unabashed plug, Crumpton

dustoyevsky said:

I guess this would fit in the "local pride" category:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1137960420?bctid=1539...

Yeah yeah, I know the source. Offered in spite of.

Suffice to say, the guy who owns this bike is somewhat patiently
waiting for it to re-appear from the bowels of Shipping (and Bicycling
Magazine).

Funny-- I've been part of the cycling scene here in Austin for over
twenty years, minus the years of 2001-2006 that I spent in Seattle.
I've never even heard of Nick Crumpton or his bikes. I guess he must
limit his public interface to only the scowling plum-smugglers of our
fair city.

I wonder how much he'd charge for a longtail cargo bike frame? Or a
sociable tandem? I think handbuilding should be used where it yields
noteworthy benefits. I mean, can't someone buy a plastic road bike
basically indistinguishable from that one just about anywhere for a
whole lot less money?

I guess a lot of folks who are indiscriminate enough to drop $9k on a
bike must want something just like what they've already got, only more
expensive. If one of the consequences is a guy making bikes by hand
and earning a decent living for his work, though, then that's OK by
me.

Chalo

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Chalo said:

dustoyevsky said:

I guess this would fit in the "local pride" category:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1137960420?bctid=1539...

Yeah yeah, I know the source. Offered in spite of.

Suffice to say, the guy who owns this bike is somewhat patiently
waiting for it to re-appear from the bowels of Shipping (and Bicycling
Magazine).

Funny-- I've been part of the cycling scene here in Austin for over
twenty years, minus the years of 2001-2006 that I spent in Seattle.
I've never even heard of Nick Crumpton or his bikes. I guess he must
limit his public interface to only the scowling plum-smugglers of our
fair city.

Quoted message said:

I mean, can't someone buy a plastic road bike
basically indistinguishable from that one just about anywhere for a
whole lot less money?

But the Crumpton SL is stiff, yet compliant. The Seven was stiffer, but
not as compliant.

Holy moly. I hadn't watched the video before I wrote this. At 1:26 on
the video, the reviewer talks about how the frame has the stiffness of a
race bike, but the comfort of a "plush" (?) bike.

I thought we were only joking here when we accused Bicycling of doing
that.

Functionally, I think the mass-produced bikes (pick one) are similar,
but the reviewer also praises its aesthetic qualities, and I can't find
hi-res enough photos to comment either way.

I'm pretty uninterested in the aesthetics of bicycles that are otherwise
functional, but it's a legitimate differentiation.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

Ryan Cousineau said:

Chalo said:

Quoted message said:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1137960420?bctid=1539....

I mean, can't someone buy a plastic road bike
basically indistinguishable from that one just about anywhere for a
whole lot less money?

But the Crumpton SL is stiff, yet compliant. The Seven was stiffer, but
not as compliant.

Holy moly. I hadn't watched the video before I wrote this. At 1:26 on
the video, the reviewer talks about how the frame has the stiffness of a
race bike, but the comfort of a "plush" (?) bike.

I thought we were only joking here when we accused Bicycling of doing
that.

Functionally, I think the mass-produced bikes (pick one) are similar,
but the reviewer also praises its aesthetic qualities, and I can't find
hi-res enough photos to comment either way.

I'm pretty uninterested in the aesthetics of bicycles that are otherwise
functional, but it's a legitimate differentiation.

Here's an article with nice detail shots of teh Crumpz0rz:

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3956
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:bIfdLRij92MJ:www.pezcyclingnews.com

It reminds me of a fancy bowling ball or accordion. Here are some of
the highlights of the accompanying review:

"A marked contrast is in the seat tube, and that makes perfect sense,
as the tube it’s self performs a bit different job than the others…
You’ll notice a spiral pattern and it’s a thickness that will give
some stability against bending (different than twisting), but also do
a good job of absorbing vibration."

"All of the joints are minimal… And all are wrapped with not just
size, but function in mind, a bit like wrapping an ankle for a
sporting event (to keep it from twisting to the sides but allow
freedom of movement vertically. Meaning the wrap will resist twist
more, but allow for some vertical compliance. Roughly translated,
that’s stiff for power, but soft for ride…"

"The Crumpton is stiff enough to cost you no power loss. The
acceleration is what you would expect from a very light very stiff
bike. The road holding during rougher surface turns is extremely
impressive as the frame and fork will flex well enough to not cause
the tires to skip and chatter the way some of the overly stiff newer
bikes can."

