From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Subject: Re: top five innovations
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 92 22:00:39 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Sep3.194251.8768@hpcvusn.cv.hp.com> harry@cv.hp.com (Harry Phinney) writes:
>
>There's no need to infer what statistics were used in the development.
>Their research was published in Bike Tech Volume 2, Number 4 dated
>August, 1983.

That's interesting, but doesn't negate other articles.Especially when
additional information available from interviews was present. I believe
the articel in Bicycling (But who knows -- maybe it was Cycling or BG)
mentioned the lower cadence that Dr. Okajima used.
 
>Is it not deceptive to claim a significant performance enhancement for a
>product which does not in fact provide such an enhancement?

Harry sometimes you reach for these things, don't you? Is this any more
a deceptive practice than for Continental to stress in many adds that
they have won so many world championship medals or Olympic medals? 

If you have trouble with advertising claims you are in the wrong country.

>No, it's not an implication, nor is it a fact.  It is an opinion which
>you hold, and nothing more.

After you write that joint loading appear to be lower in the tests
documented, you claim that it is _opinion_ that Biopace has any
effect on performance?
>
>I like a lot of Shimano's products, and will admit that they make some
>of the best parts around.  They also have produced some of the worst
>junk ever pushed on otherwise ignorant consumers.

Perhaps you can tell us another giant company that hasn't had failures?
Ford Motor Company? Remember the Sargeant York antiaircraft weapon (NOT)?
Honda Motors? Several failures due to faulty market research.
General Dynamics? Space shuttle Challenger ring a bell?
Campangnolo? Comeon now!

If you're looking for perfection in business of any kind, you're on the
wrong  _planet_.

Harry, when did you reach perfection? What do you do that is so
perfect that you can critisize a company that has almost single-
handedly redesigned an entire industry? Without Shimano, mountain
bikes would never have become what they are. Shimano has brought
out innovation after innovation and while some have been real
duds, it's pretty difficult to argue with improved braking systems,
accurate index shifting, mass produced cold forgings, STI, hyperglide and
even Biopace (-- I'msure you have noted several writers talking
about their preference for Biopace.)

Shimano is a commercial company and they are only worth their next
hit component or are only as worthless as their next flop. I
get good components, with superior performance, at lower prices
than from any other manufacturer in the world. As long as that
is happening I can afford to like Shimano. When they start
building complete crap I'll switch, but I'm not planning on it.


  Have you ever (tried
>to) worked on a FFS (Front Freewheel System) bike?  Have you ever tried
>to make a Positron derailleur "index"?  Tried to get brake pads for your
>AX equipment lately?  While screwing people is undoubtably not high on
>their list of priorities, they've none the less managed to do so many
>times.
>
>Harry Phinney   harry@hp-pcd.cv.hp.com


Newsgroups: rec.bicycles