. There were a few deluded souls, however, who still believed in English bikes but I figured that anyone who likes tweed doesn't know much, right?

Then I bought a team miyata to race on and well I never looked back. I have Japanese and American bikes (and one seriously oddball bike from Argentina just to spice things up a bit). I like Miyata and Bridgestones and Specializeds a lot and all were made in Japan. I rate them as highly as I do my made in the US Trek bikes. Everything else being equal, I probably like vintage Treks the best but that's a close call and my answer may change depending on what stage the moon is.