Originally Posted by
KonAaron Snake
Frankly, I’m this case, nice workmanship was kind. I understand your point about - if - it came before the designs that followed (I don’t know that to be accurate), but the geometry of the bike is totally wrong for that concept/group. If the intent was only to build a tool to hang some parts from, ok. If it was to build a bike for use with ax, Blech.
I also think you might be romanticizing how suppliers are chosen; that’s typically a function of price, relationships, and location.
None of which is to try and take away from a very important designer; I’m sure he’s made many impressive bikes. This one isn’t among them to me.
It could be that I don’t like what Shimano ordered rather than what he built.
Well I get it and do agree, he admits it was somewhat of a kludge, supposedly built in a day right before the show. I do understand the relationships, he was on board with them from early on when Campy didn't want to listen about what was coming and Shimano did, this is fairly well documented most recently in a BQ article last year I think.
You're right about the romanticizing that most of us are guilty of but this was a bona fide relationship based on Shimano's need to tap into someone with real world hands on experience and vision, Jim was it for them, especially after Campy blew him off.
Here's Peter Kohlers excerpt, turns out it was 1980 so the year before Lotus went there.
Sidney Star embraced the aero concept for Lotus and was the first to introduce it to the United States market on a commercial basis after a one-off frame was made (in one day!) for the New York Bike Show in January 1980 by Jim Merz for display at the Shimano stand. Three prototypes were built in 1981 for Lotus’ sponsored attempt to break the transcontinental record from Santa Monica, California to New York by Jim Black in June, and painted in a striking pink livery. One of these still exists in a private collection.