"...the twist control (providing the stiffness) is, to some degree,
done in a way that doesn’t prevent some of the bounce that is lacking
in some carbon bikes today."

I'm sure it comes equipped with a saddle that is hard and narrow for
austerity yet soft and wide for comfort, spokes that are short
radially while remaining remarkably long from end to end, and bar tape
that is wrapped counterclockwise without sacrificing its traditional
clockwise-wrapped qualities.

Chalo

Chalo said:

dustoyevsky said:

I guess this would fit in the "local pride" category:

Quoted message said:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1137960420?bctid=1539....

Quoted message said:

Yeah yeah, I know the source. Offered in spite of.

Quoted message said:

Suffice to say, the guy who owns this bike is somewhat patiently
waiting for it to re-appear from the bowels of Shipping (and Bicycling
Magazine).

Funny-- I've been part of the cycling scene here in Austin for over
twenty years, minus the years of 2001-2006 that I spent in Seattle.
I've never even heard of Nick Crumpton or his bikes.  I guess he must
limit his public interface to only the scowling plum-smugglers of our
fair city.

I wonder how much he'd charge for a longtail cargo bike frame?  Or a
sociable tandem?  I think handbuilding should be used where it yields
noteworthy benefits.  I mean, can't someone buy a plastic road bike
basically indistinguishable from that one just about anywhere for a
whole lot less money?

I guess a lot of folks who are indiscriminate enough to drop $9k on a
bike must want something just like what they've already got, only more
expensive.  If one of the consequences is a guy making bikes by hand
and earning a decent living for his work, though, then that's OK by
me.

You could equally well argue that any of the small
American frame building shops in the 70s and 80s that
made steel bikes, made race bikes that were more or
less just as good for racing as an off-the-rack Benotto,
Bianchi, or Cinelli, and therefore none of them should
have bothered. That would have been a damn shame.
And most of them couldn't have kept the doors open
by building only for tourists and commuters without
the trade from racers.

I have no particular desire for a stupid-expensive frame
like that. I do see that even people who do things with bicycles
that aren't to your taste might appreciate a bike that is made
custom, or just like the idea of buying something from
the person who made it.

Small businesses like framebuilders aren't a zero-sum
game. A guy who spends his time building high-zoot
carbon frames isn't taking away any chances for others to
build useful bikes. I would argue that the more small
builders, the better, as it makes more people aware
that you can get things from craftsmen as opposed to
conglomerates.

What that video really made me wonder about was,
where were they riding? I thought they said near
Pasadena, but some of those roads looked a lot more
rural than I'd expect for that area (and some looked
too flat to be the Angeles Crest Highway).

Ben

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Chalo said:

Ryan Cousineau said:

Chalo said:

>http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1137960420?bctid=1539...

I mean, can't someone buy a plastic road bike
basically indistinguishable from that one just about anywhere for a
whole lot less money?

But the Crumpton SL is stiff, yet compliant. The Seven was stiffer, but
not as compliant.

Holy moly. I hadn't watched the video before I wrote this. At 1:26 on
the video, the reviewer talks about how the frame has the stiffness of a
race bike, but the comfort of a "plush" (?) bike.

I thought we were only joking here when we accused Bicycling of doing
that.

Functionally, I think the mass-produced bikes (pick one) are similar,
but the reviewer also praises its aesthetic qualities, and I can't find
hi-res enough photos to comment either way.

I'm pretty uninterested in the aesthetics of bicycles that are otherwise
functional, but it's a legitimate differentiation.

Here's an article with nice detail shots of teh Crumpz0rz:

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3956
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:bIfdLRij92MJ:www.pezcyclingnews.com

It reminds me of a fancy bowling ball or accordion. Here are some of
the highlights of the accompanying review:

"A marked contrast is in the seat tube, and that makes perfect sense,
as the tube it¹s self performs a bit different job than the othersŠ
You¹ll notice a spiral pattern and it¹s a thickness that will give
some stability against bending (different than twisting), but also do
a good job of absorbing vibration."

