Brian Ratliff

Why would I ride a bike purpose built to survive falling over on the sidewalk? Also, you are comparing middling-to-low quality metal bikes of yore to top end racing machines of modern times. Racing machines were pretty fragile back then too (probably more fragile than today's racing machines).

And I dare you to drop your aluminum frame onto a point load at the top tube. I dare you. Carbon is much more durable (and repairable) than aluminum frames ever were.

Campag4life

You aren't and won't be missed.

Campag4life

Penny Farting.

Lazyass

I hope you know that even people on other cycling forums laugh at you. Google for the win

Campag4life

In bold...because Brian everybody knows that a carbon bike falling onto a sharp object is the measure of whether a bike is strong enough to endure hard riding. In fact, after every TdF stage win last year, Specialized took their Tarmac and threw it down onto a sharp concrete wall. Oddly, they only broke one so are looking for something sharper to prove this theorem.

Speaking of jokes about the robustness of carbon. Remember the flap last year at the TdF when Contador crashed which turned out to be his fault and the bike shown was actually crashed while transporting it?...lol. It was determined the crash was Contador's fault...riding in rainy flat light conditions and eating one handed when he hit a pothole and endo'ed his Tarmac at a pretty good rate of speed breaking his leg. It didn't break the frame however.

Campag4life

Its OK LA. At least they are laughing. You make me laugh and are becoming one of my favorites because you are so special. In fact, your comments about geometry were almost too much to bare.
Need I remind you the double entendre about slow riders. You fit the bill.

RoadGuy

The Bike Market is not made by by people who think they ride fast.

Fast is a relative term in the mind of the rider. And slow a relative term. How much faster (mph) is the Tour being ridden with megabuck carbon frames? Not much. There have been studies, and riders are not going much faster. Could you keep up with them? I doubt it, or you would be riding in the tour with Sponsors. So, I guess you're slow.

How far do you ride, and how often? What is your average speed over the distance. Yes, I don't ride as fast as I used to. My average speed over a 100 mile ride on the bike path is down to 16mph. So, what? My average used to be 20mph at the same distance at a highest speed reached of 45mph on city streets and on the bike path. I usually don't ride at more than 25mph for more 15 minutes at a time. I'd rather slow down and enjoy the view while I'm riding. Do I care? Not a bit.

You think you're fast? Do I care? Do you make a living as Pro? I doubt it, and because you don't, I don't consider you to be fast. Walter Mitty, it just ain't so.

Do you really think that the relatively low number of carbon bikes that are made control the whole bike market? How many carbon bike are made in comparison to the steel and aluminum bike market in the World?

I don't understand the priority of a modern carbon bike? I can see what you think it should be, do I care? Not a bit.

The guy with the new Tamrac? He cares about whether the frame breaks. If he/they (owners) didn't, there would not be as many carbon frame owners crying, and complaining, how their $3000, $4000, $5000, plus frames broke without warning, without reason, and how the manufacturer is refusing to replace it.

Armor cladding would not make a F1 car more crashproof, just more bulletproof. The carbon fiber honeycomb chassis makes it lighter, stronger, more rigid, and safer in a crash. Obviously it is you that doesn't understand F1 Design.

StanSeven

I'm waiting to get 10,000 posts and then go out in a ball of flames

RoadGuy

An aluminum bike is more practical for my use, as it is for most other people who ride in traffic in the city, because "stuff" happens. Aluminum bikes are not designed to specifically to survive falls on concrete, they just do because of the inherent strength. Are you saying that all carbon bikes are purpose built bikes, not meant for everyday use under everyday conditions? Exactly the reason that everybody doesn't need one, and everybody doesn't ride one. And should not be forced to pay for one.

Carbon frame more repairable than aluminum? Make more economic sense, if possible yes, considering the higher cost of the carbon frame. I could have an aluminum frame repaired (if damaged), but it doesn't make good economic sense, since I could buy, 2X, 3x, 4x, or 10X new aluminum frames what what it would cost you to replace your single carbon frame?.

