or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Other Stuff › Archives › rec.bicycles.marketplace › How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How Do These Airborne Specs Look? - Page 3

post #31 of 163
Thread Starter 

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

araby wrote:
> Are you serious?
> An extra 5 pounds on a rider plus bike all up weight of 230+20lb bike
> weight i.e.250lb is 5/250 =2%!!

Just figured that it all adds up...my weekend rides can be like 50+
miles (and Jersey has a lot of hills)....

> Have you ever stopped to consider why these bikes are being offered at such
> a massive discount. There aren't any free lunches.

Indeed, that's why I wanted your opinions on these two particular
Airborne models being discounted.

> Also if you aren't familiar with -as you put it "Shimano this and Bontrager
> that", why are we having this discussion?

I just wanted to know what folks in the know think of this Airborne

> You really need to buy a copy of
> Bike 101 and read it. I don't understand your comments re: caliper brakes.
> Virtually all performance road bikes have them including ALL the TdeF
> iders -same thing with drop bars

Sorry, but I'm not your kind of rider...never knew the difference
between "wheel" and "rim" for the longest time; just didn't occur to

> I'm not trying to be rude but are you on the level

Sorry, but I really haven't any idea which is why I'm here asking!

> -or are you trying
> (-successfully!)to wind us up?

What is it with the Black Helicopters and New World Order?? =)

> Cheers
> Roy
post #32 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

NYC XYZ wrote:

{whole buncha snippage}

> I totally agree. Thing is, $1,200 for this bike is quite a deal! I'm
> sure I'll fit...I've always bought pre-built bikes, and they've never
> felt totally comfortable, whatever that means when it comes to
> bicycling.

Have you ever been fit to a bike?

Giving up now, BS
post #33 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

jabario@backpacker.com wrote:
>>> Get yourself into a LBS and have them

> find you something that is just right for you. They can swap out stems
> and handlebars and seats (for a small upcharge usually, sometimes
> they'll do even trades) and get it dialled in. Mail-order shops can't
> do
> that for you. <<
> There are no small charges at an lbs. They will want $30 for a stem
> you can get for<$10 online. LBS have crappy return policies. Order
> saddles online then you can return them . Or get a Brooks B17 and be
> in bliss. I wouldnt hesitate to buy a bike online.


NYC, Just frigging go to a shop already; why is that so distasteful for
post #34 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

NYC XYZ wrote:
> I'm thinking of the Thunderbolt Triple now, even though my first
> impluse was towards the titanium hybrid....

As I said 12 hours ago, "Dude, you're all over the map."

Bill "OK, this time I /really/ give up!" S.
post #35 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?


Saddles are so personal, to borrow a phrase, "you gotta break a few eggs to
make an omelette."

I have half a dozen saddles in a wicker basket in my living room. I have a
1976 Brooks Team Pro on my one and only bike. I found the Brooks *in the

If you haven't tried a tensioned leather saddle (Brooks specifically) and
you're into "comfort" not racing, you might consider giving one a shot. I
will never go back to plastic saddles unless I get in to time trialing or
something - then I'll still probably look for a Brooks Swallow.

Download their catalog at:
(right click and "Save As...")

See Sheldon Brown's page on saddles:

For folks opinions on the Brooks:
Note the 4.83/5.00 average rating.

Good luck.

"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> jabario@backpacker.com wrote:
>> There are no small charges at an lbs. They will want $30 for a stem
>> you can get for<$10 online. LBS have crappy return policies. Order
>> saddles online then you can return them . Or get a Brooks B17 and be in
>> bliss. I wouldnt hesitate to buy a bike online.

> I must say, many of the NYC LBSes don't seem to be too "caring"...maybe
> they're tired of the same damned noobish concerns day after day. =)
> It's true there are no small charges...fixing a flat is at least ten
> bucks! (I do understand they've got more expenses, though.) The other
> thing with LBSes is that you deal with "personalities"...it's not like
> you go to McDonald's and just get your hamburger (LOL -- wait, hear me
> out, don't flame me!), you go and the person wants to know why the hell
> anyone would want pickles in their hamburger, why don't you try the
> healthier chicken sandwich, whatever...I find it hard to talk to LBS
> folks 'cause if they're knowledgeable about bikes it's like they're
> running for the Presidency or something! =D
> I mean, hell, if I want to annoy someone with my stupdity, I'll come to
> usenet and do it.
> But the Brooks B17?? Looks like any ol' saddle!
> You mean the Serfas RX doesn't look comfy to you??
post #36 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

>>But the Brooks B17?? Looks like any ol' saddle!

You mean the Serfas RX doesn't look comfy to you??

