# I want to build a near MX Leader



## kellyjk (May 25, 2006)

I am looking to find someone with a 52c-c MX Leader to give me as many measurements to be able to build a near replica. The first point that I already know is that the top tube is different from my Max frame set. I have a complete Max tube set and fork set for the build including the luggs. 

Up until about a year ago I had not ever ridden a Merckx frame ...but when I bought a Corsa and a Titanium ax I have found that the Geometry fits me. So now I am looking for all the practical information so I can piece together an acturate picture for my frame builder.

I would really like it that if someone could measure an existing frame for me. I feel lucky enough to have found a Max ftube set so now I would like to take the next step 

Any information I can get from members ...will be of great help 

thanks John


----------



## kjmunc (Sep 19, 2005)

Who's MAX lugs are they? The magic of Eddy's MXL's are said to be attributed to his proprietary lugs. Hopefully you can get close to replicating, but why not just buy a 52cm MXL Merckx??

p.s., My 62cm measurements won't be much use to you, but there are plenty of MXL geometry charts floating around this forum if you do a quick search.


----------



## kellyjk (May 25, 2006)

I have yet to find complete information on merckx geometry. I have a 52cm Corsa extra and if this is the full expression of Century geometry ,I already have my answer. 

So the magic is in the lugs eh but isn't it also the round top tube instead of the eliptical.. which in turn means different lugs?


----------



## innergel (Jun 14, 2002)

Why would you change the geo from the Corsa and AX if it fits you so well? IIRC, MXL has Century geometry too, so you should be good to go. 

If it were me, I wouldn't try to replicate an MXL. I'd build a frame that was a tribute to an MXL. Get the geometry correct for you and then paint it in a classic Merckx paint scheme.


----------



## kellyjk (May 25, 2006)

Hell yeah now your talkin!


----------



## steel515 (Sep 6, 2004)

what do you mean magic is in the lugs?why was this discontinued if its so great? Too heavy?


----------



## kjmunc (Sep 19, 2005)

The MAX tubing used to make the MXL was a tubeset made by Columbus and similar tubesets were also used by many other builders of the era to construct strong bikes for powerful riders. As a tubeset, MAX is not significantly heavier than some of the lightest tubesets of that era, but rather it's the lugs that were used that increased the weight. 

The difference between a MXL by Merckx and another MAX bike is that the MXL tubes were drawn to Eddy's specs and are oriented differently than many other MAX tubed bikes, hence the need for unique lugs which were designed by Eddy in addition to a unique fork crown. 

Without those lugs and fork crown you will have a MAX tubed bike, but it will behave and feel differently than a MXL.


----------



## kellyjk (May 25, 2006)

and so the legend continues


----------



## jroden (Jun 15, 2004)

I kind of wonder if you really need or want a frame as overbuilt as the MXL in a 52. I'd imagine a well built steel bike with a lugged design and the similar geometry as your corsa with the long chanstays and low bottom bracket would handle nicely and be quite a lot lighter with no downside. I like the MXL because it's stiff, but I'm pretty big and ride a 60, so even the difference in flex between the mxl and Corsa was quite apparent, I'm not sure if you would find it so much different in your size, maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## merckxman (Jan 23, 2002)

*Info*

There is a detailed section in here http://italiancyclingjournal.blogspot.com/2007/11/columbus-steel-tubing-for-frame.html about MAX (look for the details of MAX, the lugs, etc.)


----------



## Guest (Oct 8, 2008)

kjmunc said:


> The MAX tubing used to make the MXL was a tubeset made by Columbus and similar tubesets were also used by many other builders of the era to construct strong bikes for powerful riders. As a tubeset, MAX is not significantly heavier than some of the lightest tubesets of that era, but rather it's the lugs that were used that increased the weight.
> 
> The difference between a MXL by Merckx and another MAX bike is that the MXL tubes were drawn to Eddy's specs and are oriented differently than many other MAX tubed bikes, hence the need for unique lugs which were designed by Eddy in addition to a unique fork crown.
> 
> Without those lugs and fork crown you will have a MAX tubed bike, but it will behave and feel differently than a MXL.


The reason that the lugs had to be specially made for the Merckx MX Leader is because MErckx did not use a full MAX tubeset.

The down tube and seat tube were MAX as were the chainstays.

The head tube, top tube and seat stays were EL/OS.

I have a bike that is MAX tubed, all MAX tubed and the differences are vast, and stark.


----------



## dunhill (Apr 3, 2008)

Maybe you can choose Tommasini to order...like this one..
http://www.flickr.com/photos/donsfoto/sets/72157607879536344/


----------



## txzen (Apr 6, 2005)

About the only complaints heard of the MXL come from those on the smallest frames. It's plenty stiff and, occaisionally, unforgiving in a 61 I can tell you. 

Seems like overkill in your case, IMHO.


----------



## Marz (May 14, 2006)

Hi Kellyjk, my 52cm MXL has a 53.5cm top tube but I'm not sure of the angles.

I've yet to post a ride report but after only 284kms I can only state my impressions. It feels too stiff but seems to carry momentum. Overall, and this will probably sound heretical, my 2004 Re Rosa Merak, alu/carbon is so much sweeter and, as it's reaonably light, feels like a better ride. As txzen states, the small MXL is probably overkill.

I have an unbuilt Corsa 0.1 which I will transfer the components onto and probably sell the MXL as I just don't get the 'great ride'. It's obviously a result of the triangle being too small and being just too stiff. I don't know why Eddy bothered to produce it in the small sizes.


----------

