Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

David Kirk compares two bikes he built.

Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

David Kirk compares two bikes he built.

Old 04-15-19, 06:56 PM
  #1  
Chuckk
Groupetto Dragon-Ass
Thread Starter
 
Chuckk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lostin Austin, TX
Posts: 250

Bikes: http://mcaf.ee/hsm2z

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
David Kirk compares two bikes he built.

David Kirk compares the feel of a 1990 Coors Lite Serotta he built with a current Onesto XL
Here's hoping the Facebook link works for you:
=68.ARBLUumgjeAVs_uLoXVEs-yqJHbRm3lVCqSlt0TUUmDccLgDl9xQsE_1dnWvvkoYPCl2TiI1gjSKaPHd7WOwd9x4A7Tw6eomxpT6EyIwSJoccmd8HQKnXDxM53 bUO4eMwY6kso52JUQceHgvRY9IG6_ESdU6sl_ss7uqB6rUKPvk0PVb6dbiL7_YPWAlo_vySFR9CKQbQZQDQJcVZvPUkI9eH5WIAp D2i0JbseekvbdaasVLcBgqgrAhtS07TwRnMFrDh0WqBaRlxgMjaj_odsi0CQ6OomFc4HiamUwweUkfAr9JAPSdDoNOYjELbZ3pEF TvmWPTUJnLi_D2HTTpNVyGS8vDgUkiNWXCOi8qpiKVxpBs78h5neHY&__tn__=K-R]Kirk Frameworks Facebook

Last edited by Chuckk; 04-15-19 at 07:12 PM.
Chuckk is offline  
Old 04-15-19, 07:29 PM
  #2  
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 17,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
that's a crazy long link, but it works
unterhausen is offline  
Old 04-15-19, 11:26 PM
  #3  
omgar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
For those who don't like/don't have Facebook;

"It's hard for me to process that it's been 30 years since I walked into Serotta for my very first day of work. In many ways it feels like yesterday. Time flies as they say.

A lot has changed in those three decades but a lot is the same...or at least very similar. A few years ago I had the opportunity to buy one of the actual Coors Light Team framesets that I built for the team in 1990. There was no way I was passing it up as it happened to be the only one that's my size. I got to wondering recently how the state of the art lugged bike I built back then would compare to my current offerings. It's hard to test ride a frameset so I scoured eBay and the Paceline Forum and was able to piece together a Shimano Dura Ace 7400 kit for the build. This was the hot ticket when I built this frame and it just seemed right to test it with period components.

What follows is a purely subjective take on a top shelf lugged bike from 1990 and what I build today....both of them being built with my own two hands.

First the Serotta - this frame is lugged and it's built with Serotta's proprietary tapered (down and seat tubes are 1 3/8" at the big end and 1 1/8" at the small end) Colorado tubing. In the case of this particular bike, being so large (62 c-c by 59) I built it with an oversize 1 1/8" top tube (1" being more common at the time). The tubing in this frame was made by Columbus and it featured what passed for thin walls at the time. Most of the tubes have the thick end butts of .9 and the thinner center section .7 mm.

I'd not held one of these in my hands for a very long time before this one arrived and frankly I was shocked by how much it weighed. By today's standards it's a bit of a tank. In 1990 it certainly wasn't.

As mentioned above I built it using period 8 speed Dura Ace 7400. It's got a Cinelli bar/stem and the classic Selle Italia Turbo saddle. The wheels are built with Dura Ace cassette hubs, butted spokes and and Mavic Reflex clincher rims. I've mounted new Continental folding 23 mm tires (never ride vintage tires!).

The complete bike as shown weighs 22 lbs even without pedals. I recall that being a respectable number for such a large bike back then.

