Seat post size, an indication of the tubes used?
#1
Merckx wannabe
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 254
Bikes: Rampon EL/OS 5700 groupset
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Seat post size, an indication of the tubes used?
I've been searching the forums and couldn't find a definite answer, though there are some indications that the seat post size is usually linked with specific types of tubes.
Does this thing makes any sense?
27.2mm seat post is usually related to Reynolds 531?
Are there any "rules", "guidelines" or just plain myths regarding this topic?
Does this thing makes any sense?
27.2mm seat post is usually related to Reynolds 531?
Are there any "rules", "guidelines" or just plain myths regarding this topic?
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,768
Bikes: Cinelli, Paramount, Raleigh, Carlton, Zeus, Gemniani, Frejus, Legnano, Pinarello, Falcon
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
I can't think of any rules. In the olden days, Reynolds tubing took a lot of different seatpost sizes. At some point 27.2 kinda became a standard, but I've had 27.2, 27, 26.8 and 26.4, 26.2, 26 on French bikes. 26.8 is not uncommon on older English 531 frames.
#3
Decrepit Member
I've been searching the forums and couldn't find a definite answer, though there are some indications that the seat post size is usually linked with specific types of tubes.
Does this thing makes any sense?
27.2mm seat post is usually related to Reynolds 531?
Are there any "rules", "guidelines" or just plain myths regarding this topic?
Does this thing makes any sense?
27.2mm seat post is usually related to Reynolds 531?
Are there any "rules", "guidelines" or just plain myths regarding this topic?
Originally Posted by Lennard Zinn
Seat-post size, on the other hand, often is dictated by the tubing manufacturer. The outside diameter of the seat tube will often be an English size, say 1.375″, and the I.D. will be dictated by the wall thickness, which the frame manufacturer selects as being appropriate for that particular rider and frame size. That’s why there are so many seat-post sizes – lots of framebuilders are trying to find the best balance between stiffness, strength and weight, while they are stuck with the English-size O.D. to make sure that a front derailleur clamp will fit on, and front derailleur clamps only come in 1-3/8″ (34.9mm, a.k.a. 35mm), 1-1/4″ (31.75mm, a.k.a 32mm), and 1-1/8″ (28.6mm).
27.2mm became the standard seat-post size because most high-end road frames in the 1970s and 1980s were lugged and were almost universally made out of Columbus SL or SLX or Reynolds 531. These seat tubes were 1-1/8” in diameter, or 28.6mm. The single-butted seat tube was 0.9mm thick at the bottom and 0.6mm thick at the top. Well, 2×0.6mm = 1.2mm, which, when subtracted from 28.6mm, yields an I.D. of 27.4mm. However, the tolerance on the wall thickness and roundness of the seat tube made it so that you rarely could fit a 27.4mm post inside, even before brazing. And then, the seat tube always got distorted during brazing, making it even less possible to fit a 27.4mm in there, but a 27.2mm fit nicely. The same goes for why a 27.0mm seat,post was often used on the bigger sizes, which were made out of Columbus SP or SPX, whose seat tubes had 1.0 X 0.7mm wall thicknesses. Because of tolerances, the predicted 27.2mm post (28.6 – 2×0.7 = 27.2mm) never fit, but a 27.0mm fit nicely.
Lennard
27.2mm became the standard seat-post size because most high-end road frames in the 1970s and 1980s were lugged and were almost universally made out of Columbus SL or SLX or Reynolds 531. These seat tubes were 1-1/8” in diameter, or 28.6mm. The single-butted seat tube was 0.9mm thick at the bottom and 0.6mm thick at the top. Well, 2×0.6mm = 1.2mm, which, when subtracted from 28.6mm, yields an I.D. of 27.4mm. However, the tolerance on the wall thickness and roundness of the seat tube made it so that you rarely could fit a 27.4mm post inside, even before brazing. And then, the seat tube always got distorted during brazing, making it even less possible to fit a 27.4mm in there, but a 27.2mm fit nicely. The same goes for why a 27.0mm seat,post was often used on the bigger sizes, which were made out of Columbus SP or SPX, whose seat tubes had 1.0 X 0.7mm wall thicknesses. Because of tolerances, the predicted 27.2mm post (28.6 – 2×0.7 = 27.2mm) never fit, but a 27.0mm fit nicely.
