Garth, if the audiophile world is any example, it will not cut short. I have a set of Audio magazine covering most of the '50s, and the debates at that time are very similar to the debates of modern times. The underlying issue is the same. Scientific theory gives some valid insight, but it cannot resolve subjective viewpoint on performance. Stress/strain theory and metallurgy allow us to engineer bike frames and predict their performance. This yields predictive models that are very straighforward to apply for tubes and perhaps even for lugs, but might not be easily applicable to all the possible variations of joints.
Another issue is user (rider) motivation. We want to make buying decisions, and we want to buy the preferred riding experience. That experience is exactly what cannot be predicted by engineering theory. We are motivated to seek subjective insight.
Shops want to sell us what we want, or at least what they think they can convince us is what we want. They are motivated to give us subjective insight.
This form of discourse is so far removed from quantititive scientific/engineering discussion and even from the disciplines of scholarly discussion in the humanities, that I always feel one should take everything with a grain of salt, and look at trusting the speaker rather than the statement.
However, YMMV.
Ken Freeman Ann Arbor, MI
-----Original Message----- From: classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org [mailto:classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org] On Behalf Of Bianca Pratorius Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 3:45 AM To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: [CR]Frame flex and double blind tests
Over the years I have enjoyed test riding various older steel frame road bikes. Many of these have been the same size and similar top tube measurements etc... I have noted many obvious differences between various frames, that I think, or imagine could be attributed to construction techniques and tubing type or even construction philosophy, but because I have an open mind on these issues I can not be sure what is the causative factor for what characteristics. I have performed no double blind tests, because of the difficulty of doing so. When I compare say a Colnago to a Fuji or a Schwinn Super le Tour, I do not switch cranks, seat posts, seats, stems and bars, wheels and tires for each comparison. Essentially I am shooting in the dark, but I muddle on, attempting to determine what causes what. It helps to read a bit from individual frame builders' interviews, but perhaps their opinions are somewhat biased. It helps to read what others here at Classic Rendezvous write, but now I see there is very little agreement about an issue I thought was settled. I still think I know something about the issues at hand, but experience often proves a better teacher than theory. I have gone through similar developments in my stereo habit, and think I have arrived at a better experience with my tube hybrid amp, handmade audiophile recipe wiring and sand filled stands, but I still benefit a lot from reading the debates on esoteric and mainstream press. I can honestly say that the recent discussions here have been the most interesting (for me) in a long time, and I hope that nobody is inclined to cut it short just because of lack of agreement.
Garth Libre in Miami Shores Fl.