2003 Gary Fisher Big Sur or Trek 8000

Jem

pas wrote:

> jem wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>>I rest my case. Don't think I don't know what the
>>>Piedmont region of NC yields as far as trail conditions
>>>go either. I lived and rode there.
>>>
>>>JD
>>
>>All I ever claim is that I've been happy with my Trek and
>>had good luck with it. Rest your case? Please, just rest
>>your moust. Or how about coming up with some hard
>>statistics on frame failure rates, but Trek or ANY bike
>>manufacturer?
>
>
>
> first, you should read the FAQ for this group, if you
> haven't. It's always at the bottom of Bomba's posts.
> Second, one thorough search of the mtbr forums on this
> subject, that should bring up a few intresting results for
> you. Third, it's just one guys opinion, dont' get your
> panties all in a wad.
>
> penny
>
>
>
>
You mean the part that says JD argues with anybody?

Jd

jem <jmessick@triad.rr.com> wrote in message news:<OPDGc.125473$2o2.6412894@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
> JD wrote:
> > jem <jmessick@triad.rr.com> wrote in message news:<ephG-
> > c.116199$2o2.6234002@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
> >>You probably get more for your buck with a Trek then
> >>with any botique bike.

> > That is complete and unadulterated bullcrap. How does
> > one get more bang for the buck with a broken frame? Does
> > the "BANG" come from the noise when the frame breaks? I
> > buy bikes to ride them as intended and nothing but the
> > best will last and that goes for anyone who wants to
> > ride instead of waiting for a warranty to be honored.
> > How long did it take for your Yugo to die on the
> > highway?

<edited for hilarity>

> All I ever claim is that I've been happy with my Trek and
> had good luck with it.

Wow, a selective memory that even doesn't remember something
they wrote when it's still right in front of their face!
Your most outlandish CLAIM is still just as funny as when
you posted it the other day.

JD

Jd

bicycle@charter.net (R.White) wrote in message news:<27bc6c79.0407061540.71640b2f@posting.google.com>...
> If I was actually on medication, how is making fun of
> something that is beyond a persons control any different
> than someone commenting on your ability to be a good
> father? They're both subjects that are best left alone,
> but you feel it is ok to belittle someone for a medical
> condition.

Your being a psycho has everything to do with your
schizophrenic postings in am-b. If you're not on meds, you
need to be. BTW, you only belittle yourself and don't need
much help in making yourself any more insignificant than you
already are.

> The affects of your comments on me are nil since I do not
> take or have a need for any anti-depressant medication,
> but it's attitudes like yours that prevent people who
> might need help from seeking any because they know they
> will be ridiculed and made fun of for something they
> cannot overcome on their own. I work with these people for
> a living and I can say with utmost confindence that people
> like you make their lives hell.

Should I get my violin out and play the world's saddest tune
to accompany your oh-so-politically correct whine? You are
only worthy of ridicule becuase the ridiculous nature of
your psychotic leg-humping posts. Dragging your
(un)profession into the fray is lame and predictable.

JD

R.White

BarneyFife@usafcct.com (JD) wrote in message news:<ebf270c9.0407071030.1ba6042c@posting.google.com>...
> bicycle@charter.net (R.White) wrote in message
> news:<27bc6c79.0407061540.71640b2f@posting.google.com>...
> > If I was actually on medication, how is making fun of
> > something that is beyond a persons control any different
> > than someone commenting on your ability to be a good
> > father? They're both subjects that are best left alone,
> > but you feel it is ok to belittle someone for a medical
> > condition.
>
> Your being a psycho has everything to do with your
> schizophrenic postings in am-b. If you're not on meds, you
> need to be. BTW, you only belittle yourself and don't need
> much help in making yourself any more insignificant than
> you already.

The 911 operator's making a diagnosis. Let the pro's handle
that sort of thing and stick with what you do best Jerry,
answering the phone.

Jem

JD wrote:
> jem <jmessick@triad.rr.com> wrote in message news:<OPDGc.-
> 125473$2o2.6412894@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
>
>>JD wrote:
>>
>>>jem <jmessick@triad.rr.com> wrote in message news:<ephGc-
>>>.116199$2o2.6234002@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
>>>
>>>>You probably get more for your buck with a Trek then
>>>>with any botique bike.
>
>
>>>That is complete and unadulterated bullcrap. How does one
>>>get more bang for the buck with a broken frame? Does the
>>>"BANG" come from the noise when the frame breaks? I buy
>>>bikes to ride them as intended and nothing but the best
>>>will last and that goes for anyone who wants to ride
>>>instead of waiting for a warranty to be honored. How long
>>>did it take for your Yugo to die on the highway?
>
>
> <edited for hilarity>
>
>>All I ever claim is that I've been happy with my Trek and
>>had good luck with it.
>
>
> Wow, a selective memory that even doesn't remember
> something they wrote when it's still right in front of
> their face! Your most outlandish CLAIM is still just as
> funny as when you posted it the other day.

Again, how about some hard statistics?

Bomba

jem wrote:

> Again, how about some hard statistics?

We've been over this before. The only people that have 'hard
statistics' are the manufacturers warrantying the frames.
Surprisingly, they're not keen to share that sort of
information with the general public.

Alas, the only evidence anybody is able to put forward is
their own personal experience. As someone who has broken
numerous Trek frames, I would suggest that JD is in a
justifiable position to grumble.

Jd

bomba <myarse247@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.07.09.10.20.38.24370@hotmail.com>...
> jem wrote:
>
> > Again, how about some hard statistics?
>
> We've been over this before. The only people that have
> 'hard statistics' are the manufacturers warrantying the
> frames. Surprisingly, they're not keen to share that sort
> of information with the general public.

Thanks for sharing the obvious, Jon. Though he's been around
here a while, James must have missed when this was covered
the many times it has been before.

> Alas, the only evidence anybody is able to put forward is
> their own personal experience. As someone who has broken
> numerous Trek frames, I would suggest that JD is in a
> justifiable position to grumble.

Funny thing, since I reiterated my statement the other day,
I've noticed a crapload of treks on bike racks with nary a
scratch, nor dirt on them. Many more than I have seen on the
trail. I live close to an urban trailhead and see countless
cookie cutters in new condition that obviously don't see the
dirt at all.

JD

Jd

bicycle@charter.net (R.White) wrote in message news:<27bc6c79.0407081055.38b10232@posting.google.com>...
> BarneyFife@usafcct.com (JD) wrote in message
> news:<ebf270c9.0407071030.1ba6042c@posting.google.com>...
> > bicycle@charter.net (R.White) wrote in message news:<27-
> > bc6c79.0407061540.71640b2f@posting.google.com>...
> > > If I was actually on medication, how is making fun of
> > > something that is beyond a persons control any
> > > different than someone commenting on your ability to
> > > be a good father? They're both subjects that are best
> > > left alone, but you feel it is ok to belittle someone
> > > for a medical condition.
> >
> > Your being a psycho has everything to do with your
> > schizophrenic postings in am-b. If you're not on meds,
> > you need to be. BTW, you only belittle yourself and
> > don't need much help in making yourself any more
> > insignificant than you are already.
>
> The 911 operator's making a diagnosis. Let the pro's
> handle that sort of thing and stick with what you do best
> Jerry, answering the phone.

Here's a suggestion, ricky. Take your meds, get a clue and
then call your shrink in the morning. You'll never know what
my educational background is, so keep flailing away.

JD

John Spann

"JD" <dij@usafcct.com> wrote in message
news:ebf270c9.0407090907.11f45e3b@posting.google.com...
> bomba <myarse247@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.07.09.10.20.38.24370@hotmail.com>...
> > jem wrote:
> >
> > > Again, how about some hard statistics?
> >
> > We've been over this before. The only people that have
> > 'hard statistics' are the manufacturers warrantying the
> > frames. Surprisingly, they're not keen to share that
> > sort of information with the general public.
>
> Thanks for sharing the obvious, Jon. Though he's been
> around here a while, James must have missed when this was
> covered the many times it has been before.
>
> > Alas, the only evidence anybody is able to put forward
> > is their own personal experience. As someone who has
> > broken numerous Trek frames, I would suggest that JD is
> > in a justifiable position to grumble.
>
> Funny thing, since I reiterated my statement the other
> day, I've noticed a crapload of treks on bike racks with
> nary a scratch, nor dirt on them. Many more than I have
> seen on the trail. I live close to an urban trailhead and
> see countless cookie cutters in new condition that
> obviously don't see the dirt at all.
>
> JD

Even in Fuita? For shame...I thought that was an attribute
particular to Phoenix.

