Wildwood 

Here is a link to an article from CyclingWeekly.com.
Published back in May, so perhaps made the C&V Forum before.
Colnago Master Olympic (Gilco) compared to Colnago C68. Top o th line race bike from each year.

Can a classic steel race bike beat a modern superbike? | Cycling Weekly

This is not a 'which is the better bike' or 'disc brakes are better' article.
I thought it fair. Not too long. Not too technical either.
I won't post the spoiler.

repechage

Reasonably fair.
there were wider range cassettes in 1992
no mention about the feel of the closer ratios available on the TT course.

be interesting to see what aero rims, even with 32 spokes would have contributed.

if I was racing still I would have close to the latest and greatest. Probably discs too.
although I think that a rim brake in back would be less fussy. Discs do provide better modulation, no doubt about it.

bamboobike4

Thanks for that. Good article, and worth reading.

I can somewhat compare. My breakdown:
2003 Master Extra Light. 1993 Precisa fork, Gilco tubing. DA9000. 52/36 and 11-34. DA9000/Aeroheads. 19+ lbs.
vs.
2016 CLX, carbon. Super Record 11. 50/34 and 11-34. Zipp 404’s (tubular). Under 16 lbs.

My favorite is the 2003 Master. It rides better. My guess is it’s the wheels. I use carbon-only saddles on both. I have little doubt my results would be similar. The carbon bike is easier to push, just not as fun, climbing is a bit easier.

If I had to keep only 1: The Master Extra Light. I don’t tire of looking at it.

Regarding the tester’s bikes:
The DA7700 can run an 11-34 with a 7700GS RD and a Roadlink. He could swap in a TA 38T ring. So, his top end is 53/11 and climbing 38/34.

The DA9200, I’ve read, can run 11-30 and can’t “modify up.” But it can run a compact crankset, so top end is 50/11 and climbing 34/30.

Would love to see a comparison with them geared that way, as far as wattage needed to run side by side.

mschwett 

a minor point, but the 9200 can run an 11-34 out of the box. mine is 52-36 and 11-34. 52/11 top and 36/34 bottom.

icemilkcoffee 

I think most of the ride feel differences can be accounted for by the fact that the Master was running on 23mm tires and the C68 28mm.

I am kind of surprised the older Colnago didn't come with tubulars though.

nomadmax 

I don't ride a vintage steel bike for what it does, I ride it for what it "is".

mstateglfr 

That article confirms what I have found- the only 2 measurable differences between my older steel frame bikes and modern road bikes for how I ride are both pretty easily compensated for- gearing and tire width.
My main steel road bike has fast rolling 32mm tires and a50/34 crank mated to a 11-30 in back.

The big complaints about the 30 year old Colnago were limited gear range and narrow tires. Pretty easy resolution.
Not all road bikes from that era can fit 28s, but most all can fit 25s. And plenty can fit narrow 28s or even nominal 28s.

bamboobike4

Holy cow, thanks for that info. Were I to go Di2, I'd be all over that, and someday, likely will be. You just made my day.
Now, how to put that 9200 on my steel Colnago? RiddleOfSteel.....?

bamboobike4

So why am I so slow!

madpogue 

+1, is it worth 14 seconds to ride a bike with no soul?

genejockey 

Is your bike spending too much time Being and not enough time Going?

genejockey 

Depends on what day you ask me.

seypat

It's too bad(so sad) that the drivetrain component companies only want to sell electronic shifting for newish bikes. Imagine the newest 12 or 13 with enough cogs eliminated to go into 120 or 126 spacing. Matching derailleurs and shifters. I think that would sell like hotcakes or 7 Eleven coffee.

romperrr 

I only skimmed the article as I'm leaving for work soon and missed this part. This is a big difference and I wish the test controlled for tire size.

cb400bill

One bike may be faster than the other. I know which one is the prettier one.

bamboobike4

I need to be going more.

bamboobike4

The carbon bike finishes. Ride over.
The steel bike finishes. Conversation begins.

Spaghetti Legs 

Thanks for posting Stu, I always enjoy reading these old vs new comparisons. I have a Colnago EPS with Zipp 202 wheels that at one time was the latest and greatest in plastic tech but now tends towards the "grand old man" amongst the cutting edge crowd at 10+ years old. that being said it still checks in at a little over 15 lbs weight. I still like to ride fast but am less and less interested in squeezing every little bit of speed out of me and my bike as time passes. I have found that the EPS tends to be around 0.5 mph faster on average speed over the same routes. My riding is very hilly and maybe that difference wouldn't be as pronounced on flatter roads when the old steel bike doesn't pay as big a penalty for the extra 5-8 lbs. Sifting through some old ride data, I did come up with some interesting nuggets: My fastest time on the 75 mile 6000+ foot climbing Storming of Thunder Ridge was on my downtube shifted 8 speed Merckx Century. On one of my flatter 40 mile routes (about 60 ft/mile climbing) my fastest time (twice!) has been posted on my mid 90's Gios Compact with bling deep dish Vento wheels.

A couple of comments: the article didn't include a cost comparison. That C68 as shown would cost around $15k. My guess is the Master Olympic cost in the neighborhood of $3k new, which would inflation adjust to about 1/2 the cost of the C68. That's a lot of moolah for the incremental gain. I. also think modern bikes, lose a lot in the visual aesthetic today. Sadly the C68 is the first non external lugged frame in the Colnago C series. I think they lost a little bit of that nostalgic connection to the past with that.

seypat

That's the most important thing.

Germany_chris

A new Master X-Light frame is ~2500 euro so call it $2800 TYD then build with modern components, I'd like to see the new Master with a modern drivetrain compared to the C68. Then we'd compare modern steel at ~$7k to modern CF at 15k

madpogue 

Or at best, the carbon bike finishes, and a conversation begins, which lasts about 13.5 seconds.....

genejockey 

Hello...I must be going.
I cannot stay,
I came to say,
I must be going.
I'm glad I came,
But all the same,
I must be going!

Bad Lag

How much does the C68 cost, $10k?

himespau 

My 1989 (?) Master Piu currently has 25's on it but 28's should be no problem and I could probably squeeze something bigger on there (clearance might get a bit tight). It's got 10 sped Campagnolo triple stuff on it now (mainly Racing T and Centaur) and has decent range and is fairly comfy. Not super light with Columbus SP tubing, but plenty decent ride.



I'm building up a 1996 Merckx Titanium EX now (as I slowly acquire the rest of the parts not in my bin) with pretty much the same setup (except with 54-42-32 crankset and 11-25T cassette instead of the 53-42-30 and 12-25T). It also has plenty of room for at least 28 mm tires.

My dearly departed (got hit by a car a bit over a year ago) 1990 Concorde Aquila (PDM team livery) had the same build as well (though I had to swap out the fork it came with for a Nashbar 1" Carbon threaded fork years ago to get wider than 23mm tires on the front - plenty of room for 28 on the back - I think the fork was not original - the fact that it was Tange on an SLX frame is a pretty good indicator, also was missing the crown engravings).

I seem to have a pattern for what I like.

Trakhak

I don't believe in ghosts.