# Reynolds 953 vs. Columbus XCr stainless steel



## aclinjury

Would like to hear your opinions regarding these 2 materials.

Also like to see listed are the options of makes regarding each material.

Xcr is newer and I'm guessing fewer companies build frames based on them (among them are Cinelli and Firefly)

I'm looking to buy a stainless frame in the future, and I'm doing some research on them. I wonder how these 2 materials ride compare to titanium?


----------



## Scooper

aclinjury said:


> Would like to hear your opinions regarding these 2 materials.
> 
> Also like to see listed are the options of makes regarding each material.
> 
> Xcr is newer and I'm guessing fewer companies build frames based on them (among them are Cinelli and Firefly)
> 
> I'm looking to buy a stainless frame in the future, and I'm doing some research on them. I wonder how these 2 materials ride compare to titanium?


I don't think you could go wrong with either one, or with Reynolds 931 or KVA MS2 for that matter.

I've been riding a lugged, polished 953 Waterford RS-22 for six years and love the ride. I've ridden it twice from San Francisco to Los Angeles on the AIDS/LifeCycle ride, and it's very comfortable on long rides, although that probably has more to do with the geometry than the material. The weight of my 61 cm (c-t) frame is 1650 grams.

This chart may help in comparing the four stainless tubesets. 953 and KVA MS2 are both seamed, but the welds are so homogeneous that they are virtually seamless after drawing.










Here's my bike.


----------



## aclinjury

It looks like the compliancy order from least compliant to most is 953, 931, Xcr

My frame size will be 51cm top tube (effective), so it's on the smaller side. And a smaller frame will flex less compared to a larger frame. I wonder if I should go with Xcr as opposed to 953? Problem for me is so far all the Xcr frames I've seen on the market is in the $4000 range, which is expensive.


----------



## Scooper

The cost for a raw tube set in either XCr or 953 is roughly the same (~$600) and stainless is really tough on the framebuilder's tools (953 more so than XCr, 931, or KVA MS2), so stainless frames reflect these higher costs. At NAHBS, a number of framebuilders who had a good reputation with 953 (Waterford, Dave Wages, Dave Anderson) have started building with MS2 because it's easier on tooling without the availability problems of 953.

SOMA has just introduced the Smoothie SS frame which is fillet brazed polished KVA MS2, and it sells for $2,000.


----------



## Scooper

Compliance is basically a function of Young's modulus (stiffness modulus - E), the wall thickness and diameters of the tubes. Young's modulus of all steels is virtually the same (~200 GPa), and the tubing wall thickness of all four stainless tube sets are similar. The tube diameters from all four are also pretty standard, so I don't think you'd be able to tell the difference among the four in terms of the ride. I'm 6' tall and weigh 180, and my 953 frame with OS tubing has a very similar ride to my '87 Paramount built with standard size tubes (Columbus SL with SP down tube) except for the difference of the longer chainstays and wheelbase on the 953 frame which makes it more comfortable on longer rides.


----------



## skepticman

Here is a comparison from the head of Indy fab.

Project XCr - Page 2

Cinelli claims XCR has a better elastic response than other materials.

Cinelli True Story: A Uniquely Vibrant Ride: Cinelli XCR

One alternative to stainless is normal steel with a rust proofing treatment called Cataphoresis (Cyfac's name). AKA Cataforesi (Tommasini's name) or Cathaphoresis (Casati's name).

I was told by Cyfac that the ride is a lot more tuneable with a Spirit tubeset vs. XCr, which I'm guessing is due to a wider variety of tube diameters and thickness.


----------



## Scooper

Thanks for posting the links. Gary's IF Project XCr write-up is particularly good. He makes no bones about 953 being harder on tooling, but his comment that the 953 is more "compliant" than XCr would seem to be at odds with the Cinelli write-up that XCR as a material has more "elastic response"; Young's Modulus is the modulus of elasticity (that's what the "E" stands for), and since all steels have the virtually the same modulus of elasticity I think their assertion may be influenced by self-serving marketing hype?


