Nov 29, 2001 10:16 AM
|I've just hit the 1.5K mark on my Seven Odonata, which I took possession of during the last week of September. Now that isn't Doug Sloan-type mileage, but it's enough during a two-month time period to get a pretty good impression of the bike. The build-up is Seven/Wound Up fork; Record 10; Ritchey WCS bar and stem; Campy Moskva rims on Record hubs; CK headset; Axial Pro tires.
Here's the bottom line: it's light (16lb 10oz); it fits great (nothing aches or goes numb); it handles great; the quality -welds, finish, etc.- is great; the bb is nice and stiff.
b But I can't tell any significant performance difference between my bike and my friend's Serotta Legend, or my other friend's Litespeed Vortex.
Yeah, there are little differences, but not one thing that would make me say one is better than the other. It's not like comparing beer to wine to scotch, it's more like comparing Coke to Pepsi. While we all think that we can tell the difference, double-blind lab tests show that we can't with any level of consistency (and I have 30 years of road-riding experience on some pretty good bikes).
How do I feel about this? Mixed. I'm a little disappointed that the heavens didn't open and a choir of angels descend to carry me along in a mystical chariot, but I'm also very pleased that I have a bike of superb craftsmanship that fits me perfectly.
The only problem is that my bike lust has now been shifted from looking for the ultimate in all-purpose road performance to the ultimate in aesthetics. At least I don't have to pretend to be objective in that area.
|why would you expect a significant performance difference?||duh!|
Nov 29, 2001 10:34 AM
|Shhhhhh! You're ruining years of marketing!||js5280|
Nov 29, 2001 10:38 AM
|Another Truth. . .|
|Coke Vs Pepsi||Spokeman|
Nov 29, 2001 10:55 AM
|I love doing the blind taste testing at fairs and such. I can tell the difference every time.
Coke rules, Pepsi sucks.
|agreed (nm)||Indiana Rider|
Nov 29, 2001 11:10 AM
|Coke is VERY different from pepsi, let me tell you!||Pablo Escobar|
Nov 29, 2001 11:50 AM
Nov 29, 2001 12:20 PM
|that approximately 70% of participants cannot discriminate between Coke and Pepsi in blind taste tests, and an even greater percentage cannot consistently identify whether a sample is Coke or Pepsi.
And Consumer reports has demonstrated that 80% of respondents cannot tell decaffeinated coffee from regular.
They also note that nearly everyone insists that they
tell the difference...
(and the famous Pepsi Challenge has been widely debunked)
|if only the CIA thought like you do..................||Pablo Escobar|
Nov 29, 2001 12:47 PM
|All this proves...||mr_spin|
Nov 29, 2001 1:17 PM
|If 70% really can't tell, it just goes to show how little taste people have. It reminds me of those ads for some cheap wine: Wine so good, it comes in a box. That's a direct quote, as if that were something to be proud of.
I can tell the difference. I can't stand Pepsi, so I drink Coke. Believe me, I can tell the difference, although from a fountain, the difference is definitely more subtle.
The strange thing is that I can't stand Diet Coke, so I drink Diet Pepsi. The difference there is like night and day.
|Diet: Coke sucks. Non-diet: Pepsi sucks. (nm)||nn23|
Nov 29, 2001 7:42 PM
Nov 29, 2001 11:00 AM
|One need not justify why. Just do it!
(See example of this philosophy exercised with vigor.)
|Shouldn't be a surprise.||Leisure|
Nov 30, 2001 1:27 AM
|Even if we were talking about the Fisher Sugar versus that gorgeous Ellsworth up there, the (obvious) differences in feel would not translate much into different lap times. What you're really investing in is what feels right for you and lets you ride the way you want. Luckily, you're talking about elite Ti frames which are more like fine wines than soda taste tests (I'll have a Coke, thanx). You may not feel that way about it right now, but that's because you're discriminating and want the best. Don't worry, that initial mixed feeling will go away and that subtle acquired-taste thing will kick in and you'll never regret your purchase.|
|In defense of Seven||abykerman|
Nov 30, 2001 11:58 AM
|If you expected to be carried off in a "mystical chariot" when going with a custom then you were mistaken. However it's the little things that make the difference. I work for a frame builder and the biggest difference is frame alignment. I know that I'm gonna get razzed for this but Lightspeed is know as the Huffy of Ti bikes. Their frames are never true. I know of people who buy several frames before they find one that's true enough. They just keep buying and selling frames till they get a true one. Now that's not going to be something that you'll notice in a huge way but it's there, and so are the aches and pains that come with ridding something not true. Lightspeed does make some pretty decent bikes I'll give them that, but they aren't even in the same class as a custom. The money spent on a custom is well worth it. Knowing that you have a bike built by a craftsman who loves cycling is worth the money. Having a bike that was built to fit your body is worth it. Just about every pro out there rides a custom frame. Seven is one of the best built bikes in the world Period!|
|In defense of Seven||TJeanloz|
Nov 30, 2001 12:26 PM
|In defense of Litespeed. Part of my job at the bike shop was checking over new frames when they came in. This included checking alignment, whether they needed to be faced, and cosmetics. Of about 50 Litespeeds I checked, two were rejected. One had the BB shell milled incorrectly, one had the rear end welded on about 1mm too far to the left- it was just BARELY out, we debated whether or not it was bad enough to send back. If it were a Bianchi, we'd have kept it, but we expected more from Litespeed.
That being said, that is a reject rate of ~4%, which I think is astonishingly high. You are, however, comparing apples to oranges; a custom Litespeed (which, contrary to popular belief, is available) is every bit the bike that a custom Seven is. But in higher volume production, Litespeed does lose a little bit of QC.