And isn't it funny that there was a lot less interest in fixed gear/single speed specific bikes when everything was 6 or 7 speed.............. David Feldman
> You have some valid points, but I don't agree about new equipment being
> more practical and economical to maintain. While it may be expensive to
> maintain something one actually rides in completely original condition,
> as some CRers do, it is infinitely easier to maintain classic equpiment
> in functional condition than with new equipment. This is the whole
> philosophy behind Rivendell and the iBOB list and is shared by many on
> the CR list. Tried to buy an 8-speed cassette in the combo you want
> lately? Campy 9 speeds will probably soon become a problem. When one
> replaces Ergo/STI components one has to be sure the new chain is
> compatible with the cassette, is compatible with the dreailleur, is
> compatible with the shifters, not to mention chain with cassette with
> chainrings. Don't mix 10 speed with 9 speed with 8 speed. Don't mix
> Campy with Shimano, and if someone else makes it, figure which it is
> campatible with and if they make both, don't mix the Shimano type ones
> with the Campy type ones from the same manufacturer. This is cheap?
> This is easy? Sometimes it is easier to just chuck the whole gruppo and
> buy the latest coolest one, which of course the Shimano marketerers want
> you to. And while you're at it maybe you should just buy a new bike as
> last year's Ti model didn't have adequate Al/V numbers, whatever that
> meant. A disposable bike - the marketer's dream. That classic 7 speed
> FW on the other hand can be replaced with 7 or 6 or 5 speed FW, Regina
> or SunTour or Atom or Shimano with a Regina or Sedis or HHK or Shimano
> chain with Campy or Simplex or Suntour or Shimano or Huret derailleurs,
> the same front and back or not, with matching shift levers or not, with
> a dozen brands of pedals from 1920 to 1990 that could all use the same
> cleats or no cleats at all. Have to watch a bit for French and Swiss
> thread, but the vast majority of bikes made from the mid 70s to 1990
> have the compatible threads except only for BB. Replace almost any
> classic component with almost any other classic component you have handy
> or can buy cheap or just happen to fancy. Isn't that easier?
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerry Moos
>
> Tom Dalton wrote:
>
> > David,
> > To characterize consumers as "suckers" simply because
> > they buy what is made available to them might be bit
> > unfair. Perhaps you are simply suggesting that the
> > bike industry (and the publications that are supported
> > by it) is not putting customers' needs first these
> > days. I would have to agree with that. But, I bet
> > it's a lot easier to point to Lance Armstrong's Trek,
> > say "it weighs 18 pounds and has 18 gears and he won
> > the Tour de France," than to say "you're old, over
> > weight, and you're no Lance Armstrong. Your
> > requirements are nothing like his. To obtain a
> > posture that your tired body is capable of
> > maintaining, you need a bigger frame. Given that you
> > don't have a personal mechanic or an unlimited supply
> > of chains and freewheels, and considering that you
> > don't know how to properly select your gears anyway,
> > you don't need 9-speed STI... "
> >
> > To be sure, significant forces in the bike industry
> > are selling customers gear that will ultimately hinder
> > their progress as riders and drive them away from the
> > sport. These are the companies that sold everyone
> > MTB's (yuk) and then fully-suspended MTB's
> > (double-uck) and now nobody is buying much of
> > anything. They didn't enjoy cycling, even after they
> > bought in to the $2000 Y-bike. They've moved on. Go
> > figure. The bike industry certainly shoots itself in
> > the foot now and again.
> >
> > Getting back to the poor consumer, how can we blame
> > him or her? Without significant experience, or honest
> > advice from someone with significant experience, he or
> > she is left to use what's most readily available.
> > This leads me to a certain gripe I have about
> > attitudes voiced by some CRer's and other Retro types:
> > Is it reasonable to expect that people will go out of
> > their way to track down out-of-production equipment to
> > "enhance" their riding experiece, when what most
> > people care about is the ride and not the asthetics,
> > history, nostalgia, etc. that drives us to our strange
> > pursuit? Really, if I'm going for any half-serious
> > ride I ain't packing friction shifting, toeclips, or
> > tubulars, be sure of that. The new stuff is simply
> > better. If I ever get back to the point where I'm
> > riding more than twice a week, I'll be 9-speed STI'ing
> > as soon as I can afford it. Aside from that fact that
> > such systems provide performance advantages over my
> > current 7-speed downtube system, I just don't want to
> > have to hunt down old style Campy axles and NOS
> > 7-speed freewheels when I inevitably need them. I
> > don't have the time or the money to use and maintain
> > collectable equipment. I'll save it for the ocasional
> > nostalgia ride.
