rpenmanparker 

Harsh!

jamesdak 

Yep, heck the Bikewagon is local too me yet every time I researched these I just couldn't find enough redeeming reasons to get one even at the dirt cheap prices. But to each their own.

joejack951

Perhaps I shouldn't have said 'most' because when I think about it, that statement isn't true. That said, the discerning buyer, which hopefully includes many/all $1000+ bike buyers, will care how their bike looks. Is that a bad thing? I certainly don't think so. Adjustability is good and all, but when you need to take it to extremes to make the 'ideal' frame size fit, that's when I go looking elsewhere. Why would I want to spend a good chunk of money on a bike that will look 'kludgey' when there are a ton of options out there that don't have that designed-in problem?

I know you really like your Venturi and I'm happy it works for you. When I checked the sizing it appeared that I'd need an 80mm stem to make one fit. No thanks.

chaadster

In most cases, there are several possible reasons for something, and I'm sure you have a long-winded, purely speculative, and highly fantastical answer which strains credulity and of which you are absolutety is the only reason, a type of fiction which you're so fond of spinning in your neverending quest to slam this bike, but for the sake of those following along, let me say the correct answer is "low production volume."

Now, in my turn at a vain effort, hoping against all odds to stem seneseless retorts, there are most certainly compounding factors to the Venturi's scarcity, including lack of distribution, low brand recognition, virtually non-existent marketing, being at the "bleeding edge" (of steel's resurgence), having unusual geometry, etc. The point being, however, that with numbers like only 150 MY'12 frames built (one of which went to Breeze himself), even if it had been a commercial hit, the Venturi was destined to be scarce.

chaadster

You're a trend-driven, form-over-function guy; I applaud your self-awarness and courage in admitting that. Personally, while I also care about bike looks, to an extent beyond most, probably, I see that there are not a ton of options, but actually zero options to what the Venturi offers. From the aggressive geometry, to the unique construction, down to the distinctive, historically significant paint scheme of the MY'12, there was, and remains, no other production bike on the market with the feature set of the Venturi. For less demanding buyers, thoigh, yes, I get your point.

I don't understand why, however, if you needed an 80mm stem to fit a Venturi and size S came fitted with one, why you were averse to the stem length?

chaadster

Yes, not everyone needs to be a connoisseur, yet it's kind of sad that one might do what they characterize as research and not at least recognize the unique elements of design, history, and construction are not needing redemption, but are in fact, raisons d'être. There are a great many things I do not need or necessarily want, but which I still can appreciate for what they are. It's like why people go to art museums, and on the flip side, why some people, like ISIL, destroy art. So sad!

jamesdak 

Lol, that's a whole lot of fancy talk, now can you give me what real fact as to why it would be a better choice than a more conventional bike?

joejack951

I'm really not a 'form-over-function guy' (see my posting history regarding disc brakes). And as far as being 'trend-driven', my 1984 Trek 660 fits me virtually the same as my brand new bike so if there is a modern 'trend' to bike fit they are copying decade's old ideas.

But, there's 'aggressive geometry' and then there's the Venturi. Perhaps if the other aspects of the frame that mean so much to you meant even a little to me then I could have been persuaded to ride a frame with a stubby stem. But to me, having to drop down to a size 48cm frame (requiring an extra 20mm of exposed seatpost than my 50cm Hongfu), run more saddle setback than I'd prefer because of the steep seat tube angle, and size down the stock stem (the small comes with a 90mm) results in an awkward set up for me, one of the most average size guys on the planet.

I mean, if I can build this and fits perfect, why would I want to deviate?

chaadster

I have no doubt that, for you, whatever it is you call "more conventional" is absolutely the best choice. Now get out there and make cycling great again!

pdedes

you need the s/m. at 5-10, i ride the m. i love mine. best bike in my stable.

chaadster

Your objections are aesthetic-- too much post, too little stem,etc.-- and your needs are met by a generic (literally), super trendy, carbon fiber bike. If we were talking about performance attributes, groundbreaking steel construction, the history of cycling, and singular design and distinctive styling, your question "why deviate?" might have significance beyond being an expression of vanity.

But yes, your bike is very sharp and handsome and modern. I think it's cool that your needs and aesthetic intersect so successfully.

Juan Foote

This thread had me laughing inappropriately a few times. Great banter, fun ways to insult without injury, yay!

