Classic & Vintage - Cudak888's Top 5 List of Overrated C&V Machines:

I have nothing better to do this week then mouth off :p

My apologies if I've offended any fanatics.

5. Peugeot PX-10
The traditional PX-10 by itself, is a great bike - perhaps one of the best 531 bargains of the day, and responsible for putting many a rider on a lively machine with Nervex lugs. Yet, these things presently command prices right along with Italian machines with Columbus SL, despite having near-consistently sloppy lugwork and brass oozing out from joints, and paint jobs that rival that of a fixed gear hipster Drew armed with a paintbrush. They don't deserve it.

4. 1958-1979 Schwinn Paramount
The Paramounts, unlike the PX-10's, were generally well built, and never failed to win in the appearance department - rarely do you find one that isn't beautiful, even if looking worse for wear. Regardless, despite being a reasonably small-run frameset, Paramounts are unusually plentiful - more so then PX-10's - and command equally silly prices that better machines do not bring due to name appeal. Furthermore, the stiffer seattube used on these things give the Paramount's a dead feeling for most riders of lighter weight.

3. Colnago Super Duper Master Pooper
I can't put together an overrated list and leave an Italian marque out. Sloppy framework, chipping paint, and peeling chrome punctuate the majority of the desirable Colnagos, yet, people go nuts over them. I'd rather have a Basso that costs a third of the price (and rides the same), or a De Rosa that costs the same and is far better in quality.

Someone (I forgot who) said it best: Ernesto was best at marketing Ernesto. Wiser words were never spoken - his framebuilders simply pushed out what was needed to fill the demand of that marketing.

2. Trek 720/728
Once again, a bike that brings considerable prices on eBay, though at least the 720/728 appears, at first, to be a well thought-out machine - mounts for front racks, and cantilever brakes on all but the first edition from 1982. Long 531 chainstays so one doesn't hit their heels on the rear racks. Sure, it sounds brilliant - on paper. These very chainstays - which appear to be a very clever idea - absolutely ruin the 720's. The flex on these 720's is of such a pronounced nature that one tires out quicker with an unloaded 720 running with 25c tires at 100 PSI then with a hardtail mountainbike running knobbies on pavement.

For that matter, I've long suspected that many Treks had inefficient silver penetration on their brake bridge. Granted, I have little to go on - you might have seen my rant this morning about the blue frame that split at the bridge/seatstay much like my 720 - but I've got a hunch that this affects more frames then most people realize (and I'll be keeping my eye out for any other examples of this same damage).

1. Raleigh International
I just don't get this one, I really don't. Raleigh tried to copy the Schwinn Paramount as a touring bike, and magnificently failed in the quality department - and the International still doesn't have mounts for a front rack (Schwinn never figured that out either, though I know at least one all-chrome 54cm frame was custom ordered with front rack braze-ons and a considerable load of extra French-tourer type fittings).

That said, I don't know how many Internationals I've seen with lower Nervex headlugs that no longer resemble Nervex lugs as a result of two pounds of brass forced into the joint because of improper heating of the lug during construction. While not characteristic of all of them, I've seen worse brazing on Internationals then I've seen on Peugeot PX-10's. Granted, Raleigh did some decent Internationals (while Peugeot had a nice middle ground of mediocrity), but the bad ones far exceed the term bad.

Paint was nothing spectacular, some nicer then others, with pinstriping that looks like a 5-year-old Nottinham lad was employed to do the job, armed with a can of Testors and a cheap paintbrush. It looks even worse when that dull gold lining is slathered over a horribly-brazed lower headlug.

Don't get me started on frame alignment either - I know of at least two that were checked in a framebuilder's jig, and found to have slightly warped headtubes from overheating and possibly due to being force-fit during construction (there is a term for this built-in tension, but I forget what it is).

