Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

A lot of the recent "innovation" is a bad bargain for anyone not pushing a competitiv

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

A lot of the recent "innovation" is a bad bargain for anyone not pushing a competitiv

Old 06-29-21, 02:24 PM
  #76  
mschwett 
please no more flats
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 797

Bikes: aethos, creo, vanmoof, public ...

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 430 Post(s)
Liked 493 Times in 275 Posts
Originally Posted by pgjackson View Post
Well, my point is that the huge majority of cyclists out there are not physically capable of even coming close to maxing out their bike.
but what does that matter? thereís little or no relationship between being able to ďmax something outĒ and enjoying it. who can max out a sports car? a bike? skis? scuba gear? a fancy camera?
mschwett is offline  
Likes For mschwett:
Old 06-29-21, 02:24 PM
  #77  
genejockey 
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
 
genejockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 11,332

Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6215 Post(s)
Liked 6,572 Times in 3,369 Posts
Originally Posted by pgjackson View Post
Well, my point is that the huge majority of cyclists out there are not physically capable of even coming close to maxing out their bike.
I don't think you need to max out your bike to be faster on a modern bike. If modern bikes truly are more efficient, then putting in the same watts, no matter how many or how few, the modern bike will always be faster. Plus, better brakes will make you a more confident descender, so you can descend faster, even well below the speeds the bikes is capable of.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."

"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
genejockey is offline  
Likes For genejockey:
Old 06-29-21, 02:30 PM
  #78  
icemilkcoffee 
Senior Member
 
icemilkcoffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,283
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 764 Post(s)
Liked 591 Times in 362 Posts
Originally Posted by pgjackson View Post
Put 95% of cyclists today on one of those old TdF bikes from the 70's and I bet they go just as fast as they do on their modern-marvel bike.
You know that's not true. There is a reason why you have a 16.1lb Rossetti bike, right?
For a given amount of wattage, the newer bike will go faster because it has less air drag, and accelerate faster because it is lighter. That's just physics. It applies to the top flight riders and it applies equally to average joes.
icemilkcoffee is offline  
Likes For icemilkcoffee:
Old 06-29-21, 02:32 PM
  #79  
UniChris
Senior Member
 
UniChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,785

Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 872 Post(s)
Liked 363 Times in 261 Posts
Originally Posted by Bald Paul View Post
That being said, I recently broke a spoke on my front wheel. Any ideas?
Are they headed spokes or z bend spokes?

For the latter you may be able to improvise if you find someone with a spoke threader to do that part. Lots of people go to Tommy Miller for odd stuff like that.

​​​​​​
If what you need is a super long conventional J head see if any of these work - if you ask they'll probably custom cut and thread for you if you're in between the sizes for their wheels.

https://www.unicycle.co.uk/penny-far...ess-steel.html

Last edited by UniChris; 06-29-21 at 02:40 PM.
UniChris is offline  
Old 06-29-21, 02:43 PM
  #80  
pgjackson
Senior Member
 
pgjackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Gulf Breeze, FL
Posts: 4,128

Bikes: Rossetti Vertigo

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times in 69 Posts
Originally Posted by icemilkcoffee View Post
You know that's not true. There is a reason why you have a 16.1lb Rossetti bike, right?
For a given amount of wattage, the newer bike will go faster because it has less air drag, and accelerate faster because it is lighter. That's just physics. It applies to the top flight riders and it applies equally to average joes.
I have a 16lb bike because its cool. I wanted to see what all the CF excitement was about. Didn't make me go any faster than my previous aluminum bikes, but I love my bike.
pgjackson is offline  
Likes For pgjackson:
Old 06-29-21, 04:23 PM
  #81  
terrymorse 
climber has-been
 
terrymorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 4,589

Bikes: Scott Addict R1

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1217 Post(s)
Liked 1,032 Times in 551 Posts
Originally Posted by Reflector Guy View Post
There is probably some tiny incremental improvement that comes with threadless stems over quill.... That we'll soon be able to read about. That seems to be the theme of this thread.
Quill + threaded headset:
  • creaky
  • not very stiff
  • involved to set bearing pre-tension
  • stem sometimes gets stuck in steering tube
Threadless headset + stem:
  • doesn't creak
  • as stiff as you want to make it
  • trivially easy to set bearing pre-tension
  • stem never gets stuck in steering tube
  • swapping stems is super easy
Are those tiny improvements? I don't think so.
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat



terrymorse is offline  
Old 06-29-21, 04:44 PM
  #82  
Gresp15C
Senior Member
 
Gresp15C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,766
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1017 Post(s)
Liked 588 Times in 381 Posts
I ride bikes with both "classic" and newer components and materials. I'm not a strong or competitive cyclist, so some improvements are lost on me, but others seem beneficial.

Each rider has their own take on the pro's and con's of each new thing that comes along, and has to decide whether it's worth upgrading. For myself, since I mess with old bikes, I certainly have my own criteria for which generations of components I'll put up with. For instance, I don't keep steel wheels or cottered cranks. There are components that I've made peace with, such as quill stems and rim brakes, that I wouldn't necessarily look for on a brand new bike.

There seem to be two unavoidable drawbacks: First, because bikes last a long time, rapid innovation means that there is a proliferation of component standards, making it harder to find spare parts. Second, trying to decide among alternatives that may only be marginally different creates a lot of confusion and trepidation when buying a new bike.
Gresp15C is offline  
Likes For Gresp15C:
Old 06-29-21, 04:49 PM
  #83  
genejockey 
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
 
genejockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 11,332

Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6215 Post(s)
Liked 6,572 Times in 3,369 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse View Post
Quill + threaded headset:
  • creaky
  • not very stiff
  • involved to set bearing pre-tension
  • stem sometimes gets stuck in steering tube
Threadless headset + stem:
  • doesn't creak
  • as stiff as you want to make it
  • trivially easy to set bearing pre-tension
  • stem never gets stuck in steering tube
  • swapping stems is super easy
Are those tiny improvements? I don't think so.
You forgot 'infinitely adjustable height', and 'Bar height less limited by steerer length' under 'Quill + threaded stem'
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."

"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
genejockey is offline  
Likes For genejockey:
Old 06-29-21, 05:21 PM
  #84  
dedhed
SE Wis
 
dedhed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 9,051

Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2147 Post(s)
Liked 2,179 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by UniChris View Post
Actually they've changed completely and are now as much computer software as machine. We're already seeing the beginning of them not having engines at all.
​​​​​
The difference is, that's necessary - we basically can't even afford to legally permit older cars to be driven (apart from miniscule numbers in limited use collectible registration) due to the missing safety features, emissions, and inefficiency issues.
My 1976 pickup has exactly 6 wires to start, run the engine, and charge the battery. Gets 6 uncatalyzed mpg, but hey, it has safety glass and seatbelts.
dedhed is online now  
Old 06-29-21, 05:35 PM
  #85  
Reflector Guy
Senior Member
 
Reflector Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,115

Bikes: Bianchi Via Nirone

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked 1,002 Times in 478 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse View Post
Quill + threaded headset:
  • creaky
  • not very stiff
  • involved to set bearing pre-tension
  • stem sometimes gets stuck in steering tube
Threadless headset + stem:
  • doesn't creak
  • as stiff as you want to make it
  • trivially easy to set bearing pre-tension
  • stem never gets stuck in steering tube
  • swapping stems is super easy
Are those tiny improvements? I don't think so.
Oh, I agree, definitely. My post was completely in jest but it fits right in with some of the other crazy ones early on in the thread.
Reflector Guy is offline  
Likes For Reflector Guy:
Old 06-29-21, 05:53 PM
  #86  
Vintage Schwinn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 543
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 273 Times in 186 Posts
Well it varies according to each individual's desires, expectatations and the joy & pleasure that they derive from whatever bicycle that ultimately choose to pilot.

From a purely practical standpoint, viewing it simply and strictly from a bean-counter/CPA 's perspective, than yes it is silly to even ponder the question because probably 95% or more folks probably have machinery that though state-of the-art today, doesn't do for them--or--assist them any better that the typical bicycle of fifty years ago because they simply are not that close to being a top-caliber cyclist that would benefit from such small differences in equipment technology!

Yeah, but it is never just black and white and pure facts, from a rational human buyer's perspective. Very few people make such purchasing decisions like a robot or computer. Yeah, there are a few of the stereotypical university science professors and research scientists, and ultra-egghead accountant types that do approach purchases/acquisitions in such a way, but most other humans give greater emphasis to other "reasoning" for purchasing/acquiring something such as a car, bicycle, boat, tennis raquet, golf clubs, musical instrument, clothing, shoes, electronics-stereo-television-home entertainment equip-computers-phones, and other items and gear. It is pretty much the same as to different individuals' overall perspective about dining and eating-out and entertaining and vacationing & travelling the world.
What one person finds perfectly suitable may not be the same viewpoint that another person has.
They both are correct. There is no general right or wrong that can be just given as answer. Each person is different and must decide for themselves what ultimately makes them happiest.

Does anyone need an automobile that can go from zero to sixty miles per hour in ten seconds or less? Certainly not, but there are many that meet or exceed that criteria with a some doing so in under four seconds. Most every new econon-box subcompact today is capable of 100 mph top speed and has excellent steering and braking response and handles well on a twisty, winding road at speeds to at least 85 mph, something a sixties-seventies musclecar cannot do, although hell yeah, a 426 hemi mopar, 454 chev, and many more from mopar, GM, Ford, and AMC can certainly fly in a straight-line. I specifically chose the 426 Chrysler hemi and the 454 Chevrolet because these engines are massively heavy v-8 big block engines, and with that 800+ pounds of engine in the engine bay, you cannot get anything close to decent steering, much less anything close to handling with even the best factory front suspension available and overall chassis tuning of that era or any era. The problem is more of a physics problem. There once was a saying that went that there is no substitute for cubic inches, but that has largely been disproven over the past 40 years.
FIAT has issued a Dodge Truck that has sold well over the past few model years that has over 700 horsepower, and this is real, net horsepower rating, and not the fudged- overinflated by 20%, SAE GROSS horsepower ratings that the US Automakers used prior to 1972 model year. Yep, it simply is to capture those customers that want to brag and boast about having the "ultimate" and those same customers derive satisfaction and pleasure from folks gawking and looking at their truck and asking questions and commenting about how "cool" that it is. There is no practical reasoning for and no benefit to having 700 horsepower in any street vehicle of any kind, and much less so in a pickup truck of all things. .................but you know to some it is just beyond cool.....and therefore has a perception of status or "cool" or whatever you wanna call it among a certain group of folks...............................sure, some might take a different viewpoint, that it is excessive from a "green" viewpoint in that it likely gets relatively low miles per gallon, even though from a purely emmisions standpoint, the 700 hp new Dodge truck probably polutes far less than a 2005 Chevy Tahoe or 2005 Ford Explorer, and probably five times less than any 1980's GM vehicle that is carburetted and still on the road today in 2021.
Hey, isn't this overall topic much like the age old debate of $$$$$ swiss timepiece versus a new $15 quartz watch.......or just using the phone's display..
Baby boomers eligible for Soc Security or receiving SS in 2021 likely do remember when the Bulova ACCUTRON tuning fork method produced the world's then most accurate watch more than sixty years ago....... If I am not mistaken, this was also used as the basis for the clock in the Apollo 11 moon mission in July 1969.
I remember that SEIKO, I'm fairly sure it was SEIKO that introduced the superior and more accurate Quartz method at about that point in time as the sixties ended and 1970 rolled up on the calendar. .....Anybody here was in college during 1972 that recalls the new calculator from Texas Instruments that sold for over $100 and was the approx size of seven smart phones of 2021 stacked together to make a shape of a small brick......that T.I. calculator did little more than add/subtract/multiply/divide.....
Well, the small red led display of that T.I. calculator led to some manufacturers making DIGITAL WATCHES which were on the market by 1973.
So yeah, today's new $8 Chinese quartz watch from Walmart is still more accurate than my Chopard automatic "Mille Miglia" chronograph --and-- that $8 Walmart quartz watch is still more accurate than my Girard-Perregaux automatic chronograph. Yeah, are seconds or a fraction of second per day something to really get concerned about. Many fully serviced and cleaned mechanical movements aren't within + or - 45 seconds per day of accuracy.
You also have a lot of boneheads that say a vinyl record is superior to a compact disc and that is just absurd. Sure, you could have one that has better eq and balance than a poorly done CD but there are numerous limitations with respect to what you can and cannot get on to vinyl. Bass must be mono on vinyl. You can do stereo bass on tape or cd & digital if you wish. You've got to reduce the deep bass response and you have to reduce certain treble spectrum instruments like high-hats and cymbals. You don't have to do this for CD, TAPE, or DIGITAL. With Vinyl, you are limited to approx 20 min per side BEFORE THE SOUND QUALITY BEGINS TO DEGRADE with each minute over 20, and 23 is the point where Sound Quality really drops off with every additional minute. With a Vinyl record, you've got to place your most dynamic songs on the beginning of each side, because sound quality degrades as the grooves get closer to the center label. There are other issues with respect to noise, and increased noise with each subsequent playing no matter how clean. Even if everything were absolutely perfect with the LP pressing and lack of warpage and best-in-the world equipment, you still have an overall s/n (signal to noise ratio) that falls way short of what better tape decks can do, and way, way, way short of s/n ratio of compact disc, dvd, blu-ray, md, or any other digital format. You also have significant issues and variances with respect to the mechanical "stampers" that press an album. Quality control and sound quality issues arise because of this and it has always been a major issue since 1948 when the LP came to be. Stampers are replaced after some qty number of pressings.............ever wonder why your copy of an LP sounded like dog-doo and yet your girlfriend's same copy of that LP sounded really good, even though you bought the album within the first month or two that it may have been released......................it is a crapshoot because one LP could be made on the 6000 stamping of the stamper just before being replaced and hers may have been the 232nd stamping of another stamper..................there was just no way to tell, then - or now...........................exception being some numbered limited editions etc and mobile-fidelity labs pressings that carried numbers....
The other thing is that to get a really good sounding LP, you had to have somebody really good doing the mastering for the record, and they had to do generally a large number of test pressings to get it right....................well that was fine if you were a Motown label artist , or were The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Santana, Led Zeppelin, Joe Cocker, Pink Floyd or anybody really huge but if you were a nobody-just outta the garage band or artist, your LP or 45 might come back sounding thin and dead with no bass and you might have had no ability to change that. There aren't really any classical music folks today that favor the LP as a vehicle for the best sonic quality for new releases. Why would someone want speed issues that arise from even slightly warped LP's and noise and limited overall sound quality, and limitations on both time capacity and the extra-ordinary monkeying that one must do to reduce deep bass and certain treble items to get them on to vinyl.
This is a huge issue with live recorded symphony performances. Tape and Digital formats including compact disc have zero issues with accurately representing the sound as recorded with deep bass and all the brilliant high end. Vinyl cannot do that and must have the brilliant near genius talent of someone experienced in the black art of doing whatever needed to master the LP such that it sounds like it did on the tape. A lot of those folks are dead and gone. Unless you're already huge, I doubt that you've got Bob Ludwig's phone number, and thus it is just gonna be mostly luck that your LP sounds at least half as good as the CD or digital version.
Yeah, it is mind boggling that young folks are crazy about LP's these days. There is no scientific reasoning for that.
Vintage Schwinn is offline  
Likes For Vintage Schwinn:
Old 06-29-21, 05:54 PM
  #87  
Reflector Guy
Senior Member
 
Reflector Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,115

Bikes: Bianchi Via Nirone

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked 1,002 Times in 478 Posts
Originally Posted by Vintage Schwinn View Post
Well it varies according to each individual's desires, expectatations and the joy & pleasure that they derive from whatever bicycle that ultimately choose to pilot.

From a purely practical standpoint, viewing it simply and strictly from a bean-counter/CPA 's perspective, than yes it is silly to even ponder the question because probably 95% or more folks probably have machinery that though state-of the-art today, doesn't do for them--or--assist them any better that the typical bicycle of fifty years ago because they simply are not that close to being a top-caliber cyclist that would benefit from such small differences in equipment technology!

Yeah, but it is never just black and white and pure facts, from a rational human buyer's perspective. Very few people make such purchasing decisions like a robot or computer. Yeah, there are a few of the stereotypical university science professors and research scientists, and ultra-egghead accountant types that do approach purchases/acquisitions in such a way, but most other humans give greater emphasis to other "reasoning" for purchasing/acquiring something such as a car, bicycle, boat, tennis raquet, golf clubs, musical instrument, clothing, shoes, electronics-stereo-television-home entertainment equip-computers-phones, and other items and gear. It is pretty much the same as to different individuals' overall perspective about dining and eating-out and entertaining and vacationing & travelling the world.
What one person finds perfectly suitable may not be the same viewpoint that another person has.
They both are correct. There is no general right or wrong that can be just given as answer. Each person is different and must decide for themselves what ultimately makes them happiest.

