Re: [CR]Spec Weight vs. Reality

(Example: Books)

From: "P.C. Kohler" <kohl57@starpower.net>
To: "Pete Geurds" <raleighpro@dejazzd.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <20050130071359.3645.qmail@web30510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <003001c506c8$e0ababa0$0100000a@home> <006501c506dc$18799480$c75f0e44@ownerejujeippx> <003701c506e3$f19f02c0$22e0fea9@man> <001001c506eb$97a60bd0$0100000a@home>
Subject: Re: [CR]Spec Weight vs. Reality
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:57:40 -0500



----- Original Message -----
From: Pete Geurds
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [CR]Spec Weight vs. Reality



> My calculator's not handy, 59cm is what 231/2"?
> You can bet they weighed the 201/2" model for the catalog.
> Also, cynical me wonders if the pump, and the clips&straps made it on for
> the weigh-in.
>
> Pete Geurds
> Douglassville, Pa

Yes... 59 cm is approx 23 1/2" c-t-t.

No pump but the spec chromed steel Cristophe toe-clips.

I suspect, as others have privately e-mailed, spec weights were based on 56 cm. But that's not enough to account for 2 lbs. Maybe that titanium axle, give or take some for a imprecise scale and more for some brochure chicanery equals more or less what I got! I know... I still have the crank dustcaps on... that's what's doing it.

Peter Kohler
Washington DC USA