roguedog

Don't know much about tubing but found a bike with Ishiwata. I know that sheldon brown says this is a good quality tubing but were there varies tiers of tubing?

I'm not sure I'm sayign this right..

Like, Reynolds 531 and Columbus SLX are on some sort of "quality" scale. Does Ishiwata tubing have something similar? For instance, Ishiwata EX is awesome cuz it's light and double butted, blah blah.. but stay away from Ishiwata XX cuz it's just straight tubing.. or something like that?

BlankCrows

The search function is your friend.

The bottom thread in the list at least has some info.

Ishiwata Threads

T-Mar

Arranged by family. DB = double butted, TB = triple butted, QB = quad butted. Please note that weights vary depending on the source and year, so take them as relative versus definitive. All are CrMo except for the manganese alloy Mangy series.



015 Alpha, 1780g, DB, record attempts, 125 lb limit
017 Record Breaker, 1870g, DB, record attepts, 150 lb limit
019D/E Exactus, 1930g, QB, seamed
019 Glories Victory, 1970g, DB, road racing, 150 lb limit
022D Exactus, 2170g, QB
022 Speed Gallant, 2200g, road racing/touring, 175 lb limit
024D Exactus, 2350g, QB
024 Ultra Strrong, 2360g, DB

EX0-L, 1950g, QB, seamed
EXO-M, 2125g, QB, seamed
EXO-H, 2140g, QB, seamed

EX-F, 2150g, TB, raod racing
EX-T, 2250g, TB, road racing/touring, 200 lb limit

Mangy V, 2235g, DB, road racing/touring, 200 lb limit
Mangy X, 2420g, DB, touring, 200 lb limit
Mangy EX, 2420 TB
Mangy EXO, 2450 QB

T-Mar

FYI, also a CF016 (1565g, but it's carbon fiber main tubes, with CrMo forks and stays. Also Nicrmo (1706g), a unique steel tubeset, which I assume is nickel-chromium-molybdenum, asnd which required adhesive bonding.

BlankCrows

Excellent info as always from T-Mar.

There are a good amount of tubing inquiries. Perhaps a sticky type thread (or topic in one of the other sticky areas) gathering info for tubing types from different manufacturers can be created.

silversmith

Cool! Now I have to search the web and find one of these.

wrote4luck

Where would my Fuji fit into this? The Ishiwata decal says "Si35 triple-butted"

T-Mar

That was a 1990 era tubest. It had internal channels (SI = splines internal?) and often appeared as Feather SI35. I didn't include it because I have no data on it, other than what it says on the label. There are other Ishiwata tubests that are not included for the same reason, such as the 025 tubeset.

USAZorro

Hey T-Mar - would you venture a guess on what frameset my 1973 (or 74) Fuji Finest has? It's labeled double butted chrome molybdenum. I'd guess 22 - or possibly 19, or possibly not even Ishiwata?? You'd probably have a better idea. 56cm if that makes a difference - and it's done fine toting my 165 lb carcass around these past two years.

unworthy1

T-Mar, as always is a wealth of information...but I always thought that Fuji made their own tubing. I haven't really been paying attention, but is it a given that Ishiwata drew (some? all?) the tubes for Fuji? How about Miyata's tubing?

Bikedued

I found these pics that should help with the Miyata splined tubing.,,,,BD

Called Hardtlite I believe, yes the spelling is correct.

Grand Bois

Every Fuji I've seen has had a Valite tubing sticker. Was Valite used only on the lower end bikes? What is it? I read somewhere that it was developed for robot brazing.

T-Mar

Miyata started producing their own tubes in 1981. Even into the 1990s their catalogs state "We were, and are, the only manufacturer to draw our own tubes". So at least from a C&V perspective, Miyata appear to be the only legitimate contender for bicycle and tube manufacturer. If others existed, I'm sure there would have been some very prominent ads or even libel suits.

Personally, I always wondered about Araya tubing as they manufactured bicycles and rims. You'd think that tubing is not much of a stretch from rims. But maybe they just did forming on supplied steel and aluminum strip.

It's quite common for bicycle brands to have private label tubing manufactured for them by the tubing mills. If you've got the dollars, your supplier will do anything for you. I suppose the marketers think of it as a selling point, where they can tout the superiority of their tubeset, because the consumer doesn't know what it actually is. In some ways a known tubeset is a drawback, because the consumer can lay his hand on some hard facts to compare it to the competition.

Another reason, applicable primarily to the boom era Japanese brands, may be that the Japanese tubing, either rightly or wrongly, did not have the reputation and/or prestige of Columbus and Reynolds.

So, based on the Miyata claims and trend for private label tubing during the boom, it would appear that Fuji did not manufacture their own tubes. Early models that generic or Fuji labels could be standard offerings by Ishiwata an/or Tange, and/or custom tubesets produced to Fuji's specs by Ishiwata and/or Tange.

Actual Ishiwata labeled Fuji started appearing around 1988. By that time the Japanese tubing manufacturers had gained enough prestige to stand on their own merits against the likes of Reynolds and Columbus. At least, that's my thinking on the apparent reversal in Fuji's policy. Maybe they were trying to cut some costs too, in the wake of the yen re-evaluation.

