do it, with style.

There are few things in life more satisfying than running a nitwit - who is dressed-up like an insect - into the weeds on his $8,000.00 carboniferous toy while on a nice, vintage steel-framed bicycle.

+1 - In most criteriums there is minimal shifting, 2 or 3 gears used at most. Shifters belong on the downtube anyway. Its the rider not the bike. Except on Bike Forums where the bike counts more.:D

dubesor, that bike has a style all it's own and is much more comfortable to ride then the swanky new Aluminium and Carbon bikes. I found this quate on a poster in a bike shop I used to work in. the pic was a peleton heading down the road with a lone stragler about 2ft behind. on the bottom was this "the joy is not in winning but in having the courage to join the race" nice bike ride and enjoy.

Its all about the motor. Throw some realy good Michelins on there with lightweight inner tubes and you'll be good to go. Check your hub adjustments (a touch of play when fully clamped down then tighten a smidge).

I think the motor is much more important than the transmission - MUCH!

thanks for all the encouraging advice, everyone!

i might try racing the 1937 claud butler too when that one's ready :P

Yes You Can
 

On a steel bike, given the right course, you'll be faster. Sounds silly ? Advantage of "carbon" is low weight, and, mainly due to rear triangle geometry, "responsiveness", the ability to brutally accelerate. On long climbs the carbon is an advantage, in "shorttrack" crit stuff, it's good too. Indexed shifting allows you to use the bike like a racing car, moving through the gears. Non-indexed, you need a different pedalling technique, not a constant cadence and always equal application of power.

With steel you are going to be a load faster down hill. Overtake, or take a breather. If the terrain is suited to keeping up momentum, you'll go down in history as the guy who made the world realize carbon is a marketting fad. Most people are riding carbon wunderbikes because the magazines and the sales bumph tells them they have to. Those bikes have their uses, but they aren't best suited for all races.

Are you talking about carbon or steel here? I have the option of indexed or 'floaty' shifting with my Shimano SIS

So you're saying a course with a more down-sloping grade is an advantage for older bikes?

I would go for it. Only advice I have is to change the
stem and the handlebars. You wouldn't want to snap
either one of them in a full blown sprint.

Aluminum DOES fatigue... Better too be safe than sorry. :thumb:




Shortcut.

It's an advantage for older riders :P

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18...piegazelle.jpg

Here's me trying to catch my breath on the downslope.

Swap them out for new aluminum parts? Or new CF parts?

Why would a steel bike have an advantage going downhill?

It doesn't. What would be an advantage is aero rims with first class hubs and good descending skills.

I think you should go ahead on that bike, but keep in mind:

1. does the race have a lot of hills?
2. is it really technical or just a sunday/sat morning ride?

if its a ride with a few rolling hills, then you should do just fine, given that bike is ~5lbs over what most carbon bikes are, it doesn't really matter THAT much unless you are going to be doing a lot of climbing.

if the race is a technical corner crazy crit, then i'd still go on that bike, but make sure you are fully re-acquainted with its handling and knowing what gear to be in, etc.

tires sound fine, and wheels should be fine too.

you WILL feel a difference with more modern wheels, fewer spoke count, lighter materials, but watch the gearing.

my bianchi feels far more alive with its 12-21 8-speed cassette, than it did with the 13-25...6-speed.

He's saying fat men on heavy, steel bikes go downhill faster than light weight guys on lightweight, carbon fiber bikes.

That's quite right. Weight is an advantage downhill. Extreme example is tandem. The cx of one rider and the weight of two. Ever tried to keep up with a freewheeling tandem on a downhill ? You kept up ? It was a daydream. The heavier weight is faster downhill. On moderate uphills which don't require getting out of the saddle, a steel bike will keep up momentum beter than a carbon bike. The pedalling technique required for getting the most out of this is different. Pedalling cadence has risen a load in recent years. Suited to carbon lightweights and indexed shifting. The indexing allows you to shift seamlessly and keep up the cadence. Without indexing (steel), the modulation should come more from your legs, not the drivetrain being used like a gearbox (CF). Even ultralite wheelweight at circumference (rim and tire) isn't always best. There is thing called momentum, and if you look at some of the track record attempts over long distances, you'll see guys now trying (Japan) really heavy rims.

Anyway, give it a try. Be nice to know how it goes :)

I have to add my "go for it," and can attest to excellent results on an identical (size, color, etc) bike upgraded to STI shifting and with the OEM wheels modified to accept an 8-sp freehub and cassette.

Properly lubed, hubs packed well, and fit right, I had no problem finding my bike split to be in the top 10, against many younger "motors" and almost all younger bikes. Top 2 bikes splits were a steel framed Brew and a 1993 Paramount, so go figure.

I promply bought another frame, same size, in black, and upgraded it heavily, got it under 20 lbs, and cut 3:45 off of that 15mile time, no aeros, either. The weight wasn't much of a factor, but shifting smarter and keeping revs up made the difference.

If there are not a lot of hills, and you keep up your momentum, that bike will race just fine.

Oh, and that purple bike? Sold to a guy with a $4000 Scott. He says "once you get it up to speed, it stays there." He's learned from his Ironman what his plastic fantastic (and it is really nice) bike can't teach: how to ride fast. Get it going, then keep it going, and on the downhills, a little weight and properly packed hubs will give you 3 lengths.

+1!

batman_3000, heavier things go faster downhill only when the air resistance is the same. Actually, it's the air drag/weight ratio that makes the difference. The weight of a carbon bike with rider is about the same weight as a steel bike plus rider. The difference isn't likely to be significant since the air resistance is the same.

A feather lands more slowly than a pebble only because of its air resistance, not its weight. If there were no air, they would fall at exactly the same rate.

So that was you! :notamused:

This guy races crits with downtubies...

Exactly
 

You have it in a nutshell:

weight is not really a problem on hills below a certain grade. And even then, I'm not sure how much difference a few pounds really makes. I know there is a psychological difference, the physics just doesn't seem to be there to support a significant performance difference.

Go for it
 

While I can't say that I have actually competed on an older steel bike, I am a construction superintendent that has spent the biggest part of 10 years living in motel rooms. The bike I travel with is an ancient Univega Viva Sport, and I always try to find group rides wherever I am.

Invariably, I ask a LBS where the rides are, and I show up with my ratty old travel bike. I am 47, and it is absolutely amazing how many rides I have ridden alone, because most of those riders out there with their $3000 bikes are not into it mentally or physically, and drop on the first hill or headwind. (Houston has some hellacious headwinds, and I'm not even going to mention Wyoming)

It is sort of fun to have everyone looking down their nose at you at the start, when you know you are going to outride 70 percent of them regardless of age or equipment.