Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site varian.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!zehntel!zinfandel!varian!fred
From: fred@varian.UUCP (Fred Klink)
Newsgroups: net.bicycle
Subject: Re: Cannondale frame quality
Message-ID: <379@varian.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-Oct-85 14:48:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: varian.379
Posted: Thu Oct  3 14:48:31 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 7-Oct-85 05:49:06 EDT
References: <285@ncr-sd.UUCP> <4200025@uiucdcsp> <246@tekchips.UUCP>
Organization: Varian, Walnut Creek, CA
Lines: 33

> >Buying a bicycle: Cannondale have the best frames (except for
> >Gary Klein's frames); also look at Bridgestone bicycles.
> >
> >Is that why Cannondale's recalling their forks? 
> 
> I missed something.  What does the quality of a frame made by
> Cannondale have to do with the quality of a fork supplied by a
> Japanese manufacturer? Cannondale is recalling some of its Chromoly
> forks, but even the ones it isn't recalling are steel forks on
> aluminum frames, and there is simply no need for Cannondale to
> manufacture them itself. Even if Cannondale did a poor job of
> selecting somebody else's forks, that still is not necesarily a
> reflection on the quality of its frames.

You can use that argument to justify alot of bad judgement (not
necessarily bad engineering).  Nearly every manufacturing operation
buys "parts" at some level and assembles them.  If Cannondale chose
a dubious fork it begs the question of what other bad choices they
made along the way.  The quality of the product is the quality of the
finished system's function.  Also, why is there "no need for Cannondale
to manufacture them itself" when nearly every other top quality framemaker
manufactures their own forks with the same care they put into the
rest of the frame?

The thing to keep in mind is the original posting's unqualified statement
that Cannondale make the "best frames"-- no mention of best value,
best component selection, intended use, etc.
To post on this net that anything is the "best" in response to a 
request for information is irresponsible.  I think its important
that any claim of that sort be followed up with a critical response.
A responsible posting would say "in my opinion ------- is the best
--------- for use by riders who are (tourists, racers, communters).
I have used them for 'n' years with (no problems, only these problems...)"