[CR]Was: Hopefully not too dumb a question: Now, Archives 1983

(Example: Humor:John Pergolizzi)

Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 16:45:19 -0500
From: <loudeeter@aol.com>
References: <20051206025305.73778.qmail@web33907.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43960021.7030507@new.rr.com>
In-Reply-To: <43960021.7030507@new.rr.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: [CR]Was: Hopefully not too dumb a question: Now, Archives 1983

http://search.bikelist.org/?SearchString=1983&MsgFrom=oroboyz@aol.com

You'll find Dale's explanations in here, along with others' "guesses" as to why 1983 was selected. Lou Deeter, "love the archives", Orlando FL

-----Original Message----- From: John Thompson <JohnThompson@new.rr.com> To: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Sent: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:18:25 -0600 Subject: Re: [CR]Hopefully not too dumb a question

Syke - Deranged Few M/C wrote:
>
> Why was 1983 picked as the cutoff date?

IIRC, it was chosen because around that time a number of technological changes were introduced or popularized that represented a significant departure from previous years; e.g. non-ferrous frames, new joining techniques (TIG welding, epoxy bonding), non-standard tubing diameters, indexed shifting that actually worked, clipless pedals, etc.

--
John (john@os2.dhs.org)
Appleton WI USA