One thing I am suspicious of in that test is how they tested the joints. Bikes operate as a system, and tube deflection is kept to a minimum because the parts are often triangulated. It's tempting when testing joints to test them unsupported, as t-junctions, different failure rates in that format are certainly noteworthy for certain applications, but not necessarily all that meaningful for frames themselves. Without he original article, hard to say what any of it means. Does make one wonder why nothing more quoteworthy has emerged on the subject in 25 years. We have new welding machines, tubes, fillers, etc...

The major flaw in the test is that there is no attempt to deal with the weight issue, at least not in what is reproduced in the link. Sure they accept that lugs are heavier by a few ounces on a bicycle basis, on a joint basis that is massive. The joint in tig is a little strip a few 1/16ths wide that runs around the tube junction. The lug (or brazed joint) isn't a few ounces more on maybe a 6 pound frame, it's a few ounces more vs. something that ways not an ounce at all. If we used as much structure in our welds as is used in lugs the whole scenario would change. Sure gussets are not appreciated in the bike world, or roadie world, but that is one option that is being ignored here. Another option might be much more enhanced butting in TIG tubes, though that does not seem necessary, it would probably win a few tests, though.