----------



## aclinjury

skepticman said:


> Here is a comparison from the head of Indy fab.
> 
> Project XCr - Page 2
> 
> Cinelli claims XCR has a better elastic response than other materials.
> 
> Cinelli True Story: A Uniquely Vibrant Ride: Cinelli XCR
> 
> One alternative to stainless is normal steel with a rust proofing treatment called Cataphoresis (Cyfac's name). AKA Cataforesi (Tommasini's name) or Cathaphoresis (Casati's name).
> 
> I was told by Cyfac that the ride is a lot more tuneable with a Spirit tubeset vs. XCr, which I'm guessing is due to a wider variety of tube diameters and thickness.


Thanks for the links.

I'm leaning toward Xcr now.

Independent Fabrication is another nice option


----------



## Scooper

aclinjury said:


> Thanks for the links.
> 
> I'm leaning toward Xcr now.
> 
> Independent Fabrication is another nice option


XCr is a great choice, but if you are concerned about your small frame being overly stiff, I think you should probably consider specifying the new XCr for lugs.

The XCr tubing used for the Cinelli XCr has a larger diameter than normal OS, and will almost certainly have a stiffer, harsher ride when used on a small frame. The new XCr for lugs has standard OS tube diameters, and I think you'd find it much more satisfactory for the frame size you want.

Here are the tubing diameters for XCr and XCr for lugs.

XCr. Note that the top tube diameter is 31.7, the down tube diameter is either 35 or 38 (!), and the seat tube is either 31.7 or 33. A small frame with this size tubing will be pretty stiff.










XCr for lugs. These tubes are regular OS diameter (28.6 TT, 31.7 DT, and 28.6 ST).


----------



## aclinjury

Didn't know that there are Xcr for lugs. But this sounds interesting.

I have a circa 1993 Casati Laser that uses 4130 thin wall chromoly. Tubes are of standard size (for those days), and fillet welded. Top tube is 51cm (traditional geometry). And honestly, I think this is plenty stiff for me for touring/sportive purposes, with skinny 1" diameter head tube and quill stem.

If I were to get the Cinelli Xcr, then the size I would get is 48cm (sloping geometry), which has an effective 51.5cm top tube. (This is the smallest size from Cinelli). And if the Xcr tubes are oversized, then I can see that the frame will most likely be stiffer then my old Casati. 

However, I do want this Xcr build to be semi stiff, not all-out-racer stiff, but somewhat a little stiff. (Reason is I already have a Serotta Ottrott whenever I want to ride a soft couch on a century). 

I'm all for lugs, but I don't think Cinelli makes lugs. And furthermore, lugs will probably jack the price up another thousand dollar. (if you go lugs, you gotta go pretty, no ugly lugs will do).

BTW, does any fabricator ever make lugs with oversized tubings?? I wonder if lugs plus oversized tubings will give me the magic combination?

Really wish I could test ride an Xcr bike and 953 bike back to back. But these frames are hard to find, much less test them.


----------



## Scooper

aclinjury said:


> Didn't know that there are Xcr for lugs. But this sounds interesting.
> 
> I have a circa 1993 Casati Laser that uses 4130 thin wall chromoly. Tubes are of standard size (for those days), and fillet welded. Top tube is 51cm (traditional geometry). And honestly, I think this is plenty stiff for me for touring/sportive purposes, with skinny 1" diameter head tube and quill stem.
> 
> If I were to get the Cinelli Xcr, then the size I would get is 48cm (sloping geometry), which has an effective 51.5cm top tube. (This is the smallest size from Cinelli). And if the Xcr tubes are oversized, then I can see that the frame will most likely be stiffer then my old Casati.
> 
> However, I do want this Xcr build to be semi stiff, not all-out-racer stiff, but somewhat a little stiff. (Reason is I already have a Serotta Ottrott whenever I want to ride a soft couch on a century).
> 
> I'm all for lugs, but I don't think Cinelli makes lugs. And furthermore, lugs will probably jack the price up another thousand dollar. (if you go lugs, you gotta go pretty, no ugly lugs will do).
> 
> BTW, does any fabricator ever make lugs with oversized tubings?? I wonder if lugs plus oversized tubings will give me the magic combination?
> 
> Really wish I could test ride an Xcr bike and 953 bike back to back. But these frames are hard to find, much less test them.


