Columbus SL

[jhcakilmer]

I'm considering one of the Viner frames that are NOS from early 90s. They use the Columbus SL tubing and I was wonder about the riding characteristics of this tubset, and how would it be for large riders?

Has any ridden this frameset, any oppinions welcome. Thanks

[Chris]

I raced on these frames in the late 80s and early 90s. I am 6'2". They are overall nice bikes, but be sure to check the geometry. As I recall, the angles were abnormally steep. Maybe even something like 74/74. I can't recall.

[sspielman]

Originally Posted by jhcakilmer

I'm considering one of the Viner frames that are NOS from early 90s. They use the Columbus SL tubing and I was wonder about the riding characteristics of this tubset, and how would it be for large riders?

Has any ridden this frameset, any oppinions welcome. Thanks

How big is the rider? Frame size? Does the rider have souplesse?...or pedal in squares?

[jhcakilmer]

Rider size = 210-220 6'3", I'm pretty easy on equipment, and I spin, no squares!

[sspielman]

Originally Posted by jhcakilmer

Rider size = 210-220 6'3", I'm pretty easy on equipment, and I spin, no squares!

Got it...it's for you....
I wouldn't wonder if SL isn't a little light for a big rider on a big frame...BUT, people tended to refer to the standard butted Columbus tubes as "SL" when the frame could be made with some or all "SP". Most better production bikes using Columbus started using some of the heavier "SP" tubing for the downtube and/or chainstays in the larger sizes....I'll bet that is the case for the Viner...and that it would be a pretty slick bike....

[stevep]

its surely sp in that size.
same stuff but thicker.
should be ok.
i thk sp probably takes a 27.0 post
s

been awhile though...

[Fixed]

sl on my fixed it's great imho
cheers

[jhcakilmer]

How would this compare to the Genius tubing, used in 90s Casati frames, etc?

[sspielman]

Originally Posted by jhcakilmer

How would this compare to the Genius tubing, used in 90s Casati frames, etc?

If the design is the same (and it almost never is) I doubt that you could detect any difference.

[dvancleve]

Genius was Columbus' newest/lightest/best at the time when SL/SP was the old standby. I believe Genius was designed with TIG welding in mind, but was also used lugged. SL/SP is comparable to Reynolds 531 if that helps any.

Doug

Originally Posted by jhcakilmer

How would this compare to the Genius tubing, used in 90s Casati frames, etc?

[Fixed]

of the stuff i ride it is my fav.
cheers

[michael white]

SL was .9/.6, considered light in its day, but burly in today's context, when tube walls are way thinner. I for one loved the ride of SL.

[cpg]

Originally Posted by michael white

SL was .9/.6, considered light in its day, but burly in today's context, when tube walls are way thinner. I for one loved the ride of SL.

That's true but remember the diameters were smaller so that is a fairly light tube. Still I understand your point. Due to heat treatment and lots of alloying tubes have become lighter.

Curt

[michael white]

If I went to you (curt) and said,
ok I want a frame with a really great ride, but please make it harder to dent than some of these lightweight wonders, and 4.5 lbs or so is plenty light . . . then SL might be just what the doctor ordered?

[CNY rider]

Originally Posted by michael white

If I went to you (curt) and said,
ok I want a frame with a really great ride, but please make it harder to dent than some of these lightweight wonders, and 4.5 lbs or so is plenty light . . . then SL might be just what the doctor ordered?

My Mariposa contains a healthy helping of Columbus SL.
I'm a 145 pounder with the sprint of a jellyfish.
I like it.