New bike questions



Status
Not open for further replies.
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> >
> > 5) Anyone have any first-hand experience with Trek bikes?
>
> Nah, never heard of 'em. Oh, that's right, we sell about 2500 a year.
:>)
> So I guess you can figure I'm not terribly objective and should assume I'm 100% totally biased.
>

Hey...I don't mind a biased dealer. I used to be in the home/car audio biz many years ago. In
theory, we could've made a ton of money on Sanyo car audio, which the boss loved to put on sale.
Unfortunately, none of the employees would sell them without first telling the customer that they
were ****, and that the boss ran ads for Sanyo, just to get people in the door. Our honesty worked.
 
"Chin Chan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Eventhough Trek and other companies assembled or built their bikes in
China, the profits still go back to the shareholders in US. The workers there get peanuts.
>
>

I'm torn as far as my personal boycott goes. On one hand, capitalism is addictive, so perhaps it
would be a good thing if the Chinese got a bigger taste of it. But, as you say, they don't get much
of the benefit. On the other hand, I can't forget the things I read about China in the news.
 
"Tom Keats" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, "David L. Johnson"
> <[email protected]> writes:
> > On Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:33:11 +0000, Tom Keats wrote:
> >
> >> I think the Trek 800 Sport is an excellent starter. Some folks here don't like the wheels much,
> >> though -- particularly for heavier riders. The wheels are plain, ol' 36-spokers. If you're
> >> under 200 lbs, you'd be okay.
> >>
> > As opposed to what? Boutique wheels are _less_ appropriate for a 200-pound plus rider than
> > "plain, ol' 36-spokers".
>
> That's what I'd like to know! But awhile back, I suggested an 800 Sport to a somewhat heavyweight,
> and was sorta taken to task on the basis, the wheels aren't good enough. But chances are tney know
> what they're talking about more than I know what I'm talking about, so I defer to them. After all,
> it ain't about who's right ... it's about getting people onto bikes. And keeping them there.
>

1) I'm no heavyweight, but I'm curious: Do some wheels self destruct quickly or go out of round with
heavier riders?

2) IMHO, what will get more people on bikes is making physical harrassment by automobile drivers a
felony. I've been knocked off twice, and both times, it was absolutely intentional. The cops
caught one and charged him with reckless endangerment or some **** like that. Unfortunately,
we're not allowed to shoot them.

Now, I wear a hunter-orange vest when riding. If someone touches me during daylight hours, there are
only two possible reasons: They're looking to harm me, or they're too blind to drive. Either way,
I'll be in the courtroom with them, to "assist" them.
 
"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Harris" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > I bought a Trek 800 for my then 12-year old daughter about
> two years ago. As
> > with most bikes in that price range, the wheels are
> machine built. I
> > tensioned and stress relieved them as soon as we got the
> bike home. A 200+
> > pound rider would likely have problems with those wheels
> due to the build
> > quality, not because of the materials.
>
> Good point. One reason cheap bikes have "heavy" wheels is that the lower build quality
> necessitates sturdier components. But if you take a cheaper wheel and retension it with care,
> you'll have a very sturdy wheel indeed.
>
> Matt O.
>

Hmmm....something a competent bike shop should be able to do?
 
"Dan Daniel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I ended up with a Marin Muirwoods, after looking at a bunch of used bikes and a bunch of new ones.
> Major points in its favor- no shock. Steel. Nice geometry for me (but you need to ride any bike
> you are looking at).
>
> http://www.marinbikes.com/bikes/urban/spec_muirwoods.html
>

Thanks - I'll add this to my list, since there's a local dealer. Question: Why do you consider "no
shock" to be a point in its favor?
 
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 15:00:51 GMT, "Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Dan Daniel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> I ended up with a Marin Muirwoods, after looking at a bunch of used bikes and a bunch of new
>> ones. Major points in its favor- no shock. Steel. Nice geometry for me (but you need to ride any
>> bike you are looking at).
>>
>> http://www.marinbikes.com/bikes/urban/spec_muirwoods.html
>>
>
>Thanks - I'll add this to my list, since there's a local dealer. Question: Why do you consider "no
>shock" to be a point in its favor?
>

From riding low-end bikes with shocks, I was just really disturbed by the feel. This is very
personal- I don't do a lot of difficult off-road riding, and I have never gotten used to the feel of
shocks on roads. I like knowing where my front wheel is, period, not within an inch and within a
fifth of a second.

Negatives (for me)- Maintenance and wear concerns. Feels strange. Not going to spend more than $400
total, so my shock choices were going to be low-end. Money for the shock means less money on better
quality shifting, etc. Weight.

