Columbus SL or Matrix?
 

I currently have a Ciöcc with an SL frame and 105 components. While I really like how it rides, I have some reservations. For one thing, I can't shake the feeling that I may be a bit too heavy for the frame. When I stand on the pedals, I tend to not apply full on, 'sprint' power, because I feel like I should be taking it easy on the frame. Another thing is that in order to run the rear wheel the bike came with, it means spreading the rear triangle a few millimeters. I know a steel frame can take it and it's not supposed to be a big deal, but it still bothers me.

The second part of my "dilemma" is that there is a Bertoni Nuovo Italia with a Columbus Matrix frame. It has full Campy Veloce components and Zonda wheels. I know Matrix is about 265 grams heavier than SL for a 56cm frame. My question is, should I sell the SL Ciöcc to buy the Matrix Bertoni? Am I putting too much emphasis on the tubing and not enough on the components?

I think it's all in your head. I don't know what you weigh but lots of big guys ride SL frames without a lot of complaints. Are you afraid of breaking the frame? or just getting too much flex?

I don't really understand your comment about needing to spread the frame to put the rear wheel in? Is the 105 kit 8 or higher speed and the frame built for 6/8 speed wheels? I suspect the Bertoni would have the same issue unless someone cold set the frame for the wider 9spd wheelset. The Matrix Corsa Mondiale model came with Shimano 600EX SiS which I'm pretty sure was 6spd.

https://scontent-ord5-2.xx.fbcdn.net...og&oe=6854C49F

both are perfectly fine bikes and I bet the ride quality will be so similar it may come down to what color you like (and all components could be swapped so those aren't the important factors)
Personally I'm partial to Ciöcc (owner of 2) and have only built a Bertoni for a friend and his was way too tall for me to do more than a quick test ride...but it was a very well-made frame and impressive quality.
All that said the SL tubing is more premium having cost a bit more for the builder than Matrix (now called Cromor) and although slightly heavier I doubt Cromor tubing has any more physical strength than SL.

I think you may just have to flip a coin

FWIW, Columbus originally recommended a maximum 180-lb rider weight for SL tubing. For many years I mistakenly thought that meant that the frame was too fragile and would eventually break under heavier riders. But all they meant was that it might be a bit too flexible for tall and strong sprinting specialists.

If I were worried about sprinting and climbing stiffness, I wouldn't bother with another steel bike and would instead look around for a USA-built Cannondale 2.8 frame or similar (as Mario Cippolini famously said to a moto cameraman in the middle of a Tour stage, "Cannondale! Is best bike!).

And I'd keep the Ciocc, if only because that's a more prestigious brand than Bertoni, which was a private-label brand built in Italy under contract to Ben Lawee (who also created the Italvega and Univega brands). You might not always prefer a stiffer bike, after all.

For the trivia buffs: the Bertoni that Ben Lawee commissioned and imported are said to have been made by Torpedo builder Torresini in Padua

The rear wheel has a 130mm hub with a 10 speed cassette. The dropout spacing is 126mm; hence, spreading the triangle a bit. I get that Ciöcc is a more prestigious brand and that SL is premium tubing. I just think I need a slightly beefier frame, and the all Campy components on the Bertoni are a huge plus. I bought a 1981 Motobecane Le Champion from the Bertoni seller two years ago, and he did an exquisite job restoring it.

Do you have a Columbus source for this recommendation or has it been passed along by word-of-mouth from unknown origins?

I’ve never heard it, despite working for a small Columbus importer in the 1980s/90s, which certainly doesn't rule it out, but I paid attention to this stuff…

Only the most discerning riders would be able to tell any difference between two otherwise identical frames made from Matrix or SL. The default wall thicknesses of a Matrix tubeset are the same as an SL tubeset; it's just that the Matrix will be seamed and then drawn. The geometry of the frame will be much more of a difference.

Ride what works for you. I'm 6'4" and 200# and wouldn't hesitate to ride a bike with SL tubing. I like Reynolds 531, which is a little lighter and flexier. I also wouldn't be worried about spreading the rear triangle.

Looked around a while ago for details on who built the Bertoni bikes, and at least one source claimed that they were built by Daccordi.

I saw the weight recommendations on a chart that was hosted on a U.S. website many years ago that subsequently disappeared. At least, I haven't been able to find it again. Frustrating.

But having worked for the importer, you must know of the recommendations by Columbus regarding the suitability of their tube sets for various applications, e.g., KL tubing being best suited to "record attempts."

My guess is that someone in marketing at Columbus pointed out that weight limits might be bad for business. Especially in the American market, which was full of big and tall potential purchasers who might be put off by such limits. Better to recommend best practices and leave it at that.

I was under the impression the '86/87 frames, at least some, were built by Bianchi

I believe there were two "runs" of Bertoni bikes one as full bikes in '86/87 and another in I think '92 for the '93 model year as frames only (i don't recall if kits were offered. The earlier bikes I was under the impression were or maybe just some were built by Bianchi. I believe the later run was Daccordi



https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8238c0a74d.jpg
Distinctive Daccordi seatlug
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8ec9d47a93.jpg

My understanding is that Matrix/Cromor used the same metal alloy as SL, but was seamed. This apparently was a bit cheaper to manufacture and did not result in any loss of strength. I had an Olmo with Matrix, I liked it and only sold it because it was too small. I would think frame geometry and components would make more of a difference in feel than the tubing.

