Walmart bike good enough?

[[email protected]]

I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.

However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
5-10% faster?

So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?

 

[[email protected]]

On Sep 4, 9:50 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
>
> However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> 5-10% faster?

At most the difference would be 5-10% only on significaltly steep
hills. Otherwise it would have little effect.

> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?

They are often stronger, the individual componets are often more
presice and easier to keep in proper adjsutemtn. And the tires and
bearings, etc are better such that the offer less resistance. They are
usually less squishy as well. So you may be able to ride a given speed
with less effort.

But as you have no issues with your current bike, there is no reason
to expect it won't continue to do just what you need it to do.

IMO the price point for significantly better performance is well above
$300, so don't bother.

Have fun!

Joseph

 

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

>> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?
>
> They are often stronger, the individual componets are often more
> presice and easier to keep in proper adjsutemtn. And the tires and
> bearings, etc are better such that the offer less resistance. They are
> usually less squishy as well. So you may be able to ride a given speed
> with less effort.
>
> But as you have no issues with your current bike, there is no reason
> to expect it won't continue to do just what you need it to do.
>
> IMO the price point for significantly better performance is well above
> $300, so don't bother.


Not true, in my humble opinion. Even a $300 mountain or hybrid bike,
purchased from a decent bike shop, is going to be far easier to maintain,
and less-costly in the long run (because it will last a whole lot longer).
Rolling resistance etc isn't really the issue; durability, ie., TTW (Things
That Work) vs STFA (Stuff That Falls Apart) is the key difference.

Department stores are *not* made to be repairable, because people don't
bring them back to the department store for work. Simple as that. That may
incidentally be repairable, but it's not a primary focus. Bike shops loathe
things they can't repair, because the customers *do* bring that back when
something goes wrong. When we don't like something on a bike because it
doesn't last or it's difficult to work on, we let the manufacturer know, and
stop selling that particular model. The department stores lack that feedback
loop, so they just don't care. Better to sell something that looks like a
real bike than actually is. BSOs, or Bike Shaped Objects, is what they're
commonly called.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

 

[Daryl Hunt]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
>
> However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> 5-10% faster?
>
> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?

There is a difference between "shimano" and "SHIMANO". The "Next" bikes
from Walley World are real junk. While they work just fine right out of the
store, the more you use them the more you have to keep adjusting them until
they end up being a daily adjustment. While you can upgrade them, don't
bother. The upgrades will take you into the cost of a decent bike.

The Schwinn out of walmart seems to be the exception. There is little
difference (except for the name on the frame in plastic) from the 139 buck
Walley World Schwinn and the 250 buck Schwinn out of a bike shop. In fact,
as pieces break on the walley world Schwinn you do a piece by piece upgrade
to the better equipped Bike Shop Schwinn. It's a poormans way of getting a
decent bike in time.

But if you can afford the 300+ bike at the Bike Shop, you should be able to
get MOST of these upgrades right off the showroom floor on it.

The pocket book drives these decisions more than anything else. But your 12
mile a day trip, your Next Walley World Special will be pretty much a pain
in the tail very quickly.

 

[Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
>
> However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> 5-10% faster?
>
> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?
>


This Walmart bike is good:
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5751042

 

[Hank Wirtz]

On Sep 4, 2:15 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> This Walmart bike is good:http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5751042

Dunno if it's good, but it's overpriced for its spec and level of
dealer support.

For similar levels of support, you can get a 105-equipped bike from
Bikesdirect.com for $700-$800. For the same price as the Walmart one,
you could get an Ultegra-equipped one.

For most people though, who will need service after the sale, a
similarly equipped one could be had for a similar price from an LBS.
That would be the way to go.

 

[landotter]

On Sep 4, 3:10 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?
>
> > They are often stronger, the individual componets are often more
> > presice and easier to keep in proper adjsutemtn. And the tires and
> > bearings, etc are better such that the offer less resistance. They are
> > usually less squishy as well. So you may be able to ride a given speed
> > with less effort.
>
> > But as you have no issues with your current bike, there is no reason
> > to expect it won't continue to do just what you need it to do.
>
> > IMO the price point for significantly better performance is well above
> > $300, so don't bother.
>
> Not true, in my humble opinion. Even a $300 mountain or hybrid bike,
> purchased from a decent bike shop, is going to be far easier to maintain,
> and less-costly in the long run (because it will last a whole lot longer).
> Rolling resistance etc isn't really the issue; durability, ie., TTW (Things
> That Work) vs STFA (Stuff That Falls Apart) is the key difference.
>
> Department stores are *not* made to be repairable, because people don't
> bring them back to the department store for work.

Around here, you can get $200 bikes at the Altus level or therebouts
from Target, Wally World, and Dicks Sporting goods. Dialed in right by
somebody handy, they're much better than the $79 specials. Heck, I
even recommend that students at Uni around here pick up a beach
cruiser from a big box store for campus cruising because of theft.

