FREEWHEELS .....

Sheldon Brown said:

Tom Ace said:

Quoted message said:

>Reminds me of Jobst Brandt saying that there's no rational reason to buy a manual shift car
>instead of an automatic nowadays, and that it's juvenile to prefer a stickshift.

That would be an ignorant statement, so I'm sure he didn't say that.

In this group, Jobst has said there's no longer any good reason to buy a manual car, and that
people want them because of irrational desires for a feeling of control, or because of juvenile
notions of machismo. Do a google search and see for yourself.

Gee, I missed that.

Something else where Jobst and I are in basic agreement, though I wouldn't care to characterize
the reasons that some folks prefer this atavistic apparatus.

Manual shifting cars are cheaper and get better fuel economy with a concientious driver. I use
"manual" for those reasons. I wonder if they may be more reliable. Brandt likes to editorialize when
he thinks he's onto some abstruse sociological phenomena -- "machismo" seems to be one of his
favorite fantasies. It's funny, and he's a decent writer, so I make a point of reading them
(postings).

JP,

You hit the nail on the head. I have a mostly-Italian bike and I would like to keep it somewhat
authentic as I upgrade it. I have no intention of accepting inferior performance though. I'm
guessing that Campagnola derailleurs, cranks, & chainrings are not inferior to Shimano and I might
pay a small price premium. Regarding freewheels, my Campy choices are non-existant and Regina or
Gipieme choices are few. I'm not going to put Nissan parts on my BMW, even if they are slightly
superior and a touch cheaper. Aesthetics are also a factor. So is anal-retentiveness. If I had an
Ultegra outfitted bike, I would try for replacements/upgrades solely in the Ultegra or Dura-Ace
group, while "Sora wouldn't even be an option for me". It makes sense in my world.

What is funny is the number of responses that one innocuous remark elicited. OTOH, the responses
have been somewhat mild and even courteous compared to some other newsgroups I've witnessed.

Jerry Cipriano
-----------------------------------

JP said:

Tom Ace <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Maybe the basis isn't rational. That doesn't necessarily make it goofy or prejudicial.

The man has an all-Italian bike and wants to keep it that way. That's not irrational, it's just
that performance/cost is not the paramount decision factor.

Quoted message said:

Reminds me of Jobst Brandt saying that there's no rational reason to buy a manual shift car
instead of an automatic nowadays, and that it's juvenile to prefer a stickshift.

That would be an ignorant statement, so I'm sure he didn't say that.

Quoted message said:

I agree with Sheldon that Shimano-bashing is often based on misinformation and/or prejudice. But
there are other possible reasons (e.g., aesthetic ones) for preferring one brand over another.

Aesthetics are not an irrational factor. Buying _poorly funtioning_ Italian equipment because his
mother was Italian would be an example of irrationality.

JP

"Jerry C." <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

JP,

You hit the nail on the head. I have a mostly-Italian bike and I would like to keep it somewhat
authentic as I upgrade it. I have no intention of accepting inferior performance though. I'm
guessing that Campagnola derailleurs, cranks, & chainrings are not inferior to Shimano and I might
pay a small price premium. Regarding freewheels, my Campy choices are non-existant and Regina or
Gipieme choices are few. I'm not going to put Nissan parts on my BMW, even if they are slightly
superior and a touch cheaper. Aesthetics are also a factor. So is anal-retentiveness. If I had an
Ultegra outfitted bike, I would try for replacements/upgrades solely in the Ultegra or Dura-Ace
group, while "Sora wouldn't even be an option for me". It makes sense in my world.

What is funny is the number of responses that one innocuous remark elicited. OTOH, the responses
have been somewhat mild and even courteous compared to some other newsgroups I've witnessed.

What I think is funny is your puristic aesthetic. I pride myself on being smart enough to use what
works for my purposes regardless of the label. I see examples all the time of guys who would rather
not ride, and search the ends of the earth for the correct name-brand, when offered a brand mismatch
that would otherwise have them rolling. Now, if this was a restoration of a valuable collectors bike
I could understand ...

