PKN10E or UO8
 

I'll get straight to the point, I've been looking for a solid beater/commuter (possibly touring) bike for a while now, something that would be fairly inexpensive and last. I couldn't tell you why I'm looking at two Peugeots in particular, but from what I've read they are good for fixing up with new parts. So here's my question, I've found a PKN10E and UO8, both from 1980 I think (I used bikeboompeugeot.com as a reference), which of the two is better for my use cases? I know that the PKN has the Reynolds 531, but I've heard it has speed wobble. I don't know much about biking (I mainly bike recreationally), but that sounds like a problem. Can it be solved, or is it actually that big of a problem? If neither are really good for my use cases what should I be looking for? I really appreciate any help, and apologize for any mistakes I may have made (first post).

-----


speed wobble can be caused by mis-dished wheel or mis-aligned frame or fork

not something inherent with model

the PKN is the better machine


-----

The PKN 10 is the better bike. It has nicer parts and a better frame (Reynolds 531 double butted main triangle and forged drop outs). That said, the UO 8 has a frame that is better suited for touring as it has a nice long wheelbase and relaxed frame angles.

Starting in 1979, the inexpensive U08/9/10 models had a completely new frame and fork, still having lugs but made from a better "103" Carbolite tubing.

The geometry was also completely reworked, with a much steeper seat tube angle, shorter chainstays and a bit slacker headtube angle.

The end result was a frameset that really worked well for more spirited riding versus the older U0-* frames.

The PKN-10 was a very nice midrange bike, much lighter than even the UO-10 model having alloy cranks and rims. It still used seamed tubing for the fork legs though.

Honestly, unless you know what you're doing look for an '80's Japanese bike. A Peugeot of that vintage isn't a good candidate for upgrading/updating due to French threading and sizing.

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/velos.html

I don't know. I had a pkn10 from 1980, and I had no problem with threading. I think the only thing that was French on it was the steerer threads and fork crown, but I could even be mistaken about that, because I didn't change out the headset. It was a fantastic bicycle. I absolutely loved applying Mafac Racer brakes on that bike on steep descents.

I'm in Dedhed's camp... unless you're nostalgic for a particular bicycle or brand, I'd suggest to you (and my friends who want to dip their toes into vintage road bicycles) to look for an 80's bicycle with a Japan or Taiwan made frame. Brand is pretty much inconsequential. Japan and Taiwan produced frames have threads and sizing that were about as universal as one could hope for, and parts are readily available, still. Read up about what makes a good touring bicycle, if you are seriously leaning that way. I'm big on "sport touring" entry level to mid level bicycles from the 80's. Otherwise, a perfect "beater" bike is just that: a bicycle that's probably got some cosmetic issues that turn other riders "off". Use the cosmetic issues to negotiate a better price. Let us know what you end up purchasing.

What is the difference between "103" carbolite tubing and the tubing used on the older UO8s/UE8s/UO9s/UO10s? I thought this was just a change in the sticker but that all of these bikes had fairly similar hi tensile steel frames.

I agree on going with Japanese for a commuter/beater than a Peugeot. Why should you care?

• I used to sell Peugeots, along-side some other brands, in the 1980's
• Commuted on a Gitane Super Corsa (WITH tubulars) for about 10 years in the early 2000's.
• Still have 2 pairs of NOS Swiss BB cups in the barn.

I like to work on bikes more than riding them. So I live with the funkiness, but for a bike that needs to be ready to go without fussing with it regularly, I have been much happier since transitioning my commuting with a mid-80's Trek. Lives under the deck. Gets oil maybe once per year, and just works regardless of me ignoring it.

I based my assumption of a lighter, more highly-processed tubing on the fact that the 103-tubed bikes no longer used any spot-welded cable stops, but switched to more-costly brazed pieces. This suggests that there was a necessity for this, that the newer tubing perhaps didn't endure their fatigue-strength tests after spot-welding.

The 103 "Carbolite" designation was the first change in labeling in perhaps decades, so I think that it's likely that Peugeot after so many years actually made some improvements to their in-house manufactured tubes. A frame-weight comparison would be the tell.

The bigger news with the new 1979 frames was their improved sportiness. The first-year 103-tube U09 model actually bore a "Super Sport" inscription on the top tube and the bike performed quite well (much more responsive to pedaling input than the older frames, I have both), especially after the rims were replaced with alloy parts (the U0-10 model came with alloy rims).

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...52e27c42f3.jpg

True. Ask the man who has owned both. :) My PKN-10 was my all-time favorite road bike, but it simply was one size too tall and long for me, so I gave it to my son.

1980 PKN-10 bottom bracket was Swiss-threaded. Well-mannered all-rounder, not whippy or shaky.

Make that forks with big ugly seams on the backs of the forks! :(
Fit and finish in general were significantly inferior to my otherwise-comparable 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia.
All that said, the Peugeot was a blast to ride and very versatile, including tire width accommodations.