[CR]record components

(Example: Framebuilding)

Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 04:31:20 -0800
From: "Dennis Young" <mail@woodworkingboy.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
In-Reply-To: <CATFOODuF4MUWLIUe6y00001f0b@catfood.nt.phred.org>
Subject: [CR]record components

Sorry, off time period, but I still have to disagree with Louis. I have ridden the post super record, record components on a bike that has provided more than satisfactory service throughout the kilometers, over 25,000 to date. The bottom bracket is the only part that has required replacement. I agree that there are a few somewhat quizzical engineering arrangements, the shifting is not comparable to the same time period Dura ace, and I had one bum hub that was probably a factory defect, but I wouldn't refer to the set up as a disaster. I will still take those components over their Japanese counterparts when you consider the design appearance. Lightness was a factor if you were possibly outfiting a racing team, but Super Mario managed to win a few races with those disasters. Contrary to your post, I think that the finish leaves something to be desired, as it doesn't hold up that well to oxidation, even with regular cleaning and waxing. Are your conclusions based on first hand experience?

Dennis Young Hotaka, Japan
>
> And I have to disagree with this. The post-Super Record componenent
> groups (Record, Croce d'Aune, Chorus and Athena), while beautifully
> finished, were engineering disasters. They were heavy and didn't work
> well. Campy lost almost its entire market share as a result of these
> groups. They were lucky not to go out of business entirely. The
> C-Record group may become collectible, as the Edsel of the Campy

> family.

>

> Louis Schulman

> Tam