Serious question. There are many brands, but I'm just using colnago as an example.

There's a wine store by my apartment that puts little cards next to each bottle of wine that describe what the taste is like. Some might consider it cheating, but it helps helps me develop a palate - tell me to look for subtle flavors of X now, and maybe next time i can find it on my own.

So, as I mentioned in a previous thread, I have caught this bug and i'm doing research and monitoring the sites for italian steel, high-end columbus tubing, probably 90s since i would prefer 130mm rear spacing. I have only owned stiff aluminum and carbon fiber bikes in recent memory.

Maybe some day it would be nice to invest in new custom steel - Bishop perhaps - but I think to fully appreciate something like that, I should have more experience with the material. Unfortunately, when buying used/vintage, I will probably have to buy the first frameset based solely what i have read about it.

So my question is - How would you compare the ride of a current carbon or aluminum racing frame to a 90s lugged italian steel colnago? What would you write on the little card by the frameset?

I cannot answer your question (never been on an AL or CF), but would like to point out that those wine cards are pure BS! Ask a dozen experts to describe a wine and you will get a dozen different answers.

Intelligent, insistent, not too fruity, with a nice ambience.

It is like riding a bike that is almost as a good as a Bianchi

Its like biting into a York.

The problem is, everybody's "seat of the pants" is different, so their descriptions will vary. Myself, I'm simply not articulate enough to convey the exact feel except to say mine tracks dead-straight at stupid-low speeds and inspires my complete confidence any time the road turns

DD

Then how do you know you prefer old steel?

Nah, not quite. Rather, they will agree on some impressions and disagree on other - and then, of course, there are matters of taste. But real wine experts will to some extent be able to pick up the same impressions. Not unlike what you'll see with expertise in just about any field that is not hard and fast science.

My bike? A strong European bouquet, with freddish undertones. (I think the triple accounts for the latter)

Because anyone should be able to tell the difference between a decent steel frame and a oversized alloy frame and a carbon monoque.

Its been years..But I had a 82 Colnogo. It was very very tight handling. I think the head and seat tube were about 74 degrees. Very short wheel base and my toe clip back then clipped the front wheel when I turned. It was very responsive but not stiff enough for my then 190lb body mashing on the pedals. I prefered a stiffer frame back then and went to a Miyata. Heavier but stiffer. Nice bike overall. Now I ride a Specialized Roubaix

The only Colnago I've tried was too big for me, so my experience with that brand isn't usefull. However, it will share some characteristics with other high-end steel frames in comparison with aluminium or carbon frames. It is less rigid, meaning that for sprints, climbs and descends, it will act differently. For sprints and climbs, you will have to use more power to keep a certain speed, and for descends you will have to be more carefull, in particular in curves. On the other hand, the fact that it's more "sloppy" will (probably) mean that it's less tiring to ride for longer stretches.

How a high-end Colnago will differ from a ditto Bianchi or Masi or ... I can't say. Depending on vintage, there will of course be minor (but real and noticable) differences in geometry and thus handling.

I'm not necessarily asking for a comparison between brands of vintage steel...more like a cheat sheet on appreciating a quality steel ride for when I start.

like a friend having you listen to a song and saying "listen to what the bass does here..."

Well, I can tell you that with older road bikes like the 80's Banani or Concorde I sold, as well as with my 70's Crescent Pepita, there's a noticeable "give" when I really mash. The whole bike is being pulled/pushed "out of shape". Compared to modern bikes, they're definitely "rubber" like.

Doesn't matter to me, though, as I don't race. I just love biking (and old, usefull and pretty stuff).

Colnago was one of the early well known adopters of a geometry that was more upright. Sweeping generalizations are problematic, but Ernesto went with a steeper head angle by a touch and less fork rake than his contemporaries at the time, say Cinelli, Pogliaghi, Gios, DeRosa and Masi. While still keeping a decent amount of bottom bracket drop, in the 75 mm range.
Grandis might have been in sync with what Colango was doing, but was less well known being a much smaller builder.
Pinarello may or may not, I was not aware of his bikes until 1977, and was not in a position to measure, and by 1977 changes by others were well underway.

