>I said there's a real, objective difference. It's not just "subjective." I'm >not imagining it. It's real.
Agreed -- the "real" difference you've identified is an improvement in climbing efficiency (or maybe more generally, pedaling efficiency overall). I wasn't suggesting that it was imagined -- in fact I suggested it could probably be measured. >Now as to trade-offs and costs vs benefits: I'm unaware of having given up >anything as a result of this change. I won't even call it a trade-off, >>because that implies you're giving up something to get something else. I don't doubt that you're unaware of having given up anything that's of value to you as a result of the change from the Saluki to the MAP. That was my point in qualifying my statement about giving up other desirable characteristics of a bicycle with the parenthetical "which in your subjective view may be very little" (I should have gone further and acknowledged that in your subjective view it could be nil). But I have to say that I'm skeptical that every rider will exactly share your view about the trade-off -- Jim Thill, for example, seems to have at least a somewhat different view of the trade-off. As many people have said on this list in many different contexts, bicycle design involves endless compromises, and different riders I think inevitably will prefer different sets of compromises for different uses. Having said all that, I do very much appreciate the detail with which you've laid out the reasons for your preferences -- it's very informative, and helps me think more clearly about what I like in a bike, and why. Back to work. -----Original Message----- From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com [mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve Palincsar Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 3:47 PM To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [RBW] Re: Interesting discussion: Riv bikes v. BQ bikes On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 19:40 +0000, Allingham II, Thomas J wrote: > It seems to me that what you've just said, Steve -- and I think it's > all you've said -- is that you personally (and subjectively) value the > incremental benefit in climbing/pedaling efficiency (relative to the > efficiency of your Saluki) more than you value whatever is given up in > other desirable characteristics of a bicycle (which in your subjective > view may be very little; others might take a different view) to > achieve that incremental efficiency. We can objectively measure that > incremental pedaling efficiency. It's a lot harder (I think I would > say impossible) to make an objective judgment of the net value to all > riders (as opposed to any one individual rider) of the costs and > benefits of any isolated design decision. > I said there's a real, objective difference. It's not just "subjective." I'm not imagining it. It's real. Now as to trade-offs and costs vs benefits: I'm unaware of having given up anything as a result of this change. I won't even call it a trade-off, because that implies you're giving up something to get something else. I'll come right out with it: the notion that all stiffness is good, and that infinite stiffness is infinitely good is just plain wrong. There's no doubt that for some loadings, some frames will have insufficient stiffness and that some additional amount will provide just enough; but going beyond that point into the realm of "more" does not provide additional benefit, even though it is measurable. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com<mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com>. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en-US. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ **************************************************** To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this message was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. **************************************************** **************************************************** This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email (and any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error please immediately notify me at (212) 735-3000 and permanently delete the original email (and any copy of any email) and any printout thereof. Further information about the firm, a list of the Partners and their professional qualifications will be provided upon request. **************************************************** ============================================================================== -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en-US. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
