Bicycle Quarterly Reviews the Love #3

[winmonster]

Bravo to Jan for being willing to step into the hornets' nest. And bravo to VS for being a hornets' nest.

Jan, you clearly know what you like size-wise. You have taken a look at the stock geometries and measurements and determined that none of them really fit you the way that you like. So maybe the review was not fair, no? I say that because anyone who has found Pegoretti and is willing to put that much money into a bicycle would realize the custom option is available if the stock geometries do not agree with them.

[Bssc]

Jan Heine, your statement that the Peg.fit you just fine is an affront to good fitting bikes and reviews world wide. In the fist place a frame to big will be sluggish , a stem to short will make for a twitchy front end handling, you blame trail but every one knows how wrong you are. A seat to low on a frame lowers the center of gravity and there fore changes the stability of a ride. If you knew anything of frame design and or proper fit you would know just how inept your review is.

[Archibald]

If you go to blackhatsarebest.com, they'll tell you black hats are best. Likewise, if you go to VBQ, they're going to tell you you need a flexy frame with 1950's French rando geometry and nautical properties. Seriously, who is surprised by this review? Anybody?

Post #2 in this thread should have been monkey steals the peach or throat punch. Think of all the innocent electrons that could have been saved.

[54ny77]

is my seat too low?

[dbohemian]

A seat to low on a frame lowers the center of gravity and there fore changes the stability of a ride.

A seat height remains static for a particular rider one frame to another (also accounting for setback/seat etc) but let's assume that it stays within 2cm. The center of gravity does not change just due to that one parameter. His seat is no lower than on any other frame (accounting for BB drop)

I understand why Jan chose this particular size. He was trying to maintain his standard reach measurement without having the bars very low which is a preference for him. Like D. Kirk I don't agree with this choice. This overall design is probably better executed as a smaller size with more handlebar offset.

But I think we should realize that Jan is well read and understands these things but we can disagree with how he implements them.

[GrantM]

I've often wondered why "race" bikes in these "tests" just don't get raced.
It's nice to read all the words about tire grip and such, but geeze...
why not just let a racer compete on the bike? Should tell you everything
you need to know.

PS. I thought this peg was a new integrated seat mast model....
and a -17 stem in a 13 would sharpen up the way that one handles.

[mike p]

http://midwestpoet.files.wordpress.c...dead-horse.jpg

Mike

[e-RICHIE]

how about if we try to keep questions and comment real and relevant to the thread?
some of mine are unaddressed and i'd love to hear from someone french speak to them.
at this point they are all unrelated to the OP.

what is the deal with these bicycles, these opinions that are so strongly taken, and the
folks who turn on every review when the very environment for which/in which they were
conceived no longer exists?

my comment about civil war reenactments, though harsh, still resonates atmo. i really want
to know or hear otherwise, and that these integrated bicycles are better for events than
what most people use (and have used for generations). aside from some overt embellishments
and homages (that's french...) to the past, they seem like vehicles for which events are no
longer held. who knows more about this stuff and can add to the noise?

[dave1215]

...who knows more about this stuff and can add to the noise?

where is pierre?

[Archibald]

how about if we try to keep questions and comment real and relevant to the thread?
some of mine are unaddressed and i'd love to hear from someone french speak to them.
at this point they are all unrelated to the OP.

what is the deal with these bicycles, these opinions that are so strongly taken, and the
folks who turn on every review when the very environment for which/in which they were
conceived no longer exists?

my comment about civil war reenactments, though harsh, still resonates atmo. i really want
to know or hear otherwise, and that these integrated bicycles are better for events than
what most people use (and have used for generations). aside from some overt embellishments
and homages (that's french...) to the past, they seem like vehicles for which events are no
longer held. who knows more about this stuff and can add to the noise?

Quite simply, I think Rando is just the new touring bike. Just poncier. That's not necessarily a bad thing.

[Dazza]

I wrote a ton of stuff to reply to Jan's replies,
but I gave up as
I have got a two frames awaiting to start prep post paint to go to Cananda and Sweden
but I very much welcome Jan's responses
anyhow
regards, custom/bespoke bicycles
The best builder's approach to get the best performance for a rider that may be intending to

a. Race road
b. race track
b. Be casual
c. Be sort of sporty fitness
d. Rando
d. Touring

is determine accuratly their position data {refer to sheet}
how that is determined is another subject
then the rider's position and saddle and bar shape is drawn onto the page
and a frame is designed to fit under this
and then the frame is made with correct material choices.
and their aeshetic flavours are added, but these do not detract from any performance or durability of the frame and some times these things enhance the frame.

this is the skill and experience of the maker.

