jimmuller 

Why would a Nishiki want to be a De Rosa? Okay, I can understand aspiring to be one.

All this talk about construction methods still leaves open the question of how much it matters on the road, though admittedly some of you do say such-and-such rides better.

A personal experience: When I worked in RI and did the car/train/bike commute I had to cross the Blackstone River. Any way you look at it the west (right) bank is a steep drop to the river. I had one route on a poorly maintained back road down to the river which dropped about 150ft of elevation in about 1500ft of distance. DeLorme Topo NAm shows some of it hitting a grade of about 16%, with a stop sign at a fairly busy road at the bottom, pretty scary. (No, I did NOT go up that way, tried it once never did again.) I rode it on the mid-level Bianch, the Centurion, and the Peugeot UO-8. They had decidedly different responses to the bumps. The UO-8 was not locked down to the road as well, felt looser. The Centurion did feel pretty confident. I don't recall the Bianchi's response as especially loose.

Well, of course the cheaper UO-8 should have been worse. But the point is, road response does matter and some frames may be better than others. I would expect that a well-made, more expensive bike would be better at some things than a cheaper bike.

unterhausen

I had to carry my gravel bike up about 10 flights of stairs, and it turns out that bike is a lot heavier than it rides. I have always thought you could make up for a lot as long as your position is right and you have decent wheels. Weight certainly isn't that important if you don't switch bikes very often, but when it comes down to it, tires are everything.

Wileyone 

After Silver Brazing and Painting they were floated down from Heaven by Harp Slinging Angels and once on the Ground they were Sprinkled with Fairy Dust.

exmechanic89

'Silver' fairy dust, not the brass fairy dust the Colnagos received.

DIMcyclist

Keeping a portage strap in your saddlebag or messenger bag can occasionally be quite handy.

-

mstateglfr 

I suppose silver is used with lighter thinner walled tubing and investment cast ligs, but the frame i am building is .8/.5/.8 tubing with cast lugs and its brazed with both brass and silver. The brass penetrates.

Perhaps .8/.5/.8 isnt thin enough, but very few bikes have .7/.4/.7 tubing.
Ive seen classic tange 1 tubing...typically pretty light...brass brazed.

Really not trying to argue and moreso just understand how silver is on inherently better(how thenoriginal comment i responded to sounded) bikes.

Kontact 

There are all sorts of reasons that manufacturer might want to use silver - Trek likely did for reasons that don't have anything to do with tube thickness. And I can think of modern tubesets in 7/4/7 - usually oversized. (I thought Tange 1 was also 8/5/8.)

Perhaps unterhausen can shed light on why a maker not working with 753 or stainless would have chosen to use expensive silver if it isn't an issue to use it on tight lugs or with thin tubing. Silver isn't really a "better" braze material than bronze - bronze is going to have higher sheer strength, it just takes more heat and is less viscous than silver. If neither is an issue, than neither is an issue.

iab

Is the Colnago red? Then ....





Is the Nishiki red? Then ...





Are they both red? Then ....

Vonruden

I’ll trade my Nishiki for a Colnago if anyone is interested?

martl

Very likely, not. I've never seen a bad Nishiki (or Tsunoda or...)

Besides the point. A 1960 Beetle is better made and more reliable than a Maserati Birdcage. Still i'd prefer to own the Maserati. Or rather: I'd like to have both for their individual qualities, the beetle for its quality and reliability, the Maser for the sheer madness that posesses it

qcpmsame 

O.P. ain't reappeared, judging from his General Cycling Forum posts, its hit and run each time. Interesting discussion, and calm compared to the GC threads' results.

Bill

Mooo

Wasn't Arni selling Colnago frames through Bike Warehouse (now Nashbar) for like $450 back around 82/83?

desconhecido 

Silver brazing on the Paramount bikes. Is that a rule across time or only for certain year spans? What is it about silver brazing that makes a DB 531 frame and fork (for example) better than one brazed with more common brass rod? Is it a matter of temperature control or penetration or is there a mechanical properties difference? It's not obvious to me why one brazing material would be better than another if the joints are properly prepared and fitted and the brazing is well executed. Does using silver allow for precision that is not available if brass is used because of the characteristics of the metal when melted?

I see that I am not the first in this thread to have this question. We are talking about C&V and Paramount bikes and my understanding from that context that we are talking about Paramount bikes made with DB 531 tube sets compared to Italian bikes using some sort of DB Columbus tubing.

Maybe it's just being pedantic, but I'm really curious about why one filler material compared to another would be important and objectively better.

OK, looks like 753 was appearing about 1980. Is that when Schwinn started silver brazing?

repechage

You are asserting that post count and forum lean are an indicator?
I did not bother to review beyond the post count, when I saw that and the probable inclination of the question...

