Re: [CR]NOW: this horse is different:was:This horse is dead

(Example: Racing)

To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
Cc: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]NOW: this horse is different:was:This horse is dead
From: "Richard M Sachs" <richardsachs@juno.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 21:27:45 -0500

snipped: <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net> writes: "...Steel has been obsoleted because it is heavier."

a pound of steel weighs more than a pound of aluminum? e-RICHIE chester, ct

On Sat, 30 Nov 2002 17:18:48 -0700 Chuck Schmidt <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net> writes:
> Richard M Sachs wrote:
> >
> > e-CHUCKIE
> > i disagree with your point of view at this mail's bottom.
> > the reason, in essence, that there are no lugged frames
> > is this (and this is a VERY GENERAL overview...):
> (cut)
> > these lugged bicycles don't exist in the mainstream anymore
> > due to economic reasons, not due to reasons relating to the
> > industry's "working toward(s) a more competitive bike."
>
> E-Richie,
>
> I respectfully disagree with the above:
>
> In the bike industry (concerning racing bikes)...
> The public wants the bikes the pros are winning on.
>
> In the pro peloton...
> Lugged steel has been obsoleted because it is heavier. Steel has
> been
> obsoleted because it is heavier.
>
> A competitive bike in the pro peloton is not a steel bike and the
> chief
> reason is weight.
>
> Chuck Schmidt
> SoPas, SoCal