snipped: "A 2 lb. feather frame! Lugged or lugless? Now, who to ride the contraption in a cyclocross??? "
i'm trying to be objective and you have to make it personal. go back to my original post; i said the choices were 'economic'. (listees, see the archive-i'm not re-writing the speel (sp?)...) furthermore, what i choose to do as a one-man shop has little overlap with what the industry/corporations do. the size of businesses (like mine) insulates me from the day-to-day trends and swings of the marketplace. and fwiw, the team's cross frames weigh 3.5 frames and are as light or lighter than most next to them in the races each weekend. e-RICHIE chester, ct off to race cross
Chuck Schmidt <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net> writes:
> Richard Sachs wrote:
> >
> > snipped:
> > <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net> writes:
> > "...Steel has been obsoleted because it is heavier."
> >
> > a pound of steel weighs more than a pound of aluminum?
>
>
> 1 lb.of steel = 1 lb.of aluminum = 1 lb.of feathers
>
> Hmmmmmm. A 2 lb. feather frame! Lugged or lugless? Now, who to
> ride
> the contraption in a cyclocross??? The mind boggles...
>
> "Hey Richie, come over here and check this out, Dude"
>
> Chuck Schmidt
> SoPas, SoCal
>
>
> .