I agree with Mike and with Mike. That is to say: more weight with sufficient advantage is acceptable; adding weight without sufficient need is not. For my Fargo I'd be happy with steel, fwiw, tho' I'd prefer long-lived aluminum for my road bikes.
Segwaying: I like working on old Schwinns -- that they can be ridden or stored for decades and be dug up again in usable or near-usable condition proves their good design and build. But man, when I heft a Collegiate or a Varsity or a Suburban, and then heft a decent low end aluminum (frame + wheels + components) hybrid or cruiser or mtb -- my daughter's Electra 3i, for example -- it is revealed to me with ineluctable certitude that aluminum is the best thing that ever happened to cheap bikes. On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Mike On A Bike <shaljia...@guilford.edu>wrote: > I'm pretty sure you can't cringe at chainring weight unless you're < 2% > bodyfat. > > On Saturday, May 25, 2013 4:58:53 PM UTC-4, Mike Schiller wrote: >> >> for those of us who are in good shape and ride a lot of miles * >> unnecessary* extra weight bike is important. A good 7075 aluminum ring >> will last a long time. Probably around 3-4 times longer than the basic >> Sugino rings. >> I'd rather keep my bikes as light as I can within reason. I already make >> weight compromises, like a Brooks saddle and racks. The durability of SS >> rings is great for single speeds and tandems but a waste on a geared bike >> IMO. >> >> ~mike >> >> On Saturday, May 25, 2013 12:56:57 PM UTC-7, charlie wrote: >>> >>> I get the weight thing but seriously............its not that much of a >>> difference in the overall weight of your bicycle especially if you include >>> your weight in the equation (as Grant says). If durability is a prime >>> concern in your drive train go ahead and get steel rings they will probably >>> out last any aluminum rings 10-1. When you ride high mileage, dirty >>> conditions or do crummy maintenance, parts are just parts and longer >>> wearing parts are better. The guy that rides 15,000 miles a year is >>> probably in such good riding condition that a little weight doesn't matter. >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, May 25, 2013 11:43:39 AM UTC-7, Mike Schiller wrote: >>> >>>> Sugino rings are 6061 aluminum and wear pretty fast. The Surly >>>> stainless ones are nice and shiny and wear well but are I heavier. They >>>> weigh about twice as much as aluminum. A good compromise are the 7075 >>>> aluminum rings that wear well and are lighter. While I'm not super bike >>>> weight conscious, a few ounces here and there add up to a heavier ( and >>>> slower) bike. >>>> I prefer to use TA rings if possible or Race Face who makes some >>>> durable rings as well. >>>> >>>> ~mike >>>> >>>> >>>>> -- > 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. > > > -- http://resumespecialties.com/index.html patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com Albuquerque, NM -- 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.
