1960's Vs 2002

[RogerT]

Can anyone explain why the Carlton Corsa ( 1960's vintage ) that I have just "restored " and is made from 531 tubing is MUCH nicer to ride that my 2003 Dawes Audax that is also 531 Tubing ( although it is the C version )

I have ridden them back to back this week on my commute across some VERY bumpy Fen roads and the Carlton gives a smooth and compliant ride without any loss of rigidity when pushing hard.  The Dawes is heavier and you feel every bump.

Any ideas ? HAve we really not advanced in 30 years ?

[MSeries]

Different wheels, different geometries.

[mike]

I think it's the dawes audax bike that's the problem, a mate has one and to me it feels pretty 'dead'.  Its a good price for a steel framed bike, but I wonder how the relative price compares to the Carlton back in the 60s?

[RogerT]

Different wheels, different geometries.

Accept geometries, but the wheels I am using on the Carlton are cheap and nasty Ex E bay, whereas the Dawes has Mavics on Tiagra Hubs.

[MSeries]

Different wheels, different geometries.

Accept geometries, but the wheels I am using on the Carlton are cheap and nasty Ex E bay, whereas the Dawes has Mavics on Tiagra Hubs.

Depends how (well) they are built too. A crap wheelbuilder will build crap wheels with good components. Mavic what though, some rims are worse than others ? Tiagra isn't that good either though a hub will not affect the feel of a bike much unless it's graunching.

[rogerzilla]

Tyres?  A diamond frame is so vertically stiff that differences are almost impossible to detect.  You can sort of tell the difference between a track bike and a road racing bike, but only because the trackie has a tendency to pitch you over the bars on bumps (the front wheel is tucked right in) - the ride is just as (un)comfortable on the same rubber.

Likewise, spoke tension makes no difference to vertical stiffness, unless the spokes are so slack that the wheel doesn't work.

[border-rider]

A lot of modern  touring/audax bikes are built with pretty tight geometries - they wouldn't have looked out of place in a road race a few decades ago.  The 1950s & 60s club/touring bikes are built in a more relaxed way - it doesn't actually much affect how fast you can go (though handling won't be as sharp) but they're an awful lot more comfortable. 

When I had my best audax bike made, the builder convinced me to go for something with longer chain stays and a generally more old-fashioned geometry.  It worked  a treat, and it's a pretty fast bike too.

[RogerT]

Tyres?  A diamond frame is so vertically stiff that differences are almost impossible to detect.  You can sort of tell the difference between a track bike and a road racing bike, but only because the trackie has a tendency to pitch you over the bars on bumps (the front wheel is tucked right in) - the ride is just as (un)comfortable on the same rubber.

Likewise, spoke tension makes no difference to vertical stiffness, unless the spokes are so slack that the wheel doesn't work.

Tyres is a possibility.

Dawes..    700*25 Spesh Armadillos      110 PSI
Carlton     700*23  Vittoria Pro tetch     125 PSI

It just that the Carlton feels so "alive" whereas the Dawes is, as Mike says, "dead".

Maybe it's time to think about a new Audax bike...I do lust after the VAn Nicholas .

[Rollo]

My 531 Dawes Audax is pretty unleasant to ride too.  It's been relegated to winter hack.
I think the tubing on it is seriously over-specced - look at the size of the seat and chainstays, they have quite a girth!  I think it's 531 tubing from the thicker end of the spectrum, which makes the frame much more rigid and less springy.

[RogerT]

My 531 Dawes Audax is pretty unleasant to ride too.  It's been relegated to winter hack.
I think the tubing on it is seriously over-specced - look at the size of the seat and chainstays, they have quite a girth!  I think it's 531 tubing from the thicker end of the spectrum, which makes the frame much more rigid and less springy.

Rollo

I think you have hit the nail on the head, the tube Diameters between the 2 bikes are VERY different.

[Ian H]

Of course the Carlton's tubes might be quite a bit thinner than when it was new.

But I think it's the tyres.

[rogerzilla]

Good thin tyres can actually give a nicer ride than bad wide tyres, although not as nice as good wide tyres!  What you need in a tyre is a really elastic carcass and lightweight sidewalls.  Sometimes you can stretch the tread by hand on an unmounted tyre, and this is ideal.

Thick, stiff gum sidewalls and (especially) Kevlar belts under the tread do nothing for the ride and can actually reduce grip because the tyre doesn't follow the road surface properly.  I had a pair of first-generation Kevlar-belted tyres once, and apart from pummelling my arms, they were really scary on corners.  The compound seemed grippy enough, but the tyre just wasn't able to sink into the "grain" of the tarmac.

[mrcharly-YHT]

Absolutely. What are the sidewalls on armadilldos like?

I've ditched my schwalbe marathon for pasela tg. I can run the pasela 10psi higher than the marathon and it is still a softer ride.

[border-rider]

Absolutely. What are the sidewalls on armadilldos like?

Teak.

