Dropper posts for every bike?

On 12/3/2019 5:54 AM, Duane wrote:


I used DT friction shifters for years. I can’t imagine anyone preferring
them over brifters but whatever floats their boat.

Like Eddie Merckx said (paraphrasing) it doesn’t matter how long or short
you ride. Or how fast or slow. Just ride. I would also add, and STFU
criticizing other riders preferences.

Oh, good grief!

As I've said dozens of times: This is a _discussion_ group. We discuss
things. If you're so insecure that you can't tolerate any disagreement
with your choices, why would you enter a discussion about your choices?

Furthermore, if you pretend instead to defend _others'_ free choices,
perhaps you should stop sniping at only those who differ from you.

Contrary to certain posters' whining, I don't say "You shouldn't use
[whatever] equipment." But I do frequently point out that for much
equipment, the near-magical claims are exaggerated, or irrelevant to
most people's riding.

And I think I have a tendency to quantify things. Quantification
shouldn't be sneered at in a "tech" group.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 12/3/2019 11:44 AM, sms wrote:


I remember when "real cyclists" mocked stem-mounted shifters and "safety
brake" levers
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51WE-ZXb18L._SL1024_.jpg.

I hope you're not defending those "safety" levers. Those were always
terrible. (Modern "interrupter" auxiliary levers are a different matter.)

The idea that someone should buy a bicycle with drop handlebars than not
be riding in the drop position, was an anathema to them.

I don't remember that at all. And the photos at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_Merckx
seem to belie that idea.

Brifters were a great invention, far superior to bar-end shifters.
Finally you didn't have to move your hand at all to shift.

Wowee!

But... but... you still tout bottle cages instead of Camelbacks! Get
with the program!

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 8:23:25 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/3/2019 10:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 8:08:25 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/2/2019 8:34 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 3:39:38 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 09:49:37 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 1:44:11 AM UTC+1, Duane wrote:
wrote:
On Sunday, December 1, 2019 at 4:17:23 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/30/2019 11:24 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 27, 2019 at 10:04:33 AM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Should pro road racers use dropper posts?

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/worldto...111819293.html

If they do, it won't be long before anyone who uses an ordinary seatpost
will be scorned as a luddite.

--
- Frank Krygowski

I believe a dropper seatpost in professional road bicycle racing might
be a safety benefit. Currently, racers descending a mountain will
frequently put their groin and belly and chest onto the top of the
toptube to become as aerodynamic as possible. This is a
somewhat/definitely unsafe position to control a bicycle when
descending. But with a dropper seatpost, the racer could get himself
into the low aerodynamic position, AND remain seated on the saddle.
Overall a much safer position to descend a mountain. So a dropper
seatpost would be an easy safety enhancement for professional
bicyclists. Who would be against increasing the safety aspect of
professional bicycle racing?

IMO, racers can do whatever is within the rules to win a race. But as I
said, it won't be long before anyone who makes a different choice than a
racer will be scorned, at least by some.

Scorned? Really? Maybe by some idiots, but in general?


Over the years, it's happened with lycra clothes, helmets, clipless
pedals, 6 then 7 then 8 then 9 then 10 then 11 cogs, index shifting,
STI, aero wheels, carbon fiber, aero frames...

Not over here. I heard that the US is a ****ed up country but this I can't believe.

Lou



Seems to me that the scorning comes from the other way around. Just check
the recent posts here about Di2.

I was flabbergasted too. Is Frank not frequently 'accusing' us of:
- being a victim of marketing,
- using parts that are unreliable without any experience with them himself,
- using equipment with un noticeable advantages/gain according to his standards.
- that we are non racers and we don't need any of the new stuff even if we are telling him that it makes our rides more pleasant,
- keep bugging us about wearing a helmet,

He has to show me one post where I mock about his choice of equipment. I think we are very nice to him. Concerning modern equipment Frank and John B are the Statler and Waldorf of rec.bicycles.tech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpYEJx7PkWE

Lou

Are you arguing that you actually "need" electric shifting (for
example) in order to ride a bicycle? Or in my recent tirades, the
"need" for STI shifting to ride a bicycle?