Those cushy saddles are fine for round the corner rides and such but
for longer rides you need to support the sit bones . Check out
www.mtbr.com and look at B17 reviews.
There are no better saddles at least for my butt. Proper sizing is
crucial. If you know what size you need then mail order is great.
post #37 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

On 23 Jul 2005 06:58:10 -0700, in rec.bicycles.tech "NYC XYZ"
<jack_foreigner@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> -or are you trying
>> (-successfully!)to wind us up?

>What is it with the Black Helicopters and New World Order?? =)

Well, some folks get wound up pretty easily and methinks this one is
in search of a reason. You're perfectly on topic asking a
bicycle-related question here.

If you want to see him have a conniption fit, propose restricting
bicycles or requiring insurance... something like that. Sometimes
it's fun to push a hot button and watch them slaver and chew the rug;
however, you don't ever *learn* anything therein and I have a short
attention span for that sort of thing.

post #38 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Gooserider wrote:
>> Aluminum can be SCARY light, and steel isn't 5-10 pounds heavier. Try 1-2
>> pounds.

> So what's generally lighter, all other things (frame geometry, etc.)
> being equal -- ti, carbon fiber, aluminum, or quality steel?
>> I'm sure you couldn't stand to lose 5 pounds off your body, right?

> Hehehe...5'11" and 230 lbs. -- I was statistically overweight for my
> age and height even at my best shape of 185 lbs.!

Then you shouldn't be worrying so much about frame material and a couple of
pounds on the bike.

>> If you want to be comfortable, frame material is the least of your
>> concern.

> Well, part of comfort for me would be not carrying so many pounds,
> whether portaging over stairs or climbing long New Jersey hills!

Comfort is more about position and fit on the bike. Comfort is cumulative.

>> Tire size and frame geometry have far more to do with it.

> Frame geometry affects weight??

No, but it definitely affects comfort. An upright position with less weight
on the hands makes a huge difference.

>> That being said,
>> don't you wonder why so many touring bikes are STEEL? :-)

> LOL -- didn't know they were!

I'd say the majority are. There are some aluminum(Cannondale comes to mind)
and some Ti(Airborne, Lightspeed), but most are steel.
post #39 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

23 Jul 2005 06:29:31 -0700,
<1122125371.169914.95270@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "NYC XYZ"
<jack_foreigner@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> Mark
>> is a regular poster here and a nice guy, but don't talk politics with
>> him.

>LOL -- politics? That's interesting...the bike advocacy orgs here in
>NYC seem pretty left-of-center!

It's okay to talk politics with Mark as long as you're nuts enough to
agree with him.
post #40 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

"threefire" <threefire@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> You must be joking. You think economically sanctioning a country will
> help improve its human rights? You think the ruler rather than the
> regular people are going to suffer more from a poor economy?

Then perhaps the people will do what oppressed people have done throughout
history----rise up and overthrow the yoke of the oppressor.

> "enemy" thing is nothing more than a fear out of ignorance. When was
> the last time China was of any real and actual threat to the US? How
> many of the claims you made were from first hand experience instead of
> politically motivated propaganda (you believe everything said on TV?
> they also say you can lose 70 pounds in a month on TV)? The human
> rights violation theory is way overrated. It's in many people's
> interests to exaggerate these things.

Really? Apparently the Chinese military believes they are a threat.

China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against the US if it is attacked by
Washington during a confrontation over Taiwan, a Chinese general said on

"If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to
the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with
nuclear weapons," said General Zhu Chenghu.

> Besides, half of the goods sold in this country are made in China. You
> better stop buying anything now.

Hey, every little bit helps. There are multitudes of bikes available which
aren't made in Communist sweatshops. You just have to butch up and spend a
bit more, or less. There's no need to buy an Airborne when you can buy a
perfectly serviceable Giant, Trek, Cannondale, Soma, Surly, Bianchi, or any
other US, Taiwanese, or Euro bike. Can you buy American made toys? Probably
not. But you can buy American bikes.
post #41 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Gooserider wrote:
>> The problem with buying Chinese goods is the very real possibility that
>> doing so supports our enemy.War with China over Taiwan is not out of the
>> question.

> Of course, the other school of thought counters that this is precisely
> why you must keep 'em engaged through trade. As their economy becomes
> ever more dependent on foreign trade, etc., war becomes more and more
> "impractical"...if Nixon hadn't gone to China, China might be just
> another North Korea now.

Or, the Chinese will continue to pour massive amounts of money into their
military, strengthening them for the eventual takeover of Taiwan. That is
the more likely scenario.

>> The Chinese have a horrible human rights record, you know.

> So do many US allies. That doesn't stop us from buying Saudi oil, etc.

There are alternatives to buying Chinese bicycles. Saudi oil, not so much.
At least not now. That's why I drive a car which gets excellent mileage, and
commute by bicycle 4 days/week. The cartels aren't getting rich off me.

>> People
>> there are routinely put in re-education camps, undergo forced
>> sterilization,
>> are placed in forced labor camps, and face other such horrible acts.

