fender1

I have been wondering about this for a bit now and figured I would ask the group to see what others think. There are a number of modern road frames (Rawland, Rivendell, Boulder, SOMA etc.) being built using more traditional size steel tubes (vs. modern OS) with the idea that they are more "lively". I know Jan Heine is a big proponent of the traditional size tubing for it riding characteristics.

I was wondering where an older 531 or Columbus frame would fit amongst this new group? Are these frames what is being emulated or are the newer frames improving on where the older frames left off? Anyone riding a new, lightweight frame who would like to chime in?

Six jours

Given the same wall thicknesses, I can't tell a difference between old and new tubing. IOW, a modern 9/6/9 frame rides just like an old 9/6/9 frame, and an old 7/4/7 frame rides just like a modern 7/4/7 frame, IMO.

I have run into folks who claim that modern steels stand up better in a crash and that modern steel will last longer. I can't speak to the former, but there are numerous old steel bikes which have stood up to decades of hard use, so I think the latter is probably off-base.

I will say, though, that quality control on modern tubing is improved. I have worked with a fair bit of old stock 531 and find that defects and crooked tubes are pretty common. New stuff - especially from True Temper - is always straight and almost never has defects, so is more enjoyable to build with. The end products, though (at least assuming you culled the defective 531 tubes from the set) will be identical.

Six jours

And FWIW, I believe that "lively" is near-synonymous with "flexible". There is at least one additional factor at work, IMO, but I think most of what makes a standard diameter thinwall frame feel "livelier" than an OS frame with similar wall thickness is simply flex. Even Jan admits that an OS frame with exceptionally thin walls flexes and feels "lively" or "planes" in much the same way as the standard diameter frame.

Frankly, I suspect that ultra-high strength, very thin wall OS steel tubing makes into a "better" frame in almost every way. The only reason I don't personally prefer them is simply that they look stupid to me, and standard diameter tubing works just fine for what I want to do with it.

Bandera

The Soma Stanyan that I built as a modern substitute for my Internat'l fills the bill nicely.
Good ride quality & handling w/ the benefit of 130mm spacing, 1 1/8" threadless fork, a full set of braze-ons and clearance for mudguards.
Nicley built frame, clean straight & lugged.
A proper club rider's all-arounder.

-Bandera

Barrettscv 

I have had a Soma Double Cross with Tange Prestige and I have a Serotta Nova Special X with Columbus SPX, a Simoncini Cyclocross Special with Columbus CROMAR and I've had a few Reynolds 531 framed bikes.

I would say that the Tange Prestige bike feels more like a 531 frame in terms of stiffness and ride quality. The Columbus SPX and CROMAR are thick walled with a stiffer responsiveness and firmer riding. Part of this is the geometry, The Double Cross is a recreational CX bike while the Serotta Nova Special X with Columbus SPX is a race level road bike and the a Simoncini Cyclocross Special with Columbus CROMAR is a race level CX bike.

KonAaron Snake 

I think you have an opinion already Fender, and I'm curious to hear it. Speaking for myself, I like OS tubeset sand consider them the major advantage of modern frames, so I have no experience with modern frames like you describe.

Scooper

I agree; my Waterford 953 OS thin wall tubing frame has the same ride "feel" as my Paramount 531 standard diameter tubing frame, but the Waterford frame is almost two pounds lighter (both frames are the same size and have virtually the same geometry). My initial concerns that the 0.3mm to 0.4mm wall thickness of the 953 tubing might be more susceptible to dents have proven baseless after seven years riding the Waterford.

It's really hard for me to see the difference between 25.4mm and 28.6mm top tubes or 28.6mm and 31.7mm down tubes at a distance of 10 or 15 feet.

repechage

The difference between a 25.4mm vs a 28.6mm top tube is really incremental.
General wall thickness is noticeable in the extremes of thick compared to thin.
The oversized steerer, I think is noticeable.
Now is there one that will make you noticeably faster?
No.
I think the sweet spot for steel is probably similar to the waterford Scooper has. I would lump the Masi 3V's in almost that category.
My 3V "feels" fast.
If I was racing today I probably would want an oversized aluminum bike or Carbon for the final sprint.

