Re: [CR]To ride or not/fairly short...

(Example: Framebuilders)

To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]To ride or not/fairly short...
From: "Richard M Sachs" <richardsachs@juno.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2002 20:18:39 -0400

rare use of upper case by: e-RICHIE of chester, ct

<chuckschmidt@earthlink.net> writes: In today's state of the art racing bikes, a method of joining tubes that adds less than 3 oz is, to quote a friend of mine, "Off the back, Jack!" HUH? ARE YOU MAKING A COMMENT OR POSING A QUESTION? You said, "...i have a modern bicycle that i like and i wouldn't enjoy my cycling as much on a bicycle with less efficient parts, or on one that weighed 4 pounds more..." Modern bicycles are all about weight, which is just one of the reasons lug steel construction is moot. And with modern bicycles (we are talking about racing bicycles I assume) 3 oz count. MY INITIAL POINT MENTIONED 4 POUNDS. I WOULD NOT WANT A 4 POUND WEIGHT PENALTY IF I COULD AVOID IT. MY MODERN BICYCLE ALLOWS ME TO DO THAT. I DON'T THINK THAT TURNING THE 4 POUND ISSUE INTO THE 3 OUNCE ISSUE IS A VERY SPORTING THING TO DO! You say, "...i'm just not all that keen on using something i had used for tens of thousands of miles back in the day that the goods were new, not classic." My comment, "Nostalgia isn't what it use to be, I guess." CHUCKIE-ARE YOU AGREEING WITH ME OR SKEWERING ME? I'M GETTING MOVEMENT JUST THINKING OF THE POS- SIBILITY OF BEING IN ACCORD WITH YOU. I MEAN, IT'S LIKE WE'RE REACHING ACROSS THE ENTIRE CONTINENT, ACROSS THE HEARTLAND, OVER THE ROCKIES AND THE GRAND TETONS, AND WELL PAST ALL THE DESERT WASTELAND AND SAYING, "YOU DA' MAN, YOU DA' OTHER MAN." WHATDA' COUNTRY!