Re: [CR]Now:Old & New Was:Intro

Example: Production Builders:LeJeune

Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 23:25:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Harris <>
Subject: Re: [CR]Now:Old & New Was:Intro
In-Reply-To: <>

---Thanks Chuck,when I bought my Raleigh "pro" in 1973
I wasn't thinking of 2002 and what a wonderful classic
it would be/is.When Eric Clapton?,took delivery of
that wonderful Condor.It was state of the art.A
Litespeed is a wonderful piece of work now.And it too
will become a "classic".Help e-richie!Since I think we
mostly share VERY similar views.Harris.

--- Chuck Schmidt wrote:

> Steve Maas wrote:

\r?\n> >

\r?\n> (cut)

\r?\n> > The contrast between old bikes and modern ones is

\r?\n> more than just the

\r?\n> > technological one; it's a fundamental difference

\r?\n> in style and

\r?\n> > purpose. Today's bicycles and components are

\r?\n> designed around a

\r?\n> > "coolness" standard, intended to appeal to guys in

\r?\n> their mid-20s who are

\r?\n> > unperturbed by big credit-card balances. Old bikes

\r?\n> get their value from

\r?\n> > true beauty, elegant design, and their lessons

\r?\n> about our history and

\r?\n> > place in society.


\r?\n> To me this sounds like something that might have

\r?\n> been said at any period

\r?\n> in the last 100 years (other than references to

\r?\n> coolness and credit cards).


\r?\n> At any period, the current bicycle of that time was

\r?\n> cutting edge for

\r?\n> that period. When I'm riding one of my old racing

\r?\n> bikes I like to point

\r?\n> out to other riders that the bike they perceive as

\r?\n> an old crock was

\r?\n> cutting edge and state of the art for its time. But

\r?\n> I would hope that

\r?\n> this list is not all about living in the past.

\r?\n> Change is good!


\r?\n> Chuck Schmidt

\r?\n> South Pasadena, Southern California