A real life version of this "does it matter" was a co-worker would let a "tire kicker" customer test ride a few bikes, one was a ringer, a full Campagnolo race bike, the others more pedestrian, say a Peugeot UO8, Nishiki Olympic and say a Raleigh Super Course, all set in various gears. The favorite bike was almost always the bike in the lowest gear.

qcpmsame 

Not at all sir, I have watched his posting in the GC forum, for a few months, its the way he does things. No assertions are/were made, more of an observation about the discussion here being civil and constructive. But, if I have crossed a line let me know and I'll pack up and get out of the way.

Bill

joesch

Depends on the intended usage, like many others have stated, commuting or racing ??
Comparison would start with tubing, I think Nishiki used Tange vs Columbus for Colnago.
Wheels, hubs, and components are also big for a comparison.
Id rather have an Colnago if both setup as standard road bikes.

vintagerando

I agree. Most riders probably could not tell the difference.

jimmuller 

Um, I think this requires some qualifications. For models designed with the same intended use most users would probably not be able to tell which bike was which brand. But the bikes might still feel different enough to be distinguished. With my bikes I believe I can feel the differences well enough to identify them fairly reliably, most of the time, probably, for most of them, most likely, with only a few errors or maybes. But then, I'm familiar with them. If I were just starting out I might sooner or later be able to sort out A from B from C but I wouldn't know which was which brand.

since6

I would throw out an additional thought, we are throwing around production bike vrs. hand built bike, but aren't these really just differences in degrees? While materials are different, they are sized the same and to a degree built the same. Someone took the tube set for the production bike and the tube set for the hand built bike and then made a bike frame, materials make a difference as well as the skill of the builder in how the finished product looks, but there is something else to my mind that is substantially different from either a production or hand built bike and not just by degrees.

A custom bike.

A custom bike is your bike, where a builder understands and discusses your uses of this bike, your body is measured, your grail components are sourced and the builder chooses among many tubes and choices in constrution to arrive at a mix that will serve your needs and desires. It is a one of a kind bike. To me this is a much bigger difference than that between a production vrs. hand built bike and I feel it every time I ride my Custom Stevenson.

All my other bikes are nice, even special, but this one is me.

Erzulis Boat 

I have rode many fine vintage bikes and there are differences. But because a bicycle is truly the sum of it's parts to include the "engine", then things get different in a hurry.

I will try to be objective and isolate what I perceive is coming from the frame itself, and not fit, components, and tires.

I will have to say that no two bikes ride the same. No question there.

For example, my 1970 Schwinn Paramount with 531 that is actually really stiff, and a bit nervous. I have a Faggin that is super smooth and "soft", a real nice ride.
I have a Nishiki that feels "heavy" but once up to speed is incredibly smooth and stable. One of my brother's Colnagos just wants to accelerate, you give it the gas, and it just goes.
I have a Bottecchia at the upper end of my size range (a 57) that feels "racy", but it has lousy brakes.

Compared to modern bikes, the vintage stuff just can't compete, so part of the enjoyment is the attendant cache, and what degree of "cool" the bike had in it's heyday. My daily rides are carbon zoot machines, so vintage bikes are most definitely a rose colored pursuit.

I think it might be better to not frame them in the context of today, but go back in time and roll both, the Nishiki vs. the Colnago. Hmmm. I know what one I would choose.

I also feel that the Italians controlled the narrative to a large extent, and could get away with lesser workmanship. But frame building is an art, and goes beyond the alloys and mathematics. We are comparing these bikes with hindsight, and applying modern logic relative to elements that are purely quantifiable in an engineering sense.

One is not better than the other, but given the choice...................

Drillium Dude 

I noted this, too. Pot-stirrer

I still say he needs to turn the cranks before making the call.

DD

Kontact 

Does it really matter? Is the thread better when we comment on the poster's themselves?


If you were an MTB rider in the early '90s, you might have had a thing for the Alien. That thing was the heat.





But I have been reading a posting to this thread as if "Nishiki" and "Colnago" were stand-ins for "Top end Japanese lugged bike" and "Premium Italian lugged bike". For many folks a Panasonic, RB-1 or high end Miyata is everything they could desire in a lugged road frame, even compared to Italy's best. Plus, Japanese paint was generally better.

Wileyone 

Or a Colnago for that matter.

Salamandrine 

I thought the Nishiki Professionals of the early 80s were very nice bikes. They were well made and all campy. IIRC the lugwork was quite good. It'd be very fair to say those were about as good as a Colnago, aside from aesthetics.

Oh, here's an older thread. Perhaps this discussion needs more Nishiki pictures. @since6, did you buy that bike?

Chrome Molly

Generally speaking the Nishiki would be a higher end model to be comparable. Then it would boil down to preference and/or which has the better wheels and tires. Geometry might matter also in terms of better (for a specific purpose).

Otherwise likely not much difference and value is typically part of my better equation.