Good quality bikes

On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 4:22:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 May 2021 15:04:19 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 12:54:43 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2021 7:58 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 4:29:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2021 5:56 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2021 1:38 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
The Airborne looks like it will be about a half lb less weight than the Trek Emonda in the same size. One might suppose that the Trek might be more Aero but like the Airborne, it has large diameter tubes that had no attempt at being aero in design. Also one would have to question whether small diameter round steel tubes are less aero than the much larger diameter of, say, the Pinarello frameset. I can't say that I ever noticed any difference between the late Basso Loto I had and the Trek Madone which was supposedly quite aero.

Of course I'm not a pro rider and I very seldom even approach the speeds that the pros commonly get in the peloton.

But isn't that the entire point of Aero? To give you that very small gain when you ride at those sorts of speeds all day long? You sure as hell aren't going to put out these sorts of power and my entire reason for posting this is to tell you that you sure as hell aren't going to gain enough to even consider spending large amounts of money on a fantasy bike to make it worth your while.

Another point - Components are now more expensive than good frames. But China is invading that space as well. You can get a Sensah 11 speed group complete for $200. They have been working their way up from not very reliable and seem to have now hit a high enough reliability standard that I will give them a test. The failure points seem to be the levers on the previous versions but that supposedly has been reengineered to be reliable. And if it weren't so you could always buy SRAM levers which have the same pull ratio and we know that those levers are reliable. And you would still save a pile of money. I'll see after I get rid of all of my extraneous bikes.
Regarding minor differences between road (i.e. racing) bikes, slight
differences in component performance, new manufacturers or even nations
producing frames and parts... Well, I just don't get it.

I can understand owning different bikes with greatly different purposes,
e.g. a bike for loaded touring, a bike for trails in the woods, a bike
for getting groceries, a folding bike for traveling.

But I don't understand owning several bikes for "fast" riding,
especially if a person is too old or two slow to compete in actual races.

- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,
?? I haven't given up. What gave you that idea??
- special bike for bad weather ,
Good point. Add that to the list of extra bikes I can understand.
- just a spare bike,
You're duplicating. The spare bike can be one of the ones already
mentioned. (Last night I was very busy before the night ride to which a
friend had invited me. So instead of switching bikes, I did the ride on
the "spare" folding bike I already had in the car.)
- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike
Those are good examples of multiple bikes just for fast riding. Is your
"climbing bike" really so much slower in a time trial that it will
prevent you from winning, um, whatever you might otherwise win? (Maybe a
Powerbar? Or for first place, maybe a cycling cap?)

snip snotty remarks

That was a snotty remark, Lou.
I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.

No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on.
Honestly, I don't seem to spend it on enough stuff. Despite being
retired, my account totals keep increasing. They would even if the stock
market stopped rising.

I long ago realized that accumulating more possessions isn't going to
make me any happier. That applies to lots of things, and certainly to
bikes.
Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?
I remember the conversation, but I don't remember the details.

I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades. I've now mostly moved on to other instruments, but if I
were to consider another guitar, it would probably be because I had
developed an interest in another type of music - e.g. an electric guitar
for hard rock, perhaps a dobro for some types of blues, maybe a
classical guitar if I decided to return to that style.

True story: I once had a friend who suddenly came into a _very_ large
amount of money. Among other toys, he began splurging on expensive
guitars, ones costing up to $10,000 apiece. He ended up with over 50 of
them when his wife divorced him.

Odd thing was, he was a terrible, terrible musician, literally unable to
consistently count to four while playing. The extra fancy (and
extra-fancy) guitars didn't help a bit.

I hope the analogy is clear.

Not really. I don't think Lou has ruined his life or his marriage by hoarding high-end bikes. We're talking a half-dozen bikes that get ridden, apparently a lot -- and that are maintained in a hospital setting. You would be lucky to be one of Lou's bikes. What is the possible harm in that?
Of course, my original comment in this thread wasn't directed towards
Lou's stable of bikes. I was saying that I, personally, don't understand
why an old non-racer would want to acquire multiple "fast" bikes that
are extremely similar.

To generalize, I also don't personally understand collecting Hummel
figurines, commemorative coins, vacation homes, hunting trophies,
motorcycles, ex-wives, etc.

There are people who choose to collect bikes to stock bike museums. I've
visited several, from tiny to large. But even those tend strongly toward
variety, to display samples of various types. I don't recall a bike
museum with all road racing bikes with minor equipment or frame variations.
I don't understand a lot of Tom's purchases, but if he decides to spend his dividends on bicycles -- who cares. I don't want a bunch of racing bikes from the last century, but since when am I the arbiter of want or need.
Tom is free to continue his attempts at whatever he's attempting. But to
repeat what I've said many times: If a person posts something to a
discussion group, that person should expect that it might get discussed,
and that it won't be a uniform chorus of "Yes, good idea." That wouldn't
be much of a discussion, and not a good way to learn.

