Chombi1 

Never saw this one before, but it seems to be a good article on the Vitus 979.
So in case you are a 979 fan, or just want to know more about the frameset's history/design, here's the link:

ipernity: The Peugeot PX-10DU (Vitus 979) by Peter Kohler

TenGrainBread 

Thanks for the link! Great read.

devinfan

Thanks Chombi, what a great read! I wish there was this much info on all bicycle models! Curious to hear what others think of the ride of these frames. I've ridden an old 979, a newer Alan with the larger tubes and an old Alan with small tubes and so far I like the old Alan best, it was "just right".

Bandera

My 979 is still in regular service having been ridden to some good road race results "back when" it was built.
For a fast paced ride on the chip seal in the TX Hill Country still my C&V choice.

@Chombi1: Thanks for the link.

-Bandera

lotekmod

Thanks for the link! I agree with devinfan, I wish there were in-depth articles like that on more bikes. I rode/raced a Vitus for several years in the early '90s, even at a svelte 135lbs back then on a 54cm frame I could get the rear rim to rub on the brake pads on steep climbs. Of course at that time I was climbing in a 42x21 gear so not exactly "souplesse". Now that I'm older, and slower, and live in a flatter area I think the Vitus could be a good ride for me. I've thought about buying one several times over the past years but there's so much nice steel out there it's hard to make the commitment of funds and garage space. That article has me thinking again though....

exmechanic89

Cool article. I remember the excitement these frames stirred up in the early days. Oldschool steel riders said they would be too noodly to be successful but it looks like they did ok, and I suppose paved the way for carbon.

I always wondered if anyone had tried gluing together a cromoly frame, since even silver soldering a frame must change the tubes slightly from the heat. Seems like a glued cromo frame would be pretty stiff.

qcpmsame 

Thanks for sharing the link with us Chombi, great article. Once again I learned something useful here.

Bill

exmechanic89

Pretty cool. After reading this, I just Googled an old BF post about those frames. I wouldn't mind one of those bikes.

bikemig 

Great article. These were (and are) beautiful bikes.

exmechanic89

That would be awesome!

Bandera

Since 979 production involved bespoke frameset components & Aerospace bonding tech in a dedicated clean facility w/ proper ventilation for toxic products knocking up a ride-able frameset in the garage w/ do-it yourself epoxy seems unlikely at best.

NOS is still available:

https://adrenalinebikes.com/store.cf...ategoryID=5798

-Bandera

rowebr

Very cool that some new frames are still available. I noticed they offer to build them up with modern components. I'm thinking that with a Vitus, since one can't cold-set the rear to 130mm, the best option for going modern is to just squeeze a 130mm road hub between the dropouts. Can anyone report success stories/warnings about using a modern rear hub paired to a 9/10/11 speed drivetrain with a 979?

Bandera

Mine is a late production 979 and accepts a 130 rear wheel w/o any problem.
Pic of it converted to 10 cog Shimano a few seasons ago, 53X39 13-25.

-Bandera

rowebr

Very nice!

non-fixie 

Thanks for the link, @Chombi1. Great stuff.

I have a 992 hanging somewhere in the rafters. Always considered it too small, but after reading this I think it might not be such a bad idea to build it up and give it a try.

easyupbug 

There are a lot of success stories but for me "do no harm" is about my only C&V rule. So the damage reports and the fact that a business exists (Untitled Document) to repair 979 frames is enough to not spread the beautiful frame.

The Sheldon Brown solution is to drop a 8,9,10 freehub onto a 126 body and it worked perfectly on my 600 6 spd hub. Built the wheel up with H Plus Son rim and running a DA 9 spd drivetrain and all is well.
I am so impressed with the ride it is now in my daily ride rotation and I have a spoke order on the way to build a matching front wheel with DA hub. My only past experience with a aluminum road bike was a Raleigh 500(?) and I rattled a few fillings loose in the short time I had it.

One caution here is that being well into my 60's I don't generate much bottom bracket flex.

T-Mar

I've always been puzzled by the fact that the Peugeot branded version of the Vitus 979 was never officially imported into Canada and the USA, though we got the Peugeot versions of the carbon fibre frames. I've always wondered if this was part of the licensing agreement between Peugeot and Vitus, yet we got rebranded Vitus 979 from the likes of Cilo and Motobecane, among others.

As for the ride quality, I've always had issues with the flex of steel, metric tubed frames, let alone a 979.

Chombi1 

You have to consider that the Peugeot PY10FC CF bike was a proprietary design (different from the Vitus Carbone 3, which it is often mistaken to be) done by Peugeot and Vitus engineers, with different/larger diameter, CF main tubes with different (from Vitus Carbones) CF fiber layup patterns, for additional stiffness. The frameset was not sold as a Vitus nor re-branded and sold by any other company. Unlike the 979 Peugeot which was a rebranded 979.

T-Mar

Thxs, I realize that. Unlike the Vitus Carbone models, the PY10FC also used aluminum collars pressed over the ends of the main tubes to prevent fraying. This is the easiest way for an owner to identify a frame that has missing decals, as the difference in main tube diameter is only 1/32". Reportedly, Peugeot manufactured the main tubes in-house and supplied them to Bador for assembly.

Kevindale

Not to derail this thread, but I'm not sure what you mean by a steel 'metric tubed frame.' What are some examples?

T-Mar

The metric standard used different outer diameters for the main tubes. Metric seat & down tubes are 28mm versus 28.6mm (1-1/8") for imperial tubing. The metric top tube is 26mm versus 25.4mm (1") for imperial. Given equivalent material and wall thickness, a tube with a larger outer diameter will be stiffer. Due to the slightly larger diameter seat and down tubes, a frame built with imperial tubing will be slightly stiffer at the bottom bracket than a frame built with the equivalent metric size tubeset. Some cyclists can notice the difference.

Metric tubesets were used primarily by French and Spanish builders, up until the mid-1980s when most started converting to imperial tubing. Some Swiss and Belgium based brands also used metric tubing. Most tubing manufacturers offered their higher grade tubesets in both metric and imperial versions until the mid-1980s. Notable exceptions were Reynolds 531SL and first generation Reynolds 753, which were only offered in metric sizes.

Edit: Corrected typo in metric top tube diameter, per following post.

unworthy1

he meant to write 26mm, not 28mm...even T-Mar makes a typo now and then!

And BTW, great article from P. Kohler, who I thought of as "Mr. Raleigh" due to his CR list contributions, but now see he has a greater range of knowledge and interests.
Thanks to Chombi1 for sharing!

T-Mar

Thanks for catching my typo.

Kevindale

Thanks for the very clear explanation. Wow, that seems like such a tiny difference -- I'm sure I wouldn't be able to tell. By my calculations, the imperial downtube has about 2.2% more material in a 0.5mm thick section, compared to the metric downtube. I guess that's enough to matter.

top506

There are two metric 531 bikers in the barn, a third in process, and a 979, and I've never flexed any of them pedaling. I HAVE experienced the unique Vitus twitchiness on fast decents.
Granted, I am a relatively light, recreational rider. I DO love riding all three.

Top