SJX426 

My understanding as well.

BTW, does the tube set include all tubes, including fork legs, stays and HT?

Nessism

Stays likely, but no on fork. Not sure about head tube.

Road Fan

I can't say anything about 250# riders, since I'm only a measly 202# at the moment.

But I recall reading somewhere that ELOS, with larger diameter, stronger steel and thinner walls (7-4-7), was intended to match the strength and flexibility of CrMo SL (9-6-9) with a lighter frame. I didn't find my Mondonico ELOS too stiff, too noodly, or anything other than NICE, on my climb up from Niagara on the Lake to Niagara Falls a few summers ago. And the Campy sidepulls kept the descent speeds in check very nicely, on the route back to the hotel.

I know one can calculate the theoretical difference in the stiffness of the belly of an SL tube versus the belly of an ELOS tube of the same length, armed with a scientific calculator or MS Excel on your computer. I know I cranked that out a few years ago, but the results are lost in several house cleanings. It was a little enlightening, but it would not let you make any predictions about how an SL frame would feel versus an ELOS frame.

Fivethumbs

Andre Tchmil won the '94 Paris-Roubaix on a Team Lotto Caloi-branded Merckx.MX Leader

bulgie 

No, Max frames are heavy because a Max tubeset is heavy. It's possibly a good choice for a very large sprinter, but even for that guy, I think large diameter round tubes would be better than the goofy bi-ovalized gimmick, which actually reduces the torsional stiffness compared to that same tube without the ovalizing.

The "should have been brazing" comment is hard to figure out since in steel, all lugs are brazed. Well, other than a couple (failed) experiments with glued lugs, which is super dumb in steel since brazing is so weight-efficient in comparison.

I suppose you meant those lugged Max frames should have been lugless fillet brazed? Still not a meaningful statement, since brass fillets can weigh more than lugs. I made a lot of fillet-brazed frames, probably laid down a literal mile of brass fillet over a couple decades doing it full time (and before some wise guy says it's bronze not brass, just let me say I disagree, but let's not argue about that, reasonable people may disagree on the jargon). Anyway, I'm no stranger to fillet-brazing, but the lightest frames I ever made had lugs. Yes a lugged frame can be lighter than a lugless frame. TIG-welded can be the lightest of all, but with the thinnest tubes, maybe not the longest-lasting method, especially in most of the C&V era. Newer air-hardening steels may have changed the equation, but once carpet fiber took over, the question of whose steel frame is lighter became sorta moot..

The frame I made for the 4-time national champion and 2-time Olympian in the Match Sprint was lugless, and it was not light! The first one was heavier than his two previous frames (a Masi and a Serotta), with much larger tube diameters (larger than Max), and he pronounced it almost stiff enough! Then had me make a second frame, even stiffer, and the 1st frame became the training and backup race-day bike. The second, heavier one is the one he won the most races on, so the extra weight probably didn't slow him down too much. 200-meter times don't lie. (Obviously, this is ancient news from back when top riders still rode steel.)

The point of that story is I am not afraid to make a stiff frame when it's needed, but almost no one needs a frame as stiff as a typical Max frame. If you just like the feel of it, that's fine, I don't judge. But I laugh when some weekend warrior thinks he needs a frame as stiff as what a world-class sprinter needs. Most people literally can't even imagine what that sort of horsepower or peak pedal force feels like.

Even little Greg Lemond could out-sprint almost anyone reading this forum, and he rode (and won) on some of the most flexible frames ever made. When Bicycling Magazine tested his actual world championship winning TVT, they proclaimed it the most flexible frame they'd ever tested. They said it felt like the rear wheel was trying to pass the front wheel. One of the guys he outsprinted to win that World Championship road race was Sean Kelly, who won a bunch of green jerseys in the TdF, not a bad road sprinter himself. Did Greg win despite the extra flex, or partly because of that flex? We'll never know. Kelly's bike was a Vitus, small-diameter aluminum, none too stiff either, but it didn't seem to slow him down... (The other guy in that sprint was on steel but it didn't make him win.) Yes my examples are all from old-timey racing, because everything's carpet-fiber now and I'm just not interested in that. 'S why I'm here on C&V.

But whatever the material, if you think your peak pedal force is higher than the guys winning the biggest races in the pros, then by all means get a stiff frame. You're probably delusional and you'll actually be making yourself a tiny bit slower, but don't worry, you'll never know it. So ride and be happy.

I have always believed that a little give in the frame ("the right amount") makes you faster. Not for comfort, I mean pure speed. Climbing, sprinting, whatever you want to measure it by, there is some amount of flex that's best for you, and it's not zero. I can't prove it and I think no one ever will, but the "stiffer is better" camp certainly hasn't proved their case either. I only mention this because so many people think the issue is settled, and it most definitely is not. The difference in speed directly attributable to frame stiffness (or lack thereof) is probably tiny, so it's not that important of a question. An overly-stiff frame, in my opinion, is slowing you down only a small amount, probably too small to measure because it's lost in the noise. Whether it's making you more sore at the end of a long ride (or more sore the next day) is a more interesting question, but we know tires, saddle, even bar tape can mitigate that, making comfort from frame flex mostly moot too.

But everyone should at least try a flexy frame, and with an open mind. Ignore that little voice in your head that tells you you're as strong as Armstrong on drugs, and so you need a frame as stiff as his. That voice is insane. Also, give it a good long try-out if you can. Flexy frames may take some adaptation in your pedaling style, which may be why beginners tend to like stiff frames. Yeah I said it — stiff frames are for people who don't know how to pedal! Ha!

