Re: [RE: [CR]Bike technology peaked in the 1984?]

(Example: Production Builders:Tonard)

To: jtagli1@uic.edu
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:56:10 -0400
Subject: Re: [RE: [CR]Bike technology peaked in the 1984?]
From: "Richard M Sachs" <richardsachs@juno.com>


my input re:

On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:07:59 -0500 John Taglia <jtagli1@uic.edu> writes: <<<even Richard Sachs has been known to build with OS tubes. (anyway, if he didn't,...>>> all my frames are full-oversized frames with modern (?) tube sizes, and are joined with pinned lugs, as they've always been. the exception is when i am commissioned to make a pre-90s type frame with what-was-then 'typical' tubing and pressed steel lugs. it's the client's choice.

<<<Of course, today it is harder to buildtobuild the artisan type bikes as nothing but investment cast lugs are manufactured (and apparently fewer of those),>>> there are plenty of lugs available for oversize, modern (?) tube sizes. most of them are androgynous. with some imagination, these can be finessed.

<<<not to mention the economics of competing with third world labor.>>> it helps if you convince yourself that we're the fourth world.

also, then versus now/what's better... as a racer, i need an even playing field. therefore, 9-10 gears, (not speeds!!!!), are better. and ergopower IS better. anyone who has ever ascended-while-shifting/shifted-while-ascending will attest to the fact that if you sit down (in the peloton) to shift, you will lose 20 places in the field. if you don't compete, none of this matters. but we can't expect the industry, (i don't consider myself part of the industry), to make parts for multiple segments of an already-small market. e-RICHIE