Re: [CR]Want NOS Vintage?--It is available

(Example: Events:Cirque du Cyclisme:2007)

Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 11:37:23 -0400
Subject: Re: [CR]Want NOS Vintage?--It is available
From: Douglas R. Brooks <dbrk@direcway.com>
To: Richard M Sachs <richardsachs@juno.com>, <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030224.114254.-132869.16.richardsachs@juno.com>


I believe that my sort-of-oldschool RichardSachs frame is a 20th Anniversary model. It uses the 1" tubes and Nervex Pro lugs but makes a few concessions to modernity: perhaps the internal cable routing on the top tube but certainly the 130 spaced rear. What I love about this bike particularly is that it can be built in any number of ways and look aesthetically "right" to my eyes. It's been set up with Super Record, Superbe Pro last generation, and Campagnolo 9spd Ergo, and every time the frame has become a bicycle that pleases both the eye and on the road. Despite being a "collector" of sorts, I don't acquire bikes that I don't ride. I feel like there should be parts from the classic era left in boxes or put on frames that are works of art-and-craft and not taken on the road. I guess I'm not interested much anymore in participating in that aspect of the hobby, so I build them to ride. There are some nice pictures of my RS bikes on my yahoo photos site, if folks are interested (don't already know they are there, along with Singer, Herse, Berthoud, etc.). Look here if you like: http://photos.yahoo.com/dvicakrababa

Part of what I am saying is that I might at some point commit (as I have before!) to an oldschool tubed/designed Sachs in the 30th mode but I'd likely put _really nice used_ parts on it so that I felt right about riding it. Just my own quirkily [sic] preference for the relationship between collector and rider.

Douglas Brooks Bristol, NY
> From: Richard M Sachs <richardsachs@juno.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 11:42:48 -0500
> To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR]Want NOS Vintage?--It is available
>
> corrections to post below::
> 1) frightenly should be 'frighteningly'.
> 2) "...generated 8 orders, but ONLY one of those..."