| |
Main
Date: 13 Aug 2007 16:57:31
From: SMS
Subject: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
Due to the high volume of traffic on this site I've been requested by my
hosting company to use a unique domain name for this site (which forced
met to ante up for another domain!). Actually I have no idea why they
care, since the new domain redirects to the old URL anyway.
The site is now accessible at "http://bicycleluggageracks.com".
There have been several updates to the site recently:
1. Comparison summary chart of all racks.
2. Addition of three more racks (Khyber stainless, Khyber Aluminum, and
Zefal Safari III.
3. U.S. source for the Pletscher Master.
4. Triangulation characteristic for all racks.
5. Several missing pieces of data in terms of weight and capacity have
been filled in.
Steve
http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2007 19:15:16
From:
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
On Aug 14, 3:03 pm, Ozark Bicycle
<bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On Aug 14, 1:54 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > An aluminum touring bicycle, do they actually sell any of those?!
What an odd question!
> IIRC, the first Cannondale bicycle was a touring bike - the 1983
> ST500. Ugly (especially the welds), and a bit goofy, but it was the
> beginning of a pretty successful line of bikes.
>
> Some of the the touring bikes that followed, such as the early ST600
> and ST1000 were pretty darn good, IMO.
They are more than pretty darn good. Richard Ballantine, a somewhat
renowned author of many books on bicycling, has said the 1000 is one
of the best loaded touring bikes in the world.
I agree. Of course, the disclaimer is that I've got one, so someone
might say I'm prejudiced.
The bike was 17 years old when it carried me and my full camping load
coast to coast with absolutely no problems. That's after countless
other tours over the years.
- Frank Krygowski
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2007 22:39:53
From: Jef Poskanzer
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
On Aug 14, 11:54 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com > wrote:
> Amusing since they used to have a statement on their web site that
> stated the facts about compact frames, ""there's a disturbing trend
> among some bike companies to re-tool their road frames by shortening the
> seat tube and slanting the top tube down from the head tube. This new
> design "breakthrough," they argue, saves frame weight. And if you take
> their claim literally, they're right - a shorter seat tube does make a
> bare frame a little lighter. What they don't tell you is that their
> complete bicycle actually weighs more than a bike with a conventional
> geometry. Why? You have to use longer (and therefore heavier) seatposts
> and stems on smaller frames to fit the rider properly, and their added
> weight more than off-sets the few grams saved by their sloping top tube
> frames."
Yeah. It's annoying.
Does anyone still make a fat-tire frame with a level top tube?
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2007 12:03:21
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
On Aug 14, 1:54 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com > wrote:
> Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> > On 2007-08-14, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >> Clive George wrote:
>
> >>> There's still that compact frame rant - you do know that compact doesn't
> >>> refer to the wheelbase, don't you? It's entirely possible to have
> >>> compact geometry with touring length chainstays.
> >> It is, but the other disadvantages of the compact frame geometry remain.
>
> >> I think it's a non-issue for touring, as there are no compact frame
> >> touring bicycles with long chain stays, at least none that I've ever
> >> seen, and I think I've seen every model (at least in the U.S.). It would
> >> look rather strange.
>
> > Cannondale?
>
> Have they gone over to the dark side?
>
> Amusing since they used to have a statement on their web site that
> stated the facts about compact frames, ""there's a disturbing trend
> among some bike companies to re-tool their road frames by shortening the
> seat tube and slanting the top tube down from the head tube. This new
> design "breakthrough," they argue, saves frame weight. And if you take
> their claim literally, they're right - a shorter seat tube does make a
> bare frame a little lighter. What they don't tell you is that their
> complete bicycle actually weighs more than a bike with a conventional
> geometry. Why? You have to use longer (and therefore heavier) seatposts
> and stems on smaller frames to fit the rider properly, and their added
> weight more than off-sets the few grams saved by their sloping top tube
> frames."
>
> It looks like in 2002 they changed the geometry. I do recognize the rack
> they're using!
>
> An aluminum touring bicycle, do they actually sell any of those?!
IIRC, the first Cannondale bicycle was a touring bike - the 1983
ST500. Ugly (especially the welds), and a bit goofy, but it was the
beginning of a pretty successful line of bikes.
Some of the the touring bikes that followed, such as the early ST600
and ST1000 were pretty darn good, IMO. The frames were non-noodly (a
bugaboo of some older steel touring frames) and they were
conservatively designed and hell-for-stout. Nicer bikes, IMO, than the
early C'dale racing bikes. YMMV.
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2007 01:01:24
From: Clive George
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com > wrote in message
news:46c0efa9$0$27252$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> There have been several updates to the site recently:
There's still that compact frame rant - you do know that compact doesn't
refer to the wheelbase, don't you? It's entirely possible to have compact
geometry with touring length chainstays.
