Originally Posted by
redcolnago
It's all about weight Scooper. If you don't buy into Sl being better because it's lighter you may as well be riding a Walmart bike. The thing to do was have the lightest bike. The thing for Harley owners might be to have the loudest bike-doesn't mean it's better, but that's what they are focused on.
The density of all the steel alloys commonly used for bicycle tubing, from plain AISI 1010 carbon steel to Reynolds 953 high strength stainless is virtually the same (~7.9g/cubic centimeter), so only differences in the length, diameter, wall thickness, and butting profile of steel alloy tubes affect the weight of the tubes.
The eighties Columbus SL with its 0.8/0.5/0.8 wall thickness is comparable in weight to Ishiwata 019 with the same 0.8/0.5/0.8 wall thickness. Columbus SP with its 0.9/0.6/0.9 wall thickness would be comparable in weight to Ishiwata 022 with the same 0.9/0.6/0.9 walls.
EDIT - Oops! See T-Mar's correction in the post below. Thanks, T-Mar!
My post six years ago was rhetorical. Weight isn't everything. A 56cm SL frame might be great for a 5'8" 140 pound rider, but SL would likely be too flexy for a 62cm frame built for a 6'2" 180 pound rider, especially if the rider were powerful.
The point of my question, "How are 022 and SL light years apart?" was to suggest that 022 might be better for a bigger frame/heavier rider, while SL might be better for a smaller frame/lighter rider.
The only other difference between SL and 022 is the alloy. SL was Cyclex and 022 was 4130. Cyclex is a chromoly alloy with a slightly higher ultimate tensile strength and yield strength than 4130, but certainly not "light years apart."
