thbirks

I totally agree, however the cheapest option is usually not the best value. I suppose Pete could have found a pair of Chuck Taylor all-stars for $20. I don't look down on anybody because of the car the drive, the house they own or even the bike they ride, but I view department store bikes as a travesty. The are designed and sold as toys. I believe this hurts cyclists in general as the public then sees bikes as toys or at best sporting equipment. As a child I only had department store bikes and when I bought my first bike store bike I was blown away at the difference, and It wasn't even a expensive bike.

I think that toy bikes have even become worse over the years as now-a-days they're designing the bikes with half-arsed suspension systems that self-destruct while being ridden. I believe that all bikes should have to meet a set of standards in order to be sold. This is because I believe bikes are vehicles not toys.

In respect to the original poster, $250-$300 will buy a decent bike at a shop that can actually help you after the sale. If you ride the bike hard and often you'll wear things out, but the bike will be worth fixing.

goose

Agreed.

I am not trying to argue against that point either. I totally understand what you guys are saying. My point is that a lot of people are very easily impressed one way or the other (I am not speaking specifically of the original poster of this thread). If I were a kid reading some of the posts here, I would think that there is no way to ride unless you are rich. That may not be what some are saying, but that is how it comes across sometimes.

If the point is to try to help people who are seeking help, there is no point in humiliating them. I know you (and others here) don't want to see people make mistakes by buying cheap just for the sake of buying cheap. It still remains, however, some people (and maybe it is the minority) just can't spend that kind of money, and the advice I am seeing to those people is "don't waste your time".

I am NOT advocating buying a cheap (not the same as inexpensive) bike, but I could never advocate slamming you for what you ride either. I will be perfectly honest- If the attitude of many of the people that post here (and I like the place and most of the people, don't get me wrong) are indicative at what you will find at most organized rides- there is no way I would be a part of it.

thbirks

I appreciate what you are saying, 'goose. A couple of weeks ago I passed a group of club cyclists going in the opposite direction. It was funny to see that some of the cyclists waved at me as I waved to them and others first looked at my bike, which is built for commuting by the way, before deciding to wave or not.

Biking doesn't have to be expensive. Many people make it that way because they like spending money. That's my guess anyway.

thbirks

You won't hear this from me

But if someone were to come to me and say "look I need a bike but i've only got $100 to spend." There's no way I'm going to send them to a department store. I've personally purchased a used bike for $50, A nice Motobecane and hardly ridden too. I probably should have overhauled the bearings right away, but I didn't. I rode the bike and replaced and repaired things as needed. The bike was quite enjoyable to ride. This is just my opinion but why support the crappy bike industry when there are so many good bikes to recycle.

midwestmntnbkr

This is a little off the subject of the post, but hopefully not TOO far off.

Your text reminds me of several occasions where I was shunned at a group ride because I was not on a road bike. At the time all I had was a hardtail MTB that had slick tires on it. It seems as though most roadies think that if you're not on a road bike you shouldn't ride with them at all. They changed their mind some when I could hang with them in a pace line and sometimes even pass some of them!!

It never ceases to amaze me how many times as I would ride that bike on a popular route for cyclists, the number of people on road bikes that would act as though they never even see you, even though I would always wave to them...SNOBS!!

I now have a road bike and I still wave to everyone, whether its a child, MTB, commuter, or even sometimes I wave to other roadies...I still have some coarse feelings for those hard core roadies.

ITS NOT WHAT YOU RIDE...ITS THE FACT THAT YOU RIDE PERIOD

velocipedio

I don't want you to interpret this as confrontational, or an attack -- it is neither -- but I do think you have some issues to deal with when it comes to cyclists, bikes and cycling culture.

Yes, you can get a perfectly adequate bicycle for $300 or less at your local X-Mart; but it's worth specifying what it's adequate for. It would be adequate for relatively undemanding short-distance travel. It will be heavy and poorly assembled, and probably built with inferior components; it probably won't be very durable. But it will be a bicycle. You might even enjoy riding it.

However, it is not snobbish or demening to the person who spends $300 in an XMart to point out that (a) in bicycles, you get what you pay for and (b) you'll probably get more for the same price at a specialist bike shop. Personally, I think cycling is a much more enjoyable sport when you have a good quality bike. I am serious enough about the sport that I am willing to pay a fair bit for a good bike. Someone who is not so serious about the sport may not want to spend as much. That's cool, too.

There's a popular belief that the machine [or in music, the instrument] doesn't matter. "It's not the bike," after all. That's true, to a point. However, Lance Armstrong would not have won the Tour de France, or even made it up le Col de Tourmalet, on a 50 lb Huffy [though he could still kick my butt, but that's another story].

Frankly, I think there's a certain anti-snobbishness in that way of thinking. It's like a combination of "I don't need no stinkin' $2000 bike..." and "Bikes are toys; who'd spend $2000 on a toy?"

I found your comments on musical instruments quite interesting, in that respect. Sure, a great musician can play great msic on any instrument... But isn't it interesting how great musicians [Hound Dog Taylor excepted] who spend so much time babying and tweaking their instruments to get them "just right?" Isn't it amazing how SRV would hunt for weeks in Austin guitar shops looking for that "perfect" strat? It's worth noting that Carlos Santana -- surely one of the greats of the instrument -- choses to play a Paul Reed Smith and not a Samick.

These guys can/could get music out of a toaster over; they can/could play any giutar -- but they'd rather not fight the instrument to make the music. They'd rather have the istrument be a perfect Zen transmitter of their ideas.

