Re: [CR] Agresti U2..was weenies?

Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:43:03 -0800
From: Steve Maas <>
Subject: Re: [CR] Agresti U2..was weenies?
References: <A5E72E8AE73AD311954A009027887CFFC392FD@SLSERVER> <>

Very good question: "optimized" to us technogeeks implies some kind of trade-off, and obviously there are none in that bike; it's designed for the single purpose of light weight.

Interesting that they included the weight of the air in the tires. Since they're at that level of detail, I wonder if they compensated for buoyancy in air, per Archimedes? Also, why calculate the weight by adding the component weights? Why not just weigh the &%!*#* thing? Maybe because you can use the errors in your favor? Or quietly ignore things like crank bolts?

Hey, maybe they've got something here! We can reduce the weight of our bikes by maybe 3-4 grams by letting the air out of the tires! Improved efficiency!

This is nutso. <flame_bait> Real men ride on steel frames and 36-spoke wheels! </flame_bait>.

Steve Maas Long Beach, California

J.Dunn wrote:
> Two questions:
> What is the definition of "optimized" (I can well imagine) and, just
> curious, do the Tufo Elite tires need no tubes . I mean, they weighed the
> air and tire glue, you'd think the tubes might be a factor if these tires
> aren't tubeless? Maybe this bike is so light the tires don't need tubes?
> And one more comment. I notice that, weight weenie, or whatever, 7 speed,
> it seems, is enough for this guy (always has been for me). ;-)
> John Dunn in Boise
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Grant McLean" <>
> To: "Classic Rendezvous Mail List (E-mail)" <>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 11:47 AM
> Subject: [CR]weenies?
>>This sould be a laugh for most on this list:
>>Classic content: look at those CLB brakes!
>>Grant McLean
>> O \O/
>> _< \_ _< _
>>(_)>(_) (_)>(_)