Columbus Max Appreciation

http://kleinanzeigen.ebay.de/anzeigen/s-anzeige/krabo-krautscheid-nos-bahnrahmen-stahl-track-frame-pista-rh-60/161006881-217-2149?ref=search

See what people mean about the seat-tube lug.

Ah thanks dron/alibi.

o hai! hadn't seen this thread :)

might aswell post a detail of the fork crown on my Somec that's in the OP

Am I wrong or do the top tubes on these (and the Landshark) seem like they're oriented the other way around from all the others - i.e. horizontally flattened end at the head tube rather than at the seat cluster? Anyone know why that might be? And what the different ovalising is supposed to achieve?

For the tl:dr crew:
[QUOTE]Quote:
the ovalized tube can be either stiffer or more compliant in a given direction if that is important to the builder... we orient our top tube and down tube on opposing axes at the head tube to soften up the ride, because the top tube will mate better with the tubes at each end, and because we find it attractive.

[/QUOTE]

Anyone else not understand that at all?

The downtube flares out to the left and right at the bottom so you get more contact area with the BB shell. It then flares up/down at the head tube end to give more contact with the head tube. More contact means less twisting and a laterally stiffer frame.

That's a fairly standard rational, right?

Surely a straight(?) oval toptube would mate better at either end than one that's seasoned at one end, right? Or am I missing something obvious?

I think you are right to question that.
The sentence quoted is poorly worded. I think they are three separate statements, they have flipped the tube to 'soften the ride', also because they 'mate better' and 'look better'. I don't think they are saying as they mate better therefore a softer ride. Stiffer if anything, surely?

If you read up a little in the article they mention more on the topic.
My understanding, the oval tubes are stiffer across the longer section. If the flatter section is at the headtube there should be slightly more flex come through from the fork/head tube to soften the ride.

Thought I'd post this here, nice stays mind:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sancineto-Columbus-Max-Vintage-frame-/331088125255?pt=UK_Health_Beauty_Fragrances_Women_s_Fragrances_PP&hash=item4d1663dd47

Just posted in the porn thread:

I'm really glad I didn't buy that, ride L'Eroica next year and have the time of my life. Really.

Sancineto ... why so small? :(((

MiniMax

Good effort

Awesome.

I'm really glad I didn't buy that, ride L'Eroica next year and have the time of my life. Really.

would you be allowed?

Good point, probably not! Early 90's I would have thought thinking about it, with L'Eroica being pre 1987.

This tubing is magic! I've rode steel bikes in past but this is nothing like it the power transfer and stiffness is almost similar to carbon, its surprising.

I'm trying to design a frame for Rychtarski/Orlowski to build me and debating ovalised Life or MAX top and down tubes, depending on costs.

Anyone know if I'd be right in thinking that, apart from shape of tubing, they're drawn from same(ish) steel alloy?

Also, the larger the diameter of the tube, the stiffer it gets (torsionally?), yes?

Will definitely have MAX chain stays, though thinking smaller diameter Life or Zona for seat stays and 28.6/29.8mm seat tube for comfier cruising and cutting weight, but a tapered 46-56mm head tube (poss 44mm) to keep front end stiff, and a 73mm wide PF30 BB. :D

Kind of a bike I can spend all day on, that won't flinch at the sight of a mild pot hole, and can still be powered up hills (if it's rider can manage it)!

Useful input welcome.

rosko_ct by NYC Velo, on Flickr

brett by NYC Velo, on Flickr

not too sure if max, but don't know what else it should be...

Correct.

Be quick!

http://www.ebay.it/itm/Vintage-Somec-Columbus-Max-/271357601307?hash=item3f2e2c661b&_uhb=1

http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Vintage-Somec-Columbus-Max-/00/s/OTYwWDEyODA=/$T2eC16FHJFoE9nh6m++HBQsc2jl6h!~~60_57.JPG