*Nerd alert*

josame
josame Posts: 1,162
edited March 2008 in Pro race
I have just had a look at the TdF 1903-2003 Centenary book and by my reckoning
handlebar gear/brake shifters came in around 1993. How come Lance Armstrong still has a gear shifter on his frame in 2002 and possibly 2003.

Pic below
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/image ... osters.jpg

Told you it was nerdy...
'Do not compare your bike to others, for always there will be greater and lesser bikes'

Comments

  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    josame wrote:
    I have just had a look at the TdF 1903-2003 Centenary book and by my reckoning
    handlebar gear/brake shifters came in around 1993. How come Lance Armstrong still has a gear shifter on his frame in 2002 and possibly 2003.

    Pic below
    http://imagecache2.allposters.com/image ... osters.jpg

    Told you it was nerdy...

    Weight.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • redddraggon
    redddraggon Posts: 10,862
    As Iain says, it's weight.

    LA still had rear derailler STIs but downtube shifters for Front mech. You don't need to do much shifting from big ring to little ring, so LA used a downtube shifter instead of STIs. I believe Pantani also used a Downtube shifter after the introduction of Ergos.
    I like bikes...

    Twitter
    Flickr
  • shockedsoshocked
    shockedsoshocked Posts: 4,021
    Didn't Indurain still use downtube shifters for a bit after STIs were introduced aswell because of the weight issue?
    "A cyclist has nothing to lose but his chain"

    PTP Runner Up 2015
  • LangerDan
    LangerDan Posts: 6,132
    Its also possible to achieve better trimming of the front derailleur position with the down-tube lever, particularly when using wide gearing on lightweight, flexible frames.
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • drenkrom
    drenkrom Posts: 1,062
    I remember reading something where he said it was for the trimming control.
  • Salsiccia
    Salsiccia Posts: 405
    He'd have had no problems with that if he'd been on Campag...

    *ducks for cover*
    I was only joking when I said
    by rights you should be bludgeoned in your bed
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    First winner of the Tour to ride Shimano...

    When will we have an SRAM winner?
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • redvee
    redvee Posts: 11,922
    Thought it was weight when in the mountain stages. RH STI, LH D/Tube.
    I've added a signature to prove it is still possible.
  • campagone
    campagone Posts: 270
    Isn't there a UCI weight limit which applies to all bikes? 6 point something kilos? therefore there wouldn't be a weight advantage would there :wink:
  • skut
    skut Posts: 371
    it was used in the montain stages only - and even then not all of them. To stop the chain jumping off the ring when changing rings...
  • redddraggon
    redddraggon Posts: 10,862
    campagone wrote:
    Isn't there a UCI weight limit which applies to all bikes? 6 point something kilos? therefore there wouldn't be a weight advantage would there :wink:

    There never used to be, the min weight things is rather recent.
    I like bikes...

    Twitter
    Flickr
  • celbianchi
    celbianchi Posts: 854
    redddraggon wrote:
    campagone wrote:
    Isn't there a UCI weight limit which applies to all bikes? 6 point something kilos? therefore there wouldn't be a weight advantage would there :wink:

    There never used to be, the min weight things is rather recent.

    Would have applied to LA though as it was passed in 2000 at 6.8kg. OP mentions the 2002 and 2003 TDF's.
  • redddraggon
    redddraggon Posts: 10,862
    celbianchi wrote:
    redddraggon wrote:
    campagone wrote:
    Isn't there a UCI weight limit which applies to all bikes? 6 point something kilos? therefore there wouldn't be a weight advantage would there :wink:

    There never used to be, the min weight things is rather recent.

    Would have applied to LA though as it was passed in 2000 at 6.8kg. OP mentions the 2002 and 2003 TDF's.

    Oh right, I thought it was later than that.
    I like bikes...

    Twitter
    Flickr
  • celbianchi
    celbianchi Posts: 854
    redddraggon wrote:
    celbianchi wrote:
    redddraggon wrote:
    campagone wrote:
    Isn't there a UCI weight limit which applies to all bikes? 6 point something kilos? therefore there wouldn't be a weight advantage would there :wink:

    There never used to be, the min weight things is rather recent.

    Would have applied to LA though as it was passed in 2000 at 6.8kg. OP mentions the 2002 and 2003 TDF's.

    Oh right, I thought it was later than that.

    Scary how time flies isn't it. If I'd have had to guess I'd ahve put it later as well.
  • andy_wrx
    andy_wrx Posts: 3,396
    Interesting that in those days they did want to save weight and get down to the minimum.

    These days bikes are so easily under the min they have to ballast-up - and sometimes they mess-up and the bike's underweight

    - whose time-trial bike was weighed last year underweight at the start of a prologue or TT, so they frantically fitted a bottlecage and full bottle just to get it up to the min ?

Categories