Classic & Vintage - Characteristics of European vs Asian bikes?

I've heard people mention differences in ride characteristics and other differences between European and Asian bikes.. is this due to components and materials used?

I've almost exclusively ridden asian bikes.. really I can only think of one non-Asian bike I've ridden and that was a Peugeot that I had very briefly

Is this some kind of "feeling" or are there objective differences due to construction/materials/etc? I mean if you had bikes with identical geometry, wheels and tires, but one was made in Italy with Columbus and another made in Japan with Tange, would they ride significantly differently, so much that one might be able to tell in a blind test?

IMO, the differences are more related to the specific model than the country of origin. A Tange Champion frame to me is indistinguishable from a Reynolds or Columbus frame.

It seems to me that the greatest differences are in the styling. This is a generalization of course, but when it comes to styling, I think it is often possible to spot which 70's/80's bike is English, or French, or Italian - but it can be a more challenging telling the country of origin for Japanese bike in the absence of a headbadge.

If you ask me, my Fuji Finest looks vaguely French, my Nishiki Int'l looks slightly English, and my Miyata 610 looks a little bit Italian.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh117/auchencrow/Fuji%20Finest%201972/1972FujiFinest005a.jpg

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh117/auchencrow/Nishiki%20International/DSCF6810a.jpg

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh117/auchencrow/Miyata%20610/DSCF7074a.jpg

This could very well turn into a hornets nest, and purists on either side will have very logical and compelling arguments.

I have owned and ridden multiple European, Asian and American made steel bicycles. The is generally something to be said for all of them. We all just have our preferences.

I think the mentality difference between the Europeans and Japanese play a significant role in how each bike feels and performs.

For instance, the Italians have been building bikes for racing for over 100 years now. That's a century worth of knowledge, skill and focus on one thing, fast bikes. The Japanese cannot match that. They cannot match the TDF and Giro wins or the victories in the Classics and the feedback the Italians get from the likes of Merkx, Coppi and a bunch of other great riders. The Japanese can build a very competent bike, but I would not take one for racing over an Italian bike. A properly built Italian bike in SL steel just urges you to go faster, take turns harder and tighter and tromp on the pedals uphill. While my Miyata is a very good bike, it doesn't quite give me that feeling. It's a bit more relaxed, where I'm not sure the Italians even know how to build a relaxed frame. Is there even such a thing as an Italian "touring" bike? The Italian frame just seem's to have one mission - go fast. The Japanese philosophy doesn't have that single mindedness nor are they steeped in race history, which is where so much of the Italian knowledge on speed comes from.

I'm sure other's here will disagree and point out great Japanese racing bikes that are just as good as the Italians, but I'm not sure they could change my mind. Having ridden both, I think there is a distinctly different feel to both of them...

It really in my view has everything to do with decade and price point.

In the 70's Japanese bikes were just becoming bike shop accepted. They had for a given price point better components than a typical european bike. Gitane accepted in the USA market spec bikes more Japanese parts than Peugeot who was very Eurocentric and Raleigh who did not accept Japanese components until the decade was almost over.
Here is one example of different views on bike design, Jappanese bikes that got kickstands often used a 285 cut Esge kickstand, Peugeot and Raleigh 265 for the same stand. The Japanese bikes had a higher bottom bracket, which did not help handling. Japanese bikes also had by and large a longer rear triangle, long top tubes in small sizes and short top tubes in larger sizes, they made do with just raising the top tube often and did not lengthen the bike as it got bigger.

In the 80's this began to change as the Japanese had a wide ranging portfolio of components in the upper and mid range price points and created frames to match, even then though they did not often get it right, but this may also be the product planners and not necessarily the mfgs.

The upper end, a true racing machine that was accepted by racers was a big hurdle. The Japanese and then the bikes coming from Taiwan had better luck with the triathlete crowd in selling a mid and upper mid range bike that was quite capable but lacked acceptance by the mass start racers.

There was a 1982 issue of Bicycling that compared high end Italian bikes to high end Japanese bikes. No winner was chosen but the Japanese were significantly stiffer...