--
Robin Hubert <[email hidden]

Jerry C. said:

You hit the nail on the head. I have a mostly-Italian bike and I would like to keep it somewhat
authentic as I upgrade it. I have no intention of accepting inferior performance though.

I know how you feel. I have three "mostly-Italian" 1970's bikes and feel the same way. However, the
first of these "mostly-Italian" bikes is an original Schwinn Paramount P-15 / 1974. As stock
equipment this bicycle came with a Shimano Crane Derailleur and a suntour pro-compe gold freewheel.

From about 1960 until about 1980, campagnolo did not do much in the way of innovation. In that
period campy rested and was mostly a marketing company. About the only thing they produced was a set
of sidepull brakes. Suntour filled that technical vacuum from japan, producing beautiful products
and revolutionizing geartrains, first with the slant-parallelogram derailleur patents, and later
with ultra 6 and ultra 7 derailleurs.

They started something that campy is still finishing today (if you think about it, campy sells an
"ultra ultra ultra-10" gear system.) If I traveled into the past with a chorus bicycle, labels
removed, the inhabitants of 1970 would assume that it had a suntour drivetrain. imitation is the
most sincere form of flattery.

So, i would suggest you might want to get a collectable suntour ultra freewheel for your italian
bicycle. The quality is unsurpassed by the european brands, and you can add 2 more gears to your
classic bicycle without molesting the rear triangle.

- Don Gillies San Diego, CA

Robin Hubert said:

What I think is funny is your puristic aesthetic. I pride myself on being smart enough to use what
works for my purposes regardless of the label. I see examples all the time of guys who would
rather not ride, and search the ends of the earth for the correct name-brand, when offered a brand
mismatch that would otherwise have them rolling. Now, if this was a restoration of a valuable
collectors bike I could understand ...

My first job out of school was selling hi-fi equipment. In 1963, the big names in semi-high-end
audio electronics were Scott and Fisher. The word on the street was that they were both excellent
products, but that Scott had a slight edge in tuners, while Fisher amplifiers were a wee bit better
than Scott.

To me this made it obvious that the way to go was to get a Scott 340b tuner and I forget which
Fisher amp, but I was always amazed at the number of folks who would rather not mix brands, although
there was no technical compatibility issue whatever.

Sheldon "Picking And Choosing" Brown +-------------------------------------------+
| Genius may have its limitations, | but stupidity is not thus handicapped. | --Elbert Hubbard |
+-------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

Apparently there are those that don't respect my decision to try to go with mostly Campy components.
Why is it that some feel I must choose what they would choose or otherwise I'm deserving of
criticism? Is it necessary that we all choose a Mac rather than Windows or vice-versa?

Robin, I am "smart enough" to use what works for my purposes, and the Campy components I'm talking
about happen to work. Are you saying the Campy components won't work well or are noticeably inferior
to less expensive Shimano components? Did I say that I "would rather not ride"? I am also "smart
enough" to not throw that "smart enough" innuendo at others who simply may choose to go with a
different mixture of parts. Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?

Sheldon, I also have been into audio since the 60's when I built my first Dynaco amp and tuner. I
don't remember the first brand of speakers I got. The second pair was KLH. I think I had a Dual
turntable. I regard the audio equipment analogy as irrelevant to my bike, unless it is a different
person involved with a different outlook. I could make food comparisons to bolster my position also,
e.g. I don't prefer Mexican, Hawaiian or Greek pizza toppings, nor cheddar or sundried-tomato
bagels. However, food comparisons are also irrelevant. What is relevant is that which is important
to me and makes me happy. Sheldon, I was respectful to you in my previous posts, so I'm wondering
why you're still snipping at my intentions.

Jerry Cipriano
-----------------------------------

Sheldon Brown said:

Robin Hubert said:

What I think is funny is your puristic aesthetic. I pride myself on being smart enough to use
what works for my purposes regardless of the label. I see examples all the time of guys who would
rather not ride, and search the ends of the earth for the correct name-brand, when offered a
brand mismatch that would otherwise have them rolling. Now, if this was a restoration of a
valuable collectors bike I could understand ...