Does anyone need an automobile that can go from zero to sixty miles per hour in ten seconds or less? Certainly not, but there are many that meet or exceed that criteria with a some doing so in under four seconds. Most every new econon-box subcompact today is capable of 100 mph top speed and has excellent steering and braking response and handles well on a twisty, winding road at speeds to at least 85 mph, something a sixties-seventies musclecar cannot do, although hell yeah, a 426 hemi mopar, 454 chev, and many more from mopar, GM, Ford, and AMC can certainly fly in a straight-line. I specifically chose the 426 Chrysler hemi and the 454 Chevrolet because these engines are massively heavy v-8 big block engines, and with that 800+ pounds of engine in the engine bay, you cannot get anything close to decent steering, much less anything close to handling with even the best factory front suspension available and overall chassis tuning of that era or any era. The problem is more of a physics problem. There once was a saying that went that there is no substitute for cubic inches, but that has largely been disproven over the past 40 years.
FIAT has issued a Dodge Truck that has sold well over the past few model years that has over 700 horsepower, and this is real, net horsepower rating, and not the fudged- overinflated by 20%, SAE GROSS horsepower ratings that the US Automakers used prior to 1972 model year. Yep, it simply is to capture those customers that want to brag and boast about having the "ultimate" and those same customers derive satisfaction and pleasure from folks gawking and looking at their truck and asking questions and commenting about how "cool" that it is. There is no practical reasoning for and no benefit to having 700 horsepower in any street vehicle of any kind, and much less so in a pickup truck of all things. .................but you know to some it is just beyond cool.....and therefore has a perception of status or "cool" or whatever you wanna call it among a certain group of folks...............................sure, some might take a different viewpoint, that it is excessive from a "green" viewpoint in that it likely gets relatively low miles per gallon, even though from a purely emmisions standpoint, the 700 hp new Dodge truck probably polutes far less than a 2005 Chevy Tahoe or 2005 Ford Explorer, and probably five times less than any 1980's GM vehicle that is carburetted and still on the road today in 2021.
Hey, isn't this overall topic much like the age old debate of $$$$$ swiss timepiece versus a new $15 quartz watch.......or just using the phone's display..
Baby boomers eligible for Soc Security or receiving SS in 2021 likely do remember when the Bulova ACCUTRON tuning fork method produced the world's then most accurate watch more than sixty years ago....... If I am not mistaken, this was also used as the basis for the clock in the Apollo 11 moon mission in July 1969.
I remember that SEIKO, I'm fairly sure it was SEIKO that introduced the superior and more accurate Quartz method at about that point in time as the sixties ended and 1970 rolled up on the calendar. .....Anybody here was in college during 1972 that recalls the new calculator from Texas Instruments that sold for over $100 and was the approx size of seven smart phones of 2021 stacked together to make a shape of a small brick......that T.I. calculator did little more than add/subtract/multiply/divide.....
Well, the small red led display of that T.I. calculator led to some manufacturers making DIGITAL WATCHES which were on the market by 1973.
So yeah, today's new $8 Chinese quartz watch from Walmart is still more accurate than my Chopard automatic "Mille Miglia" chronograph --and-- that $8 Walmart quartz watch is still more accurate than my Girard-Perregaux automatic chronograph. Yeah, are seconds or a fraction of second per day something to really get concerned about. Many fully serviced and cleaned mechanical movements aren't within + or - 45 seconds per day of accuracy.
You also have a lot of boneheads that say a vinyl record is superior to a compact disc and that is just absurd. Sure, you could have one that has better eq and balance than a poorly done CD but there are numerous limitations with respect to what you can and cannot get on to vinyl. Bass must be mono on vinyl. You can do stereo bass on tape or cd & digital if you wish. You've got to reduce the deep bass response and you have to reduce certain treble spectrum instruments like high-hats and cymbals. You don't have to do this for CD, TAPE, or DIGITAL. With Vinyl, you are limited to approx 20 min per side BEFORE THE SOUND QUALITY BEGINS TO DEGRADE with each minute over 20, and 23 is the point where Sound Quality really drops off with every additional minute. With a Vinyl record, you've got to place your most dynamic songs on the beginning of each side, because sound quality degrades as the grooves get closer to the center label. There are other issues with respect to noise, and increased noise with each subsequent playing no matter how clean. Even if everything were absolutely perfect with the LP pressing and lack of warpage and best-in-the world equipment, you still have an overall s/n (signal to noise ratio) that falls way short of what better tape decks can do, and way, way, way short of s/n ratio of compact disc, dvd, blu-ray, md, or any other digital format. You also have significant issues and variances with respect to the mechanical "stampers" that press an album. Quality control and sound quality issues arise because of this and it has always been a major issue since 1948 when the LP came to be. Stampers are replaced after some qty number of pressings.............ever wonder why your copy of an LP sounded like dog-doo and yet your girlfriend's same copy of that LP sounded really good, even though you bought the album within the first month or two that it may have been released......................it is a crapshoot because one LP could be made on the 6000 stamping of the stamper just before being replaced and hers may have been the 232nd stamping of another stamper..................there was just no way to tell, then - or now...........................exception being some numbered limited editions etc and mobile-fidelity labs pressings that carried numbers....
The other thing is that to get a really good sounding LP, you had to have somebody really good doing the mastering for the record, and they had to do generally a large number of test pressings to get it right....................well that was fine if you were a Motown label artist , or were The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Santana, Led Zeppelin, Joe Cocker, Pink Floyd or anybody really huge but if you were a nobody-just outta the garage band or artist, your LP or 45 might come back sounding thin and dead with no bass and you might have had no ability to change that. There aren't really any classical music folks today that favor the LP as a vehicle for the best sonic quality for new releases. Why would someone want speed issues that arise from even slightly warped LP's and noise and limited overall sound quality, and limitations on both time capacity and the extra-ordinary monkeying that one must do to reduce deep bass and certain treble items to get them on to vinyl.
This is a huge issue with live recorded symphony performances. Tape and Digital formats including compact disc have zero issues with accurately representing the sound as recorded with deep bass and all the brilliant high end. Vinyl cannot do that and must have the brilliant near genius talent of someone experienced in the black art of doing whatever needed to master the LP such that it sounds like it did on the tape. A lot of those folks are dead and gone. Unless you're already huge, I doubt that you've got Bob Ludwig's phone number, and thus it is just gonna be mostly luck that your LP sounds at least half as good as the CD or digital version.
Yeah, it is mind boggling that young folks are crazy about LP's these days. There is no scientific reasoning for that.
Td;dr
Reflector Guy is offline  
Likes For Reflector Guy:
Old 06-29-21, 07:55 PM
  #88  
shelbyfv
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 10,088
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2990 Post(s)
Liked 3,836 Times in 1,972 Posts
Originally Posted by Vintage Schwinn View Post
Well it varies according to each individual's desires, expectatations and the joy & pleasure that they derive from whatever bicycle that ultimately choose to pilot.

From a purely practical standpoint, viewing it simply and strictly from a bean-counter/CPA 's perspective, than yes it is silly to even ponder the question because probably 95% or more folks probably have machinery that though state-of the-art today, doesn't do for them--or--assist them any better that the typical bicycle of fifty years ago because they simply are not that close to being a top-caliber cyclist that would benefit from such small differences in equipment technology!

