Vintage looks, contemporary performance

people focus too much on the performance in terms of speed but forget the difference
in comfort. My lugged steel bike is flexy AND uncomfortable at the same time compared
to my carbon bike.
Certain bumps and vibrations from the road don't get to the saddle at all and the frame
is still stiff when standing up and pedaling hard.

wheels look wrong. put some handbuilt ones with regular spokes.
but what do i know I have a pair of campagnolo factory wheels on an 80s slx bike for everyday riding while i save the sunday wheels for ... ah, sundays.

http://velogogo.com/post/133257953/cielo-cross-bike-from-chris-king-if-there-ever

I'm saving. Cielo bikes were at the bike show on the Bromley Bikes stand. They're nice in the flesh.

Balls, from the title of the thread I thought I was going to get granny porn.

http://www.fredericgrappe.com/media/revues/manipvelo.pdf

"FROM THE OFF, there’s little doubt about which bike the riders prefer. “I had to fight the bike the whole way up the climb!” Jeannin gasps, looking rather wound up as he hands back the Pinarello. Subsequent riders get even more emotional. “It’s nil! Worth nothing! Zero!” spits Morgan Kneisky."

but yeah this article is about old steel bikes not modern ones.

Regarding this;

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh167/edscoble/BQbicycleperformance.jpg?t=1289440711

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh167/edscoble/BQbicycleperformance1.jpg?t=1289440711

so what is this article trying to say? there is absolutely no difference between the bikes?
having a stiffer and more comfortable bike thats easier to control has no benefits?

The strange thing is that they didn't bother to find a steel bike that fitted the riders. They are not exactly rare. Why didn't they just use one that was the same effective size as the Pin?

(the steel bike still had modern componentry in it, the cranks, yet still it was slower. Probably would have been slower with time correct straps and clips and shoes.)

Are they trying to say something like "but, if the steel bike was lighter then it would be faster"?

But yeah the fit issue seems genuine but hard to quantify the effect on speeds & power.

The funny thing is all those steel is real ads after the article :), the magazine (checked their website) doesn't seem any less biased than some magazine hyping new carbon fibre bikes.

on overall the whole article the article seems a little sad. I don't really think they genuinely belive right sized pinarello would have done any better. Every pro tour rider is choosing new carbon because they are little twats advertising new carbon fibre bikes because companies wanna sell more bikes?

so what is this article trying to say? there is absolutely no difference between the bikes?
having a stiffer and more comfortable bike thats easier to control has no benefits?

My understanding, and personal opinion, is that there is little time to be saved, especially for us mere mortals.

But that the increase in front end stiffness, ride tuning, and general better ergonomics is heavily felt, especially by us mere mortals.

I've not read this entire thread but has anyone suggested (dan) watch 'The Ride of My Life'?

It's on youtube in 6 parts. If you don't really know anything about road bikes then that would be a pretty good place to start.

They were producing less power at the cranks on the steel bike, not the back wheel. Suggests to me that they weren't pedaling as hard.

I've not read this entire thread but has anyone suggested (dan) watch 'The Ride of My Life'?

It's on youtube in 6 parts. If you don't really know anything about road bikes then that would be a pretty good place to start.

A quote I liked from that, was something along the lines of....

"we know more about steel then any other bike building material"

Its all about taking a material, and tuning it into a good bike. The trouble is, as vintage bikes are made from steel, people blame the metal. When they should be looking at the specific tubeset and frame design.

http://www.baumcycles.com/wp-content/gallery/ristretto/ristretto-01.jpg

Non sequitur. Of course you can go fast on old-style bikes, you're just faster on new-style bikes. :)

I think that's what I was trying to say. But wasn't explicit enough.

But of course, this means that out against other people, it makes no sense to give yourself an additional handicap.