Of course, at the risk of repeating myself - naturally, the Internationals command obscene prices on eBay just as all the other machines here. Does it deserve it? Well, as with everything I've said here, it is subjective - but I wouldn't pay anything close to eBay prices for one, let alone Craigslist prices (and it isn't because I'm cheap either).

-Kurt

Thanks for the entertainment, I expect a full on royal rumble in here!

I would nominate the generic term "english three speed" as a contender for a top 10 spot. I think they are great... but the prices are going insane on a lot of them.

I have seen one of the good Raleigh Internationals in person. Here is my proof:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3621/3604408620_9fdd235f29_o.jpg

I enjoyed the read!

I would nominate the generic term "english three speed" as a contender for a top 10 spot. I think they are great... but the prices are going insane on a lot of them.

Indeed, and the lugwork on any of them from the post-TI era (roughly 1960-on) is horrific. On par with the Internationals at times.


I have seen one of the good Raleigh Internationals in person. Here is my proof:

I remember seeing that one - and I also remember yelling at you like a madman that you should have snagged it - it was the best International (in terms of build quality) I've seen so far. Is it still available?

-Kurt

Hmmm now how about an underrated version of this thread eh? I think that'd pose a little bit more of a challenge.

Out of your top 5 I can only speak for Colnago: ride, perhaps? To this day, my Colnagos all posess a ride quality I prefer to anything else - including the one American-made, cutom-built bike I have. Since all my bikes are equipped with NR/SR from back in the day, the only difference between any of them are the frames. As for the paint/chrome/brazing issues many people bring up: I myself have just not seen it. I've owned a total of 7 different Colnagos (Supers and Mexicos). The 83 Mexico I currently have is original, the paint has held up fantastically, as has the chrome. The 73/74 Super currently in restoration had obviously been raced hard in it's lifetime, but once the paint was removed the attention to detail was obvious. Perhaps I've just been lucky and have never seen one of these badly-built examples?

Is it possible once one person sees one bad one, the assumption is that the rest are the same; the myth is then perpetuated? Because if that's so, I hope this is the beginning of perpetuating a new myth! Colnagos deserve their reputation for excellence, as far as this member is concerned, because the examples I have owned, ridden and enjoyed have all been superb. I didn't become biased because they were *** frames, thats for sure!

My 2 cents...

Well, Kurt, I got rid of an International for........a Paramount! My second Paramount, with several more after that.

I was at a bike swap last spring. There was a beaten and neglected PX-10 and a Mixte version of the UO-8 (sorry I'm not a Peugeotophile). I asked the guy how much for the PX-10, and with a straight face said $1,000 for both bikes! I just walked away shaking my head.

Once they are old enough to be considered "vintage" we can probably add any of the higher end Grant era Bridgestones to the list. Perfectly nice bikes, but appreciably better than others of the same era? I don't really think so. I say that as the owner of two (an RB-T and an MB-4).

Good points there, Drillium. It's too bad you're about as far as possible (excluding Alaska) from me, for I'd like to see those Colnagos of yours and feel the individual ride on those machines. That's one thing I intended to (and forgot) to mention above - they do have a good ride, all things considered.

On another note, I just remembered - I should have shoved Kessels-produced Eddy Merckx frames in this list. Sure they are nice, but they don't ride unbelievably different then similar Italian machines (maybe a bit different in the fork - let the Belgians do it their way), and the frames are nothing special - no filing, no nothing - they could just as well be repainted Bridgestone RB-1's in terms of looks.

-Kurt

A worthy recipient for a Forum Bravery award.

I have my secret 'hates' but am too 'chicken hearted' to put them in print.

I do have a Colnago super dooper Master of the universe and love it. I am also aware of the shortcomings of the Colnago marque but....I just don't care. It rides beautifully. I do still agree with your comments though.

Good luck Kurt,

Gary.

I asked the guy how much for the PX-10, and with a straight face said $1,000 for both bikes! I just walked away shaking my head.

Well, that fellow was just a nut - particularly if that price was based on 50/50 for the two. I would, however, not be too surprised if I found some nut asking $900 for the PX and $100 for the UO-8 - not that either are worth it in that case either.

-Kurt

I remember seeing that one - and I also remember yelling at you like a madman that you should have snagged it - it was the best International (in terms of build quality) I've seen so far. Is it still available?

-Kurt

Well, it's not technically for sale, but I get the impression it could be if I made a fair offer on it. I remember where the guy lives and I think about it every now and then.

I'm kind of hurt that none of my bikes made your hoity toity list!

[I have nothing better to do this week then mouth off


5. Peugeot PX-10
I agree, but hey, I've been beat by guys riding them. The one I had maintained my feelings for French bikes.
4. 1958-1979 Schwinn Paramount
I didn't love them at the time, but have grown to.
3. Colnago Super Duper Master Pooper
Never had one: they always looked sweet though.
2. Trek 720/728
Never had one or any interest, but if that's what you like...
1. Raleigh International
Here I'll take offense. I think the early ones, before the bike boom were pretty sweet bikes. Yeah, later, they got a little sloppy. And no, the International was not a copy of a Paramount, the International was built in the traditional English (particularly Carlton) style. If anything the Paramount was a copy of a Raleigh, OR a PX10. I've had a number of Internationals (and identical Carltons) and I'd take the ride over a Paramount. But my 72 has a ridiculously high bottom bracket for some reason!

I'm kind of hurt that none of my bikes made your hoity toity list!

Some of us keep a low profile and fly below the radar with obscure marques. :)

...
I do have a Colnago super dooper Master of the universe and love it. I am also aware of the shortcomings of the Colnago marque but....I just don't care. It rides beautifully. I do still agree with your comments though.

Gary. Gary is right -- there is something special about a vintage steel Italian frame. My Bianchi is a blast to ride and arguably the fastest bike I have ever owned.

I'm not saying they are not overrated but I'm not buying your opinions on Colnago. Pin a number on your jersey or move to a State with mountains before you start judging Ernesto.

1. Raleigh International
Here I'll take offense. I think the early ones, before the bike boom were pretty sweet bikes.

I'm inclined to believe that - the one mkeller234 pointed out is a late '60s example. The examples I've had the displeasure to experience have been post-1973.


the International was not a copy of a Paramount, the International was built in the traditional English (particularly Carlton) style.

Not a copy in terms of geometry, but in terms of appearance.


But my 72 has a ridiculously high bottom bracket for some reason!

Pictures, pictures...

-Kurt

I'm not saying they are not overrated but I'm not buying your opinions on Colnago. Pin a number on your jersey or move to a State with mountains before you start judging Ernesto.

Fit and finish and ride quality are two different things. Why do you think I own 3 Paramounts and a Superior (baby Paramount), and yet kick them into this list? I like the ride.

Granted, I'd probably switch over to the closest thing to a Colnago that I presently own if I wished to sprint up the mountains - a Basso.

-Kurt

I'm not saying they are not overrated but I'm not buying your opinions on Colnago. Pin a number on your jersey or move to a State with mountains before you start judging Ernesto.

One of my fondest memories from 1974 was tackling Tuna Canyon in the Malibu hills of Los Angeles with my boss at the bike shop. He had just plunked down several hundred dollars on a Colnago, and I told him I was going to climb Tuna for my seventh time on my trusty 1971 American Eagle [Nishiki], and asked if he would care to join me to break in his new toy. We got to the first switchback, and he declared "this is BS" and turned around and headed home. Sometimes it's not the bike ...

Once they are old enough to be considered "vintage" we can probably add any of the higher end Grant era Bridgestones to the list. Perfectly nice bikes, but appreciably better than others of the same era? I don't really think so. I say that as the owner of two (an RB-T and an MB-4).

I was going to add the same item to the list. Not C&V in the same way that the other five are, but I can't believe the prices these go for.
In the past month, there was an RB-1 on the local CL for $800. Just recently, an RB-2 showed up with someone looking for $600.
Those prices might be somewhat inflated or wishful, but neither of them has been relisted with a lower price. Seems that they either sold or the sellers subconsciously never wanted the bikes to sell in the first place.

PX10...obviously I have an opinion.

You need to step back in time to the mid 70's to understand why its so popular. The bike boom peaked in the mid 70's which in turn lead to a great interest in cycling amongst the American public. During the 60'd to late 70's Peugeot was doing extremely well in international cycling. Everyone wants to 'be like Mike' which in turn lead to alot of cyclist wanting the PX10 which was riden by some of the worlds best yet was a very affordable bike. The PX10 allowed cyclists to live their dreams.

I was going to add the same item to the list.

I was considering it myself, though my experience only goes up to the RB-3. As for the RB-3, it looks pretty much on par with any mid-range Miyata or one of the Raleigh USA's in terms of build quality, and the ride was quite similar.

-Kurt

which in turn lead to alot of cyclist wanting the PX10 which was riden by some of the worlds best yet was a very affordable bike. The PX10 allowed cyclists to live their dreams.

One of the reasons I've grown to love the idea of the PX-10, even though I don't care for the finish. I've been silently looking for one off and on that isn't too sloppy, and has a full Nervex Pro lugset on it.

-Kurt

I would go with the the Schwinn Black Phantom as #1. These command prices up into the thousands of dollars for mint examples. In reality they don't have anything that other balloon tire bicycles don't also have. The quality is great generally, but you're still running the same quality moving parts as any other Schwinn heavy really, with the same production techniques and roughly the same quality paint finish. You just end up paying for the name these days. It was top of the line when it was made, but the prices due to the collections out there have sky rocketed over the years. As much as I like old Schwinns, the prices on the Phantoms just aren't justified in most cases now, well besides the fact that people own several and let them sit in the home just to look at. While they should be a little higher in price than the lower models in the line, even 60 years later, these seem to be in a price universe unto themselves (maybe the Aerocycle has joined them).

well, i've only got a px10 out of the group (that I paid $50 or so for and havent ridden yet) so I can't really comment much. That said I'd love to own any of them given the right opportunity. I just cant justify the prices they seem to be selling for. Guess that proves your point..

1. Raleigh International
Here I'll take offense. I think the early ones, before the bike boom were pretty sweet bikes. Yeah, later, they got a little sloppy. And no, the International was not a copy of a Paramount, the International was built in the traditional English (particularly Carlton) style. If anything the Paramount was a copy of a Raleigh, OR a PX10. I've had a number of Internationals (and identical Carltons) and I'd take the ride over a Paramount. But my 72 has a ridiculously high bottom bracket for some reason!

Interesting about the bottom bracket height! My Woodrup also has a very high BB. Could that have been a trend in British road bikes back then?

px-10.. I agree they arent lookers, but If I came across one for the right price I am sure I'd pick it up!

Colnago.. Yep yep, I had an early 90s one, wasnt impressed with it, the only nice thing I can say about it was I liked the chrome head tube lugs, luckily I got it super cheap.. I also like the whole why spend 600 dollars on a name when you can spend 60 on something that rides just as nice?

Paramount.. never had one, never even saw one, I secretly lust for one though (just a little bit), its "the other american bike", actually I would prefer a Volare. Hearing about the dead ride really turns me off now though, thats my biggest peeve for ride quality.

Hearing about the dead ride really turns me off now though, thats my biggest peeve for ride quality.

It depends how much you weigh. I hover around 215-230, and find them fine - someone 190 or less would probably beg to differ.

