Mike Kone wrote:
> Grant's bikes were an effort to solve some of the problems, but his
non-integrated approach makes the bike's use combersome. Rear bags
hanging off seats (hitting the riders behind), zip-tied fenders, no
provision for internal lighting systems. Sure his bikes address the
issues in a roundabout way, but but the whole is ungainly and not as
seemless to the rider.
>
> The construteur approach gets it all in a nice package with no
excuses. And the advantage is the constructeur bike offers endless
opportunties for the craftsmanship and innovation that folks like Peter
Weigle, Bruce Gordon - and shorty Brian Baylis can wow us with.
______________________________________
Mike et al,
of course Mike is - in many ways - right and the constructeur has his
own possibilities to really show and make something fantastic and I read
"The Golden Age.." with as much joy as any of you. Nevetheless as an
avid tourer and an owner of both a custom Riv and a Heron Touring and a
few on topic bikes that get ridden I wonder if you can´t go to far.
The constructeur approach comes with a price both in money and in lack
of versatility. It is sometimes good to be able to change wheels, racks,
lights after different needs and uses and over time!
I would like to fight a small battle for the well-thought-out, versatile, well-prepared bike that may take different shapes with standard equipement and develope with its master.
That doesn´t at all hinder a touring/audax/commuter approach!
It also means that a good bicycle designer should not only put his abilities to the frame but to the other (_all_ the other) parts as well. And their interaction.
yours obedient
Olof Stroh
Uppsala Sweden