> I forgot to mention in my previous post, that personally I never have given a second thought to ANY bicycle based on who rode one or who won races on what machine. The LAST thing I care about in a frame is WHO rides one, followed closely by what RACES were won on what bikes.
Well ditto... I was simply replying to those who are of the opinion (perfectly valid and well stated) that Italian bikes are best because they won this and that and were ridden by him or them. I mean the King of Italy rode a Bianchi and the King of England rode a Humber. So what? They never had to save up their newpaper money to buy their first "lightweight" like I did! And that was a Peugeot folks, too. Not a Raleigh.
But there is nothing invalid about discussing the nationality of a bike. What I have tried to bring to this discussion is before the Global Village of today, nations DID bring differences to cycling as with other things. And that played an important role in the design and evolution of the bicycle.
Did it matter if the King of England rode a Humber? No. But it did matter that seven million of his countrymen enjoyed pleasure cycling compared to say in Italy. It did matter that Italians built and designed bikes based on their experiences with cycling. As did the British. And the French. Rather than today when it's designed in Seattle, built in China and sold on the global internet. It would be a damn poor show if the Italian genius for creating things of exquisite beauty didn't translate into a bicycle. Or the British hand at engineering didn't reflect in the perfection of an FC hub.
Washington DC USA