My first job out of school was selling hi-fi equipment. In 1963, the big names in semi-high-end
audio electronics were Scott and Fisher. The word on the street was that they were both excellent
products, but that Scott had a slight edge in tuners, while Fisher amplifiers were a wee bit
better than Scott.

To me this made it obvious that the way to go was to get a Scott 340b tuner and I forget which
Fisher amp, but I was always amazed at the number of folks who would rather not mix brands,
although there was no technical compatibility issue whatever.

Sheldon Brown

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Jerry C.
Apparently there are those that don't respect my decision to try to go with mostly Campy components.
Why is it that some feel I must choose what they would choose or otherwise I'm deserving of
criticism? Is it necessary that we all choose a Mac rather than Windows or vice-versa?

<huge snip>

Hey Jerry, you said "A Shimano derailleur is simply not an option for me." The fact is that Shimano IS an option but you don't want it for your own personal reasons and you're entitled to them. If you had simply said "I want a Campagnolo derailleur" you wouldn't have created this mess and you probably would have only gotten two or three flame posts for your ridiculous prejudices <BEG>.

David, I'm not wrong as you say if you read my whole sentence, which includes "... for me".
Enough already.

Jerry C.
---------------------------------------------------------

David Damerell said:

In article said:

David Damerell said:

Of course it's silly. You said "A Shimano derailleur is simply not an option for me." This is
manifestly untrue, unless you're chained to a pillar in Campy's head office (in which case, why
do you need a bicycle?)

David, since I am not "chained to a pillar in Campy's head office", and since the Shimano
componentry is not an option for me on my current bike, then what I said is not "manifestly
untrue" nor is it "silly".

Don't top-post, it gives you crabs.

Perhaps you believe that a Shimano derailleur is not an option. You're wrong.

Ah, mate, "snipping" is part of the atmosphere! I didn't mean to offend. Just spirited discourse.
Don't take it all personally! Your attitude reminded me of this type, upon which I reflected. If
you'd relax, you might find humility enjoyable.

--
Robin Hubert <[email hidden]>

"Jerry C." <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Apparently there are those that don't respect my decision to try to go with mostly Campy
components. Why is it that some feel I must choose what they would choose or otherwise I'm
deserving of criticism? Is it necessary that we all choose a Mac rather than Windows or
vice-versa?

Robin, I am "smart enough" to use what works for my purposes, and the Campy components I'm talking
about happen to work. Are you saying the Campy components won't work well or are noticeably
inferior to less expensive Shimano components? Did I say that I "would rather not ride"? I am also
"smart enough" to not throw that "smart enough" innuendo at others who simply may choose to go
with a different mixture of parts. Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?

Sheldon, I also have been into audio since the 60's when I built my first Dynaco amp and tuner. I
don't remember the first brand of speakers I got. The second pair was KLH. I think I had a Dual
turntable. I regard the audio equipment analogy as irrelevant to my bike, unless it is a different
person involved with a different outlook. I could make food comparisons to bolster my position
also, e.g. I don't prefer Mexican, Hawaiian or Greek pizza toppings, nor cheddar or
sundried-tomato bagels. However, food comparisons are also irrelevant. What is relevant is that
which is important to me and makes me happy. Sheldon, I was respectful to you in my previous
posts, so I'm wondering why you're still snipping at my intentions.

Jerry Cipriano
-----------------------------------

Sheldon Brown said:

Robin Hubert said:

What I think is funny is your puristic aesthetic. I pride myself on being smart enough to use
what works for my purposes regardless of the label. I see examples all the time of guys who
would rather not ride, and search the ends of the earth for the correct name-brand, when
offered a brand mismatch that would otherwise have them rolling. Now, if this was a restoration
of a valuable collectors bike I could understand ...