There was a 1982 issue of Bicycling that compared high end Italian bikes to high end Japanese bikes. No winner was chosen but the Japanese were significantly stiffer...

Where was most of the advertising from?

I too think it is mostly preconceived notions....what really comes into play is geometry, tubing, construction and size of the frame... At least as far as how a frame feels when ridden.

Of course, there will be variables that contribute to the feel, like which rims, tires, spokes and how they are tuned. Are the bars and stem steel or alloy, etc. There could be any number of combinations that might each feel differently to a specific rider.


In the end, an all Italian ride, with Columbus tubes and Italian parts will certainly feel superior to the rest ! Hehehehe.....yes, yes, I'm a certified Italophile !

Joe

Here is a link to a 1987 article where Bicycle Guide magazine asked Bruce Gordon to build two otherwise identical racing bikes. One was made with Tange Prestige and the other was made with Columbus SL. I found it to be an interesting read.

http://bhovey.com/Masi/Scans/BicycleGuide/pages/87_03Steel1.htm

The dropout eyelets are more ...nevermind ;)

For me, Italian bikes just seem to have a little something extra. Maybe it's just frame flex or steeper angles, but I haven't experienced it in any Asian, American or French frames. For the bikes I've owned, I could definitely pick the Italians in a Blindfold test.

Where was most of the advertising from?

Ha!

I have found that typical Japan, the build work is top notch (think brazing, lug fit, and so on). Finish work on mid grade and even lower bikes were quite good. Japanese chrome has been much, much better on the bikes I have owned.

Ride wise, I am not good enough to be able to tell much difference.

I mean if you had bikes with identical geometry, wheels and tires, but one was made in Italy with Columbus and another made in Japan with Tange, would they ride significantly differently, so much that one might be able to tell in a blind test?

Most likely not, but that's not the difference between Asian and European bikes, at least from the C&V era. The significant differences were in the frames, IMO. High-end Euro bikes (Columbus or Reynolds tubing, but production-line built) tended to have lighter tubing and better frame geometries, at least outside the 54-56 cm range that everyone in Japan seems to ride. Especially in my size range (63-66cm) the geometry differences can be huge. 74 degree seat and 72 head angles may work on a 54, but scale that up to 64, and you've got something that handles like a shopping cart. And a 56cm top tube? Anybody know where I can get a 170mm stem??

And then you've got the Brits: Reynolds tubing, but again with the weird geometry. F'rinstance a 65cm (25.5") Raleigh Competition GS had 74 degree parallel angles and a 57cm top tube. Oh good. Now I only need a 150mm stem and a seatpost with about 6 inches of setback. Sheesh.

But getting back to the original question: for my money, the difference in C&V bikes from Europe and Asia comes down to tubing and geometry, with the Euros winning hands down.

SP
OC, OR

It's funny how times and impressions change.

When the Japanese broke into the American consumer market with everything from watches, to cars to guitars and bikes, they were all pretty much scoffed at as low-end, much like Chinese goods are now. And in those days, that perception was pretty much right on. But these days, a lot of those Japanese products we laughed at are now looked at with some desirability, and the prices for that stuff reflects that new found respect.

But in the 70's, it had to be an Italian bike to get any street cred. Riding an Italian said you were a serious rider who had money and you knew good bikes. All of us had that one friend that had that one Italian road bike that made us drool with envy. It spoke of hand-built quality and sleek, fast, and innovative designs. Japanese bikes were like Toyota's, decent for transportation, but it was just bland, mass produced white bread, vanilla and un-exciting. Nobody gave you a second look on one and nobody drooled when they saw your new Japanese bike.

So again, I think the two different philosophies made for two very different bikes that can be felt and is real.

I have owned, built and ridden hundreds of vintage road bicycles. I have, on purpose, compared them all to each other. I am not a great rider but I honestly belief that not all bikes are created equal. Some are better than others and country of origin has nothing to do with it when ride quality is the issue.