You don't need to use lugs with the XCr for lugs tubes. They're called that because the outside diameters are standard for OS lugs, but the butts are beefy enough to be TIG welded. Note that the main tube butt walls for both XCr and XCr for lugs are in the range of 0.65mm to 0.8mm thick. The stay wall thickness at the butts are also the same (0.7mm) for both tubesets.

*EDIT -* There are lots of lugs for OS tubing, including stainless steel lugs. The lugs on my Waterford are stainless NEWVEX lugs for oversize tubing, and are made by Richard Sachs.


----------



## Scooper

One more thought... Carl Strong has been working with both 953 and XCr for years, and his TIG welding is flawless (he won the best TIG welded frame award at NAHBS), and he has lots of very happy customers. You might give him a call and discuss your options.


----------



## Burnette

*XCr and 953*

I'm also looking to have a stainless steel road bike made to measure for me.
Been looking for awhile now and I'm leaning towards 953. Don't think you could go wrong with XCr either though.
My bike will be size 52. 
What I gathered from this thread is that XCr would be about 50g lighter (a wash, not a factor) and somewhat stiffer due to it's larger diameter tubes, a plus.
If you want stiff but not too stiff, how would a lugged 953 bike ride compared to an XCr bike? I think that trying to peg that down is akin to trying to pick a saddle for someone. We would have to ride these bikes of two different materials ourselves. I feel confident that a good builder could make me a 953 bike stiff enough just as I also feel that an XCr bike could be made to be just as compliant. To get that stiffness and compliance ratio you desire, you have to believe in the builder's abilities.
Cinelli, Independent Fabrication, Waterford, Firefly and Anderson Custom Bicycles to name some of my faves, are the ones to talk to.
My personal taste for each: XCr, Firefly makes awesome eye candy in stainless, not to mention Ti. Road // Stainless | Firefly Bicycles
Stainless Steel 953 Lugged: Anderson Custom Bicycles, ABC Signature Stainless Road. IMG_6090 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!


----------



## jtompilot

My top three are Anderson, Cyfac, and Casati. If I want to go cheap it would be Quiring in Michigan


----------



## Scooper

jtompilot said:


> My top three are Anderson, Cyfac, and Casati. If I want to go cheap it would be Quiring in Michigan


I didn't realize Scott Quiring worked with stainless, but I see from his price list that his TIG'd XCr custom road frame is $1800. That's about as inexpensive as I've ever seen.


----------



## aclinjury

Scooper said:


> I didn't realize Scott Quiring worked with stainless, but I see from his price list that his TIG'd XCr custom road frame is $1800. That's about as inexpensive as I've ever seen.


$1800 is just for frame, not including fork. Still a cheap price!

How is Quiring work?? Very tempted at the price. But last thing I want is a custom nightmare should things go wrong, and while not directing at Quiring, but we all know custom frame can be a love/hate experience.

Also, the pricing list was last updated June 2011. I wonder if prices have changed since?


----------



## Scooper

aclinjury said:


> $1800 is just for frame, not including fork. Still a cheap price!
> 
> How is Quiring work?? Very tempted at the price. But last thing I want is a custom nightmare should things go wrong, and while not directing at Quiring, but we all know custom frame can be a love/hate experience.
> 
> Also, the pricing list was last updated June 2011. I wonder if prices have changed since?


I've no personal experience, but he's been around a while. Maybe one of his customers will chime in.


----------



## jtompilot

A bunch of people here in Michigan ride his MTB frames..his work looks good


----------



## DaveT

I had Scott build a ti bike for me several years go. Everything was on time, on budget. Scott was pleasant to deal with and his craftsmanship was excellent. He has an excellent reputation.



aclinjury said:


> $1800 is just for frame, not including fork. Still a cheap price!
> 
> How is Quiring work?? Very tempted at the price. But last thing I want is a custom nightmare should things go wrong, and while not directing at Quiring, but we all know custom frame can be a love/hate experience.
> 
> Also, the pricing list was last updated June 2011. I wonder if prices have changed since?