I'd bet you that any Pro rider is faster than you on an aluminum bike with your riding your precious carbon fiber bike. Does that make you slow? Yes, your slower than him/her. Do you care? The engine is the most important factor in the performance of a bike and rider. Riding a carbon bike would not make me a Pro Level Rider, just as it has not made you one.

RoadGuy

I must have missed the part where Specialized did that to the bikes.

Did the riders ride the same bikes the next day, and the next stage, day after day? I sincerely doubt that... I'm betting that they rode new/fresh frames each day, retiring the ones they crashed, and trashed.

WhyFi

Wow. Just... wow.

redtires

In the bike world, you may as well have an Apple Lisa as your desktop to go with those old bikes. JK of course.

Brian Ratliff

You know, you are self minded and simply arguing that everyone should bend over backwards to serve your needs. I get that. I like it. Makes you a true capitalist... except for the buying stuff part... but the roots of self-interest are definitely in the same place.

Okay then. I endorse your opinion that innovation should have stopped when you were 20 and everyone should ride the same bikes for the same reason as you do, because, well, what you do is admirable and rooted in good ethical philosophy, whilst what I want and do in and with a bike are without merit and actually unethical. I'm sold. I'm a convert. I'll throw away my carbon bikes tomorrow in favor of the much superior aluminum frames from the 1990s.

Carbonfiberboy 

What a remarkable day it's been at BF. What a display of stamina! I'm out of popcorn and dinner won't be for another hour.

I remarked in some recent thread that your freebie power meter is the bunch. It's only about whether you can hang or not, certainly not about absolute speed. I've been riding with the same group of people for 15 years. We've grown old together, but by golly we're still not slow.

It's been interesting to watch the technology flow through the group. My screen name here dates to 2000, when I became the first group member to purchase a carbon bike. I was so nuts over it! Yes, I confess, I bought speed and was no longer the slowest rider in the group. So yes, you can buy speed, but it's "compared to what." Back then, most folks rode custom steel, Davidsons, Ericksons and the like. The first move of the faster riders was to titanium, not carbon. I was the lone carbon rider for years. Eventually a few people bought carbon, and the flood gates opened.

Today I think a steel Colnago was the last to go. She bought carbon last year. One custom Ti - the rider is 6'5". Some of the tandems are still steel. Most tandems and some randonneurs are using discs but most folks are sticking with rim brakes, at least for now. Most of us are riding 9-speed triples. There are a few 10-speed triples. Not many compacts. No carbon wheels. People only migrated to new technology when it became necessary for them to hang with the group and I guess carbon wheels haven't been enough bang for the buck. Or maybe our roads are too nasty.

My aluminum rain bike with the hated Ultegra cone and cup hubs is now my roller bike. I had to rebuild those suckers every month to keep them rolling. I wasn't about to run my Rolfs in the rain and wear out those rims and thus trash the whole wheelset.

The only older thing that went away that I miss are the Open Pro Ceramic rims. They never wear out, so I still have them - on my roller bike of all things.

The new rain bike is our tandem with CK hubs, Kinlin 279 rims, and CX-Ray spokes. Those wheel components are a good example of benefit from changing standards. I have the hubs looked at once a year. I never break spokes and they build through the standard hub holes. Love the wide rims. The rims still wear out and I have to replace them. Discs would fix that, but that would mean a new tandem, which would have to be carbon. And would of course have thru-axles, heh, heh. So that might happen. Wouldn't want to die with enough money to buy a new tandem still in the bank.

qclabrat

started enjoying this thread, then no so real fast

I have a bunch of bikes and interchange parts often

Usually go with the what works till it's near death

I hear 26rs are dying, I'll be there to put the final nail on the coffin
Perfectly good std IMO

ColinL

Road bike world, maybe.

My MTB is brand new and others like it can still be had with threaded bottom brackets, because a few manufacturers realized that pressfit was not a reliable design for something subjected to a lot of dust and mud. On road bikes, it's a race to zero. Pressfit costs a little less and weighs a little less. Creaking? Eh, just buy a new bike. It won't creak! (For a while. )

RoadGuy

Talk about closed minded...

I never said that innovation should have stopped. I expect bike manufacturers and manufacturers of other items to support the items that they manufacture. For as long as the Buyers find the items useful, not only until next year when the manufacturer goes in a different direction. You make it, and you are responsible for it. That means that if it contains toxic materials, the manufacturer is responsible for the ultimate safe disposal the materials, and cost of the disposal. Don't dump it on the public and walk away. You manufacture a new product, then you are responsible for the support and technology of the product. You don't get to stick the Buyer with a bill for a new/different one next year, and you aren't allowed to use "...that was last year's model..." as an excuse for the mistakes you made, and walk away from the product.

Let me dumb it down for you, since I'm one of the people with an IQ of over 150.

DIFFERENT STROKES FOR DIFFERENT FOLKS.

I go my own way, and make my own decision after evaluating the options. I am not a slave to fashion, and I don't care what the current fashion is. I replace stuff when it make sense from a support or functional basis.

Just because I don't ride the same bike as you, doesn't make me wrong, and it doesn't make you wrong (or right).

I don't demand that you buy and to ride the same bike as me, and I won't make fun of you because you don't ride the same bike as me.

I expect to to give me the same space and respect as I afford you.

BillyD

The insults and arguing stop now, guys.

Thanks a lot.

Brian Ratliff

How can it continue if a business has 30+ years of parts to support? And where's the cutoff point? When 2000 customers are left? When 10 are left? When 1 is left? How would they even know how many people like you exist? Do you all send in a card every year to Shimano telling them that you are still around and still need parts?

RoadGuy

Being a Crook has nothing to do with IQ. It's a personal choice. A lack of personal integrity. Bill Gates knew that what he bought and turned into MSDOS was stolen from Digital Research, AND he chose to break the legal contract that he signed with the people that stole/copied it. Early copies of MSDOS mistakenly included copies of the Digital Research Trademark and Name inside of them along with the stolen code. To this day, Microsoft continues to obtain/steal other companies' code under false pretenses, and incorporate it into Windows, without paying the Owners/Publishers of the code.

Bill Gates succeeded because he was able to plan and visualize a better business plan and willing to execute the plan at any cost, while other more honest Software Publishers drew lines and refused to step over them.

Many Crooks go more legit after they make their fortunes. Look at the Kennedys. They made their money as Rum Runners during Prohibition. Yet nobody talks about that now.

WhyFi

I'm at a loss - what are some examples of this in the bike world?

RoadGuy

Product Development belongs in the lab. Once you market it, and sell it, you are responsible for it. Square tape bottom brackets still exist because they work and there is still a demand for them. How many other designs have appeared and fallen out of favor since then? Do I expect the manufacturers of those dead designs to support them? Yes I do, because they stuck those designs on the Buyers. I stay behind the bleeding edge, because I don't care to bleed with the early adopters.

If the bike manufacturers stopped using the bottom bracket that is installed in your bike tomorrow, and the parts manufacturers followed suit, would you simply fork out say $5K-$10K for a new bike on the spot? Without a single word of complaint? I highly doubt it.

Brian Ratliff

Who enforces this responsibility exactly?

RoadGuy

Have you ever run a Virus and Spyware sweep immediately after doing a Windows Update? The Official Microsoft Software Update Sites are crawling with bugs of all sorts. Automatic Updates are for Suckers. Have you ever read the disclaimers on the Update Sites? The User agrees to hold Microsoft harmless for any damage caused by the Update Packages regardless of the reason or the damage done to the User's Computer/s.

WhyFi

I don't know if it's any different in the bike world, but in electronics and appliances, most jurisdictions (in the US, at least) need to be able to provide parts for between 3 - 7 years after the product is manufactured. I can't fathom how this isn't being met or exceeded in the bike world, so I don't know what RG is talking about.