Now onto my current offering - the Onesto XL. It's a 61 by 58.5 cm. and like the Serotta it's lugged but in this case it's built with Reynolds 953 stainless tubing. The tubes are XL in size (1 3/8 down and 1 1/4" top and seat) and the steerer is 1 1/8" compared to the smaller 1" on the Serotta. The 953 material is so much stronger than the old Columbus that the tube walls can be made shockingly thin...in this case the main tubes are .55 - .35 - .55 or just a bit over 1/2 the thickness of the Serotta tubes. If you want to cut the frame weight by a ****-ton then making the tubes 1/2 the thickness is a good start. Since the tube diameter is the main contributor to stiffness the Kirk Onesto is stiffer than the Serotta while being much lighter. All of the main tubes on the Onesto are larger than the Serotta counterparts but the thin walls keep the weight down and reduce road shock in comparison. This frame is built with the optional curved Terraplane seat stays which add to the surefootedness of the bike.

The Onesto is built with 11 speed Dura Ace 9100. It has a Deda aluminum stem and Deda carbon bars. The saddle is a Fizik and the post is Fizik carbon. The wheels are by HED and they feature the 25 mm wide Ardennes rims and bladed spokes. I've mounted 30 mm Challenge Strada Bianca clinchers (measure an actual 32mm) - interesting to note that these tires measure 10 mm wider than the ones fitted to the Serotta.

This complete bike weighs 17.6 lbs without pedals. I have to admit that this surprised even me....that's a 4.4 pound difference. I'm far from a weight weenie but any way you cut it 4.4 lbs is a lot.

I was excited that the day I completed the Serotta build was warm and dry enough to take it out and test it and it was very interesting. Of course one can't compare directly the ride of one frameset against the other and that was never my aim - I wanted to see what the best bike I could build in 1990 felt like compared to what I can build today. That said......

I rode the Coors Light Serotta first. It felt well damped despite the fact that the tires are so narrow and hard. It feels a bit harsh on sharp edged bumps but not painfully so. The BB is plenty stiff. I'd like to have been better able to feel the torsional stiffness of the frameset (vital to proper steering and handling) but the vintage Cinelli quill stem and 64-42 bar combo is so flexible that at first you wonder if something is broken. The stem twists like it's made of damp cardboard and of course this colors the ride of the bike in a big way. I knew this would be the case but it's even more so than I expected it to be.

I like the steering and tip-in of the Serotta very much. It carves a turn nicely and lets go of it just as it should allowing you to adjust the line on turn exit with ease. We used good numbers back then and not-surprisingly they still work.

The control weighting is much heavier then the current Shimano offerings and it feels more like Campy than anything else today. The brakes take a firm squeeze and the shift lever action is very precise, if a bit heavy. The shifting makes a serious "CLICK" compared to the subtle modern 'click'. Not good or bad but certainly different.

The saddle (one of my favorites back then) feels fine but not great compared to my modern saddle. The shape's not quite right and it's pretty damn firm up the middle. But the big ergonomic challenge is the Cinelli bars. Of course riding on the tops is fine and the drops aren't an issue but the hoods are not pleasant. It made me remember the hours spent with my wrist cocked at that unnatural angle on the short hoods. The wrist angle and support is one thing but the low elevation of the hoods is another. Modern bar/lever combos place the hands MUCH higher and a bit further out.

Taken as a whole I really like the ride and if I were to put a modern bar on it I could enjoy it for fun rides. I'd for sure be slower, and I guess that matters to a certain extent, but it would fun to spend the day on...at least with better shaped bars!

Jumping on the Onesto directly after getting off the Serotta was fascinating. They share some DNA but there are some profound differences. The first impression is that it rolled easier, smoother and faster. The frame is stiffer and more responsive while at the same time being more compliant...and the handling is much more precise. It feels like you could put a penny on the road 100 meters away, in the middle of a turn, and pick a line that would have you run it over at 35 mph....and tell if it was heads or tails up. No doubt the stiff and precise bar/stem combo help this in a big way but the torsional stiffness of the frame's main triangle can be felt from the first corner and is very welcome.

The control weights are much lighter but even more precise. The modulation of the brakes is better which is saying something. The saddle fits me just perfectly (Fizik Antares EVO) and the bar/lever combo is much more comfortable while giving more hand placement options.

One can't overlook the wheel/tire combo. The 25 mm wide rims covered by 32 mm tires are a revelation. The roll faster, ride smoother, handle just as precisely and weigh less. It's hard to grasp that last point.