My first job out of school was selling hi-fi equipment. In 1963, the big names in semi-high-end
audio electronics were Scott and Fisher. The word on the street was that they were both
excellent products, but that Scott had a slight edge in tuners, while Fisher amplifiers were a
wee bit better than Scott.

To me this made it obvious that the way to go was to get a Scott 340b tuner and I forget which
Fisher amp, but I was always amazed at the number of folks who would rather not mix brands,
although there was no technical compatibility issue whatever.

Sheldon Brown

Jerry C. said:

Sheldon, I also have been into audio since the 60's when I built my first Dynaco amp and tuner. I
don't remember the first brand of speakers I got. The second pair was KLH. I think I had a Dual
turntable. I regard the audio equipment analogy as irrelevant to my bike, unless it is a different
person involved with a different outlook. I could make food comparisons to bolster my position
also, e.g. I don't prefer Mexican, Hawaiian or Greek pizza toppings, nor cheddar or
sundried-tomato bagels. However, food comparisons are also irrelevant. What is relevant is that
which is important to me and makes me happy. Sheldon, I was respectful to you in my previous
posts, so I'm wondering why you're still snipping at my intentions.

I wasn't, I was addressing the more general issue of the idea of choosing components based on brand
marketing as opposed to by function. I certainly intended no disrespect.

Since the Scott and Fisher components were just as compatible as your friction based system is with
any modern rear derailer, I believe it was an apposite analogy.

As to your specific case, I seem to recall that you wound up buying a Veloce rear derailer, which is
a fine choice. I didn't specifically recommend that because of cost issues.

I wouldn't make any claim that any particular Shimano derailer is better than your new Veloce.

I would assert that _any_ modern derailer from _any_ manufacturer is functionally better than your
old Nuovo Record, pretty though it may be. Technology has marched on.

Nobody disputes your choice of Campagnolo equipment, but it is of some interest to some of us
whether it is caused by a fondness for Campagnolo, or by a dislike for Shimano.

Your original posting suggested the latter, and I'm curious as to what might your beef be
with Shimano.

Sheldon "Good Stuff Is Good Stuff" Brown
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. |
| Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts
shipped Worldwide captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

Scott,

Why do you post your "ridiculous prejudices" here? Why don't you understand that I am the only
person that can define what is an option for me? Why do you post on the internet when your limited
vocabulary is reflected by words such as "doohickey" and "gonfleur thingy" (in other posts)? To be
quite frank, you are not qualified to suggest alternate phrasing for my posts or anybody elses until
you demonstrate some conceptual understanding. Apparently you are not embarrassable.

Jerry Cipriano
------------------------------

DiabloScott said:

Quoted message said:

Hey Jerry, you said "A Shimano derailleur is simply not an option for
me." The fact is that Shimano IS an option but you don't want it for your own personal reasons
and you're entitled to them.

That means IT IS NOT AN OPTION "FOR ME", get it!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you had simply said "I want a Campagnolo derailleur" you wouldn't have created this mess

"This mess" is propagated by POOR READING/UNDERSTANDING SKILLS and anal-retentive tendencies in many
respondents, both of which you are now demonstrating.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and you probably would have only gotten two or three flame posts for your ridiculous
prejudices <BEG>.

Check out my bike blog!

WHY? Your self-absorption is only of interest to you. There is no sign of intelligent life there.

Sheldon,

I always thought that you didn't INTEND any disrespect, but constantly second-guessing and
criticising shows disrespect just the same. I have already made it clear in previous posts what my
preferences/intentions are, but you indicate below that you still don't understand where I'm coming
from. Ergo, I will clarify.

I have no dislike for Shimano and would invest in either 105 or Ultegra if I had to choose a Shimano
derailleur, crankset, or rear wheel/cassette (an option I didn't previously discuss with you).
However, I do have a preference for Campy, a preference for tradition, and an aesthetic preference
for as much consistency of components as possible and affordable. My bike is an Italian frame with
mostly Italian components, and most of them are Campy. My aesthetic preference is not a panoply of
disparate pieces that happen to work well together .... unless that is the only alternative. Since
that is NOT the only alternative, it is not an option FOR ME. "It is not an option for me" has a
different meaning than "It is not an option". You are not alone in failing to understand this.

