Front mech = chain slapper

We tend to make up terms at the Atelier after a few beers...

This SLX bike is 1733 grams in a 56:
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-v...ecord-slx.html

This one is 1864 grams in 56:
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-v...ional-slx.html



Reading an awful lot of these reviews, it really seems like you can take a tubeset and make a light or heavy frame out of it, and it must come down to the lugs and how they are thinned. I've seen SP and Aelle frames that are light and Tange Champion #1 frames that are heavy. SLX built to the standard it deserves should be a light-ish frame.

British English. (Instead of French.)

I usually use mech for a rear, just because I'm too lazy to type out derailleur. Not trying to be an Anglophile exactly, tho I won't argue if accused of that.
A front is a clanger! I also like the Americanized "derailer" (Saint Sheldon approved!)

In Italian, deragliatore is used for fronts only I believe, with a rear being a cambio.

Yeah, that's from the same guys that weighed a Cinelli SLX frame size 55 at 2400 grams.

I'd take their numbers with copious amounts of salt.

Not a Nivacrom tubeset but decent quality stuff.

It's all part of my kit.

So many replies, so few pictures.
1985 Pinarello Montello SLX from the friend of the original owner,
The friend sandblasted off the four color fade and chrome and painted it green and added stickers when he got it in 1992 and redid it with DuraAce components.
Judging from old Pinarello finish quality, it had originally been raced and probably needed it. The friend had realized his costly error when I finally bought it (nobody else in town was interested).
Correct bottom bracket shell and I pulled the crank and verified spiraling in the seat and wheel stays - but none in the downtube!
When we went through an ID string a decade or so ago, but most likely guess was that they put in the downtube backwards.
Since then, I've also heard of manufacturers swapping a tube or two out of a build but keeping the tube labeling.
European Montellos were available in SL as well as SLX, but not here.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...61744e8cf5.jpg

…or possibly replaced the SLX down tube with SP. Not uncommon as frames got towards 60cm and upwards, and can account for frame weight differences wrongly attributed to the difference between SL and SLX…

Merckx frames in particular often seemed to weigh a shade more than the tubing decal would indicate, and ride more solidly. Established framebuilders producing by the hundred or thousand would buy individual tubes in bulk rather than complete tubesets, giving the flexibility for such customisation.

A few data points:
In my coterie of frames are 3 Columbus-tubed ones:
1984 Motobecane Team Champion, SL, 60 cm
1984 Guerciotti "SLX" model from Ten Speed Drive, SLX, 60 cm
These two weigh (F&F) within 90 g of each other, have very similar geometry, and 70 of that is the difference between forks (Guerciotti is heavier).
The third is an outlier -- 1983 Serotta Club Special, SLP & (maybe?) SL, 63 cm. Its fork weighs 32 g more than that of the Guerciotti, but its frame 350 g more than the Guerciotti's. Somewhat larger frame, obviously, but I have a couple other 63-ish cm double-butted frames, and this is the heaviest of them.

I’ll take SLX over the SP my Paramount came with any day.

If you put XTR on a SLX frame, you'd save hundreds of grams in letters alone. :)

It came up in the bike misnomenclature thread. I still can't forgive taking a bearing and calling it a bracket.

When is a bearing alone a bottom bracket?

"Bottom bracket" is a term we use to mean cups, spindle, and balls. That collection of parts is typically called a bearing.

Lugs were previously called brackets, so it makes sense that the thing we call the "bottom bracket shell" was the bottom bracket, since it was the bracket on the bottom. Then it morphed to what we have now.