Lennard
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bastrop Texas
Posts: 4,464
Bikes: Univega, Peu P6, Peu PR-10, Ted Williams, Peu UO-8, Peu UO-18 Mixte, Peu Dolomites
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 954 Post(s)
Liked 1,619 Times
in
1,039 Posts
Oddly enough some have seen two identical bikes from the same year and manufacturer (mostly French) with different seat post sizes - Go Figure???
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 378
Bikes: 1951 Armand Carlsen, 1969 DBS Deluxe, 1949 Diamant, 1978 DBS Winner Tandem, 1955 Herkules... to infinity and beyond!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
Then there's the whole distinction between metric and imperial tubing sizes. The seat tube on my Peugeots (Reynolds 531SL) have an outer diameter of 28.0mm, whereas the same tubeset would be 28.6 when delivered to imperial specification. One takes a 26.4 seatpost, the other a 26.2.
I believe Reynolds themselves once told a forum member here that the framebuilders reamed the seattubes themselves in a variety of sizes.
I believe Reynolds themselves once told a forum member here that the framebuilders reamed the seattubes themselves in a variety of sizes.
#6
Decrepit Member
Framebuilders ream the seat tube after brazing the seat cluster as the heat from brazing often distorts the seat tube. The reaming is done to ensure the seat tube is round and the distortion caused by the seat cluster brazing heat doesn't obstruct the correct diameter seat post from sliding into the seat tube.
#7
multimodal commuter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NJ, NYC, LI
Posts: 19,808
Bikes: 1940s Fothergill, 1959 Allegro Special, 1963? Claud Butler Olympic Sprint, Lambert 'Clubman', 1974 Fuji "the Ace", 1976 Holdsworth 650b conversion rando bike, 1983 Trek 720 tourer, 1984 Counterpoint Opus II, 1993 Basso Gap, 2010 Downtube 8h, and...
Mentioned: 584 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1908 Post(s)
Liked 574 Times
in
339 Posts
So yes, Branimir, as a general rule: the thicker the seat post, the thinner the tubing wall, which generally means better tubing. Assuming a standard 28.6 mm seat tube diameter, a 27.2 post means Columbus or 531 butted tubing; 26.2 to 26.8 might be straight gauge 531 or another high quality (often Japanese) tubing. Anything from 25 up to 26.4 or so can be garden variety hi-ten steel.
But there are always exceptions. My Raleigh Record Ace seems to be the lightest frame I own, made of butted 531, and it takes a 25.4 post.
But there are always exceptions. My Raleigh Record Ace seems to be the lightest frame I own, made of butted 531, and it takes a 25.4 post.
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Reynolds 531 might be anything from 26,0 to 27,2. The Peugeot PX 10 used Reynolds 531 double butted. I have owned two from 1977 - while both came with the original seatposts, one of them was 26.6, the other one 26.4.
I think, these differences might have just occured during production. Here is a nice little info on french rear spacing:
"Also appeared as Peugeot Trophy and Spidel. Top quality French hubs. The spacing could get weird. The front hubs often measured less than the standard 100mm. The 120mm (5-speed) rears often measured out 124mm. Gotta love the French. Weight given is both hubs with skewers
EDIT: Some additional information. While pursuing another issue, I learned from an informed CR lister why the rear hubs were spaced 124mm for the "standard" five speed hub. It seems that in combination with certain frames, some brands of 5-speed freewheels simply would not fit. So many French builders compensated by spacing the rear at 122mm and spacing the hub to 124mm. A simple, elegant solution. Gotta love the French still applies.""
I think, these differences might have just occured during production. Here is a nice little info on french rear spacing:
"Also appeared as Peugeot Trophy and Spidel. Top quality French hubs. The spacing could get weird. The front hubs often measured less than the standard 100mm. The 120mm (5-speed) rears often measured out 124mm. Gotta love the French. Weight given is both hubs with skewers
EDIT: Some additional information. While pursuing another issue, I learned from an informed CR lister why the rear hubs were spaced 124mm for the "standard" five speed hub. It seems that in combination with certain frames, some brands of 5-speed freewheels simply would not fit. So many French builders compensated by spacing the rear at 122mm and spacing the hub to 124mm. A simple, elegant solution. Gotta love the French still applies.""