This whole "planing" thing I find a bit humorous.
The closest thing I felt to that was on a Teledyne Titan decades ago, when climbing on a certain climb at a defined cadence the frame felt it sprung back at you in a way that returned energy to you in a useful way.
Pedal faster and it went away. Pedal slower and it went away.

fender1

Ha! No set opinion as of yet. I tend to favor the modern steel but I have a 78' Raleigh Pro that I really like. The geometry works well for me and it has a nice set of Challenge tires on it. The Rivendell I have is modern steel, OX Platinum and Reynolds 725 (Waterford built) and I like it's ride with big tires, bags and dyno hub.

I asked the question because I recently picked up this Raleigh Super Tourer frame and it is all 531 and has 73 degree parallel head & seat tubes. It will easily fit fenders and 35mm tires. The chainstays are about 43mm long. The Raleigh geo is pretty close to a Rivendell Roadeo (72 ST/73 HT w/ 43cm chainstays). Not sure of the BB drop on the Raleigh.

Raleigh looks like this:

[IMG] Untitled by bylar13, on Flickr[/IMG]

With a 35mm tire:

[IMG] Untitled by bylar13, on Flickr[/IMG]

Got me thinking about building it up as light as I could, with big tires and whether or not I would be in the ballpark of one of the modern bikes of the same ilk.

Six jours

Raleighs get a bad rap because the workmanship on the great majority is merely adequate. You tend to find thick lugs with minimal filework, poor lug shorelines with bubbly brazing, evidence of overheating, and incomplete brazing penetration.

That is mostly cosmetic, though, and even the worst of it rarely results in any kind of failure, so if it doesn't bother you, then you've got a frame as good as any modern bike built with 8/5/8 or 9/6/9 standard diameter tubing. You may actually find that it rides better than your Riv, especially if you upgrade the tires. (I like Rivendells and the people who ride them, but the Rivendell ride is dead and unpleasant for me - I think thick wall OS is a mistake for anyone under 6'3" and 250 pounds.)

Six jours

I notice it right away and really don't like it. I think it takes away a great deal of the elegance of a classic frame. Of course, that's purely subjective and there is no right or wrong. Just a personal thing - and I do realize that that personal thing is costing me a couple of pounds!

Michael Angelo 

Very nice bike, The Sports Tourer is very similar to the Competion Model. That one looks great.

Michael Angelo 

I've got some really good pics of Raleigh's terrible brazing. I'll post some close up pictures if you like....

RobbieTunes

I just like steel that isn't very heavy.

A real bike has a TT smaller around then your....., so maybe it's all relative.

Fred Smedley

OK , what makes a OS frame, a 1.25 downtube ? a 1-1/8 toptube?

Scooper

Here 'ya go....

Chombi

You can almost just replace "Raleigh" in your post to "Peugeot", and it will describe the two companies at that time accurately regarding QC/Craftsmanship issues but surprising good ride.....
Pretty much a symptom of western companies getting too comfortable to what was status-quo, while the global economy was setting up to kill them with better made and easier accessed products from Asia......

Michael Angelo 

I'll have to get a Columbus MAX frame set ...........

crank_addict

You can change the entire ride characteristics on old steel with just the change of a fork - material and rake. Then you have the talk about wheels. Call it sacrilegious but back when I swapped the flashy chrome off my Colnago S. Mex. for a Kestrel EMS carbon fork. Man I looooved it! This was before the straight rake became the rage. Amazing transformation.

fender1

Thanks! The brazing on this one looks surprisingly good. I have had a few Raleigh's (flips) that fit your description.

Bandera

The classic British 531 club rider's framesets of the 70's were extremely versatile with fine ride characteristics. The designers assumed that the machine would see use on rough country lanes touring with a modest load, as a fixed gear or stripped of mudguards in club time trials with light tubulars fitted. Not easy to find those specs in today's market but they are out there.

Good choice to build that Raleigh up as a proper gentleman's sporting machine, it will serve well.
Here's a pic of one that I've had in service for 40 years, works a treat.

edit: I'm working up the specs for a bespoke frameset which will almost certainly be a standard tube sized 853 Mercian.
When a proper modern club rider's frame is required I'll go with the constructors who have done that for decades and can apply modern tech as necessary.

-Bandera

Fred Smedley

Just think if you owned the whole Kestrel bike

Fred Smedley

Thanks for that.

Zinger

I've never rode the OS tubing but as someone 6'4", 200 lbs I didn't even want OS tubing when I was briefly considering a new Mercian. That's one reason (besides money) I bought another Columbus SPX Trek 970 frame like the one I used to have. Plenty stiff without the weird looking (to me) OS tubes.

I actually like the 531 ride fine for distances anyway (although my 531 frame is only a 60mm).

Scooper

Really?