Re: [CR]No more DeRosas : they all broke ?!?!

(Example: Framebuilding:Tubing)

Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:33:00 -0800
From: "Steve Maas" <stevem@nonlintec.com>
To: chuckschmidt@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: [CR]No more DeRosas : they all broke ?!?!
References: <c1.4ab9a8ee.2ebe963a@aol.com> <418D865C.1070302@nonlintec.com> <418D896B.F67A260C@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <418D896B.F67A260C@earthlink.net>
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

I didn't write the original question. It was from Don Gillies, I think.

Steve Maas Long Beach, CA

Chuck Schmidt wrote:
> Steve Maas wrote:
>
> (snip... about the test)
>
>>To me, this is sloppy work, decorated with sloppy thinking.
>
>
>
> Steve, reading your conclusion above makes me wonder why you wrote your
> original question:
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Do you wonder if perhaps the reason why the early 1970's SLX DeRosas
> are so rare, is because these framesets have all broken ??
> Quite possibly - after all, the DeRosa in this fatigue-limit test
> performed the worst out of 20 bikes !! And will we be stuck with TREK
> OCLV frames for a long, long, long time because apparently they are
> balanced in a way that allows them to survive many fatigue cycles ??"
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Reads pretty much like a troll? Or perhaps the emoticon was missing?
>
> Chuck Schmidt
> South Pasadena, Southern California
>
> .
> _______________________________________________


>

> .