You wrote below: "it is of some interest to some of us whether it is caused by a fondness for
Campagnolo, or by a dislike for Shimano." I am concerned about our society if that's what people are
concerned about. That pales in significance next to topics such as universal employment, a national
health care system, election reform, and legitimate justification of military invasions.

Actually, I haven't purchased the Veloce yet because my LBS has prices approximately 40-50% higher
than many shops represented here in this newsgroup. I aim to also get a 7sp 13-28 freewheel, but the
closest I've found (excepting a $90 Suntour) is the Shimano 14-28. If you know of a recommendable
and reasonably-priced 7sp 13-28, I would welcome your suggestion.

On a different subject, you mentioned "why is top posting frowned upon?" Someone else in RBT
mentioned a similar sentiment. However, it is incorrect to assume that one or the other is an
accepted standard. I have read in many newsgroups many posts proclaiming either top posting or
bottom posting as preferable and the accepted standard. Both sides have their own advantages and
disadvantages. I DO NOT TAKE A POSITION EITHER WAY. It is really not that important. I can read
either way easily. The only thing I have difficulty with is when three writers have their posts
interspersed. Additionally, I've seen criticisms for reposting 2 and 3 generations of original
messages. There is no limit to what may be criticised. That is unfortunate and reflects a prevalence
of poor understanding, poor manners, and intolerance.

Jerry Cipriano
----------------------------------------

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Jerry C. first wrote:

<snip> Sheldon, I was respectful to you in my previous posts, so I'm wondering why you're still
snipping at my intentions.

Sheldon Brown replied:

Quoted message said:

I wasn't, I was addressing the more general issue of the idea of choosing components based on
brand marketing as opposed to by function. I certainly intended no disrespect.

Since the Scott and Fisher components were just as compatible as your friction based system is
with any modern rear derailer, I believe it was an apposite analogy.

As to your specific case, I seem to recall that you wound up buying a Veloce rear derailer, which
is a fine choice. I didn't specifically recommend that because of cost issues.

I wouldn't make any claim that any particular Shimano derailer is better than your new Veloce.

I would assert that _any_ modern derailer from _any_ manufacturer is functionally better than
your old Nuovo Record, pretty though it may be. Technology has marched on.

Nobody disputes your choice of Campagnolo equipment, but it is of some interest to some of us
whether it is caused by a fondness for Campagnolo, or by a dislike for Shimano.

Your original posting suggested the latter, and I'm curious as to what might your beef be with
Shimano.

Sheldon "Good Stuff Is Good Stuff" Brown
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. |
| Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts
shipped Worldwide captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

In article said:

Why do you post your "ridiculous prejudices" here? Why don't you understand that I am the only
person that can define what is an option for me?

Because that's not true? Anyone who is reasonably technically competent can see what is an option.
"for me" remains a meaningless addendum - we never though the derailleur was for your Aunt Maria.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Kill the tomato!

Jerry C. said:

However, I do have a preference for Campy, a preference for tradition,

... except the tradition of using whatever works, which is well over a hundred years old...

Quoted message said:

Italian components, and most of them are Campy. My aesthetic preference is not a panoply of
disparate pieces that happen to work well together .... unless that is the only alternative. Since
that is NOT the only alternative, it is not an option FOR ME.

It is an option FOR YOU. You have the money to purchase a Shimano derailleur and have it fitted, and
if you did that it would shift the gears. What you mean is that you don't want one. That's fair
enough, but it's an option.

"It is not an option" (append "for me" if you like, although those words is clearly entirely
superfluous - who else would you be talking about?) means something entirely different. A 32mm front
tyre is not an option (for me) because it won't fit in the front forks - that's meaningful.

