I'm fine talking steel, lugs, carbon, groupsets, touring, fixies, really just about anything bike related. Nothing really gets me going like talking about rider weight. I am 6' and right around 225 pounds. Yes, I will be the first to admit that I need to lose some weight, but I refuse to call myself fat. I am a man and I am an American man. Its my right to eat and drink beer AND enjoy my sport.
I can ride a Riv weighing closer to 35# with a stout frame and 36 spoke heavy wheels and have a blast. I can also ride my carbon race bike with low spoke custom wheels and have a blast too at half the bike weight. I even have an old 979 set as a urban fixie, and its super fun too. Any bike can be fun and bicycles as a whole are overbuilt to the point that rider weight doesn't really matter. A powerful track sprinter probably would flex my Vitus in half, but for normal people with normal power, a bike will perform just fine. I will vnture a guess that most of us here have more than one bike availiable to us. If I am doing a fast ride, I ride my racing bike. A long ride on a weekend, I pick something else. Every thing has its specific use. Anyone remember the movie Tin Cup, where Kevin Costner play the back nine golf holes with only a 7 iron? It can be done, but why would you try? I can tour on my carbon, but why when I have my touring bike. I could race on my Atlantis, but why when I have a racing bike on the hook next to it? Scott On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:18 PM, charlie <cl_v...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I think this whole frame flex business has something to do with rider > power and weight also. I don't believe a super light tubed frame would last > long with me riding it and would most likely develop cracks sooner. Were I > 165 pounds again maybe not but the average beginner male cyclist over 40 > who is able to afford a pricey frame probably doesn't weigh that > either......probably closer to 200 I'd wager. Just wanted to put a dose of > reality into perhaps why the G-man makes stouter frames that many. Do they > perform significantly worse than a skinny, thin tubed frame? I don't know > but I'll bet we'd be splitting some pretty fine hairs. > > > On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 10:26:55 AM UTC-8, Patrick in VT wrote: >> >> On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 12:18:52 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: >> >>> >>> For a mind-blowing example of the above, be sure to read the road test >>> of the titanium road bikes in the current issue of BQ. (I'm going to >>> leave the big reveal to Jan, if he wants to pick up on the cue...) >>> >> >> i'm inclined to believe that frames of any material can have "optimized" >> frame flex characteristics as far as performance is concerned. all the >> talk regarding stiffness with respect to racing bikes seems a little >> overdone, if not a little misleading, since removing material - be it >> steel, CF or Ti - from the frame to put them at combat weight must also >> reduce stiffness to some degree, esp. when that the bulk of that weight is >> in the main tubes. i'm not 100% on that, but would agree with Jan that it >> points to a correlation with weight and flex. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/oQ9-E59_Yo4J. > > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