(At lunch after today's club ride, I was talking with a friend I hadn't
seen for quite a while, a psychologist. In our long conversation I made
some comment about some psychological point, and he said "No, that isn't
right" and proceeded to explain. Had he agreed with me just to be nice,
I wouldn't have learned what I learned.)

So you are purposely making stupid comments to be taught many lessons?
Thus speaks the chap to who the bicycle bottom bracket (containing 1
moving part) is so obviously a challenge.

And incredibly enough we have some totally ignorant fool who believes that a bottom bracket has only one moving part. If you don't even know what a bottom bracket is, why are you commenting on it?

On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 9:38:05 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 8:57:14 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 7:42:12 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 4:25:22 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 1:58:13 AM UTC+2, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 4:29:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2021 5:56 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2021 1:38 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
The Airborne looks like it will be about a half lb less weight than the Trek Emonda in the same size. One might suppose that the Trek might be more Aero but like the Airborne, it has large diameter tubes that had no attempt at being aero in design. Also one would have to question whether small diameter round steel tubes are less aero than the much larger diameter of, say, the Pinarello frameset. I can't say that I ever noticed any difference between the late Basso Loto I had and the Trek Madone which was supposedly quite aero.

Of course I'm not a pro rider and I very seldom even approach the speeds that the pros commonly get in the peloton.

But isn't that the entire point of Aero? To give you that very small gain when you ride at those sorts of speeds all day long? You sure as hell aren't going to put out these sorts of power and my entire reason for posting this is to tell you that you sure as hell aren't going to gain enough to even consider spending large amounts of money on a fantasy bike to make it worth your while.

Another point - Components are now more expensive than good frames. But China is invading that space as well. You can get a Sensah 11 speed group complete for $200. They have been working their way up from not very reliable and seem to have now hit a high enough reliability standard that I will give them a test. The failure points seem to be the levers on the previous versions but that supposedly has been reengineered to be reliable. And if it weren't so you could always buy SRAM levers which have the same pull ratio and we know that those levers are reliable. And you would still save a pile of money. I'll see after I get rid of all of my extraneous bikes.
Regarding minor differences between road (i.e. racing) bikes, slight
differences in component performance, new manufacturers or even nations
producing frames and parts... Well, I just don't get it.

I can understand owning different bikes with greatly different purposes,
e.g. a bike for loaded touring, a bike for trails in the woods, a bike
for getting groceries, a folding bike for traveling.

But I don't understand owning several bikes for "fast" riding,
especially if a person is too old or two slow to compete in actual races.

- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,
?? I haven't given up. What gave you that idea??
- special bike for bad weather ,
Good point. Add that to the list of extra bikes I can understand.
- just a spare bike,
You're duplicating. The spare bike can be one of the ones already
mentioned. (Last night I was very busy before the night ride to which a
friend had invited me. So instead of switching bikes, I did the ride on
the "spare" folding bike I already had in the car.)
- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike
Those are good examples of multiple bikes just for fast riding. Is your
"climbing bike" really so much slower in a time trial that it will
prevent you from winning, um, whatever you might otherwise win? (Maybe a
Powerbar? Or for first place, maybe a cycling cap?)

snip snotty remarks

That was a snotty remark, Lou.
I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.

No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on.
Honestly, I don't seem to spend it on enough stuff. Despite being
retired, my account totals keep increasing. They would even if the stock
market stopped rising.

I long ago realized that accumulating more possessions isn't going to
make me any happier. That applies to lots of things, and certainly to
bikes.
Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?
I remember the conversation, but I don't remember the details..

I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades. I've now mostly moved on to other instruments, but if I
were to consider another guitar, it would probably be because I had
developed an interest in another type of music - e.g. an electric guitar
for hard rock, perhaps a dobro for some types of blues, maybe a
classical guitar if I decided to return to that style.

True story: I once had a friend who suddenly came into a _very_ large
amount of money. Among other toys, he began splurging on expensive
guitars, ones costing up to $10,000 apiece. He ended up with over 50 of
them when his wife divorced him.

Odd thing was, he was a terrible, terrible musician, literally unable to
consistently count to four while playing. The extra fancy (and
extra-fancy) guitars didn't help a bit.

