Re: [CR]Nagasawa track bikes

(Example: Racing:Wayne Stetina)

To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:43:37 -0500
Subject: Re: [CR]Nagasawa track bikes
From: "Richard M Sachs" <richardsachs@juno.com>
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

i betcha he builds at least 150 plus frames a year. not a small output in my mind. and - i meant "butt boy", nt "but boy". sorry. i have been following nagasawa since the mid 70s. there's a piece in the archives about it. if it's lost i can forward it again. btw, i missed you. e-RICHIE chester, ct

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:37:57 -0700 Chuck Schmidt <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net> writes: I think they look very Japanese and if I was buying a Japanese bike I'd want it to look very Japanese, so that's all good; but streamlined output isn't what I want to see in a bike frame from a smaller output builder.

And by the way... what is "a long time nagasawa but boy"??????????????????

Chuck Schmidt South Pasadena, Southern California

Richard M Sachs wrote:
>
> yes. no. no. no. dunno. yes.
>
> i'm saying that i personally cannot eschew* them due to
> the "labor saving" reasons because history has shown
> that they pre-date the ones we all love - the campagnolo
> 1053 set - with all the gee-gaws added on. there's no
> disputin' that. are they great for track frames? all that
> matters is if itcheygoomie nagasawa likes them and feels
> he's not stepping backwards in choosing them. would i use
> them? yes - but i wouldn't turn my back on the gee-gawed
> ones either. it would depend on the application.
> heck - if he's going to the effort to eliminate some elbow
> grease so that his output is streamlined, why not gussy
> them up. to my eye they are a little much, but i'm a long
> time nagasawa but boy so i'll cut him more slack than most.
>
> e-RICHIE
> chester, ct
> * i just wanted to use "eschew" in a sentence.