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 378
Bikes: 1951 Armand Carlsen, 1969 DBS Deluxe, 1949 Diamant, 1978 DBS Winner Tandem, 1955 Herkules... to infinity and beyond!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
After some digging, here's what a Reynolds representative wrote to forum veteran miamijim in 2007:
this is really difficult to reply to.
You see when we supplied Peugeot we did supply tubes that were metric size (28.0mm outside) and imperial (28.6mm outside).
Then in each diameter the thickness of the tube was also supplied, 0.7mm or 0.55mm.
The frame builder would also ream the inside of the tube, so really it could
be a 26.6, 27.0 or 27.2 depending on the seat tube and reaming done.
this is really difficult to reply to.
You see when we supplied Peugeot we did supply tubes that were metric size (28.0mm outside) and imperial (28.6mm outside).
Then in each diameter the thickness of the tube was also supplied, 0.7mm or 0.55mm.
The frame builder would also ream the inside of the tube, so really it could
be a 26.6, 27.0 or 27.2 depending on the seat tube and reaming done.
#11
Senior Member
TUBING size Reference Charts on FB
hey guys, just a heads-up for you, in case you might be interested:
I've started a collection of TUBING SIZE CHARTS from the various TUBING MANUFACTURERS on facebook, to help people who deal with vintage bikes.
I don't know how to direct-link the post itself, but here is a link to the album that's part of the post:
FB Tubing Charts Gallery on FB
You'll find outside diameter listed, as well as the wall-thicknesses. Finding out the seatpost size is a simple mathematical operation (OutsideDiameter - (2*WallThickness)), and for single-butted tubing, it would be by subtracting the non-butted section's thickness.
As someone mentioned, I am skeptical that builders went through the trouble of "reaming out" seat tubes to merely increase the diameter, since, seatposts were available in all diameters needed for the various seat tube sizes. Polishing/refinishing however, is a different matter. (and then there is the matter of doing it for the wrong reasons: because you don't stock the correct size seatpost).
This may have been necessary for seam-welded tubing, that wasn't finished on the inside by the tubing manufacturer (and thus needed to have the weld-seam removed), or cheaper "gaspipe" tubing. But it was not needed for quality tubing.
I've seen mentions that reaming was necessary from distortion after welding... but for the most part, in these forums, we are usually talking about better quality bikes made from better alloy tubing, which required brazing, so as not to overheat the tubing.
If any reaming was needed to correct significant deformation from welding, then it would either have been over-heated in the first place or made from very low-grade tubing that is thick enough to allow for such temperatures and more leisurely manufacturing methods.
Some seat tubes were double-butted, while others just used more economical thicker straight-gauge tubing. However, some bikes (like an old Peugeot that I once had) seemed to use smaller outside diameter tubing as well. But most seat tubes were single-butted, with the thicker butted end at the bottom-bracket shell, and the larger-opening straight-gauge end at the seat-cluster.
I've started a collection of TUBING SIZE CHARTS from the various TUBING MANUFACTURERS on facebook, to help people who deal with vintage bikes.
I don't know how to direct-link the post itself, but here is a link to the album that's part of the post:
FB Tubing Charts Gallery on FB
You'll find outside diameter listed, as well as the wall-thicknesses. Finding out the seatpost size is a simple mathematical operation (OutsideDiameter - (2*WallThickness)), and for single-butted tubing, it would be by subtracting the non-butted section's thickness.
As someone mentioned, I am skeptical that builders went through the trouble of "reaming out" seat tubes to merely increase the diameter, since, seatposts were available in all diameters needed for the various seat tube sizes. Polishing/refinishing however, is a different matter. (and then there is the matter of doing it for the wrong reasons: because you don't stock the correct size seatpost).
This may have been necessary for seam-welded tubing, that wasn't finished on the inside by the tubing manufacturer (and thus needed to have the weld-seam removed), or cheaper "gaspipe" tubing. But it was not needed for quality tubing.
I've seen mentions that reaming was necessary from distortion after welding... but for the most part, in these forums, we are usually talking about better quality bikes made from better alloy tubing, which required brazing, so as not to overheat the tubing.