My thinking is that most of the early Fuji are probably Ishiwata. Fuji used primarily components from the JEX trade organization which included SunTour, Dia-Compe and Sugino. Tange was a member of the rival JBM group. While I can find no evidence that Ishiwata was part of JBM or JEX, Fuji seemed to buy very little from JBM companies during this era, making Ishiwata more likely than Tange. There is also the Japabese preference for strong, long term supplier relationships. The fact that later Fuji used Ishiwata, indicates that they were probably the supplier for earlier models.

To incease your confidence, there are a couple of options. The holy grail is finding a tube manufacturer ID on something like the steering column. Sometimes, you can deduce the manufacturer by seat post diameter (USAZorro, post yours). Barring that, you can always section a frame and take measurements, but I'm reluctant to do that. However, if anybody wants to volunteer to an old Professional, Newest or Finest.....

roguedog

T-Mar... who ARE you?? You must be a living encyclopedia of bike history. How came you by this knowledge??

roguedog

mods... please delete my extra posts so i don't look like quite so much of an a$$ (really am sorry all. SBC guys coming today to hopefully resolve my lag issues)

USAZorro

T-Mar - it takes 26.6mm.

Cheers,

Z

East Hill

We told Lossy that T-Mar is at least a bike-history demi-god.

That's true .

East Hill

T-Mar

That's actually quite a small post for a butted Ishiwata tubeset. 022 and even 024 would have used a larger posts, according to the specs I have. I can come up with several scenarios:

1. Ishiwata made it custom for Fuji.
2. It's one of the heavy gauge Ishiwata tubesets (like 025), for which I don't have specs.
3. The slot is pinched and the post is actually smaller than the correct size.
4. It's a mixed tubeset with a plain gauge seat tube.
5. The seat tube was inserted, upside down.
6. It's a Tange tubeset. Tange tubesets typically use 26.6-26.8mm posts.

Next time you overhaul the headset, have a good look at the steerer for an identifying mark.

VaLite was reportedly a vanadium steel alloy. It was stronger than hi-tensile but not as strong as chromium molybdenum. It is commonly found on upper entry level and lower mid-range Fuji from the early 1980s. In order to control costs, lower models would often employ Valite main tubes with hi-tensile stays and/or forks, while the better models would often have VaLite forks and/or stays paired with a CrMo main triangle. Forum member Beaverstuff has reported VaLite frame with Ishiwata steerer, so these tubesets appear to have been made by Ishiwata for Fuji.

The early 1980s timeframe and tensile strength values put it in the same era and league as the manganese alloy tubesets such as Columbus Aelle, Miyata Mangalight and Tange Mangaloy. These tubests were more tolerant of brazing parameters and therefore permitted a more automated and therefore less expensive, production process. In order to be competitive, Valite would likely have had similar capability.


Suffice it say that I have been involved in the sport and industry for a very long time and that I throw out very little of what I have collected. I am somewhat reluctant to give out more details. You know that old saying. "If I told you more, I'd have to kill you..." Well, I wouldn't kill you, but it might be the end of T-Mar as a forum member, as it would probably increase my e-mails and PM to the point where they would occupy most of my available time. Currently they consume about 1/3 of my BF time. If you really want to know the details, I'll tell, you, but you wouldn't want to be repsonsible for my BF disappearance, would you?

reverborama

Here's a chart from an article about tubing in the July '82 issue of Bicycling:

www.salt2salt.com/scans/TubingChart.JPG

I have a couple more tidbits that I will scan in the next couple of days related to VaLite tubing.

T-Mar

Those weights for the Magny tubesets do not pass my sanity check. The density of steel does not change dramatically for different alloys, yet these sets weigh substantially more than anything else, even more than Tange's hi-tensile sets, which have thicker tubes!

HillRider

Is it certain that the tubes are all the same length among the various tube sets? If the Mangy tube sets came with longer tubes (say to allow building larger frames) then the set would weigh more even if the wall dimensions were the same as another set that had a lower published weight.

T-Mar

Sure, tube length will play a part, but they would have to be very long for that weight. According to the Bicycling chart, Magny X has the same wall thickness as 022, but the weight is 3190g versus 2185g. That's almost a 50% increase in weight! So if 022 came in lengths that allowed you to build a 25" frame, a Magny X set of that weight would be for about a 36" frame! I don't see too many of those around. Even if you assume factors such as longer butts and tube lengths, those figures are just too high. I suspect the 3 should be a 2. Thus Magny X would become 2190g, which is close to the 2185g of 022.

Kaptain Amerika

I'm looking at late '70s/early '80s Treks and wondering if the Magny X is straight gauge or DB in the forks and stays. Not sure whether to insist on a full 531 steel frame or if the Ishiwata is OK. THANKS so much for any help; I know this thread is fairly ancient.

Bikedued

Not exactly what you're looking for as an answer, but I love my 022 Trek 510. It rides and handles every bit as good as any 531 bike I've ever owned. I know it's blasphemy, but it actually rides nicer than a few of the 531 bikes I've owned..,,,,BD

Scooper

The stays and fork blades are straight gauge (stays are 0.8mm and fork blades are 1.0mm).