Brewcity24

Trying to figure out the type of Columbus tubing used on my new Limongi but can't quite find the right answer.

It states its "Superbutted", Acciaio CrMo Cyclex but that's it. Am I missing something?? According to this website https://www.equusbicycle.com/bike/col...umbuschart.htm only the SLX and SPX were "Superbutted"

dddd

Sounds like SLX.

From your tubing label...

...ELICOIDALI...
...are medium-sized tubes of ridged pasta.
The ridges spiral gently up around the inside of the tube.
This pasta is used with tomato or cheese-based sauces.

The Limongis I've ridden are very fast bikes, built for serious racers with an aggressive, rider-foreward geometry.

unworthy1

I'd agree: probably SLX and I don't know why it doesn't have those letters on the decal. But, the light blue background seems to be something I've seen on custom-drawn tubesets, often for Bianchi but maybe Columbus extended that practice when they made custom sets for other customers, too. My guess is that Limongi may have spec'd something slightly different from the standard SLX tubeset...if it's a large frame it could be something that involved a heavier down tube and/or seat tube.

madzho

Greetings!

I'm planning to purchase a more or less classic road bike. It has all requirements - size, looks etc...
Theres only one ting I'm concerned with - tubing. It's clear that frame was build from Columbus tubes, but label don't says which specific one(CROMOR, SL, SLX...)?
Below you'll find some info and photo of label - I hope this will help identify tubing.
Frame is F. MOSER and it takes 27.2mm seatpost(from my understanding this leaves CROMOR, SL, SLX, TSX...). Rear and front fork dropouts are branded F. MOSER.
And I know that SLX, TSX have helical reinforcements in seattube and steerer(CROMOR and SL has only in steerer), but I have no chance to check that.

I know that here is bunch on guy's who can solve this in no time. I'll hope they're online
Thanks in advance for your help!

Picture - https://www.dropbox.com/s/3kczm0wkg4m5im9/IMG_1060.JPG

T-Mar

That is an SL/SP decal.

Chombi

Yes,.......wouldn't SLX say "SLX" in the bottom of that decal?? Even the older decals just had "Columbus" and the pretty bird on them when it was SL/SP, but never said "SL and/or "SP"

unworthy1

it's the "standard" decal used from approximately the '70s through at least early '80s. This is from the era in which that decal could indicate a frame built with SL or SP tubing (SP probably only used with a large size road frame, or a track frame that was expected to be hammered), but might also indicate a mixed set (both SL and SP together)
And, in the case of a not-so-honest frame maker, could also indicate a frame with some Falck items (such as stays, fork blades, steerer and head tube) substituted but not named.
It's also not a totally accurate indication of the precise year made, since older decals still on-hand might be used for years afterward by thrifty builders...but this style decal was in use when the other sets would be Aelle, Trampo, Zeta, Record, C&C and KL, and would state so right on the decal.

Jeesh, I'm slow: T-Mar and Chombi beat me to it

catonec 

Yum!

madzho

Thanks for useful information!
As I understand there is no way to determine which tubing it has - SL, SP or SL/SP mixed set?
I see only one way - weight the frame precisely and see is it closer to 2215g(SP) or closer to 1925g(SL) or somewhere between - then mixed(SL/SP) set? Am I thinking in right way? And yes, these weights I took from equusbicycle.com info page...
This MOSER is for big guy's, 60.5cm center-to-center, so as you stated, could be SP too.
Then another question pops up - how precise is weights found on equusbicycle.com? I see that difference between SL and SP is 290grams. and thats a lot. I'm not a weight weenie, but I hope that it have SL tubing...

unworthy1 mentions that this labels was used till mid 80'. Bike seller says this bike is from mid 90'... I guess he isn't well informed then. Because I don't think that F.MOSER is "thrifty builder" and uses 10 year old stickers. They're serious company and I hope they use period correct labels

Here is few pictures of this bike. It wouldn't let you to determine tubing, but it might tell you production year
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/71cv3poau1od1q5/WQk4Z-hJ_p

unworthy1

At a glance, it certainly looks like a more modern frame (maybe from the '90s) than that decal would promote...the "51.151" on the fork indicates Moser's Hour Record...it doesn't tell us what tubing the frame's made with, but probably Columbus, small chance it could be Oria.
Nice frame. regardless.

bbattle

nice collection of Columbus decals here. and some Columbus history: https://italiancyclingjournal.blogspo...for-frame.html

did not see the OP's in there, though.

unworthy1

that's a great link: never seen so many "oddball" Columbus decals collected in one spot before, very useful for future sleuthing, perhaps.
Right that there's no match to the OP's but it caused me to look more carefully at that light-blue background decal and, if I'm correct, there's the very small white letters that say "riverniciato", meaning this decal was for a repaint...in which case it might not have much to do with what that Limongi is actually built with!