That said, my LBS understands that there is a need for bikes at a low
price point, so they sell Schwinn 26" path bikes, dialed in very
nicely for $250. They sell the snot out of those, proudly, because the
shop cares about getting folks on bikes in the first place. Amusingly
enough, people now come into the shop to buy 500 dollar and up bikes,
as "it seems everybody in the neighborhood rides a bike now." That's
an LBS run right. They treat us home wrenchers right as well, never
overcharging for minor parts or even making much at all from cables
and ferrules, and get the best word of mouth advertising in the world
because of it.

 

[Ron Hardin]

[email protected] wrote:
>
> I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
>
> However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> 5-10% faster?
>
> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?

I do 8,000 miles a year on a Huffy and it's perfectly fine.
--
[email protected]

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

 

[Michael Warner]

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 12:56:36 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

> They are often stronger, the individual componets are often more
> presice and easier to keep in proper adjsutemtn.

For anyone unfamiliar with cycling jargon, adjsutemtn is a clear, viscous
liquid (named after an ancient Dutch recipe) in which your bike's
components should be kept when not in use.

 

[Sir Thomas of Cannondale]

Are you familiar with Craigslist, the web page? I did a quick search for a
used bicycle .

There were hundreds of high quality road, mtn, old, really old, not so
old... heck, I got myself interested in a couple of them.

Why ride a Wally World piece of **** when you can buy a really nice second
hand bicycle on Craigslist.

==========================================================================

PS.. once you start riding to work on the light-weight old road tour model
you paid $100 dollars for?

You will be riding to work more than twice a week!


[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
>
> However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> 5-10% faster?
>
> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?
>

 

[Mike A Schwab]

On Sep 4, 2:50 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
>
> However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> 5-10% faster?
>
> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?

For riding on the road, you will want to set any suspension to hard or
locked to improve your speed.
Also, one upgrade you may want to do immediately is Inverted Tread
Tires. This will smooth your ride and give you about 2mph faster
speed.

 

[Roger Zoul]

[email protected] wrote:
:: I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
:: miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
:: bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
:: issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
::
:: However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
:: I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
:: is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
:: the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
:: 5-10% faster?
::
:: So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?

Why don't you continue to ride your bike and see how much adjustment &
tweaking you have to do over time, while reporting back here. If it gets
you a year without too much hassle, then that will be interesting info for
us. If not, then you will have validated the claims of others here (which
might be helpful info to have) and then you can move to another bike. OTOH,
I'd hate to hear of you stranded 12 miles from home, so please have some
backup means of getting home. Take your cell phone!

 

[Roger Zoul]

Ron Hardin wrote:
:: I do 8,000 miles a year on a Huffy and it's perfectly fine.

Do you have a link to the specific model? Do you spend a lot of time on
maintenance to keep it going? How many miles do you have on it?

 

[bluezfolk]

On Sep 5, 7:48 am, "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> :: I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> :: miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> :: bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> :: issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
> ::
> :: However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> :: I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> :: is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> :: the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> :: 5-10% faster?
> ::
> :: So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?
>
> Why don't you continue to ride your bike and see how much adjustment &
> tweaking you have to do over time, while reporting back here. If it gets
> you a year without too much hassle, then that will be interesting info for
> us. If not, then you will have validated the claims of others here (which
> might be helpful info to have) and then you can move to another bike. OTOH,
> I'd hate to hear of you stranded 12 miles from home, so please have some
> backup means of getting home. Take your cell phone!

Without saying anything bad about Walmart bikes, I'd like to make the
suggestion that for commuting a mountain bike might not be the best
choice. I switched from a road bike to a hybrid many years ago for
use as a commuter in NYC.

Eric

 

[Roger Zoul]

bluezfolk wrote:
:: On Sep 5, 7:48 am, "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]> wrote:
::: [email protected] wrote:
:::
::::: I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to
::::: work 12 miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy
::::: walmart'ish bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly
::::: I have no issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
:::::
::::: However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I
::::: suppose if I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but
::::: what difference is that going to make? The weight of the rider
::::: dominates the mass of the system, so a 10 lb bike weight
::::: reduction should only make you go 5-10% faster?
:::::
::::: So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?
:::
::: Why don't you continue to ride your bike and see how much
::: adjustment & tweaking you have to do over time, while reporting
::: back here. If it gets you a year without too much hassle, then
::: that will be interesting info for us. If not, then you will have
::: validated the claims of others here (which might be helpful info to
::: have) and then you can move to another bike. OTOH, I'd hate to
::: hear of you stranded 12 miles from home, so please have some backup
::: means of getting home. Take your cell phone!
::
:: Without saying anything bad about Walmart bikes, I'd like to make the
:: suggestion that for commuting a mountain bike might not be the best
:: choice. I switched from a road bike to a hybrid many years ago for
:: use as a commuter in NYC.
::
:: Eric

I certainly wouldn't disagree...but the OP appears to be happy at the moment
with what he has.

 

[rdclark]

On Sep 4, 3:50 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
>
> However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> 5-10% faster?
>
> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?

Aside from weight and parts quality (and the quality of brakes,
chains, hubs, spokes, rims etc. really do start to matter to high-
mileage riders), it's that they're available in many sizes, with
further adjustability through parts swapping.