----------



## aclinjury

Good to hear about Scott Quiring. Well I will definitely give him a call soon then.


----------



## maxxevv

If off-the peg stainless on a budget is your target, you can give these guys a shot:

RIKULAU INTERNATIONAL CO.,LTD

They are a Taiwanese company. Their products don't really look much on the web, but are top-notch in terms of finishing in the flesh. In fact, they were amongst the first to work with 953 tubes, they are in fact the first out with 931 frames on the market.


----------



## mnoble485

Tyler Evans at Firefly just answered this same question on another forum.
I will try to remember what he said but don't quote me.

All things being equal titanium will be lighter
Stainless will dent easier
The ride will be identical.

He went on to talk about the availability of more tube sets in Ti as opposed to stainless.

He said it better!

Mike


----------



## Scooper

I have tremendous respect for Tyler Evans and Firefly, but I'm confused. Mike, can you provide me with a link to Tyler's comments?


----------



## mnoble485

I don't post much here so I am not sure of the rules so I sent you a PM 

Mike


----------



## Scooper

mnoble485 said:


> I don't post much here so I am not sure of the rules so I sent you a PM
> 
> Mike


Got the PM. Thanks!


----------



## Scooper

For those interested, I read the Tyler Evans' post which Mike (mnoble485) referenced above, and Mike described Tyler's points pretty accurately. Tyler, in his post, discussed an XCr frame compared to a titanium frame (presumably 3/2.5 Ti alloy that Firefly uses), both with similar geometry and sized with a 56cm top tube.

_1. The titanium bike will be lighter._

Comparing my 61cm c-t 953 frame to a similar size/geometry 3/2.5 Ti Litespeed Classic, the weights are virtually identical (1650g for my Waterford RS-22 and 1618g for the Lightspeed which has shorter chainstays (417mm vs. 432mm for the Waterford). If there is a difference, it's really insignificant.

_2. The Stainless will dent easier._

XCr with a hardness of 28-36 HRc will be more prone to dents than 953 with its hardness of 44 HRc. 3/2.5 Ti has a relatively lower hardness of 24 HRc, but because of its low density (0.162 lbs/cu.in.), low Young's Modulus (about half that of the steels), and relatively low UTS (690 MPa) its walls are thicker than the stainless steels with their higher density (0.28 lbs/cu.in.) and higher strength (2000 MPa for 953 and 1300 MPa for XCr), so the thicker walls do help with dent resistance. I know this is anecdotal, but my 6 year old 953 frame has seen lots of abuse without the slightest dent anywhere.

_3. They will ride nearly identical._

While this is pretty subjective, I can't disagree.


----------



## aclinjury

Update:
I started this thread and it's been 15 months since. And just to update those interested, I have finally gotten the Cinelli XCR. I will do a writeup on it and will update again.


----------



## Scooper

aclinjury said:


> Update:
> I started this thread and it's been 15 months since. And just to update those interested, I have finally gotten the Cinelli XCR. I will do a writeup on it and will update again.


Great! I'm looking forward to reading about your impressions.


----------



## Cinelli 82220

Curious about the XCR as well. Looking forward to your report acl.


----------



## aclinjury

no problem, i will update my ride experience as soon as i get it built up. Still waiting for a few small parts to come in.

But as a teaser, here's a pic of the frame. Size "51cm" customized, 51.7cm effective top tube. (I had the size customize for a couple hundred more, why not if I'm paying mucho dollar for the frame it already). Wait time was 6 months. I ordered it from an official Cinelli seller in Hungary (I will discuss more detail on the seller and experience with him in my future review post, but it initially took some faith from me buying such an expensive frame from a seller in Europe, even if he's authorized).

but just feeling the frame in my hands, i feel like a kid. There's something masculine about cold, hard, metal. Right away first thing I notice is the oversized downtube of the Cinelli compared to my 1993 Casati Laser with Columbus SLX tubes, yet the Cinelli is lighter. I don't have the weight number myself, but Cinelli says it's about 1400 g, so this makes it about 1 pound heavier than a typically equivalently sized carbon frame.