This particular Onesto won the "Best Road Bike" award at NAHBS in Salt Lake City a few years back and it's my daily ride. It gets used hard and put away wet. I love it and for the first time in a very long time I can't think of anything I'd like to change on my bike.

All this brings something to mind for me - I have often read online "I had a 1990ish Pinarello/Colnago/Ciocc...etc so I know what a steel bike rides like." I would agree that they know what an average 1990 steel bike rides like but they have no idea what a modern steel bike rides like until they've ridden one made with modern materials. Frankly my old Serotta rode better back then than did most anything else out there and even it falls far short of a modern steel bike with it's thin, light and oversize tubing. It's interesting to me that no one says "I rode a carbon bike back in 2000 and I didn't like it so there's no reason to try a modern bike like a Crumpton." Times change, materials change, and the bikes built with them change.

I'm proud of the bikes I built 3 decades ago. They were top shelf at the time and they helped set that standard. It was a big deal to me to play a part in that. That said I'm so much more proud of the rides I make now.....but there's no way I'd be able to build my current bikes without having built all those bikes, all those years ago. I stand on the shoulders of the giants that helped teach me this craft. A huge thanks to them all."


omgar is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 04:43 AM
  #4  
horatio 
Hump, what hump?
 
horatio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SC midlands
Posts: 1,194

Bikes: See signature

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Good to know someone is making new steel frames.
__________________
### 60cm Ciocc Designer '84 frameset to trade for something comparable in a 54-56 size ###

2010 AB T1X ** 2010 Cannondale SIX-5 ** 1989 Bianchi Brava ** 1988 Nishiki Olympic ** 1987 Centurion Ironman Expert(2) ** 1985 DeRosa Professional SLX ** 1982 Basso Gap ** 198? Ciocc Competition SL ** 19?? Roberts Audax ** 198? Brian Rourke ** 198? Mercian Olympic
horatio is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 05:34 AM
  #5  
jethin 
Senior Member
 
jethin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 680
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
To me this is compelling evidence in the ďhow do old bikes compare to newĒ debate. Two word answer: they donít, at least when it comes to performance and often comfort. But Iíll still be riding old steel because... well just because.

Interesting about the Cin bars/stem being a wet noodle. Iíve never noticed this. Frankly I donít understand the need to put much stress on the bars at all, even out of the saddle. But itís possible Iím just a weakling.
jethin is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 05:53 AM
  #6  
TenGrainBread 
Senior Member
 
TenGrainBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,497
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 551 Post(s)
Couple points:

-Lots of people are still making new steel bikes with 0.9/0.7/0.9 or 0.8/0.5/0.8 tubes.

-There were common options thinner than 0.9/0.7/0.9 in 1990. This Serotta was clearly built for stiffness and not feathery weight.

-Reynolds 953 is one of the most expensive and thinnest tubesets out there and not very common.

So I would say this isn't really a test of "old steel" vs. "new steel" but rather the exceptional heat-treated 17-4 stainless alloy that makes up 953 vs. a standard alloy steel tubeset that was even somewhat overbuilt for the time.

The handlebar/brake hood ergonomics I agree with Kirk as being one of the biggest if not the biggest difference in old vs. new road bikes. As to the old cockpit being "flexible as wet cardboard", I suspect there is some placebo effect going on here. Even if the old cockpit is less stiff, it is very difficult for humans to flex thick heat-treated aluminim in a perceptible way.

Last edited by TenGrainBread; 04-16-19 at 05:58 AM.
TenGrainBread is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 06:10 AM
  #7  
seypat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,569
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 790 Post(s)
It reads a little like a sales brochure for his new offerings. That's what I got out of it. Even the new saddle is way better than the old one? That turbo has stood the test of time. So popular that it is in production today.
seypat is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 07:03 AM
  #8  
Wileyone 
Senior Member
 
Wileyone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: GWN
Posts: 1,956
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1038 Post(s)
Originally Posted by seypat View Post
It reads a little like a sales brochure for his new offerings. That's what I got out of it. Even the new saddle is way better than the old one? That turbo has stood the test of time. So popular that it is in production today.
I agree.

