Re: [CR]NOW: this horse is different:was:This horse is dead

(Example: Framebuilders)

From: "Chuck Schmidt" <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>
To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]NOW: this horse is different:was:This horse is dead
References: <20021201.073518.-181899.35.richardsachs@juno.com>
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 09:34:20 -0700

Richard M Sachs wrote:
>
> 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

Make it personal??? Hey Richie, we are just having a little fun here at your expense :)

BTW, I'm not talking about weight of frames mattering in cross racing, I'm talking about the pro road racing peloton and the importance they place on lightness and stiffness of their frames. I'm also not talking about what the industry does in general but what happens at the top of the racing food chain. It's pretty much all aluminum, or carbon, or aluminum/carbon, with little or no ti, and maybe next magnesium. Not steel and certainly not lugged steel.

I think this "different horse" is dead...

Chuck Schmidt off to ride a 27 year old lugged steel Peter Johnson for
the first time
SoPas, SoCal