[CR]Best Bike Ever is Meaningless!!- EXCEPT FOR

(Example: Component Manufacturers:Ideale)

Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 9:21:08 -0800
From: <cgallegro@charter.net>
To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sensitivity: Normal
Subject: [CR]Best Bike Ever is Meaningless!!- EXCEPT FOR

The best ever, thats easy!

Elmira Gulch's bike, very cool and very historical.

I'd buy that one.

Regards Craig Griffith San Luis Obispo, Ca. USA


> Hi CR gang,
>
> Its been said before but this keeps on going - and going so I'll say it again...
>
> The "best bike ever" is a personal thing - kinda like saying who is the best significant other on the planet or what is the best religion (or lack of one however these things are defined).
>
> Everyone is looking for something different, there are countless criteria.
>
> So if someone believes that bicycles which rekindle their memories of the past are important, they love track bikes, they remember a gorgeous day in Boston at the BiEx (bicycle exchange in Cambridge), and they have a thing for bicycles built by alumni of Witcomb USA - than the track bike in question is going to be their best-bike-ever. It is completely rational.
>
> Conversely, some have commented that the bike in question is nothing super special, not truely ornate, built from stock parts etc. But some folks relish these points as being more utilitarian and of serving the bicycles primariy purpose of being a tool (those sterling silver things notwithstanding).
>
> The bottom line..
>
> Shy of the departement store, its pretty much all good.
>
> Mike Kone in Boulder CO
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "Tom Sanders" <tsan7759142@sbcglobal.net>
>
> > I would like to say that one can hardly state with any certainty that one
> > bike is the best ever if one has not even ridden that bike. Or even ridden
> > a bike by that maker. Having said this, I am to be a bit hoisted on my own
> > petard, I fear. I have a wonderful bike that I ride every chance I get,
> > and that I have (probably rashly) proclaimed the best bike ever for years.
> >
> > The reason I say there may well be a flaw in my assessment is not due to any
> > lack in the bike ( A Sachs 25th Ann. Replica), but because a doubter will
> > surely ask me at some point "If you feel you need to have ridden such a bike
> > to make this statement, don't you feel that you also need to have ridden the
> > bikes it might have to be compared with to be sure you are correct?"
> > Ah, there's the rub, alright! While I have ridden a great many of them, my
> > riding experience is by no means complete. I guess that others will have to
> > take into account whether a person making such a statement might actually
> > have any first hand knowledge of that bike, firstly, and secondly, the
> > state of that person's knowledge of bikes in general to determine the worth
> > of the statement or whether he or she is just expressing a general
> > aesthetic approval of the bike in question...and perhaps adding a bit of
> > hyperbole.
> > I guess this is the problem with all such extreme judgments, in the end.
> > Tom Sanders
> > Lansing, Mi USA