Hello Peter, Why because you could be astride a lethal rust bucket that's why. You love talking about death pedals, death forks and death stems which lets face it just stupid hysteria! But the most important thing the main safety issue the frame, what all the components are hanging off could have been built at least 50 years ago from tubing which might even be pre war. The other factor is that this frame might have been refinished at least six or seven times, that's fierce shot blasting with inevitably some loss of metal. This ain't rocket science but good old fashioned common sense. Now we come to equipment and it is patently obvious that you have never ridden a 150 on a Sunday when the equipment you so beloved love from that rose tinted past was the norm. Derailleur gear cables breaking leaving you stuck in top gear, punctures on Boa alloys HP's causing your tyre to roll off the rim, Asp internal punctures because of their design, these had to have a special rim tape fitted like a wick and for good measure we had to stick an extra piece of rubber on the inner tube around the valve hole. Leather saddles that made you feel like you were acting in Brokeback Mountain. No the equipment of the 70's and 80's was far superior to anything previous or since. Personally to use a well known hard arsed British cycling expression I think you are talking absolute bollocks. Give me a Copeland, Millar, Sachs or Bayliss built to a 60's road racing design with 70/80's gear. Why because I wan't to ride the bleeding thing and breath the wind not park it up and some pseudo rally and pose with it just for some tosser to come along and say that Bluemells never made that colour mudguard when your Ephgrave was built. Each to their own but this is my own slant. That's what makes this sport of ours so great opinions and characters. Be lucky Mick. Greatest cycling innovation ever plastic Unica saddles that you didn't have to break in or worry about getting wet, these were in the days when there were no plastic bags to keep them dry outside the caff's.
--- "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I admit I didn't even know what a "KOF" was until I
> had joined the CR List
> And was too embarassed to ask. I think it's swell
> there are folks who st
> build bikes the traditional way.
> But I am not in the market for them.
> Because I don't quite see the point. A good steel,
> lugged frame of the
> right size and geometry and build quality is the
> same if it's built c. 1
> or 2006. And an original classic frame from one of
> the famous builders o
> manufacturers has the added benefit of the history,
> tradition and ethos
> that comes with it. And such frames can be restored
> to within a inch of
> their lives so you can, if you wish, have perfection
> instead of patina.
> what of components? Mitch Butler suggests 1970s-80s
> components on these.
> Hmmm? Now that really does beg the question. Why? If
> anything, moder
> components are superior than the old ones in terms
> of performance. And i
> you accept 1970s bits, why not 1970s frames? To me,
> if you bought into t
> KOF idea, you'd go for modern components and not
> "try" to be retro. Rea
> retro is, if anything, a LOT cheaper. That gorgeous
> 1954 Stella I lusted
> over on eBay sold for about a third of a fully
> fitted out KOF. Pristine.
> Perfect. Real character. Original. And cheaper, too.
> So it's a matter of horses for courses. I have no
> "problem" with KOF thi
> or that. But until the supply of original 59 cm-62
> cm racing frames from
> the CR List era runs out, I just can't see myself
> being in the market for
> Peter Kohler
> Washington DC USA
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
Thats all for now. Keep those wheels spinning, in your memories if not still on the road. Be lucky Mick Butler Huntingdon UK.
Classicrendezvous mailing list