Yes, it is Dale's list, and if Dale says 1983, then 1983 it is. Personally I have voiced the opinion that a slightly later date might be more suitable, arguing that gear from the the mid-to-late 80's was not substantially different from that in the list timeframe. The fat aluminum tubes, tig welding, carbon monocoques, deep-section rims etc didn't really come around to offend us until the 90's. However, my New England Democrat ancestry drives be to play both sides here (just kidding, I never bought into the baseless flip-flopper accusation). I think there is one very significant event that supports the "1983 good, 1984 and later bad" list rules. In the very beginning of 1984 Moser took his disc wheeled funny bike and captured the world hour record. The UCI allowing use of that bike opened the flood gates. Later that year the US dominated the 1984 Olympics with their fancy Huffys. While in truth this dominance was primarily due to the absence of the eastern block riders, the events solidified the idea that equipment matters. While cyclists have always sought a technical advantage, I think the Moser record and the '84 Olympics did a lot to stir the pot at a time when most riders had been happy with their SR-equipped lugged steeel bikes. Well, at least it was good for business. Over the next few years we saw so many other new products, including indexing, clipless pedals, and more non-lugged non-steel frames. LeMond dragging those dreadful triathalon bars into the 1989 TdF, and the UCI once again sitting back and letting it happen, really took things to a new low. Again, good for business, but at that point the discipline of time trialing had been redefined. The UCIs efforts to reel things in have been nothing but a diversion form the real 'technological' problems we have today.
Tom
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!