Originally Posted by CharlesC

In reference to Reynolds vs Columbus: "Steel is steel". Maybe yes, maybe no. Back in the day there were many heated debates about the relative merits of the two types of tubing. Both were available, then and now, in various wall thicknesses with corresponding varing ride qualities. My recollection is that racing frame makers tended to chose Columbus tubing with the possible unfounded idea that it was stiffer. I was and am a touring rider and chose Reynolds tubing for my frame sets in wall thicknesses that were appropriate for that use. The Jackson and Roberts frames I rode were made to exact custom design criteria set by the buyers. I don't think I ever rode a standard stock bike from either maker. Ane Deanster04 is right; A Cinelli needs to be seen in the flesh and rode to appreciate these great bikes. They were often heavier than contenporary brands but had a feeling of quality that Colnago, Roberts, Bob Jackson, Claud Butler and the rest of the breed didn't have, in my sorta biased opinion. All were excellent bikes, but Cinelli set the standard.
That said, I have one set each of Columbus SL and SP tubing that I'm dying to make a couple of frames from. I also have a fairly large pile of Reynolds 531 tubing sets, Pragnet lugs of various types, Gargette BB shells, etc. that I need to convert to frames. I'm also thinking about making a superlite all rigid mountain bike frame for us old duffers who don't jump off tall buildings...........