Quoted message said:

You wrote below: "it is of some interest to some of us whether it is caused by a fondness for
Campagnolo, or by a dislike for Shimano." I am concerned about our society if that's what people
are concerned about. That pales in significance next to topics such as universal employment,

Don't be an idiot. This is a bicycle tech newsgroup. What do you expect people to talk about?

Top posting still gives you crabs. Don't do it!
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Kill the tomato!

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

Why do you post your "ridiculous prejudices" here? Why don't you understand that I am the only
person that can define what is an option for me?

Because that's not true? Anyone who is reasonably technically competent can see what is an option.
"for me" remains a meaningless addendum - we never though the derailleur was for your Aunt Maria.

The guy was referring to aesthetic considerations, which are (obviously) subjective. The "for me",
which you seem to find objectionably gratuitous, was merely a qualifier emphasizing the
subjectiveness, in case there was any confusion. You seem to remain confused (and cranky) despite
the hint, missing and diss'ing at the same time, if you will.

In article <[email hidden]>, Jerry C. <[email hidden]> wrote: [A whole pile
of blather.]

As a public service I will now summarise the remaining posts from this clown. This serves a dual
function - people who are bored of mocking him will know how the thread turns out, and he can use it
as a handy crib sheet for his own posts.

He will continue to defend the words "for me", as if he could possibly have meant anything else.
Somehow the fact that everyone else reading those words took them to mean the same thing will
continue to be a problem with their understanding, not with poor phrasing.

He won't attempt to provide any rational explanation for the fact that he'd rather buy a new bike
than use a Shimano derailleur - in fact, he's probably hoping we've forgotten about that. If
challenged directly on it, he may even deny he said it.

He'll ramp up the abuse. Our understanding and reading comprehension will be repeatedly insulted; I
think one "anal-retentive" has already been spotted, and no doubt there are more to come. The appeal
to irrelevant outside issues worked well with "DiabloScott" and his bike blog, so we'll probably see
that again - with any luck, he'll spot _my_ idiot magnet and try and make something of it. People
will continue to show disrespect, but to be frank this is perfectly accurate by now and hence not
per se abusive.

Top-posting will prove a fertile source of frothing, but you can refer to the earlier thread for
examples of how that will work out. People with opinions about posting style will be labelled with
increasingly nasty terms, but I think the odds are against an out-and-out Godwin. Really this is
going to be about pointing out how free-thinking and tolerant he is (except when it comes to
derailleur manufacturers) when compared to his opponents.

The dismissal of the issue as unimportant next to world hunger, or whatever, will probably continue.
We will all be petty small-minded fools for continuing to discuss bicycle tech on a bicycle tech
newsgroup - he, of course, can continue to discuss it without any such problems.

The eventual outcome will be pure kook cliche. "All these people think I'm an idiot - what is
_wrong_ with them?"
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Kill the tomato!

Peter Cole said:

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

He'll ramp up the abuse. Our understanding and reading comprehension will be repeatedly insulted;
I think one "anal-retentive" has already been spotted, and no doubt there are more to come.

The "anal-retentive" term was used to describe himself.

He said;

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"This mess" is propagated by POOR READING/UNDERSTANDING SKILLS and anal-retentive tendencies in
many respondents,

I don't think so.

This is a neat sample of what we can expect as the froth level approaches danger;

"I know that you are always lurking because you have no other life and your nature is governed by
arrogance, ignorance and apparently frustration with personal failure. Your venting below of
misplaced hatred is a perfect example of your pathology. Ergo, I didn't and don't seek your poison."

Since he doesn't seem to have a very varied style, I eagerly await "poison", "pathology", "hatred"
and "venting" making appearances here.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Kill the tomato!

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Peter Cole said:

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

He'll ramp up the abuse. Our understanding and reading comprehension will be repeatedly
insulted; I think one "anal-retentive" has already been spotted, and no doubt there are more
to come.

The "anal-retentive" term was used to describe himself.

He said;

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>"This mess" is propagated by POOR READING/UNDERSTANDING SKILLS and anal-retentive tendencies in
>many respondents,

I don't think so.

OK, I didn't see that (I thought I read the whole tedious thread), what I saw was:

"Jerry C." <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
* JP, *
* You hit the nail on the head. I have a mostly-Italian bike and I would
* like to keep it somewhat authentic as I upgrade it. I have no intention
* of accepting inferior performance though. I'm guessing that Campagnola
* derailleurs, cranks, & chainrings are not inferior to Shimano and I
* might pay a small price premium. Regarding freewheels, my Campy choices
* are non-existant and Regina or Gipieme choices are few. I'm not going to
* put Nissan parts on my BMW, even if they are slightly superior and a
* touch cheaper. Aesthetics are also a factor. So is anal-retentiveness.

Quoted message said:

This is a neat sample of what we can expect as the froth level approaches danger;

"I know that you are always lurking because you have no other life and your nature is governed by
arrogance, ignorance and apparently frustration with personal failure. Your venting below of
misplaced hatred is a perfect example of your pathology. Ergo, I didn't and don't seek your
poison."

Since he doesn't seem to have a very varied style, I eagerly await "poison", "pathology", "hatred"
and "venting" making appearances here.

OK, I guess that wasn't part of this thread?? A pre-emptive strike on your part?

It's funny that some people are defending Shimano when Shimano was not attacked. You too fail to
understand this.

Additionally, I have lurked for a long time and read many of Q.S.P.C.'s posts (Peter C.). I find
them interesting and helpful, but not angry. He performs a service, as do many others such as Andrew
Muzi and Sheldon Brown. Sheldon's cranky reply to me can be overlooked for his intention was good
and he performs a great service to the bike community. OTOH, there are critics that don't contribute
anything and merely complain and infest this newsgroup. Frequently (but not always) they hide behind
the skirt of an anonymous pseudonym. Guess where you fit in.

Jerry C.
-----------------------------------

Precious Pup said:

There is no reason to attack Shimano. Why is Q.S.P.C. angry?

Q.S.P.C. is forever [censored] because he thinks he's entitled to sell Shimano stuff at some given
price/markup. Other Shimano supply chains undercut him and he thinks someone owes him
something or that he has an entitlement to make a living running a bike shop. So he
whines about it in rbt time after time after time. If you enjoy whining, by all means
throw the dog a bone.

Don,

I'm going to more modern Campy components, but what you said is interesting. I currently have a 6
speed, but I can fit a 7 speed into my 126mm space (I forget the correct technical term for that
space). Are you saying that a vintage Suntour 8 or 10 speed would fit in 126mm?

Jerry C.
--------------------------------------------------

Donald Gillies said:

Jerry C. said:

You hit the nail on the head. I have a mostly-Italian bike and I would like to keep it somewhat
authentic as I upgrade it. I have no intention of accepting inferior performance though.

I know how you feel. I have three "mostly-Italian" 1970's bikes and feel the same way. However,
the first of these "mostly-Italian" bikes is an original Schwinn Paramount P-15 / 1974. As stock
equipment this bicycle came with a Shimano Crane Derailleur and a suntour pro-compe gold
freewheel.

From about 1960 until about 1980, campagnolo did not do much in the way of innovation. In that
period campy rested and was mostly a marketing company. About the only thing they produced was a
set of sidepull brakes. Suntour filled that technical vacuum from japan, producing beautiful
products and revolutionizing geartrains, first with the slant-parallelogram derailleur patents,
and later with ultra 6 and ultra 7 derailleurs.

They started something that campy is still finishing today (if you think about it, campy sells an
"ultra ultra ultra-10" gear system.) If I traveled into the past with a chorus bicycle, labels
removed, the inhabitants of 1970 would assume that it had a suntour drivetrain. imitation is the
most sincere form of flattery.

So, i would suggest you might want to get a collectable suntour ultra freewheel for your italian
bicycle. The quality is unsurpassed by the european brands, and you can add 2 more gears to your
classic bicycle without molesting the rear triangle.

- Don Gillies San Diego, CA