And 650-b wheels on it too--that's one sweet bike. I know this is OT, but Cannondale, Trek, and REI's Novara line still have real touring bikes that mainstream consumers can see. There is also a Novara with long caliper brakes and 28c+fender room--but semi-racing geometry, carbon fork, and dual controls. It deserves to steal many sales from other bikes! David Feldman Vancouver, WA Apologies, Dale, I won't stray again!
<apgmaa@earthlink.net>; <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:14 AM Subject: Re: [CR]Bike Marketing and Frameset Materials (long)
> I find it interesting that many Japanese companies produce modern race
bikes
> with new materials and technologies, and yet they continue to produce very
> traditional touring bikes with lugs, non-aero brake levers, down tube
> shifters, metal fenders, etc for the traditional tourist.
>
> Like this model from Maruishi which we discussed on the I-BOB list
> yesterday:
>
> http://www.maruishi-cycle.com/
>
> Unfortunately, I've never seen anything like this offered in the US.
>
> Ed Braley
> Falmouth, Maine
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Feldman" <feldmans1@earthlink.net>
> To: "Andrew Gillis" <apgmaa@earthlink.net>;
<classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 7:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [CR]Bike Marketing and Frameset Materials (long)
>
>
> > Amen, bro Gillis, you describe well the path of (to this bike business
> > lifer's knowledge) intentional and deliberate consumer FRAUD that has
been
> > practiced by the "Big Bike Companies." It will be interesting to see
> if,
> > with smaller but still visible brands like Surly and Gunnar selling
> > practical road frames and bikes, the big co's product planners are
dragged
> > back to user-friendly reality in the next few years. CR relevance--ever
y
> > industry product planner should have to ride one of their un-fenderable
> > jackhammers for three hours on Northwestern chipseal on a day when it's
> > going to rain half an inch, and the next day do the same ride in the
same
> > conditions on a "classic" bike that has, like, fender room, non-aero
> wheels,
> > and a compliant frame!
> > David Feldman
> > Vancouver, WA
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Andrew Gillis" <apgmaa@earthlink.net>
> > To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 11:38 PM
> > Subject: [CR]Bike Marketing and Frameset Materials (long)
> >
> >
> > > CRs:
> > >
> > > About two years ago I read a couple of things that clarified my
> > perspective
> > > on frameset materials:
> > >
> > > 1. An article in European Car magazine that did a thorough analysis of
> the
> > > VW/Audi 1.8T engine. The article described that in practice there was
> > > actually fairly little in common between a passenger car engine and a
> race
> > > car engine (besides internal combustion) because the design
requirements
> > > were so different.
> > >
> > > 2. A review in either Cycling Plus or Cycling Weekly of the UK based M
> > Steel
> > > framebuilding shop. The builders construct frames from almost any
> material
> > > they like, and for their Brevet rides they choose to ride steel,
because
> > > it's the most comfortable, versatile and cost effective.
> > >
> > > So, since the Bike Biz markets bikes to the general public based on
the
> > > newest Tour de France designs, the 'relevance' of their bikes to the
> > > majority of the non-racing public has progressively become less and
> less.
> > > Too-low threadless stems, aero wheels and harsh-riding oversized
> aluminum
> > > frames are three mass market items that immediately come to my mind.
> > >
> > > Within the CR time period, spending more money for a racing bike
> generally
> > > meant getting a bike that was both lighter and more durable at the
same
> > > time. A top grade frameset was comfortable and lasted a good while,
and
> > with
> > > it you also received much more durable running gear and the total
> > investment
> > > was generally well worth the $$. With a modest change of gearing and
> tires
> > > the bike was usually suitable for the non-racer as well.
> > >
> > > Now, with 200g aluminum handlebars that must be thrown away after a
> year,
> > > and $300 carbon fiber handlebars that must also be tossed if they are
> > > scratched (along with carbon fiber cranks and carbon fiber brake
levers
> > and
> > > carbon fiber seatposts that crack) and my local friend who has had two
> or
> > > three Bianchi aluminum frames crack within a year of their use despite
> his
> > > much lighter than average weight... well you now spend a lot of money
> just
> > > so that you can throw it all away and then spend a lot more money
after
> > > that!
> > >
> > > Yes, the new bikes are lighter, and that helps a slight bit. I do
prefer
> > the
> > > comfort advantages of more gears and Ergo shifting, but excluding
> > > world-class racing where every gram and second count, the newest bikes
> > have
> > > little that is relevant to my needs. I'm not willing to sacrifice
> comfort
> > or
> > > durability to the extent that is 'expected' by the Marketing Guys.
> > >
> > > If I was buying another bike (and I'd have another steel bike made)
I'd
> be
> > > sorely tempted to email the major corporate manufacturers and point
out
> in
> > > specific detail why each of their top designs was irrelevant to my
> needs,
> > > and since I could afford to buy any bike I wanted, I had a custom bike
> > made
> > > to MY specs, to suit MY needs.
> > >
> > >
> > > Andrew Gillis
> > > (the rain in Long Beach doesn't bother me, just marketing-created
> > > 'obsolescence'!)