On Mar 24, 2009, at 10:52 PM, Bill M. wrote:

> The 'less than a full water bottle' arguement always seems specious to
> me.  I don't carry less water to make up for a heavier bike.

That's not the point of that argument.  The point is that- at least  
IME- no one complains that the weight of their water bottles (about  
2.5 pounds for 2 20-oz bottles) slows them down or that they can even  
feel the difference between full and empty bottles on their bike.   
Yet people will get all lathered up over a bike component that weighs  
100 g more than another.

Grant's attitude to this, as part of the guiding philosophy of RBW,  
seems to be "meh."  Adding a few ounces of steel to the frame with  
slightly thicker tubes means a bike that might very well outlive its  
40 year old purchaser.

Back in my racing days I chased those 100 grams, generally at much  
expense and never for any measurable improvement in performance.  Now  
I ride my bike for fun and I don't sweat it.  I've got bikes ranging  
from 21 lbs to 27 lbs and I don't to have any less fun on any of  
them.  I prefer to measure my rides in smiles per hour these days...

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to