shuru421

Is it the bi-ovalized tubing that gives off the impression that it looks/feels dented/crimped? For instance the top tube etc. Anyone else with Max frames feel this way?

easyupbug 

Got any photos? I had an early nineties Merckx pass through the shop and don't remember anything unusual about the frame at all?

T-Mar

MAX tubes are not round along their entire length. They are oval (actual elliptical) at the ends. The orientations of the ovals change from end of the tube to the other to provide additional stiffness in a certain axis. For instance the down tube has the major axis of the oval oriented vertically at the head tube end but laterally at the bottom bracket end. This provides greater vertical stiffness at the head tube and greater lateral stiffness at the bottom bracket. This processing, in addition to the larger size and thinner gauges employed, resulted in a very stiff but light frame.

genejockey 

Probably because what MAX is mostly is STIFF. There's no compromise with comfort, so if you're less than 200#, it's just completely unyielding. I ride a 59cm Battaglin MAX frame, and it is hard riding. I can only imagine what it would be like in a smaller, and thus stiffer frame size. I suspect that EL OS was stiffer than the other tubesets, but less so than MAX and thus more comfortable. A better compromise for the pros, because how many of them are >200#?

martl

100% of those pros riding MAX bikes switched to even stiffer alloy frames and continued to use them until CF became mainstream in the peloton from 2003.

You are correct that pro road riders are typically a akinny bunch. i'm 5'8/130 lbs and i felt downright fat when i met the TdS peloton in 2003 (including fat Jan). You are also correct that the weight on it affects the compliance of the bike.

The construction of a diamond shape frame has next to nothing to do with it. The most noticeable suspension effect is done by the saddle and the tires, Followed the fork (steerer tube mostly nowadays), stem/handlebar and seatpost. all of these wil "give" in ammounts of millimeters, any frame will only do that in tenths of millimeters under a load of ~200kg which is a reasonable assumption for hitting a bump with an average rider in the saddle (quite a hard bump, actually).

If you want to compare compliance of two given bikes, i recommend to ride them on cobblestones with no tires on the rim, eliminating one of the interferences (this is how measuring is done properly). If you then still can tell a harsh frame from a compliant one, i will believe you.

genejockey 

Hard to imagine stiffer. Easy to imagine lighter - though I think the mistake many people make is thinking MAX must weigh a ton, because it's steel and it's massive. But IIRC the tubeset wasn't that much heavier than other Columbus tubesets of the time.

genejockey 

I'm satisfied that I can tell the difference between my bikes made of different tubesets in the same sizes, with the same tires at the same pressures on the same roads. I even use the same model of saddle.

martl

same seatpost at same length, same fork with the same tube length, same saddle with the the same amount of miles on them, same stem, same stack, handlebars tape too? using a calibrated floor pump? (those pressure gages are about +-0.5 when they are good ones?) )

I own 30+ bikes of all eras (well, almost all, it stops at 1910...) made of steel, SLX, beercan alloy, Titanium, one of magic Pego Columbus, and the most uncomfortable one is that one that currently has the not-yet-broken-in Brooks new swallow on it...

genejockey 

Clearly, the problem is you have too many bikes, and thus are no longer capable of discerning the subtle differences. Thousands of miles over hundreds of rides, on the same roads over more than a decade, I can tell the difference.

martl

maybe so i still can tell a good chamois from a ****** one

The (thought) experiment with "no tires" isnt as ridiculous or detachewd from real life as it may seem. Some here, including me, have been around when sometimes one was forced to hobble on a punctured tubular.
What we are experiencing in that situation is the compliance of the whole system "bicycle" minus one dominant component. This will intensify the riders perception of the effect the rest of the components still working as "suspension" have, including the frame. In that situation, a more compliant frame is easier to tell from a non compliant one.

If you haven't had the pleasure, let me tell you, you may not be able to know which side of the dime was up you just rolled over, but you definitely knew there was a dime. No matter what sort of frame youre riding.
One could in fact detect very, very small debris and even the height difference between the tarmac and the white road marker. That is the compliance offered by a bike frame, still watered down by all the other components, all of which are softer than the frame.

Diamond shaped bike frame "compliance" is a myth, marketing stunt, amplified by bike journalists who never did the math. The old timers said it, it must be true.

genejockey 

Sorry, dude. I'll take empirical observation over hypothesis.