"All of the joints are minimalŠ And all are wrapped with not just
size, but function in mind, a bit like wrapping an ankle for a
sporting event (to keep it from twisting to the sides but allow
freedom of movement vertically. Meaning the wrap will resist twist
more, but allow for some vertical compliance. Roughly translated,
that¹s stiff for power, but soft for rideŠ"

"The Crumpton is stiff enough to cost you no power loss. The
acceleration is what you would expect from a very light very stiff
bike. The road holding during rougher surface turns is extremely
impressive as the frame and fork will flex well enough to not cause
the tires to skip and chatter the way some of the overly stiff newer
bikes can."

"...the twist control (providing the stiffness) is, to some degree,
done in a way that doesn¹t prevent some of the bounce that is lacking
in some carbon bikes today."

I'm sure it comes equipped with a saddle that is hard and narrow for
austerity yet soft and wide for comfort, spokes that are short
radially while remaining remarkably long from end to end, and bar tape
that is wrapped counterclockwise without sacrificing its traditional
clockwise-wrapped qualities.

"The special part of Nick¹s bikes lies in his joining the tubes...
He of course starts with an extremely accurate tube cut and finish
that lets him basically call out angles down to fractions of degrees.
This allows for geometry with true nuance as I was able to spec
very slight changes to the Geometry that I have used on the past
two or three other custom frames in just the past year
(rough life, but some one has to...). I specified angles down
to the hundredth of degree and Nick knocked em out using some
fairly expensive gear..."

Ooohh! Nuances.

Fifteen yards for illegal use of ellipses...

--
Michael Press

On May 8, 12:56 am, "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]>
wrote:

excuse me, snipped content just to get a place to post (but thanks for
a reasoned answer).

Still unabashed.

Well, we'll give it another day. Nighty-night. --D-y

Chalo said:

It reminds me of a fancy bowling ball or accordion.

Beauty, eye of beholder.

Suffice to say, I saw another Crumpton in person, broad daylight
yesterday. With your bowling ball, accordion comment firmly in mind;
WTH, it's not my bike! Um, appreciation entirely undiminished. This
one is a darker, purple-ish color. The effect is more subtle (and more
subtle yet in black or very dark grey) but still v. attractive in a
more "formal" way, if you will. The brighter red of the test bike,
which I have also seen live and in the carbon fiber, is a knock-out
(opinion expressed as such). Yeah, an accordion should look so good...

Quoted message said:

Here are some of
the highlights of the accompanying review:

"A marked contrast is in the seat tube, and that makes perfect sense,
as the tube it’s self performs a bit different job than the others…
You’ll notice a spiral pattern and it’s a thickness that will give
some stability against bending (different than twisting), but also do
a good job of absorbing vibration."

"All of the joints are minimal… And all are wrapped with not just
size, but function in mind, a bit like wrapping an ankle for a
sporting event (to keep it from twisting to the sides but allow
freedom of movement vertically. Meaning the wrap will resist twist
more, but allow for some vertical compliance. Roughly translated,
that’s stiff for power, but soft for ride…"

"The Crumpton is stiff enough to cost you no power loss. The
acceleration is what you would expect from a very light very stiff
bike. The road holding during rougher surface turns is extremely
impressive as the frame and fork will flex well enough to not cause
the tires to skip and chatter the way some of the overly stiff newer
bikes can."

"...the twist control (providing the stiffness) is, to some degree,
done in a way that doesn’t prevent some of the bounce that is lacking
in some carbon bikes today." [end quote from review]

Quoted message said:

I'm sure it comes equipped with a saddle that is hard and narrow for
austerity yet soft and wide for comfort, spokes that are short
radially while remaining remarkably long from end to end, and bar tape
that is wrapped counterclockwise without sacrificing its traditional
clockwise-wrapped qualities.

I don't read the review as per your reaction (just above) at all. The
reviewers (taking at their word as presented) liked the way the
Crumpton rode, in preference to a couple of other "dream" (cost no
object) frames, while the Crumpton was much, much cheaper than the
most expensive "other". One owner testimonial I've heard was in regard
to a greatly reduced amount of hand punishment during a road race on
bumpy, nasty chip-n-seal, compared to the steel frame he'd been racing
on. That's a result we'd be looking for with improvements in materials
and build methods, no?