Gorgeous bike!

Didn't know that, about the two Bertoni production runs. That said, Google says that some people have said that at least some of the Bertonies were built by Bianchi but that that claim was just a rumor.

Keep the Ciocc. If you had to spread the stats it’s a classic era frame. Upgrade if and when you want over time.

Matrix is Cromor which is also great tubing, but as stated above, a different manufacturing process that is considered “lesser” by some (not me).

I've only had one Bertoni. It was all Campy, but too small for me.
Eventually I stripped the bike and the inside of the BB freaked me out with all sorts of pointy barracuda teeth on the inside.
I hadn't ever seen pinned construction before!
With research I found that some were built by an Italian specialty builder.
That was 30 years ago, the frame was sold and I don't recall who the builder was.....

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...046ef0043e.jpg

Sl

Cheers thanks. Yes, Columbus made various recommendations as to usage for different tubesets but I couldn’t recall anything from the factory that listed specific rider weights.

Without claiming to be able to discern the difference, there is a difference - Columbus catalogues of the 1980s listed Matrix at 2190gms and SL at 1925gms, approaching 15% heavier. There were also variations in thickness for at least some of the tubes.

You should always consider option C, a different bike :)

Depends what type of riding you do.

I'm currently 190lbs and have a SL bike. For all day comfort at steady pace its a great ride, it's still the only bike I've ridden a double century in a day on.

But I tend to have a more hard riding style, city based with lots of hard start/stop accelations and I love bombing fast down hills with fast sweeping turns and for this the SL is a bit too noodly for my liking. My Max and SLX/Max mix frames are better at that type of riding for my weight.

I've got a chromor frame too and find it defintely stiffer but not necessaily in a nice way, harsher ride i feel and I wouldn't chose it for longer rides over SL, SLX, SPX, Max, EL-OS etc

And it sounds like you are already limiting yourself for fear you will rip the bike apart. I doubt you will but if you're not confident in it you'll forever be over cautious.

I suggest you try and test ride some other frames and materials, borrow some mates' bikes and give them a good go at the type of riding you do, and compare with your SL and if for you the change in ride and confidence is worth the outlay, then go for it.

I still predict option C to be the winner:)

Well, I'm not the lightest guy- probably 235 lbs. Before buying the SL Ciöcc, I had read that Columbus didn't recommend it for riders heavier than 180 lbs or so but I must confess I disregarded it. I've got four other steel frames, two are 531 and two are 853, and I've never felt like I had to take it easy on them when standing on the pedals. Another thing is, the Bertoni is a better build because of the all Campy components, and because I know the guy who built it and have the utmost confidence in his work and in the frames he chooses to rebuild. In other words- if the Bertoni has any rust at all, it will be only very superficial.

Another vote for SL. I've ridden SL consistently for more than 3 decades at about 220 lbs or more with no issues.

Matrix/Cromor is kinda like the wall thicknesses of an SL tubeset with an SP downtube and chainstays, which was a popular way to make an "SL" bike stiffer. And it mimics what Bianchi tended to do with their special Columbus mixes. You can see the exact specs here:
https://www.equusbicycle.com/bike/co...umbuschart.htm

Matrix is standard chromoly rather than the nicer Cyclex alloy, and it is seamed tubing other than seamless. Except for some particular tubes models (like one True Temper made in the '80s), seamed tubing doesn't cause any problems and chromoly lasts just as long as Cyclex in these wall thicknesses, so Matrix isn't as nice a tube as SL/SP, but not in a real important way.

Ciocc is a very high quality brand that has a real following. Bertoni is a value brand. Both were made by Italians. None of which can tell you anything about the actual quality of the frames, but the Bertoni is less likely to have hand thinned lugs - for instance. Both should be competently brazed, designed and painted. But the comparison is more like the difference between '80s Serotta and Trek steel frames.


Not knowing what size, which 105 components you have, how much you weigh or anything else, it is hard to say whether a Veloce/Matrix bike is an improvement over an SL 105 bike. But I would stop riding the Ciocc with kit gloves and really see what it can do. SL is thicker walled and stiffer than Tange Champion #1 or Reynolds 531c, so you don't exactly have a noodly frame with SL.


https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-v...e-peugeot.html

...and my source said Bianchi built them (IIRC).

that frame definitely has more of a "Daccordi" look especially with the "plug-in" seatlug. I had long heard rumors of a Bianchi connection with (earlier) Bertoni but I think read here in some C&V threads that Lawee just used his old trusted supplier that had made so many "Italvegas" for him in earlier years which was Torresini/Torpedo.

But I'm only repeating hearsay so take all with a grain of salt (malt vinegar, too, but that's optional)

Here's the Wikipedia entry for Univega. It includes a long paragraph on Bertoni about midway down the page, written by someone who seems pretty confident about the brand's history. From that paragraph:

"Bertoni was a brand created by Ben Lawee circa-1980. The frames were manufactured in Italy by Daccordi, sometimes mistakenly assigned to Bianchi, which had no connection to the Bertoni brand other than Ben Lawee's Bianchi imports during the 1960s."

By the way, several posts in this thread reference Torpedo bikes. That's probably an autocorrect error. I doubt that the cheap German bikes, built in Frankfurt, are meant.