> I totally agree. I just don't think that I can have any more effect on
> those issues than the US government, which has very limited effect on
> issues it considers even more important.

But you can do the right thing. I'll bet you wouldn't buy a shampoo you knew
was tested by being squirted in puppy's eyes(hypothetical, of course). Why
you wouldn't have a problem buying a bicycle made in a country whose
government routinely does worse things to people is beyond me.

>> Every
>> dollar you spend on Chinese goods goes to strengthen them both
>> economically
>> and militarily. I would no more buy Chinese goods than I would buy
>> conflict
>> diamonds.

> Conflict diamonds? What are these, please?


Basically, conflict diamonds are those from Sierra Leone, Angola, and Congo.
The sales of diamonds finance rebels who commit horrible atrocities against
the civilian populations. Chopping off hands and feet with machetes is
routine. I really don't think a little bling is worth somebody losing their
hands, and the UN agrees.
post #42 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

<andresmuro@aol.com> wrote in message
> since you want a Ti bike, I would suggest that you go here:
> http://www.habcycles.com/
> Habanero frames are good quality, just like airborne. However, it is
> smaller volume, and the owner, Mark, will spend more time talking to
> you and answering all the questions that you have very patiently. Mark
> is a regular poster here and a nice guy, but don't talk politics with
> him.
> Andres

Habaneros are still Chinese. If you want Ti, save up and buy a Litespeed.
Otherwise, there are plenty of perfectly fine bikes made from other
materials. Ti can't do anything good steel doesn't. So it doesn't rust? I
live in Florida, ride steel, and I don't have a rust problem. Proper
maintenance goes a long way. Ti is
post #43 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Gooserider wrote:
>> Airborne is fine, if you don't mind buying a Chinese bicycle.

> Indeed! Oddly enough, Airborne notes on its website that although the
> frame comes from a Chinese aerospace and satellite company (?!), their
> bikes still qualify under US Trade regulations as American Made!

Ah, the wonders of free trade. How many American Ti fabricators could be
employed if those bikes were made here?

>> I don't
>> support communist dictatorships.

> This is so interesting...what Red China products do you do without, and
> what do you substitute them with? Like everything's made there these
> days.

Can I find American made cheap plastic junk? No. Can I find bicycles, cars,
motorcycles, appliances, and electronics not made in China. Sure, and I

>> I own three Taiwanese bikes, and an
>> American bike. The American bike is head and shoulders above the
>> Taiwanese
>> quality wise, but it was far more expensive, too. I wouldn't buy the
>> Airborne, but that's purely on an ethical level. I'm sure the quality is
>> fine.

> Are you sure those so-called "Taiwanese" bikes aren't perhaps made in
> some mainland China factory? I understand everybody's got factories in
> China.

If the sticker says "Made in Taiwan", then that's the deal. They're all made
at the same factories, anyway.
post #44 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Vis-a-vis the price, anyway -- $1,300 for 19-lb. bikes!!
> http://www.airborne.net/eready/janet...TI-special.asp
> http://www.airborne.net/eready/janet...TB-special.asp

You want to be comfortable? Here you go:


Steel frame, fat tires, relaxed geometry. Fender-able, rack-able. Heavier
than your 19 pound Chinese wonder machine, but comfortable enough for you to
actually ride the thing. You ride the Surly enough and you'll easily drop
the 6 pounds of weight difference. Plus, the Surly is a better fit for NYC,
unless you think the gossamer wheels on the Airborne are going to handle
potholes and curbs well.
post #45 of 163

Re: How Do These Airborne Specs Look?

On 23 Jul 2005 05:50:33 -0700, "NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com> wrote:

>RonSonic wrote:
>> "In some distant land it is possible that bicycle seats are made out of rainbow
>> and stuffed with cloud. In this world it's easier to just get used to something
>> hard."

>Ah, straight out of the '80s Charmin commercial!

Nope, article in a cycling journal in 1905.

>> Heres the deal, upright position puts more weight on your ass it also forces
>> your legs around the saddle at an awkward angle unless you set the seat too low.
>> Which puts yet more weight on your ass and kills your pedalling efficiency.
>> That big sofa-like saddle will require that you set it low.
>> There is no reason for a saddle like that to be light. It simply cannot be fast
>> anyway.

>Ah, yes, conventional wisdom. That's why it's so hard for me to find a
>"comfort bike" with "performance" specs!

Sorta like finding a luxury car with sports car performance and minivan cargo

>> Fit is never equal.

>We're talking theory, here, and necessarily so, since there's no exact
>way to quantify "comfort" and "fit," least not over usenet!

Point is, all other things are never equal. The bike I scoot up to the library
on is a bit different from the one I blast through the forests with and those
are nothing like the road beast. All do have some commonality in how I fit, but
horses for courses as they say.

