dcrocker

I've been riding and racing since 1981. My first good bike was a Colnago Super, lugged Columbus - cost about $300-400 for the frame. I was 15 when I bought it and put used Campy NR on it - I used the components for the next 7 years, but changed to a smaller frame.

I've raced on the Colnago, a Biemuzetta (used to make frames for Palo Alto Bikes and Performance), a Miyata, a Cannondale, a Giant carbon, a Serotta CSI, and now a Ritchey Breakaway. I peaked as a Cat 1 while riding the Miyata for CRC of A back in 1989-90, and it's been a slow downhill ride ever since.

The best racing frame I had was the Cannondale. It was extremely ugly, I thought, but it did take a lot of abuse and it simply gave me a lighter, stiffer ride. The Serotta I had was beautiful enough that I had it repainted by Cyclart in San Diego - a spectacular Sachs-knockoff paint job of red with white headtube and seat tube panel. But for racing? I'd take the Cannondale over a Serotta CSI again. Ugly, but no question about superior performance in my experience.

What I don't understand is paying a lot for ugliness. For sponsorship reasons, I was given the Miyata, the Cannondale, and the Giant. I would have ridden on a wet noodle if it were free. But since I'm no longer a Cat 1 and even more importantly don't pretend to be, I'm shopping for either price vs. performance, or unique convenience. The Ritchey is tig-welded steel - I like the look of lugs, but the Ritchey packs up well and travels with me, which is crucial to my staying connected to the sport.

So my takeaway: I don't understand paying a lot for an ugly frame that performs well (Trek, in my opinion). I do understand paying a little for a frame that performs well (Cannondale, in my opinion). And I do understand paying a lot for a beautiful frame that performs as well, but how many of us can afford it? The new Serotta CSI frame costs more than the entire Ritchey Breakaway with Ultegra and a travel case thrown in. That's my IRA contribution for the year!

A trivia bonus for those who are still reading - my favorite frame from my teenage years was the Mclean. How many readers remember those? I couldn't afford it! But I loved it, and recently saw one for sale on ebay, where dreams do sometimes come true...McLean died when I was 16 - I think he was in his 20's.

I keep on telling myself that once I've put enough money away for my children's college tuition, I'll get a really nice lugged Serotta frame again, or maybe a Sachs...

Maj.Taylor

Mclean made a bike called the Silk Hope. He was definitely one of the up and coming framebuilders when he died. He died right after getting off his bike one day, and he was maybe in his late-20s, but I thought more like his early-30s. Silk Hopes are very nice frames. How much did someone want for it on eBay? (Hey, how about something a little more difficult next time? )

Adgooroo

Was just thinking about the road bikes I've owned since high school - Started on a - don't laugh - Rollfast 10 speed, which was lavished with attention, served me well, and took me to and from my summer job, about a 20 mile ride each way. Next bike was a Raleigh Grand Sport (stolen), next was a Cinelli/Campy equipped (stolen). In the interim, I got married, had kids, and "settled" for a steel Peugeot that I bought 20 years ago and still ride and love. When I went back into the market to find a NEW bike - I was stunned at how much more technology and how much less weight I could buy in today's market for the same "inflation-adjusted" dollars. I think the advancement in bike tech has been stunning; clearly competition has created better and better bikes. You name it - it works better and weighs less than it used to. Fork, stem, bars, brakes, shifters, gears, seats, wheels, hubs, and frames - the improvements are great.

Jsouw

Hi Dave, I actually know quite a few people from "the days" that remember and still rever your frames. Your work was legendary you know. I always lusted after one of your frames, but was too young and poorly-paid to afford one, even a Fuso. My brother was able to afford a Fuso while he worked at the Two Wheel Transit Authority. He still has it and it along with it's Campy Nuovo and Super Record parts mix are in mint condition. It also has Clement Seta Extras and Cinelli M-71 pedals. I was finally able to afford a 1985 Masi Gran Criterium with beautiful lugwork. It was a bit of a rough and twitchy ride compared to my current aluminium Russ Denny. Nevertheless, I am still kicking myself for selling it. By the way, it's great that your back to being interested in the bike world again. Let us know if you ever start building again. I have a decent paying job now. Also just to let people know, Richard Sachs has a 3 year turnaround time at $3000 per frame. Lugged steel isn't going away anytime soon.

galen_52657

It should be about 4 lbs lighter....

