RE: [CR]Vintage Racebikes


Example: Bike Shops

From: John Price <jprice@2-10.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: RE: [CR]Vintage Racebikes
Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 14:54:59 -0600


That's pretty interesting. I've never thought to look at average speeds like that - definitely food for thought. If nothing else I would've thought such things as improvements in road conditions would've up'ed the average speeds the most.

How does the same apply to the various randonneuring events I wonder ? I know PBP is more controlled in that regard but if you look at - say - winning times over the past 2-3 decades are they dropping significantly (within the controlled time "window" anyway) ? Are they staying about the same ?

John Price Denver, CO

-----Original Message----- From: donrazr@juno.com [mailto:donrazr@juno.com] Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 3:55 PM To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: [CR]Vintage Racebikes

Thought this letter from the letters section at cyclingnews.com was interesting in the light of this ongoing thread of vintage vs new race bikes.

Bike tech a waste of time? Consider this: Leige-Baston-Liege winner's average speed in 2001 was 38.5 kmh, in 1974 it was 38.5 kmh! But get this, in 1943 it was 37.7. Makes you wonder if titanium frames, 10 speed clusters etc are making any difference at all. Another comparison: Amstel Gold winner's time in 2001 was 38 kmh. In 1967 it was 43.7. I know courses vary over the years, as do wind and weather conditions But looking at average speeds over, say, the last 40 years, you'd be hard pressed to see an upward trend of any sort. Factoring in the road surface, which would presumably be better now than in the 50's and 60's, and things look bad indeed for the expensive new bike technologies and training methods. (Read Cycling News Tech Pages) Stuart Davis Australia Saturday, April 27, 2002 Just thought it was kinda interesting. Don W. Tucson, AZ