frank theriault wrote: > > I don't disagree with what you (rather, Mr. Ballantyne) say. I > heartily endorse the purchase of good quality bicycles with the best > groupo that one can afford. If one buys a slug of a bike, too much > effort will go into riding it, it won't be fun, and the bike will > languish in a garage or basement rather than fulfilling it's destiny > of being ridden by smiling owners. > > IMHO, even more important than weight or quality is ~fit~. I see too > many people on very expensive bikes that do not fit them. Aerodynamic > and pedaling efficiency can only be obtained by proper fit, including > appropriately sized and adjusted frame, stem, seatpost and seat, > cranks, etc. > > Bicycling was referring only to weight. The shaving of pounds and > ounces drives up a bike's price exponentially - at some point on > reaches the point of diminishing returns. A (relatively) heavy bike > with high-quality frame and components, a bike that fits properly, > will always outperform a poorly fitting 14 pound CF/titanium wonder.
There's also something to be said for simply buying something of *quality*. I'm not as good a photographer as Steve McCurry, but I can still really appreciate things like the Limited lenses. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