I hadn't appreciated that the Dawes had Spec.  Armadillos.  Good commuting tyres, but very rigid.  I had 37 mm ones on my commuter and even they gave a harsh and jarry ride.

[Really Ancien]

My somewhat worm-eaten copy of Richard's Bicycle book points out that there were 5 different labels applying to 531. The two highest grades have the main Reynolds logo at an angle rising from left to right. This means that all tubes and the forks are either Double Butted 531 or 531 Special lightweight, they also specify the type of tubing, saying if all tubes are butted or not. Butted forks and stays are the biggest factor in the ride of a frame. They are lighter and springier, when coupled with the greater rake and longer wheelbase and stay length of a 60s frame they will give a better feel at the expense of precise handling. These labels are illustrated on pages 31 and 32 of my 1979 edition. I can't readily find a picture of them on the net.
So what kind of label do the two frames have?

Damon.

[RogerT]

Sadly the labels on the Carlton are all but illegible, all I can see is the 531 "lettering"

the Dawes has 531C tubes.

[Really Ancien]

Sadly the labels on the Carlton are all but illegible, all I can see is the 531 "lettering"

the Dawes has 531C tubes.

If the 531 lettering is level and not overwritten with Reynolds then it's a plain guage main frame only. If the 531 has Reynolds written over it, all tubing is plain guage. if Butted is written over the 531 then only the main triangle is Butted 531. if the 531 is at an angle with Reynolds overwritten then it is all Butted 531. Corsas were fairly basic in my recollection. My 1982 Raleigh Record Ace has a different arrangement with the 531 level and 4 stars 2 each side of the 531, and it states that the Frame tubes, stays and forks are butted, so maybe the steerer or head tube are something else, more research needed perhaps.

Damon.

[Really Ancien]

A 1960s all Butted bike would have this label and crucially, small labels on the forks as well.


Damon.

[Ian H]

Here's a catalogue.

The Corsa is listed as a 'sports' frame, which suggests plain gauge, or main triangle and forks only.

[Really Ancien]

Here's a catalogue.

The Corsa is listed as a 'sports' frame, which suggests plain gauge, or main triangle and forks only.

I had two of the bikes listed there. A corsa with the chrome stickers on purple metallic paint, that was made from Truwell 208 tubing and a slightly earlier Continental with green Bluemels guards. The Corsa looks to have loads of rake and trail though.

Damon.

[RogerT]

I can not definetly say that it is a Corsa..research on the frame number has dated it as mid 1960's but there is doubt about the exact year/model.  Original paint is all but gone.  The reason I think it is a corsa is by matching the lugs/layout of braze ons etc etc.  It could be an international. It is also possible that the the 531 stickers are non original, just to muddy the waters even more.

All I know for sure is that it is a lovely ride and will be main commuting bike for the foreseable future.

[MSeries]

Don't you love those Maes handlebars

[Charlotte]

A lot of modern  touring/audax bikes are built with pretty tight geometries - they wouldn't have looked out of place in a road race a few decades ago.  The 1950s & 60s club/touring bikes are built in a more relaxed way - it doesn't actually much affect how fast you can go (though handling won't be as sharp) but they're an awful lot more comfortable. 

When I had my best audax bike made, the builder convinced me to go for something with longer chain stays and a generally more old-fashioned geometry.  It worked  a treat, and it's a pretty fast bike too.

Absolutely.  I was quite surprised to see just how kicked-out the forks on my Mercian are when I built it up.  But it handles beautifully and it's miles more comfortable than most bikes.

It's sort of like a 50's road path thing going on 

[rogerzilla]

There's a very narrow window of acceptable fork offsets for a given head angle; so I suspect your Mercian has a slacker-than-normal head angle (racing bikes are normally 73 or 74 degrees head, with an offset of 43-45mm).

If you get too much offset the bars get floppy and it's difficult to ride hands-off, although it can be persuaded to "snake" round potholes and rocks more easily, which is why MTBs err towards lots of offset, even allowing for their slacker head angles.  Too little offset and it feels rather stiff going into corners, and you tend to hit potholes even if you're trying to avoid them.  There are also implications for loaded handling, but I've never quite understood those.

[Biggsy]

Tyres?  A diamond frame is so vertically stiff that differences are almost impossible to detect.  You can sort of tell the difference between a track bike and a road racing bike, but only because the trackie has a tendency to pitch you over the bars on bumps (the front wheel is tucked right in) - the ride is just as (un)comfortable on the same rubber.

Likewise, spoke tension makes no difference to vertical stiffness, unless the spokes are so slack that the wheel doesn't work.

The wheel base should make a difference too - to the way the bike pivots over bumps.  When all else is equal, a longer bike should give a softer-feeling ride than a shorter one.  Not because of flex, but because of the angle of the bike as the wheel mounts the bump.

All else is rarely equal, though.  You could only be sure the frame was to blame for the difference in feel if the components and riding position were exactly the same with both bikes.