and i don't see anyone doing what you imply is being done.
now we all know there is a huge elitist element in cycling but even in the roadie forum i don't recall seeing anyone shunned for having a cheap bike... however i can recall numerous posts where the agreed points were along the lines of conditioning being the focus, not the bike.
where are these threads where this other thing has happened?

i find it is more likely that the owner of the cheap bike resents the owner of the expensive one... not necessarily in an envious way, although i am sure there are those that fit that bill, but more in a cultural way.
i might be wrong but i don't believe these roadie ostracizers exist... at least not in any significant way. there are certainly some blowhards in recreational cycling that love to spend money but not all that spend money are blowhards.

for matter of record? by your reasoning Cig is bragging about his Denali by listing the price paid.
personally, if i state what i paid for an item, it is to do only that.
no hidden motives.
I'll agree with you in this. But let's face the facts here when referring to "most" people. People tend to brag about how expensive their *things* are because in this day and age status is more important than function. And people who live for status can not fathon function on the cheap, they just can't accept that someone can spend way less than them on something identical and still be as happy, if not happier than they are.


by the same logic, airplanes are simple things. there is as much engineering in todays bicycles as there were in many of yesterdays airplanes... but this is a pointless avenue.
Todays airplanes are not that simple, and yesteryears are only simple compaired to todays standards... but this is getting off track here.
And I was referring to the frames, which when it comes to an all_steel_frame technology can only take you so far for the basic function of it. We are, after all, only talking about composite materials and the actual assembly of the frame... at least that is all I was talking about.

you spoke of how you knew better than to express dissent with another's opinion... Cig's opinion in this case.... and i was just clarifying that Cigs opinions are at times represented as unbiased fact.
but then how can i be confused when you were talking about him proving things with his opinions?
And you sir, make a very good point here.

I finally read the entire thread and now my eyes hurt. I *do* understand now why people are getting on Cig about his review, but it still seems like alot of people who have replied to this thread have only done so in order to quantify their own expensive tastes. Though others have legitimate issues with the review.
I think Cig got what he paid for, from his first few posts he said he wanted to pick up a bike on the cheap to see if they really were as bad as people say, and it looks like he got a good one. Then everyone and their mother had to chime in, including me.

If you're talking sheer man hours involved in engineering a plane, you'll have to go back about 70-80 years to find a plane that took as much time to design as a bicycle.

In addition to having deplorable grammar, you come across in this entire thread as, well, a jerk.

I've really never witnessed anything like it on these forums till this thread, and I read a LOT in this forum. Who knows what your issues are. Whatever they may be, you should really find somewhere else to resolve them.

Give it a rest. Thanks.

and i don't see anyone doing what you imply is being done.
now we all know there is a huge elitist element in cycling but even in the roadie forum i don't recall seeing anyone shunned for having a cheap bike... however i can recall numerous posts where the agreed points were along the lines of conditioning being the focus, not the bike.
where are these threads where this other thing has happened?
I'm not about to go searching for all threads mentioning this, it's absurd to really request that, if in fact, you are asking me to do so.
In the mountain Bike and Roab Cycling forums, they are there, and can be found, I'm just not going to do it just to *prove* what is already known: that when someone mentiones that they just purchased a bike from a department store most of the replies to that thread are along the lines of "that bike is garbage" or "you just wasted your money." And you likely already know this and are just being a difficult little monkey! :p

i find it is more likely that the owner of the cheap bike resents the owner of the expensive one... not necessarily in an envious way, although i am sure there are those that fit that bill, but more in a cultural way.
i might be wrong but i don't believe these roadie ostracizers exist... at least not in any significant way. there are certainly some blowhards in recreational cycling that love to spend money but not all that spend money are blowhards.
I can see myself agreeing with this. Maybe I just store the snobby posts closer to the top shelf of my brain. I have a pet peve with snobby people and tend to let their idiocities eat at me.

agreed.




and me... i really can't resist.:o

hit a nerve did i?

i will say what i please.. if you don't like it don't read it.

Wasn't it bicycle builders from ohio who designed the first function plane?
it's funny how my comments on metal qualities have morphed into engineering or aircraft. :D

i know the element you are talking about and it is not what i have heard described... like the need to spend 1000 dollars in order to be a part of the club type of think is what i am interested in hearing for myself.

and no, i am not asking you to provide it...

Yes, it was made of paper, flew about a block, then crashed. That's why engineers have been designing aircraft ever since.

Put it this way, the difference between a road bike designed by a designer such as sasha white over at vanilla and one designed by a team of engineers over at Trek is maybe 1-2%, if that.

The difference between a plane designed by say the guys over at skytek and one designed by lockheed martin is maybe an order of magnitude if not more. And hell even the skytek works better than the wright brothers' plane.

BTW: don't you two have anything better to do than argue online at 2am sunday morning? I'm giving my girlfriend a hitler-like moustache with electrical tape since she passed out on the couch again.