Yeah, but it is never just black and white and pure facts, from a rational human buyer's perspective. Very few people make such purchasing decisions like a robot or computer. Yeah, there are a few of the stereotypical university science professors and research scientists, and ultra-egghead accountant types that do approach purchases/acquisitions in such a way, but most other humans give greater emphasis to other "reasoning" for purchasing/acquiring something such as a car, bicycle, boat, tennis raquet, golf clubs, musical instrument, clothing, shoes, electronics-stereo-television-home entertainment equip-computers-phones, and other items and gear. It is pretty much the same as to different individuals' overall perspective about dining and eating-out and entertaining and vacationing & travelling the world.
What one person finds perfectly suitable may not be the same viewpoint that another person has.
They both are correct. There is no general right or wrong that can be just given as answer. Each person is different and must decide for themselves what ultimately makes them happiest.

Does anyone need an automobile that can go from zero to sixty miles per hour in ten seconds or less? Certainly not, but there are many that meet or exceed that criteria with a some doing so in under four seconds. Most every new econon-box subcompact today is capable of 100 mph top speed and has excellent steering and braking response and handles well on a twisty, winding road at speeds to at least 85 mph, something a sixties-seventies musclecar cannot do, although hell yeah, a 426 hemi mopar, 454 chev, and many more from mopar, GM, Ford, and AMC can certainly fly in a straight-line. I specifically chose the 426 Chrysler hemi and the 454 Chevrolet because these engines are massively heavy v-8 big block engines, and with that 800+ pounds of engine in the engine bay, you cannot get anything close to decent steering, much less anything close to handling with even the best factory front suspension available and overall chassis tuning of that era or any era. The problem is more of a physics problem. There once was a saying that went that there is no substitute for cubic inches, but that has largely been disproven over the past 40 years.
FIAT has issued a Dodge Truck that has sold well over the past few model years that has over 700 horsepower, and this is real, net horsepower rating, and not the fudged- overinflated by 20%, SAE GROSS horsepower ratings that the US Automakers used prior to 1972 model year. Yep, it simply is to capture those customers that want to brag and boast about having the "ultimate" and those same customers derive satisfaction and pleasure from folks gawking and looking at their truck and asking questions and commenting about how "cool" that it is. There is no practical reasoning for and no benefit to having 700 horsepower in any street vehicle of any kind, and much less so in a pickup truck of all things. .................but you know to some it is just beyond cool.....and therefore has a perception of status or "cool" or whatever you wanna call it among a certain group of folks...............................sure, some might take a different viewpoint, that it is excessive from a "green" viewpoint in that it likely gets relatively low miles per gallon, even though from a purely emmisions standpoint, the 700 hp new Dodge truck probably polutes far less than a 2005 Chevy Tahoe or 2005 Ford Explorer, and probably five times less than any 1980's GM vehicle that is carburetted and still on the road today in 2021.
Hey, isn't this overall topic much like the age old debate of $$$$$ swiss timepiece versus a new $15 quartz watch.......or just using the phone's display..
Baby boomers eligible for Soc Security or receiving SS in 2021 likely do remember when the Bulova ACCUTRON tuning fork method produced the world's then most accurate watch more than sixty years ago....... If I am not mistaken, this was also used as the basis for the clock in the Apollo 11 moon mission in July 1969.
I remember that SEIKO, I'm fairly sure it was SEIKO that introduced the superior and more accurate Quartz method at about that point in time as the sixties ended and 1970 rolled up on the calendar. .....Anybody here was in college during 1972 that recalls the new calculator from Texas Instruments that sold for over $100 and was the approx size of seven smart phones of 2021 stacked together to make a shape of a small brick......that T.I. calculator did little more than add/subtract/multiply/divide.....
Well, the small red led display of that T.I. calculator led to some manufacturers making DIGITAL WATCHES which were on the market by 1973.
So yeah, today's new $8 Chinese quartz watch from Walmart is still more accurate than my Chopard automatic "Mille Miglia" chronograph --and-- that $8 Walmart quartz watch is still more accurate than my Girard-Perregaux automatic chronograph. Yeah, are seconds or a fraction of second per day something to really get concerned about. Many fully serviced and cleaned mechanical movements aren't within + or - 45 seconds per day of accuracy.
You also have a lot of boneheads that say a vinyl record is superior to a compact disc and that is just absurd. Sure, you could have one that has better eq and balance than a poorly done CD but there are numerous limitations with respect to what you can and cannot get on to vinyl. Bass must be mono on vinyl. You can do stereo bass on tape or cd & digital if you wish. You've got to reduce the deep bass response and you have to reduce certain treble spectrum instruments like high-hats and cymbals. You don't have to do this for CD, TAPE, or DIGITAL. With Vinyl, you are limited to approx 20 min per side BEFORE THE SOUND QUALITY BEGINS TO DEGRADE with each minute over 20, and 23 is the point where Sound Quality really drops off with every additional minute. With a Vinyl record, you've got to place your most dynamic songs on the beginning of each side, because sound quality degrades as the grooves get closer to the center label. There are other issues with respect to noise, and increased noise with each subsequent playing no matter how clean. Even if everything were absolutely perfect with the LP pressing and lack of warpage and best-in-the world equipment, you still have an overall s/n (signal to noise ratio) that falls way short of what better tape decks can do, and way, way, way short of s/n ratio of compact disc, dvd, blu-ray, md, or any other digital format. You also have significant issues and variances with respect to the mechanical "stampers" that press an album. Quality control and sound quality issues arise because of this and it has always been a major issue since 1948 when the LP came to be. Stampers are replaced after some qty number of pressings.............ever wonder why your copy of an LP sounded like dog-doo and yet your girlfriend's same copy of that LP sounded really good, even though you bought the album within the first month or two that it may have been released......................it is a crapshoot because one LP could be made on the 6000 stamping of the stamper just before being replaced and hers may have been the 232nd stamping of another stamper..................there was just no way to tell, then - or now...........................exception being some numbered limited editions etc and mobile-fidelity labs pressings that carried numbers....
The other thing is that to get a really good sounding LP, you had to have somebody really good doing the mastering for the record, and they had to do generally a large number of test pressings to get it right....................well that was fine if you were a Motown label artist , or were The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Santana, Led Zeppelin, Joe Cocker, Pink Floyd or anybody really huge but if you were a nobody-just outta the garage band or artist, your LP or 45 might come back sounding thin and dead with no bass and you might have had no ability to change that. There aren't really any classical music folks today that favor the LP as a vehicle for the best sonic quality for new releases. Why would someone want speed issues that arise from even slightly warped LP's and noise and limited overall sound quality, and limitations on both time capacity and the extra-ordinary monkeying that one must do to reduce deep bass and certain treble items to get them on to vinyl.
This is a huge issue with live recorded symphony performances. Tape and Digital formats including compact disc have zero issues with accurately representing the sound as recorded with deep bass and all the brilliant high end. Vinyl cannot do that and must have the brilliant near genius talent of someone experienced in the black art of doing whatever needed to master the LP such that it sounds like it did on the tape. A lot of those folks are dead and gone. Unless you're already huge, I doubt that you've got Bob Ludwig's phone number, and thus it is just gonna be mostly luck that your LP sounds at least half as good as the CD or digital version.
Yeah, it is mind boggling that young folks are crazy about LP's these days. There is no scientific reasoning for that.
shelbyfv is offline  
Old 06-29-21, 07:58 PM
  #89  
ColonelSanders
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Vegemite Island
Posts: 4,130