BillyD

There's no need to enter the thread in this aggressive manner. If this thread isn't to your liking just try another thread.

joejack951

Don't ignore the fact that my fit and aesthetic needs are also met by a 1984 lugged steel frame. While the new frame might be 'generic' there is some distinctive style worked into it (I love the seat stay junction), just not in the way of a paint scheme, though I am working on some decals to create more visual interest on the rest of the frame. As far as performance is concerned, as much as I like old school steel, carbon fiber and disc brakes takes 'performance' to a new level for me. I say 'performance' merely because I feel like I'm starting over with cycling a bit after several low mileage years and a ~6 month hiatus surrounding the birth of my second son.

Thanks for the comments on my bike!

rpenmanparker 

Aren't you confusing the cause and the effect? This isn't a Bugatti automobile. It is a mid-market, everyday workhorse bicycle. Do you not sell many because you don't make many, or isn't it the other way around: you don't make many because you can't sell them? You are creating a mystique which is not supported. Some things are in high demand because they are rare. Other things are rare because they are not in high demand. Here we have the latter case.

And BTW, you are getting really close to being offensive.

PepeM

I'm glad we're back to The Breezer Venturi being the best bike ever built. We shall not let the haterz and ignorants put it down.

pdedes

i typically spec my bikes with 120-130mm stems. the breezer's geometry is such that the shorter stems combine with fork trail to give a lovely neutral-quick handling bike.

rpenmanparker 

No doubt the frames are right for somebody. Just the fact that you need such long stems for your size suggests the Venturi is a great choice for you. But how many people ride 130 mm stems on medium bikes? I run a 100 mm stem on a "normal" medium. Would the Venturi medium handle so sweetly with a 70 or 80 mm stem?

pdedes

i don't like the feeling of a twitchy bike. shorter stems coupled with traditional trail give this feeling. my breezer runs with the supplied 100mm stem. perfectly matches the trail.

rpenmanparker 

Understood. But if you weren't you, if you were me, how would your bike handle with a 70mm stem.

joejack951

Like Robert, I typically use 100-110mm stems. I'm sure I could get used to the handling with a 70-80mm stem on a Venturi but it would not handle like a bike with a longer stem and I'd never get over the appearance.

noodle soup

+1.

pdedes Venturi is beautiful, it fits him well. His setup looks right by today's standards. Few Venturis that I've seen built up look "right".

pdedes

overly quick for my liking

rpenmanparker 

I suspect so. Seems to me that is what most folks would be facing. That makes you the lucky one to fit it with the right stem.

I know chaadster will find this hard to believe, but I think the Venturi could have been "the bomb". Fantastic. Just what should be going on with steel. I just think the unusual geometry makes it wrong for most people. Too bad. The material, construction technique, paint, ride characteristics (as related by others), etc. are great. Why did it have to be self-defeating?

chaadster

This whole "70mm stem on the size M frame" thing is a silly, and I think pointless, hypothetical. Most people buy frame size based on top tube length, so why wouldn't you get a frame that fits and is designed to work with your needed reach?

Furthermore, the wild speculation about handling being odd or whatever is just plain wrong.
Look at the numbers:

The S/M Venturi (535mm TT) is fitted with a 90mm stem, a 40mm offset fork, and a 73.5º HT angle, which generates 58mm of trail.

A size 52 Specialized Venge (536mm TT) is fitted with a 90mm stem, a 45mm offset fork, and a 73º HT angle, generating 56mmj of trail.

Both bike fall within the common trail range for sporty road bikes, but the Venturi actually has **more** trail than the Venge, so all this blather about freakishly quick, unstable handling is off-base and ridiculous.

Further, moving a size down on either the Venturi or the Venge, we see the Venturi coming spec'd with an 80mm stem and the Venge with a **shorter** 75mm stem. You hate short stems? Where's the outrageous hyperbole about hideously short-stemmed Venges? 75mm?? How could they...and on a pro-level bike costing Bugatti-esque money? It's outrageous! And I won't even get into the fact that had to recall 1,000 '16 Venge S-Works which were sold for potential dropout failures...but that they were charging Bugatti-esque money for bikes built with probably 8x the production volume (recall estimate does not include bikes in mfg stock) of '12 Venturis is, well, I'm sure shocking to some.

Given the facts, clearly many of the comments in this thread are not arising from honest, thoughtful consideration, and rather belie the true motivations and objectives of those who post them.