Yikes! This again... At least there is the possibility of an interesting conversation this time, what with Greg's mention of the Teledyne & Graftec bikes in the same message as the word "classic". So (treading in dangerous waters here), what makes something "classic"? I'd just like to suggest that maybe the thing working well for it's intended purpose would be a prerequisite. If that were true, our new friends (welcome David White), 28 year old Jack Taylor, even with updated indexing shifters, surely qualifies. So would Lance's OCLV bikes. But the Teledyne & Graftec bikes? From what I here they both broke a lot. Jerry Moos suggests a bike can be a "total design disaster" and still be a classic. Personally I'm not so sure. So Greg, are you suggesting that none of the newer bikes could ever be classics? Not even if they were both groundbreaking & worked well? Perhaps a Klein or C40 as a couple of examples. Remember I don't own any of these "modern" bikes either, but I suspect that 25 or 30 years from now I'll wish I did. Richard Rose, just thinking out loud in Toledo, Ohio
> Well....
>
> I own a Teledyne precisely because it was virtually the first real
production
> Ti frame (Speedwell Ti excepted), so it's historic and groundbreaking. I
also
> own an NOS Graftek for exactly the same reasons.
>
> That still dosesn't make that modern TIG'ed or screwed, glued, and tatooed
> stuff "classic."
>
> As for what should be discussed on the CR list, I humbly suggest you go
> re-read the CR rules & regs.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Greg Parker
> A2 MI USA