Re: [CR]Was: Frame integrity, now modern components on old frames


Example: Framebuilders:Chris Pauley
From: <"richardsachs@juno.com">
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:50:21 GMT
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]Was: Frame integrity, now modern components on old frames



-- "Daniel Artley" wrote:


"...one of the reasons that I'm hooked on old steel bikes is the ride that modern steel bikes I've ridden don't seem to have, the comfort, the handling, not just the cache'. I would think that most of the CR people have something with modern shifting in their garages..."

snipped:


-- "Daniel Artley" wrote:


"I don't wish to venture off CR timeline, but one of the reasons that I'm hooked on old steel bikes is the ride that modern steel bikes I've ridden don't seem to have, the comfort, the handling, not just the cache'..."

those are interesting points. re the first - it's too bad the industry went an uprooted the classic-type frame in its quest to produce more units using higher efficiency/less manpower. re the second - that's another conundrum, as if to suggest that the older frames are listworthy but the older parts are just sort of window dressing "of the time". i don't use old stuff so it's difficult to put myself into the example, but don't the old frames and the old parts equally comprise the reason there's a CR list in the first place?
e-RICHIE
chester, ct