|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Agreed. I picked it due to the cycling tie in and to show the contrast to n the watch market.
Winner. (I really want that frameset) |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Richard Mille watch pictured (like most skeletonized watch models) is nearly illegible.
|
#34
|
||||
|
||||
No, they are not.
Lugged steel bike frames are...like lugged steel bike frames. Watches are like watches. Comparing anything to some random other item seems to me to be a waste of time. But that’s just me. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
I think the analog/digital comparison should apply more to mechanical/electronic groupsets rather than frames/brakes.
I mentioned this in Weight Weenies many years ago...the only response I got was the distant sound of Millennials clicking on their iPhones... |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
They're analogous in the emotions they evoke: An appreciation for old school craftsmanship.
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
That's kind of what I had in mind: both are timeless so to speak.
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
In a way...both are finely crafted and mechanical, and both are inferior to their newer electronic counterparts as actual tools.
I do love my mechanical bikes, and particularly enjoy my downtube shifters, but only because they force me to slow down a bit and engage with the ride, whereas the ergos (even the mechanical ones) are sorta thoughtless and encourage me to focus on the outright effort. |
|
|