Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Denver Mods 7/26/84) 6/24/83; site druhi.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!houxm!mtuxo!drutx!druhi!bhilden
From: bhilden@druhi.UUCP (HildenbrandBE)
Newsgroups: net.bicycle
Subject: Bicycle Frame Tubing and Slick Tires
Message-ID: <110@druhi.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-Oct-85 17:11:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: druhi.110
Posted: Wed Oct  9 17:11:48 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 07:16:32 EDT
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver
Lines: 30

Regarding Columbus/Reynolds tubing comparisons I seem
to remember the following figures.  For a 23" frame,
a tubing set of each weighs:

	Columbus SL	2000 grams
	Reynolds 531	2300 grams
	Columbus SP	2400 grams

So, I would say the 531 tubing is more like SP than SL.

About "smoothies", I don't know what the big deal is
concerning if the hold in wet and/or dry conditions.
I ride Specialized Touring II's and after about 300-500
miles the tires have zippo tread pattern left.  I ride
the suckers until the nylon cords start poking through.
In Colorado we have rain soaked roads on fast downhills,
the only problems I have experienced is hydroplaining
right after a rather large downpour(I suspect any tire would
hydroplane under these conditions).

I guess my point is that unless Avocet and Specialized
are using a wierd rubber compound, the lack of a tread
pattern should not make one(1) bit of difference.

Bruce Hildenbrand
ihnp4!druhi!bhilden

p.s. - outside of aerodynamic equipment(Disk Wheels, rims, helmets)
the only way I have found to really increase performance of my
bike is to train harder:-)!!