And wasn't intended to be one.

- the front fork tubes are awkwardly crimped to attach to the steering tube. The weld there is on the ugly side
- the chainstays are not one solid piece. They stop about four inches back, have a slip joint, then continue to the rear. I would guess because it was easier for them than forming one solid piece.
- The chainstay tube is simply crimped at the back to form a "dropout"
- the seatstay tube is crimped at the bottom and a slip joint is used to join it to the chainstay
- the lock is basically zip-tied to the chainstays. I'm guessing noone would rely on this kind of lock in this country anyway
- the brake bridge is just a flat piece of metal tacked to the seatstays
- the rear rack mounts to the brake bridge with a very tacky piece of metal resembling galvanized steel
- the crankset is cheap looking
- the chainring is bascically a piece of stamped steel, cheaper looking than anything you would find on a WalMart bike
- the bell only works half the time. Every other use the plastic gears bind and the lever will not move.
- I could continue but would sound even more nit-picky than I already do.

On first or second glance, it is a very attractive bike. It's only upon closer inspection that these things come out. The fabrication techniques just seem either lazy or low-tech (for instance, maybe they do not have the equipment to form a one-piece chainstay).

There is nothing mechanically wrong with the bike, I just feel that the construction quality does not coincide with the selling price - nor that of the equivelently price Retrovelo.

It's been sitting in my office for about two weeks now. I've yet to decide whether I'm going to keep the bike and ride it, or resell it.