Sorry, all: I somehow missed the chance to coRRRRRect spelling, punctuation, etc. (!)
Phil - 10 years ago
I reluctantly voted for the Aeolus: why?
I'm an old geezer, the classic frames, for me, date from the 80s (Vitus, Italian beauties, English classics, etc.).
However, I certainly enjoy keeping up with modern technology and fashion.
Positive: new frame tube (and carbon construction) concepts have liberated the painter - no longer do you just need to, e.g., emphasise lugs - you can enhance/distort the shoe and structure of a major tube, to dramatic effect;
Negative: it's difficult to judge the merits of a fame (no disrespect intended to Bike War, at all) by showing only only a profile shot - one needs to view the frame in several views in order to judge the overall perspective, in terms of aesthetics;
they used to say that you should check an old frame for 'bends', e.g., top tube kinked meant it had crashed. How (tongue in cheek) do you evaluate some of these current frames?
Kinky seat-stays / 'reversed (visually) offsets? OK, rider comfort. What's the matter with getting your buttocks banged about, a bit? Look at your saddle to absorb road shock.
And so on. Yes, as declared, I'm an old-timer. But some progressive design features look rather suspect to me - for example, I'd never buy a Pinarello (even if I wanted to afford it). So ugly. (So good, says Froome.)
Grouch over - but, I'm serious.
Sorry, all: I somehow missed the chance to coRRRRRect spelling, punctuation, etc. (!)
I reluctantly voted for the Aeolus: why?
I'm an old geezer, the classic frames, for me, date from the 80s (Vitus, Italian beauties, English classics, etc.).
However, I certainly enjoy keeping up with modern technology and fashion.
Positive: new frame tube (and carbon construction) concepts have liberated the painter - no longer do you just need to, e.g., emphasise lugs - you can enhance/distort the shoe and structure of a major tube, to dramatic effect;
Negative: it's difficult to judge the merits of a fame (no disrespect intended to Bike War, at all) by showing only only a profile shot - one needs to view the frame in several views in order to judge the overall perspective, in terms of aesthetics;
they used to say that you should check an old frame for 'bends', e.g., top tube kinked meant it had crashed. How (tongue in cheek) do you evaluate some of these current frames?
Kinky seat-stays / 'reversed (visually) offsets? OK, rider comfort. What's the matter with getting your buttocks banged about, a bit? Look at your saddle to absorb road shock.
And so on. Yes, as declared, I'm an old-timer. But some progressive design features look rather suspect to me - for example, I'd never buy a Pinarello (even if I wanted to afford it). So ugly. (So good, says Froome.)
Grouch over - but, I'm serious.