A modern Herse for the common man?

I've been thinking about a new bike recently. Specifically, I've been thinking about the Kogswell P/R. The P/R is an inexpensive, TIG welded, steel frame/fork with geometry borrowed from the Herse frames of yore. It retails for $540 and that includes fenders. It also is designed around 650b wheels. It's a go anywhere and carry anything kind of bike.

That said, it's a pretty hefty frame. Bikes built up typically weigh 25 pounds or more. Now I'm hardly a gram counter but at the same time I have to squawk at that kind of weight. Don't try to tell me weight doesn't count. Anyone who says this probably hasn't had the pleasure of riding a nice, light bike. Most of the people who claim weight doesn't matter tend to be steel riding luddites and hearing them say weight doesn't matter is pretty hard to buy into. I guess ignorance is bliss.

The reality is there's no reason you can't build a reasonably durable (5-10 year lifespan for an average, active rider) bike with generator lights, fenders, and rack that weighs under 20 pounds. 50 years ago Herse and Singer made bikes that weighed less than this. Of course their bikes featured extensively modified components and cost a fortune. Modern builders have a few advantages. For starters we now have different materials such as composites, stronger aluminum alloys, titanium, and stronger steel alloys. Using mostly stock parts from Shimano, Campagnolo, Ritchey, and FSA one should have no problem getting a bike down under 20 pounds.

Starting with the frame the first thing I'd change is the tubing. Titanium would be the best choice as it's durable, comfortable, and light. However it's not cheap and is a real chore to work with. If cost were no object this would be the material of choice. My choice of material would be Easton Ultralite. It's been around for many years so its durability and traits are well established, it's easy to work with, and it's not very expensive. As for ride quality, it's not oversized to the degree of a Cannondale or Klein and aluminum is more flexible than steel. In real world terms, my Easton Ultralite cross bike is probably a tad more comfortable than my SOMA Smoothie ES made from Reynolds steel. Why not simply make it from a lighter steel tubeset? Well you could and it would be a great frame. However it would likely cost more than an alloy frame and I'm not sure if an ultralight steel is really anymore durable than a midweight aluminum. One of the goals here is to achieve the functionality and weight of the bikes used in the technical trials while taking advantage of modern manufacturing technology. With that objective in mind, doing the bike in steel would be a challenge.

Geometry is a no-brainer: copy the Kogswell P/R. The P/R is an incredibly well executed bike based on the works of Herse and Singer. Of course with a frame made from lighter steel or alloy the bike wouldn't really be a P/R - more likely just the R part. Of course the R part in this case could stand for "randonneur", "racy", or "rain bike". In a nutshell, it would be a zippier version of the P/R. A perfect bike for:
1) Timed randonneur events.
2) Commuters who want a bike with some zip and don't want a high BB cyclocross bike.
3) Road racers wanting a rain bike.
4) Go fast credit card tourers.
5) Century riders.

Now I just have to find someone to make it! Sadly, I don't have $20,000 to spare.