Positives- if a shock makes riding more enjoyable for someone, then that's great. Given a choice
between a bike with a shock and no bike, I'll be happy to ride a shock.

If the bike you like has a shock, then buy it. I was surprised at how hard it was to find a low-cost
'mountain bike' without a shock, so you might not even be able to do comparison.
 
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 14:26:39 +0000, Doug Kanter wrote:

>> > As opposed to what? Boutique wheels are _less_ appropriate for a 200-pound plus rider than
>> > "plain, ol' 36-spokers".
>>
>> That's what I'd like to know! But awhile back, I suggested an 800 Sport to a somewhat
>> heavyweight, and was sorta taken to task on the basis, the wheels aren't good enough. But chances
>> are tney know what they're talking about more than I know what I'm talking about, so I defer to
>> them. After all, it ain't about who's right ... it's about getting people onto bikes. And keeping
>> them there.

No, it's about selling expensive equipment to people with a valid credit card. Maybe the wheels
weren't "good enough", but that would be because they were poorly built, not because they weren't
some black-anodized boutique "wheelset" with 17 spokes.

Who are "they" and why do you presume they know what they are talking about? If they are your
management at the shop, they have a financial stake in the deal, and although we'd like it to be the
case that the only consideration is the welfare of the customer, somehow I am less believing than
you seem to be.

>>
>
> 1) I'm no heavyweight, but I'm curious: Do some wheels self destruct quickly or go out of round
> with heavier riders?

Poorly built ones, yeah.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored _`\(,_ | by little
statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo (_)/ (_) | Emerson
 
In article <[email protected]>, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> writes:

> No, it's about selling expensive equipment to people with a valid credit card.

No, it's usually not.

Usually, it's about not making customers come back, without complaints. And maybe bring some
goodwill along with them.

> Maybe the wheels weren't "good enough", but that would be because they were poorly built, not
> because they weren't some black-anodized boutique "wheelset" with 17 spokes.

I've dealt with bike shops who've done factory wheels, and then wouldn't let me pick up the bike
until they've at least given it an inspectful once-or-twice-over -- especially with cheap-o,
machine-built wheels.

They're not idiots who've never heard of stress-relieving. Furthermore, I'd have problems *not*
finding a stress-relieved wheel at all. Unless, maybe, I shopped at places I don't, like Sears.

You don't get an 800 Sport at Wally World, *-Mart, or Target -- you get one at a Bike Shop, where
they have wrenches who are supposed to know what they're doing, and salespeople who are supposed to
know what bikes to steer a customer toward, and which ones to steer a customer away from. And the
shops I've dealt with, don't release a bike until they're confident about it, its rider, and the
match thereof.

> Who are "they"

Knowledgable people, right here, in r.b.m. See the previous thread titled: "New bike questions".

> and why do you presume they know what they are talking about?

Because they've proven themselves right before. And maybe they've had worse bike shop experiences
than I've had. It helps to keep an open mind. And open ears.

cheers, Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn
[point] bc [point] ca
 
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 18:28:46 +0000, Tom Keats wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, "David L. Johnson"
> <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> No, it's about selling expensive equipment to people with a valid credit card.
>
> No, it's usually not.

Well, if someone is sold a pair of boutique wheels rather than a set of 36-hole handbuilt (or
rebuilt) wheels, as was suggested by this thread, then I would have to disagree. High-tech wheels
with low spoke counts and deep-v rims might indeed have advantages in a time trial, but not for a
heavyweight rider, again as was suggested on this thread. A bigger rider does best with lots of
spokes and a well-built standard wheel. The suggestion I was reacting to was that of someone (lost
track of who said what) who was upbraided for recommending a bike with standard wheels, rather than
"better" wheels -- and I admit, here I assumed this meant boutique wheels.

>> Maybe the wheels weren't "good enough", but that would be because they were poorly built, not
>> because they weren't some black-anodized boutique "wheelset" with 17 spokes.
>
> I've dealt with bike shops who've done factory wheels, and then wouldn't let me pick up the bike
> until they've at least given it an inspectful once-or-twice-over -- especially with cheap-o,
> machine-built wheels.

That is exactly what is needed.

> They're not idiots who've never heard of stress-relieving. Furthermore, I'd have problems *not*
> finding a stress-relieved wheel at all.
...
> you get one at a Bike Shop, where they have wrenches who are supposed to know what they're doing,
> and salespeople who are supposed to know what bikes to steer a customer toward, and which ones to
> steer a customer away from. And the shops I've dealt with, don't release a bike until they're
> confident about it, its rider, and the match thereof.

That is the ideal. Unfortunately, not all bike shops are like that.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig... You _`\(,_ | soon find out the
pig likes it! (_)/ (_) |
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads