Re: [CR]performance vs. longevity :was cranks

(Example: Production Builders:Cinelli:Laser)

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 11:27:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Tom Dalton" <tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]performance vs. longevity :was cranks
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <A5E72E8AE73AD311954A009027887CFF60DC94@SLSERVER>


Grant, I swear I'm not making it my mission to pick on everything you say, but... Another reason low end parts don't break as much is that they aren't ridden as hard or as much. At a given weight (a big assumption) a high quality part will last longer. Tom Dalton Bethlehem, PA Grant McLean wrote: What a struggle product managers must have.......

Professional riders have always wanted lighter weight, and don't care how long parts last or how much they cost, because they never buy them. Paying customers want the same parts as the pro's to make themselves appear authentic, assuming that the "top of the line" parts are best for their own long term use. As a retailer, I can tell you some recreational riders are bigger weight freaks than the Pro's.

Farther back than Super Record ti parts, high-end bike parts have been used other than as they were intended: for racing. Why should any part designed for racing last longer than one Tour de France.... or one stage of the Tour for that matter?

Most lower end parts don't break, so if you want parts that last, don't buy parts that push the envelope.

Grant McLean Toronto, over flowing landfills, Canada

_______________________________________________

---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes