Classic & Vintage - steel hierarchy

So now that I've glimpsed a true, 80s handmade steel frame, I'd like to ask if someone wouldn't mind posting a comprehensive list of steels and their relative qualities? Maybe even make it a Sticky? I've been learning as I go, but I'm generally curious. Is Columbus generally considered the best? And among that brand, what are all the different types: slx, aielle, etc.? What about Reynolds v. Columbus, and the different shades of CrMo? Tange v. Ishiwata v...? Mangalloy? Should I make up a spreadsheet to post? I think it would be great to have as a reference: it seems like something Mr. Brown would have done.

it seems like something Mr. Brown would have done.

!!!

Please tell me that you mean something Sheldon "not dead yet" Brown might already have done. You aren't trying to give us some bad news?

See: http://www.desperadocycles.com/Editorial_Articles.htm,
tables 1-4 are particularily helpful. If you search the forum you will find more infor as well. However, as well all remind eachother again and again, it is the builder that is most important. Tange Infinity, columbus SL or SLX, reynolds, true temper.. they all make top quality products, but it is the builder that brings them to life.

Thanks for the info, cyclotoine. I realize the craftsmanship is so important, but I'm just getting to glimpse the world of handmade for the first time: thus far, it's been variations in manufacturers for me.

Here's my take....

The Desparado pages are a great resource. That's a hidden link so download those tables andn save them on your harddrive for future referance.

As cyclocitine said, the quality differences are really non-existant.

There are 3 qualitative differences in the old tube sets to be aware of. By far, the biggest is the thicknesses of the tubesets. Most brands offered tubes with different thicknesses. Thinner is lighter, but more flexible. Thicker is heavier, but stiffer. I can tell the difference in the same basic frame design in different thicknesses. IMO, you need to consider thicker tubesets if the rider is:
a) heavier than 170lbs
b) doing loaded touring
c) a strong racer
d) rides on very rough terrain
e) rides large 62cm/25" frames

The second difference is more of an aesthetic one. True Temper and later version of Tange were seamed tubes The Bridgestone catalogs archived on Sheldon Brown's site have a great review of the different ways to manufacture tubes. The modern seamed tubes are just as good as drawn tubes, but from an aesthetic point of view, some folks prefer drawn tubes just because.

The last difference is the high Magnanese tubes like Mangalloy, Mangy X and Valite. These tubes were used to make frames with robots. Some bikes used these tubes for the entire frame Others used them in the rear triangle and classic CrMo in the main triangles. This typically indicates a robotic made rear triangle end and a handmade main triangle. A frame from the 80s that uses CrMo in all tubes generally means a totally handmade bike.

Now... setting aside this technical stuff, I will state the crazy bit. The brand does matter from an aesthetic point of view, just as much as color and lug type!!! I mean, if I'm getting a Celeste green Bianchi, it needs to have Columbus tubing! It just does. A British Mercian will be and needs to be Reynolds 531. IMO the most important aspect of a handbuilt lugged frame it that you love it. Loving it means you like the brand, the country of origin and the brand of the tubeset.

Now, to answer your question about Columbus tubing directly.... I remember Columbus as being favored by racers. The other top tube by reputation of course was 531, which was usually associated with the top British and French bikes. Columbus was associated with Italian race bikes and, imo, sort of coat tailed on the whole Campy thing. In practical terms, Columbus SL is (generally) a tick thicker than 531 and hence stiffer and better for sprinting. 531 frames were associated with touring bikes and softer rides.

Me? I ride Ishawata 022 and just love it.

441 CrMo frame is one of the best that was made.

Pinnah, great take on steel tubes. I purposely bought a bike with 501 tubing because I'm a clydesdale. Working great for me.

Thanks for the info, especially pinnah. So far, I really enjoy the Nishiki I just bought that's made of Tange CrMo. Everything I've ridden on the lighter Tange tubes seems really responsive. I'm a very lightweight rider--125 lbs (very small bones)--so I like the thinner stuff. That columbus tubing just looked so elegant, and it really was amazingly light.

I've ridden an old Trek with Ishiwata 022, and I really liked that, too.

Thanks for the help. BTW, for some reason, the link that cyclotoine gave comes up odd and split-screened on my Mac-with-firefox. I couldn't really read anything.

I appreciated all the info.

Last question: what's the difference betw. "501" and "Reynolds 531"? They're both Reynolds tubes, right?