That said, from a collector's point of view, and this is only my opinion, the general order of preference is: Italian, French, English and then Japanese.

Of course, you must also consider the situation the bicycle was built for.

A racing bicycle is not built for comfort - it is built to go fast. A touring bicycle is not built to go fast - it is built to go far. Try touring on my Cyclops (http://www.mytenspeeds.com/My_TenSpeeds_1/Feature_Bicycles/Feature_Bicycles_Canada/Cyclops/CYCLOPS_1_Start.htm) or racing with my Motobecane (http://www.mytenspeeds.com/My_TenSpeeds_1/Feature_Bicycles/Feature_Bicycles_France/Motobecane_Gran_Jubilee/MOTOBECANE_GRAND_JUBILEE_1_Start.htm), and you will see what I mean.

I don't really think you can make generalizations about bikes from the same country, let alone the same continent. A Colnago doesn't ride like a De Rosa and a Raleigh International doesn't ride like a Motobecane Grand Record. I think Japanese bikes might be more similar to one another based on Japanese business integration and imitation (they were often all listening to the same engineer/consultants), but I don't think there is a European quality to a bike. I haven't ridden enough Japanese bikes in the same class to really consider whether they had a sameness. I would say I thought my Miyata 916 rode more similarly to my Merlin than any other bike I had (and I consider that high praise).

As far as desirability and collect-ability, I know a lot less about Japanese road bikes and the steel ones aren't usually in my favorite period (early-mid 90s or pre-80s). Japanese bikes dominate the 80s, and that's just not my favorite period. I think they generally get more respect for their touring bikes and sports tourers; I know that I LOVE my partially Japanese Koga Miyata and I wouldn't trade it for the world. I think my wife's Panasonic DX-3000 is an awesome, smart bike - especially for its status at the time. Usually collectors want the most expensive and desirable from their childhood (or earlier) and the Japanese bikes were usually marketed on price point rather than superiority...they didn't have the tour wins (though that's just a reflection of sponsorship and tradition). It doesn't make them lesser quality bikes or riders, I just think they are less likely to warrant a museum exhibit. I really love the Japanese perfectionist approach to mass production and I think their paint and workmanship were fantastic at a given price.

Don't you guys believe that the 100+ years of professional racing experience had a huge impact on Italian (and French to some degree) bike building?

The feedback that the Italian builders got from all that racing and the riders that rode their bikes could simply not be matched by the Japanese, thus the two bikes cannot truly be compared? And yes, the rides will be quite different and noticeable because of that...

I'm not sure that I buy that to be honest...that expertise was available to Japanese companies (for a price) and it isn't that hard to take a protractor and tape measure to a winning bike and figure out the angles. I do think that the Japanese interest in track racing might influence their approach.

Shimano was certainly putting out a superior product to Campagnolo from the mid-80s up through the release of Campagnolo Ergo gruppos without that experience.

Edit - there might be a universal quality to Euro bikes...crappy paint!

the Japanese were significantly stiffer...

TWSS :innocent:

...that expertise was available to Japanese companies (for a price) and it isn't that hard to take a protractor and tape measure to a winning bike and figure out the angles.

+1 Reverse engineering(nice name for copying) has been around for a long time and continues today. 100 yrs of experience is nice but every builder does not start from that same point from 100 yrs ago, making that argument pretty much irrelevant. I remember reading the Bruce Gordon article referenced above when it first came out and I believe the results say it all---its all in eye(and mind) of the beholder, totally subjective.

The real differences (IMHO) are in the eye of the beholder. I'm relatively new to this whole C/V business, but I find it fascinating.

For some reason, all the bikes I have been involved in have been made in Japan. One of them, however, has a frame made by Colnago, probably under a licensing arrangement (1985 Celo Europa). I posted a thread on it a while back, and the attitude by some seemed to be generally dismissive because it was made in Japan and has Japanese components (105's), heaven forbid. So maybe it's just an 'authorized' copy, but in truth, the line is so blurred, I don't see a significant difference.