If any reaming was needed to correct significant deformation from welding, then it would either have been over-heated in the first place or made from very low-grade tubing that is thick enough to allow for such temperatures and more leisurely manufacturing methods.
Some seat tubes were double-butted, while others just used more economical thicker straight-gauge tubing. However, some bikes (like an old Peugeot that I once had) seemed to use smaller outside diameter tubing as well. But most seat tubes were single-butted, with the thicker butted end at the bottom-bracket shell, and the larger-opening straight-gauge end at the seat-cluster.
Last edited by Timmi; 11-23-17 at 05:37 PM.
#12
Senior Member
I have personally watched hundreds of Bassos and Rossins being uncrated and reamed. Those are usually counted as better quality bikes and definitely brazed. They needed reaming badly. Have seen a new Hetchins that needed reaming. A new Colnago built for Eddy but sold when he switched to De Rosa that needed reaming. Some builders at the level of Chris Kvale build so precisely that Columbus SL frames might use a 27.4 but even in that rare air it is not assured every time. Reaming is normal. Big question is does the builder do it or does the store do it. If the builder expected the store to do it and the store is not prepared to do it anything might happen.
And then there are liners. For all sorts of reasons builders decide to use liners. I've never personally examined a seat bore on an old RRA, first guess is that for a frame built of 0.7 straight gauge in the 30s there were few if any seatposts available so they lined it for a normal post. But there are all sorts of other explanations for why rhm would have a light frame with a one inch post, my guess is only a starting point for an investigation of facts.
Probably half of all the top quality bikes I have owned came with an undersized seatpost fitted. Presume many here have had the same experience. Still there are collectors and perfectionists who have obsessively maintained bikes and no clue why that binder bolt is bent or why the post is stiff going up and down or why the post keeps getting so scarred. General public, average LBS, they just put a post in a hole. They come in different sizes?
And then there are liners. For all sorts of reasons builders decide to use liners. I've never personally examined a seat bore on an old RRA, first guess is that for a frame built of 0.7 straight gauge in the 30s there were few if any seatposts available so they lined it for a normal post. But there are all sorts of other explanations for why rhm would have a light frame with a one inch post, my guess is only a starting point for an investigation of facts.
Probably half of all the top quality bikes I have owned came with an undersized seatpost fitted. Presume many here have had the same experience. Still there are collectors and perfectionists who have obsessively maintained bikes and no clue why that binder bolt is bent or why the post is stiff going up and down or why the post keeps getting so scarred. General public, average LBS, they just put a post in a hole. They come in different sizes?
#14
Senior Member
I have personally watched hundreds of Bassos and Rossins being uncrated and reamed. Those are usually counted as better quality bikes and definitely brazed. They needed reaming badly. Have seen a new Hetchins that needed reaming. A new Colnago built for Eddy but sold when he switched to De Rosa that needed reaming. Some builders at the level of Chris Kvale build so precisely that Columbus SL frames might use a 27.4 but even in that rare air it is not assured every time. Reaming is normal. Big question is does the builder do it or does the store do it. If the builder expected the store to do it and the store is not prepared to do it anything might happen.
And then there are liners. For all sorts of reasons builders decide to use liners. I've never personally examined a seat bore on an old RRA, first guess is that for a frame built of 0.7 straight gauge in the 30s there were few if any seatposts available so they lined it for a normal post. But there are all sorts of other explanations for why rhm would have a light frame with a one inch post, my guess is only a starting point for an investigation of facts.
Probably half of all the top quality bikes I have owned came with an undersized seatpost fitted. Presume many here have had the same experience. Still there are collectors and perfectionists who have obsessively maintained bikes and no clue why that binder bolt is bent or why the post is stiff going up and down or why the post keeps getting so scarred. General public, average LBS, they just put a post in a hole. They come in different sizes?
And then there are liners. For all sorts of reasons builders decide to use liners. I've never personally examined a seat bore on an old RRA, first guess is that for a frame built of 0.7 straight gauge in the 30s there were few if any seatposts available so they lined it for a normal post. But there are all sorts of other explanations for why rhm would have a light frame with a one inch post, my guess is only a starting point for an investigation of facts.
