I actually haven't ridden any high tensile steel frames in their stock configuration, but I have an early Centurion Le Mans that I converted to a fixed gear roadster, and I think the ride quality of the bike is very pleasant. I keep the tires at about 90 psi and have ridden it with un-sprung saddles (unlike in the photo) for outings as long as 80 miles. The frame geometry is clearly modeled on French bikes. It also has rather detailed lug work, though the quality of the brazing on this particular frame was rather shabby out of the factory.

-Gregory

That is an absolutely stunning bike!! What is that color (paint code)?

Thanks! It's a real joy to ride around. The color? Hmmm... Rustoleum red? It's a cheap rattle can job. I was practicing, really, but also forgot how soft the paint dries... Next time I use rattle cans I'll invest in two-stage stuff.

I wish Auchencrow was still on the list! He has an excellent collection of very fine gaspipe bikes.

Early (70's) Fuji S-10 S, Special Tour / Road Racer. Centurion Le Mans.
What I would like to know is what is the weight difference between low carbon, hi-ten, cro-mo, straight gauge, butted and double butted? How much difference does it make?
Also compare vintage quality hi-ten bikes to today's budget hi-ten frames (SE Draft?)

The devil is in the details (what size/tubing/lugs/braze-ons/dropouts/etc). Generally a higher-quality butted 56cm (center-to-center) chrome moly bare frame will weigh around 4.75 lbs. A hi-ten (carbon steel) frame will be about a pound more. A fillet-brazed straight-gauge (non-butted) cro-mo frame will add yet another pound, and a 56cm electro-forged Schwinn frame from the 70's will weigh around 8 lbs. These are very general results from a spreadsheet I've compiled over the years. What this means is that the weight of the frame itself will vary within a pound or two, but components will add or subtract at least that. We haven't even begun to discuss the weight on the engine (you). If for instance you're a 300-lb gorilla, your weight as a percentage will affect things to a much greater extent.

What many people will talk about with lightweight frames is an intangible called "ride quality". Some will swear that a Reynolds 531 or Columbus-tubed frame will have a much more "lively" ride, while others will insist that their particular French Hi-Ten frame is the nicest they've ever ridden. Frame geometry, tire size and brand, rim material, saddle type, even handlebar shape will all affect this perceived "ride quality". The takeaway from all of this is there's no way for a person to point at a particular bike and know without riding it how much they will enjoy it. Frame weight is just one of many factors that will affect your riding experience. I suspect a blind test between two identically-equipped bikes will yield an opinion from most that one rides better than the other.

So all the fuss is about a pound or two? (or five if we go real old school electro-forged) and some intangible that is going to feel different from person to person (and really different for a 300 lb [down to 235 now, thanks] person). I seem to remember reading a comparison of identical bikes, appearance and equipment the same, just made with different tube sets. If I recall correctly, the differences varied from negligible to some what noticeable, but the testers could not agree on which was best.

Exactly.
I remember reading about the same test. I'm sure one of our fellow members will provide a link eventually.
Congratulations on the weight loss, BTW. You've done much more to reduce the weight you're pedaling around than any carbon-cranking weight weenie could.

I found this thread which refers to one such blind test: https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vintage/1110384-magnificent-7-frame-tubing-test.html

It's all Columbus tubing types and grades but it gets at what you guys are discussing. Essentially that a bike built by a skilled frame builder is a good bike and that unless your comparing the lowest end with the highest end, you wont notice much.

This is why I wanted to start this thread (and why this same topic has been started likley hundreds of times).
People always talk about the "feel" of a ride and I found that to be an esoteric but completely valid idea. So why not ask about which bikes "feel" great to ride but are made of "low quality" stuff.
Also a big thing for me is the idea of a quality frame build. Forged dropouts instead of stamped, braze on derailurs instead of claw on, beautiful lug work etc. These are generally regarded as elements of a quality build, and they are not exclusive to high end tubing.