Juan Spanos

R.White

dij@usafcct.com (JD) wrote in message news:<ebf270c9.0407091145.57031fd0@posting.google.com>...
> bicycle@charter.net (R.White) wrote in message
> news:<27bc6c79.0407081055.38b10232@posting.google.com>...
> > BarneyFife@usafcct.com (JD) wrote in message news:<ebf2-
> > 70c9.0407071030.1ba6042c@posting.google.com>...
> > > bicycle@charter.net (R.White) wrote in message news:<-
> > > 27bc6c79.0407061540.71640b2f@posting.google.com>...
> > > > If I was actually on medication, how is making fun
> > > > of something that is beyond a persons control any
> > > > different than someone commenting on your ability to
> > > > be a good father? They're both subjects that are
> > > > best left alone, but you feel it is ok to belittle
> > > > someone for a medical condition.
> > >
> > > Your being a psycho has everything to do with your
> > > schizophrenic postings in am-b. If you're not on meds,
> > > you need to be. BTW, you only belittle yourself and
> > > don't need much help in making yourself any more
> > > insignificant than you are already.
> >
> > The 911 operator's making a diagnosis. Let the pro's
> > handle that sort of thing and stick with what you do
> > best Jerry, answering the phone.
>
> Here's a suggestion, ricky. Take your meds, get a clue and
> then call your shrink in the morning. You'll never know
> what my educational background is, so keep flailing away.

Ditto Jerry.

You know squat about my life.

PKB.

R.White

dij@usafcct.com (JD) wrote in message news:<ebf270c9.0407090907.11f45e3b@posting.google.com>...
> bomba <myarse247@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<pan.2004.07.09.10.20.38.24370@hotmail.com>...
> > jem wrote:
> >
> > > Again, how about some hard statistics?
> >
> > We've been over this before. The only people that have
> > 'hard statistics' are the manufacturers warrantying the
> > frames. Surprisingly, they're not keen to share that
> > sort of information with the general public.
>
> Thanks for sharing the obvious, Jon. Though he's been
> around here a while, James must have missed when this was
> covered the many times it has been before.
>
> > Alas, the only evidence anybody is able to put forward
> > is their own personal experience. As someone who has
> > broken numerous Trek frames, I would suggest that JD is
> > in a justifiable position to grumble.
>
> Funny thing, since I reiterated my statement the other
> day, I've noticed a crapload of treks on bike racks with
> nary a scratch, nor dirt on them. Many more than I have
> seen on the trail. I live close to an urban trailhead and
> see countless cookie cutters in new condition that
> obviously don't see the dirt at all.

The same "scientific" metheod Vandeman uses. No surprise
there since you both beat the same drum

R.White

dij@usafcct.com (JD) wrote in message news:<ebf270c9.0407090907.11f45e3b@posting.google.com>...
> bomba <myarse247@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<pan.2004.07.09.10.20.38.24370@hotmail.com>...
> > jem wrote:
> >
> > > Again, how about some hard statistics?
> >
> > We've been over this before. The only people that have
> > 'hard statistics' are the manufacturers warrantying the
> > frames. Surprisingly, they're not keen to share that
> > sort of information with the general public.
>
> Thanks for sharing the obvious, Jon. Though he's been
> around here a while, James must have missed when this was
> covered the many times it has been before.
>
> > Alas, the only evidence anybody is able to put forward
> > is their own personal experience. As someone who has
> > broken numerous Trek frames, I would suggest that JD is
> > in a justifiable position to grumble.
>
> Funny thing, since I reiterated my statement the other
> day, I've noticed a crapload of treks on bike racks with
> nary a scratch, nor dirt on them. Many more than I have
> seen on the trail. I live close to an urban trailhead and
> see countless cookie cutters in new condition that
> obviously don't see the dirt at all.

The same "scientific" metheod Vandeman uses. No surprise
there since you both beat the same drum.

Jd

bicycle@charter.net (R.White) wrote in message news:<27bc6c79.0407100529.2477497a@posting.google.com>...
> You know squat about my life.

Yes, I squat on your (lack of) life.

JD

Jd

dij@usafcct.com (JD) wrote in message news:<ebf270c9.0407101950.4a48e38e@posting.google.com>...
> bicycle@charter.net (R.White) wrote in message
> news:<27bc6c79.0407100529.2477497a@posting.google.com>...
> > You know squat about my life.
>
> Yes, I squat on your (lack of) life.

Also, consider yourself now with the likes of frightpig,
duhski and other various idiots in this newsgroup that don't
contribute anything meaningful and hence are not worthy of
any more responses from me.

JD