-Kurt

4. 1958-1979 Schwinn Paramount
The Paramounts, unlike the PX-10's, were generally well built, and never failed to win in the appearance department - rarely do you find one that isn't beautiful, even if looking worse for wear. Regardless, despite being a reasonably small-run frameset, Paramounts are unusually plentiful - more so then PX-10's - and command equally silly prices that better machines do not bring due to name appeal. Furthermore, the stiffer seattube used on these things give the Paramount's a dead feeling for most riders of lighter weight.

-Kurt

Glad I have an `83 Paramount :)

Is it possible once one person sees one bad one, the assumption is that the rest are the same; the myth is then perpetuated?

There was more than one bad one - there was a period where Colnago expanded too fast and lost the handle on quality control. While they're good bikes, they're not as good as their reputation or the prices they bring - there's nothing really special or distinctive about them. This is especially true of the late-70's to mid 80's bikes prior to the introduction of the Master, and the mid-level bikes from the mid 80's on (exceptions exist, but most are factory production bikes). Again, good riders and reasonably attractive, but some of the early and mid-80's bikes (the Sarroni red ones in particular) don't warrant the prices paid for them (those mylar chainstay protectors and taped dropout junctions - yuck). Definitely belong on the overrated list, IMO (and I'm a Colnago fan generally and have owned four).
Quick edit to say if you start looking at Supers beginning in 1971 and then observe what happens to that model in particular, the steady decline is pretty obvious, especially once the Super starts sliding down the model food chain into afterthoughtdom.

I'm inclined to believe that - the one mkeller234 pointed out is a late '60s example.

I'd suggest that's a 71 with the hot dog "international" on the top tube. Bought one in college about 73 for 200., exactly like that brown one. It was a "good" one.


Not a copy in terms of geometry, but in terms of appearance.

Huh? The British were making "Paramount" looking frames long before Schwinn switched from the "oldstyle" Paramounts to the Nervex lugged versions. Remember, Nervex lugs were the hot number from the late 50s until the early 70s: many, many makers used them. The slash cut seat stay or wraparound was a British and French feature for decades before the Paramount took that up.


Pictures, pictures...

I've posted it before.. all chrome 72 with a triple, this site doesn't allow me to post pics anymore for some reason.

(sniff, sniff, sobber, drool, mopey face, bummed, ... )
Looks like I'll have to dust off my Master Light and put it up for sale and then start shopping around for a Basso, or some other obscure underrated underappreciated well made bike. I can use the left over money from selling the Colnago to buy a cabin by a lake in the woods and fish my sorrows away. I wonder if my 8 speed Shimano 600 group on it will kill the value any, probably have to just trade it straight across for a Cinelli or Ciocc or Robin Hood or something.

Colnago: While they're good bikes, they're not as good as their reputation or the prices they bring - there's nothing really special or distinctive about them.

I don't know, when I started riding in the early 70s the Colnagos certainly looked nice compared to the either older stuff or production stuff we rode. Usually it was the kick-ass riders that had a Colnago, or a Pogliagi, or a Galmozzi...

I think for pure performance the Italians certainly knew what they were doing.

I would go with the the Schwinn Black Phantom as #1.

Krates would be #2.

I've got no problem with your list.

I don't know about bikes, but I know what I like....

...or ws that art?

Hey there. I have a PX-10, only it was made in Japan, and has great chrome and is well brazed. Nah, the lugs aren't thinned, but it rides like a dream.

oh. Wait. It says Fuji - The Finest on it. Sure looked like a PX-10 from across the room though. :o

I see someone has offered a 1975 Finest on CR for $1550. That's wishful thinking.

Quite strange that my list would be entirely different from yours - not because I disagree with your assessment of the bikes, but because of the sales figures typically attained.

I'm tempted to throw one that I actually own on my list. I'll have to give this some thought.

Interesting about the bottom bracket height!

Sorry, its my Paramount. Musta been a custom order. I think its 12.5", which is like track bike... on a touring frame.

