Best & worst of cycling products

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Rik O'Shea, Oct 23, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rik O'Shea

    Rik O'Shea Guest

    Best & worst of cycling products Here's my top 3 best and worst of cycling products from the past
    few years.

    4 of The Best (well I thought I'd be positive on the best side of things)
    (1) Index shifting What a great invention. I remember the cycling press telling us that the real
    pros & racers would still be using friction shifting for the smooth gear changing they required
    - of course this had nothing to do with the fact Campag at the time were miles behind Shimano in
    producing an index shifter that worked. My thoughts are with poor Andre Vander Pol - who at the
    time finishing second (again) in the World Cyclo Cross Championships because he fluffed the gear
    change with his Campag friction shifters at the start of a two-up sprint.

    (2) Clipless Pedals It seems almost barbaric now (like something from Ben Hur) that racers used to
    fly along with their feet tightly strapped into toe clips and straps.

    (3) Brifters I remember when Phil Anderson first used the Dura Ace prototye in the pro peleton and
    beat faster sprinters by virtue of his ability to shift to a higher gear during the sprint.
    Everybody wanted these but they were only a prototype and we had to wait.

    (4) High quality clincher rims & tires What Joie de vie when Michelin Hi-lite tires came a long -
    the start of a revolution for a quality alternative to gluing ...

    3 of The Worst
    (5) Tires that you glue onto the rim I still remember my Dad's bemused expression when I used to
    tell him that I had to glue my tires onto the bicycle rim. His bemusement to this was only
    exceeded when I explained what was required to fix a puncture. It is a firm testament to his
    fatherhood that he retained an external sense of composure - I'm just glad that he never rolled
    around the floor clutching his sides in fits of laughter, though at times I'm sure he may have
    suspected that he raised an idiot for a son.

    (6) Latex tubes for clincher rims Ho, Ho, Ho - that's the sound of the tire manufacturers laughing
    all the way to the bank - pure unadulterated Snake Oil of the highest form.

    (7) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
    raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
    with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.

    -R
     
    Tags:


  2. In article <[email protected]sting.google.com>, Rik O'Shea <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >(3) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
    > raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
    > with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.

    Your explanation lacked several popular options for solving that problem at moderate expense.

    http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2787

    http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2854

    And a shiny new mountain bike, if it came from a bike dealer, should come with some consideration
    for making the bike fit the purchaser. If not then it's the dealer that's inferior, not the bike.

    --Paul
     
  3. Ajames54

    Ajames54 Guest

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:57:28 GMT, [email protected] (Paul Southworth) wrote:

    >In article <[email protected]>, Rik O'Shea
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>(3) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
    >> raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
    >> with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.
    >
    >Your explanation lacked several popular options for solving that problem at moderate expense.
    >
    >http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2787
    >
    >http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2854
    >
    >And a shiny new mountain bike, if it came from a bike dealer, should come with some consideration
    >for making the bike fit the purchaser. If not then it's the dealer that's inferior, not the bike.
    >
    >--Paul

    In most cases they come out of the box cut to length..

    But you are recommending buying a product to solve a problem with another product that was created
    to solve a problem that did not exist... Threadless have no benefit other than weight and then not
    much benefit there...

    Oh OH! this might want to go into the Cows thread...
     
  4. tpe123

    tpe123 Guest

    The best:

    The wide availability of aluminum as a rim material. For decent braking and weight savings is
    nice, too.

    The worst:

    Ridiculous knobby tread pattern tires that never leave the pavement.
     
  5. Terry Morse

    Terry Morse Guest

    ajames54 wrote:

    > Threadless have no benefit other than weight and then not much benefit there...

