Dagnabbit, Richard, that's Heatkit, not Heathcliff.
John "Grew Up In St. Joseph, Michigan, Just Across The River From Heath's HQ" Taglia
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001,
Richard M Sachs wrote:
> i used the word. so i'll take a crack at it...
> three things to say first, and i don't mean to be
> smug. 1) if you have to ask the question, you'd
> likely not get the answer. 2) sometimes the only
> answer to 'why', is 'because'. 3) i don't know how
> to describe it, but i know it when i see it.
> in response to doland's query re: the pinnacle of
> the vintage era, i tried to define its downslide by
> inferring that once the pre-finished frame parts
> came to be in full time use by full production factories
> to small framebuiders, bikes, as were previously,
> were no longer 'made', as much as they were 'assembled'.
> i would compare it to heathcliff make-your-own
> televsion kits, or slr cameras, or even player pianos!
> the investment cast parts/plug-in dropouts/one-piece
> brake bridge/bridgeless bb shell with CAST-IN cable
> guides...all these time items came into being, not to raise
> the quality level of the frame, but to reduce the man hours/labor
> needed to produce a decent frame. the quality level at frames
> shops had always been high. using the newer pieces added
> nothing. perhaps not even efficiency. on the other hand,
> as frame factories moved in to this era, it was possible to
> add the cache of custom framebuilding to what previoiusly
> were factory level frames.
> after a point in time, the details that helped to make up
> the hallmarks of fine framebuilding were now, essentially,
> for sale to anyone who cared to omit/bypass experience,
> training, intuition, etc., and make a lot of frames without
> the labor previously needed. i view it as a good thing, not
> otherwise. it allowed the bar to be raised for all involved.
> but it heralded out the time that my answer to doland
> was meant to address. period.
> when all needed to make a table is a tool and a piece
> of wood, both available from home depot, such a table
> would not likely be revered in 'fine woodworking'
> magazine, nor should it. the same holds true within the
> context of vintage/pinnacle/etc. as my reply to doland
> suggested: soul-less.
> e-RICHIE
> who's replying to:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:57:18 EST M4Campy@aol.com writes:
> Hello all-
> Since several members have talked about the "soul" of bicycles being
> lost on the downside of the /pinnacle/
> I guess it begs the question...
> What gives a bicycle soul?