Todd Kuzma wrote:
>
> on 4/8/04 2:03 PM, Fred Rafael Rednor at fred_rednor@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> i was surprised to get cc-ed on this, so
> >> i'll ask, "what <do> you think the old
> >> builders had in mind?"
> >
> > Is it some sort of sacrilege to contend that they were
> > businessmen who sold racing bicycle frames? No doubt, they
> > liked bicycle racing - and may have been passionate about it -
> > but there should not be any doubt they were businessmen.
>
> I don't get it. If these "racing" frames didn't require great attention to
> detail, then why both to regard them as special? If they had crappy brazing
> and alignment, then they were crappy frames. If they are simply
> "serviceable," then they aren't special.
>
> There is some wierd mystique that surrounds certain builders that exists to
> this day. Put the right name on a crummy bike and the masses will bow down.
> Tell the right marketing story, and people will see flaws as "character."
> Yet wheel out another bike with the same flaws but without the fancy name,
> and those same people turn up their noses.
My opinion?
If something like a "stinky" De Rosa is Eddy Merckx' choice to race on (he wasn't sponsored by Ugo) then I want it.
Chuck "shallow guy" Schmidt South Pasadena, Southern California
.