Re: [CR]re: We are truly... mainstream-how much faster you'd be


Example: Production Builders

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 18:36:09 -0600
From: "Mitch Harris" <mitch.harris@gmail.com>
To: "John Barron" <jb@velostuf.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]re: We are truly... mainstream-how much faster you'd be
In-Reply-To: <2EE0D947EB994CD09AE26EA77EF8F2D3@JB>
References: <2EE0D947EB994CD09AE26EA77EF8F2D3@JB>
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

On 8/2/07, John Barron <jb@velostuf.com> wrote:
> It would be romantic if old bikes were as fast as new bikes, wouldn't it?
> Well, without getting too worked-up about this, I'll tell you all that my
> experience shows that a $3,000 Heuer watch from the 60's doesn't keep as
> good a time as a $9.99 quartz watch bought today; a $100,000 Ferarri from
> the 60's doesn't perform, overall, as well as a $22,000 Camry bought today,

Faulty analogies, each.

Mitch Harris Little Rock Canyon, Utah
> and a $5,000 Cinelli, Masi, DeRosa, whatever from the 60's will NEVER
> perform as well as a $600 race bike bought today.
>
>
>
> What we love about racing bikes from the old days can not be expressed in
> elapsed time over 20 kilometers. It's MUCH more. So, PLEASE get over the
> fact that all the bikes we spend time, money and bandwidth on, are dogs when
> compared to modern bikes. Your argument that "you are unlikely to be faster
> on a modern bike" is like trying to divide by zero. It doesn't compute.
>
>
>
> * Old bikes are cool for lots of reasons
>
> * Modern bikes are boring/generic for lots of reasons
>
> * We embrace the old bikes for reasons that many people won't ever "get"
>
> * If old bikes were as fast as modern bikes, we wouldn't have to try to
> explain all of the subtleties as to why we dig old race bikes
>
> * Everyone should on the list should think about accepting the fact that
> while it would be convenient to simply say, "it's the rider, not the
> equipment", the reality is that modern bikes kick bloody arse on the old
> bikes. I raced for 13 years, and although I HATE to admit it, modern bikes
> make me significantly faster!
>
>
>
>
>
> John Barron
>
> Minneapolis
>
>
>
>
>
> "Norm and Val Lafleur" wrote:
>
>
>
> Marcus, sounds like a great weekend. I know how you ride and I don't think
> you had to worry about embarassing yourself.
>
>
>
> The comment in your note that really caught my attention was, "think how
> much faster you'd be on a new bike." A few years ago after 20 years of
> beating myself up trying to stay with the fast guys on the local century I
> thought I'd try something different....ride it on a fixed gear. If you
> can't be fast go for style points. So in 2004 at age 61 I did a fixed gear
> century. I was amazed at how few other riders noticed. Those that did were
> usually sitting on my wheel when suddenly they would say "hey you don't have
> a brake" and I would respond "and no gears either".
>
> The following year I continued the "style" theme by riding my 1988 Basso
> Loto with 7 speed friction C Record shifting. Again mostly unnoticed.
>
> The third year I rode my modern carbon Trek with 10speed Ergo.
>
>
>
> The result was that I finished all three rides within 5 minutes of each
> other. So, I believe you are unlikely to be faster on a modern bike unless
> you are riding hilly terrain where weight and wider gear ranges might make a
> difference.
>
>
>
> You might be faster however by swapping the sneakers for cleated shoes.
>

>

>

> Norm Lafleur

>

> Ashfield, Ma.