I might comment, that in my usual 2 - 3 hour Sunday ride in Bangkok I
might shift 4 to 6 times. On the average that would be one shift every
30 minutes... Do I really "need" electric shifting?

Nope, and no one is saying you do.

Unlike your weekend ride around Bangkok, I'll shift three times or more just getting out of my parking garage as the driveway progressively steepens to 15% before emerging onto the street, and I'll shift a whole lot more riding home. I'm fine with cable actuated STI, but DT shifting would be a total drag since I often climb out of the saddle, and I hate sitting down and reaching for the next gear. Nobody here is going to tell me DT friction shifting is perfectly fine. Screw that.

Nope, and no one is saying you must think that.

I've moved on, and that does not make me a faddist, fashionista, pretender or anything else. In fact, the fashionistas are the retrogrouches who must remind everyone that they still use friction shifting or ride a penny farthing or wear tweed or ride an Eroica bike.

:-) You've implied an interesting definition: "Fashion (noun) - that
which is out of fashion."
Lou asked about who was mocking whom. Seems to me you've just mocked
the people who dare talk about satisfactorily using older technology. If
not, why the word "fashionista"?

I am mocking people who make it a point of pride to ride old stuff because it is somehow more authentic and makes them "real cyclists." Read the Eroica coverage -- riding old bikes is all part of the epic struggle to cover the mileage, and it gets the riders closer to the true cycling experience, etc., etc. https://pelotonmagazine.com/features/my-leroica-ride/ Really? Screw that. I'd rather have the untrue experience of riding a gravel bike with appropriate tires and suitable gears, including shifting that allows me to keep my hands on the bars as I bounce down the trail.

Well, that mindset exists in other realms. There are hunters who eschew
guns, and try to take deer using bow and arrow. (That movement initiated
mostly just for the challenge, and there was quite a battle before it
was made legal.)

There are folks who ski not by using chairlifts, but by grunting along
under their own power. Some of those people still slather carefully
chosen wax compounds on the bottom of their skis, changing them each
time conditions change. Can you imagine?

CX or AT skiing is a different sport than straight alpine skiing -- and AT and CX skis can be highly technical. AT skis, for example, are built for light weight, climbing speed and are used with skins that can also be very technical. https://www.switchbacktravel.com/best-backcountry-skis Not to mention that AT takes a lot more equipment, including beacons, probes, etc. These are not olde tymers recreating the past.

The skiing equivalent to retro bikes would be resort skiing on edgeless wood skis with leather boots and cable bindings. The actual real-life equivalent are the guys who want to yak at me on the lift about their 210cm Olin skis with 50mm waists and their first generation Look bindings and the best-ever Raichle rear-entry boots. They complain about wider, shaped skis as being "cheating." Okey-dokey. You go guy, and I love your bell bottom snow suit!

-- Jay Beattie.

On 12/3/2019 9:38 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

The skiing equivalent to retro bikes would be resort skiing on edgeless wood skis with leather boots and cable bindings. The actual real-life equivalent are the guys who want to yak at me on the lift about their 210cm Olin skis with 50mm waists and their first generation Look bindings and the best-ever Raichle rear-entry boots. They complain about wider, shaped skis as being "cheating." Okey-dokey. You go guy, and I love your bell bottom snow suit!

LOL, I have some telemark skis with cable bindings. But they do have
steel edges. I still use them occasionally when my wife wants to go
downhill skiing and I tag along. Always gets some comments. One woman
runs a telemark and back-country ski school founded by her and her late
husband http://www.alpineskills.com/index.html saw me using them at
Sugar Bowl and commented that when they moved to the newer back country
equipment that they couldn't even give away their old equipment.

