Re: [CR]The canard of lightweight - Simplification

(Example: Framebuilders:Cecil Behringer)

Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 17:57:12 -0700
From: "Chuck Schmidt" <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]The canard of lightweight - Simplification
References: <20030226005757.95080.qmail@web13309.mail.yahoo.com> <008201c2dd38$e3445ad0$e4e45cd1@YOUNGC>


Well yeah, when it is something like my '59 Mercian Superlight with the bikini lugs! Lug'd steel fixed gear "road/track" bikes weight around 16 to 18 without all the extra stuff a gear'd bike has.

The English "road/track" fixed gear bike is the one thing I can't thank the Brits enough for! Sublime!

Chuck "48x16" Schmidt L.A.

"Charles T. Young" wrote:
>
> Depends. Does the 16 pound bike have nice head lugs to look at and a
> pleasant ride? If I've got my head down for 150 km, I'd rather be looking at
> something besides toothpaste / stack 'o dime welds and not get beaten up by
> a frame with harsh ride characteristics.
>
> It is all rather hypothetical in my case, so I can be an aesthete rather
> than an athlete.
>
> While a black and tan sounds good, the single malt cupboard is a closer. It
> may go better with canard anyway.
>
> Charlie
>
> Charles T. Young
> Honeybrook. PA
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "ken denny" <kendenny66@yahoo.com>
> To: "wayofftheback" <wayofftheback@yahoo.com>;
> <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 7:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [CR]The canard of lightweight - Simplification
>
> >
> > Sure I can. In fact, I'll simplify even further. if yyou were doing a
> 150km flat time trial would you choose to do it with a 15 pound bike or a 16
> pound bike, if both bikes offered the same levels of performance and there
> was zero risk in choosing the bike that weighed less?
> > Besides, it's fun!! (get it???).
> > You are beating a dead horse.
> > Ken (the only hub in this universe is the bulge around my mid-winter
> waist - damn them Black 'n Tan's are good!) Denny
> > Boston