Mark B

clubman 

Certain frames, under certain conditions feel like they have a sweet spot that combines your pedal strokes with the flex of the frame, not unlike that harmonic resonance made famous by the collapsing suspension bridge. If there is such a thing, the challenge for a rider is to utilize that effect to their advantage when they need it.

I know it sounds a little airy-fairy (is that PC?) but I believe it enough to try to find it when I ride,

himespau 

As a ~240 lb man who likes to think he can sprint in races (but never gets over 12-1300 W) who rides 64 cm frames, I probably need a stiffer frame than most, but your point about me not putting out pro-level torque is right on and I'm sure I'm overthinking things when debating these points. I do pedal like a beginner though, so that your final point is valid.

Nessism

I make no claim of being a world class framebuilder like Mark B., but I have enjoyed building frames for myself and select friends over the years. Being a bit of a techno geek I’ve mixed and matched different tubing, size and gauge, in my builds and have generated opinions on how they affect the characteristics of a frame.

First off I’ll say that frames flex very little in the vertical direction so tubing differences don’t drastically affect ride smoothness unless comparing something super thin and small diameter against something super stout. Fork flex is a far more meaningful characteristic affecting comfort (with tires being the most significant.) Anyway, what I have noticed regarding different tubing is a difference in bottom bracket (lateral) stiffness. One of my pet peeves is chain rub so that is something that I always take notice of.

Early on in my experimentation I made a frame for a friend who raced so I used a super beefy down tube in OS sizes and that thing was pretty stout; the rear wheel would almost skip while sprinting if your pedal stroke was sloppy. In comparison my more conventional OS tubed daily rider at the time was definitely softer through the BB. It was lighter too, with almost all the weight difference centered in the down tubes.

I’ve always been intrigued by MAX tubing and wanted to build a frame with it but my skills weren’t up to the challenge, in part because my building method and tooling relied on round tubing. Ceeway in England started offering some XL OS tube lugs though (in about the year 2003) so I saw my chance to build something similar so I ordered some. Excepting for the stays, MAX uses ovalized XL OS tubes so I think my frame (and the other two that followed) share a lot of the same characteristics.

The frame I was able to create came in at the 4 lbs mark and had excellent BB stiffness. Ride smoothness was firm but not harsh (again, frames don’t flex very much vertically so…). Anyway, the moral of the story is that MAX sized tubing isn’t beastly mystical stuff. It’s simply one step larger from OS. From what I’ve read, no personal experience, the Columbus branded MAX lugs were quite heavy, so a frame made with them would weigh a bit more than the frame I built.

As an aside...a MAX fork on the other hand looks like a MONSTER so buyer beware on that front. And there are newer super jumbo XL OS tubes these days that make MAX look like SL. As the tubes get larger in diameter they also get stiffer so…

shuru421

Hi, what fork are you running there?

Nessism

That red frame had a Look HSC3 carbon fork. My subsequent frames have used Reynolds Ouzo Pro forks. Between the two the Look is a fair bit softer riding.

The red frame racked up something in the range of 25k miles and was crashed a few times, so it went into dry dock a while back for a down tube replacement and rust removal. Even though the fork seemed to be solid I cut it up before I would be tempted to put it back into service just for safety's sake.

That frame uses mostly Columbus Zona tubing that's .7/.5/.7 and has medium long butts. The black frame shown below uses the same tube sizes but with thinner sections. It's a smig lighter and more flexible. Good fun.

mikemowbz

Posed with scenery:

P!N20

Very nice. Was that made for you or did one come up for sale?

I think that's the first time I've seen clips and straps on modern Ultegra cranks!

mikemowbz

Purchased frame / fork / headset used in 2018 from a former manager (IIRC) of Performance Bicycles in Victoria, BC.


Their shop had a relationship with Ryffranck and hooked up a number of customers with his bikes; they still pop up for sale a bit more often there than elsewhere in western Canada, it seems. You can see their decal on the top tube.


I don't drive. I schlepped that frame set bus - ferry - bus - SkyTrain coming home to Vancouver, and earned myself a few sour looks on the sardine-can packed city bus from the Tsawwassen ferry to the SkyTrain station in Richmond...


I'll be doing a few adjustments and getting out for a ride on this one tomorrow!

Masoch

Hi, I have just joined this forum, after long weeks of researching. It is just fantastic, and gives me everything I couldn't find elsewhere. Many many thanks, I'll soon be back with photos and reactions.

genejockey 

I have frames from flexy (SL) to MAX, and I love them all. They encourage different riding styles - the MAX begs me to stand on the pedals, whereas the SL is cushy and just not 'crisp'. The MAX is a little harsher and has me seeking the least bumpy line on the road, but it doesn't toss me out of the saddle the way my Cannondale 3.0 frame does. 25mm tires at 90F/95R help a lot. I rode too many years at 120 psi! Is it 'too stiff' for a mere mortal like me? I dunno. I mean, I weigh 200 now, down from as high as 240, and the MAX bike has been my "Go-To" bike for close to 15 years. In addition to being the best sprinting bike, it's also the best cornering bike, and so the best descending bike. Not the best climber, of course, but doesn't lose any energy when I'm straining around the 20% grade on the inside of hairpins.

Do I "need" a MAX bike? I dunno. I LOVE the MAX bike, though. Mind you, it's a 59cm frame. I see MAX frames as small as 54, and I can only imagine what they're like to ride. Maybe if I were 5'8 and 250#...