At 02:21 PM 07/02/2009 -0600, Dickey wrote:
>All the talk about CF, Alum, and TI bikes, being as good, better, or old
>fashioned or who ever else, got me thinking( look-out).
>I'm 62 yrs and still ride, always do every bit of my own work on bikes.
>I love to get my hands greasy as much or more then riding.
>So here's the catch! I have never swung a leg over anything but standard
>size real steel. When I see a CF bike it's like I glanced at a 1997
>Nissian! No reaction what so ever. When I see lugs it's like seeing a 32
>Ford coupe with a chromed out 350.
> Is there anyone else who has been totally faithful to steel?
I wouldn't go so far as comparing lugged steel to a Deuce Coupe, but maybe a car with no computer. No, I've never owned a bike other than lugged steel, no clip-on pedals, no index shifting and no aero brakes. I haven't even owned an aluminum bike. Not that I really have anything against those features; it's just that the last new bike I bought was in 1982 and I've never needed to replace it, partly because I slacked off cycling from the late eighties to the late nineties. Why fix what ain't broke? Then I discovered all the classic/vintage bike stuff on the Internet, which validated my opinion. Maybe it's also partly to do with my conception of the value of material things. I bought my last new car in 1973 because after that it seemed that new car prices were inflating at a fasteer rate than my income. Today my "good" car is a 1985 Camaro and I'm driving a 1992 Volvo wagon in the winter.