(sniff, sniff, sobber, drool, mopey face, bummed, ... )
Looks like I'll have to dust off my Master Light and put it up for sale and then start shopping around for a Basso, or some other obscure underrated underappreciated well made bike. I can use the left over money from selling the Colnago to buy a cabin by a lake in the woods and fish my sorrows away. I wonder if my 8 speed Shimano 600 group on it will kill the value any, probably have to just trade it straight across for a Cinelli or Ciocc or Robin Hood or something.
Ship it to me and cheer up.

I don't know, when I started riding in the early 70s the Colnagos certainly looked nice compared to the either older stuff or production stuff we rode. Usually it was the kick-ass riders that had a Colnago, or a Pogliagi, or a Galmozzi...

I think for pure performance the Italians certainly knew what they were doing.

They were nice in the early 70's - that was when they established the reputation Ernesto nearly killed when he expanded production too fast.
Look what happened with Supers from '71 on, as the attention to detail gets less and less (lugs not as well finished and thinned, fewer cutouts - though those were crude anyway). Having said that, Colnago seemed to know what he was doing when it came to designing a contemporary race bike - probably one reason Eddy worked with Colnago and rode his frames. Colnago was ahead of Masi in this regard, IMO. I believe he contributed to the trend toward smaller, stiffer frames (with correspondingly smaller seatposts) starting in the 1960's.
(No one on this list will accuse me of being an Italian bike hater.)

Looks like I'll have to dust off my Master Light and put it up for sale and then start shopping around for a Basso, or some other obscure underrated underappreciated well made bike.

I think the Master was the design that got Colnago on the way to reclaiming its mojo - they certainly got the paint and graphics thing sorted during the 80's.

Kurt,
Somehow I get the idea that you're confusing fit and finish with ride quality.
Most pro's (and lets face it this is where the ride quality really counts) couldn't care less
if the lugs were thinned or not, had file marks or had paint that was going to peel in a year
(they'd have a new frame). To the pro's and the framebuilders the frames/bikes were tools
to be used for one purpose, and that wasn't toodling around Coral Gables.

Marty

(No one on this list will accuse me of being an Italian bike hater.)

Hey, I'm still riding mainly on my '84 Cinelli, which most people will concur is a piece of sheet, but I still enjoy it, and always have.

But man, when I rebuild a wheel for my '63 Carlton, man that is a sweet riding bike, but way different than the Cinelli.

Kurt,
Somehow I get the idea that you're confusing fit and finish with ride quality.

On the contrary - I think you'll see that the list is considerably biased towards fit and finish for most of them, while ride quality takes a back seat.

I could conceivably make a list called the Top 5 Overrated C&V Ride Qualities, and I can guarantee you that the list would be significantly different. Colnago would probably be axed entirely from the list, the Trek 720 would take position #1, and Merckx would probably end up in there as well. I'd probably put the Paramount at #5, only because the ride quality is of such a specific character that would suggest a far more limited appeal then their present demand. (In other words, I suspect lots of folks are buying them who might change their mind about the ride quality if they would only bother to try something else).

The only problem is that I can't think of the rest - there are far more unappreciated frames out there with outstanding ride qualities then there are highly sought-after machines with terrible ride qualities. Come to think of it though, I've always wanted to try out a Rene Herse or Alex Singer. I didn't put them in the list due to the fact that I've never seen one in person, let alone ridden one, yet I'm almost certainly expecting disappointment. No touring bike with a $10,000+ price tag can have a ride equal to that price that something equally nice in fit and finish could match.


Most pro's (and lets face it this is where the ride quality really counts) couldn't care less
if the lugs were thinned or not, had file marks or had paint that was going to peel in a year
(they'd have a new frame).

Well, you've described my Basso quite well - somewhat sloppy, marginal thinning, file marks present in cases, terrible paint and chrome; but it rides as if were a bullet straight out of James Bond's Walther PPK. I'd liken it to a Colnago, and as Otis pointed out, they have a great, lively feeling when going uphill.