That be one of them there "fixies". I'm talking geared road bike here. Still looks nice though.
I won't be racing this build, just putting the miles in on it. I do like to crank it up a bit though. I guess an audax type set up would be the best bet? I can't imaging i'd be carrying much gear on it though so racks not necessary. Half way between an audax and a racing model? Hmmm.

I didn't post it as it wasn;t built for gears and I rightly assumed you wanted to hear about geared roadie bikes with some classy feel. I reckon MF mentioned mine as it was built for the road and comfort with audaxy kind of geometry, with clearances for mudguards + 28s. 853 with 725 rear triangle, 'R' fork, semi sloping TT (which is all about fit for me ... means I can have high stem without loads of steerer sticking up).

I love SuperP's Mercian. It's a light tourer. For a proper road build something like JayGee's lovely steel job is worth looking at, meet him and try it out if he lets you! It's great. Like everyone's already posted: Enigma, Rourke, Goff, Mercian, Roberts, Jackson, Yates, all worth considering for this. If you;re going to build something Audaxy, really for lots of miles, I guess you'll need to consider the geometry very carefully. And where's the harm in putting rack eyes on? If you ever use something small like a saddlebag a lightweight rack great to support it, also just for strapping your waterproofs to so you don't need to use a rucsac or whatever. Then again a rack can always be Pclipped on.

Where's the harm in putting rack eyes on? If you ever use something small like a saddlebag a lightweight rack great to support it, also just for strapping your waterproofs to so you don't need to use a rucsac or whatever. Then again a rack can always be Pclipped on.

Very good point.

Over distance if your carrying even small amountrs, its better placed on a rack, or in panniers.

as been mentioned ride what is comfortable to you. i loved my carbon road bike, but my 1958 holdsworth is way more comfortable. in terms of performance i don't think it is the massive difference that what everyone makes it out to be. heck, at rolla hillclimb i rode faster than quite a few roadies on plastic bikes, this is on a 50+yr old fixed with mudguards etc. flexy stem, flexy this and that, old technology; you can still get shit feeling and sloppy modern bikes, throwing everythign in the same basket is crap.

Sometimes it can look good:

https://static.lfgss.com/attachments/20212d1263767557-montana_track.jpg

No.

The strange thing is that they didn't bother to find a steel bike that fitted the riders. They are not exactly rare. Why didn't they just use one that was the same effective size as the Pin?

The shop that supplied the bike was Tour De Ville (man I loved that shop), they have quite a lots of different steel bicycles that's likely to fit the rider even better.

Josh, i'm guessing this is you? Great shot.

http://www.merciancycles.co.uk/gallery/34/gallery-image/191/

Interesting thread this. My road bike is built round a Master X-Light frame & my Winter training bike is a fixed Yates. This year I've also had a long term loan of a Cervelo S2 & rode a Condor Leggero in the Dolomites.

I'd definitely echo Ed's point about fit and comfort. It's taken me a month to get used to my Yates, tinkering with stem length and saddle set up; I found it very uncomfortable on the first few rides but it's like a magic carpet now I've got my position right.

I race my Colnago, rode the Raid Pyrenean & Hell of the North on it; it's a great versatile bike.

The S2 and Leggero both 'felt' a lot quicker but light, stiff wheels on both certainly contributed to this. Both were comfortable enough for 120 mile + rides.

I'll always be a sucker for the craft aspect I see in steel frame construction, I'd love a light carbon race bike but I've a feeling I'd still mainly ride the Colnago. I'm planning to buy a set of race wheels for it next year, rather incongruous but it'll be interesting to see if it has a major impact.

"Vintage looks, contemporary performance"

That's my M.O. when in the sack, except without the contemporary performance.

Josh, i'm guessing this is you? Great shot.

http://www.merciancycles.co.uk/gallery/34/gallery-image/191/

Love it:

Another thing worth mentioning is that old component can be actually lighter than modern one.

case in point - Mafac Raid is lighter compared to a Paul Racer (ref. Bicycle Quarterly).

TA Crankset is another example, including dust cap, bolt and two arm weighting 480g;