Maj.Taylor

Nope.

jank

First Bike - Kent BMX 1980
Second - PK Ripper1983
Third - Nishiki Olypic 1985
Flash forword - Giant TCR w/Dura Ace

Ithink that the same amount of people are buying the high end Italian bikes, but you have the addition of people that aren't sure if they will enjoy riding but would like to try. The more affordable bikes allow people the chance to try without going broke and the poor a chance to have joy. The engineering used to create high-end hand-made frames is the same used by the the other companies in Taiwan. One last thing - all these bike companies are trying to make a profit.

TomInFLA

My point-oh-two on this: Back in the late 70s when I started riding, I rode on a crappy Raleigh until I put enough cash together (and placed consistently enough to get a good discount at the sponsor LBS) to buy a used Gios Torino, with Campy Super Record gruppo. It cost $550 (I think), which at the time was pretty cheap for that bike. That was a sweet bike, which I sold in a fit of stupidity back in the early 90s. Back in the 70s, the only way to get a good racing bike was to go with Italian steel or something similar. There were very few options back then. But price was always a consideration for a guy like me. I never felt the bike was holding me back (I wasn't all that talented to begin with), so I was very happy with my Gios. But then American companies like Cannondale realized there was a market for higher end bikes, and for a while it seemed that all you saw at races were 'dales. They were not the most expensive bikes out there, but they performed well, at least in my opinion.

In the late 80s / early 90s, I raced for years on a Cannondale, which went straight ahead fast like few bikes did. It was a great crit scratcher, but a brain rattler, especially in the corners. It was medium priced for a racing bike ($600, if I remember correctly). So perhaps in that manner, I lowered my standards as I sacrificed handling for speed. But I didn't feel that way, as I always felt that a lighter and fitter me was better than a lighter and fitter bike.

I now ride a Davidson Stiletto which I got for a steal at the LBS (some young knucklehead traded it in because he wanted an exotic frame material, and steel wasn't going to do it for him). I understand the Davidson is a high-end, limited production bike, and frankly I've never ridden a better bike.

All in all, I was and am a serious roadie for over 25 years now. I never felt that (to use today's prices) a $5000 bike would give me so much more than a $1500 bike. In that sense my standards were never lowered, as I never felt that a very high-end bike would improve my performance that much. I have ridden some bikes that pros would ride, and yes the ride was great.

As for bikes as art, I have yet to see a bike more beautiful than a well kept vintage celeste Bianchi.

VintageSteve

If weight is such a large factor in improvement with today's bikes, how come I haven't been passed by riders on these light bikes, especially on hills? Frequently I catch a rider (and racers) on a modern bike and after saying a greeting I see their faces turn to frustration or anger after seeing my '84 Moulton or '83 Pinarello (21lbs. ea.) pull away.
How heavy does a bike have to be to be too heavy?
If this is a standard of improvement, who is saying it is?

Maj.Taylor

VS, we both know 95% of the people here have yet to figure out that it's the motor.

lotek 

40 pound mountain bikes.

531Aussie

What about this one?

(i've said this a few times, but I've never got an answer.... )

If weight is SO crucial, why does my bike still feel the same when I've got 3lbs of
water on it?

Dave Moulton

Exactly; and if you give that three pounds of water to someone riding with you do they suddenly drop back and you shoot forward?

