| Re: capo
landotter wrote:
> qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> > Michie wrote:
> > > All of my cycling buddies are buying dem new Cannondale Capos for some
> > > reason.. "Why is Mike selling his Surley?" "Oh, he decided to buy a
> > > Capo." "Why did Johnny get rid of his Bianchi fixie?" "He sold it
> > > and bought a Capo." All the guys at the local Bike Doctor rave over
> > > them.. And yah know what, I've got my eyes on a shiny silver one,
> > > myself.. I'm amazed at how light they are, even with the stock
> > > components and brakes (not just on the front, but the back, too!" Some
> > > may say that's blasphemy, however.. (grin)
> >
> > 48/17-> BIG gear plus can ya put fenders on this thing? If not, bad
> > form, if yes, they ought to be standard.
>
> 48/17 on a bike that has no brakes and screams velodrome is one thing,
> but on a street ride with two brakes? That's just 'toopid. Agree on the
> fender issue. For $300 less you can get a Redline 925. Four pounds
> heavier, but ya get fenders and spec that basically makes the bike
> durable enough to be called an appliance. If I wanted to go light and
> fast, I'd go for a Pista with a front brake instead of the Capo. Only
> thing that stands out are the sweet high flange hubs. Those are
> certainly pretty.
Fenders capacity would be a negative for this bike. Appliance is not
the operative word here, rather accessory (as in fashion). It's for
folks who want to look like a bad-ass nutcase fixed riding messenger
without worrying about killing themselves. IMO it has as much
street-cred as a pair of fake workboots.
Joseph
|