    Written by someone who has never tried to remove a frozen quill stem.
    --
    terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://www.terrymorse.com/bike/
     
  6. Werehatrack

    Werehatrack Guest

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 12:06:48 -0400, ajames54 <[email protected]> may have said:

    >On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:57:28 GMT, [email protected] (Paul Southworth) wrote:
    >
    >>In article <[email protected]>, Rik O'Shea
    >><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>(3) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
    >>> raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
    >>> with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.
    >>
    >>Your explanation lacked several popular options for solving that problem at moderate expense.
    >>
    >>http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2787
    >>
    >>http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2854
    >>
    >>And a shiny new mountain bike, if it came from a bike dealer, should come with some consideration
    >>for making the bike fit the purchaser. If not then it's the dealer that's inferior, not the bike.
    >>
    >>--Paul
    >
    >
    >In most cases they come out of the box cut to length..
    >
    >But you are recommending buying a product to solve a problem with another product that was created
    >to solve a problem that did not exist... Threadless have no benefit other than weight and then not
    >much benefit there...
    >
    >
    >Oh OH! this might want to go into the Cows thread...

    It's already there, more than once.

    Not worth arguing about; those who like the threadless stems are welcome to use them, and those who
    aren't need not pay any attention to the hype. (I keep waiting for someone to come out with a
    star-nut-less threadless clamp that would onbiate the whole thing...)

    --
    My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail. Yes, I have a killfile. If I
    don't respond to something, it's also possible that I'm busy.
     
  7. Matt O'Toole

    Matt O'Toole Guest

    "ajames54" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...

    > On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:57:28 GMT, [email protected] (Paul Southworth) wrote:

    > >In article <[email protected]>, Rik O'Shea
    > ><[email protected]> wrote:

    > >>(3) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
    > >> raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
    > >> with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.

    > >Your explanation lacked several popular options for solving that problem at moderate expense.

    > >http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2787

    > >http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2854

    > >And a shiny new mountain bike, if it came from a bike dealer, should come with some consideration
    > >for making the bike fit the purchaser. If not then it's the dealer that's inferior, not the bike.

    > In most cases they come out of the box cut to length..

    That's not true. If it is, then the manufacturer is to blame -- not the design. Also, don't blame
    threadless for a frame with a too-low front end. This is just as big a problem with quill setups,
    and still requires a new stem to fix. Furthermore, most quill stems lack a removable face plate, so
    grips and bar tape have to be redone -- a lot of labor, and a real pain. At least most threadless
    stems have removable face plates, making stem swaps a one-minute operation.

    > But you are recommending buying a product to solve a problem with another product that was created
    > to solve a problem that did not exist... Threadless have no benefit other than weight and then not
    > much benefit there...

    Actually they're not lighter at all, unless a carbon or lightweight aluminum steerer is used --
    which it is not with most production bikes (except very expensive ones). Even bikes with carbon
    forks are likely to have heavy steel steerers.

    The real advantage is to manufacturers and dealers, who only have to make and stock forks in a
    single, universal size.

    If sized properly, a threadless setup offers about the same adjustment range as a quill arrangement.
    Admittedly, a quill stem is easier to adjust. However, a threadless setup is stronger, and less
    prone to seizing later on, etc.

    Getting back to the original subject -- whether or not you like threadless, it hardly qualifies as a
    cycling "worst."

    Instead, I'd nominate the proliferation of low-spoke-count, aero-kitsch wheels. They *may* have
    their place, but not on mid-range production bikes, used for everyday riding and training.

    Matt O.
     
  8. In article <[email protected]>, ajames54 <the newsgroup> wrote:
    >On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:57:28 GMT, [email protected] (Paul Southworth) wrote:
    >
    >>In article <[email protected]>, Rik O'Shea
    >><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>(3) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
    >>> raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
    >>> with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.
    >>
    >>Your explanation lacked several popular options for solving that problem at moderate expense.
    >>
    >>http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2787
    >>
    >>http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2854
    >>
    >>And a shiny new mountain bike, if it came from a bike dealer, should come with some consideration
    >>for making the bike fit the purchaser. If not then it's the dealer that's inferior, not the bike.
    >>
    >>--Paul
    >
    >
    >In most cases they come out of the box cut to length..
    >
    >But you are recommending buying a product to solve a problem with another product that was created
    >to solve a problem that did not exist... Threadless have no benefit other than weight and then not
    >much benefit there...

    Threadless is what's on new mass-produced mountain bikes. I'm not discussing whether a threaded
    steer tube would be a better idea - it's a moot point because the manufacturers are not going to
    listen to it. The only issue in my mind is how to take bikes that actually exist on the sales floor
    of every bike shop and fit them to the people who buy them. The steer tube extender, while hideous,
    solves the problem and does not cost a lot. Considering the position that the new bike purchaser is
    in (owns a bike with a threadless steer tube) that's all he should care about.
     
  9. Ajames54

    Ajames54 Guest

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:32:59 -0700, Terry Morse <[email protected]> wrote:

    >ajames54 wrote:
    >
    >> Threadless have no benefit other than weight and then not much benefit there...
    >
    >Written by someone who has never tried to remove a frozen quill stem.

    Spent 8 years in a bike shop owned one for more than 4... I've seen many a frozen stem... only a few
    of which were any real difficulty at all.
     
  10. Rik O'Shea wrote:

    > Best & worst of cycling products

    Best:

    1. Tyres that don't (or hardly ever) puncture. We're not at steel-belted car tyre levels of
    reliability yet, but tyres like the Vredestein PRS models roll well and don't even need Kevlar.

    2. Clipless pedals. With the giveaway price of SPDs these days, who would want anything else?

    3. Brakes that work. Shimano dual-pivots are fantastic if you were brought up on crappy Weinmann
    side-pulls.

    4. Thumbshifters on mountain bikes. Never bettered, RIP. Why someone can't make 9-speed thumbies is
    beyond me.

    5. Little cheap computers. I remember tyre-driven speedometers.

    6. Rear LED lights.

    Worst:

    7. Chains that need special joining pins. With 7 and 8 speed I used to junk them and get a Sedis. I
    can only get my 9 speed bike running reliably with a "proper" Shimano chain - Dura-Ace at that.

    8. Rapidfire shifters. Why?

    9. The Rock Shox Ruby road fork. OK for Paris-Roubaix I suppose, but as useful as a chocolate
    teapot otherwise.

    10. Cannondale Force 40 brakes. Contrary to what some people say, not all that difficult to set
    up, but the claimed 40% extra braking power is presumably in comparison with sticking your
    foot down.

    11. Disc brakes. Instead of using a perfectly good rotor that has to be on the bike anyway (the
    rim), let's add another one. No, you can't have a radial front wheel any more and these things
    put more force on your spokes than an 18" granny gear. Oh yes, and the front wheel might pop out
    occasionally.

    12. That saddle I bought last year and rode for 50 miles until my perineum felt like it
    was bleeding.
     
  11. Matt O'Toole wrote:

    > The real advantage is to manufacturers and dealers, who only have to make and stock forks in a
    > single, universal size.

    I think the big advantage of Aheadsets (I don't have any on my bikes) is that you can strip and fix
    them with an allen key, not huge wrenches that cost 10UKP each (I have two in all the three usual
    sizes so I don't really care now). Having said that, given a properly faced head tube, the
    conventional ones never come loose. So unless you want to regrease the bearings halfway across
    Siberia, it's a moot point.
     
  12. DiabloScott

    DiabloScott New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2003
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    2
    Klein Air Headset - no star fangled nut. Internal bearings installed from bottom of head tube. Steer tube bonded to bearings. Top cap is just a rubber plug.

    Works good lasts long time - so far.
     
  13. Al Frost

    Al Frost Guest

    [email protected] (Rik O'Shea) wrote in news:[email protected]:

    > Best & worst of cycling products Here's my top 3 best and worst of cycling products from the past
    > few years.

    My best/worst some go back a few years.

    Best

    - Non cup and ball headsets - no more "indexed" steering, ever!

    - Ti railed saddles - Half the weight of steel railed saddles and much more reliable than Al rails.
    Plus removes weight from high on the bike.

    Worst

    - Suicide levers - name says it all

    - Lawyer tabs - My vote for worst human invention ever

    - Serrated braking surfaces

    - Rear suspension for MTBs - I bet most are sold just 'cause they look "cool"

    ALF
     
  14. Jay Beattie

    Jay Beattie Guest

    "Rik O'Shea" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Best & worst of cycling products

    <snip>

    > (4) High quality clincher rims & tires What Joie de vie when Michelin Hi-lite tires came a long -
    > the start of a revolution for a quality alternative to gluing ...

    You are almost a decade late! The Mavic Mod Es/Michelin Elans in about 1975, Turbos in about '77.
    Mike Sinyard at Specialized (I think he was still living in a trailer at that point) was a genious
    for jumping on the narrow tire craze. 1977 Turbos were at least as good as Elvezias, Condors and all
    the other sale bin sew-ups that I was riding.

    >
    > 3 of The Worst

    > (1) Tires that you glue onto the rim

    Absolutely on my list. I was also happy to see the demise of the two bolt, under-seat clamp seat
    post (Campagnolo) and clamp-on everything. I would not call these "bad" products, however, and
    reserve that category for products that were bad at the time -- and not just in retrospect. Things
    in that category would include BioCam, Dura Ace AX, Delta brakes, Biopace, clay-pigment colored
    tires, Umma Gummas, BG saddles, and a number of the early step-in pedal systems that were trying to
    snatch the market from Look. I don't ride off road, but it seems to me that a lot of the whackiest
    stuff is on mountain bikes. -- Jay Beattie.
     
  15. Paul Southworth wrote:

    >>Your explanation lacked several popular options for solving that problem at moderate expense.
    >>
    >>http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2787
    >>
    >>http://harriscyclery.net/site/page.cfm?PageID=49&SKU=SM2854
    >>
    >>And a shiny new mountain bike, if it came from a bike dealer, should come with some consideration
    >>for making the bike fit the purchaser. If not then it's the dealer that's inferior, not the bike.

    A shy person responded:

    > But you are recommending buying a product to solve a problem with another product that was created
    > to solve a problem that did not exist... Threadless have no benefit other than weight and then not
    > much benefit there...

    The same is true with threaded headsets/quill stems! Most bike shops assemble new bikes with the
    stem all the way up to the "minimum insertion" mark. If the customer wants the bars higher, a new
    stem or a stem extender is needed...so where's the advantage?

    In my retail experience, for every customer who wants the bars lower or farther away, there are a
    hundred who want them higher or closer.

    It's sorta like zoom lenses for slide projectors...to most naive purchasers, the zoom lens sounds
    like a good option, 'cause they can adjust the size of the image...they don't realize that the zoom
    only lets them make the image _smaller_!

    Sheldon "Usedta Be In The Photographic Equipment Biz" Brown
    +---------------------------------------------------------+
    | Man does not live by words alone, | despite the fact that sometimes he has to eat them. |
    | --Adlai Stevenson |
    +---------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
    Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts
    shipped Worldwide http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
     
  16. Ajames54

    Ajames54 Guest

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:36:32 -0400, Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Paul Southworth wrote:
    >

    >A shy person responded:

    Not so shy as all that...
    >
    >> But you are recommending buying a product to solve a problem with another product that was
    >> created to solve a problem that did not exist... Threadless have no benefit other than weight and
    >> then not much benefit there...
    >
    >The same is true with threaded headsets/quill stems! Most bike shops assemble new bikes with the
    >stem all the way up to the "minimum insertion" mark. If the customer wants the bars higher, a new
    >stem or a stem extender is needed...so where's the advantage?

    but there is still and inch and a half of motion downward... just because "most bike shops" do
    things foolishly does not detract from the fact that a quill stem has more potential adjustment than
    an Aheadset style system.

    I don't deny that these extenders seam like a reasonable solution to the problem they address...
    however the problem itself originates from a change in design that achieved nothing of note..
     
  17. Matt O'Toole

    Matt O'Toole Guest

    "Zog The Undeniable" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected].svr.pol.co.uk...

    > Matt O'Toole wrote:
    >
    > > The real advantage is to manufacturers and dealers, who only have to make
    and
    > > stock forks in a single, universal size.
    >
    > I think the big advantage of Aheadsets (I don't have any on my bikes) is that you can strip and
    > fix them with an allen key, not huge wrenches that cost 10UKP each (I have two in all the three
    > usual sizes so I don't really care now). Having said that, given a properly faced head tube, the
    > conventional ones never come loose. So unless you want to regrease the bearings halfway across
    > Siberia, it's a moot point.

    No argument there. Plus we no longer have to buy expensive headset wrenches.

    Mine have found a second life servicing BMW fan clutches (which require a thin 32mm wrench).

    Matt O.
     
  18. Matt O'Toole

    Matt O'Toole Guest

    "ajames54" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...

    > On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:36:32 -0400, Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Paul Southworth wrote:
    > >
    >
    > >A shy person responded:
    >
    > Not so shy as all that...
    > >
    > >> But you are recommending buying a product to solve a problem with another product that was
    > >> created to solve a problem that did not exist... Threadless have no benefit other than weight
    > >> and then not much benefit there...
    > >
    > >The same is true with threaded headsets/quill stems! Most bike shops assemble new bikes with the
    > >stem all the way up to the "minimum insertion" mark. If the customer wants the bars higher, a new
    > >stem or a stem extender is needed...so where's the advantage?
    >
    > but there is still and inch and a half of motion downward... just because "most bike shops" do
    > things foolishly does not detract from the fact that a quill stem has more potential adjustment
    > than an Aheadset style system.

    This is simply not true. Most quill stems have about 2" of adjustment, which is the same as most
    threadless setups (three (1/4") spacers, plus flipping the stem over).

    *Some* quill stems like the Nitto Technomic have lots of range, but most bikes *do not* come with
    those. And if you want one you have to strip the bars and redo the grips/tape, because they lack
    removable face plates.

    BTW, there's a nice quill stem with a removable face plate for $20.00 or so -- the Dimension, which
    came on Lemond road bikes until they went threadless. Just spreadin' the word...

    > I don't deny that these extenders seam like a reasonable solution to the problem they address...
    > however the problem itself originates from a change in design that achieved nothing of note..

    It's sure a lot cheaper to stock just one size of every fork. And not deal with stuck quill stems
    anymore... or headset wrenches...

    Matt O.
     
  19. Matt O'Toole

    Matt O'Toole Guest

    My best:

    Good clincher tires.

    Modern drivetrains with wide range gearing, especially for mountain bikes

    Indexed shifting, and brifters/Gripshift, together

    Clipless pedals, especially w/ cleats you can walk in (SPD)

    Collapsible/folding bikes, from Brompton to Breakaway

    My worst:

    Tubular tires and all their associated hassle and expense

    Rod brakes

    Flexy, ineffective brakes on old, cheap bikes

    Campy Delta brakes

    Rim-eating Shimano brake pads

    The proliferation of aero-kitsch wheels

    The proliferation of anodized and machined rims that crack and wear/warp prematurely

    The proliferation of "race" geometry frames with needlessly short wheelbases, and no tire clearance

    Matt O.



    "Rik O'Shea" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Best & worst of cycling products Here's my top 3 best and worst of cycling products from the past
    > few years.
    >
    > 4 of The Best (well I thought I'd be positive on the best side of things)
    > (1) Index shifting What a great invention. I remember the cycling press telling us that the real
    > pros & racers would still be using friction shifting for the smooth gear changing they
    > required - of course this had nothing to do with the fact Campag at the time were miles behind
    > Shimano in producing an index shifter that worked. My thoughts are with poor Andre Vander Pol
    > - who at the time finishing second (again) in the World Cyclo Cross Championships because he
    > fluffed the gear change with his Campag friction shifters at the start of a two-up sprint.
    >
    > (2) Clipless Pedals It seems almost barbaric now (like something from Ben Hur) that racers used to
    > fly along with their feet tightly strapped into toe clips and straps.
    >
    > (3) Brifters I remember when Phil Anderson first used the Dura Ace prototye in the pro peleton and
    > beat faster sprinters by virtue of his ability to shift to a higher gear during the sprint.
    > Everybody wanted these but they were only a prototype and we had to wait.
    >
    > (4) High quality clincher rims & tires What Joie de vie when Michelin Hi-lite tires came a long -
    > the start of a revolution for a quality alternative to gluing ...
    >
    >
    > 3 of The Worst
    > (1) Tires that you glue onto the rim I still remember my Dad's bemused expression when I used to
    > tell him that I had to glue my tires onto the bicycle rim. His bemusement to this was only
    > exceeded when I explained what was required to fix a puncture. It is a firm testament to his
    > fatherhood that he retained an external sense of composure - I'm just glad that he never
    > rolled around the floor clutching his sides in fits of laughter, though at times I'm sure he
    > may have suspected that he raised an idiot for a son.
    >
    > (2) Latex tubes for clincher rims Ho, Ho, Ho - that's the sound of the tire manufacturers laughing
    > all the way to the bank - pure unadulterated Snake Oil of the highest form.
    >
    > (3) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
    > raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
    > with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.
    >
    > -R
     
  20. Q.

    Q. Guest

    Best ... this poster:

    http://www.allposters.com/gallery.asp?aid=845999&item=275028

    Worse ... all those Huffy bikes I was forced to ride as a kid.

    C.Q.C.

    "Rik O'Shea" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Best & worst of cycling products Here's my top 3 best and worst of cycling products from the past
    > few years.
    >
    > 4 of The Best (well I thought I'd be positive on the best side of things)
    > (1) Index shifting What a great invention. I remember the cycling press telling us that the real
    > pros & racers would still be using friction shifting for the smooth gear changing they
    > required - of course this had nothing to do with the fact Campag at the time were miles behind
    > Shimano in producing an index shifter that worked. My thoughts are with poor Andre Vander Pol
    > - who at the time finishing second (again) in the World Cyclo Cross Championships because he
    > fluffed the gear change with his Campag friction shifters at the start of a two-up sprint.
    >
    > (2) Clipless Pedals It seems almost barbaric now (like something from Ben Hur) that racers used to
    > fly along with their feet tightly strapped into toe clips and straps.
    >
    > (3) Brifters I remember when Phil Anderson first used the Dura Ace prototye in the pro peleton and
    > beat faster sprinters by virtue of his ability to shift to a higher gear during the sprint.
    > Everybody wanted these but they were only a prototype and we had to wait.
    >
    > (4) High quality clincher rims & tires What Joie de vie when Michelin Hi-lite tires came a long -
    > the start of a revolution for a quality alternative to gluing ...
    >
    >
    > 3 of The Worst
    > (1) Tires that you glue onto the rim I still remember my Dad's bemused expression when I used to
    > tell him that I had to glue my tires onto the bicycle rim. His bemusement to this was only
    > exceeded when I explained what was required to fix a puncture. It is a firm testament to his
    > fatherhood that he retained an external sense of composure - I'm just glad that he never
    > rolled around the floor clutching his sides in fits of laughter, though at times I'm sure he
    > may have suspected that he raised an idiot for a son.
    >
    > (2) Latex tubes for clincher rims Ho, Ho, Ho - that's the sound of the tire manufacturers laughing
    > all the way to the bank - pure unadulterated Snake Oil of the highest form.
    >
    > (3) Threadless fork/ahead stem I recall trying to explain to a college in work that in order to
    > raise the height of the handlebars on his new shiny MTB that he either had to get a new stem
    > with a steeper angle or a get a new threadless fork cut higher. This is definitely progress.
    >
    > -R
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...