Just like every clock is correct twice a day, there are people who are
actually the right size and body geometry to be fit correctly by a Wal-
mart bike. It's just like finding shoes at a yard sale that just
happen to fit you.

Maybe your Wal-mart bike fits you, and that's your good luck. Or maybe
you don't know the difference between a bike that fits and one that
doesn't, and yours doesn't, really, and the more you ride the more
uncomfortable you'll become. Or maybe you're young enough to ignore
the discomfort, only to regret it when you're 50 and your knees stop
working.

Have you ever gone hiking in shoes that don't fit *perfectly*? They
seem OK for a mile or two. Two weeks later...

r

 

[Pat]

> Ron Hardin wrote:
> :: I do 8,000 miles a year on a Huffy and it's perfectly fine.
>
> Do you have a link to the specific model? Do you spend a lot of time on
> maintenance to keep it going? How many miles do you have on it?

Oh Roger, you just opened a can o' worms.
>
>

 

[Ron Hardin]

Roger Zoul wrote:
>
> Ron Hardin wrote:
> :: I do 8,000 miles a year on a Huffy and it's perfectly fine.
>
> Do you have a link to the specific model? Do you spend a lot of time on
> maintenance to keep it going? How many miles do you have on it?

The current one is a Huffy Ironman, bought 1998, so it has 72k miles on it.

It doesn't require any attention except twice a year, when it's time to consider
replacing the power train. That's at about 4k miles. The chainwheels last maybe
12k before you need to replace them.

It was one of their top-of-the-line models, but the lesser models lasted as long.

The life is determined by how many components need replacement at the same time.
It's always worth replacing single components. But if it's several, a whole new
bicycle may be cheaper.

Huffy sells parts by the way, so keeping it in parts isn't a problem.
1-800-USA-BIKE. They wind up on your porch the next day, if you live in Ohio.
Anyway they used to. They may have moved to China.
--
[email protected]

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

 

[DougC]

[email protected] wrote:
> I have recently got into biking and have started commuting to work 12
> miles each way a twice a week. My bike is some heavy walmart'ish
> bike, 18-speed mountain bike, shimano gears. Honestly I have no
> issues with it, as it is tuned up correctly.
>
> However, all the websites say to avoid these bikes, why? I suppose if
> I spend $300+ I'll get a 10 pound lighter bike, but what difference
> is that going to make? The weight of the rider dominates the mass of
> the system, so a 10 lb bike weight reduction should only make you go
> 5-10% faster?
>
> So what are the real benefits of expensive bikes?
>

These are things I have seen perhaps 5 years ago, looking at other
people's cheap bikes:

In the past I have seen that Wal-Mart bikes had the bottom bracket and
headset bearing races cut right into the BB shell, and no dust covers on
the bearings (even for MTB/BMX bikes!). So when these bearings would go
bad, the bike frame (and basically the whole bike) was shot, because
from an economic standpoint it's not worth fixing the frame.

The wheel bearings may not be a standard size either, necessitating
buying a whole new wheel when the bearings go bad, instead of just
buying new bearings for the wheel. Another wheel problem is wheels that
won't stay true, and this can usually be traced to ultra-cheap spokes
used--but once again, it isn't worth it to pay a bike shop to lace good
spokes into a Wal-Mart rim and hub. You might as well just buy a
whole-better-wheel pre-built (which you can do, when the OEM wheel goes
bad).

Dept store bikes have been improving over time, but I haven't looked
closely at any examples lately. A lot of people buy them and never
manage to wear them out, so in that respect, cheap bikes are "good
enough" for a lot of people.

I don't have an original source for this, but it's a widely repeated
story: once during an interview, the president of Huffy was asked why
they built bikes so cheaply. His response was that research they did
showed that the average person who shopped for a bike at a department
store rode it less than 75 miles /total/ before getting rid of it. So
his company built their bikes to be as cheap as possible, while lasting
75 miles.

....A lot of non-bicyclists would think that riding 75 miles would be
something akin to the Bataan death march, but for many people it's only
a single weekend's worth of riding. For some people it's one day's worth
of riding.

-------

Personally I don't feel that the weight of cheaper bikes is really
detrimental to their typical use; comfort is far more important than
weight. My long-distance/recreational bike is a recumbent that weighs
near 40 lbs, and I'm much happier riding that than I would be riding any
sub-20-lb upright road bike.
~

 

[Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®]

"Hank Wirtz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Sep 4, 2:15 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> This Walmart bike is
> good:http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5751042

>Dunno if it's good, but it's overpriced for its spec and level of
>dealer support.

>For similar levels of support, you can get a 105-equipped bike from
>Bikesdirect.com for $700-$800. For the same price as the Walmart one,
>you could get an Ultegra-equipped one.

>For most people though, who will need service after the sale, a
>similarly equipped one could be had for a similar price from an LBS.
>That would be the way to go.


Of course. It was said in jest. I would buy a bike from Salvation Army
before I buy one from Walmart.