Looking more at the big picture: Frankly, the point of the exercise is
to win the contest and so good deal for Nick Crumpton. Um, he's kinda
grouchy sometimes (<g>, please) and I've never been to his house for
dinner, to address another possible area of discussion, and I'm not a
prospective customer looking to get bumped up the wait list or trying
to wrangle a price break. I don't know if he's heard of rbt, either
<g>. Pretty complete disclaimer, I guess. "Local pride" and, although
bashed, still an un_a_bashed plug.

The ironic thing here, to me, is that I've seen some of your "home
work", where you've made bike parts that work for you (via email you
sent me) and expressed honest appreciation, FWIW. But the point is, I
think you and Nick, "politics" aside, would have things to talk about,
bicyclingly speaking.

Just as a side note, I was talking to Nick on a ride a week or so ago,
IRT stay length and room between the chainstays for "wider" tires,
since I'd noticed that one of his customer bikes had a whole lot more
"tire clearance" just aft of the BB than his personal ride. The brake
bridge on the customer bike was quite a bit higher, also. How about
that, a well-regarded custom CF builder leaving room for 25mm tires,
mud, and out-of-true wheels? There's some progress for you! <g>

OK, gotta go check the Lotto numbers... --D-y

Quoted message said:

Chalo said:

Funny-- I've been part of the cycling scene here in Austin for over
twenty years, minus the years of 2001-2006 that I spent in Seattle.
I've never even heard of Nick Crumpton or his bikes. I guess he must
limit his public interface to only the scowling plum-smugglers of our
fair city.

Quoted message said:

What's a plum smuggler?

-snip-
http://www.funnycoolstuff.com/2006/09/18/why-bicycle-shorts-are-always-black
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On May 9, 10:58 am, A Muzi <[email hidden]> wrote:

http://www.funnycoolstuff.com/2006/09/18/why-bicycle-shorts-are-alway...

This one loads a lot faster:

http://cucinatestarossa.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/red_bike_shorts_1.jpg

I think the picture is a little bigger, too. --D-y

dustoyevsky said:

Just as a side note, I was talking to Nick on a ride a week or so ago,
IRT stay length and room between the chainstays for "wider" tires,
since I'd noticed that one of his customer bikes had a whole lot more
"tire clearance" just aft of the BB than his personal ride. The brake
bridge on the customer bike was quite a bit higher, also. How about
that, a well-regarded custom CF builder leaving room for 25mm tires,
mud, and out-of-true wheels? There's some progress for you! <g>

Now that is a good thing. I wonder how he managed it with prefab stay
units?

I used to hang out occasionally with this guy at Dead Baby Bikes
events:

http://www.outsideconnection.com/gallant/hpv/joe/

Joe would occasionally become visibly irritated and perturbed that I
would spend so much time and expertise making ordinary bikes, as
opposed to some ungainly feet-forward abortions. He thought it was a
waste of my effort. Now I find myself in Joe's position, thinking in
regard to Nick's bikes "why bother, when you could buy almost the same
thing on eBay for less than the cost of materials?"

I guess it's like curly lugs. I don't mind curly lugs, but I'll be
damned before I'll spend a fortune and years on a waiting list to get
a bike whose only real distinction is curly lugs. Still, there are
folks who do go to absurd lengths to get curly lugs (and the maker's
mark thereof).

As for me, I don't opt in to being choosy. I can either be choosy, or
I can give up cycling, or I can hurt myself. If I were 5'10" and 150
lbs., and every manufacturer of every bike-related thing in the entire
world made something that would work just fine for me, I suppose I
might get distracted by minutiae. But to my eyes, every bike with
73.5 degree angles, short stays, plastic forks, too few spokes and too
little tire clearance is so interchangeable with all the others as to
become invisible. They all make me say "meh". I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight and price.

Chalo

Chalo said:

I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight

Oooh, there goes *your* credibility.

Ryan Cousineau said:

Hm. What about a one-stop commuter nexus in a downtown core? Valet bike
storage, on-site showers and lockers, bike shop with same-day service
for repairs, and (oh, why not...) a bit of coffee service? The trick
would be getting a central enough location that you had a viable
customer base, but such a business would have a chance of being a
game-changer: actually creating bike commuters by virtue of easing some
of the pain.

Check. Bike Central here in Portland.

www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=34813&a=58381

Ted

--
Ted Bennett

Chalo said:

dustoyevsky wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What's a plum smuggler?

(Chalo responded):

Quoted message said:

Ask your mother.

Well I did and she had no idea. She suggested I wait in line and ask a
real expert. Your mom.

Sincerely, D-y

Chalo said:

dustoyevsky said:

Just as a side note, I was talking to Nick on a ride a week or so ago,
IRT stay length and room between the chainstays for "wider" tires,
since I'd noticed that one of his customer bikes had a whole lot more
"tire clearance" just aft of the BB than his personal ride. The brake
bridge on the customer bike was quite a bit higher, also. How about
that, a well-regarded custom CF builder leaving room for 25mm tires,
mud, and out-of-true wheels? There's some progress for you! <g>

Now that is a good thing.  I wonder how he managed it with prefab stay
units?

He's good. Wins shoot-outs and awards and stuff for his work.

Quoted message said:

Now I find myself in Joe's position, thinking in
regard to Nick's bikes "why bother, when you could buy almost the same
thing on eBay for less than the cost of materials?"

You'd have to ride and compare and be honest with yourself.

Quoted message said:

I guess it's like curly lugs.  I don't mind curly lugs, but I'll be
damned before I'll spend a fortune and years on a waiting list to get
a bike whose only real distinction is curly lugs.  Still, there are
folks who do go to absurd lengths to get curly lugs (and the maker's
mark thereof).

Curly lugs, I don't care too much but for those who do, more power.
Not a waste in my book.

Quoted message said:

As for me, I don't opt in to being choosy.  I can either be choosy, or
I can give up cycling, or I can hurt myself.  If I were 5'10" and 150
lbs., and every manufacturer of every bike-related thing in the entire
world made something that would work just fine for me, I suppose I
might get distracted by minutiae.  But to my eyes, every bike with
73.5 degree angles, short stays, plastic forks, too few spokes and too
little tire clearance is so interchangeable with all the others as to
become invisible.  They all make me say "meh".  I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight and price.

You're not picking from among them in the first place. My secondhand
Litespeed Catalyst, with 73.5's, short stays, carbon fiber fork, 32/36
spokes (unless I put the Shamals or the Trispoke on) works just fine
for me. Tire clearance isn't vast but it works with a 25-ish tire on
the back, handles very well, rides a little stiff but OK as I'm not
doing the 140-mile days of my relative youth. If I were carrying loads
or other people, well duh, I wouldn't use that bike in the first
place. So lighten up on the sour grapes already, OK? --D-y

dustoyevsky said:

Chalo said:

Now I find myself in Joe's position, thinking in
regard to Nick's bikes "why bother, when you could buy almost the same
thing on eBay for less than the cost of materials?"

You'd have to ride and compare and be honest with yourself.

Ride it? [break, destroy, hurt self] Mmm... no. Some other time and
some other bike maybe.

I just wrote off a coaster brake hub last night. I was climbing a
little hill-- the thing went "pop" and decided it was a two-way
freewheel. This after doing the same to a SRAM 7-speed gearhub a
couple of weeks ago and crunching up a tandem cassette hub a couple of
months ago. I have better ways to risk my hide and depreciate
equipment than to reduce somebody's precious toy to the world's most
expensive and toxic kindling.

The folks who cough up phenomenal sums for bikes like Crumpton's and
treat them like prizewinning Shih-tzus can take a chance on them. I
know such folly would only end in sorrow if I were to try it. Nick
probably doesn't even have access to the ingredients to make a plastic
bike I would consider safe to ride. By the time I set it up with
trustworthy components, it wouldn't even be particularly lightweight
anyway.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But to my eyes, every bike with
73.5 degree angles, short stays, plastic forks, too few spokes and too
little tire clearance is so interchangeable with all the others as to
become invisible. They all make me say "meh". I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight and price.

You're not picking from among them in the first place.

Right; I'm picking around them. I could get something like that in my
size, but it would be inadvisable. Even the upgraded equivalent
(tandem fork, full spoke count wheels) would suffer from inappropriate
weight distribution, lousy ride, and excessive risk of wheel damage.

But the same things that make such bikes unusable for me, make them
marginal for practically everyone. Isn't that the point-- to sport a
bike with bird bones and stiletto heels that isn't really cut out for
life on the mean streets? It proclaims that you ride bike only for
leisure, not practical matters.

Chalo

Chalo Colina said:

dustoyevsky said:

Just as a side note, I was talking to Nick on a ride a week or so ago,
IRT stay length and room between the chainstays for "wider" tires,
since I'd noticed that one of his customer bikes had a whole lot more
"tire clearance" just aft of the BB than his personal ride. The brake
bridge on the customer bike was quite a bit higher, also. How about
that, a well-regarded custom CF builder leaving room for 25mm tires,
mud, and out-of-true wheels? There's some progress for you! <g>

Now that is a good thing. I wonder how he managed it with prefab stay
units?

I used to hang out occasionally with this guy at Dead Baby Bikes
events:

http://www.outsideconnection.com/gallant/hpv/joe/

Joe would occasionally become visibly irritated and perturbed that I
would spend so much time and expertise making ordinary bikes, as
opposed to some ungainly feet-forward abortions. He thought it was a
waste of my effort. Now I find myself in Joe's position, thinking in
regard to Nick's bikes "why bother, when you could buy almost the same
thing on eBay for less than the cost of materials?"

If one reads Joe's published rants, it becomes obvious he would
certainly qualify as out side the main stream of cycling.

Quoted message said:

I guess it's like curly lugs. I don't mind curly lugs, but I'll be
damned before I'll spend a fortune and years on a waiting list to get
a bike whose only real distinction is curly lugs. Still, there are
folks who do go to absurd lengths to get curly lugs (and the maker's
mark thereof).

I would rather have a bicycle with plain lugs. Ornamentation for the
sake of ornamentation is unattractive.

Quoted message said:

As for me, I don't opt in to being choosy. I can either be choosy, or
I can give up cycling, or I can hurt myself. If I were 5'10" and 150
lbs., and every manufacturer of every bike-related thing in the entire
world made something that would work just fine for me, I suppose I
might get distracted by minutiae. But to my eyes, every bike with
73.5 degree angles, short stays, plastic forks, too few spokes and too
little tire clearance is so interchangeable with all the others as to
become invisible. They all make me say "meh". I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight and price.

Sorry to say, but I doubt that there is much money to be made in
bicycles for those who are in the 99.9th percentile in both height and
weight.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Chalo said:

Ride it?  [break, destroy, hurt self]  Mmm... no.  Some other time and
some other bike maybe.

Not meant in that manner, whatsoever. "You'd have to ride one suitable
for you, compare to similar others".

Quoted message said:

I just wrote off a coaster brake hub last night.  I was climbing a
little hill-- the thing went "pop" and decided it was a two-way
freewheel.  This after doing the same to a SRAM 7-speed gearhub a
couple of weeks ago and crunching up a tandem cassette hub a couple of
months ago.  I have better ways to risk my hide and depreciate
equipment than to reduce somebody's precious toy to the world's most
expensive and toxic kindling.

I've never actually met you, intros and all, but I do remember a brief
encounter at the old South Austin Bikes, actually not too long past
the time when I swapped out some plumber labor (venting for bathroom
fixtures IMS) for a tubular tire or two with Jim Keene and (I think)
Al, or maybe Joe. Anyhow, even my paltry 182 lb. racing weight of old
pushed the envelope of equipment made for a population where 165lbs.
is "big".

Quoted message said:

The folks who cough up phenomenal sums for bikes like Crumpton's and
treat them like prizewinning Shih-tzus can take a chance on them.  I
know such folly would only end in sorrow if I were to try it.  Nick
probably doesn't even have access to the ingredients to make a plastic
bike I would consider safe to ride.  By the time I set it up with
trustworthy components, it wouldn't even be particularly lightweight
anyway.

Some of the Crumptons are being raced. Large pack crits (over 100
riders at one Driveway crit recently) and RR's. *I* would probably go
the pampered route but then that's why I ride a secondhand Catalyst
with the decals already removed. Which actually, I bought cheap to
race and not have a ton invested, in case it got Crumpled. No worries
IRT stone chips, rust, clear coat dings, etc., and it doesn't show
dirt too bad, either.

Quoted message said:

But the same things that make such bikes unusable for me, make them
marginal for practically everyone.  Isn't that the point-- to sport a
bike with bird bones and stiletto heels that isn't really cut out for
life on the mean streets?  It proclaims that you ride bike only for
leisure, not practical matters.

In talking to Nick (and reported conversations, etc.) he's done the
"push it to the edge" thing IRT weight, with "experimental
prototypes" (my words). His SL (lightest offering) isn't nearly as
light as it could be, in the interest of a long lifespan at intended
use. And, while they might not want to take their beautiful (opinion)
new Crumptons on one of the 140-mile dirt road rides of yore, at least
a couple of the local Crumpton owners are members of the old
Freewheeling gang of go-for-the-dirts-on-Sunday riders. One is a
'crosser (8th and 10th at ancient Nats), the other is a fairly recent
Texas age-degraded Crit champ. Meaning: besides the eye candy aspect,
their bikes are used for racer stuff-- group rides, racing. Point
being, farbon works well for that-- a recent road race, Cold Spring I
think, was held on a nasty chip-n-seal road (did I already mention?),
where one Crumpton owner reported being surprised at the lack of hand
trauma during (and after!) the event-- compared to what would be
expected on his old steel bike. IOW, this is avocation (or lifestyle
<g>😉 not lawnchair kkleisure, or posing.

It comes down to tools for the job IMHO. If I had the discretionary
bux (not with young kids still in the house), easy choice. For now, I
scrounge <g> and that's OK, too.

At the risk of re-repeating, the object was to win the comparison. So,
congrats to the little guy, for once <g> in this modern corporate
world, and he's a local, too. --D-y

Chalo said:

dustoyevsky said:

Chalo wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now I find myself in Joe's position, thinking in
regard to Nick's bikes "why bother, when you could buy almost the same
thing on eBay for less than the cost of materials?"

Quoted message said:

You'd have to ride and compare and be honest with yourself.

Ride it?  [break, destroy, hurt self]  Mmm... no.  Some other time and
some other bike maybe.

I just wrote off a coaster brake hub last night.  I was climbing a
little hill-- the thing went "pop" and decided it was a two-way
freewheel.  This after doing the same to a SRAM 7-speed gearhub a
couple of weeks ago and crunching up a tandem cassette hub a couple of
months ago.  I have better ways to risk my hide and depreciate
equipment than to reduce somebody's precious toy to the world's most
expensive and toxic kindling.

The folks who cough up phenomenal sums for bikes like Crumpton's and
treat them like prizewinning Shih-tzus can take a chance on them.  I
know such folly would only end in sorrow if I were to try it.  Nick
probably doesn't even have access to the ingredients to make a plastic
bike I would consider safe to ride.  By the time I set it up with
trustworthy components, it wouldn't even be particularly lightweight
anyway.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But to my eyes, every bike with
73.5 degree angles, short stays, plastic forks, too few spokes and too
little tire clearance is so interchangeable with all the others as to
become invisible.  They all make me say "meh".  I wouldn't know how to
pick from among them except by weight and price.

Quoted message said:

You're not picking from among them in the first place.

Right; I'm picking around them.  I could get something like that in my
size, but it would be inadvisable. Even the upgraded equivalent
(tandem fork, full spoke count wheels) would suffer from inappropriate
weight distribution, lousy ride, and excessive risk of wheel damage.

But the same things that make such bikes unusable for me, make them
marginal for practically everyone.  Isn't that the point-- to sport a
bike with bird bones and stiletto heels that isn't really cut out for
life on the mean streets?  It proclaims that you ride bike only for
leisure, not practical matters.

Chalo

Heavens above, Chalo, you're like two grumpy old reactionaries rolled
into one. People are using these Crumpton bikes to distinguish
themselves from the mob of cyclists. It's a legitimate purpose. If it
keeps a small craftsman going, that's a good thing, and if it puts
caviar in his mouth that's even better, because it creates space below
him for others with a less boutiquey, more craftsmanlike outlook.

Andre Jute
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/BICYCLE%20HUMOUR.html

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Ted Bennett said:

Ryan Cousineau said:

Hm. What about a one-stop commuter nexus in a downtown core? Valet bike
storage, on-site showers and lockers, bike shop with same-day service
for repairs, and (oh, why not...) a bit of coffee service? The trick
would be getting a central enough location that you had a viable
customer base, but such a business would have a chance of being a
game-changer: actually creating bike commuters by virtue of easing some
of the pain.

Check. Bike Central here in Portland.

www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=34813&a=58381

Ted

A NON-profit? I want to make some money, here!

Thanks. I'll look into it.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."