RE: [CR]Dumb Question, BB cable guides

(Example: Production Builders:Cinelli)

From: "Tom Harriman" <transition202@hotmail.com>
To: <marcus.e.helman@gm.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: RE: [CR]Dumb Question, BB cable guides
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 04:35:44 +0000


Hi Marcus. My guess would be the efficiency mass production. By running t he cables under the BB, it's two less things that have to be brazed on to the frame, and it's going to be easier and faster to paint that part of the bike. The bicycle industry is like all other businesses, it's always going to be looking for ways to cut cost and stay profitable.

Tom Harriman. San Francisco, Ca
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> From: marcus.e.helman@gm.com
> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:59:23 -0400
> Subject: [CR]Dumb Question, BB cable guides
>
> Why did framebuilders start running cables under the bottom bracket? It
  
> seems to offer no advantage. I have one bike with the cables run on top
  
> of the BB, and one with the cables running underneath. There is no
> difference in shifting that I can tell. Maybe it's just esthetics.
> Personally, I prefer the more traditional top of BB treatment.
>
>
> Wondering,
> Marcus Helman
> Detroit, MI