V-Rex vs. Rocket as climber
rocket...@my-dejanews.com
Unfortunately I haven't been able to find anyplace or anyone in south Texas
with both bikes to take an extended ride before making the big purchase. How
do the Rex and Rocket compare for climbing and over-all performance?
( My sense is the geometry isn't that much different between them, but
there's a big price difference that I'm not sure I can justify without lots
of advice from experienced riders of both).
Derek, San Antonio
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Gregg Scott
miles on it. i know that is not much but at first i thought that is was not
a very good hill climber. now that my legs and lungs are starting to get in
shape i realize that i was wrong about the hill climbing ability of the
rocket. spinning and working the gears have done a lot for my in this
area.... thanks again to the group for good info on this topic.
gregg
gsc...@webspam.net
to reply replace the M with an N
rocket...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<7eemv2$8he$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Jim Barstow
(in addition to a bunch of others). I ended up buying a Saturn V
with a bunch of upgraded components. My feeling was the
rocket/saturnV geometry was more responsive and quicker. I
came to the SWB world from a BikeE and these bikes are
defintely more responsive than the BikeE. (They are also much
better at climbing; I had trouble with the front wheel lifting
on very steep hills and that has never happened on the
saturnV.) I can't attest to their behavior on long climbs since
I rode them on angletech's test loop which is a only a fraction
of a mile.
Jim Barstow
<rocket...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:7eemv2$8he$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
chedd...@my-dejanews.com
rocket...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> I briefly rode a V-Rex and Rocket among other SWB and LWB bents at Angletech.
> Unfortunately I haven't been able to find anyplace or anyone in south Texas
> with both bikes to take an extended ride before making the big purchase. How
> do the Rex and Rocket compare for climbing and over-all performance?
>
> ( My sense is the geometry isn't that much different between them, but
> there's a big price difference that I'm not sure I can justify without lots
> of advice from experienced riders of both).
>
> Derek, San Antonio
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
>
much stiffer frame which in my opinion brings much more power from the pedals
to the rear wheel, Test ride those bikes again and this time put all of your
left foot pressure on the left pedals as you start out on a hard sprint and
compare the two bikes I think you will notice more frame flex on the Rocket
than on the V-Rex which lets your leg power go into the frame instead of to
the rear wheel.
Jeff Cowen
Interesting question. My sense is that they're similar, curious if anybody's done
side-by-side tests.
> The V-Rex is a slightly lower to the ground bent than the Rocket and has a
> much stiffer frame which in my opinion brings much more power from the pedals
> to the rear wheel, Test ride those bikes again and this time put all of your
> left foot pressure on the left pedals as you start out on a hard sprint and
> compare the two bikes I think you will notice more frame flex on the Rocket
> than on the V-Rex which lets your leg power go into the frame instead of to
> the rear wheel.
Is that really true? The V-Rex seat height is actually claimed to be slightly
taller -- neither anywhere near as low as a Lightning P-38, a great climber. I
*think* the Rocket is also triangulated, although only to the headset tube rather
than all the way to the bottom bracket as on the V-Rex. Would that make so much of
a difference in stiffness?
With the larger rear wheel I'd expect the V-Rex to be faster downhills and on
flats, but weight is probably more significant when climbing. Both bikes have high
bottom brackets, said to be good for hills.
Only thing I can say for sure is that my V-Rex climbs well, and the limiting factor
is the engine. Spinning is a requirement for hills, much more so than for wedgies,
and you may well prefer lower [and possibly also higher] gears than are standard on
either model.
- Jeff
chedd...@my-dejanews.com
dynamics are the most important factors in hill climbing and in keeping up a
constant speed it is also true that a stiffer frame will provide more power
to the rear wheels than a frame with more flex in the direction of pedal
forces, since you have a V-Rex look close at the bottom bracket and main tube
and the two smaller tubes that go back to the headset and you will see the
welds combine all three tubes to make them as one thick tube and in their
tetrahedron shape not really a (triangle) as most people think this makes
for the strongest and yet lightest possible frame and if one were to look
further into the fame you would see that the whole frame is a tetrahedron (
a triangle in every direction) at all places on the frame, this is an
engineering trick taken from the aircraft industry. The V-Rex frame is just
slightly heavier than other frames but is so much sronger compared to other
frames. One thing to do to make the bike lighter is to buy higher end
components they are ussually less wieght and preform much better than the
stock items that come with the bike and a better preforming bike makes for
happy rider, I know mine makes me feel good all over and I am glad I spent
the extra cash to upgrade the bike when purchased new, and thats my advice to
anyone weather they are going to buy a Rocket or a V-Rex or any other bent
get the best components you can afford to buy it will make you a happy camper
in the long run.
Bob Cardone
I just wonder , all things being equal, exactly how much effect you
would get from downgrading components slightly, frame strength, or
body and leg strength, one at a time. I think that the most dramatic
difference in climbing would be produced by varying the strength of
the rider, vs the other two.
Bob Cardone
Littlebigfoot
(snippage from other contributors)
Re: "I just wonder , all things being equal, exactly how much effect you
would get from downgrading components slightly, frame strength, or
body and leg strength, one at a time. I think that the most dramatic
difference in climbing would be produced by varying the strength of
the rider, vs the other two. "
Well, if all things are held equal then you'd hold rider strength equal too,
on the theory that it's a controllable variable (to some degree). I don't
think there is an even weight decrease as you move from lower to higher
grade components, but I'm just going by the recent component decriptions in
Bicycling magazine. It looks like you get the biggest weight advantage when
you hit the highest category, i.e. XTR or Dura Ace for Shimano stuff. The
Ultegra cranks are hollow, though. And the fact that the damn stuff just
works better might be some advantage as well, especially after it's been in
use for a few seasons. Initially performance probably varies evenly but
minutely up the product line. The biggest difference between low and high
end components is durability.
--
-Scott
freewh...@littlebigfoot.com
Remove "little" from email address to reply,
because I'm tired of being a target.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
Brian Clark
components and here's what I found. The vision bike weighs two pounds
less than the V-Rex, but the V-Rex has lighter weight components on it.
The two pound differences are probably in the frame and steering systems
because the Vision weight is quoted with USS. The V-Rex with it's Grip
Shift 9.0 component group is pretty much the lightest weight component
group you can get. If you want to make the bike any lighter you will
have to look at upgrading the cranks,bottom bracket, rims, and hubs. The
added possible weight penalty of the triangulated frame is worth it as
far as less frame flex and durability is concerned.
Jeff Cowen
Chedderhead???
Yes, I agree with you very much about frame stiffness being directly linked to the
ability to put power to the pavement. In fact, that was a primary attraction of the
V-Rex for me after riding some other brands. The multidimensional triangulation
[ooh!] is great -- there is *no* pedal steer whatsoever. I just meant that I
thought the Rocket was also stiff. I understand aluminum bikes are better than
CroMo in this regard.
Aerodynamics won't help you climb at 5mph unless maybe you have a 30mph headwind.
Indeed, a fairing is usually just dead weight going up the hill. Of course, down
the other side is another story!
Weight is a primary factor, but most people could stand to lose 10-15 pounds. That
makes it odd to spend mega-$ to save 1.5 pounds on your bike, unless you're a
serious racer in great shape. But heck, I had fun ordering mine with King hubs &
headset, Cook crank, XTR cogs, etc. Before leaving the house, I decide whether I'll
need to bring my 4.5 pound lock & cable and the 2.5 pound headlight battery. Those
make a difference in my climbing ability!
rocket...@my-dejanews.com
Rans literature shows the VRex is one pound more than Rocket. Seat height so
close as not to make a difference. I know the Rex has better components (9
spd vs. 8 spd cassette). Clearly the pictures show the VRex frame looks
stiffer up front...My big worry is twitchiness at 30+ mph. The Rocket has a
39.6 " wheel base and VRex 42.7 ".
My ride at Angletech was short, spanning less than 2 hours to ride all of
these bents: I compared a Bike E (wasn't comfortable fit for me)...dual
suspended Vision SWB, USS (lots of pogo, very twitchy)..Tailwind (great
comfort, didn't like tiller steering effect, although nice on
straightaways)...VRex (comfortable, good handling and clear
favorite)...Rocket (similar ride to VRex, although my feet felt higher in the
pedals). Owner, Kelvin, was very knowledgeable, patient and trusting of me
with his bikes. I just can't say from the short ride that I want to spend
$700 more for a VRex though ! My wife thinks I'm a little crazy spending a
grand for a Rocket. Decisions, decisions.
Anyway, I won't buy ANYTHING til I sell my 87 BMW K75 Sport (750) motorcycle.
It's immaculate if you know anyone in the market.
Appreciate any insight on the Rocket/VRex comparison...
Derek
___
In article <7ekcv6$1d1$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
chedd...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <370C2AF8...@mediaone.net>,
> Jeff Cowen <blue...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> > Hi Derek,
> >
> > Interesting question. My sense is that they're similar, curious if anybody's
> done
> > side-by-side tests...
Littlebigfoot
Structurally speaking a tetrahedral frame ought to be lighter than a
monotube frame, for a given strength level. It's possible that the Rans
frame is overbuilt. That is, because the strength us guaranteed by the
structure then you should be able to get away with much lighter tubing.
Compare the weight of the dome on St. Peter's Basilica with the weight of a
comparable sized geodesic structure (ignoring materials, of course).
Impacts don't have to be borne locally, but stress loads are borne by the
structure as a whole. It's possible that the Rans bikes are not such a
great engineering achievement after all. The P-38 is nearly tetrahedral,
and is also a very light bike, 3 lbs lighter than the V-Rex. I assumed that
most of the weight difference was in the seat and other components unique to
Rans, as did Larry Black. Perhaps we were wrong.
--
-Scott
freewh...@littlebigfoot.com
Remove "little" from email address to reply,
because I'm tired of being a target.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
Brian Clark <Brian...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:18269-37...@newsd-284.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Littlebigfoot
Sounds like your V-Rex is set up similar to mine, except that I used Ultegra
crankset and a Suntour XC Pro headset. I got one of those Velo racer locks
made by Kryptonite. They're just a little over 1 lb. It works well,
although the U is not as large as many other locks in the same category. I
figure that if I have a huge lock that's built like a tank, and I don't take
it along because it's so heavy, then it's not really doing me any good.
--
-Scott
freewh...@littlebigfoot.com
Remove "little" from email address to reply,
because I'm tired of being a target.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
Jeff Cowen <blue...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:370E3354...@mediaone.net...
Littlebigfoot
I know that Larry Black told me he sells five V-Rexes for every Rocket.
--
-Scott
freewh...@littlebigfoot.com
Remove "little" from email address to reply,
because I'm tired of being a target.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
<rocket...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:7emj99$psn$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
Brian Clark
I thought I said the frame and steering might be heavier, but it was
probably due more to the ASS compared to vision's USS. The weight HAS to
be coming from somewhere because the grip shift components on the V-Rex
are some of the lightest you can get. If the grip shift 9.0 was on the
Vision VR-44 the bike would be close to one pound lighter than it is. It
could be coming from the seat or maybe the adjustable track for the
seat?.
You are assuming that Rans uses lighter weight tubing for
their frame because it is designed with more tubes. Maybe it is, maybe
it isn't. Most recumbent makers just tell you the material and O.D. of
the tubes, but not much else. I have never seen it mentioned if
recumbent makers use butted tubing in any of their frames. Considering
that most wedgies priced above $300 use butted tubes, It would be
interesting to know if recumbent makers use this more expensive tubing
in their framesets.
I like how some poor guy's question of which of two bikes
to buy takes a goofy left turn into a discussion of architecture and
frame materials. I think it would help him more if someone with lots of
riding experience on BOTH bikes helped him out. I haven't ridden either
bike, so everything that I say is just basically blowing smoke out my
ass.
SStangler
but I have no problem going uphill on my Rocket - and I pull a Burley with a
30-lb kid!! It took me most of last season to get my legs and lungs in shape to
do so though...
Keep on spinning!
Camilo Acosta
www.rotatorrecumbents.com
Jeff Cowen
URL?
- Jeff
Richard Tengdin
> I would if I could connect to that web site.
You sure it's the right
> URL?
> - Jeff
Try http://www.rotatorrecumbent.com/ (not
...recumbents.com)
--
Richard Tengdin
Duplex/Duet/Trek 520
Littlebigfoot
This is great. Now we have a Rotator advocate to spar with the Rans LWB
advocate. You need to fix your hypertext link though.
--
-Scott
freewh...@littlebigfoot.com
Remove "little" from email address to reply,
because I'm tired of being a target.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
Camilo Acosta <cac...@cableone.net> wrote in message
news:371243...@cableone.net...
rocket...@my-dejanews.com
Doesn't look real strong though with just one chromo tube...Anybody have one
to offer personal testimony? Derek
> Try http://www.rotatorrecumbent.com/ (not
> ...recumbents.com)
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
tjs...@my-dejanews.com
but one difference I noted between the Rocket and the V-Rex (having owned
both bikes), is that the V-Rex was more "vertically compliant" than the
Rocket--that is, it seemed to absorb road shock a bit better. This may have
been due to in part to my height (6'4" tall) which resulted in Rocket seat
being positioned right over the small 20" wheel. The Rocket did give a rough
ride at times. Someone of more normal height may not have this problem.
Another nice feature of the V-Rex is that you can attain adequate gearing
with fairly normal-sized chainrings (although one could fit a 3x7 hub to the
Rocket to get higher gears). I would also occasionally get numb feet on the
Rocket--I presume from the elevated BB (relative to the seat height), which
didn't occur with the V-Rex.
I didn't notice any real difference between the bikes with respect to
bottom bracket stiffness--both were plenty stiff for my pedaling style. The
V-Rex was a better bike for me, but I'm sure there are plenty who prefer the
Rocket. Both are fine bikes. All of the Rans models, in fact, are
exceptional machines. Now if they'd just start facing their head tubes and
bottom brackets!
rocket...@my-dejanews.com
who has offered they owned both bikes. I'm trying to talk myself into the
extra dollars required by a V-Rex purchase. I want something akin in
performance to my 92 Specialized Sirrus triple with 700cx23 and, look
clipless and Suntour Edge components...Its about 24 pounds and pretty
quick...but my back has been bothered by hard rides with it in the last year
or so (not to mention the normal wedgie discomfort). I'm selling a
motorcycle to buy the bent, so if I really need to, I will have the bucks for
a Rex, but would rather use the money saved (buying a Rocket) for other
stuff...
Would you say the Rocket equivalent to my wedgie? Or would you say I'd need
to get a V-Rex...to find the same level of performance...I recognize it will
take a while to build the bent muscles.
Derek
tjs...@my-dejanews.com
rocket...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> I want something akin in
> performance to my 92 Specialized Sirrus triple with 700cx23 and, look
> clipless and Suntour Edge components...Its about 24 pounds and pretty
> quick...but my back has been bothered by hard rides with it in the last year
> or so (not to mention the normal wedgie discomfort).
Derek,
Performance-wise, there's likely very little discernable difference between
the Rocket and the V-Rex. The primary difference (IMHO) is likely going to be
shock absorption and riding position (I found the V-Rex to be slightly faster,
but the difference was very slight, and another rider's experience may differ
from mine). The larger rear wheel and more compliant frame of the V-Rex may
be somewhat easier on your back. The Rocket also has a slightly more "radical"
riding position (higher bottom bracket relative to the seat height), so the
wedgie-to-bent transition may take a bit longer than on the V-Rex. The Rocket
sure is a fun bike to scoot around town on, but I prefer the more neutral
positioning on the V-Rex position for longer distances ( again, YMMV). The
V-Rex now comes in two frame sizes (39" and 41", I believe), so you get a bit
more of a custom fit than the single-sized (40") Rocket.
My impressions of these bikes are tainted by my height (6'4"), so someone
of more normal stature may have an entirely different experience. If at all
possible, try to ride both bikes to see what appeals to you most. If the
Rocket feels compliant (make sure you try it over some rough roads--it's
possible that it may feel less jarring with the seat further forward than I
had it situated) and you're not put off by the higher BB, that bike would be
a great choice. It's certainly one of the true 'bent bargains out there at
under $1K (and the V-Rex is a bargain in its class). If you like the ride of
the V-Rex better, buy it! You'd hardly regret it (and if you ever did, the
V-Rex carries excellent resale value...)
> I'm selling a
> motorcycle to buy the bent, so if I really need to, I will have the bucks for
> a Rex, but would rather use the money saved (buying a Rocket) for other
> stuff...
> Derek
Well, Rans also sells a V-Rex framekit (frame, fork, headset, seat, idlers,
steering assembly), so if you're moderately proficient with bike assembly, a
bit of judicious selection from the mail-order catalogs will allow you to put
together something very nice (probably nicer than stock) for a something less
than complete-bike version of the V-Rex. I'm not sure of the current
framekit pricing, but it's certainly an option to consider (that's the way I
built my V-Rex). That's also an option with the Rocket, BTW, if you prefer
the ride of that bike (you could put together a "Super-Rocket").
Also, if you're after performance, you might also want to check into the
LWB bikes (unless you can't fit the length of the bike into your lifestyle!).
But LWB selection is another can of worms...
rocket...@my-dejanews.com
> Performance-wise, there's likely very little discernable difference between
> the Rocket and the V-Rex. The primary difference (IMHO) is likely going to be
> shock absorption and riding position
Thanks your words were very valuable and echoed posts I've read by other
riders and what I recall from my brief rides in November 98. Cheers!
Eric Geoffrey Vann
----------
In article <92374976...@news.remarQ.com>, "Littlebigfoot"
<freewh...@littlebigfoot.com> wrote:
> It's possible that the Rans bikes are not such a
> great engineering achievement after all. The P-38 is nearly tetrahedral,
> and is also a very light bike, 3 lbs lighter than the V-Rex. I assumed that
> most of the weight difference was in the seat and other components unique to
> Rans, as did Larry Black. Perhaps we were wrong.
My recumbent area members have been "plagued" with frame failures of P-38s.
Littlebigfoot
as I recall. Rans has a lifetime warranty. Were the failures at the welds,
or did the tubing buckle?
--
-Scott
freewh...@littlebigfoot.com
Remove "little" from email address to reply,
because I'm tired of being a target.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
Eric Geoffrey Vann <eric...@beezodogsplace.com> wrote in message
news:7f4vau$j...@chronicle.concentric.net...
HSherrod
>That's interesting. Thanks. Lightning has only a five year frame warranty,
>as I recall. Rans has a lifetime warranty.
The Rans "Lifetime Frame Warranty" that came with my VRex had the following
exclusions:
"This warranty does not cover damage resulting from abuse or accident. Frame
cracks are not covered.
I would rather have the Lightning five year warranty if it coveres frame
cracks than the Rans Lifetime warranty that dosen't. Lifetime warranty sounds
good but as someone else pointed out the devil is in the details.
JHarper905
>cracks are not covered.
So if Rans does not cover frame cracks what the hell would they
cover? If the tubing explodes they would cover it.
Really now, if you don't cover cracks what would you cover? Sounds like
a big load of crap to me! I have use the warranty on Raleigh bikes with a
broken fork blade.
Good thing I held out for the HPVelotechnik instead of the Tailwind or
V-Rex. BTW, I want a Lightning M5 bad!
John Harper
HSherrod
>
>>"This warranty does not cover damage resulting from abuse or accident.
>Frame
>>cracks are not covered.
>
> So if Rans does not cover frame cracks what the hell would they
>cover? If the tubing explodes they would cover it.
> Really now, if you don't cover cracks what would you cover?
Exactly my thoughts. However, I should point out that this was a 1995 Vrex
which I never had any problem with other than VERY soft paint. They may have
changed the warranty since then, but it left me dumbfounded in 1995 as to what
it could possibly cover.
Littlebigfoot
Yeah I can see the story now: "Man on bike hit by semi. Bike company
replaces frame. No warranty on skeletal structure of rider." I think that
a failed frame is a failed frame, and a cracked frame is a failed frame,
because it's a dangerous frame. Whether Rans says so explicitly or not the
civil court system would uphold their liability. But that does not sound
like a reasonable exception clause. The meaningful exception is that the
warranty only covers the original owner, and most people who buy bikes sell
or dispose of them within 7 years. From that perspective a 5 year warranty
is about as good as a lifetime warranty.
--
-Scott
freewh...@littlebigfoot.com
Remove "little" from email address to reply,
because I'm tired of being a target.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
HSherrod <hshe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990415184304...@ng-fp1.aol.com...
> > "Littlebigfoot" wrote:
> >That's interesting. Thanks. Lightning has only a five year frame
warranty,
> >as I recall. Rans has a lifetime warranty.
>
> The Rans "Lifetime Frame Warranty" that came with my VRex had the
following
> exclusions:
> "This warranty does not cover damage resulting from abuse or accident.
Frame
> cracks are not covered.
>
HSherrod
>I think that
>a failed frame is a failed frame, and a cracked frame is a failed frame,
>because it's a dangerous frame. Whether Rans says so explicitly or not the
>civil court system would uphold their liability. But that does not sound
>like a reasonable exception clause. The meaningful exception is that the
>warranty only covers the original owner, and most people who buy bikes sell
>or dispose of them within 7 years.
>From that perspective a 5 year warranty
>is about as good as a lifetime warranty.
I think you are exactly right. I my case I sold the Vrex after four years
effectively making it a four year warranty. My point, if there is one, is that
you can't assume that a Lifetime warranty is better than a three year or five
year warranty. All warranties are Limited warranties and you need to be aware
of the limitations and exclusions.
Brian Clark
and stick to my wedgies. No sense in buying a $2000 bike that the
manufacturer won't stand behind.
P.S. I have been riding my Schwinn Mountain bike for nine years so
far and no problems with frame or fork. Schwinn will cover cracked
frames if it was a manufacturing defect and not caused by rider
abuse,which means racing or acts of stupidity by the rider. Schwinn
almost went bankrupt a few years ago, so I'm not really sure what
"lifetime warranty" means, me or their company ?.
Littlebigfoot
I don't think the stipulation regarding "original owner" is any different
for wedgies. Even my Kreitler rollers have such a stipulation. If there is
a company that warrants their frames, or any products, for as long as they
stay out of the junkyard I haven't heard of them. I had a problem with
cracking of the "crosscut" layer on my Trek composite frame. The rep I
talked with said that this layer was considered part of the finish, not the
frame. But I talked with someone who actually manufactures composite
frames, and he said the crosscut layer is part of the structural integrity
of the frame, so strictly speaking I could probably make a stink with Trek.
I've decided it's probably not worth the trouble. I don't think the frame
is going to collapse on me as a result of that crack, which is the bottom
line.
In summary, don't give up on recumbents as a result of warranty issues. If
it comes down to it, buy the bike from a good LBS and whatever is not
covered by the manufacturer's warranty will be covered by the distributor.
This is certainly the case with Mt. Airy. No one who has a frame failure on
a P-38, purchased from them, is going to have to "eat it." This I have
directly from Larry Black.
--
-Scott
freewh...@littlebigfoot.com
Remove "little" from email address to reply,
because I'm tired of being a target.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
Brian Clark <Brian...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:29675-37...@newsd-284.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
JHarper905
This MTB will be rolling for many more years and has a lifetime warranty.
Life...yes after 11 years it is still under warranty. In 5 years my boys will
be beating the hell out of it like I have and still it is under warranty.
I have owned Raleigh cycles and they were under warranty for life also.
The problem with the 5 year warranty is if you have small boys around they want
to ride your bent when they get big enough. I think I will have my
HPVelotechnik for many years with minor upgrades over the next decade or so.
I would still have my Raleigh Super Course if my brothers did not throw it
away! I am sure someone spotted the Reynolds tubing sticker so it is probably
still tooling around Chicago.
In a couple of years Cannondale or Specialized should be making bents so
the warranty dispute should be mute.
John Harper
Brian Clark
early Cannondales had their frames improperly heat treated after welding
and you could actually see the warped tubes on the frames ?.