Don't get me wrong.......I would love to own an honest-to-goodness Campy-equipped, handmade Italian bike someday. It won't be for the technology, but for the appreciatioin of the art and the craftsmanship. Those things don't contribute a lot to how well they ride, but are of inestimable value for how they make us feel when we ride them. But a mass-produced bike? I doubt there's a lot of difference between the bikes that were built in great numbers on the European continent, or in Asia. YMMV.

TWSS :innocent:

Ha!

As I recall (and I'd be tempted to agree with), the Bicycling article cited the Japanese track history as an influence, and also cited the Italian road racing tradition as the motivation for their all-day comfort design....

Of course, all bikes tended to shift to being stiffer, having more aggressive geometry, and having tighter clearances in the 80s.... The Japanese may just have been leading the charge on that. Bear in mind, this article compared top of the line bikes, not sport tourers. Guerciotti, Rossin, and DeRosa vs. 3Rensho, Fuji, and Miyata.

IMHO, the changes in style and ride philosophy have everything to do with marketing and sales, and little to do with heritage...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_693JCT80K-E/Si17BBKaH2I/AAAAAAAAAlo/4UgT_wqThHU/s1600/ItalyJapan.JPG

I don't really think you can make generalizations about bikes from the same country, let alone the same continent. A Colnago doesn't ride like a De Rosa and a Raleigh International doesn't ride like a Motobecane Grand Record. I think Japanese bikes might be more similar to one another based on Japanese business integration and imitation (they were often all listening to the same engineer/consultants), but I don't think there is a European quality to a bike. I haven't ridden enough Japanese bikes in the same class to really consider whether they had a sameness. I would say I thought my Miyata 916 rode more similarly to my Merlin than any other bike I had (and I consider that high praise).

As far as desirability and collect-ability, I know a lot less about Japanese road bikes and the steel ones aren't usually in my favorite period (early-mid 90s or pre-80s). Japanese bikes dominate the 80s, and that's just not my favorite period. I think they generally get more respect for their touring bikes and sports tourers; I know that I LOVE my partially Japanese Koga Miyata and I wouldn't trade it for the world. I think my wife's Panasonic DX-3000 is an awesome, smart bike - especially for its status at the time. Usually collectors want the most expensive and desirable from their childhood (or earlier) and the Japanese bikes were usually marketed on price point rather than superiority...they didn't have the tour wins (though that's just a reflection of sponsorship and tradition). It doesn't make them lesser quality bikes or riders, I just think they are less likely to warrant a museum exhibit. I really love the Japanese perfectionist approach to mass production and I think their paint and workmanship were fantastic at a given price.

And those are some of the reasons I love my Italian bikes... I don't want mass production perfectionism, or computer designed robotically constructed bicycles.

I want something that shows the human touch and the passion of a master builder.

A file mark here, a slight change in the cutout of a lug there..... Something that exemplifies the term "Labor of Love" .... Something that I can picture in my mind being crafted, individually, in an age old workshop, lamps focused on the work at hand, a master at work filing the end of the tubing that he has selected because it "sounded just so" to his knowing ears when pinged with a deft fingertip..... the lingering odors of brazing, bicycle grease, old hardwood benches, espresso and freshly baked bread all blended together....

There ya go...you want a mass produced pop-art poster or the Mona Lisa ?

Yes, give me a no-name, Columbus steel bicycle, produced by a master in a quaint old shop anywhere in Italy, where building and racing bicycles has been a passion for more than a hundred years !

- Joe

Sorry, can't help. Never owned a Japanese bicycle.

[/COLOR]
And those are some of the reasons I love my Italian bikes... I don't want mass production perfectionism, or computer designed robotically constructed bicycles.

I want something that shows the human touch and the passion of a master builder.

A file mark here, a slight change in the cutout of a lug there..... Something that exemplifies the term "Labor of Love" .... Something that I can picture in my mind being crafted, individually, in an age old workshop, lamps focused on the work at hand, a master at work filing the end of the tubing that he has selected because it "sounded just so" to his knowing ears when pinged with a deft fingertip..... the lingering odors of brazing, bicycle grease, old hardwood benches, espresso and freshly baked bread all blended together....