On 12/3/2019 12:38 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 8:23:25 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/3/2019 10:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 8:08:25 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/2/2019 8:34 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 3:39:38 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 09:49:37 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 1:44:11 AM UTC+1, Duane wrote:
wrote:
On Sunday, December 1, 2019 at 4:17:23 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/30/2019 11:24 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 27, 2019 at 10:04:33 AM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Should pro road racers use dropper posts?

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/worldto...111819293.html

If they do, it won't be long before anyone who uses an ordinary seatpost
will be scorned as a luddite.

--
- Frank Krygowski

I believe a dropper seatpost in professional road bicycle racing might
be a safety benefit. Currently, racers descending a mountain will
frequently put their groin and belly and chest onto the top of the
toptube to become as aerodynamic as possible. This is a
somewhat/definitely unsafe position to control a bicycle when
descending. But with a dropper seatpost, the racer could get himself
into the low aerodynamic position, AND remain seated on the saddle.
Overall a much safer position to descend a mountain. So a dropper
seatpost would be an easy safety enhancement for professional
bicyclists. Who would be against increasing the safety aspect of
professional bicycle racing?

IMO, racers can do whatever is within the rules to win a race. But as I
said, it won't be long before anyone who makes a different choice than a
racer will be scorned, at least by some.

Scorned? Really? Maybe by some idiots, but in general?


Over the years, it's happened with lycra clothes, helmets, clipless
pedals, 6 then 7 then 8 then 9 then 10 then 11 cogs, index shifting,
STI, aero wheels, carbon fiber, aero frames...

Not over here. I heard that the US is a ****ed up country but this I can't believe.

Lou



Seems to me that the scorning comes from the other way around. Just check
the recent posts here about Di2.

I was flabbergasted too. Is Frank not frequently 'accusing' us of:
- being a victim of marketing,
- using parts that are unreliable without any experience with them himself,
- using equipment with un noticeable advantages/gain according to his standards.
- that we are non racers and we don't need any of the new stuff even if we are telling him that it makes our rides more pleasant,
- keep bugging us about wearing a helmet,

He has to show me one post where I mock about his choice of equipment. I think we are very nice to him. Concerning modern equipment Frank and John B are the Statler and Waldorf of rec.bicycles.tech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpYEJx7PkWE

Lou

Are you arguing that you actually "need" electric shifting (for
example) in order to ride a bicycle? Or in my recent tirades, the
"need" for STI shifting to ride a bicycle?

I might comment, that in my usual 2 - 3 hour Sunday ride in Bangkok I
might shift 4 to 6 times. On the average that would be one shift every
30 minutes... Do I really "need" electric shifting?

Nope, and no one is saying you do.

Unlike your weekend ride around Bangkok, I'll shift three times or more just getting out of my parking garage as the driveway progressively steepens to 15% before emerging onto the street, and I'll shift a whole lot more riding home. I'm fine with cable actuated STI, but DT shifting would be a total drag since I often climb out of the saddle, and I hate sitting down and reaching for the next gear. Nobody here is going to tell me DT friction shifting is perfectly fine. Screw that.

Nope, and no one is saying you must think that.

I've moved on, and that does not make me a faddist, fashionista, pretender or anything else. In fact, the fashionistas are the retrogrouches who must remind everyone that they still use friction shifting or ride a penny farthing or wear tweed or ride an Eroica bike.

:-) You've implied an interesting definition: "Fashion (noun) - that
which is out of fashion."
Lou asked about who was mocking whom. Seems to me you've just mocked
the people who dare talk about satisfactorily using older technology. If
not, why the word "fashionista"?

I am mocking people who make it a point of pride to ride old stuff because it is somehow more authentic and makes them "real cyclists." Read the Eroica coverage -- riding old bikes is all part of the epic struggle to cover the mileage, and it gets the riders closer to the true cycling experience, etc., etc. https://pelotonmagazine.com/features/my-leroica-ride/ Really? Screw that. I'd rather have the untrue experience of riding a gravel bike with appropriate tires and suitable gears, including shifting that allows me to keep my hands on the bars as I bounce down the trail.

