Qui si parla Campagnolo
12-31-1969, 08:00 PM
On Jul 8, 9:38 am, Michael Warner <m...@westnet.com.au> 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.
Hmmm, durable and compatible should be the goals of a thing that you
hang other makers stuff onto. Keeping the customer happy type thing.
Ease of manufacturing and ease of installation is certainly something
a frame maker would like. Anything to reduce $ and raise the bottom
line but I doubt a rider cares.
>
> > 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 :-)
Yep, change or die is the bike maker mantra these days. Common in any
market that has seen flat sales for so long. Taking 3% from another is
a 3% gain. Too bad there is so little that actually makes the market
bigger, puts more people on bikes. Golf is growing way faster than
cycling. BTW-my wool jerseys aren't replicas but like a good bike,
something that has lasted a couple of decades. Yer right tho, usenet,
place for discussion. Please come in and discuss. I know you have
never been in the shop. Talking about bikes is what we do. I will not
throw you out, will fix whatever wunder, plastic, modern, finicky
machine you have with pleasure. You gotta ride it, I don't.
> 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.
Hmmm, durable and compatible should be the goals of a thing that you
hang other makers stuff onto. Keeping the customer happy type thing.
Ease of manufacturing and ease of installation is certainly something
a frame maker would like. Anything to reduce $ and raise the bottom
line but I doubt a rider cares.
>
> > 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 :-)
Yep, change or die is the bike maker mantra these days. Common in any
market that has seen flat sales for so long. Taking 3% from another is
a 3% gain. Too bad there is so little that actually makes the market
bigger, puts more people on bikes. Golf is growing way faster than
cycling. BTW-my wool jerseys aren't replicas but like a good bike,
something that has lasted a couple of decades. Yer right tho, usenet,
place for discussion. Please come in and discuss. I know you have
never been in the shop. Talking about bikes is what we do. I will not
throw you out, will fix whatever wunder, plastic, modern, finicky
machine you have with pleasure. You gotta ride it, I don't.