Re: [CR]weights of classic and modern frames

(Example: Events:Cirque du Cyclisme:2004)

From: <"kohl57@starpower.net">
To: pariscycles@yahoo.co.uk, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:11:09 -0500
Subject: Re: [CR]weights of classic and modern frames


Folks, I only brought up frame weights in this KOF discussion to get some specifics on the advantages (weight, ride, components or something) of a KOF vs. a "classic" lightweight. It was asserted that KOF frames today are "half" the weight of classic era ones. If the case has made to substanti ate that, great. I haven't quite seen it yet but hey, the "lightest" riding bike I own isn't the lightest weight one I own. And if you own a KOF and

think it's the best and the brighest, who can argue with that. Around th is part of the country, about the only time I see lugged steel are KOFs so I' m not objecting.

But it's been interesting to document actual weights and if any conclusion

can be drawn from all of this, it's that weight weenies have been at work for a long, long time in cycling. And yes... 1950s lightweights we re indeed that and not, by any stretch of the imagination, "pipe iron" in compared t o today's steel frames. Bobet on that 26 pound Stella could still beat the

socks off everyone on this list no matter what they were riding. And he 'd have a really cool French rooster as a headbadge. Show me a KOF with a rooster and I might be interested.

Peter Kohler Washington DC USA

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .