Originally Posted by
obrentharris
I hope that any noobs who are still with us here will understand that, in some cases, we are dealing with aesthetics here. The brake bridges and bottom brackets above are good examples. All the example shown are perfectly serviceable; but many of us prefer the aesthetics and additional work put into the "better" examples.
Same goes for the much-quoted lugwork examples. Much more work and attention to detail went into the "good" examples but that doesn't mean that the "bad" examples are going to fail. Those small gaps under the lugs, while ugly to many of us, make up only a tiny percentage of the brazed surface. Indeed, the two bikes shown appear to have been ridden quite a bit with no failure of the joints. This sort of flaw is indicative of shoddy workmanship and hurried assembly but seldom means that the bike is going to fall apart.
Brent
+1
The glue that holds a lugged frame together is brass or silver and you cannot see it from the outside... the best looking lugs may very conceal joints that are poorly filled while a lot of mass produced frames with plainer or less elegant lugs are well built.
Many plainer looking Japanese made frames are better built than their European counterparts.. Bianchi is a good example of this as they outsourced a good deal of production to Japan for their second tier bicycles which tend to be very well made.
The Wisconsin built Treks tend to be as good as a frame gets... they made the Italians up their game and were on par with their Japanese counterparts.
As for the Japanese... it has been said that Miyata never built a bad bicycle, their QC was exceptional.