This wheel weight thing has me puzzled. My early '80's DeRosa has Gel 280's (tubulars), laced to Ofmega low flange hubs, 32h. (7 speed). My "modern" Richard Sachs rides on Mavic Reflex tubulars, 32h Record 9-speed. (1'ST generation - they are lighter now). I admit to not having put these wheelsets on a scale, but the new ones feel as light or lighter, and have proven indestructable especially compared to the Gel 280's. BTW, everything about the newer bike is better than the older bike. But, the DeRosa is very pretty. Just not as pretty as the Sachs! Richard Rose (Toledo, Ohio)
-----Original Message----- From: classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org [mailto:classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org] On Behalf Of Bicycle Classics inc Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 11:15 PM To: Moos, Jerry; 'walter skrzypek'; classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: RE: [CR]Bike technology peaked in the 1984?
A few comments on Jerry's comments.
Jerry hits it right on with wheel weight. If someone in 1970 was to say that hubs would have 10 cogs on them and that rims would be 140 grams heavier they'd be called a nut. It is nuts. We've had manufacturers of high-tech wheels tell us its nuts. We've had "founders" of cutting edge titanium frame companies tell us its nuts.
Why does this crazy wheel thing persist? I think it has to do with the demise of tubulars. From observation, you can't make a clincher rim that weighs much under 400g hold up, but you can make a sub 300g tubular rim that is somewhat well behaved. If nobody rides tubulars, than let the rim weights go to $@(#. Oh well, tubulars still rule!
Mike Kone