Arguing over simple/stupid **** is what keeps me going on nights like this. I'm at work, and will be for quite a few more hours, and waiting on test results from the foundry gets quite boring... I can only keep my thumb inserted in my rectum for so long you know! ;)

Because that's just how it is. Anyhoo... Stop making sense, you're exciting the patients.

it took me a while to figure out why this post is bothering me..
it's not because you called me a jerk, i am sure you believe that i have heard that one before.
i think it's the dig on my grammar that bothers me.
i know that in a literary arena this scatterbrain typing would be seen as deplorable but given the setting here?
sure, ostrasizer is probably not a word but then i don't think webster's recognizes roadie either so shouldn't that be acceptable?
on another board i once had a complaint about my lack of capitilization but my lack is far from an oddity.
i mean, in a community where an entire statement can consist of nothing more than "+1 on the armadillos", can't a guy neglect the shift key?

then i look at your stuff and see you misused till and also failed to place a question mark.. unless Who is an individual here.... and the repeated use of commas is questionable, not to mention the overall sentence structure.

i can understand that you dislike me cause i'm opiniated or you dislike my thoughts or whatever but i honestly don't understand why my grammar is offensive to you.

even with as little as you have shared here, i conclude that you are unreasonable ;)

Obviously we don't agree on some things, but I can defend you on this one.
I don't see you as being a jerk, just openly opinionated and very vocal (keboardal??) about it. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean I can't respect your input, but it does mean that I'll make fun of it. :p
Our discussion previously got, somewhat loud, but never did I see you as being a jerk. I'm sure the way I write things can sometimes come of as me being self riteous (to use someone elses terminology) but for the most part I type exactly how I would say something. Thus with lack of tone and facial expressions it can get confusing.
Personally I don't find ones lack of grammar annoying. In fact it makes them more human in my eyes. I've said before, I hold high respect for someone who has mastered the English language, but the fact is, we don't really talk like that.

BTW: Ostrasizer *can* be a word if you want it to be, do a definition search for NEOLOGISM and see for yourself. ;)

You simply CANNOT tell us that without posting a photo... WE DEMAND A PHOTO! :D

Yep, I am unreasonable. Notice how the little quibble has driven everyone, including the OP, out of this thread. Good work.

To quote you, "if you don't like it, don't read it."

:rolleyes:

28 pages of posts and the OP has yet to use the word brake correctly.

It took me a while to figure out why this thread bothered me. And it is you. I read the whole thread yesterday. Not that I am considering a Denali*, it has been instructive to me as a returnee to cycling. Except your frequent interruptions to complain, which seem to serve no purpose but to derail the discussion based on some grudge/bias you hold. The OP was kind in not asking you to "butt out", imo. You sir, are the unreasonable one, and your display here overnight only confirmed that impression.

The OP's original premise was to see if a Wal-Mart bike could be made usable for him, and his subsequent posts did a good job of following up on that premise. The sniping from folks like you who have a problem with that original premise is just annoying and would have been dealt with by the moderators at other forums I inhabit.

* About the Denali: I have good mechanical skill, so I could probably duplicate the repairs/adjustments that Cig did. And I am certainly (as I have posted here in other threads) in the market for a low-priced bike. (Short description: if $750 really is the entry-level break point for a new bike, I am walking instead!) But I don't go into Wal-Mart stores, and I don't buy anything that I would wear that I can't try on first, so I guess it really isn't an option for me. Still, the discussion has been very informative. Thanks!

Really? I've read only part of this thread and if it is at all possible, my IQ level has dropped at least 10 points! :mad:
I've also lost 15 minutes of my life that I can never regain! :cry:

it's nice to know there are some thick skinned folks around, and self righteous wasn't an accurate label to put on you... as i said last night, i mistook your original tone.
as for me being a jerk, i don't mind the label. anyone who has the balls to speak their mind will be called a jerk or "insensitive" by those with some tact.

what "display" was this?

as for Cigs review i have described more than enough of why i find it objectionable, if i have said it once too often it is because i was prompted to or because someone challenged the idea supporting his review as an impartial one. never have i had or stated a problem with what you percieve Cig's original premise to be, nor will i in the future. furthermore i hold no grudge i only call them as i see them.
what you are not seeing is that Cig's displayed intentions were making this bike usable for everyone not just "for him".
if offense has been taken by my words, than the offended should try to understand themselves a bit better because i have slandered no one. i have only reviewed the thread in a logical manner, which seems to be personally offensive to you and the others of whom i am left to assume have some personal stake in this.

the closest i have come to a personal jab (other than with Pj7) was in regards to Cig's claimed speed. i did take his feelings into considration before i spoke and tried to present the evidence that supported my opinion in a plain manner.
three factors there can say it all... thirty year avid cyclist/mechanic- personal top speed one year ago 16ish- personal best today 30ish
if drawing a conclusion from these three submitted pieces of evidence makes me a jerk than so be it and if a moderator would interfere with anyone for doing so i would find that board completely pointless... do you belong to a fascist board or somehting?

i don't know who your enemy is, or who it is that told you 750 dollars is a base price in cycles.. but it has little to do with me or with this thread.
so lets stay on topic, eh? ;)

Have you been to a bike shop lately? :rolleyes:

No, I haven't. I've read that Portland and a few other places have a few shops that are actually offering/featuring bicycles built for commuting, i.e.equipped with fenders, chainguards, lights, etc at reasonable prices. Do many bike shops in the US have readily available commuting bikes at any price?