I think you've missed my point once again. I see nothing wrong with PX-10s, and I never badmouthed them. I just identified them as being poorly crafted. Heck, I even said I'd like to own one. They are cool bikes. They are cool mostly for the very reason that you cite, which is that they were used to win a lot of important races, including the Tour. As you also pointed out, they were the first good bike of a lot of riders, back in the boom days, much like a Cannondale CAD-whatever or Trek OCLV today. Nothing special, but a great representative of a particular era in racing. As you also said, the purpose of a racing bike is to allow a sufficiently strong rider to win races. BUT, if that is the only criterion by which you evaluate the bikes that we ride/collect/hoarde, why not just get a 2005 OCLV? It has been quite clearly demonstrated that such a bike wouldn't stand in the way of winning any races. In fact, bikes from recent years are some of the first bikes that may actually be "faster" than a PX-10 of Masi GC.
Obviously, I'd be silly to assert that the Masi was "faster" than the PX-10 in any appreciable way. The better craftsmanship doesn't confer a competitive advantage, unless the PX-10 breaks midrace as a result of a badly overcooked joint, or is just so badly misaligned that it won't go in stratight line, and I really don't think they were quite that bad. Still, I'm sorry to say that "doesn't slow me down" is not enough to get me excited about a bike. The Masi's craftsmanship and heritage would get me excited. And while the Peugeot's heritage would also get me excited, the craftsmanship would not, "charming" as it is. Both bikes are cool, but to say they are the same other than the finish is simply not true. The quality of the Masi frame is better in many respects, even if that doesn't make it faster. Futher, to assert that one is not objectively better crafted, that it's all just "opinion"... well, I guess that in itself is an opinion, and a rather ill-considered one at that.
Bear in mind that I actually favor "warts and all" pro bikes, production racing bikes, for my tiny collection. While I admire Confentes and the meticulously finished American descendents, I have little aspiraton to own such bikes. I just don't think that they are all the same.
Tom Dalton Bethlehem, PA
Jerome & Elizabeth Moos <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net> wrote: As mentioned a couple of days ago, Peugeot has won more TdF than any other marque, and probably the next several places would also be filled with bikes which do not meet Masi's aesthetic standards. Didn't prevent them winning though, did it? The purpose of a racing bike is to allow a sufficiently strong rider to win races. There is absolutely no evidence that all of the factors you site made Masi any more successful at achieving that purpose than the "lesser bikes" you so love to badmouth.
Regards,
Jerry Moos Houston, TX
Tom Dalton <tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com> wrote: "The Masi had a better finished frame, that's all."
If by finish you include the mitering, lug prep, brazing, cleanup, paint, decals, geometry, frame component quailty, and design details, I can't say that I disagree. I think Jerry has done us all a service by distilling his understanding of vintage racing bikes as he has. We can now weigh his opinions in the context of this understanding when determining their merit.
Tom Dalton Bethlehem, PA
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com