Rick Onanian <
[email protected]> wrote in message news:<
[email protected]>...
> On 22 Jan 2004 09:55:20 -0800,
[email protected] (Jonesy) wrote:
> >
[email protected] (Carl Fogel) wrote in message
> >news:<
[email protected]>...
>
> >> saved by not buying our "entry-level" $800 bikes.
> >
> >For MTBs, entry-level is more in the $300-400 range. You can get
>
> That may be the top end of entry-level for MTBs assembled at an LBS; but the last time I checked,
> you can get a reasonably good one for $250, and can probably get a cheap one (but still properly
> assembled) for $150 -- which is the top-end price at WalMart, and probably nearly the same bike,
> just better assembly.
Maybe around your parts, but not here. Low-end Trek MTB is $299. Cheapest new bike around that
*doesn't* come from a big-box store.
> >good, used bikes even cheaper than that. And they will still be higher quality than the dept.
> >store bikes.
>
> Used bikes are where it's at for somebody considering a WalMart bike. You should be able to find a
> properly adjusted used bike at a LBS between $50 and $100, and probably even less.
$99 is the lowest-priced used MTB I've seen here. Had a new chain and brake pads. Obviously from
the late '80s or early '90s, but looked fully functional and actually had decent tread left on
the tires.
> Or, at a yard sale or charity store (Salvation Army) you can find the formerly ubiquitous 10-speed
> road bikes for $10 to $30, often requiring no repairs whatsoever, or maybe requiring two $6
> WalMart 27" tires and $2 tubes. If you're observant, you will often find such bikes being thrown
> away on trash day: free.
Ah, yes - good idea. *If* the purchaser has the tools needed for such things. Around here, if you
bring an old, ugly beater into a shop, they tell you they can't fix it, and that you should really
buy one of "these bikes right here."
BTDT, walked away.
> Those ideas are both cheaper and better, even for two mile commuting, although they do require
> more effort than going to WalMart and getting something that's rideable and returnable if it
> breaks or goes out of adjustment soon.
One of the reasons a lower-end bike from a bike shop is probably a better deal, in the long run.
Those adjustments are often part of the purchase price.
> >If my childhood experiences are any guide, you are most likely correct. But my idea since then
> >has been "buy the best bike you can afford." If WalMart bikes fit that bill, so be it. And if
> >all you
>
> A WalMart bike is rarely the best bike for the price -- although it is the only bike brand-new for
> that price (except their most expensive models, equaled in price but better assembly at LBS).
I would agree. I would steer most folks away from those bike-shaped toys if for no other reason than
they only *look* like they could be ridden on dirt trails. If you only have $100, solid cap on your
bike-purchase, I would still aim folks toward a used LBS bike. I figure that in a year, the used
"real" bike will still be going strong, while the bike-shaped toy will have not aged nearly as well.
As we speak, I have a friend's WalMart bike in my garage for some shifting issues. While I am
dreading the prospect of getting the thing to work acceptably, I am (not so) secretly smug about the
first thing that came out of his mouth when he unexpectedly dropped the thing off: "Do *not* say 'I
told you so'!"
I didn't. But I *thought* it rather loudly.
With regards,
Bob
