Wow! I’ve got my own personal internet fan/stalker! That’s cool.

I just don’t understand how that explains your inability to understand why that whole ‘steel must be comparable or inferior’ thing is so weirdly off-base. But then, non-sequiturs and changing the subject are kind of your thing.

At any rate, I think indyfabz has the right idea. You’re unworthy of interaction with someone as old and wise as me. ‘bye now.

And after we vintage out, hopefully........it's wings and unobtanium frames with turbo legs for un-Dogly speed.
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...a0794b5e07.jpg

IDK,... sometimes carbon and brifters.
and don't forget your readers.
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...1ecb39869f.jpg

On Road Cycling it all leads to constantly worrying about having the latest and asking when the next iteration of innovation no one asked for is being released :D

Well, people would want to talk about what is new in a sport regarding all aspects of advancement and exploring new areas. What is left to discuss about bikes, which were identical for almost 30 years between the late '60s to the '90s? They looked alike, rode alike and performed alike. If you like old stuff, that's good for you. It's plentiful, cheap and getting cheaper.

...interesting. I have experienced the opposite a couple of times. Sometimes, it's more of an adventure when you lose the group. Must be a YMMV issue. :) I do think this group ride fixation has a lot to do with all the petty squabbling that goes on in here. nttawwt

...:roflmao2:....................:love:

...fer sure I am unworthy. I would have to work all day, and far into the night, to keep up with your level of vitriol. But you have that sig line to keep up with, so there's a reputational burden imposed. :)

Just my opinion but the videos and discussions of the bikes that changed a lot and history of the bikes from 60s, to the 90s is lot more fun and interesting than about reading someone saving 0.5 watts with integrated handlebar, and 2 watts waxing their chain every 200 miles and 2 watts on hookless rims.

...i'm kinda in the same boat, except on the hookless rims thing. The recent instances of public rider outcry on whether they are dangerous has been of interest. The dueling narratives of, "the damn things come apart while racing," versus the manufacturing narrative of, "they're perfectly OK if you don't hit a rock, and use them within the tire and rim compatibility, inflation pressures as prescribed," impresses me with all the concerns for rider safety.

But only from the riders. :)

The roads of my life may be leading to steel and vintage, or at least steel.

My Emonda is hooked up to the trainer - deeper CF wheels, lighter bike... my CF TCX is hanging on the wall and hasn't been moved all spring... been riding my heavier, rim brake 23 year old steelie and setting PB's, smashing PB's, on just about every segment I frequent. Shallow heavy wheels, 28mms stuffed onto narrow rims, slow round tubes...

And - the ride is much much smoother than both of the other bikes.

It turns out that we all have different interests, and different things that spark our curiosity...and that's totally okay.

It's interesting to see that the new innovations have made bikes more uncomfortable. Aero and tube shaping requires the carbon to be more rigid and stiff. Hydraulic brakes forced wheels and hubs to be reinforced with more spokes to withstand force on rotors. Forks are more reinforced on both sides to make them even to address again, the force on the disc brakes. All these things have made the modern bike less comfortable than a vintage steel. It's interesting to see how cycling is going backwards and yet marketed so well as positives. People should ask more why 23mm on steel is more comfortable than 30mm on latest carbon.

And yeah I too have a latest carbon, but I think my road next year will lead back to steel as well, because I'm not as interested in super stiff rigid aero bike with super stiff fork and more rigid wheels.

I'm headed to the French Alps in a few months - I rented a CF Colnago, decked out with DI2, CF wheels... a high $$$$$ bike. It will be interesting to see what $8-10 grand gets you over my old steelie, or even my newer bikes. Time/speed wont be a concern with me, just comfort.

Maybe I will be blown away and come back with N+1 fever... but it better be a hell of a fever to make me drop that kind of coin.

I suppose it varies with location, the type of group ride, and one's own outlook.

It's fun to see though, people are able to build ridiculously light steel bikes relatively affordable, I'm seeing on youtube at least to try to get some ideas. I was definitely brainwashed 7 years ago as I got into carbon bikes. I'm already planning my next build next year, I think I'll build a Crust Steel.

Also the best climb in French Alps is still Pantani beat Armstrong on his Bianchi steel vs Armstrong on his latest greatest Trek Carbon.

Not always true, it seems. Enve 3.4 disc brake wheels use the same spoke count as Enve 3.4 rim brake wheels.

Do you not carry a tool kit and 2 bottles when you ride a steel bike?

Consider:

Armstrong weighed ~ 40 pounds more than Pantani. Their fastest times up l'Alpe d'Huez were essentially identical.

Pantani's 1998 Bianchi Mega Pro XL was aluminum... https://www.bikeradar.com/features/r...hi-mega-pro-xl. His 1999 and 2000 Bianchi XL EV2s were also aluminum.

Do you think the material of their frames are what made the difference on that climb?

No, but that was my point. ALU is still heavier than Carbon prob? But that was my point.

You have no clue what you are talking about and just repeating worn out tropes. Since carbon can be laid up to achieve whatever the designer desires you can have anything from the most flexible and absorptive frame to viciously stiff all of which will be lighter and more durable than there steel counterpart. There is a whole generation of endurance bikes out there which are insanely comfortable and yet perform. Take a Specialized Aethos frame as another example 585 gram frame mass produced frame which is comfortable, durable, this would be impossible with steel. Enjoy your old steel bike and as long as you get out and do what you enjoy thats the goal, however you are looking up a horses butt if you think you couldn’t do the same with carbon only better.

Short and to the point ...

Now thats what we should be debating, what is the best climb in the Alps? First question is Ventoux still considered as part of the Alps, supposedly yes. If not Ventoux the hardest/memorable I have done is the Col de la Madeleine via the Lacets.

I doubt it. Those top-level aluminum Bianchis were extremely light, especially for a little guy like Pantani. Per the Bike Radar article I linked, his '98 bike was 15.34lbs. If I recall, those frames were sub-1kg, very comparable to (maybe lighter than) the Trek 5900 OCLV frame.