Luigi de Guzman
12-31-1969, 08:00 PM
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 01:08:08 +0930, Michael Warner wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 14:26:11 -0000, Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
>> PLUS, I would love
>> to see any real advantages to these three items when compared to 68(or
>> 70mm) BB shells, everyday seatposts and 1 1/8 inch headsets(even THAT
>> size requirement is questionable).
>
> The only advantages that you seem to accept as "real" are durability and
> compatibility, though. Others may place more importance on weight,
> stiffness, ease of manufacturing and installation etc.
It's a question of different needs. Weight and stiffness may matter to
some *riders*; that's a matter for a rider to decide for himself. Ease
of manufacturing and installation don't matter to riders/end-users at all
but rather to *manufacturers*.
Take threadless headsets and forks, for instance. The ease of
manufacturing and assembly are a tremendous advantage to bike
manufacturers and assemblers, but not so great for individual users. I
see a lot of threadless-headsetted bikes around here with the steerer
tubes neatly cut in positions that are really too short for their
riders. The riders don't really have a lot of good options to get the
bars up to a more comfortable height.
I don't pay much attention to the trick high-end euro-racer tech
because it has very little to do with my own needs. But what the hell do I
know; I just like riding my bike every so often. I'm not a racer.
>> Sorry Mike, you are not invited to comment.
>
> LOL. This is usenet, not the counter of your shop, where your retro-grouch
> mates in replica woollen Campy jerseys would toss him out if he dared to
> disagree with you :-)
NO NUOVO RECORD FOR YOU!
--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 14:26:11 -0000, Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
>> PLUS, I would love
>> to see any real advantages to these three items when compared to 68(or
>> 70mm) BB shells, everyday seatposts and 1 1/8 inch headsets(even THAT
>> size requirement is questionable).
>
> The only advantages that you seem to accept as "real" are durability and
> compatibility, though. Others may place more importance on weight,
> stiffness, ease of manufacturing and installation etc.
It's a question of different needs. Weight and stiffness may matter to
some *riders*; that's a matter for a rider to decide for himself. Ease
of manufacturing and installation don't matter to riders/end-users at all
but rather to *manufacturers*.
Take threadless headsets and forks, for instance. The ease of
manufacturing and assembly are a tremendous advantage to bike
manufacturers and assemblers, but not so great for individual users. I
see a lot of threadless-headsetted bikes around here with the steerer
tubes neatly cut in positions that are really too short for their
riders. The riders don't really have a lot of good options to get the
bars up to a more comfortable height.
I don't pay much attention to the trick high-end euro-racer tech
because it has very little to do with my own needs. But what the hell do I
know; I just like riding my bike every so often. I'm not a racer.
>> Sorry Mike, you are not invited to comment.
>
> LOL. This is usenet, not the counter of your shop, where your retro-grouch
> mates in replica woollen Campy jerseys would toss him out if he dared to
> disagree with you :-)
NO NUOVO RECORD FOR YOU!
--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com