I was looking at the usa walmart site and couldn't help noticing the price of their bikes!

[Velvet]

Peter Clinch wrote:

> D.M. Procida wrote:
>
>> What about tassels, are you keen on tassels?
>
>
> I think I can live without them! OTOH, they're not /that/ different to
> the flags popular on 'bents and trailers...
>
> Pete.

I've always thought those flags needed replacing with (fake!) foxtails,
myself...

--


Velvet

 

[Dave Larrington]

Velvet wrote:

> I've always thought those flags needed replacing with (fake!)
> foxtails, myself...

Many years ago Mr. Burrows and his crew used to use plastic fruit. My grate
frend gNick intended to go one better by mounting a plastic lobster atop the
rearmost portion of his Windcheetah's bodyshell and, using the cable drive
from an old Huret speedometer, cause it to revolve. The plan, alas,
foundered in the face of the non-availability of plastic lobsters in Ashford
(Middx.)

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

 

[Martin Wilson]

>> http://www.web-light.nl/VISIE/extremedeformities.html
>
>The fake pictures used on this site remind me of the Photoshopped pictures of
>aliens you find on the Roswell conspiracy sites.
>

Well they had me fooled. I thought they were geniune images not
created ones.

>I said above that DU is highly chemically toxic. It's not very radioactive at
>all. BTW, alpha emissions are extremely short range, so you have to ingest the
>stuff to suffer from them, and in that case you have direct chemical effects to
>bother about.
>
>The best case is achieved by sticking to the facts.
>
>Now, on a more topical note, DU for bicycles is not really trendy, because the
>military in most places are phasing out DU in favour of Tungsten, mainly to
>control costs of machining.
>
>So if you want a heavy penetrator bicycle frame, Tungsten is the way to go!

Can I have one with resin brakes and shimano tourney gears though. I
don't want it to be too expensive.

 

[Velvet]

Dave Larrington wrote:

> Velvet wrote:
>
>
>>I've always thought those flags needed replacing with (fake!)
>>foxtails, myself...
>
>
> Many years ago Mr. Burrows and his crew used to use plastic fruit. My grate
> frend gNick intended to go one better by mounting a plastic lobster atop the
> rearmost portion of his Windcheetah's bodyshell and, using the cable drive
> from an old Huret speedometer, cause it to revolve. The plan, alas,
> foundered in the face of the non-availability of plastic lobsters in Ashford
> (Middx.)
>

*snort*

Now I have to clean weetabix out t'other half's keyboard ;-)

--


Velvet

 

[Wild Wind]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Martin Wilson wrote:

<snippage>

Very cheap, seemingly well equipped bikes are very cheap for a simple
reason: very little money has been spent on them. Mechanical
engineering needs money spent on it to be good. Put these two facts
together and you come back with the clear conclusion that they're
basically cack. And will continue to be. That £34 worth of dreck from
Wal-Mart is "better value" than twice the price for similar at Asda is
questionable because the net worth of the bike is basically nothing in
the longer term in any case. You'd be better off not buying it, even if
it was 34 /pence/, because that would be 34p you could put towards
something better.

I disagree. If I was staying in an area for a few weeks, needed
to commute several miles, found public transport was extremely
expensive and couldn't bring my bike with me, I would be very
happy to buy a 34 pound bike for the purpose of getting about.
I wouldn't be too happy about having to dispose of it after, but
it would still be a good economical decision.

--
Akin

aknak at aksoto dot idps dot co dot uk

 

[AndyMorris]

Wild Wind wrote:
> If I was staying in an area for a few weeks, needed
> to commute several miles, found public transport was extremely
> expensive and couldn't bring my bike with me, I would be very
> happy to buy a 34 pound bike for the purpose of getting about.
> I wouldn't be too happy about having to dispose of it after, but
> it would still be a good economical decision.

You'd hate the bike, the shop you bought it from, its manufacturers, your
self for buying it and god for making a world in which such a pile of cack
could exist.


--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK


Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

 

[Peter Clinch]

Wild Wind wrote:

> I disagree. If I was staying in an area for a few weeks, needed
> to commute several miles, found public transport was extremely
> expensive and couldn't bring my bike with me, I would be very
> happy to buy a 34 pound bike for the purpose of getting about.
> I wouldn't be too happy about having to dispose of it after, but
> it would still be a good economical decision.

That's a very specific case though, where my point was a general one,
and if I was working for a few weeks in a US urban area it would just be
a good excuse to buy a Bike Friday and bring it home afterwards rather
than torture myself with velocheese.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Wild Wind]

"AndyMorris" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Wild Wind wrote:
> > If I was staying in an area for a few weeks, needed
> > to commute several miles, found public transport was extremely
> > expensive and couldn't bring my bike with me, I would be very
> > happy to buy a 34 pound bike for the purpose of getting about.
> > I wouldn't be too happy about having to dispose of it after, but
> > it would still be a good economical decision.
>
> You'd hate the bike, the shop you bought it from, its manufacturers, your
> self for buying it and god for making a world in which such a pile of cack
> could exist.

No I wouldn't. Why should I? I wouldn't be
looking for the smoothest ride on earth - just
something to get me from A to B for a few weeks,
and I believe that even a 34 pound bike should
be capable of that.

--
Akin

aknak at aksoto dot idps dot co dot uk

 

[Wild Wind]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Wild Wind wrote:
>
> > I disagree. If I was staying in an area for a few weeks, needed
> > to commute several miles, found public transport was extremely
> > expensive and couldn't bring my bike with me, I would be very
> > happy to buy a 34 pound bike for the purpose of getting about.
> > I wouldn't be too happy about having to dispose of it after, but
> > it would still be a good economical decision.
>
> That's a very specific case though, where my point was a general one,
> and if I was working for a few weeks in a US urban area it would just be
> a good excuse to buy a Bike Friday and bring it home afterwards rather
> than torture myself with velocheese.

Perhaps I can say what I say because I'm not too bothered
about the precise configuration of a bike that I will
only be using for a few weeks - if I could still ride it
about and it wasn't a potential hazard, that would be good
enough for me.

Also, I'm very much a minimalist, possession-wise, so the
option of buying another bike wouldn't appeal.

--
Akin

aknak at aksoto dot idps dot co dot uk

 

[Peter Clinch]

Wild Wind wrote:

> Also, I'm very much a minimalist, possession-wise, so the
> option of buying another bike wouldn't appeal.

Then you'd be better off getting something like a Bike Friday, because
you really can take them anywhere you'd be able to get a £34, rather
than having to get a new bike anywhere out of your normal patch.

And not only can you transport them anywhere, they're versatile enough
to do most of what you'd want. One bike fits most is a better approach
to minimalism from my POV than buying something new (and ****) anytime I
move around.

But the above still ignores that your basis for disagreement with my
general case is a very specific one that in unlikely to apply to very
many people.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/