Vintage looks, contemporary performance

That article has been debunked by Bicycle Quarterly.

the key in point is that the steel bicycle were too small for the rider, whether the modern one fit them perfectly.

will scan in the article today.

the modern is 55 and old one 54. Dunno about the geometry on either one, but as the riders are 173cm - 184cm I find it quite hard to belive 55 fits each one of them a lot better than 54. Or is it something about the geometry? I'm not that expert on geo of old steel bikes so dunno.

Anyway, if the biggest concern is about the flex on the steel bike (and the obvious diffrence in weight) how come a bigger steel bike would made all better and flex less?