There ya go...you want a mass produced pop-art poster or the Mona Lisa ?

Yes, give me a no-name, Columbus steel bicycle, produced by a master in a quaint old shop anywhere in Italy, where building and racing bicycles has been a passion for more than a hundred years !

- Joe







Sure...I'm with you. There's a reason I'm riding a Marnati and there's a reason that I enjoyed picking it up in Milan...but none of those things are really going to define the ride...and the OPs question was about ride characteristics. Those things are, essentially, aesthetic.

I'd also say that by the 80s most of those human touches were gone from most Italian/Euro brands as well...they embraced IC lugs. Many were subcontracting. Some of those human touches also resulted in some pretty crappy bikes...I'm thinking of my Worksop Raleigh. I'd rather own a well made, well painted Miyata than a Raleigh built after happy hour by a disgruntled, poorly trained brit. The truth is that most Euro bikes don't really fit the qualities you discussed.

[/COLOR]
And those are some of the reasons I love my Italian bikes... I don't want mass production perfectionism, or computer designed robotically constructed bicycles.

I want something that shows the human touch and the passion of a master builder.

A file mark here, a slight change in the cutout of a lug there..... Something that exemplifies the term "Labor of Love" .... Something that I can picture in my mind being crafted, individually, in an age old workshop, lamps focused on the work at hand, a master at work filing the end of the tubing that he has selected because it "sounded just so" to his knowing ears when pinged with a deft fingertip..... the lingering odors of brazing, bicycle grease, old hardwood benches, espresso and freshly baked bread all blended together....

There ya go...you want a mass produced pop-art poster or the Mona Lisa ?

Yes, give me a no-name, Columbus steel bicycle, produced by a master in a quaint old shop anywhere in Italy, where building and racing bicycles has been a passion for more than a hundred years !

A big +1!

Yes, the Japanese can copy a Colnago with a protractor, and the Russians can copy our C-5 Galaxy and the Chinese can copy - well everything! But they cannot make it better just by copying as they have deftly proven. They have to know what makes it better, and why this angle matters, and why this type of weld is better and so on and so on. Therein lies the difference. I to will take an Italian bike made in a small shop by one or two men than a mass produced or CAAD bike anyday.

I'm sure Toyota can make a copy of Ferrari, but in no way, shape, or form, would it be a Ferrari. History indeed matter's!

The full review is available on here >>>

http://www.flickr.com/photos/assemblylinecollective/sets/72157621835568475/

As oposed to several other posters I own many Japanese bikes and not some many Italian bikes. I have an Alan and two Verlicchi downhill bikes (MTB). Very interesting bikes, but not the archetype Italian bike discussed here. Had several Colnagos, but they fell outside the scope of my collection so left. My Panasonic PR-6000 wasn't really a cheapish alternative for an Italian back in the day, as it set you back considerably more than a Record equipped Master. Input came from the race team with Jan Legrand as head mechanic since TI Raleigh. In the late 80s several Colnagos in the peloton were actually Panasonics in diguise. This was before the PR-6000 was officially introduced. Against the Italian experience Panasonic could place very deep pockets and Japanese devotion to perfection. I think about the same took place with Miyata and IJsboerke/CarpiSonne about a decade earlier.

Looks like the Japanese did the same to bikes as they did to cars: first copy the best the Europeans and Americans (?) have to offer, and compete on price. Then, on build quality. Then, on engineering quality. They can build winning technology; as companies like Shimano and Honda have shown.

And after all, 'characterful' just means 'flawed'.

All I can say is my '90 Bottecchia (Columbus SL) and my '85 Pro Miyata (Miyata Triple Butted) are both wonderful to ride. They have very similar feels--fast. The frames both seem to "spring" with the pedal strokes when sprinting, urging you to go faster.

Whatever the subjective reasons some have for choosing one over the other, the fact that bikes like this are available for reasonable prices means we all win.

They can build winning technology; as companies like Shimano and Honda have shown.


Gotta say that all my Italian bikes have full Shimano - and I drive a Honda.

It really in my view has everything to do with decade and price point.

In the 70's Japanese bikes were just becoming bike shop accepted. They had for a given price point better components than a typical european bike. Gitane accepted in the USA market spec bikes more Japanese parts than Peugeot who was very Eurocentric and Raleigh who did not accept Japanese components until the decade was almost over.
Here is one example of different views on bike design, Jappanese bikes that got kickstands often used a 285 cut Esge kickstand, Peugeot and Raleigh 265 for the same stand. The Japanese bikes had a higher bottom bracket, which did not help handling. Japanese bikes also had by and large a longer rear triangle, long top tubes in small sizes and short top tubes in larger sizes, they made do with just raising the top tube often and did not lengthen the bike as it got bigger.

In the 80's this began to change as the Japanese had a wide ranging portfolio of components in the upper and mid range price points and created frames to match, even then though they did not often get it right, but this may also be the product planners and not necessarily the mfgs.

The upper end, a true racing machine that was accepted by racers was a big hurdle. The Japanese and then the bikes coming from Taiwan had better luck with the triathlete crowd in selling a mid and upper mid range bike that was quite capable but lacked acceptance by the mass start racers.

Good points, and IMO important to make. I think Fuji is a good example of the Japanese approach to frame design, as sourced in their domestic market... I recall reading somewhere (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that prior to the '80s or '90s, Fuji hadn't fielded a pro cycling team since 1945 and in the intervening time, had focused almost exclusively on making commuters & other practical bikes.

Relative to the European makers, the Japanese were late-comers to building racing bikes and the post-WW 2 era probably had something to do with that, since- on the one hand- heavy industry hadn't recovered from being bombed flat (and most people couldn't have afforded a car to begin with), and- on the other- as a result, no one really demanded unpractical extravagances like bicycles purely dedicated to racing.

I guess I'm saying that their domestic market demanded better commuter & utility bikes and (re: say, the student/ rebel origins of using & bodging mustache bars) limited the expectation of speedy bikes by younger riders; ergo, they made great commuters & utility bikes.

Gotta say that all my Italian bikes have full Shimano - and I drive a Honda.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

I have ridden, raced, toured, randonneuerd. commuted, cyclocrossed, and who knows what else. I see no trend by country of origin, or how highly the mark is exhaulted.

My favorite (racing) bikes:

1). '85/87 Peugeot P(S/V)N10
2). '86 3Rensho
3). '86 Faggin
4). '84 Univega Gran Premio

Gone because I did not like them as much (in no order):

-'81 Alan
-'78 and '82 Colnago Super
-'76 Bottechia
-'88 Guerciotti (actually, I wrecked that one, but have no desire to replace it)
-'86 Allez
-'83 Trek 6 or 7-something (760?)
-'78 Raleigh Professional
-'73 Gitane Super Corsa
-'73 PX10
-'99 Colnago steel something-or-other
-'86 Bianchi (italian built, don't recall the model)
- several others long forgotten.

Don't you guys believe that the 100+ years of professional racing experience had a huge impact on Italian (and French to some degree) bike building?

The feedback that the Italian builders got from all that racing and the riders that rode their bikes could simply not be matched by the Japanese, thus the two bikes cannot truly be compared? And yes, the rides will be quite different and noticeable because of that...
I agree to a point, but, the 3 Rensho is {for me anyway) an equal to any English, Italian or French bike that I have in my collection.

And the summation of all of these heartfelt comments and contributions is....

By this point in time, 2013, there is most certainly something out there that will please 99%, be it Italian, English, French, Japanese or what-have-you, and can be equipped with whatever gear combinations you find most suited to your desires.... Of course frame sets could be built and tested in a lab to measure all sorts of quantifiable catagories, but in the end, it is how YOU feel about the bike you ride and how it feels to you that matters.

Cheers,

Joe

I think the mentality difference between the Europeans and Japanese play a significant role in how each bike feels and performs.