...more to come later


----------



## Bill2

Pleased to see this thread. I'm pondering a Barco xcr bike now, made in Padova. Then again I'm pondering their steel 29er too. Decisions...

ciclibarco | Non ti servono le ali, spingi forte sui pedali.


----------



## aclinjury

Bill2 said:


> Pleased to see this thread. I'm pondering a Barco xcr bike now, made in Padova. Then again I'm pondering their steel 29er too. Decisions...
> 
> ciclibarco | Non ti servono le ali, spingi forte sui pedali.


I don't think you could go wrong with either bike.

I believe I've read somewhere that said that Barco makes the Cinelli. The 2 bikes look very similar. But of course Barco will never say anything about it. The cost of the 2 bikes are similar if you're in the US and buying from an authorized US seller. But with Barco you have more options, like an option for a steel fork (additional cost) or fancy paint scheme (additional cost). I got the Cinelli from an authorized seller from Europe and so it ended up being cheaper. And admittedly I like the Cinelli for its name. Ultimately, I wanted a bike from a company with history. 

But I think Cinelli paints the bike. Why did I say this? Because my frame was delayed, and when I asked the seller the reason for the delay, he said that the painter at Cinelli is sick at the hospital. But of course all this is just speculating on my part since neither Cinelli nor Barco has, nor will, revealed anything. But it's common in Italy to subcontract the frame building business, and Barco is one of the best builder in Italy.

There were a few minor differences that also made me like the Cinelli more. Things like all external cabling for the Cinelli. The Cinelli also has those bosses to for the rear cable on the headtube, the Barco has them on the downtube. I like them on the headtube better.

Also, I paid a little extra to have the Cinelli customized the geometry to fit my body. The person who spec my geometry is from Cinelli, not Barco.


----------



## Bill2

That's a sweet ride! Yeah, I saw Barco mentioning they build for Cinelli, Scapin and undisclosed others. I agree, get whatever works best for you and don't worry about the brand. I lucked into a very cheap used custom carbon built by Bertoletti but branded Viner Maxima RS. If this were a new Legend I could never afford it. Speaking of which Bertoletti builds an XCR frame Ventoux. Spoiled for choice!


----------



## Cinelli 82220

Bill2 said:


> http://www.ciclibarco.it




Whoa, serious bike porn there. Good link!


----------



## cnardone

Bill2 said:


> Pleased to see this thread. I'm pondering a Barco xcr bike now, made in Padova. Then again I'm pondering their steel 29er too. Decisions...
> 
> ciclibarco | Non ti servono le ali, spingi forte sui pedali.


Beautiful stuff there. The chromed lug is a really great look. Good luck, maybe you can get a 2'fer discount!!


----------



## Scooper

cnardone said:


> Beautiful stuff there. The chromed lug is a really great look. Good luck, maybe you can get a 2'fer discount!!


I'd be really surprised if the lugs are chrome plated; more than likely they're polished stainless like these on one of Dave Wages' frames.

Most current frames with lugs that appear to be chrome plated are actually polished stainless steel. The advantages are no hazardous waste disposal problems, no hydrogen embrittlement issues, and no pitting, all common problems associated chrome plating.


----------



## aclinjury

Finally! The Cinelli has been finished and today I got a chance to put her through a 60-mi club ride at was at times highly intensed hammering on the flat and with a few 1-2 miler hill attack.

let's talk about the bike itself and my purchasing experience. This whole process started around 1.5 years ago. The process went something like this:

1)
I wanted a stainless steel bike. After doing some research on here and a few other forum, my choice of metal came down to Reynolds 953, KVA, and Columbus XCR.

*Mr Scooper* above helped answered some of my questions regarding XCR vs 953.

I also did some reading in this thread regarding the Cinelli XCR
Project XCr - Page 2

In the end, I decided that I wanted Columbus XCR as the material. And to be honest, a part of the reason is the exclusivity of the XCR material.

2)
Next comes the choice of builder, or brand. Simply picking steel as the starting material pretty much ruled out all the cookie-cutter frames.