I hope the analogy is clear.
Not really. I don't think Lou has ruined his life or his marriage by hoarding high-end bikes. We're talking a half-dozen bikes that get ridden, apparently a lot -- and that are maintained in a hospital setting. You would be lucky to be one of Lou's bikes. What is the possible harm in that?

I don't understand a lot of Tom's purchases, but if he decides to spend his dividends on bicycles -- who cares. I don't want a bunch of racing bikes from the last century, but since when am I the arbiter of want or need.

-- Jay Beattie.
For the record I have 4 bikes for going fast and one boring utility bike
- an aero bike assigned to ride most on the flats,
- a very light bike which I assigned to be used in the mountains/hills,
- a gravel bike as my bad weather bike and for gravel rides,
- a cross bike which I use in the winter to ride off road where other people use a ATB.

Before I bought the gravel bike I sold 4 bikes; 2 road bikes and 2 ATB. If I had to reduce my stable even more I could sell a my cross bike and my very light bike but I don't need the money and I have enough storage room and they are used for their assigned purpose. These bikes I already had when I bought my aero bike and gravel bike but for me the aero bike and gravel bike have added value. Most enthusiastic cyclists here have at least 3 bikes: an off road bike (ATB, gravel or cross bike), a road bike and a utility bike. Two extra isn't too bad and I realise that I am privileged. Personally I don't see the fun in riding a folding bike, loaded touring hauling all that stuff over Stelvio Pass or riding a tandem, but I don't have to do that.
The real garage congestion occurs when your whole family has bikes. I have my:

1971 Raleigh Pro track bike now relegated to roller riding. I raced track from the '70s-90s. -- and my son used it a bit in the 2000s at Alpenrose.
Fast rain bike (disc Synapse)
Fast bike (Trek Emonda SLR)
Gravel bike (2016 Norco Search)
Commuter bike (Cannondale CAADX)

The Norco was purchased as a quick replacement for a broken commuter, a Cannondale Disc-Cross (first generation Cannondale disc CX bike). Then I got a warranty replacement for that frame and rebuilt it as my current commuter, the CAADX -- which, BTW, is a pig. Now I only use the Norco for sporadic group gravel rides or on days when I want a fast commuter (it has SPDs). It gets ridden more as my son's Portland bike when he comes to visit. It was on a screaming sale, so even if it is not used a lot, it has more than earned its keep.

Speaking of Alpenrose: Waah. RIP. https://www.bicycling.com/culture/a2...regon-cycling/ https://www.facebook.com/AlpenroseVelodrome/

Developers are taking over and shutting down one of the most iconic tracks in the US. Mike and Candy Murray, featured in the Bicycling article, are a doctor and nurse couple who have been running Oregon cycling for more than 30 years, way back before Oregon seceded from the USCF. The were also the staff at the Mt. Hood Medical Clinic that took care of my son when he shattered his ankles. https://www.oregonlive.com/outdoors/...eadows_ha.html It was bitter sweet catching up with them while they treated my son -- reminiscing about the good old days.
Yesterday a friend took one look at that Felt I am selling and offered to buy it at my asking price. All of this would be well if I could remember who he is. But I suppose I will hear from him. That is unless his wife puts the kabosh on it and I cannot remember who he is to remind him.

So at the moment I have the Airborne awaiting crank cups and wheels both of which are on the way,
The Douglas Ti which is a bit heavy and so I put a saddle on it that softens the ride
The Lemond which has Di2 on it and I have up for sale
The Colnago CLX3.0 which has a Dura Ace Di2 and is a great bike if a little small for me.
The Douglas aluminum frameset which I stripped all of the parts off to use as spares and the frameset is up for sale. That bike was 16.5 lbs assembled with those heavy Chinese Aero wheels on it. This bike wants to use no larger than 25 mm tires and I use 28's now so I'm selling it off.
I didn't like the way that the fork looked on the Airborne. It looked like it was in direct sunlight. This probably had no effect on the fork, but it did make the finish scalely, I could simply refinish it but since I found a new duplicate for a good price I will simply replace it.

There is a very nice frameset for sale locally and I've been thinking of building a really light bike for a friend since he has been riding a De Rosa forever. He's 88 and a very light bike would be something that he could use. Since everyone is going to carbon fiber they are selling really light parts for pennies on the dollar.

The local house flippers are driving the prices of home through the ceiling and I can sell my home and move to Klamath Falls and buy a newer house in the same size on a larger property size and put the rest in investments which would put me over my goal where I could start living high on the hog. The wife comes from Medford area so the change in weather wouldn't bother her. Looking at the weather patterns there it appears that there are more sunny warm days than here and snow and rain for little more than here. And you don't have people telling you not to waste water.

Jay, what is the terrain like around Klamath Falls?
Google it. https://discoverklamath.com/2020/12/...-falls-oregon/ They have a former AFB with a ridiculously long runway for the local Horizon flights. I had a client at the end of the runway (Masco/Aqua Glass). I'd skip the rental car and walk a mile to get there -- all sweaty with my trial case. https://www.klamathfallsnews.org/new...erlite-company

It's rural, conservative -- with plenty of water-rights conflicts between famers and tribes. You can go hang out with Amon Bundy. https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-n...ion-canal.html

It's not where I intend to retire. I like Medford and love Ashland. Good hospital and retirement facilities in Medford, and its located on I-5 corridor. You can retire he https://www.retirement.org/rvm/ Go ride the scenic bikeway. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQ-...channel=oregon Personally, I like being closer to an international airport, so my retirement spot is going to be down the Gorge, 60 miles out of Portland.
I suppose Medford wouldn't be a bad place if there was some climbing roads reasonably near. My memory of Washington and Oregon is either the Cascades or flat as a pancake.

The Siskiyou Mountains are challenging and were the location of a Death Ride equivalent maybe 30 years ago. I don't know what happened to that ride. I think it was called "Pain in the Passes." Medford is mostly rollers, but I haven't done a ton of riding down there except for a couple of road races (same ones, multiple years) -- and the usual cruise from Medford to Ashland. One of the road races near Jacksonville was the reason why I dumped my California corn-cob and went to a 23 tooth cassette. https://traveloregon.com/places-to-g.../jacksonville/ Jacksonville looks like one of the towns off HWY 49, like Sonora. The 23 tooth cog was recommended by race promoters, and I thought it was pretty wussy -- until lap 2 of a three lap 75 mile road race that was all up and all down some hump of a mountain. There are some challenging climbs around Jacksonville and thereabouts and then further south in the Siskiyou.

BTW, we don't have any epic climbs like Mt. Hamilton until you head into the Cascades -- but just riding around the West Hills, you can do 7K of climbing in 50 miles without getting more than a few miles from town, and you can spike it to 8k or whatever number you want. You just have to go up and down a lot of climbs -- all different and no repeats. https://ridewithgps..com/ambassador_...on-of-de-ronde Riding through the mis-named Tualatin Valley can rack up tons of climbing. If you head straight east, you get flat to rolling, but anywhere on the west side is climbing.

-- Jay Beattie.

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2021 7:58 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 4:29:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2021 5:56 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2021 1:38 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
The Airborne looks like it will be about a half lb less weight than
the Trek Emonda in the same size. One might suppose that the Trek
might be more Aero but like the Airborne, it has large diameter
tubes that had no attempt at being aero in design. Also one would
have to question whether small diameter round steel tubes are less
aero than the much larger diameter of, say, the Pinarello frameset.
I can't say that I ever noticed any difference between the late
Basso Loto I had and the Trek Madone which was supposedly quite aero.

Of course I'm not a pro rider and I very seldom even approach the
speeds that the pros commonly get in the peloton.

But isn't that the entire point of Aero? To give you that very small
gain when you ride at those sorts of speeds all day long? You sure
as hell aren't going to put out these sorts of power and my entire
reason for posting this is to tell you that you sure as hell aren't
going to gain enough to even consider spending large amounts of
money on a fantasy bike to make it worth your while.

Another point - Components are now more expensive than good frames.
But China is invading that space as well. You can get a Sensah 11
speed group complete for $200. They have been working their way up
from not very reliable and seem to have now hit a high enough
reliability standard that I will give them a test. The failure
points seem to be the levers on the previous versions but that
supposedly has been reengineered to be reliable. And if it weren't
so you could always buy SRAM levers which have the same pull ratio
and we know that those levers are reliable. And you would still save
a pile of money. I'll see after I get rid of all of my extraneous bikes.
Regarding minor differences between road (i.e. racing) bikes, slight
differences in component performance, new manufacturers or even nations
producing frames and parts... Well, I just don't get it.

I can understand owning different bikes with greatly different purposes,
e.g. a bike for loaded touring, a bike for trails in the woods, a bike
for getting groceries, a folding bike for traveling.

But I don't understand owning several bikes for "fast" riding,
especially if a person is too old or two slow to compete in actual races.

- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,
?? I haven't given up. What gave you that idea??
- special bike for bad weather ,
Good point. Add that to the list of extra bikes I can understand.
- just a spare bike,
You're duplicating. The spare bike can be one of the ones already
mentioned. (Last night I was very busy before the night ride to which a
friend had invited me. So instead of switching bikes, I did the ride on
the "spare" folding bike I already had in the car.)
- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike
Those are good examples of multiple bikes just for fast riding. Is your
"climbing bike" really so much slower in a time trial that it will
prevent you from winning, um, whatever you might otherwise win? (Maybe a
Powerbar? Or for first place, maybe a cycling cap?)

snip snotty remarks

That was a snotty remark, Lou.
I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.

No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on.
Honestly, I don't seem to spend it on enough stuff. Despite being
retired, my account totals keep increasing. They would even if the stock
market stopped rising.

I long ago realized that accumulating more possessions isn't going to
make me any happier. That applies to lots of things, and certainly to
bikes.
Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar
instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different
from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?
I remember the conversation, but I don't remember the details.

I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades. I've now mostly moved on to other instruments, but if I
were to consider another guitar, it would probably be because I had
developed an interest in another type of music - e.g. an electric guitar
for hard rock, perhaps a dobro for some types of blues, maybe a
classical guitar if I decided to return to that style.

True story: I once had a friend who suddenly came into a _very_ large
amount of money. Among other toys, he began splurging on expensive
guitars, ones costing up to $10,000 apiece. He ended up with over 50 of
them when his wife divorced him.

Odd thing was, he was a terrible, terrible musician, literally unable to
consistently count to four while playing. The extra fancy (and
extra-fancy) guitars didn't help a bit.

I hope the analogy is clear.

Not really. I don't think Lou has ruined his life or his marriage by
hoarding high-end bikes. We're talking a half-dozen bikes that get
ridden, apparently a lot -- and that are maintained in a hospital
setting. You would be lucky to be one of Lou's bikes. What is the possible harm in that?

Of course, my original comment in this thread wasn't directed towards
Lou's stable of bikes. I was saying that I, personally, don't understand
why an old non-racer would want to acquire multiple "fast" bikes that
are extremely similar.

To generalize, I also don't personally understand collecting Hummel
figurines, commemorative coins, vacation homes, hunting trophies,
motorcycles, ex-wives, etc.

There are people who choose to collect bikes to stock bike museums. I've
visited several, from tiny to large. But even those tend strongly toward
variety, to display samples of various types. I don't recall a bike
museum with all road racing bikes with minor equipment or frame variations.

I don't understand a lot of Tom's purchases, but if he decides to spend
his dividends on bicycles -- who cares. I don't want a bunch of racing
bikes from the last century, but since when am I the arbiter of want or need.

Tom is free to continue his attempts at whatever he's attempting. But to
repeat what I've said many times: If a person posts something to a
discussion group, that person should expect that it might get discussed,
and that it won't be a uniform chorus of "Yes, good idea." That wouldn't
be much of a discussion, and not a good way to learn.

(At lunch after today's club ride, I was talking with a friend I hadn't
seen for quite a while, a psychologist. In our long conversation I made
some comment about some psychological point, and he said "No, that isn't
right" and proceeded to explain. Had he agreed with me just to be nice,
I wouldn't have learned what I learned.)


The big differences between your discussion with your friend and what
passes for debate here in rbt a
1) Your friend didn’t start his rebuttal with “Hey, asshole!�
2) You and your friend actually listened to each other and made an attempt
to understand each other’s points before responding.

On 5/27/2021 6:04 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 12:54:43 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

(At lunch after today's club ride, I was talking with a friend I hadn't
seen for quite a while, a psychologist. In our long conversation I made
some comment about some psychological point, and he said "No, that isn't
right" and proceeded to explain. Had he agreed with me just to be nice,
I wouldn't have learned what I learned.)

So you are purposely making stupid comments to be taught many lessons?

No, Tom. We know that's your job.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/27/2021 9:04 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

(At lunch after today's club ride, I was talking with a friend I hadn't
seen for quite a while, a psychologist. In our long conversation I made
some comment about some psychological point, and he said "No, that isn't
right" and proceeded to explain. Had he agreed with me just to be nice,
I wouldn't have learned what I learned.)


The big differences between your discussion with your friend and what
passes for debate here in rbt a
1) Your friend didn’t start his rebuttal with “Hey, asshole!�
2) You and your friend actually listened to each other and made an attempt
to understand each other’s points before responding.

True. The guy is really, really bright and quite pleasant and
interesting. He's a PhD psychologist with long and varied experience.

I wonder what he'd make of some of the discussions here.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 9:20:25 p.m. UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2021 9:04 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

(At lunch after today's club ride, I was talking with a friend I hadn't
seen for quite a while, a psychologist. In our long conversation I made
some comment about some psychological point, and he said "No, that isn't
right" and proceeded to explain. Had he agreed with me just to be nice,
I wouldn't have learned what I learned.)


The big differences between your discussion with your friend and what
passes for debate here in rbt a
1) Your friend didn’t start his rebuttal with “Hey, asshole!�
2) You and your friend actually listened to each other and made an attempt
to understand each other’s points before responding.
True. The guy is really, really bright and quite pleasant and
interesting. He's a PhD psychologist with long and varied experience.

I wonder what he'd make of some of the discussions here.

--
- Frank Krygowski

I bet he'd find those who must respond to Tom interesting case studies also.. VBEG LOL

Cheers

On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 5:59:32 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 9:38:05 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 8:57:14 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 7:42:12 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 4:25:22 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 1:58:13 AM UTC+2, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 4:29:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2021 5:56 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2021 1:38 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
The Airborne looks like it will be about a half lb less weight than the Trek Emonda in the same size. One might suppose that the Trek might be more Aero but like the Airborne, it has large diameter tubes that had no attempt at being aero in design. Also one would have to question whether small diameter round steel tubes are less aero than the much larger diameter of, say, the Pinarello frameset. I can't say that I ever noticed any difference between the late Basso Loto I had and the Trek Madone which was supposedly quite aero.

Of course I'm not a pro rider and I very seldom even approach the speeds that the pros commonly get in the peloton.

But isn't that the entire point of Aero? To give you that very small gain when you ride at those sorts of speeds all day long? You sure as hell aren't going to put out these sorts of power and my entire reason for posting this is to tell you that you sure as hell aren't going to gain enough to even consider spending large amounts of money on a fantasy bike to make it worth your while.

Another point - Components are now more expensive than good frames. But China is invading that space as well. You can get a Sensah 11 speed group complete for $200. They have been working their way up from not very reliable and seem to have now hit a high enough reliability standard that I will give them a test. The failure points seem to be the levers on the previous versions but that supposedly has been reengineered to be reliable. And if it weren't so you could always buy SRAM levers which have the same pull ratio and we know that those levers are reliable. And you would still save a pile of money. I'll see after I get rid of all of my extraneous bikes.
Regarding minor differences between road (i.e. racing) bikes, slight
differences in component performance, new manufacturers or even nations
producing frames and parts... Well, I just don't get it.

I can understand owning different bikes with greatly different purposes,
e.g. a bike for loaded touring, a bike for trails in the woods, a bike
for getting groceries, a folding bike for traveling.

But I don't understand owning several bikes for "fast" riding,
especially if a person is too old or two slow to compete in actual races.

- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,
?? I haven't given up. What gave you that idea??
- special bike for bad weather ,
Good point. Add that to the list of extra bikes I can understand.
- just a spare bike,
You're duplicating. The spare bike can be one of the ones already
mentioned. (Last night I was very busy before the night ride to which a
friend had invited me. So instead of switching bikes, I did the ride on
the "spare" folding bike I already had in the car.)
- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike
Those are good examples of multiple bikes just for fast riding. Is your
"climbing bike" really so much slower in a time trial that it will
prevent you from winning, um, whatever you might otherwise win? (Maybe a
Powerbar? Or for first place, maybe a cycling cap?)

snip snotty remarks

That was a snotty remark, Lou.
I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.

No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on.
Honestly, I don't seem to spend it on enough stuff. Despite being
retired, my account totals keep increasing. They would even if the stock
market stopped rising.

I long ago realized that accumulating more possessions isn't going to
make me any happier. That applies to lots of things, and certainly to
bikes.
Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?
I remember the conversation, but I don't remember the details.

I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades. I've now mostly moved on to other instruments, but if I
were to consider another guitar, it would probably be because I had
developed an interest in another type of music - e.g. an electric guitar
for hard rock, perhaps a dobro for some types of blues, maybe a
classical guitar if I decided to return to that style.

True story: I once had a friend who suddenly came into a _very_ large
amount of money. Among other toys, he began splurging on expensive
guitars, ones costing up to $10,000 apiece. He ended up with over 50 of
them when his wife divorced him.

Odd thing was, he was a terrible, terrible musician, literally unable to
consistently count to four while playing. The extra fancy (and
extra-fancy) guitars didn't help a bit.

I hope the analogy is clear.
Not really. I don't think Lou has ruined his life or his marriage by hoarding high-end bikes. We're talking a half-dozen bikes that get ridden, apparently a lot -- and that are maintained in a hospital setting. You would be lucky to be one of Lou's bikes. What is the possible harm in that?

I don't understand a lot of Tom's purchases, but if he decides to spend his dividends on bicycles -- who cares. I don't want a bunch of racing bikes from the last century, but since when am I the arbiter of want or need.

-- Jay Beattie.
For the record I have 4 bikes for going fast and one boring utility bike
- an aero bike assigned to ride most on the flats,
- a very light bike which I assigned to be used in the mountains/hills,
- a gravel bike as my bad weather bike and for gravel rides,
- a cross bike which I use in the winter to ride off road where other people use a ATB.

Before I bought the gravel bike I sold 4 bikes; 2 road bikes and 2 ATB. If I had to reduce my stable even more I could sell a my cross bike and my very light bike but I don't need the money and I have enough storage room and they are used for their assigned purpose. These bikes I already had when I bought my aero bike and gravel bike but for me the aero bike and gravel bike have added value. Most enthusiastic cyclists here have at least 3 bikes: an off road bike (ATB, gravel or cross bike), a road bike and a utility bike. Two extra isn't too bad and I realise that I am privileged. Personally I don't see the fun in riding a folding bike, loaded touring hauling all that stuff over Stelvio Pass or riding a tandem, but I don't have to do that.
The real garage congestion occurs when your whole family has bikes. I have my:

1971 Raleigh Pro track bike now relegated to roller riding. I raced track from the '70s-90s. -- and my son used it a bit in the 2000s at Alpenrose.
Fast rain bike (disc Synapse)
Fast bike (Trek Emonda SLR)
Gravel bike (2016 Norco Search)
Commuter bike (Cannondale CAADX)

The Norco was purchased as a quick replacement for a broken commuter, a Cannondale Disc-Cross (first generation Cannondale disc CX bike). Then I got a warranty replacement for that frame and rebuilt it as my current commuter, the CAADX -- which, BTW, is a pig. Now I only use the Norco for sporadic group gravel rides or on days when I want a fast commuter (it has SPDs). It gets ridden more as my son's Portland bike when he comes to visit.. It was on a screaming sale, so even if it is not used a lot, it has more than earned its keep.

Speaking of Alpenrose: Waah. RIP. https://www.bicycling.com/culture/a2...regon-cycling/ https://www.facebook.com/AlpenroseVelodrome/

Developers are taking over and shutting down one of the most iconic tracks in the US. Mike and Candy Murray, featured in the Bicycling article, are a doctor and nurse couple who have been running Oregon cycling for more than 30 years, way back before Oregon seceded from the USCF. The were also the staff at the Mt. Hood Medical Clinic that took care of my son when he shattered his ankles. https://www.oregonlive.com/outdoors/...eadows_ha.html It was bitter sweet catching up with them while they treated my son -- reminiscing about the good old days.
Yesterday a friend took one look at that Felt I am selling and offered to buy it at my asking price. All of this would be well if I could remember who he is. But I suppose I will hear from him. That is unless his wife puts the kabosh on it and I cannot remember who he is to remind him.

So at the moment I have the Airborne awaiting crank cups and wheels both of which are on the way,
The Douglas Ti which is a bit heavy and so I put a saddle on it that softens the ride
The Lemond which has Di2 on it and I have up for sale
The Colnago CLX3.0 which has a Dura Ace Di2 and is a great bike if a little small for me.
The Douglas aluminum frameset which I stripped all of the parts off to use as spares and the frameset is up for sale. That bike was 16.5 lbs assembled with those heavy Chinese Aero wheels on it. This bike wants to use no larger than 25 mm tires and I use 28's now so I'm selling it off.
I didn't like the way that the fork looked on the Airborne. It looked like it was in direct sunlight. This probably had no effect on the fork, but it did make the finish scalely, I could simply refinish it but since I found a new duplicate for a good price I will simply replace it.

There is a very nice frameset for sale locally and I've been thinking of building a really light bike for a friend since he has been riding a De Rosa forever. He's 88 and a very light bike would be something that he could use. Since everyone is going to carbon fiber they are selling really light parts for pennies on the dollar.

The local house flippers are driving the prices of home through the ceiling and I can sell my home and move to Klamath Falls and buy a newer house in the same size on a larger property size and put the rest in investments which would put me over my goal where I could start living high on the hog. The wife comes from Medford area so the change in weather wouldn't bother her. Looking at the weather patterns there it appears that there are more sunny warm days than here and snow and rain for little more than here. And you don't have people telling you not to waste water.

Jay, what is the terrain like around Klamath Falls?
Google it. https://discoverklamath.com/2020/12/...-falls-oregon/ They have a former AFB with a ridiculously long runway for the local Horizon flights. I had a client at the end of the runway (Masco/Aqua Glass). I'd skip the rental car and walk a mile to get there -- all sweaty with my trial case. https://www.klamathfallsnews.org/new...erlite-company

It's rural, conservative -- with plenty of water-rights conflicts between famers and tribes. You can go hang out with Amon Bundy. https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-n...ion-canal.html

It's not where I intend to retire. I like Medford and love Ashland. Good hospital and retirement facilities in Medford, and its located on I-5 corridor. You can retire he https://www.retirement.org/rvm/ Go ride the scenic bikeway. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQ-...channel=oregon Personally, I like being closer to an international airport, so my retirement spot is going to be down the Gorge, 60 miles out of Portland.
I suppose Medford wouldn't be a bad place if there was some climbing roads reasonably near. My memory of Washington and Oregon is either the Cascades or flat as a pancake.
The Siskiyou Mountains are challenging and were the location of a Death Ride equivalent maybe 30 years ago. I don't know what happened to that ride. I think it was called "Pain in the Passes." Medford is mostly rollers, but I haven't done a ton of riding down there except for a couple of road races (same ones, multiple years) -- and the usual cruise from Medford to Ashland. One of the road races near Jacksonville was the reason why I dumped my California corn-cob and went to a 23 tooth cassette. https://traveloregon.com/places-to-g.../jacksonville/ Jacksonville looks like one of the towns off HWY 49, like Sonora. The 23 tooth cog was recommended by race promoters, and I thought it was pretty wussy -- until lap 2 of a three lap 75 mile road race that was all up and all down some hump of a mountain. There are some challenging climbs around Jacksonville and thereabouts and then further south in the Siskiyou.

BTW, we don't have any epic climbs like Mt. Hamilton until you head into the Cascades -- but just riding around the West Hills, you can do 7K of climbing in 50 miles without getting more than a few miles from town, and you can spike it to 8k or whatever number you want. You just have to go up and down a lot of climbs -- all different and no repeats. https://ridewithgps.com/ambassador_r...on-of-de-ronde Riding through the mis-named Tualatin Valley can rack up tons of climbing. If you head straight east, you get flat to rolling, but anywhere on the west side is climbing.

Maybe late in the season when I'm riding well I could do that. There are a hell of a lot of 11% sections there.

On Friday, May 28, 2021 at 1:18:20 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 9:20:25 p.m. UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2021 9:04 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

(At lunch after today's club ride, I was talking with a friend I hadn't
seen for quite a while, a psychologist. In our long conversation I made
some comment about some psychological point, and he said "No, that isn't
right" and proceeded to explain. Had he agreed with me just to be nice,
I wouldn't have learned what I learned.)


The big differences between your discussion with your friend and what
passes for debate here in rbt a
1) Your friend didn’t start his rebuttal with “Hey, asshole!�
2) You and your friend actually listened to each other and made an attempt
to understand each other’s points before responding.
True. The guy is really, really bright and quite pleasant and
interesting. He's a PhD psychologist with long and varied experience.

I wonder what he'd make of some of the discussions here.

Actually my brother-in-law is a family councilor that just retired and I showed him some of the discussions here. He agreed that I over-reacted, but that people like Frank really are assholes. Family Counselors are psychologists. You cannot hold a conversation with someone like Frank that insists that if you do anything differently than he does that you are stupid. When Frank is criticizing the most friendly person on this group - Lou - that should tell you a great deal about what is going on. People like myself that have a great deal less self control because of the damned medication I'm taking can only stand so much of a moronic fool.

On 5/28/2021 10:28 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:

... Frank that insists that if you do anything differently than he does that you are stupid.

That's false, and legally, I think it qualifies as libel.

Feel free to try digging up the times I've used the word "stupid" in
this discussion group.

We each have opinions on countless matters. Of course I state my
opinions, and of course others' may differ. This is known as "discussion."

If you become angry or uncomfortable when defending your opinions,
perhaps you should re-examine them, instead of resorting to attacks and
straw man arguments as you did above.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Friday, May 28, 2021 at 8:22:26 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/28/2021 10:28 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:

... Frank that insists that if you do anything differently than he does that you are stupid.

That's false, and legally, I think it qualifies as libel.

Feel free to try digging up the times I've used the word "stupid" in
this discussion group.

We each have opinions on countless matters. Of course I state my
opinions, and of course others' may differ. This is known as "discussion."

If you become angry or uncomfortable when defending your opinions,
perhaps you should re-examine them, instead of resorting to attacks and
straw man arguments as you did above.

Then by all means make your attempt to sue me. Your own postings have made my case.