D!n$ld Gill??s wrote:
>"A silly question of course, because there were so many gauges over the
>years. However, in the early days, let's say 1970, I believe that fewer
>choices were available. In those days, I heard an unconfirmed rumor
>that a standard Reynolds frame would be little bit lighter than a
>standard Columbus (SP?) frameset with the same geometry and
>lugs. therefore, of course, reynolds was supposed to be "better"
>(no flames, please.) Anyway, can anyone confirm or deny this rumor?"

it's more unconfirmed now than ever. i think we should use our
collective hindsight and discuss that it (the "stuff" part) was
mostly-if-not-all myth, or even mythical. there are so many variations
in the products offered to the building trade, so many variables that
are attached to the building process, so many variations in the way
so many builders can design the same size frames...that i'd suggest
it's not possible to narrow in on a brand of steel or steel composition
in order to define a ride quality. more than anything, you "feel" the
frame design and the wheels/components that adorn it. i also think
it's difficult to isolate this as a "heft" issue due to these variables.
like many, i was consumed by the 531 vs columbus thing early on, but
finally concluded that "stuff" was "stuff", and the important component(s)
was/were the design and assembly.