Colnago International (1985)

Thanks. I've still not determined whether I'm going to use the Superbe Pro / Matrix or the Campy / Campy wheelset with it.. I'm tending towards the Campy which I built for it years ago and have never had tires mounted on them. Both sets are tubular of course.

I am decidedly anti-Shimano. That doesn't mean that they don't make some good equipment or that I don't have their component gruppos on a few of my bikes. When it comes to my favorite frames or those I purposefully build up I don't tarnish them with Shimano components. With the Colnago for instance I was looking for the best components that I could afford and that complemented the quality of the frame. I am very happy with the way it came out and it never ceases to amaze me when I ride it. It took two years to build and is quite worth it.

The frame took like 3 months after placing the order and then took another 2 years to put together. I'm waiting for my new tubulars to come in to finish building out the new wheels for it. Mind you that I've owned the frameset since 1985.

Quite an investment in time on this beast. Must have been a labor of love, indeed. It's a twist to figure out the exact differences in the frames of this period such as the International vs the Super. Seeems the earlier International was a bit different than later versions in the 80s. You ever pinpoint the exact differences in the FRAME with this 85 version? Appears later built Internationals were meeting price points with the Omfega Gruppo. What does that Columbus tubing sticker say specifically?

Well, I haven't seen too many Colnagos up close and so the Int'l vs Super I was never able to really compare or understand. I've never seen or heard of another International (except in the shop in Spain where I ordered mine from) so I can't tell you anything about the differences in model years either.. The Columbus tubing is GT "Gran Tourismo" and I've only found bits and pieces about that tubing. What I did find said that it was made in very limited quantities.
Tell you one thing though, every time I ride it, I remember why I built it. It's one of the smoothest, quickest (outside my Crit), most evenly tempered bikes I've ever ridden.

Yeah, I thought that said GT. That's actually a more robust tubing similar to Aelle or Gara. Compared to the standard Colnago Super's usual Columbus SL (with SP tubes on larger frames), the weight of an average frame in GT would be 2,257 verses the regular SL Super at 1925.

Here are two of the Columbus docs with GT included as reference. See links:

Columbus Tubing Info & Weights
From Record to OR, including GT

Columbus GT Tubing
Dimensions, Wall Thickness, Weight, & Butt Information.

That's why it surprised me that beast weighed in at a cool 19lbs. What size is the frame? I have a De Rosa Professional with full Campy Super Record & Phil Wood Ti BB and the swine still weighs about 20lb. Bigger frame at a 59cm, but still.

The really interesting thing is the EARLIER Colnago International was made with Columbus SL and had full Campy SR with Panto galore. It was probably light as hell.

Anyway, that helps put some difference with the regular Colnago Super since SL was stock. I think this International was sourced to meet a price point and more all around use in varied conditions. That being said, it's a great ride and reason to be excited. Bet it's a blast to take out.

Thanks for the info.. This (as all my road frames) is a 60cm. Many of the components individually weigh in less than Campy or Dura-Ace counterparts, that with the tubulars place it lighter than many of it's bretheren. The 300 gram deficit that you point out is only 11 ounces. And yes, it is a quite spirited ride. As far as the frame cost, you're probably right, but at the time it was plenty expensive to me.

And the beast might cost even more today! Yeah, I was wondering about the actual weight of those options. While the Victory/Ofmega options were considered a bit less quality in the line at the time, some years seem to bring actual improvement in the performance ie shifting etc. Interestingly, that bike might be lighter than a normal SP bike in size 60cm. Almost all Columbus SL bikes in this size had SP tubes in critical areas. I'm 6'3 and 185-195 with a 60-61(C-C) being the appropriate size. I have come to gravitate to the 59 just because the bikes really feel more tossable at this size compared to just a bit larger. My Mavic GL330 tubs were pretty damn light on that De Rosa, too. I actually have a 59.5cm Colnago Super in Saronni colors that has yet to hit the road. Looking forward to comparisons.

After reading through the specs for SP vs GT on the larger frames (which I assume would be starting at the 60cm) shows that the SP tubing would weigh more. The positive is that the GT is more resiliant, lighter and probably cost a bit less than the SP.. Hard to say. Different frame builders will discourage the use of certain tubes depending on your riding style and with the roads, cobblestones etc in Spain, that may also be one of the reasons they built it with GT. This is great info.