Simon Brooke said:Nothing greatly wrong. But when you look at what you can pick up second
hand for £150, it's not worth it. For the same money you could pick up
a really nice bike sort of ten or fifteen years old, which would be a
much more enjoyable bike to ride and would carry on being a great bike
for years. Bikes, if moderately well maintained, do not age the way
cars do.
Check out these completed auctions to get the feel of prices really nice
bikes go for:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7156905241
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7158542633
Thanks for the extra info.
Unfortunately, I can't see any way that I can differentiate between a 'nice'
bike and any other.
Two fairly serious bikers I know have independantly recommended Ridgeback
(neither are the seller of the one I'm thinking of buying), and I have actually
had a go on one (a Supernova) and it seemed a beautiful bike. A million miles
from the £199 mountain bike I use at the moment. (Other recommendation were Scot
and Giant)
Another point is that bikes on ebay are all over the country, so I'd have to buy
one without trying it. My cycling friends say that is very unwise because 'fit'
is very important.
I'm a bit puzzled now.
Jim