Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.Jeffdixon
12-16-06, 07:49 AM
Hi there! My name is Jeff Dixon and I am the owner of Spongy Wonder Inc. In one forum our seat was completely "trashed" and I would like to make a couple of comments in our defence if I may.
The first thing I would say is how can anyone "trash" a product they have never tried. This is not objective.
Secondly, someone said "this is what happens when noncyclists try and design cycling gear." I am a 25 year cyclist and I current ride a Trek 8000 mountain bike.
Thirdly, our seat is not a rip-off the Hobson, the East Seat or anyone else. The US Patent and Trademark Office thought our seat was so unique we were informed we would be receiving a patent only three months after we applied.
Fourthly, the front end of the seat is so short you can't even see it when you sit on the seat. We performed may tests and it is literally impossible to come out of clipless pedals or traps and hit the front end. The type of motion that one needs to "entertain" to try and hit the front end of the seat is such that the seat is the last of your problems.
Fifthly, we sell many. many seats to triathletes, bike messangers, commuters, spinners, etc., etc. Our return rate is less than three percent and we have a more generous return policy than anyone else.
Sixth, our seat is recommended by more urologists than I can count.
If someone prefers neurological and urological damage to trying a new paradigm in a seat that is their choice. It seems that such an unobjective approach reveals more about a lack of knowledge and a overblown unwillingness to be open to thiose things that are beyond one's "scope" of tradition.
jhdixon
The first thing I would say is how can anyone "trash" a product they have never tried. This is not objective.
Secondly, someone said "this is what happens when noncyclists try and design cycling gear." I am a 25 year cyclist and I current ride a Trek 8000 mountain bike.
Thirdly, our seat is not a rip-off the Hobson, the East Seat or anyone else. The US Patent and Trademark Office thought our seat was so unique we were informed we would be receiving a patent only three months after we applied.
Fourthly, the front end of the seat is so short you can't even see it when you sit on the seat. We performed may tests and it is literally impossible to come out of clipless pedals or traps and hit the front end. The type of motion that one needs to "entertain" to try and hit the front end of the seat is such that the seat is the last of your problems.
Fifthly, we sell many. many seats to triathletes, bike messangers, commuters, spinners, etc., etc. Our return rate is less than three percent and we have a more generous return policy than anyone else.
Sixth, our seat is recommended by more urologists than I can count.
If someone prefers neurological and urological damage to trying a new paradigm in a seat that is their choice. It seems that such an unobjective approach reveals more about a lack of knowledge and a overblown unwillingness to be open to thiose things that are beyond one's "scope" of tradition.
jhdixon