Originally Posted by The Golden Boy

The stuff about what makes something "better" than something else is interesting. Adding in the historical context of something is also fun and exciting. Looking at what parts an owner swapped out, what they kept, or what they added... it speaks about the part, it speaks about the time, it speaks about the owner, it speaks about what's "good" and what's affordable.

Looking at stuff like aftermarket parts- something like Bullseye pulleys is really interesting to me. They were not ever cheap. Those seem to often get put on high end derailleurs- pieces that already have sealed bearing pulleys... I can only think either the original pulley was damaged, or the owner was going for the prestige of the Bullseye pulleys.

Looking how bikes are specced is interesting to me. Beyond the racing/touring/sport/ATB stuff- where a particular group gets placed on what level frames... You look at something like the Grant era Bridgestone bikes, where a flagship level bike is wearing a groupset 3rd down from the top.. interesting. Thinking of my bikes- I get a kick out of throwing top of the line parts on a second from the bottom level bike. IMO- it's a nice frame, IMO it was specced to get it to a price point.

The recent discussion about discrepancies in published tube thicknesses is interesting- my head spins with the numbers- but realizing that has a direct impact on weight, and therefore price and therefore prestige... it all makes a difference.