Re: [CR]Steel vs. carbon frames - was:Classic conciousness, where are you So. Florida?


Example: Events:Cirque du Cyclisme:2007
From: "Questor" <questor@cinci.rr.com>
To: "Charles Andrews" <chasa@classicalradio.org>
Cc: "classicrendezvous" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <6B7290610770D311A14D00805F6F291C81690C@kusc1.kusc.org>
Subject: Re: [CR]Steel vs. carbon frames - was:Classic conciousness, where are you So. Florida?
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 23:22:14 -0500


Sounds like a carbon "pretzel" frame that is stale and would give you indigestion! <GRIN>

Regards, Steve Neago
Cincinnati, OH


----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Andrews
To: 'Questor'
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 7:48 PM
Subject: RE: [CR]Steel vs. carbon frames - was:Classic conciousness, where


are you So. Florida?


> how about a carbon frame that's just plain broken and unusable?...check out
> the busted C-40 now on ebay..
>
> Chales
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Questor [mailto:questor@cinci.rr.com]
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 4:25 PM
> > To: Wdgadd@aol.com; classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > Subject: Re: [CR]Steel vs. carbon frames - was:Classic conciousness,
> > where are you So. Florida?
> >
> >
> > I'd rather have a 531 steel frame that weighs a couple of
> > pounds now instead
> > of a carbon frame with ton of problems later!
> >
> > Regards, Steve Neago
> > Cincinnati, OH
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <Wdgadd@aol.com>
> > To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 6:52 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CR]Classic conciousness, where are you So. Florida?
> >
> >
> > > In a message dated 2/15/02 12:53:44 PM,
> > rabbitman@mindspring.com writes:
> > >
> > > << Later in the morning, a rider and local shop owner
> > remarks that I would
> > be
> > > so much faster with the advantages of modern technology.
> > "Modern frames,
> > > gearing, brakes, shifting, wheels etc etc etc..... Blah blahblah
> > ablah.......
> > > so much better, faster, more blah for the buck.....
> > reliability and blah
> > ." >>
> > >
> > > If you're the last to the top of the climb on a
> > "classic" 23 pound
> > bike,
> > > chances are you will be the last one on an 18 pound
> > titanium wonderbike.
> > It's
> > > foolish to think that the bike will make you significantly
> > faster.Remember
> > > the old P.F.Flyer sneaker ad? Same nonsense. Besides, my
> > body weight often
> > > varies by almost 5 pounds over the course of a week. In my
> > opinion, the
> > only
> > > "modern technology" that would be almost essential in
> > modern racing is
> > > Ergo/STI shifting. I would feel at NO disadvantage racing a
> > standard sized
> > > lugged steel frame with 36 spoke wheels (and a 130mm low
> > dish rear that
> > let
> > > me use Ergal rims!), leather saddle, and toe clips+straps.
> > After all, the
> > > guys on the Teledyne and Exxon Graftex bikes didn't always
> > run away from
> > the
> > > field, did they (unless they happened to be John Howard)?
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Wes Gadd
> > > Unionville, CT