>> As for all the brand names and model numbers, aren't you the
>> guy whining that the components might not be adequate to your demands. If you
>> want to be a weenie and fuss about that sort of thing, then get weenie about it
>> and fuss about that sort of thing.


If you wanna fuss about it then learn about it. Don't fuss AND cling to your
ignorance. That's stupid.

>> Better for WHAT? For WHOM? How good do the parts have to be. Shimano LX is
>> perfectly adequate for pounding through the mountains why won't is suffice for
>> you?

>I'm asking the questions, and if you hear them, then I'm obviously
>soliciting your opinion, as I haven't a clue what Shimano-this and
>Bontrager-that means.

Well either get off your ass and find out - OR - explain just what sort of
riding you're doing that you fear LX is not good enough to handle so you can get
some meaningful advice. And brother unless you use words like "gnarly, sick,
xtreme" to describe the enormous "drops, hucks and jumps" you're taking, LX is
more than strong enough.

>> You don't know enough about bikes to be buying that way. Bottom line.

>It's true I'm a noob when it comes to technical stuff like this, which
>is why I'm asking here! Thing is, I do know I don't want some
>pig-heavy Huffy from Walmart, if you take my meaning....

That part I understand. Now the part you need to understand is that you are
responsible for either learning enough to make all these decisions yourself,
which also means paying money for your mistakes, or put yourself in the hands of
someone who knows and giving him the information necessary.

>> No, an 18" mountain bike is not the same as an 18" comfort bike and not at all
>> like an 18" drop bar road bike.

>Which is why I'd noted earlier about "all other things being equal" --
>an 18" comfort bike is not different in that respect than another 18"
>comfort bike.

Nope. One of the reason we have so many manufacturers is to provide bikes that
fit so many different people. They ain't all the same. I've got two 21" mountain
bikes, that are so different you wouldn't think they were the same size at all.
It's funny, I line those up with my 60cm road bike and the bars, saddles and
cranks all sorta line up, sorta, but nothing else is the same.

>Of course, I'm asking about a hybrid and a road bike, and I know there
>are differences...just wanted to pick your brains for any I may have
>missed, noob that I am.
>> The components are different to suit the fact that they are on entirely
>> different styles of bike. They are perfectly good components and work far better
>> than you ride.


Trust me, these parts are better than you.

>On my old Trek 7500, I must have put $500 worth of "work" into it over
>about eight years...new cables, chains, cranksets, etc. I really wear
>things out! But I can't imagine riding any other way -- don't see what
>I might be doing wrong, if I'm prematurely wearing parts out somehow.

Nah, just need to learn to do your own maintenance.

>> How bad do you need to stop? Calipers work fine for what they are.

>Let's put it this way...I was riding like an NYC messenger in midtown
>rush-hour traffic before I actually did it for a summer spell! =)

And there's a lot of messengers out there with ONE caliper brake and a fixed
gear, which doesn't stop any better than a coaster brake. Don't let the
advertising guys get you to think that buying more stuff is the answer.

My question is what's wrong with the Trek that it should be replaced.

>> Upright means slow and your ass hurts.

>That's intersting! I understand the "slow" part -- but I ain't racing,
>just wanted as "fast" as possible given how I ride (which means
>components, etc., to my way of thinking) -- though I don't see how
>upright means up the ass, either. =) Do you mean "crotch" or
>literally ass?? My ass rarely hurts...it's the crotch...ouch!

The more upright you sit the more of your weight is on whatever part of your
anatomy hits the saddle. If you have a stupid plush saddle it'll be your crotch
that takes the weight. If you have a proper hard saddle set high enough it'll be
the sits bones on either side of your ass and below the cheeks that bear the

I can build callouses on my ass.

>> Use your legs.

>I do, but it's the ol' suspenders-and-belt theory: two systems are
>better than one. After all, I'm already using my legs anyway! And it
>always gets to your back, in any case, eventually....

By raising the saddle you shift weight forward to your hands and legs. Using a
narrow relatively hard saddle means you can keep your weight off the tender bits
and onto the bony bits on either side. Sit on a hard wood bench, lean forward.
Feel the two spots your weight is on - that's what should be supporting you on
the bike. Riding on your taint is just cruelty.

You should be getting out of the saddle and shifting your position regularly.
Don't get settled in to one position.

Myself I like the Specialized BG saddles, they are fitted to the rider and have
a groove and cutout right where you don't want your weight to rest.

>> Ten cogs times whatever's at the front.

>> Ron

>Sorry for the noob questions, but thanks for your feedback!

Here's da Faqs jack: ftp://draco.acs.uci.edu/pub/rec.bicycles/faq They presume
knowledge, but there's good general info.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: rec.bicycles.marketplace
Cycling Forums › Forums › Other Stuff › Archives › rec.bicycles.marketplace › How Do These Airborne Specs Look?