![]() |
Columbus Aelle light?
Hi!
I've got a frame set with a Columbus Aelle sticker. The bike looks better than that. It's a F.Moser with a Campa/Gipiemme mix total weight 10,1kg including pedals. Not too bad. The frame looks nice, too, with lug cut outs/ FM BB cut out and fully chromed under the paint. But then disappointing, the Aelle sticker! I've taken it apart and put the frame on the scale: 2,155g. And that is aboyut 200g too light for Aelle! What is going on here? Many thanks for every idea. Cheers, guidogad |
... seat tuber 27,0mm; fork at 720g rather light,too.
Is it possible that the frame is butted? Usually the plain gauge frames are around 2,400g. Can't seem to fit together. Cheers, |
|
Like this one? It's Aelle.
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_GbbyvLMLh7Q/R9...0/P3161711.JPG http://lh3.ggpht.com/_GbbyvLMLh7Q/R9...0/P3161712.JPG |
Beautiful!
Yes, a little like that one. I reckon mine is older, though (and dirty). It has mostly Gipiemme Sprint parts which don't seem to have a date code. The best guess is a Capa Nuove Gran Sport rear derailleur. I think they were late 70s? |
Originally Posted by guidogad
(Post 8083417)
Beautiful!
Yes, a little like that one. I reckon mine is older, though (and dirty). It has mostly Gipiemme Sprint parts which don't seem to have a date code. The best guess is a Capa Nuove Gran Sport rear derailleur. I think they were late 70s? More pics here: http://picasaweb.google.com/A2UsedBikes/FMoser# |
Is your Moser small? Seems light for Aelle, but too heavy for SL?
OTOH, being equipped with Gipiemme and Gran Sport rather than full Record would seem consistent with a reduced cost but high quality bike. |
The frame was a decent frame and not a bad rider. There is nothing 'wrong' with Aelle.
|
Not small: 57cc. Yes, too light for Aelle; too heavy for SL. Nothing comes close to 2155g on the Columbus tubing charts, really...
|
Plus I'd think need to allow at least 250 g to account for dropouts, lugs, and the fork crown.
|
|
The 57cm Fiorelli Milano-Sanremo I had was Aelle, it weighed just under 22 lb.s with pedals and some heavier components. The frame had very delicate looking seat stays and nice cut-out lugs which may have saved a few grams. The bike rode nice, a little less "lively" than my current SL frame.
http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...iorelli012.jpg |
Originally Posted by Old Fat Guy
(Post 8083618)
|
Originally Posted by bigbossman
(Post 8083674)
Interesting, indeed. I might build up my Ciocc Aelle-tubed frame, after all. :)
It seems that even an 'expert' can't tell the difference between an entry level tube set and the top of the line, when all built by the same builder to the same specs. |
Thank you OFG for the excellent information. I'll feel a little less guilty riding around on my oldest son's 1988 Montagner. It is made from Oria 0.9 which I always thought of as a lower quality steel compared to the higher grades in my steel bikes. The bike's geometry makes for a quick reacting, hands-on ride. I even enjoy using the older Suntour components. They shift beautifully and are easy to maintain.
|
Originally Posted by Old Fat Guy
(Post 8083758)
Yep,
It seems that even an 'expert' can't tell the difference between an entry level tube set and the top of the line, when all built by the same builder to the same specs. |
Originally Posted by Old Fat Guy
(Post 8083618)
Anybody have a pdf of that? |
Originally Posted by Road Fan
(Post 8084112)
Anybody have a pdf of that?
|
Hi Road Fan,
Double click on the pages and save them, or just bookmark the site. You two can have hundreds of bookmarks that you may never look at. Just like me!:) |
Originally Posted by bigbossman
(Post 8084039)
Conversely, I know that I love the way that my Palo Alto rides. I think it is SL, but really don't know for sure.
|
Originally Posted by Old Fat Guy
(Post 8084298)
BBM, It would seem that the ride characteristics are due more to the geometry, than the type of tubing. The Palo Alto is fairly aggressive, a nimbler bike, so to speak.
I let the quality of the frame influence how I feel about the handling, ride, etc. I'm really not smart enough to know what to think about, and my butt has no skill at discerning quality. I'm just another butt on a saddle. |
Back in the 80's one of the bike magazines did a blind test of frames of different levels of quality just to see what had the best ride. I forget the details of the test. The team of experts almost all picked the Aelle frame over all others. I wish i could find the article. Aelle is not the lightest but it an't bad!
|
Originally Posted by embankmentlb
(Post 8084711)
Back in the 80's one of the bike magazines did a blind test of frames of different levels of quality just to see what had the best ride. I forget the details of the test. The team of experts almost all picked the Aelle frame over all others. I wish i could find the article. Aelle is not the lightest but it an't bad!
Read the thread! For the lazy: http://www.habcycles.com/m7.html |
Originally Posted by gomango
(Post 8084287)
Hi Road Fan,
Double click on the pages and save them, or just bookmark the site. You two can have hundreds of bookmarks that you may never look at. Just like me!:) Road Fan |
Originally Posted by Old Fat Guy
(Post 8084791)
You may want to read the above post that discussed this same article.
Read the thread! For the lazy: http://www.habcycles.com/m7.html Read it a while back - first they loved the Mondonico. Aelle frame had the best handling, probably due to greater wall thickness and hence stiffness. Presumably the potential differences in brazing quality did not matter, or were nonexistent. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:54 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.