Re: [CR] To ride or not

(Example: Framebuilders:Richard Moon)

From: <GPVB1@cs.com>
Subject: Re: [CR] To ride or not
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 19:08:15 EDT

Tom:

I hear you to some extent, and please ride whatever you wish, as everyone should, but the "vintage stuff costs more" argument is a fallacy. A new Ti-framed STI- or Ergomatic-deluxe-equipped bike costs, what, close to $4K? A beautiful vintage Colnago (just to pick an example, your actual preferences may vary) costs maybe $1500, and will appreciate over time if reasonably well maintained (which is quite easy to do). An NOS Campy NR rear der. costs about $125, whereas a new Record-Ti one costs maybe $225? Let's not even talk brake/shift lever prices - $300 "new" versus $100 NOS "vintage."

The old stuff works just fine - it just doesn't click as much!

Cheers,

Greg Parker A2 MI USA

P.S. You should probably think about upgrading to a 10-speed bike soon. 9-speed is out-of-date and doesn't work as well, I've heard! ;-)


> Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 10:24:23 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Tom Dalton <tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR] To ride or not
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
>
> It's sad but true Greg. I actually believe that my new 9-spped STI
> equipped bike is more enjoyable to ride than my 6-speed friction equipped
> bikes. The gears are both more closely spaced and of wider range. I can
> select any one of them while seated or standing and never miss a shift.
> The clincher wheels are not as sweet riding as hand made sliks, but they
> are about as nice as the budget tubulars I used to ride, and much more
> reliable. My Time pedals and shoes are far more comfortable on my feet
> than my Duegi or Addidas with SLs. I consider myself to be conservative
> when it comes to bike equipment, I didn't make the clipless or the index
> change until 1992. I just went to STI. But the stuff simply works better,
> at least with the maniacal level care I give my bikes.
> ...then why would you want to be a CR list member?
>
> Because I like old bikes. I like the stuff that I used to ride. I think
> the racing gear that's older than late 70's is really interesting, but
> things like pre-war track bikes don't resonate with me, at least not enough
> to bring me to collect them. What I really don't get is "BOB" types, some
> of whom are just getting into riding, but who long to buy and use retro
> gear that they never even knew about when it was current. I don't accept
> the whole servicability/durabilty/versatility thing. Why pay more, and
> spend all that time searching for stuff that doesn't work as well as the
> new stuff. Yeah It's not all interchangable, but the old stuff had its
> limitations, it's just that expectations were lower.