Bikes: 2017 Surly Troll with XT Drive Train, 2017 Merida Big Nine XT Edition, 2016 Giant Toughroad SLR 2, 1995 Trek 830

Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1916 Post(s)
Liked 307 Times in 216 Posts
Originally Posted by genejockey View Post
I've posted on other threads about my 25.5 mile midweek route, which I've ridden with 7 different bikes now. There's 4 minutes difference in best time between my newest bike (2020) and my oldest (1982). Same route, same rider, similar effort (based solely on HR, since they don't make power meters for Dura Ace 7200 cranks). Basically a 5% difference.
I'm not against modern stuff, but your post has me curious to know how much if any of the 4 minute difference is due to different tyres and/or if the gap would be reduced if you were to upgrade your brakes(with what is technically and financially feasible) on your older bike?
ColonelSanders is offline  
Old 06-29-21, 08:07 PM
  #90  
AlmostTrick
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
 
AlmostTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,397

Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!

Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times in 500 Posts
Originally Posted by Vintage Schwinn View Post
Well it varies according to each individual's desires, expectatations and the joy & pleasure that they derive from whatever bicycle that ultimately choose to pilot.

From a purely practical standpoint, viewing it simply and strictly from a bean-counter/CPA 's perspective, than yes it is silly to even ponder the question because probably 95% or more folks probably have machinery that though state-of the-art today, doesn't do for them--or--assist them any better that the typical bicycle of fifty years ago because they simply are not that close to being a top-caliber cyclist that would benefit from such small differences in equipment technology!

Yeah, but it is never just black and white and pure facts, from a rational human buyer's perspective. Very few people make such purchasing decisions like a robot or computer. Yeah, there are a few of the stereotypical university science professors and research scientists, and ultra-egghead accountant types that do approach purchases/acquisitions in such a way, but most other humans give greater emphasis to other "reasoning" for purchasing/acquiring something such as a car, bicycle, boat, tennis raquet, golf clubs, musical instrument, clothing, shoes, electronics-stereo-television-home entertainment equip-computers-phones, and other items and gear. It is pretty much the same as to different individuals' overall perspective about dining and eating-out and entertaining and vacationing & travelling the world.
What one person finds perfectly suitable may not be the same viewpoint that another person has.
They both are correct. There is no general right or wrong that can be just given as answer. Each person is different and must decide for themselves what ultimately makes them happiest.

Does anyone need an automobile that can go from zero to sixty miles per hour in ten seconds or less? Certainly not, but there are many that meet or exceed that criteria with a some doing so in under four seconds. Most every new econon-box subcompact today is capable of 100 mph top speed and has excellent steering and braking response and handles well on a twisty, winding road at speeds to at least 85 mph, something a sixties-seventies musclecar cannot do, although hell yeah, a 426 hemi mopar, 454 chev, and many more from mopar, GM, Ford, and AMC can certainly fly in a straight-line. I specifically chose the 426 Chrysler hemi and the 454 Chevrolet because these engines are massively heavy v-8 big block engines, and with that 800+ pounds of engine in the engine bay, you cannot get anything close to decent steering, much less anything close to handling with even the best factory front suspension available and overall chassis tuning of that era or any era. The problem is more of a physics problem. There once was a saying that went that there is no substitute for cubic inches, but that has largely been disproven over the past 40 years.
FIAT has issued a Dodge Truck that has sold well over the past few model years that has over 700 horsepower, and this is real, net horsepower rating, and not the fudged- overinflated by 20%, SAE GROSS horsepower ratings that the US Automakers used prior to 1972 model year. Yep, it simply is to capture those customers that want to brag and boast about having the "ultimate" and those same customers derive satisfaction and pleasure from folks gawking and looking at their truck and asking questions and commenting about how "cool" that it is. There is no practical reasoning for and no benefit to having 700 horsepower in any street vehicle of any kind, and much less so in a pickup truck of all things. .................but you know to some it is just beyond cool.....and therefore has a perception of status or "cool" or whatever you wanna call it among a certain group of folks...............................sure, some might take a different viewpoint, that it is excessive from a "green" viewpoint in that it likely gets relatively low miles per gallon, even though from a purely emmisions standpoint, the 700 hp new Dodge truck probably polutes far less than a 2005 Chevy Tahoe or 2005 Ford Explorer, and probably five times less than any 1980's GM vehicle that is carburetted and still on the road today in 2021.
Hey, isn't this overall topic much like the age old debate of $$$$$ swiss timepiece versus a new $15 quartz watch.......or just using the phone's display..
Baby boomers eligible for Soc Security or receiving SS in 2021 likely do remember when the Bulova ACCUTRON tuning fork method produced the world's then most accurate watch more than sixty years ago....... If I am not mistaken, this was also used as the basis for the clock in the Apollo 11 moon mission in July 1969.
I remember that SEIKO, I'm fairly sure it was SEIKO that introduced the superior and more accurate Quartz method at about that point in time as the sixties ended and 1970 rolled up on the calendar. .....Anybody here was in college during 1972 that recalls the new calculator from Texas Instruments that sold for over $100 and was the approx size of seven smart phones of 2021 stacked together to make a shape of a small brick......that T.I. calculator did little more than add/subtract/multiply/divide.....
Well, the small red led display of that T.I. calculator led to some manufacturers making DIGITAL WATCHES which were on the market by 1973.
So yeah, today's new $8 Chinese quartz watch from Walmart is still more accurate than my Chopard automatic "Mille Miglia" chronograph --and-- that $8 Walmart quartz watch is still more accurate than my Girard-Perregaux automatic chronograph. Yeah, are seconds or a fraction of second per day something to really get concerned about. Many fully serviced and cleaned mechanical movements aren't within + or - 45 seconds per day of accuracy.
You also have a lot of boneheads that say a vinyl record is superior to a compact disc and that is just absurd. Sure, you could have one that has better eq and balance than a poorly done CD but there are numerous limitations with respect to what you can and cannot get on to vinyl. Bass must be mono on vinyl. You can do stereo bass on tape or cd & digital if you wish. You've got to reduce the deep bass response and you have to reduce certain treble spectrum instruments like high-hats and cymbals. You don't have to do this for CD, TAPE, or DIGITAL. With Vinyl, you are limited to approx 20 min per side BEFORE THE SOUND QUALITY BEGINS TO DEGRADE with each minute over 20, and 23 is the point where Sound Quality really drops off with every additional minute. With a Vinyl record, you've got to place your most dynamic songs on the beginning of each side, because sound quality degrades as the grooves get closer to the center label. There are other issues with respect to noise, and increased noise with each subsequent playing no matter how clean. Even if everything were absolutely perfect with the LP pressing and lack of warpage and best-in-the world equipment, you still have an overall s/n (signal to noise ratio) that falls way short of what better tape decks can do, and way, way, way short of s/n ratio of compact disc, dvd, blu-ray, md, or any other digital format. You also have significant issues and variances with respect to the mechanical "stampers" that press an album. Quality control and sound quality issues arise because of this and it has always been a major issue since 1948 when the LP came to be. Stampers are replaced after some qty number of pressings.............ever wonder why your copy of an LP sounded like dog-doo and yet your girlfriend's same copy of that LP sounded really good, even though you bought the album within the first month or two that it may have been released......................it is a crapshoot because one LP could be made on the 6000 stamping of the stamper just before being replaced and hers may have been the 232nd stamping of another stamper..................there was just no way to tell, then - or now...........................exception being some numbered limited editions etc and mobile-fidelity labs pressings that carried numbers....
The other thing is that to get a really good sounding LP, you had to have somebody really good doing the mastering for the record, and they had to do generally a large number of test pressings to get it right....................well that was fine if you were a Motown label artist , or were The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Santana, Led Zeppelin, Joe Cocker, Pink Floyd or anybody really huge but if you were a nobody-just outta the garage band or artist, your LP or 45 might come back sounding thin and dead with no bass and you might have had no ability to change that. There aren't really any classical music folks today that favor the LP as a vehicle for the best sonic quality for new releases. Why would someone want speed issues that arise from even slightly warped LP's and noise and limited overall sound quality, and limitations on both time capacity and the extra-ordinary monkeying that one must do to reduce deep bass and certain treble items to get them on to vinyl.
This is a huge issue with live recorded symphony performances. Tape and Digital formats including compact disc have zero issues with accurately representing the sound as recorded with deep bass and all the brilliant high end. Vinyl cannot do that and must have the brilliant near genius talent of someone experienced in the black art of doing whatever needed to master the LP such that it sounds like it did on the tape. A lot of those folks are dead and gone. Unless you're already huge, I doubt that you've got Bob Ludwig's phone number, and thus it is just gonna be mostly luck that your LP sounds at least half as good as the CD or digital version.
Yeah, it is mind boggling that young folks are crazy about LP's these days. There is no scientific reasoning for that.
Darn, I was going to post this but you beat me to it!
AlmostTrick is offline  
Old 06-29-21, 08:10 PM
  #91  
Outrider1
Full Member
 
Outrider1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 266

Bikes: Trek Emonda ALR 5, Motobecane Cafe Disc Comp

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked 184 Times in 82 Posts
Would you prefer a 1978 car over a newer model?
Outrider1 is offline  
Old 06-29-21, 08:17 PM
  #92  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,402

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2136 Post(s)
Liked 3,582 Times in 1,464 Posts
Originally Posted by AlmostTrick View Post
Darn, I was going to post this but you beat me to it!
That's really weird, because I was also going to post the exact same thing ... I just wanted to finish this bottle of Tequila first.
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:
Old 06-29-21, 08:33 PM
  #93  
genejockey 
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
 
genejockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 11,332

Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6215 Post(s)
Liked 6,572 Times in 3,369 Posts
Originally Posted by ColonelSanders View Post
I'm not against modern stuff, but your post has me curious to know how much if any of the 4 minute difference is due to different tyres and/or if the gap would be reduced if you were to upgrade your brakes(with what is technically and financially feasible) on your older bike?
Braking is not a big part of this circuit. Mostly it's flat to rolling.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."

"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
genejockey is offline  
Old 06-29-21, 09:34 PM
  #94  
BlazingPedals
Senior Member
 
BlazingPedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Middle of da Mitten
Posts: 12,189

Bikes: Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, Catrike Speed

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1395 Post(s)
Liked 593 Times in 370 Posts
OP is apparently an anti-snob snob. Something that makes the activity more enjoyable isn't allowed?
BlazingPedals is offline  
Likes For BlazingPedals:
Old 06-29-21, 09:37 PM
  #95  
Russ Roth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: South Shore of Long Island
Posts: 2,099

Bikes: 2010 Carrera Volans, 2015 C-Dale Trail 2sl, 2017 Raleigh Rush Hour, 2017 Blue Proseccio, 1992 Giant Perigee, 80s Gitane Rallye Tandem

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked 639 Times in 481 Posts
Originally Posted by Troul View Post
Some of the innovation may have inspired folks to go to a modern road bicycle whereas they might have not done so if the styling didn't change. Looks can go a long way for gaining new interest imo. How many actually prefer the newer look of threadless stems vs the legacy stuff?
I do, although there were some really sweet looking quill stems they were few and far between and most were fairly generic looking and bland, no prettier then a threadless but with none of the benefits.