T-Mar

Madzho, your frame is almost cerainly SP as opposed to SL, given the size of the frame. Most Italian builders switched from SL to SP around 58cm and Moser himself had preference for a stiffer frame with heavier tubes. Traditionally, SP frames use a slightly smaller seat post, 27.0mm versus 27.2mm for SL. However, some manufacturers would ream an SP seat tube to SL inner diameter, so theey only had to stock one post size. So, unless your uses a 27.0mm post it''s not definitive.

Weighing frames to determine tubesets is futile unless your talking several grades of difference. The choice of lugs, sheel and fittings can add up to more than the difference in weight between SL and SP.

T-Mar

Good eyes! I'm used to seeing the more brazen version with the wide diagonal band.

Cared201376

Are the internal seams in low end Aelle or Cromor Tubes easy to detect? I am attaching two pictures of an old custom made frame with allegedly Columbus tubing. In both of them, the seam of the seat tube can be spotted quite easily. Could this really be Columbus tubing? Thank very much in advance for your knowledgeable opinions!

bertinjim 

Cared201376- Columbus made a high carbon, seamed tube called Zeta for entry level sport bicycles. Basso and Benotto, at least, used it extensively for their entry level bikes.

unworthy1

Just for the record: both Aelle and Cromor are reported (by Columbus) to be "cold-drawn", and therefore should be seamless. Cromor is chrome-moly and butted, Aelle is chrome-manganese and plain-gauge (although there is a rare version called Aelle R which is butted).
I'd guess like bertinjim suggests that this frame might be Zeta or could be something not by Columbus at all: Falck tubing.

Nope, scratch that...according to the Columbus catalog copy, the "tubes that form Zeta Series are still drawn, but realised from carbon steel" meaning they are not seamed, but plain high carbon steel, not alloyed with chromium, molybdenum or manganese.
So, I'd vote for Falck (IF we can believe the Columbus catalogs).

Cared201376

Thank you for your replies. My understanding is that Aelle, Cromor and Gara tubes were cold drawn, but from a seamed billet... Hence my question about whether the seam would remain visible in these low end Columbus lines. If anyone has ever seen Aelle, Chromor or Gara tubes and knows that the seam remains visible, I think the tubing could be Columbus indeed. If the seams do not remain visible after the drawing process, then obviously not.

What makes me think that the frame could be made with Columbus tubes, in addition to the claims of the person who sold it to me, is that the steer tube has helical reinforcements and that the entire frame (including the fork and dropouts) is around 2,75 kg, having a size of 59,5 x 57 cm and oversize diameters (even though I cannot measure them with precision, the diameter of the top and the seat tube could be around the 28.6, and the one of the down tube could be around the 31.7, which is what the Columbus Catalog describes for oversize frames).

The reinforcements in the steer tube and the relatively low weight excludes Aelle OR and Gara OR. (I have not seen catalogs with details about Zeta tubes, the average weight of a 54 cm Zeta set, and whether Zeta tubes have an oversized version as well, but if they are of lower quality than Aelle I would guess that these details exclude Zeta tubing too.)

At any rate, if anyone can confirm that the seams in these low end Columbus lines remain easily detectable, such as the ones in the pictures, I would think the frame could be Cromor OR.

Like Aelle and Gara, Cromor tubes were also drawn from a seamed billet, but they were butted. If I am not wrong, the first top down picture seems to show some butting at the end of the seat tube. What do you think?

Cromor frames also had steer tubes with helical reinforcements. The question, again, is whether the seams in these low end lines of Columbus would be easy to spot.

Another question is whether the 2,58 kg weight for a 54 cm Cromor OR frame indicated in the catalog could be compatible with the 2,75 kg weight of my 59.5 frame, which includes dropouts weighing at least 200 grams. The numbers do not seem to add up...

All this is very puzzling... Of course, since the frame was custom made, the tubing could be a mix of different sets. Perhaps the seat tube is even Zeta, as you are suggesting, and the rest comes from higher end lines... As I remove the bottom bracket, I cannot actually spot seams in the down tube or the chain stays, but they could still be there, in angles I cannot see...

Thank you very much again for your valuable feedback.

unworthy1

All very good questions and I can't supply much in the way of answers...except that:
in the catalog (1979-80) where Aelle (regular) and Zeta are both detailed, the description of Aelle states: "cold-drawn seamlesstube realised in chromium-manganese" (gr. 2345 for weight) and right below that is the claim that Zeta is "still drawn tubes, but realised in carbon steel" (gr. 2440) which implies it is cold drawn and seamless, but nothing explicit.
I sure don't know about seamed billets being used for any Columbus tubes...maybe that was done but I wouldn't call it a 'billet' in that case.
Anyhow, never seen any mention of Zeta as an oversize tube. Aelle and Cromor: yes.