To a great extent, that's what bikes are like. You can get one at the hardware store, but you'll have to fight it to ride it. That's okay for some people. Personally, I'd rather pay more and have a more cooperative ride.

goose

So far- so good.

In a previous post of mine (perception) most people who responded seemed to imply that this was their situation. They ride for enjoyment. As a car owner, I think I can at least say that it is difficult to "enjoy" anything that isn't paid for. I personally would have to finance a high-dollar bike, and feel sure that others are in the same boat.

I would never argue that point, either. It is more fun when you don't have to work on something before you ride, drive, play, whatever.

Consider this. As of right now, with the exception of the individuals here, I am the most knowledgable person I know of concerning bikes. How scary is that? Some of the people who visit here live in small towns (yes there are still some around) without access to a bike shop or anyone to help them choose a new/used bike. It seems that the likelihood of such a person getting a "good deal" on a quality used bike would be slim to none.

I don't shun anyone who has the resources to have a nice bike. You are right, it is a vehicle, not a toy. If a man can afford that, then wonderful. It is more important to many here to have a bike than a car. As difficult as that is for me to comprehend, I still respect that. I just don't want to see some kid or poverty stricken adult left out in the cold because of what he/she rides or can afford.

Still not angry, still not looking for a fight...

D*Alex

I've seen this happen with my club, too. Usually, early in the season, some new members, unaware of what a "moderate" road ride actually is, will show up with the most inappropriate equipment for our weeknight 40 mile rides. Usually, we just give them an easier route to follow, then we go on our own way. Once in a while, though, somebody tries to ride with us.
After 3 or 4 miles, though, the group either has to drop the guy and forget him, or else we have to slow our pace down to keep from leaving him behind. Once, this meant that we were only able to do a 25 mile loop. Now, we usually just tell MTB'ers that it's their responsibility to keep up with us, and then show them the re-group points on the map. None have been able to keep up with us since then. Just having tall enough gearing and road slicks does not make a MTB as fast as a road bike.
I don't show up at MTB rides with my road bike and expect the dirt riders to slow down to my speed. Why should they expect us to slow down to their speed?

midwestmntnbkr

Goose...without trying to stereo-type here, I would like to say I may have a reasoning for some of the debate about this. From a previous thread I remember reading that MANY of the people on this forum are computer/IT/programmer professional types of people. It has been my experience that most of these professions make a pretty good living. I am sure their are exceptions, don't shoot me yet. I noticed that you are listed as a factory worker/preacher. I don't know alot about the income of yourself, but I would presume moderate, like myself. I actually am at the low end of moderate, but that is what I choose to do and make. I am not complaining just stating a fact. A 2000-3000 bike for us is a HUGE undertaking, where for someone who makes 60-70 thous. a year it is no big deal. I know this for FACT, I bought a 3000 bike last year and it took me 12 months in lay-a-way to get it. This may be some of why their seems to be so much controversy about the X-mart bikes and a Bike shop bike. Some people have the means to buy the best and never have to settle for anything less, you and I can't always do that.

Did I make some of you say hmmmmmm? Thats what I want is to make you think a bit.

midwestmntnbkr

Interesting points you make. Question for you, If I could keep up on my MTB would I still be a liability, or would you consider me "one of the guys?"

I have been riding off and on with this club for over a year now, and only a handful of people talk to me and make me feel like I am even there. WHY? Just because I don't have a $5000 road bike made of space shuttle material that will run 27 mph? Oh well, I make do with what I have and have fun. Of course NOW I have a road bike and I love it. You are correct for sure on the addage that MTB's can not be as fast as a roadie. My roadie is so nimble and quick its amazing.

goose

I'll make my (last?) point. I was kinda hoping someone would call me on something, but no one has so-

Why shouldn't anyone who reads this and also plays either a Jap Strat or a Kramer be offended? After all, I have taken my opinion and made it out to be fact.

It's easy to say something innocently enough and yet still leave the wrong impression (ie "dept store bikes are all trash" or "Kramer's are all trash" or whatever). No doubt we are all guilty of it to some extent. I value what you all have to say about cycling in general. I just wouldn't want to see someone turned off by a brutal answer to any question.

nelson103

Wow for a new person here at the forums, i created one pretty long topic. 3 pages! Anyways...thanks for all the help guys, it's been intresting reading everyone's ideas and opinions. (lots of good points made here and there) Well I havn't bought my bike yet mainly cuz I have been shopping around. I went to about 8 bike shops (one said on the door "no one under 18 allowed" OUCH that's cruel, so I couldnt go in) The cheapest bikes there were around 320-300. I plan on hitting a few more stores before I make a final decision. I don't plan on buying a used bike but that was a good idea. I just don't know enough about bikes to buy a used one. For all i know, it could have major problems that I don't know about. Plus I wont have a dealer that can help me with it after I buy it. THANKS

a2psyklnut

Hey Nelson,

I can't believe a shop wouldn't allow anyone under 18 into their shop! I definately wouldn't shop there!

Anyways, many shops (around here anyways) take trade-ins. They usually tune them up, replace worn parts and sell em for what they have invested in them! I've seen a bike that a person bought 3 months before and decided they needed another size, the bike was sold for 1/2 of what is originally sold for and only had like 200 miles on it! It was immaculate!!!

What I'm saying, is call around and see if any of the shops have any used bikes as well.

jagsfanrick

You can get a Magna Glacier at target for $69..heckuva lot cheaper than the prices being thrown around here.

JanMM

This was a long-dead thread.

StephenH

Yeah, I was sitting there reading through it and finally noticed the date was 2002. Sheesh. The OP has already worn out two bikes by now.