I want to add the venerable Raleigh Super Course as an inexpensive, good-riding frame, but it's not purely hi-ten. The three main tubes are Reynolds 531 plain gauge, which isn't super fancy. The fork and rear stays are hi-ten. It's a great riding bike that originally came with cheap components. They were probably slapped together hastily, but the company had been brazing steel bikes for a long time, in high volume, that they didn't have to put much into it to get out a good product. I tore down my Peugeot UO-8 and transferred most of the components to a Super Course I had picked out of the trash. I expected the rides to be similar, but the Raleigh is better by far. I don't know why.

Not all mild steel is the same. High tensile is a relative term. The harder the steel, the more difficult it was back in the day to weld. Schwinn used 1010 steel for it's electro-forging, so a bike made from 1018 steel would be high tensile compared to that. The last two digits refer to the carbon content. Lugged, brazed frames had the advantage of being able to use harder "high tensile" steel. But 1018 steel is low tensile compared to more exotic alloys like 531. So, better quality mild steel bikes shouldn't be lumped into the same category as cheap department store bikes that were made from the lowest cost materials available.

Of course. It's a relative term. It's actually all lo-ten compared with the expensive stuff. They used the term "high" or "hi" to make it sound good, but it's only high compared with super-crappy stuff.

One of my first eBay purchases was a Raleigh Sprite 27. I stripped it of its cheesy Huret derailleurs, steel rimmed wheels, steel handlebars with stem shifters and converted it to a FG/SS with brakes. It rode surprisingly well; not gaspipe heavy like my Raleigh 3-speed. Had the LBS sell it for me to make room for other projects. I had put new aluminum rimmed wheels on it which probably helped the ride a lot but getting rid of a lot of excess weight elsewhere didn't hurt, either.

[MENTION=37853]bbattle[/MENTION], that's nice. I believe the frame and fork are the same as they used for the Record model, their lowest ten-speed with drop handlebars. I'm talking about the US market.

It's just that I hear people disparagingly call anything less than chromoly alloys gas pipe or Hi-Ten when in fact, there are different grades and quality of mild steel tubing used on the less than chromoly bikes.I think The harder steel used in the better quality brazed bikes has a lot to do with the overall feel of riding and not just the weight. I think it accounts for the different feel between a 1010 framed Schwinn Varsity and a 1018 framed Peugeot UO8 for example.

I just remembered the Peugeot Carbolite 103 frames. I fixed one up for a neighbor and gave it a test ride. That was extremely impressive. I'd say these are some of the best-riding non-premium frames. They didn't even look good, as the joints looked like earlier Huffys. But the ride was pretty amazing.

Wasn't there a Peugeot model in the middle of the line like PKN-10 or PFN-10 which had mild grade tubing? That was a racy bike!

Might you be thinking of the UO-10? Hi-Ten (EDIT: actually Carbolite 103) tubing with decent components bolted on.

[MENTION=332414]Hudson308[/MENTION], no, I knew the UO-10 well and sold plenty of them, quite happily. I'm talking about the next model up. There weren't many sold compared with the UO-10. I don't remember what frame tubing the PKN-10 and the PFN-10 had. I sold a few of them in 1980-1981. They rode like expensiver bikes, as they had the same geometry as the PXN-10 which was full 531 DB. The UO-10 rode like a UO-8, as the frame and fork were identical. That frameset was nice for the money, but I'm thinking of something even nicer and still "cheap" steal.

noglider-
The Canadian version of that was the PB 12 Course. It was 103, forged dropouts and the geometry of a Super Competition. Outstanding ride and handling.Details here.

Yes, then I'm remembering the PFN-10. I think the PKN-10 had three main tubes of something semi-premium. Both terrific bikes for the money.

noglider-

The French models often had Vitus 172 or 181 in the main frame but there was a parallel version that was all 103. All good, as the cliche goes.