To the pro's and the framebuilders the frames/bikes were tools
to be used for one purpose, and that wasn't toodling around Coral Gables.

I can't say my testing ground gives me good data for grades, but it has, so far, been quite adequate for virtually anything else. I have long, fast straights, shallow and tight curves, smooth roads, and the infamous Country Club-Prado which is about as close to an oval-track gravel road (granted, it is paved, but very rough) that one will find within 25-30 miles.

-Kurt

Ship it to me and cheer up.

Nah, that's alright, I'll get over it, probably the next time I ride it. -)

I'd probably put the PX-10 at the top of that list. Besides all the other facts mentioned, it has components that are mid-range at best. Let's face it, the rear derailleur and brakes are not much better than those found on the UO8. Of course that worked in the dealer's favour when selling a UO8, that looked virtually identical to the PX10 to a boom era newbie, and the advertising still showed Merckx on a Peugeot.

I also don't like the handling. It, was always too flexy, probably due to the smaller diameter metric tubes.

As Jim stated, Peugeot sold a lot of PX10 because of their racing success. However, I think more important was the price and weight. It was the least expensive top of the line bicycle you could buy, courtesy of those components. It was also advertised as the lightest, again courtesy of the components. In terms of dollars per pound, it was the clear winner of the boom period. Just ignore the so-so components, poor workmanship, flexy ride...

kurt, your list is spot on,imo.
if only you could expand it to include a 6th marque- us masi.
based on the frames that i've seen and ridden over the years, the level of skill,workmanship & detailing was so disparate between the various technicians, locales and timeframes that it's almost impossible to define them as single company's product.they've ranged from very nice to overcooked & overworked to soulessly indifferent. if not for the movie 'breaking away' and the seemingly endless mutual promotion by those same builders after setting out on their own, the only interest in them nowadays would be for the early italian bikes with direct racing lineage(ie-eddy m).

Fit and finish and ride quality are two different things. Why do you think I own 3 Paramounts and a Superior (baby Paramount), and yet kick them into this list? I like the ride.

Granted, I'd probably switch over to the closest thing to a Colnago that I presently own if I wished to sprint up the mountains - a Basso.

-Kurt

Thing is this "poor build quality" thing for Colnago's I think is overstated (thanks internet). Yes, I know they sub contracted a bunch in the late 70's and early 80's and I'm sure there were numerous crappy ones, but I never noticed at the time as I just rode and did not really know too much about bikes.

But the half dozen Supers ranging from '74-'80 that I have personally had go through my shop in the last six years (3 of which I saw naked) were all very well made. Thin even lugs with crisp edges, no blobs of braze, etc. Actually much better than most of the Italian bikes I've seen from that period. Maybe people only remember the bad ones they saw, or love to degrade stuff that's held in high regard. But I really think folks repeat a lot of stuff they really have no first hand knowledge of.

Not talking about "sprinting up" mountains, I'm talking about going down them FAST. That's when you'll like your Colnago best

Krates would be #2.

Good call-- these things have gotten very expensive of late. It seems to me that each generation reaches a certain age and then reaches for the "nostalgia" trip. It happened with ballooners starting in the 1970s and 80s as vintage high cachet machines. It seems that now people who grew up in the late 60s and into the 1970s are reaching the age where they start on the nostalgia trip, hence Krates have become a huge collector end.

kurt, you're list is spot on,imo.
if only you could expand it to include a 6th marque- us masi.
based on the frames that i've seen and ridden over the years, the level of skill,workmanship & detailing was so disparate between the various technicians, locales and timeframes that it's almost impossible to define them as single company's product.they've ranged from very nice to overcooked & overworked to soulessly indifferent. if not for the movie 'breaking away' and the seemingly endless mutual promotion by those same builders after setting out on their own, the only interest in them nowadays would be for the early italian bikes with direct racing lineage(ie-eddy m).

:beer::beer: There is at least one person willing to say it.