He wouldn't sell many new Bikes if he found his older ones comparable.
Wileyone is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 07:16 AM
  #9  
joesch
Senior Member
 
joesch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hotel CA / DFW
Posts: 386

Bikes: 83 Colnago Super, 86 Masi NS, 87 50th Daccordi, 87 Guerciotti, 96 Serotta Colorado TI, 05 Colnago C50, 08 Lemond Filmore, 13 Cervelo R3

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 121 Post(s)
Carbon bars and seat post on the newer model dont help with the steel comparison.
joesch is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 07:33 AM
  #10  
jamesdak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Utah
Posts: 5,172

Bikes: G.L. Maillot Juane & Ventoux,Schwinn Circuit, Prologue,PDG Paramount,Paramount,Tempo,Jake The Snake,LeMond Zurich & Tourmelet,Giordana XL Super & Antares,Puegeot U08,Bob Jackson,Fuji S12-S,Opus III,Orbea Cabestany,Bianchi Campione,Basso Gap

Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1094 Post(s)
Originally Posted by jethin View Post


Interesting about the Cin bars/stem being a wet noodle. Iíve never noticed this. Frankly I donít understand the need to put much stress on the bars at all, even out of the saddle. But itís possible Iím just a weakling.
Yep, I'd love to have a Kirk frame and keep the idea in the back of my mind. But the only time I've ever felt flex in any of my handlebar/stems was with the CF ones on my updated Paramount. Those bars have (or at least feel like it) some give in them when in the drops. I have several bikes built with Cinelli alloy stem and bars and they feel solid to me.
jamesdak is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 11:59 AM
  #11  
Bad Lag
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: So Cal, for now
Posts: 898

Bikes: 1975 Bob Jackson - Nuovo Record, Brooks Pro, Clips & Straps

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
I don't Facebook, ever.

What is the bottom line of this? Please summarize.
Bad Lag is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 12:50 PM
  #12  
Kuromori
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 133
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Originally Posted by jethin View Post
To me this is compelling evidence in the ďhow do old bikes compare to newĒ debate. Two word answer: they donít, at least when it comes to performance and often comfort.
He has better wheels/tires on the new one, and better cockpit ergonomics as well. Even the saddle is different. Also quill stems do flex more, it's why French constructeurs made clamp on stems. How much it matters is a different issue. So new bikes, yes, new frames, maybe.
Kuromori is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 12:59 PM
  #13  
TenGrainBread 
Senior Member
 
TenGrainBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,497
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 551 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Bad Lag View Post
I don't Facebook, ever.

What is the bottom line of this? Please summarize.
Omgar reposted the text and pictures a few posts above so you can read it directly on here.
TenGrainBread is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 05:38 PM
  #14  
Wildwood 
Veteran/Pacifist/Resister
 
Wildwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 8,178

Bikes: Bikes??? Thought this was social media?!?

Mentioned: 178 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1629 Post(s)
All respect to Mr. Kirk.

If I compared his '90's Serotta with a decent '60s bike = it would be lighter, stiffer, with better wheels, faster shifters, etc, etc, etc.

Interesting info in his analysis (altho my 70s & 80s stems are far stiffer than wet cardboard) but I still cannot see a purpose to the piece unless it is to remember an old 'friend' he built or help sell his new bikes. If I thought it would make me faster and enrich my bike riding experience, I would buy a 953 stainless steel Kirk frame.
__________________
70sFollis 072/71 Bottecchia Giro d Italia/72 Zeus Competition/78 Batavus Competition/80 Mondia Super/81 AustroDaimler Olympian/82 Harding(Holdsworth) Special/84 Pinarello SuperRecord/85 EM Corsa Extra/86 DeRosa Pro/88 Falcon Race/99 Pinarello Cadore/99 Calfee TetraPro/03 Macalu Cirrus/04 Tallerico: The less ridden = '97 CoMotion tandem + city bike, mtn bike, beach cruiser
Wildwood is offline  
Old 04-16-19, 07:11 PM
  #15  
Classtime 
Senior Member
 
Classtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,396

Bikes: 69 PX-10, 81 Medici, 84 Turbo, 87 IM, 2010 Milwaukee Road, 2011 RS

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 475 Post(s)
Oversized tubes, including steerer and head tube, together with newer stiffer bars and stem feel quite different. I just put 31.8 bars on my modern OS Waterford built Milwaukee and when I pull on the bars to put my limited watts to the pedals, they all go to the tires. He should do a follow up and swap as many components as practical--ride the same tires etc. of course modern bikes are "better". How much difference is in the frame?
Classtime is online now  
Old 04-16-19, 09:12 PM
  #16  
delicious 
dork
 
delicious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: berkeley
Posts: 1,665
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Interesting read, but I'd guess that the frame and rider size is playing heavily into these impressions.
delicious is offline  
Old 04-17-19, 01:09 AM
  #17  
RiddleOfSteel
Lugged, Dura-Ace Glory
 
RiddleOfSteel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,355

Bikes: '87 Schwinn Prologue - '74 Schwinn Paramount P15 - '8X Davidson Impulse - '89 Cannondale SR800 - '88 Masi Nuova Strada - '15 Cannondale CAAD10 Disc - '81 Trek 710 - '90 Cannondale ST400

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 731 Post(s)
A pretty good read. As a fellow tall person, riding nearly the same frame (or a touch taller), a 130mm Cinelli stem etc is going to be a noodle no matter what. Naturally a 1 1/8" stem and 31.8mm bar are going to feel lightyears stiffere and better. As to the 'cocked wrist angle' on uncomfortable hoods, blame it on the 64 Series bars and anything similar (basically all classic drop bars outside of Cinelli 65 Series/Criteriums and any similar profile). I solved the wrist angle with Cinelli 65s as the bar "gets out of the way" of one's palms due to the bar curving immediately away aft of the brake lever mount. Works/feels the same for 8-speed 6400 STIs on my Land Shark.

I'm really glad his modern steel frame includes a steel fork. That's the best 1:1 comparison given all the advancements. A steel frame and a carbon fork is a different issue entirely, and I appreciate him keeping the frame and fork the same material.
RiddleOfSteel is offline  
Old 04-17-19, 06:02 AM
  #18  
jethin 
Senior Member
 
jethin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 680
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Kuromori View Post
He has better wheels/tires on the new one, and better cockpit ergonomics as well. Even the saddle is different. Also quill stems do flex more, it's why French constructeurs made clamp on stems. How much it matters is a different issue. So new bikes, yes, new frames, maybe.
Right, which is what heís comparing in the big picture ó complete ďperiod correctĒ bikes. Perhaps he should do another comparison targeting the framesets by putting modern components on the old bike.

I think itís a given that new bikes will generally outperform old bikes at any given level (itís how technology works) and that we C&V fans can be a bit biased toward the old stuff. That said, I donít plan on turning in my C&V card anytime soon.
jethin is offline  
Old 04-17-19, 06:35 AM
  #19  
Nessism
Senior Member
 
Nessism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 2,661

Bikes: Homebuilt steel

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
I'd love to read a second review where the two bikes used the same components. That would be a true frame comparison. What Dave has done is compare a vintage bike against a modern one, and while fine, there are a lot of mixed variables in play which makes judging the frames difficult. For example, the frame weight difference between the two should be about 1/2 lbs. or so, not 4.4 lbs. as Dave noted between the bikes. Comparing a bike on 30c tires against another on 23c's will drastically cloud any judgement about ride quality too. Just too many variables to separate.

Last edited by Nessism; 04-17-19 at 07:50 AM.
Nessism is offline  
Old 04-17-19, 11:47 AM
  #20  
rando_couche
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 992
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Another thing to keep in mind is that Dave evidently built the new bike for himself, and definitely built the old one for someone else. Could well be that that customer wanted a relatively substantial bike - not an uncommon thing for pro riders, especially someone of that size. Many racers are notoriously conservative about their equipment and prize reliability above all else.
rando_couche is offline  
Old 04-17-19, 12:25 PM
  #21  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 13,963

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 704 Post(s)
The bars on the Serotta look like Cinelli 64s. I always think the Cinelli 66 with its much larter bend radius would allow the brifters to sit up near the height of the handlbar clamp. That would have eased some of his positional problems.
Road Fan is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.