(and "decontent" isn't a word...)
clive
|
| | |
Date: 14 Aug 2007 10:07:40
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 01:01:24 +0100, "Clive George"
<clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk > wrote:
>"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
>news:46c0efa9$0$27252$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
>> There have been several updates to the site recently:
>
>There's still that compact frame rant - you do know that compact doesn't
>refer to the wheelbase, don't you? It's entirely possible to have compact
>geometry with touring length chainstays.
>
>(and "decontent" isn't a word...)
>
I'd mention my favourite but I'm not his proofreader.
--
zk
|
| | |
Date: 13 Aug 2007 18:54:23
From: SMS
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
Clive George wrote:
> There's still that compact frame rant - you do know that compact doesn't
> refer to the wheelbase, don't you? It's entirely possible to have
> compact geometry with touring length chainstays.
It is, but the other disadvantages of the compact frame geometry remain.
I think it's a non-issue for touring, as there are no compact frame
touring bicycles with long chain stays, at least none that I've ever
seen, and I think I've seen every model (at least in the U.S.). It would
look rather strange.
> (and "decontent" isn't a word...)
Well it's widely used in marketing, at least in the U.S., especially for
vehicles, but yes, I haven't seen it in any dictionary.
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Aug 2007 17:43:29
From: Dennis Ferguson
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
On 2007-08-14, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com > wrote:
> Clive George wrote:
>
>> There's still that compact frame rant - you do know that compact doesn't
>> refer to the wheelbase, don't you? It's entirely possible to have
>> compact geometry with touring length chainstays.
>
> It is, but the other disadvantages of the compact frame geometry remain.
>
> I think it's a non-issue for touring, as there are no compact frame
> touring bicycles with long chain stays, at least none that I've ever
> seen, and I think I've seen every model (at least in the U.S.). It would
> look rather strange.
Cannondale?
Dennis Ferguson
|
| | | | |
Date: 14 Aug 2007 11:54:58
From: SMS
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> On 2007-08-14, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>> Clive George wrote:
>>
>>> There's still that compact frame rant - you do know that compact doesn't
>>> refer to the wheelbase, don't you? It's entirely possible to have
>>> compact geometry with touring length chainstays.
>> It is, but the other disadvantages of the compact frame geometry remain.
>>
>> I think it's a non-issue for touring, as there are no compact frame
>> touring bicycles with long chain stays, at least none that I've ever
>> seen, and I think I've seen every model (at least in the U.S.). It would
>> look rather strange.
>
> Cannondale?
Have they gone over to the dark side?
Amusing since they used to have a statement on their web site that
stated the facts about compact frames, ""there's a disturbing trend
among some bike companies to re-tool their road frames by shortening the
seat tube and slanting the top tube down from the head tube. This new
design "breakthrough," they argue, saves frame weight. And if you take
their claim literally, they're right - a shorter seat tube does make a
bare frame a little lighter. What they don't tell you is that their
complete bicycle actually weighs more than a bike with a conventional
geometry. Why? You have to use longer (and therefore heavier) seatposts
and stems on smaller frames to fit the rider properly, and their added
weight more than off-sets the few grams saved by their sloping top tube
frames."
It looks like in 2002 they changed the geometry. I do recognize the rack
they're using!
An aluminum touring bicycle, do they actually sell any of those?!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 14 Aug 2007 22:26:37
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
Steven M Scharf wrote:
> Dennis Ferguson wrote:
>> ...
>> Cannondale?
>
> Have they gone over to the dark side?...
Actually, Cannondale has discontinued their recumbent line, after making
a half-hearted effort (but better than Trek did).
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition"
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 15 Aug 2007 07:34:09
From: SMS
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Steven M Scharf wrote:
>> Dennis Ferguson wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Cannondale?
>>
>> Have they gone over to the dark side?...
>
> Actually, Cannondale has discontinued their recumbent line, after making
> a half-hearted effort (but better than Trek did).
BikeFriday also dropped their recumbent. I guess everyone that wants a
recumbent already has one!
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Aug 2007 21:27:06
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Rear Luggage Rack Web Site has moved to http://bicycleluggageracks.com
|
Steven M Scharf wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> Steven M Scharf wrote:
>>> Dennis Ferguson wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> Cannondale?
>>>
>>> Have they gone over to the dark side?...
>>
>> Actually, Cannondale has discontinued their recumbent line, after
>> making a half-hearted effort (but better than Trek did).
>
> BikeFriday also dropped their recumbent. I guess everyone that wants a
> recumbent already has one!
Yeah, not too many intelligent people around. ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