I have put forward this same argument before and it always gets shot down. There are certain things people do not want to hear. To a roadie it is, “Weight is not that big a factor.” And to the MTB enthusiast it is, “Skinny tires go faster.”

alanbikehouston

I have been trying to find the exact weights for the bikes used to set various speed records for bicycles, such as the "top speed", the "one hour", the "24 hour", etc. So far, I have found "top speed" records set by bikes weighing more than 30 pounds, and "one hour" and "24 hour" records set by bikes weighing more than 20 pounds. I was reading an interview with Tyler Hamilton were he talked about his 16 pound bike. It seems he ONLY rides it on stages that are primarily steep climbs...he prefers a heavier bike for the great majority of stages.

But, the "weight" game is great for manufacturers. There are some 23 pound bikes selling for $500. I have not seen any 16 pound bikes selling for $500.

VintageSteve

I was wondering how much you, as a framemaker, put into getting a bike lighter? I know some racers wanted SL instead of SP tubing, and the smallest frame possible, but it seemed most bikes still weighed around 20, 21 lbs. in the early 80's.

I know I never weighed my bike, never knew how much it weighed, and didn't change anything just to get it lighter, unless I was playing around like drilling something out. Even then I never knew how much weight I saved. I just thought it looked cool. And most of the time it failed, broke.

Fausto Coppi set the record for L' Alpe d' Huez in 1952, on dirt and gravel roads, and it stayed for 30-some years. Even now, Pantani holds the record set in 1997. Bikes have gotten lighter, but have records fallen as quickly as weights have?

2Rodies

Weight is a factor but not in the way you might think. I feel that some roadies need the psychological effect that having a lightweight bike affords them. Then there are some, me included, that really likes the "trick" factor that having a lightweight bike comes with. It's funny that on a ride this weekend we were discussing how light our bikes were. I said that my Orca was 15#10oz while my LOOK was kinda heavy at 17#6oz. The guy next to me said "You think 17#6oz is heavy!" and I thought about it and said yeah I guess I did!

There are some things, like wheels, that if you lighten up will make a difference but I agree that I really don't climb or sprint etc any faster on my Orca than I do on my LOOK.

Dave Moulton

The American market was always for bikes lighter the European riders used. As you say in the 1980s bikes were 20 or 21 lbs. The average European race bike at that time was about 23 lbs. Now with all the new stuff out there people are even more conscious about weight. I believe if there is an advantage it is psychological.

I never set out to build the lightest frame. I custom ordered my tube sets from Columbus with SP chainstays that made for a stiffer and more responsive rear triangle. The bigger frames I used an SP down tube also. My Criterium frame I built in Columbus PS (The track tube set.) and people have told me this is one of the best climbing bikes they have ever ridden. If someone wanted a light frame I would build it in Reynolds 753.

Someone recently sent me this picture of a 1984 Fuso he restored and built up with new CF components; it weighed in at 19 lbs.

catatonic

heh the tire width comment!

Bah, I dont care how fast it makes me, I ride off road with the widest, grippiest beasts I can...at the least it makes me feel special

Dchiefransom

I have a 1996 Trek 420 7 speed. Before I put the bottles and seat bag, etc on, it tips the scales at 25.5 pounds. My 2002 Lemond Zurich is 20 pounds. The Trek isn't lugged, and it cost me $399. In August I replaced the old wheels with Shimano 540s. The Zurich is nice, but the Trek rides so smooooooooth. I find I'm wanting to ride the Trek all the time. I'd been thinking about getting a CF bike, but now I'm just thinking of upgrading the 420 to 9 speed when the components wear out.

VintageSteve

Any talk about technology making lighter components and frames lighter reminds me of the idea of using oil with your bearings instead of grease, as it "theoretically produces less friction, less drag". I got that line of reasoning with inline skating also, repacking your bearings and taking all the grease out.
My Campy hubs have an oil hole, and I heard it was to allow one to use oil instead of grease. It supposedly made the bike faster. But I've always questioned this.
Is this just another 'urban legend'?

galen_52657

Thats a grease port.... use a grease gun with a pointed tip..... expells the old grease.