I talked to a few US-based custom bulders. And while all of them are great builders, as I have not heard bad things about them during my research,.. but there is something that did not make me click with them. I think the main reason why I didn't click with any of the US builders that I spoke to is because they seemed to want to steer me toward the conservative (aka, more relaxed) geometry when selecting steel, when I wanted a modern agressive steel frame.

So then I started to look toward Italy. Actually, I had been looking at the Cinelli XCR even before talking to any US builder. There were a few Italian XCR frames I was looking at besides Cinelli. I looked at Cicli Barco, Pellozzi, Tommasini. In the end, I picked the Cinelli because the frame has the aggressive geometry I wanted, and furthermore, Cinelli offered custom sizing (for an extra cost) which I opted for.

3)
Next is where to buy. There are a few US based Cinelli distributor. But I got mine from an authorized distributor from Hungary for a little saving. Initially, I was very hesitant in dealing with someone not from the US. So it took some faith on my part. However, this distributor is listed on the Cinelli website as the official distributor, so it was not like I was talking a blind faith (still, it took some trust on my part). Most of our exchanges were through emails, but I did call him a few times when I needed to be, and he was there most of the time I called.

4)
Next is the wait period. Initially, I was told that wait period would be 3 months, with a 50% deposit. Cinelli doesn't start the build until you pay the deposit first. There is no "stock" XCR frame sitting on the shelves. But mine took 6 months to complete since the painter at Cinelli was hospitalized (I was told) and so everything got pushed back to 6 months. And to be honest, I got a little concerned because I'm in the US and things were happening in Europe. But in the end, the wait was well worth it. And my concerns were just that.

5)
Next is pricing. Pricewise, the lowest to the highest cost of an XCR frame can vary by as much as $1000. If you're buying from a US distributor, the Cinelli (and the Barco) will cost virtually the same. With Barco, you get more options, but with options also means more additional costs too (it's not free options). Pellozzi is lower cost. But alas, my heart wanted the Cinelli XCR, so cost became a bit of a secondary factor.

6)
And now for the actual review on the build quality and actual ride of the bike. Quality wise, it's on par with any top builder. However, the Cinelli is not an over-the-top lavish custom like a one-off custom. For example, it doesn't have the flowery lugs, the metallic chamelleon shifting paint, the artistry of truely one-off's. What the Cinelli has is an overall quality weld and paint.

The geometry of the bike is that of a racing bike. Short wheelbase, short chainstays. (But it can accomodate a 25mm tires). Steering is quick, can even be called twitchy. On a straightline downhill dive to the bottom, it's a tad more twitch than a longer wheelbased bike (this is expected), but tip in into a corner and it just falls around the curve naturally, requiring less body english to steer. That's the tradeoff between short and steep versus long and slack geometry. And I wanted something short and steep.

On the pavement, how does it handle vibration? Hmm this is always a bit subjective one. Compared to my Serotta Ottrott, made of titanium and carbon, the Cinelli is a tad rougher. But compared to a typical lightweight full carbon race bike (think Tarmac, Evo), the Cinelli is more supple. It's a tad rougher than the Specialized Roubaix, and the Roubaix is a tad rougher than the Ottrott. That should give you some perspective.

How does it handle out of the saddle acceleration? With my 116 lb frame, I can only usually manage a peak sprint wattage of around 750-800w (and that is up a slight hill), I can't say that the frame is flexing for me to the point that would make me think about it. The Ottrott and Roubaix flex more than the Cinelli. If anything, my wheels are the greater source of flexing.

This bike really loves a steady power output. Get into a TT mode, head down, and hammer. It's stiff enough to give good efficieny, and smooth enough to allow you to keep on pedalling over rough tarmac (on the Cdale Evo, pedaling fast over rough tarmac is painful as the bike jumps all over the place).

What about on a steady climb? I can honestly say that with the exception of weight (more on this later), the Cinelli does not give up anything much to a pure carbon racer on the climb. 

The bike as shown in the pic at the seadock is exactly 17 lbs, 1 oz., with pedals an all. My lightest build carbon bike bike is just under 16 lbs. So the Cinelli weight a tad more than 1 lb than my carbon bike.