One has to be careful though, from say 1971 to 1985 there was a march to steeper, tighter, closer coupled Italian race frames.

If I may paraphrase,

Let me show you how this is done. First thing, hold the frame up and examine the chrome against the light. You're looking for color and clarity. Just, get a sense of it. OK? Uhh, thick? Thin? Smooth? Wavey? OK? Alright. Now, tip it. What you're doing here is checking for lug shape as it thins out towards the ends. Uhh, that's gonna tell you how old it is, among other things. It's usually more important with Italians. OK? Now, stick your nose in it. Don't be shy, really get your nose in there. Mmm... a little oil... maybe some white grease...

... and, oh, there's just like the faintest soupçon of like olive and just a flutter of a, like a, nutty Mozzarella cheese...

so, might a 90-00s colnago be stiffer?
right now I'm on hellishly stiff frames and bare carbon saddles, which is fine and I can ride all day on...but I would be happy to have another option.

I saw a recent master x light for sale for 1800 new....

Newer frames are gonna be stiffer because of better alloys and production techniques. You need to ride a vintage bike for a while and get a feel for it, it's really difficult to quantify what a frame feels like. Compared to my modern alu bike with a carbon fork, I would say that my colnago has much better ride quality and feel. It's more fun to ride IMO but I only weigh like 155lbs so flex isn't as much of as an issue for me as it is for others. It's sort of like comparing a vintage 911 to a new 3 series. The 911 is worse from pretty much all objective standards yet at the same time that's what makes it desirable.

Really?

Master framesets go for $2,700 new at two shops in town.

Buy the Master Extra Light frameset at that price.

I don't drink alcohol, so I don't know wines, but I imagine each winery formulates numerous wines for various situations and tastes. Bicycle manufacturers are much the same with subtle differences in the rides of the models depending on tubesets, geometries, etc. As such, there could be no one generic Colnago card, with the possible exception of something like "Prestige bicycles for the masses".

I don't recall ever saying that I did - hence my response, "I cannot answer your question...". I do own and ride old steel and I like it just fine. If my bike was AL or CF I would probably say the same.

hagen - I read this article just a few days ago which prompted my response, check it out if you are interested in wine ratings. Full disclosure - I don't drink wine, but am fascinated by people who claim to be experts. I'm a big Socrates fan.

After the first bottle, or 1000 miles, it doesn't matter.

If it rides well, I'll ride it to excess.
If it tastes good, I'll drink it to excess.

The main thing I experience is the extra couple pounds when lifting the bike or carrying it up a flight of stairs. Other than that there are differences in the handling of my bikes, but those are more associated with the design geometry rather than the frame material.

I don't have Nearly as much experience as many of those here, but here's my take, as a newbie. Maybe it'll be similar to what you'd notice also being a newbie to old steel. When I first got a couple of actual decent quality steel frames(No really high end, but decently respectable. Light version 531 and higher end Miyata) I noticed they were what I would describe as smoother riding and slightly flexier(148lbs) than a new AL race bike. I haven't ridden any carbon other than around a parking lot. The AL is like a harsher suspension sports car that I would ride on a really short ride just to have fun and get a thrill. It's slightly harsh and vibratey, but stiff and slightly faster. The older steel is smooth riding and has more character. Keep in mind though that high end steel is still going to be fast and awesome. I'm not saying a new Ferrari vs. a Cadillac. They're both race bikes. It's just that it's slightly noticeable once you've spent some time on numerous bikes. I personally am not racing competitively, so I'll take the nice steel every time. You notice the difference more the longer you're on the bike. Under 10mi riding fast and just for fun, sure I'd ride an AL bike, but more than that and I'd just rather have nice steel.
Ha! I feel like we could hang out. I drive a BMW E30(90 325i) with H&R, Bilstein sports, lots of other new suspension goodies, and 4.10 diff. Sure, I could have bought a faster "better driving" car for the money I decided to put into this, but the E30 is more Fun. I'd love to add a vintage Porche or a Miata to to my garage someday.

Are you describing yourself, RT?