> >
> > BTW- It was Rodale Press. Now it's Rodale Inc. Since
> > they fired everyone who actually rode a bike, Bicyling
> > has become a bigger rag than ever. I can't tell ad
> > from editorial anymore. But are they really a
> > significant influence on consumers? I think shop
> > employees and fellow riders have a lot more influence
> > here. Most people are smart enough to see Bicycling
> > for what it is.
> >
> > Tom Dalton
> >
> > --- Diane Feldman <feldmanbike@home.com> wrote:
> > > And it's why most recreational riders are suckers if
> > > they let themselves get
> > > scammed into buying the newest types of road bikes
> > > by bike companies or
> > > Rodale Publishing!
> > > David Feldman
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Andrew & Merilee Gillis"
> > > <apgmaa@earthlink.net>
> > > To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 10:01 PM
> > > Subject: [CR]RE: Frame size/saddle-height/handlebar
> > > height
> > >
> > >
> > > > To all CR's:
> > > >
> > > > I want to thank Tom Dalton for his thorough and
> > > well reasoned coverage of
> > > > the issue of modern vs retro saddle height (and
> > > handlebar height). I only
> > > > want to add a few items to his list (IMHO):
> > > >
> > > > 1. My copy of Bernard Hinault's (& Claude
> > > Genzling's) book "Road Racing
> > > > Technique and Training" comments on pg 101
> > > (Climbing, seated back) :
> > > >
> > > > "The position for flat riding that we described
> > > earlier is also good for
> > > > climbing, especially because the saddle is high.
> > > If road riders used to
> > > > feel they had to raise their saddles for mountain
> > > passes, it was because
> > > > they were often too low by ergonomic standards."
> > > >
> > > > 2. Besides all of the modern road and technology
> > > improvements which have
> > > > increased bicycle speed and necessitated a
> > > powerful and aerodynamic
> > > > position, I think that the increase in high
> > > dollar/high stakes racing
> > > > sponsorship promotes a trend towards "perfect"
> > > body types. Those whose
> > > > physiologies aren't skeletally perfect just don't
> > > cut it.
> > > >
> > > > 3. Modern arched cycling shoes allow for a higher
> > > seat position due to the
> > > > alignment of the foot. Old style flat-soled shoes
> > > (I'm virtually certain)
> > > > promoted a flatter angle of the foot and
> > > consequently a lower seat height.
> > > >
> > > > 4. A too-low handlebar position is verifiably hard
> > > on the body. I have
> > > some
> > > > mild bone spurs in the back of my neck due to 20
> > > years of straining to
> > > > raise my head up. I've solved this problem by
> > > using an extended steering
> > > > tube (added a 13mm headset washer) and a higher
> > > stem.
> > > >
> > > > The Nitto "Pearl 12" stem is the same horizontal
> > > size as a 13 cm Cinelli,
> > > > but is vertically 4mm higher than a Cinelli 1A,
> > > and 6mm higher than a
> > > > Cinelli XA, relative to their maximum heights
> > > >
> > > > I'm also glad to have the option of installing a
> > > 3T "Morphe" handlebar if
> > > I
> > > > ever need to go higher (about 13mm higher than
> > > 1997 Cinelli Eubios).
> > > >
> > > > 5. I was indirectly reminded of the
> > > non-correlation of my bicycle design
> > > > and posture to modern "professional" machines thru
> > > an article in European
> > > > Car magazine: A comparison between the VW 1.8
> > > turbo engine and a Formula 1
> > > > engine showed that the two designs are so
> > > task-specific that there is
> > > > virtually no similarity!
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Andrew Gillis (warming up in Long Beach, CA)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Classicrendezvous mailing list
> > > > Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > > >
> > >
> > http://www.bikelist.org/
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Classicrendezvous mailing list
> > > Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > >
> > http://www.bikelist.org/
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
> > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Classicrendezvous mailing list
> > Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > http://www.bikelist.org/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> http://www.bikelist.org/