All in all, I'm very happy with the purchase. This is something I will be looking to keep unless I'm forced to sell. Well that was my little review of the XCR. Notice that my steerer is not yet been fully cut to size yet as I'm in the the experimental stage and will cut it down once I get the fitting like I want it.


----------



## Scooper

That's a damn fine review. Thanks for posting.

I get the feeling you're gonna be riding that one for a very long time. :thumbsup:


----------



## aclinjury

Scooper said:


> That's a damn fine review. Thanks for posting.
> 
> I get the feeling you're gonna be riding that one for a very long time. :thumbsup:


yep you got it. this one is a keeper for life unless there is some extenuating circumstance forcing me to part with it. on the club ride, at a restroom stop, a lot of guys of all ages from old school to new school were checking out the bike. It's a little satisfying when people with highend carbon bikes like Colnago C59,60, Dogma, De Rosa King, etc, all came over to rub and feel and stroke your bike. It sort of reaffirms one's purchase decision. A couple of them were sponsored racers and I got more than a few compliments from them along the ride. I have this theory that it's innate for guys to like to touch cold hard stainless metal! However, to be honest, there was a guy who made the comment (surmising): "Why did you get steel, it's heavy. You could have gotten something like Sworks Tarmac". His comment were so off tangent to my whole underlying decision that all I could do was just smile at him.

I hope my review will serve as another anecdote for anyone who's considering buying steel, Columbus XCr, Cinelli, etc. 

My last steel bike was an early 90s Casati Lazer with Columbus SLX. That was a top of the line steel racing bike back then. It was a tad over 19 lbs. If I had to compare the Cinelli to that Casati, I would say that the Cinelli gives more oomph in acceleration, while the ride of the 2 bikes feel similar.

If I were to compare the Cinelli to a steel track fixie, I would say that a steel track fixie is stiffer, but also heavier. The track fixie has a very twitchy handling (by design) that enable it to rail around the drome, and while the Cinelli is a tad less twitchy (but still more twitchy than a typical mass produced cookie cutter), and much lighter in weight, it offers much more comfort without compromising acceleration. But here I'm comparing a track fixie to a street racer, and this is apples to oranges, and i realize this.

I'm considering going to a longer stem for more cockpit extension for those all-out out-of-saddle sprint effort. The stem in the picture is -17 degrees 90mm. Thinking about trying on a -10 degree, 100mm stem. Also, I found out real quick in just 1 ride that I love to pedal around the corners on this bike due to its quick turn-in, allowing me to keep corner speed, feel confident about the front en, and encouraging me to pedal through... but alas, my current 170mm crankarms did manage to get the pedal scraped against the pavement. So I'm considering going to a shorter 165mm crankset (which is on my other bikes anyway).


----------



## Cinelli 82220

That is an exquisite bicycle!

The headbadge is the icing on the cake. Well done ACL, well done.


----------



## aclinjury

Cinelli 82220 said:


> That is an exquisite bicycle!
> 
> The headbadge is the icing on the cake. Well done ACL, well done.


thanks! the headbadge is ti!


----------



## aclinjury

I got a PM from a reader about my bike geometry. And so I thought I post a pic of the Cinelli and the Ottrott together for a visual comparison of my endurance vs racier geo. 

I'm 5'7" with average male body proportions. Both the Cinelli and Ottrott are custom, but yet they look different since one is for endurance, one is for cafe racing. I'm considering just slamming the Cinelli, but just not yet as I'm still in the experimental phase.

The Ottrott chainstays are 412mm, and made of ti, and this combo gives it a really supple ride like butter (not exaggerating). I fly over most railroad tracks without blinking on the Ottrott. The Cinelli has a 403mm chainstays, so it feels rougher over railroad tracks. Most cookie cutter carbon frames have chainstays in the 405-410mm length. A few mm difference is enough for the rider to feel the different in character of the bike. I once had an aluminum Fuji roubaix bike with a 415mm chainstays, and that thing was almost just as comfy as the Ottrott too, yet Fuji was aluminum. So material and geo both play a role in the overall character of the bike


----------