Originally Posted by Germany_chris View Post
not to mention that cars really havenít changed since 1948 since they have 4 wheels and most have a 4 or 6 cylinder engine.
Nope, not a bit. That's why my factory miata matches my dad's 67 mustang GT with 390 from 0-60 and in the 1/4 mile while getting 4x the gas mileage, putting out less emissions and can run circles around it for when the road curves. Car and driver did a test of a Toyota Camry vs an antique corvette which was slower in every way to the camry, Sure glad his old mustang has 4 wheel anti-lock disc brakes, airbags, headrests to protect the neck, integrated sat nav, FM radio, crumple zones, an integrated safety cage, seatbelts at all the seats with shoulder straps, not to mention that 6sp manual. They're so alike its just amazing.

[
Originally Posted by CheGiantForLife View Post
Is a consumer better off riding a 1978 steel road bike that's maintainable with simple tools I bought 40 years ago? Is much of the recent "innovation" is a bad bargain for anyone not pushing a competitive racing edge. Eg, Is carbon anything as an anti-feature.​ ?
No, my parents found going from their 1979 bikes to 1993 trek Hybrids to be a marked improvement. Those bikes were replaced 3 years ago with Raleigh sport comfort style bikes with fatter tires, 1x11 drivetrain and hydraulic disc brakes and they think they're the best bikes ever made. The discs just work and don't go out of adjustment. They never rode enough to understand all the gears of those old 10sp let alone the 21sp, but they easily understand 11sp and how to use all of those wide range cassettes that have a wider range then any of the previous bikes. They appreciate the reduction in vibration and the light weight that comes with the carbon fork and being in their 60s/70s appreciate the comparatively lighter weight of the bike. They learned to love indexed with the hybrids and appreciate the newer style of shifters more. Everything about the bikes are for them easier, and since they couldn't fix any of the bikes to begin with, those new ones are nothing but an improvement that they far prefer.
Russ Roth is offline  
Likes For Russ Roth:
Old 06-30-21, 05:10 AM
  #96  
shelbyfv
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 10,088
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2990 Post(s)
Liked 3,836 Times in 1,972 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe View Post
That's really weird, because I was also going to post the exact same thing ... I just wanted to finish this bottle of Tequila first.
You could get an earlier start; remember "it's 5 o'clock somewhere."
shelbyfv is offline  
Likes For shelbyfv:
Old 06-30-21, 05:43 AM
  #97  
Bald Paul
Senior Member
 
Bald Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 907
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 418 Post(s)
Liked 829 Times in 382 Posts
Originally Posted by UniChris View Post
Are they headed spokes or z bend spokes?

For the latter you may be able to improvise if you find someone with a spoke threader to do that part. Lots of people go to Tommy Miller for odd stuff like that.

​​​​​​
If what you need is a super long conventional J head see if any of these work - if you ask they'll probably custom cut and thread for you if you're in between the sizes for their wheels.

https://www.unicycle.co.uk/penny-far...ess-steel.html
You realize it was a joke, right?
Bald Paul is online now  
Old 06-30-21, 06:28 AM
  #98  
Troul 
:D
 
Troul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 5,536

Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 1,840 Times in 1,234 Posts
Originally Posted by Outrider1 View Post
Would you prefer a 1978 car over a newer model?
Depends.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
Troul is offline  
Old 06-30-21, 07:31 AM
  #99  
Germany_chris
Iím a little Surly
 
Germany_chris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southern Germany
Posts: 1,938

Bikes: Two Cross Checks and a Karate Monkey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 483 Post(s)
Liked 860 Times in 448 Posts
Originally Posted by Russ Roth View Post
I do, although there were some really sweet looking quill stems they were few and far between and most were fairly generic looking and bland, no prettier then a threadless but with none of the benefits.


Nope, not a bit. That's why my factory miata matches my dad's 67 mustang GT with 390 from 0-60 and in the 1/4 mile while getting 4x the gas mileage, putting out less emissions and can run circles around it for when the road curves. Car and driver did a test of a Toyota Camry vs an antique corvette which was slower in every way to the camry, Sure glad his old mustang has 4 wheel anti-lock disc brakes, airbags, headrests to protect the neck, integrated sat nav, FM radio, crumple zones, an integrated safety cage, seatbelts at all the seats with shoulder straps, not to mention that 6sp manual. They're so alike its just amazing.

[
No, my parents found going from their 1979 bikes to 1993 trek Hybrids to be a marked improvement. Those bikes were replaced 3 years ago with Raleigh sport comfort style bikes with fatter tires, 1x11 drivetrain and hydraulic disc brakes and they think they're the best bikes ever made. The discs just work and don't go out of adjustment. They never rode enough to understand all the gears of those old 10sp let alone the 21sp, but they easily understand 11sp and how to use all of those wide range cassettes that have a wider range then any of the previous bikes. They appreciate the reduction in vibration and the light weight that comes with the carbon fork and being in their 60s/70s appreciate the comparatively lighter weight of the bike. They learned to love indexed with the hybrids and appreciate the newer style of shifters more. Everything about the bikes are for them easier, and since they couldn't fix any of the bikes to begin with, those new ones are nothing but an improvement that they far prefer.
All missed my larger point..

When you reduce to the absurd nothing changes i.e. little to no difference between a 1948 bike and a 198x bike because they were lugged steel, cars obviously didn't change because they have a similar number of cylinders and 4 wheels.
Germany_chris is offline  
Old 06-30-21, 07:56 AM
  #100  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,600

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Turner 5-Spot, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2504 Post(s)
Liked 2,137 Times in 1,195 Posts
Originally Posted by CheGiantForLife View Post
Is a consumer better off riding a 1978 steel road bike that's maintainable with simple tools I bought 40 years ago? Is much of the recent "innovation" is a bad bargain for anyone not pushing a competitive racing edge. Eg, Is carbon anything as an anti-feature.​ ?
In terms of comparing a 1978 bike to one from 2021...you donít have to be a competitive rider to appreciate indexed shifting, better brakes, more gearing options, more/improved drop bar options, better shifter ergonomics, and better tires,

When you adjust costs for inflation, I donít think there has ever been a better time to buy a bike than now (once the shortage is over). Turn that 1978 bike into 2020 dollars and look at what that buys you just before the pandemic hit.

Oh, and think threadless steerers are a vast improvement over threaded.

Last edited by Kapusta; 06-30-21 at 08:11 AM.
Kapusta is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.