Bicycle Quarterly Reviews the Love #3

[GrantM]

I like this picture of Tom.

[e-RICHIE]

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

clearly, everyone eats it up atmo.
even the folks in the cheap seats.

[Alistair]

Richard,

are you asking these questions w.r.t competitive events, or more general commuting/transportation/recreational cycling? I can speak to the latter, but not the former.

Alistair.

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?

[bicirossa]

"It's only eight tubes welded together." - Dario Pegoretti

[e-RICHIE]

well i dunno really, and dunno if it matters.

from my vantage point, these units are/were made and designed and perfected for trials, and long distance events,
and all things in between. so, yeah - i guess no matter how you slice it, these are competition vehicles first and then
curiosities for cyclists with a somewhat historical and nostalgic bent second.

it's been shown that time has passed these designs by and they are no longer raced at the front of any fields that we
know of. and, while is a resurgence in the french trials thang, i have no idea where the standards discussed (low trail,
planing, perfectly symmetrical fenders) fit into any value system.

that kinda sorta leaves commuters and, to an extent, fetishists atmo.

Richard,

are you asking these questions w.r.t competitive events, or more general commuting/transportation/recreational cycling? I can speak to the latter, but not the former.

Alistair.

[Brandon White]

Above Category has issued an "Open Letter" to Mr. Heine.

above category news: An Open Letter to Bicycle Quarterly

Sorry if this has been posted already on this thread, it's just too damn long to sift through. Ian makes some good points.

[Johny]

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.

i thank mr. heine for bringing mr. jerk back.

[mschol17]

well i dunno really, and dunno if it matters.

from my vantage point, these units are/were made and designed and perfected for trials, and long distance events,
and all things in between. so, yeah - i guess no matter how you slice it, these are competition vehicles first and then
curiosities for cyclists with a somewhat historical and nostalgic bent second.

it's been shown that time has passed these designs by and they are no longer raced at the front of any fields that we
know of. and, while is a resurgence in the french trials thang, i have no idea where the standards discussed (low trail,
planing, perfectly symmetrical fenders) fit into any value system.

that kinda sorta leaves commuters and, to an extent, fetishists atmo.

I might have a fetish for my commuter bike that allows me to ride home from work at 10:30 pm. Au revoir.

[dbohemian]

mr. heine-
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.

Fausto was 5'10'' dude.....

[ergott]

/thread

[GrantM]

Coppi bike:

To jerk's point, notice how low the brake levers are,
and the drops were the primary hand position.

[Rico]

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?

You gotitmo.
Especially the competiton aspect. There's a lot modern stuff at long events.
But some are there to do the distance. Maybe there's some misguided nostalgia or looking for some magic comfort.
I've seen seasoned riders just end up being minimalist. Go light. Rains you get wet. Cold you get cold.
But not as much as you used to because everyhting has changed inculding the clothes.

I have some differences with some of Jan's ideas.
Rather ride than argue/debate.

[ergott]

Coppi is lost in the 40's man. Someone should send him a bike with naughty wordnaughty wordnaughty wordnaughty wordnaughty wordnaughty wordnaughty words.

-Eric

[dbohemian]

Coppi bike:

To jerk's point, notice how low the brake levers are,
and the drops were the primary hand position.

Not arguing with that which is why I didn't quote it....But if you were to extrapolate the reach in the drops this is not unlike modern racers who spend much more time on the hoods. There is not a big difference. Just another way to get there.

[bicirossa]

that kinda sorta leaves... to an extent, fetishists atmo.

How does that differ from someone who buys a bike from one of the esteemed builders on this board?
Seriously, it's pure bike fetish either way. They're not buying it to race the Giro.

And there's nowt wrong with that.

[Jacques]

...i'd love to hear from someone french speak...

bonjour Le-RITCHIE

[GrantM]

Not arguing with that which is why I didn't quote it....But if you were to extrapolate the reach in the drops this is not unlike modern racers who spend much more time on the hoods. There is not a big difference. Just another way to get there.

But you can't extrapolate that, there is a huge difference - The drops are much closer to the rider than the hoods
if you place them at the same level, there isn't enough forward reach (just like in Jan's example)
Craig has this right, Modern components dictate an optimal set of fit points, and the Peg is just wrong.

[DOOFUS]

Coppi bike:

To jerk's point, notice how low the brake levers are,
and the drops were the primary hand position.

going back to the review bike setup, fausto's drops were down near the fork crown where they should be. put modern shallow drop bars there, on a -6 stem, and you just lost a ton of head tube on that bike. the tops of the bars would be just above the hoods because the bars might be rotated up slightly cause2010 fausto is using ergopower. as a result, you'd have more exposed seatpost.

put those contact points on a modern frame, and it would probably look like Garzelli's bike (ain't he about five ten? eh. it would look like some five ten slender stage racers bike). maybe fausto would have a bit more seat height (better roads, and maybe more leg extension for modern riders).

it wouldn't look like that messed up review bike

[Michael White]

How does that differ from someone who buys a bike from one of the esteemed builders on this board?
Seriously, it's pure bike fetish either way. They're not buying it to race the Giro.

And there's nowt wrong with that.

of course there's a lot of what is called "aspiration" in any sport or hobby.

This whole discussion feels really honest and alive (though passionate) and I love it, so in a way I think the BQ "review" was productive.

[Dustin]

Wish you guys would get this worked up over the consistently lame and uncritical bike reviews in Bicycling and so many other bike mags, month after month, year after year.

Over time, perhaps the refiner's fire of your righteous and snarky indignation would improve the breed.