Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Matthew Grimm / Flunky Kogswell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    656
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Volumetrica: huh?!?!

    My apologies for taking up bandwidth here. I should post this on some
    framebuilding forum.

    Hey, RS.

    I was just browsing the old Masi catalogs and came upon this:

    http://bulgier.net/pics/bike/Catalog...rldwide/08.jpg

    I knew a little about the V frames, but I'd never seen the lugs shown
    that way and didn't understad the 'socket' aspect.

    I'm wondering what you (and others) think of it. Seems like it might
    add a lot of material. And the aesthetics never worked for me. But
    I now see why the Raleigh Technium frames looked as they did.

    And DW, if you see this message, pls bring it too Richard's attention
    for me. Thanks.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kogswell
    My apologies for taking up bandwidth here. I should post this on some
    framebuilding forum.

    Hey, RS.

    I was just browsing the old Masi catalogs and came upon this:

    http://bulgier.net/pics/bike/Catalog...rldwide/08.jpg

    I knew a little about the V frames, but I'd never seen the lugs shown
    that way and didn't understad the 'socket' aspect.

    I'm wondering what you (and others) think of it. Seems like it might
    add a lot of material. And the aesthetics never worked for me. But
    I now see why the Raleigh Technium frames looked as they did.

    And DW, if you see this message, pls bring it too Richard's attention
    for me. Thanks.


    mon dieu*.
    i am surprised this is new to you ( as i infer from this post).
    this frame was introduced in prototype form in 79 (and painted
    as a prestige for the milan show) but hit the market in 81. it
    was a seminal frame in an era in which folks were starting to
    think outside the ferrous box. what would you like to know
    about it? i was on a three week trip to milan in 79 when i first
    saw it at the vigorelli. the original frame(s) had the lip filed
    off to suggest a lugless join, but was ultimately left on as a
    design element.
    put yourself in a 70s mindset and look it again; it was a
    groundbreaking design. imo, the shortcoming was this: the
    concept was excellent, but since the frame geometries were
    also altered for this model alone, i think it fell short of expectations,
    ride-wise.
    e-RICHIE©™®

    * french for my dieu
    Last edited by e-RICHIE; 11-15-05 at 06:28 AM.

  3. #3
    Retrogrouch in Training bostontrevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Knee-deep in the day-to-day
    Posts
    5,484
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Here's a Colnago I saw one day outside of work that also used internal lugs:
    http://www.zweknu.org/blog/index.rhtml?s=p@633

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bostontrevor
    Here's a Colnago I saw one day outside of work that also used internal lugs:
    http://www.zweknu.org/blog/index.rhtml?s=p@633

    that's an aluminum frame - glued!

  5. #5
    Retrogrouch in Training bostontrevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Knee-deep in the day-to-day
    Posts
    5,484
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey, brass, glue, it's all just a bonding agent. Whether held in place with solder or glue, the joint is still conceptually the same.

    As Matthew said, "I now see why the Raleigh Technium frames looked as they did."

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bostontrevor
    Hey, brass, glue, it's all just a bonding agent. Whether held in place with solder or glue, the joint is still conceptually the same.

    As Matthew said, "I now see why the Raleigh Technium frames looked as they did."

    i think that the stresses borne out on a nonferrous joint
    are different than those on steel; as such, the makeup
    of the bonding agent as well as the interference fits between
    the two materials cannot be compared.
    e-RICHIE©™®

  7. #7
    Matthew Grimm / Flunky Kogswell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    656
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i am surprised this is new to you ( as i infer
    from this post).


    Like I said, I'd seen them and knew that they used
    oversized tubes and that the lip was present. But
    I'd never pondered the use of the lip and I didn't
    know about the sockets. Am I repeating myself?

    this frame was introduced in prototype form in
    79 (and painted as a prestige for the milan
    show) but hit the market in 81. it was a
    seminal frame in an era in which folks were
    starting to think outside the ferrous box.


    It is ferrous, right?

    what would you like to know about it? i was on
    a three week trip to milan in 79 when i first
    saw it at the vigorelli. the original frame(s)
    had the lip filed off to suggest a lugless
    join, but was ultimately left on as a design
    element.


    Just looking for pros and cons.

    put yourself in a 70s mindset and look it
    again; it was a groundbreaking design.


    The funny thing is that when I put myself in the
    70s mindset, it looks odd. My 00s mindset finds
    them way more interesting. I guess that's what
    you get for being ahead of your time.

    imo, the shortcoming was this: the concept was
    excellent, but since the frame geometries were
    also altered for this model alone, i think it
    fell short of expectations, ride-wise.


    They do seem like they would not allow for
    'angle modification' as easily as conventional
    lugs.

    Thanks, RS. I knew you knew.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kogswell
    i am surprised this is new to you ( as i infer
    from this post).


    Like I said, I'd seen them and knew that they used
    oversized tubes and that the lip was present. But
    I'd never pondered the use of the lip and I didn't
    know about the sockets. Am I repeating myself?

    this frame was introduced in prototype form in
    79 (and painted as a prestige for the milan
    show) but hit the market in 81. it was a
    seminal frame in an era in which folks were
    starting to think outside the ferrous box.


    It is ferrous, right?

    what would you like to know about it? i was on
    a three week trip to milan in 79 when i first
    saw it at the vigorelli. the original frame(s)
    had the lip filed off to suggest a lugless
    join, but was ultimately left on as a design
    element.


    Just looking for pros and cons.

    put yourself in a 70s mindset and look it
    again; it was a groundbreaking design.


    The funny thing is that when I put myself in the
    70s mindset, it looks odd. My 00s mindset finds
    them way more interesting. I guess that's what
    you get for being ahead of your time.

    imo, the shortcoming was this: the concept was
    excellent, but since the frame geometries were
    also altered for this model alone, i think it
    fell short of expectations, ride-wise.


    They do seem like they would not allow for
    'angle modification' as easily as conventional
    lugs.

    Thanks, RS. I knew you knew.

    it is steel. the upshot, in short, is/was that it employed straight guage,
    thin-walled steel. initially, it was from excell in france. the "innovative"
    (for the time) internal joints were lightly silver brazed. theoretically,
    it would be a way to make lighter frames without burning through them.
    the straight cuts were a way that mitres, good or bad, would not really
    affect the intersection; you really can't screw up a 90 degree cut. as with
    any production shop, i would be surprised if masi did not have the parts
    cast in various angles to avoid any snags.
    e-RICHIE©™®

  9. #9
    Matthew Grimm / Flunky Kogswell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    656
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by e-RICHIE
    it is steel. the upshot, in short, is/was that it employed straight guage,
    thin-walled steel. initially, it was from excell in france. the "innovative"
    (for the time) internal joints were lightly silver brazed. theoretically,
    it would be a way to make lighter frames without burning through them.
    the straight cuts were a way that mitres, good or bad, would not really
    affect the intersection; you really can't screw up a 90 degree cut. as with
    any production shop, i would be surprised if masi did not have the parts
    cast in various angles to avoid any snags.
    e-RICHIE©™®
    Again, thanks for the info.

    It all seems to work on paper. In a production setting
    you'd save a bit of time on mitering, and alignment might
    be a tiny bit easier/better.

    I also find it interesting that the tubes were not HT.
    These days thin-wall usually means HT.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kogswell
    Again, thanks for the info.

    It all seems to work on paper. In a production setting
    you'd save a bit of time on mitering, and alignment might
    be a tiny bit easier/better.

    I also find it interesting that the tubes were not HT.
    These days thin-wall usually means HT.
    they were HT!
    e-RICHIE©™®

  11. #11
    Matthew Grimm / Flunky Kogswell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    656
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by e-RICHIE
    they were HT!
    e-RICHIE©™®
    hmmmm...

    I thought so too.

    But the link above says 'no'.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kogswell
    hmmmm...

    I thought so too.

    But the link above says 'no'.
    which link/page?


    ps
    edit: i take that back.
    that text is from the puff piece that the u.s. name owners produced.
    by "that" time, they were describing "their" 3v. imo, by the time the
    italian concept frame morphed into an american-version-made-under-license,
    it was different animal altogether.

    crowd: "tuck in your claws, e-RICHIE".
    me: "meow".
    e-RICHIE©™®
    Last edited by e-RICHIE; 11-16-05 at 06:01 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •