I guess the key here is "not much heavier". A top pro frame now is around 1,000 gr. And is not fragile at all, when used as intended. Sure, it you hit it with a hammer you could put a hole in it. But how fragile would a 1,000 gr. Steel frame be? The point is the carbon frame has a great ride and is stiff enough for a pro sprint finish. I know for a fact that you could not pay a top pro to ride a steel frame in the Tour. Some of this is all their heads, but the difference between winning and second place is mostly in your head at their level of fitness. Current bikes are a wonder. This fact does not detract from what has been done in the past. Just as a P-51 Mustang fighter is a joy to look at and see fly, in is no match for a current fighter such as the mostly carbon F-22.
Jim Merz Big Sur CA
-----Original Message----- From: classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org [mailto:classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org] On Behalf Of M-gineering Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 10:22 AM Cc: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: Re: [CR] Rene Herse Ligtweight Record Bike
Jim Merz wrote:
> Ok, but how about the argument?
A nice steel frameset isn't much heavier than a full carbon one, but much more reliable if it gets knocked about. The average customer is probably best served with an aluminium frame, but if you need a funny aeroshape. the lowest possible weight and don't mind spending a few $k if a windgust blows your bike over get a Tupperware bike.
-- mvg
Marten Gerritsen
Kiel Windeweer
Netherlands