To do a valid, informed test, write and add opinions on a high quailty frame/bike with out the correct approach is flawed and meaningless and a discredit to good journalism. {stock frames exist for a reason but still the above still applies to get the best result}
Tests are just opinions with out facts if they are done in any other way
according to my current knowledge, experiences and opinions
and may result in the actual bike being disappointing to the tester, with out a fair trial to the maker.

thus one may read

"Overall, the appeal of the Pegoretti probably lies more in the name and the story behind the brand, rather than the actual bike."

Nonsense!

[e-RICHIE]

where is pierre?

i think he would add a moi aussi to what i wrote atmo.

[justinf]

I think to keep the discussion interesting everyone should refrain from the insults and vitriol.

Obviously I disagree vehemently with the review's validity. At least, obvious to those who know me outside the digital realm. But this is. . . interesting.

vive la différence motherfuckers.

[Craig Ryan]

Much of the interest may be traced to a time when the bike was used in a very different way. Tough times where a person would ride his bike with bags, extra gear, and maybe even spare wheels to a race or event. They would travel the 100 miles or whatever one day, race the next, then ride home over a long week-end. Probably because folks didn't own cars. Their race bikes had to double as their transportation, so it had fittings for fenders and lights etc. I don't see how trail or bar height mattered, or that they thought about it beyond it was what it was. The modern brevet, double century, PBP, may all have their roots back to this time?

how about if we try to keep questions and comment real and relevant to the thread?
some of mine are unaddressed and i'd love to hear from someone french speak to them.
at this point they are all unrelated to the OP.

what is the deal with these bicycles, these opinions that are so strongly taken, and the
folks who turn on every review when the very environment for which/in which they were
conceived no longer exists?

my comment about civil war reenactments, though harsh, still resonates atmo. i really want
to know or hear otherwise, and that these integrated bicycles are better for events than
what most people use (and have used for generations). aside from some overt embellishments
and homages (that's french...) to the past, they seem like vehicles for which events are no
longer held. who knows more about this stuff and can add to the noise?

[justinf]

Oh yeah, I rode Josh's Vanilla one time. What a piece of crap. I could hardly balance.

[e-RICHIE]

ya i don't have any issue with speculating on past history and the food chain here.
but everything has changed.
so why would anyone cling to designs and mores that belong to earlier eras atmo?
there seems to be a lot of energy devoted to trail, and wheel flop, and nice fenders.
tell me why this is.
the roads are better.
the speeds and fitness levels are higher.
the industry makes more consistently high quality components.
etc.
why fixate on frame designs that employ details that would actually impede doing better at said events?

Much of the interest may be traced to a time when the bike was used in a very different way. Tough times where a person would ride his bike with bags, extra gear, and maybe even spare wheels to a race or event. They would travel the 100 miles or whatever one day, race the next, then ride home over a long week-end. Probably because folks didn't own cars. Their race bikes had to double as their transportation, so it had fittings for fenders and lights etc. I don't see how trail or bar height mattered, or that they thought about it beyond it was what it was. The modern brevet, double century, PBP, may all have their roots back to this time?

[jerk]

mr. heine-
now you are just being a fucking idiot to spite yourself maybe. coppi and bartali's bar drop? what the fuck are you talking about? those guys in black and white pictures from 1948 had less saddle to bar drop because a: they were fucking midgets and you are not. b: the hoods of their stupid non-working campy levers were halfway down the handle bar c: the drops were the primary riding position. d: european roads were alot shittier then than they are now e: races and stages were generally slower, longer and dumber.

you are essentially telling fernando alonso to put a crank starter on his 2010 ferrari formula one car and really narrow non-radial tires and wear a leather bonnet with goggles 'cause that's what giuseppe ferrina did in 1948. components, courses and technology has changed- and clinging to a cartoon parody of bike design standards that never existed outside of your uninformed fantasies is stoopid and a disservice to intelligent people and idiots alike.

the pegoretti sucked for you because you set it up in a way that sucked. it's that simple.....you might be the nicest guy in the world but you are uninformed and ignorant when it comes to reviewing bicycles and disproved by 100 years of competitive cycling history.

[tim10025]

I think to keep the discussion interesting everyone should refrain from the insults and vitriol.

I agree.

[DCT]

above category responds

above category news: An Open Letter to Bicycle Quarterly

[josh]

This thread makes me scratch my head a little. Tons of people coming out the woodwork to defend a bike they've never ridden.

Someone dared to impune the dominate philosophy of the forum and, by association, its elders. The sycophants eat this shit up.