Re: [CR]re: classic mexican bikes

Example: Production Builders:Tonard

Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 14:39:20 -0800
From: Brian Baylis <>
Subject: Re: [CR]re: classic mexican bikes
References: <001001c08fb7$4d479d60$719afea9@chasds>


I wouldn't go (anywhere near) agreeing with that statement. Since I have a somewhat different perspective on how a frame is or isn't built; and having seen on many occassions the internal (and most important) aspects of how many frames are constructed, Mexican frames don't compare favorably to Itilian built frames. There are exceptions to every rule of course. Goes to show you that what you see on the outside does not always indicate what kind of care was actually taken during the construction process. Not to mention how many frames have first class paintwork on top of 3rd rate (or worse) construction. There are SOOOO MANY details to the framebuilding process that any number of them can be overlooked, some of which will not affect the lifespan or performence of the bike, and others that will be adverse. Which is which? Maybe you'd better book a flight to the "framebuilding clinic" at the 2001 Cirque de Cyclisme to get the dope on this subject! Not going to be able to explain it in writing. Just my humble opinion as always; not to rag on any nationality or make blanket statements to be taken out of context.

Brian Baylis La Mesa (Mexican name for my town), CA (another Mexican name, no?)
> Many people slag on Mexican and
> latin american products but all the bicycles I've seen from "south of the
> border" have been at least on par with the Italians.
> *******I've probably seen a half-dozen Windsor pros over 25 years and every one of them looked quite crude to me. Seems strange anyone would be fooled into thinking one was a Cinelli, no matter the decals involved. I've also seen a couple of lower-line mexican benottos and they weren't anything to write home about either....about like a japanese midline frame in terms of finish.


> Charles Andrews