Originally Posted by
bikemig
I didn't know that the carbolite tubing used on the UO 9 and later bikes was different than the hi tensile steel used on the UO 8s and 9s. I really liked the UO 9s and 10s and wish I could find one in my size.
I did think--and perhaps incorrectly--that the frame geometry was pretty much the same on the UO 8, 9, and 10s. I'm fairly certain that they all had pretty similar long wheelbases (42 inches if my memory serves me correctly) and I thought they all had relatively slack angles. Once set up, these bikes all make fine C&V touring bikes.
The tubing difference might have been more of a processing change than chemical, which allowed dimensional (thickness) changes, but peugeot as a very large manufacturer was developing their own price-point frames from scratch vs. relying on the traditional branded tubing and lug suppliers.
I know more about these bike's geometry, which was the same over the years until 1979. That year, the frame angles changed completely, a steeper seattube angle, shorter chainstays and a more-relaxed headtube angle took the place of their traditional geometry on their price-point UO-series bikes. Suddenly these bikes lent themselves more toward spirited riding.
HLE again was some sort of high-tensile steel, translated I believe to "high elastic limit".
The lugless frame construction extended well up into Peugeot's extensive mid-priced lineup, with some of these frames sporting Reynolds tubing at least up to the level of enhanced "Chromoly-M" or 501.
Surprisingly, these "tre-tubi" lugless framesets could be about as light as an earlier, lugged PX10 frame based on the weight of these two complete bikes that I have weighed!
