Re: [CR]Life expectancy of stems and bars ... Then and Now

(Example: Framebuilders:Norman Taylor)

From: "David Snyder" <dddd@pacbell.net>
To: "Classic Rendezvous" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <2980b1ee45a22761c50262ba515fc6ed@comcast.net> <75d04b480803162108s47553a5fj94a2ffb70042cb75@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]Life expectancy of stems and bars ... Then and Now
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:30:42 -0800
reply-type=original

Kurt Speery wrote:


> When I first realised that on old Cinelli 1A stems the extension was
> solid I knew they were probably massively over-engineered.

The more I think about this, the more I realize that almost all bicycles and parts are pretty heavily over-engineered for most riders, perhaps today as much as ever. Manufacturer's have to anticipate worst-case conditions for rider size and riding style, and build to suit. Especially with bars and stems, some riders treat theirs like it's part of a universal gym, while for others, such parts could well last 100 times longer.

I guess that's why there will always be people trying to supply lighter, more-expensive, (and higher-status) "weight limit" parts, but I know there will then always be bigger, stronger riders who want those parts anyway. Spendy buyers will sometimes get into trouble by failing to differentiate what's "best" from what's appropriate.

David Snyder
Auburn, CA usa