Originally Posted by
Six jours
I was talking about modern metal vs. vintage metal, not OS vs. standard diameter.
Well, I'm not as big as Schnee, and I have a hard time keeping up with cat. 2s these days, but I personally find .9/.6/.9 standard diameter a little too heavy. I like the flexibility of .8/.5/.8, even in my >60 cm rando frames. I've ridden one built with OS tubing and found it extremely stiff, relatively speaking. I strongly disliked it and found that it made my legs build up with lactic acid -- before Jan ever used the word "planing".
I bolded the key part, which is really my whole point. The guy apparently already has the SLX and is already having the frame built. As for fatigue life and grain structure, that's really what I mean when I talk about benefits that don't transition well from paper to reality. I mean, you're riding a 17 year old frame. I have a 30 year old SL frame. People ride frames even older than that on a daily basis. How much more fatigue life do we need?
I didn't even know Reynolds had reintroduced 531. The 531 I have been using has been between 30 and 40 years old.
We obviously don't know the same people.
FWIW, I'm not really trying to start a fight or anything. I just think the argument that OS and/or modern steel is automatically better for everything and everyone is too broad, and I think the OP will find SLX as good today as we all did decades ago - as long as he's not 280 pounds, or intending to have a 63 cm loaded touring frame built with it.
No fight here from me
I win all my fights by 100metres
I just cannot for goodness's sakes can see the reason to use materails that only lurk forgotton in dusty corners and lost under benches.
The current time we live in
is the best is has ever been for choice of good materials and parts for bespoke frame building.
back to old frames
yes I ride a 17 year old frame, but not daily, not every day for 17 years , the days are gone of leaning hard on the pedals up the steep hills with the fitness I once had.
Lots of old frames that get a rollout the door a couple of times a week and the rider putters along. {Like me!} Cool, but not daily hard use. Some think they are riding hard, well their engine is riding hard, gasping hard, but they have the horse power of a daddy long legs spider.
It is better to say, 'I have had that frame for a long time and it has given much enjoyment, thus I cherish it"
but to say it is as tough........................
The fact is, frame failures dropped from all manufacturers around the world when they switched to Nivacrom steels.
So Columbus dropped the old stuff quickly.
It was common knowledge at the time.
and many other tube makers switched to the newer steels.
as for flex increasing biomechanical efficiency
Stored energy is the same in a stiff spring as in a flexy spring, may have
less strain for the same stress, but the same stored energy is there.
Only losses in the tube are heat in the flexing tube and moving air
molecules out of the way as the tube flexes {and even that is just heating
the air up around the tube}
Jan says
"Jan's altered pedal stroke" refering to OS frames
So does the flexy frame make the rider more cardiovascular efficient, or do
some riders just change their pedal technique to their personal feelings of
the frame is the question. {I reckon it is the answer}
I am off now downs stairs to finish off a frame
using some nice cast lugs {Richissimo}
some nice Columbus Spirit for Lugs tubes
and cast socket stainless dropouts {often refered to cop out dropouts by some ignorant fossilised frame builders who have no idea of the time involved in using them and polishing them}
No fight, but if I sound harsh, it is because my cup of tea has not kicked in after 50 kms in the cold and dark this morning, over the hills. Dinotte lights rock!
I am out of here , no more from me.