Well, that mindset exists in other realms. There are hunters who eschew
guns, and try to take deer using bow and arrow. (That movement initiated
mostly just for the challenge, and there was quite a battle before it
was made legal.)

There are folks who ski not by using chairlifts, but by grunting along
under their own power. Some of those people still slather carefully
chosen wax compounds on the bottom of their skis, changing them each
time conditions change. Can you imagine?

CX or AT skiing is a different sport than straight alpine skiing -- and AT and CX skis can be highly technical. AT skis, for example, are built for light weight, climbing speed and are used with skins that can also be very technical. https://www.switchbacktravel.com/best-backcountry-skis Not to mention that AT takes a lot more equipment, including beacons, probes, etc. These are not olde tymers recreating the past.

The skiing equivalent to retro bikes would be resort skiing on edgeless wood skis with leather boots and cable bindings. The actual real-life equivalent are the guys who want to yak at me on the lift about their 210cm Olin skis with 50mm waists and their first generation Look bindings and the best-ever Raichle rear-entry boots. They complain about wider, shaped skis as being "cheating." Okey-dokey. You go guy, and I love your bell bottom snow suit!

-- Jay Beattie.



Well I still sort of my my Rosi Slaloms at the end of the day when my
quads are burning from turning these new parabolics. So I don't think
your analogy is actually correct. I miss nothing of the DT shifters or
toe straps today.

On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 6:14:34 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/3/2019 5:54 AM, Duane wrote:


I used DT friction shifters for years. I can’t imagine anyone preferring
them over brifters but whatever floats their boat.

Like Eddie Merckx said (paraphrasing) it doesn’t matter how long or short
you ride. Or how fast or slow. Just ride. I would also add, and STFU
criticizing other riders preferences.

Oh, good grief!

As I've said dozens of times: This is a _discussion_ group. We discuss
things. If you're so insecure that you can't tolerate any disagreement
with your choices, why would you enter a discussion about your choices?

Furthermore, if you pretend instead to defend _others'_ free choices,
perhaps you should stop sniping at only those who differ from you.

Contrary to certain posters' whining, I don't say "You shouldn't use
[whatever] equipment." But I do frequently point out that for much
equipment, the near-magical claims are exaggerated, or irrelevant to
most people's riding.

And I think I have a tendency to quantify things. Quantification
shouldn't be sneered at in a "tech" group.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Wow, wow. Frank you started this thread. Read your first post. What was your intention when you wrote
'If they do, it won't be long before anyone who uses an ordinary seatpost
will be scorned as a luddite. '? Trying to be funny? What did you quantify? In my world it is a silly insinuation.

Lou

On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 09:38:21 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 8:23:25 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/3/2019 10:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 8:08:25 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/2/2019 8:34 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 3:39:38 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 09:49:37 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Monday, December 2, 2019 at 1:44:11 AM UTC+1, Duane wrote:
wrote:
On Sunday, December 1, 2019 at 4:17:23 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/30/2019 11:24 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 27, 2019 at 10:04:33 AM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Should pro road racers use dropper posts?

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/worldto...111819293.html

If they do, it won't be long before anyone who uses an ordinary seatpost
will be scorned as a luddite.

--
- Frank Krygowski

I believe a dropper seatpost in professional road bicycle racing might
be a safety benefit. Currently, racers descending a mountain will
frequently put their groin and belly and chest onto the top of the
toptube to become as aerodynamic as possible. This is a
somewhat/definitely unsafe position to control a bicycle when
descending. But with a dropper seatpost, the racer could get himself
into the low aerodynamic position, AND remain seated on the saddle.
Overall a much safer position to descend a mountain. So a dropper
seatpost would be an easy safety enhancement for professional
bicyclists. Who would be against increasing the safety aspect of
professional bicycle racing?

IMO, racers can do whatever is within the rules to win a race. But as I
said, it won't be long before anyone who makes a different choice than a
racer will be scorned, at least by some.

Scorned? Really? Maybe by some idiots, but in general?


Over the years, it's happened with lycra clothes, helmets, clipless
pedals, 6 then 7 then 8 then 9 then 10 then 11 cogs, index shifting,
STI, aero wheels, carbon fiber, aero frames...

Not over here. I heard that the US is a ****ed up country but this I can't believe.

Lou



Seems to me that the scorning comes from the other way around. Just check
the recent posts here about Di2.

I was flabbergasted too. Is Frank not frequently 'accusing' us of:
- being a victim of marketing,
- using parts that are unreliable without any experience with them himself,
- using equipment with un noticeable advantages/gain according to his standards.
- that we are non racers and we don't need any of the new stuff even if we are telling him that it makes our rides more pleasant,
- keep bugging us about wearing a helmet,

He has to show me one post where I mock about his choice of equipment. I think we are very nice to him. Concerning modern equipment Frank and John B are the Statler and Waldorf of rec.bicycles.tech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpYEJx7PkWE

Lou

Are you arguing that you actually "need" electric shifting (for
example) in order to ride a bicycle? Or in my recent tirades, the
"need" for STI shifting to ride a bicycle?

I might comment, that in my usual 2 - 3 hour Sunday ride in Bangkok I
might shift 4 to 6 times. On the average that would be one shift every
30 minutes... Do I really "need" electric shifting?

Nope, and no one is saying you do.

Unlike your weekend ride around Bangkok, I'll shift three times or more just getting out of my parking garage as the driveway progressively steepens to 15% before emerging onto the street, and I'll shift a whole lot more riding home. I'm fine with cable actuated STI, but DT shifting would be a total drag since I often climb out of the saddle, and I hate sitting down and reaching for the next gear. Nobody here is going to tell me DT friction shifting is perfectly fine. Screw that.

Nope, and no one is saying you must think that.

I've moved on, and that does not make me a faddist, fashionista, pretender or anything else. In fact, the fashionistas are the retrogrouches who must remind everyone that they still use friction shifting or ride a penny farthing or wear tweed or ride an Eroica bike.

:-) You've implied an interesting definition: "Fashion (noun) - that
which is out of fashion."
Lou asked about who was mocking whom. Seems to me you've just mocked
the people who dare talk about satisfactorily using older technology. If
not, why the word "fashionista"?

I am mocking people who make it a point of pride to ride old stuff because it is somehow more authentic and makes them "real cyclists." Read the Eroica coverage -- riding old bikes is all part of the epic struggle to cover the mileage, and it gets the riders closer to the true cycling experience, etc., etc. https://pelotonmagazine.com/features/my-leroica-ride/ Really? Screw that. I'd rather have the untrue experience of riding a gravel bike with appropriate tires and suitable gears, including shifting that allows me to keep my hands on the bars as I bounce down the trail.

Well, that mindset exists in other realms. There are hunters who eschew
guns, and try to take deer using bow and arrow. (That movement initiated
mostly just for the challenge, and there was quite a battle before it
was made legal.)

There are folks who ski not by using chairlifts, but by grunting along
under their own power. Some of those people still slather carefully
chosen wax compounds on the bottom of their skis, changing them each
time conditions change. Can you imagine?

CX or AT skiing is a different sport than straight alpine skiing -- and AT and CX skis can be highly technical. AT skis, for example, are built for light weight, climbing speed and are used with skins that can also be very technical. https://www.switchbacktravel.com/best-backcountry-skis Not to mention that AT takes a lot more equipment, including beacons, probes, etc. These are not olde tymers recreating the past.

The skiing equivalent to retro bikes would be resort skiing on edgeless wood skis with leather boots and cable bindings. The actual real-life equivalent are the guys who want to yak at me on the lift about their 210cm Olin skis with 50mm waists and their first generation Look bindings and the best-ever Raichle rear-entry boots. They complain about wider, shaped skis as being "cheating." Okey-dokey. You go guy, and I love your bell bottom snow suit!

-- Jay Beattie.

Coming from an era of wooden skis I can assure you that skis without
steel edges work perfectly well. It is just that they don't work well
for a very long period. Thus the invention of steel edges.

But I wonder whether you with your modern equipment enjoy skiing more
than I did with my wooden skis, leather boots and cable bindings?
You certainly spend a great deal more money doing it.
--
cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:03:33 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 6:14:34 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/3/2019 5:54 AM, Duane wrote:


I used DT friction shifters for years. I can’t imagine anyone preferring
them over brifters but whatever floats their boat.

Like Eddie Merckx said (paraphrasing) it doesn’t matter how long or short
you ride. Or how fast or slow. Just ride. I would also add, and STFU
criticizing other riders preferences.

Oh, good grief!

As I've said dozens of times: This is a _discussion_ group. We discuss
things. If you're so insecure that you can't tolerate any disagreement
with your choices, why would you enter a discussion about your choices?

Furthermore, if you pretend instead to defend _others'_ free choices,
perhaps you should stop sniping at only those who differ from you.

Contrary to certain posters' whining, I don't say "You shouldn't use
[whatever] equipment." But I do frequently point out that for much
equipment, the near-magical claims are exaggerated, or irrelevant to
most people's riding.

And I think I have a tendency to quantify things. Quantification
shouldn't be sneered at in a "tech" group.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Wow, wow. Frank you started this thread. Read your first post. What was your intention when you wrote
'If they do, it won't be long before anyone who uses an ordinary seatpost
will be scorned as a luddite. '? Trying to be funny? What did you quantify? In my world it is a silly insinuation.

Lou

I won't comment on Franks intent but read the resulting answers. It
appears that without, at the minimum, STI brake-shifters it is nearly
impossible to enjoy riding a bicycle these days.

Has cycling been reduced to a dollars and cents level where riding a
$4,000 bicycle (as one poster has frequently mentioned) results in a
more enjoyable ride?

On a personal basis, I enjoy riding a bicycle. I enjoy riding my bike
with the down tube shifters and I enjoy riding another bike with STI
shifters and, I might add, when I was 12 years old I enjoyed riding my
single speed bike with the coaster brake.

Will one enjoy it more if one installs $1,500 set of electric shifters
on their bike?

Or has cycling become just another example of macho behavior where the
guy with the most "stiff" on his bike deems himself to be somehow
better?
--
cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, 3 December 2019 18:44:11 UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:03:33 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 6:14:34 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/3/2019 5:54 AM, Duane wrote:


I used DT friction shifters for years. I can’t imagine anyone preferring
them over brifters but whatever floats their boat.

Like Eddie Merckx said (paraphrasing) it doesn’t matter how long or short
you ride. Or how fast or slow. Just ride. I would also add, and STFU
criticizing other riders preferences.

Oh, good grief!

As I've said dozens of times: This is a _discussion_ group. We discuss
things. If you're so insecure that you can't tolerate any disagreement
with your choices, why would you enter a discussion about your choices?

Furthermore, if you pretend instead to defend _others'_ free choices,
perhaps you should stop sniping at only those who differ from you.

Contrary to certain posters' whining, I don't say "You shouldn't use
[whatever] equipment." But I do frequently point out that for much
equipment, the near-magical claims are exaggerated, or irrelevant to
most people's riding.

And I think I have a tendency to quantify things. Quantification
shouldn't be sneered at in a "tech" group.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Wow, wow. Frank you started this thread. Read your first post. What was your intention when you wrote
'If they do, it won't be long before anyone who uses an ordinary seatpost
will be scorned as a luddite. '? Trying to be funny? What did you quantify? In my world it is a silly insinuation.

Lou

I won't comment on Franks intent but read the resulting answers. It
appears that without, at the minimum, STI brake-shifters it is nearly
impossible to enjoy riding a bicycle these days.

Has cycling been reduced to a dollars and cents level where riding a
$4,000 bicycle (as one poster has frequently mentioned) results in a
more enjoyable ride?

On a personal basis, I enjoy riding a bicycle. I enjoy riding my bike
with the down tube shifters and I enjoy riding another bike with STI
shifters and, I might add, when I was 12 years old I enjoyed riding my
single speed bike with the coaster brake.

Will one enjoy it more if one installs $1,500 set of electric shifters
on their bike?

Or has cycling become just another example of macho behavior where the
guy with the most "stiff" on his bike deems himself to be somehow
better?
--
cheers,

John B.

Not sure what you're doing with these posts but...

No it's not necessary to have the latest greatest components to enjoy bicycling. However they can make bicycling more enjoyable. I enjoy touring on my bicycle. I can do it with downtube shifters but it is MORE enjoyable and safer to shift with my Campagnolo Ergo levers especially, as I've said before, when riding a loaded bike uphill or in strong gusty cross-winds. In f act I can see that if it were inexpensive enough that electronic shifting would be even more convenient on a touring bike. As I've also said before, with the Ergo shifters, on either my touring bike or my road bike, I shift more often which in turns makes bicycling for me more efficient which means I go just as far with less wasted energy or I ride further using the same amount of energy.

Heck I even enjoy taking my single speed out once in a while. I tried fixed gear but in our area fixed gear is just not safe on the roads in my opinion based on what I see.

YMMV and most likely does. So does Frank's and others.

Cheers

On 12/3/2019 5:44 PM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:03:33 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 6:14:34 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/3/2019 5:54 AM, Duane wrote:


I used DT friction shifters for years. I can’t imagine anyone preferring
them over brifters but whatever floats their boat.

Like Eddie Merckx said (paraphrasing) it doesn’t matter how long or short
you ride. Or how fast or slow. Just ride. I would also add, and STFU
criticizing other riders preferences.

Oh, good grief!

As I've said dozens of times: This is a _discussion_ group. We discuss
things. If you're so insecure that you can't tolerate any disagreement
with your choices, why would you enter a discussion about your choices?

Furthermore, if you pretend instead to defend _others'_ free choices,
perhaps you should stop sniping at only those who differ from you.

Contrary to certain posters' whining, I don't say "You shouldn't use
[whatever] equipment." But I do frequently point out that for much
equipment, the near-magical claims are exaggerated, or irrelevant to
most people's riding.

And I think I have a tendency to quantify things. Quantification
shouldn't be sneered at in a "tech" group.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Wow, wow. Frank you started this thread. Read your first post. What was your intention when you wrote
'If they do, it won't be long before anyone who uses an ordinary seatpost
will be scorned as a luddite. '? Trying to be funny? What did you quantify? In my world it is a silly insinuation.

Lou

I won't comment on Franks intent but read the resulting answers. It
appears that without, at the minimum, STI brake-shifters it is nearly
impossible to enjoy riding a bicycle these days.

Has cycling been reduced to a dollars and cents level where riding a
$4,000 bicycle (as one poster has frequently mentioned) results in a
more enjoyable ride?

On a personal basis, I enjoy riding a bicycle. I enjoy riding my bike
with the down tube shifters and I enjoy riding another bike with STI
shifters and, I might add, when I was 12 years old I enjoyed riding my
single speed bike with the coaster brake.

Will one enjoy it more if one installs $1,500 set of electric shifters
on their bike?

Or has cycling become just another example of macho behavior where the
guy with the most "stiff" on his bike deems himself to be somehow
better?
--
cheers,

John B.


$4,000? Huh?
New road bikes on my showroom floor with STi start at $850
(Bianchi) and I'm not the low price vendor (Bubba's Sports,
XMart etc).

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971