Maybe this is of interest too:

http://poli.cs.vsb.cz/personal/bike/frameinf.htm

or:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/mrgrumpy/randompics/tubes.gif

Here is the link to the table that describes the metalurgy of many of the old tubesets.
http://www.desperadocycles.com/Table_1&2.htm

Note that 531 and 753 don't have chromium, which is why 531 and 753 aren't CrMo exactly. I believe that 501 is CrMo but am not 100% sure of that. Can somebody confirm?

Note also that Ishawata and Columbus are very, very close. Hence the reputation of Ishawata as being Japanese Columbus.

Here is the line to the table that describes the thicknesses of many of the old tubesets
http://www.desperadocycles.com/Tubing_Properties_For_Non_True_Temper_Tubing.htm

This second link, in particular, is gold if you are interested in selecting the lightest frame for a given rider.

Thanks a lot for the links. This is a great learning resource.

Why isn't there a "frequent links" list on BF?

Just looked at the label on a 1983 Trek 500 and the Reynolds 501 label says "chrome-moly", so that should confirm that. I read that Reynolds developed the 501 chrome-moly tubeset at the behest of Peugeot, and they bought almost all the output...'cept for the stuff that went to Trek. Really, it's NOT the tube it's the BUILDER. Though some builders really liked the way a particular tubing performed for them and would stick with that whenever possible. Others frequently swapped in different brands and gauges to create custom "blends" in a given frame, so they couldn't honestly put just one tubing sticker on the seat tube. Personally, I like alloy steel in all the major brands: I've ridden great bikes built with Reynolds, Columbus, Ishiwata, Tange, Vitus, Oria, Dedecchai, Excell, Mannesmann, True Temper...all good if BUILT good.

I'm bumping this thread to ask a specific question regarding old Treks. Say a person was interested in an older Trek frame, not for show restoration but for actual riding, including shoulder-bag commuting and fun riding around town and country. And say that person was just about 170 lbs. And say that the person was looking at a '79 Trek 530 with Ishiwata 022 and an '85 510 with Reynolds 501 tubing.

Which would you go for?

Condition and size being equal - if I wasn't planning on treating the bike roughly, I'd go with the '79. Not just for the tubing, though that would be a consideration for me. If you were 180+, the answer might be different.

Based on feelings from my bony butt I personally think Reynolds 531 tubed frames give a more somfy ride compared to Coulumbus. Of course I'm partial to Reynolds because I used it to make custom frames back in the late 1970s and most of the Columbus frames I rode were in rather upright criterium bikes. That said, I have one set each of Columbus SL ad SP tubing that I'm just dying to make a nice compact road frame and a light weight mountain bike frame out of. Nicely lugged of course like a steel frame should be. Problem is I'm out of 50% silver solder I used to use for fabricating. Might get brave and use brass altho silver sure flows nice.

fantastic information.

Since we're on this subject...
I have an opportunity to pick up an old Panasonic DX-5000 frame (Tange Prestige tubing). I weigh 180.... is this frame going to collapse on me while going over a bump?

Since we're on this subject...
I have an opportunity to pick up an old Panasonic DX-5000 frame (Tange Prestige tubing). I weigh 180.... is this frame going to collapse on me while going over a bump?

Not likely, I think that a lot of the weight ratings are so the manufacturers aren't liable in case of a failure. Most of us weight more than pro racers (i think) and ride the same types of tubing. I have a 62cm 531 frame and apparently 531 is only suited to a max rider weight of 150. How many people that require a 62cm frame do you think weight under 150 pounds? I am betting almost no one, yet they still built them and mine has been around for 20 years, not to mention my next 531 bike which is 30 years old.

First you would need to define what best is. Then, best for what, a down tube? for what design? for what rider?

There are literally hundreds of steel frame configurations that all differ in what would be optimum tube qualities.

Ask a diverse group of thirsty mtn bikers what is the best beer and you will not get a consensus and building good triangles with steel is way more complex than beer.







And for caloso to answer Your question, I would go with the 530 because it’s a better built frame. But I have no idea what type of riding you do and if weight and or stiffness or rear tire clearance is an issue with you.

Thanks. Yes, I'm partial to the '79 530 myself but I've never ridden Ishiwata and was wondering what everyone's thoughts are on it. It sounds like it's on par with Reynolds, Columbus, and True Temper.