Probably half of all the top quality bikes I have owned came with an undersized seatpost fitted. Presume many here have had the same experience. Still there are collectors and perfectionists who have obsessively maintained bikes and no clue why that binder bolt is bent or why the post is stiff going up and down or why the post keeps getting so scarred. General public, average LBS, they just put a post in a hole. They come in different sizes?
You are putting down the "average LBS" as not doing it right - but could it be that the one you were in contact with was the faulty one, doing something no longer necessary, if he was reaming out every high-end bike he received? There is no reason to ream out Columbus SL so that it requires a 27.4mm instead of a 27.2mm seatpost as you suggest. That's just nonsense.
All the bikes we come across in our sales group, that use Columbus SL for example, use a 27.2mm seatpost. None are reamed out to 27.4 - I don't even recall seeing any 27.4 seatposts appear in any of our members' listings.
As the letter from Reynolds points out, there were standard inside diameters delivered that some may ream out, but that does not imply that all, nor even most, reamed them out - it sounds more like an exception than the rule.
I do know that the bikes we see in our FB sales groups ( Velo76.com for example) seem to use a consistent given seatpost diameter for a given tubing gamut. For example, Columbus Zeta uses 26.4, Aelle 26.6, SL 27.2, just to name some off the top of my head.
As for bent tubes at the opening - well, you should know what that is from - it's from tightening it around a post that is too small. It proves nothing else. And posts that are scratched badly - that's most often from inserting them into a tube that was clamped down onto a seatpost that was too small.
You buy the right size for the tubing - simple as that.
Last edited by Timmi; 11-23-17 at 06:48 PM.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,223
Mentioned: 654 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4722 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,036 Times
in
1,874 Posts
Regrettably, in my experience, it is true. The frame prep on many of the high end European frames, especially Italian brands, could be quite bad. Personally, I've seen lots of cases where the seat tubes, had burrs, scale or distortion that prevented use of the proper size post. The Japanese were much better in this respect, even on lower grade bicycles.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,658
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5763 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,404 Posts
Since frame tube ODs a re standardized (or can easily be measured) the post diameter is a direct indicator of tube wall thickness, which is half the difference between OD and post or ID.
That in turn can offer some guidance about the type and overall quality o9f the tubing, but that's about as far as it goes.
That in turn can offer some guidance about the type and overall quality o9f the tubing, but that's about as far as it goes.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#17
Senior Member
Indeed, it appears that Ishiwata tubing was as well finished on the inside, as it was on it's outside.
Deburring however, is not the same thing - it refers to only the edges. That's part of the frame-building process.
I do agree that some builders might have over-heated the tubing, causing distortions. But I don't think that was symptomatic of the better builders or the high-end bikes.
Deburring however, is not the same thing - it refers to only the edges. That's part of the frame-building process.
I do agree that some builders might have over-heated the tubing, causing distortions. But I don't think that was symptomatic of the better builders or the high-end bikes.
#18
multimodal commuter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NJ, NYC, LI
Posts: 19,808
Bikes: 1940s Fothergill, 1959 Allegro Special, 1963? Claud Butler Olympic Sprint, Lambert 'Clubman', 1974 Fuji "the Ace", 1976 Holdsworth 650b conversion rando bike, 1983 Trek 720 tourer, 1984 Counterpoint Opus II, 1993 Basso Gap, 2010 Downtube 8h, and...
Mentioned: 584 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1908 Post(s)
Liked 574 Times
in
339 Posts
Since my reference to my 1948 Raleigh Record Ace (RRA) has been quoted a couple times above, I'll add to that the little I know.
I have had three 531 Raleigh made bikes over the years: the 1948 RRA that I already mentioned; a 1951 Lenton Sports; and a 1958 Lenton Grand Prix. The RRA was butted tubing; the others plain gauge. All three took a 25.4 mm seat post. In fact the only Raleigh-made bikes (as opposed to Carlton-made bikes) I've seen that take a seat post other than 25.4 mm are the RSW-16 and the Twenty, both of which take a 28.6 mm seat post. I assume the 531 bikes had a sleeve brazed into the seat tube so they could take the standard seat post.
Also worth mentioning: my 1960 Allegro, full 531 butted tubing, takes a 26.6 or 26.8 mm post. It came from the factory with a 26.0 post and a shim. The post was a very nice one, chromed steel but quite light, fully domed over at the top. I guess 26.6 posts weren't that easy to source at the time.
