How Do These Airborne Specs Look?



threefire wrote:
> 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? The
> "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?

Try this on. It is an obvious and well published fact that the Chinese
are building their military for a future invasion of Tiawan, no doubt
about it. When they do, then it will be interesting to see what the US
and others, like Japan, who will also be threatened, will do. Is China
a threat to attack the US? Of course not, not any more than the former
Soviet Union was. But USSR was a threat to the economic center of
Europe and China is a threat to the economic strength of Asia, and
hence a threat to Europe and the US. To ignore this is foolhardy.

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.
>
> Besides, half of the goods sold in this country are made in China. You
> better stop buying anything now.
>
> Gooserider wrote:
> > >> Airborne is fine, if you don't mind buying a Chinese bicycle. I don't
> > >> support communist dictatorships. 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.
> > >
> > > I don't mind buying Chinese bikes, I have three of them from this
> > > manufacturer. Whether a dictatorship is communist or capitalist is all the
> > > same to me.
> > > My titanium mountain bike has taken a pounding and is still going strong.
> >
> > 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. The Chinese have a horrible human rights record, you know. People
> > there are routinely put in re-education camps, undergo forced sterilization,
> > are placed in forced labor camps, and face other such horrible acts. 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.
 
threefire wrote:
> 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? The
> "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?

Try this on. It is an obvious and well published fact that the Chinese
are building their military for a future invasion of Tiawan, no doubt
about it. When they do, then it will be interesting to see what the US
and others, like Japan, who will also be threatened, will do. Is China
a threat to attack the US? Of course not, not any more than the former
Soviet Union was. But USSR was a threat to the economic center of
Europe and China is a threat to the economic strength of Asia, and
hence a threat to Europe and the US. To ignore this is foolhardy.

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.
>
> Besides, half of the goods sold in this country are made in China. You
> better stop buying anything now.
>
> Gooserider wrote:
> > >> Airborne is fine, if you don't mind buying a Chinese bicycle. I don't
> > >> support communist dictatorships. 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.
> > >
> > > I don't mind buying Chinese bikes, I have three of them from this
> > > manufacturer. Whether a dictatorship is communist or capitalist is all the
> > > same to me.
> > > My titanium mountain bike has taken a pounding and is still going strong.
> >
> > 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. The Chinese have a horrible human rights record, you know. People
> > there are routinely put in re-education camps, undergo forced sterilization,
> > are placed in forced labor camps, and face other such horrible acts. 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.
 
threefire wrote:
> 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? The
> "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?

Try this on. It is an obvious and well published fact that the Chinese
are building their military for a future invasion of Tiawan, no doubt
about it. When they do, then it will be interesting to see what the US
and others, like Japan, who will also be threatened, will do. Is China
a threat to attack the US? Of course not, not any more than the former
Soviet Union was. But USSR was a threat to the economic center of
Europe and China is a threat to the economic strength of Asia, and
hence a threat to Europe and the US. To ignore this is foolhardy.

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.
>
> Besides, half of the goods sold in this country are made in China. You
> better stop buying anything now.
>
> Gooserider wrote:
> > >> Airborne is fine, if you don't mind buying a Chinese bicycle. I don't
> > >> support communist dictatorships. 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.
> > >
> > > I don't mind buying Chinese bikes, I have three of them from this
> > > manufacturer. Whether a dictatorship is communist or capitalist is all the
> > > same to me.
> > > My titanium mountain bike has taken a pounding and is still going strong.
> >
> > 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. The Chinese have a horrible human rights record, you know. People
> > there are routinely put in re-education camps, undergo forced sterilization,
> > are placed in forced labor camps, and face other such horrible acts. 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.
 
threefire wrote:
> 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? The
> "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?

Try this on. It is an obvious and well published fact that the Chinese
are building their military for a future invasion of Tiawan, no doubt
about it. When they do, then it will be interesting to see what the US
and others, like Japan, who will also be threatened, will do. Is China
a threat to attack the US? Of course not, not any more than the former
Soviet Union was. But USSR was a threat to the economic center of
Europe and China is a threat to the economic strength of Asia, and
hence a threat to Europe and the US. To ignore this is foolhardy.

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.
>
> Besides, half of the goods sold in this country are made in China. You
> better stop buying anything now.
>
> Gooserider wrote:
> > >> Airborne is fine, if you don't mind buying a Chinese bicycle. I don't
> > >> support communist dictatorships. 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.
> > >
> > > I don't mind buying Chinese bikes, I have three of them from this
> > > manufacturer. Whether a dictatorship is communist or capitalist is all the
> > > same to me.
> > > My titanium mountain bike has taken a pounding and is still going strong.
> >
> > 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. The Chinese have a horrible human rights record, you know. People
> > there are routinely put in re-education camps, undergo forced sterilization,
> > are placed in forced labor camps, and face other such horrible acts. 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.
 
threefire wrote:
> 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? The
> "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?

Try this on. It is an obvious and well published fact that the Chinese
are building their military for a future invasion of Tiawan, no doubt
about it. When they do, then it will be interesting to see what the US
and others, like Japan, who will also be threatened, will do. Is China
a threat to attack the US? Of course not, not any more than the former
Soviet Union was. But USSR was a threat to the economic center of
Europe and China is a threat to the economic strength of Asia, and
hence a threat to Europe and the US. To ignore this is foolhardy.

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.
>
> Besides, half of the goods sold in this country are made in China. You
> better stop buying anything now.
>
> Gooserider wrote:
> > >> Airborne is fine, if you don't mind buying a Chinese bicycle. I don't
> > >> support communist dictatorships. 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.
> > >
> > > I don't mind buying Chinese bikes, I have three of them from this
> > > manufacturer. Whether a dictatorship is communist or capitalist is all the
> > > same to me.
> > > My titanium mountain bike has taken a pounding and is still going strong.
> >
> > 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. The Chinese have a horrible human rights record, you know. People
> > there are routinely put in re-education camps, undergo forced sterilization,
> > are placed in forced labor camps, and face other such horrible acts. 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.
 
threefire wrote:
> 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? The
> "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?

Try this on. It is an obvious and well published fact that the Chinese
are building their military for a future invasion of Tiawan, no doubt
about it. When they do, then it will be interesting to see what the US
and others, like Japan, who will also be threatened, will do. Is China
a threat to attack the US? Of course not, not any more than the former
Soviet Union was. But USSR was a threat to the economic center of
Europe and China is a threat to the economic strength of Asia, and
hence a threat to Europe and the US. To ignore this is foolhardy.

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.
>
> Besides, half of the goods sold in this country are made in China. You
> better stop buying anything now.
>
> Gooserider wrote:
> > >> Airborne is fine, if you don't mind buying a Chinese bicycle. I don't
> > >> support communist dictatorships. 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.
> > >
> > > I don't mind buying Chinese bikes, I have three of them from this
> > > manufacturer. Whether a dictatorship is communist or capitalist is all the
> > > same to me.
> > > My titanium mountain bike has taken a pounding and is still going strong.
> >
> > 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. The Chinese have a horrible human rights record, you know. People
> > there are routinely put in re-education camps, undergo forced sterilization,
> > are placed in forced labor camps, and face other such horrible acts. 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.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

....

> I think "stem" is the word you're looking for, and that can be very
> difficult with threadless stems, since the height is changed with
> spacers, and the steerer's often already been cut too short to add more.
>
> You can get a riser add-on, but I haven't tried one.

I have one on my main bike, and they work fine.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
 
Quoting NYC XYZ <[email protected]>:
>Hmmm...I thought it had to do with the mechanics of the pull of the
>cable...a V-brake seems more powerful, from a mechanical POV, than a
>cantilever...I can't quite imagine in my mind's eye the same difference
>between a V-brake and caliper brakes operationally, but I have heard
>that V-brakes are second only to disc brakes.

You might hear a lot of things.

On a single bike, any brake of sensible design, not abysmally low quality,
competently installed and adjusted, will lock the rear wheel (rear brake)
or lift it (front brake).

You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Gaiman, July - a public holiday.
 
Quoting NYC XYZ <[email protected]>:
>Hmmm...I thought it had to do with the mechanics of the pull of the
>cable...a V-brake seems more powerful, from a mechanical POV, than a
>cantilever...I can't quite imagine in my mind's eye the same difference
>between a V-brake and caliper brakes operationally, but I have heard
>that V-brakes are second only to disc brakes.

You might hear a lot of things.

On a single bike, any brake of sensible design, not abysmally low quality,
competently installed and adjusted, will lock the rear wheel (rear brake)
or lift it (front brake).

You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Gaiman, July - a public holiday.
 
Quoting NYC XYZ <[email protected]>:
>Hmmm...I thought it had to do with the mechanics of the pull of the
>cable...a V-brake seems more powerful, from a mechanical POV, than a
>cantilever...I can't quite imagine in my mind's eye the same difference
>between a V-brake and caliper brakes operationally, but I have heard
>that V-brakes are second only to disc brakes.

You might hear a lot of things.

On a single bike, any brake of sensible design, not abysmally low quality,
competently installed and adjusted, will lock the rear wheel (rear brake)
or lift it (front brake).

You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Gaiman, July - a public holiday.
 
Quoting NYC XYZ <[email protected]>:
>Hmmm...I thought it had to do with the mechanics of the pull of the
>cable...a V-brake seems more powerful, from a mechanical POV, than a
>cantilever...I can't quite imagine in my mind's eye the same difference
>between a V-brake and caliper brakes operationally, but I have heard
>that V-brakes are second only to disc brakes.

You might hear a lot of things.

On a single bike, any brake of sensible design, not abysmally low quality,
competently installed and adjusted, will lock the rear wheel (rear brake)
or lift it (front brake).

You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Gaiman, July - a public holiday.
 
Quoting NYC XYZ <[email protected]>:
>Hmmm...I thought it had to do with the mechanics of the pull of the
>cable...a V-brake seems more powerful, from a mechanical POV, than a
>cantilever...I can't quite imagine in my mind's eye the same difference
>between a V-brake and caliper brakes operationally, but I have heard
>that V-brakes are second only to disc brakes.

You might hear a lot of things.

On a single bike, any brake of sensible design, not abysmally low quality,
competently installed and adjusted, will lock the rear wheel (rear brake)
or lift it (front brake).

You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Gaiman, July - a public holiday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back