For instance, the Italians have been building bikes for racing for over 100 years now. That's a century worth of knowledge, skill and ...

I'm sure other's here will disagree and point out great Japanese racing bikes that are just as good as the Italians, but I'm not sure they could change my mind. Having ridden both, I think there is a distinctly different feel to both of them...

Î think you are missing something pretty fundamental. England, France, Italy, and a few other European countries all have the century of cycling experience you mention, and it did not make their bikes "better" but rather just different. The differences in question are more due to factors that have little to do with bicycle design, but such mundane factors as the climate, the socioeconomic station of the" middle class" and so forth. All the factors I refer to, doubtless including many I have not even thought of, shaped the cycling cultures and industries of their respective countries up to the sixties or so. By that time the differences between English, French, and Italian bikes were pretty pronounced. But after that the differences stated to disappear.

Japan has its own traditions in cycling. They may not go quite as far back, but on a small scale they certainty go back well over fifty years and I don't doubt longer still. What you and I know of almost all these countries' bikes, including Italy and Japan, is what they produced for the export market. The Raleigh Professional, for example, introduced in the late sixties, was an Italian style racer made for the American market. There was nothing English about it beside the Reynolds steel frame, the Brooks saddle, and the bsc threading.

When the Japanese hit the american market in the seventies they were as capable of making a top-notch bike as anyone. If they didn't, it was because they could sell more units at a lower price point. If you rode ones you didn't like, there are countless reasons why you may have disliked it, but please don't fool yourself that the Japanese have a mentality that prevents them from making a good bike.

+1. It's important to compare apples to apples, and not a enthusiast level bike vs. a pro level bike. They were seeking different markets in most cases. And, like I said before, I'd ascribe most differences to marketing, rather than history or knowledge... And, the comparisons certainly change from the 70s to the 80s...

I don't like stiff or aggressive rides. So, I'd much rather have a 60s or early 70s Italian bike than an 80s Italian bike, or an 80s Japanese bike.... There were far more top tier Italian road racing bikes than top tier Japanese road racing bikes in the 60s and 70s, but that changed a lot in the 80s.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_693JCT80K-E/Si17BBKaH2I/AAAAAAAAAlo/4UgT_wqThHU/s1600/ItalyJapan.JPG

Holy cow, I remember that cover - blast from the past!


I know that the Japanese racing/touring bikes in the 80's had top notch fit and finish, and starting in the 70's offered compelling component groups to rival the best Italian and French offerings of the day.

All very interesting. But probably not conclusive of anything except that you build what you are motivated to build.

I can say this. I feel the differences between my bikes. The Carlsbad Masi, which I like to think is a mid-70's Italian design, really demands that I go faster, always faster. I've ridden no other bike that does that. In corners it is incredibly neutral. My Asian Bianchi, a lower level bike, has the high BB already mentioned and doesn't corner quite as well, but it is still quite poised and loves to go fast. It also demands the rider's attention. I'd say it was probably designed by the Italians, but I'd be guessing. My English and French bikes feel different as befits their target market, the Peugeot being "only" an upgraded UO8. The other French bike which was actually made in Belgium, well, I haven't ridden it enough yet.

How much these differences are due to the country of manufacture or of ownership or of design, I couldn't say. But the bikes are clearly different in intent.

Holy cow, I remember that cover - blast from the past!


I know that the Japanese racing/touring bikes in the 80's had top notch fit and finish, and starting in the 70's offered compelling component groups to rival the best Italian and French offerings of the day.

I not only remember it, I own it! I could do some scans of the article if there's enough interest.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_693JCT80K-E/Si17BBKaH2I/AAAAAAAAAlo/4UgT_wqThHU/s1600/ItalyJapan.JPG

thanks for posting that image, made it easier to find the full article: http://www.flickr.com/photos/assemblylinecollective/sets/72157621835568475/

*goes to read*

Cool! This issue of Bicycling was sold on Ebay for $90! I have the full year of 1982 in a library binding.... Time for a re-read!