I have had three 531 Raleigh made bikes over the years: the 1948 RRA that I already mentioned; a 1951 Lenton Sports; and a 1958 Lenton Grand Prix. The RRA was butted tubing; the others plain gauge. All three took a 25.4 mm seat post. In fact the only Raleigh-made bikes (as opposed to Carlton-made bikes) I've seen that take a seat post other than 25.4 mm are the RSW-16 and the Twenty, both of which take a 28.6 mm seat post. I assume the 531 bikes had a sleeve brazed into the seat tube so they could take the standard seat post.
Also worth mentioning: my 1960 Allegro, full 531 butted tubing, takes a 26.6 or 26.8 mm post. It came from the factory with a 26.0 post and a shim. The post was a very nice one, chromed steel but quite light, fully domed over at the top. I guess 26.6 posts weren't that easy to source at the time.
#19
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,793
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1390 Post(s)
Liked 1,322 Times
in
835 Posts
Regrettably, in my experience, it is true. The frame prep on many of the high end European frames, especially Italian brands, could be quite bad. Personally, I've seen lots of cases where the seat tubes, had burrs, scale or distortion that prevented use of the proper size post. The Japanese were much better in this respect, even on lower grade bicycles.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 20,305
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3464 Post(s)
Liked 2,827 Times
in
1,995 Posts
From working in a bike shop through the 70's and again for a number of years in the 80's, very few "name" frame sets did not need reaming to get the seat tubes round.
Masi, Serotta, John Howard, Fuso, KHS, Nishiki, Centurion, from my experience were pretty good.
Always be ready to correct, Colnago, Gios, Pinarello, Bob Jackson, Raleigh ( not the team bikes) almost all French, ( upper end Motobecanes were pretty good) in general, it was test, don't guess.
Heat distorts, almost without fail. It is very hard to fight physics.
Masi, Serotta, John Howard, Fuso, KHS, Nishiki, Centurion, from my experience were pretty good.
Always be ready to correct, Colnago, Gios, Pinarello, Bob Jackson, Raleigh ( not the team bikes) almost all French, ( upper end Motobecanes were pretty good) in general, it was test, don't guess.
Heat distorts, almost without fail. It is very hard to fight physics.
#21
Senior Member
I've been searching the forums and couldn't find a definite answer, though there are some indications that the seat post size is usually linked with specific types of tubes.
Does this thing makes any sense?
27.2mm seat post is usually related to Reynolds 531?
Are there any "rules", "guidelines" or just plain myths regarding this topic?
Does this thing makes any sense?
27.2mm seat post is usually related to Reynolds 531?
Are there any "rules", "guidelines" or just plain myths regarding this topic?
#22
verktyg
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 4,030
Bikes: Current favorites: 1988 Peugeot Birraritz, 1984 Gitane Super Corsa, 1980s DeRosa, 1981 Bianchi Campione Del Mondo, 1992 Paramount OS, 1988 Colnago Technos, 1985 RalieghUSA SBDU Team Pro
Mentioned: 207 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1036 Post(s)
Liked 1,237 Times
in
653 Posts
Likes For verktyg:
#23
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,776
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3582 Post(s)
Liked 3,394 Times
in
1,928 Posts
I've seen mentions that reaming was necessary from distortion after welding... but for the most part, in these forums, we are usually talking about better quality bikes made from better alloy tubing, which required brazing, so as not to overheat the tubing. If any reaming was needed to correct significant deformation from welding, then it would either have been over-heated in the first place or made from very low-grade tubing that is thick enough to allow for such temperatures and more leisurely manufacturing methods.
Likes For JohnDThompson:
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 9,579
Bikes: '65 Frejus TDF, '73 Bottecchia Giro d'Italia, '83 Colnago Superissimo, '84 Trek 610, '84 Trek 760, '88 Pinarello Veneto, '88 De Rosa Pro, '89 Pinarello Montello, '94 Burley Duet, 97 Specialized RockHopper, 2010 Langster, Tern Link D8
Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1607 Post(s)
Liked 2,213 Times
in
1,103 Posts
Thanks @JohnDThompson Excellent description of contributing factors!
__________________
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.