Re: [CR]Old equipment race-worthy?

(Example: Production Builders:Peugeot)

Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Dalton" <tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]Old equipment race-worthy?
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <a0501040fb9006ea2d277@[165.121.26.60]>


Jan Heine <heine@mindspring.com> wrote: Remember when Rominger won the hour record on a steel Colnago that looked like it was built in the 1970s?

That one had aero bars and composite wheels right? And aren't these the only two major changes since the Merckx hour record?
>>I am sure most racers have the "souplesse" to make do with a few less gears - in fact, many of >>them don't seem to shift all that much.

Less fit guys like myself have less ability to pedal at varying speeds. Having more gears helps me perhaps more than it helps real racers.
>>And when it comes to long-distance riding, which is competitive as
>>well, the modern stuff with its many opportunities to break down
>>becomes a liability.

I suppose light frames fail more (though still rarely) but the two most common failures of good equipment, flats and broken spokes are significantly less common than ten or more years ago. Anything else is usually bad set-up and maintenance.
>>Only one development comes to mind that has increased performance
>>measurably (except Biopace):

I wonder why nobody uses it?
>>Aerobars. But even those are
>>uncomfortable on long distances (150+ miles), making them a liability
>>rather than an asset in my opinion.

Doesn't it depend on setup and training? Weren't the ultra-distance guys the first to use these, primarily because they allowed a more relaxed position when set high?

Tom Dalton Bethlehem, PA

---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Mother's Day is May 12th!