Cool! This issue of Bicycling was sold on Ebay for $90! I have the full year of 1982 in a library binding.... Time for a re-read!

$90.00!!!!! I'd be lucky if I got $9.00 for my copy with my luck on eBay. I'm not willing to gamble with my copy.

awesome learning the folks great insights from experiences, biggest reason loving this forum. so kudos first.

checking back to the OP's original question:
so are we saying Italian representing European while Japanese doing Asian on the counter side, in terms of 'characteristic' of the bikes?

could be right in 'many' senses but not entirely correct in some senses.
judging things by its country of origin often—or at least some times—bears problematic stereotypical perceptions with somewhat subjective POVs.
and even in a continental scale? way to many and wide variables, unfortunately.

is Italian food superior to Japanese food? whether that is correct or not was not the point, right?
what's the characteristics of European food in comparison to Asian food? this could be interesting moot, no?
possibly not in the way of what's superior to what, in who's POV in many different ways and axis.

are Italian ppl impatient? are Japanese ppl copycats?
:)

a 2 euros and 10 yens by an asian-born, inter-continent-educated, US-residing citizen who recently fallen into bike culture.
damn there are lots to learn. :)

[/COLOR]


There ya go...you want a mass produced pop-art poster or the Mona Lisa ?

Yes, give me a no-name, Columbus steel bicycle, produced by a master in a quaint old shop anywhere in Italy, where building and racing bicycles has been a passion for more than a hundred years !

- Joe







Mostly myth here as by the early to mid eighties Italian frames were mostly mass produced as well.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh117/auchencrow/Miyata%20610/DSCF7074a.jpg

I think this image shows the typical 70's to early 80's Japanese bikes in the extreme for the recreational rider.
Note the short top tube for a pretty big frame.
While this is not the best angle, draw a line between the axles and note the drop or lack thereof of the bottom bracket, a higher bottom bracket is a bit "safer" than a lower one as there is less chance of striking a pedal in a turn.
Also note the long chain stays, bikes often do get longer stays with bigger frames but I bet this dimension is probably pretty consistent throughout this model's size range.
This bike does show some progression over "earlier" typical Japanese bikes, tighter brake clearance and probably a bit less fork rake that say a bike 5 to 8 years earlier.

I should also note some observations on gearing, way back the owner of the shop I worked for was consulted on the early Nishiki Kokusai (soon International) aside from the name not being the best for the US market he suggested the half step front chainring set up and the wide ratio 14-32 freewheel. The Suntour mechanism handled this really well, so why not exploit it? He really liked the half step pup front. So that is what it got for a number of years.

thanks for posting that image, made it easier to find the full article: http://www.flickr.com/photos/assemblylinecollective/sets/72157621835568475/

*goes to read*

....And thank you for the link!
It was fun to read the article again after all these years.

I found it particularly interesting that Shimano had apparently delved into indexing this early, with the Dura Ace AX rear derailleur and its "rube goldberg" (as the author calls it) mechanisms inside. Indexing at the derailleur rather than the shifter. This neat little fact had completely escaped any retention in my feeble brain, as this pre-dates Shimano's official launch of "SIS" by several years.

Mostly myth here as by the early to mid eighties Italian frames were mostly mass produced as well.

I think you need to re-read what I wrote. Everyone had/has mass produced bikes available....

Joe

292421292422292423

All three of these have similar ride qualities in my experience.

The Bianchi is labeled as made in Japan, the Palo Alto contract built
by BMZ in Italy, the Windsor made in Mexico, supposedly in the Italian
tradition. I have trouble telling the ride apart in them, but the blue Palo
Alto does travel with a more forgiving, stretched out feel to it.

My own opinion is that a lot of the small American builders made bikes
that were superior to these, but they usually cost more money for their
initial owners..............also they were produced in smaller quantities.

I can't really tell you much else, but the stuff about Japanese paint and
overall finish standards being superior is true. I think the Italian paints
I own are probably the most fragile. Again, the real champs on paint and
finish are the Americans that got painted with Imron or similar auto enamels.