Originally posted by Flaneur
Quote:
"any frame from the 80's is giving up a lot to even the cheaper modern frames."
Isn't that a sweeping statement? Based on what?
No it's not a sweeping statement. Frames in the 80's were silver soldered together using lugs. Today they are tig welded in inert atmospheres. This change alone has allowed lighter, more rigid and tunable designs.
"Most modern frames are carefully engineered to give you the right blend of strength weight and responsiveness."
I thought most modern frames were a compromise, designed to give value at a given price point, for a wide variety of consumers. That "blend" may or may not suit you as an individual.
are you saying that frames from the 80's are not a compromise?!
Every frame is compromise. always has been always will be, It's just that the newer designs are better at it than the old ones
"It's also more flexy and there's no discernable difference in ride quality."
I call 'more flexy' a difference in ride quality. I also might prefer a more or less resilient ride to you.
By flexy i refer to lateral stiffness, ie BB sway. The cheap Al frame I have is just as compliant vertically as the old steel one but much stiffer at the bb.
"Bike geometry and design has come a long way over the last 15yrs."
I ride bikes with 74 degree seat angles and 54 centimetre top tubes. These measurements and thus the geometry, have remained unchanged for 35 years because my thigh length, back length and arm length have remained unchanged. Please explain what I'm doing wrong- and tell the major manufacturers who still appear to use the formulae they used in the 80's...fork rake, castor angle, seat stay length, etc., etc.
OPtions open to riders are far greater today than they were in the 80's. Now theres compact geometry, sport geometry along with the conventioanl geometry. The basic dimentions that make a bike work for a rider are still the same, the technology of tube shaping and tuning these hapes and materials to achieve a specific ride for a different size frames of the same model is a definate improvement.
Design. Hmmmm. You mean carbon fibre saddles? Carbon Fibre forks and stays to make a bike tolerable to ride all day? Or something groundbreaking, like aheadsets? How did we survive without those?
If you like the old systems then fine, you keep them, but I appreciate the weight savings and gain in strength of the A-Headset system. CF saddles?? Gimick!
CF forks are an improvement, provided you're talking monomoulded forks like the Reynolds Ouz Pro
WRT design I refer mainly to improvements in materials: Tube shaping, varying wall thickness in specific areas, not just butting, varying tube diameter and blending these different shapes together to achieve a different feel. Even Elcheapo AL frames achieve this quite nicely today. Perhaps we can live without it but will you give up your car in support of your arguement??
I don't think you generalising like this is helping the poster. I think he should ride a bunch of frames to see what he likes but not over-invest in a frame he isn't satisfied with.
If you refer back to the original post, you will notice that the question was a general one and therefore you get a generalised answer. If you want me to answer indepth you'll have to wait for the book.