kingston 

While Fuji is a once cool brand that went out of business and was bought up by another company which modernized the product to compete on price and markets it primarily to people on the inexperienced end of the cycling spectrum, Nashbar markets their products to generally more experienced cyclists who want an decent product at a low price and don’t want to pay for the R&D or Marketing of the cool brands. That’s why most of the Nashbar bikes have no branding the bikes themselves. I would say that the unbranded Nashbar bikes are paradoxically cooler than Fuji’s, but it’s probably a toss-up. Neither one is very cool.

kingston 

They keep the hate inside. Especially if you're passing them. Despite what marketers want you to believe, you don't need a cool bike to be fast.

Dan333SP

Good point, Erich.

Road Fan

Not as good as the red seedless Fuji's!

Bikeracer123

Is my roubaix cool? It's as light and fast as a caad

Walter

My wife has put plenty of miles on an older Team Pro with a mix of Ultegra and DA. The bike was a "hand me down" from a local racer sponsored by a LBS so it's had lots of miles. We've had to get some crash damage on the seat stays repaired but otherwise it's been a great bike for her.

Sooner or later it's time will come but we'll have positive thoughts about that bike for a long time.

Walter

True.

RPK79

I thought to be UCI legal the bikes had to be commercially available?

andr0id

That makes Fuji (along with many "2nd tier" mfgs) excellent bikes as far as cost/performance. There is little if any difference between them and a Trek or Specialized as far as performance, but they cost several hundred less similarly equipped.

The moneys in the bike and not the marketing.

lyrictenor1

Some more winners who rode Fujis:

Juan Jose Cobo (Geox-TMC), Vuelta de Espana, 2011, Fuji Altamira

Eduard Prades (Caja Rural), Philadelphia International Cycling Classic, 2016, Fuji Transonic

kingston 

Sorry. Fuji's are not cool. I thought I covered that.

kingston 

Precisely why I don't have any cool bikes.

kingston 

I'm sure all the parts are commercially available, but nobody's winning big races on stock Roubaix's or Gran Fondo's

RPK79

People ride stock bikes?

knobd

Several regular LBS's around me carry Fuji's and it is not the bike that is preventing the winning of big races on them.

2 of my 3 bikes are actually Fuji's (1 old and 1 new) as my Scattante CX bike is a Fuji frame from Performance. I can't say anything bad about either of them. The CX is a good tough solid entry level bike that I've upgraded. The frame is excellent for the money. My '88 Tiawanese made Sagres SP (Tange Infinity frame) is heavy but is the smoothest riding bike I own. It also fits me the best. I'm always tempted to modernize the Suntour groupset but the thing is about 95% stock so I leave it alone.

kingston 

Amazing but true. You probably don't notice because you are going by too fast.

kingston 

The Sagres is pre-ASI so it's cool. You're good with that one.

kcjc

My recollection was from the late 80's/early 90's and they were nothing special. If fact Honda's were nothing special except for durability. They did put out nice high end bicycles but suffered image problem going with Tange tubing when the latest rage re light weight/technological advantage was with Reynolds and Columbus, no wins in the pro ranks, and heritage anyone cared about. Tange were a beast until Prestige and that took a few revs before they got it comparable. The high and mid range stuff they put out were just not that competitive or special.

Bikeracer123

Do you count the sl 1.1 as cool

kingston 

I don't. Coolness is a brand attribute not a model attribute. I can think of some exceptions like the Ford GT, but I wouldn't put the SL 1.1 in that category.

vinfix

I think people hate on them because they are a 2nd tier brand that ends up in the bargain bin. I built up a close-out Connoisseur frame, it made a nice steel bike. Likewise Breezer, another ASI brand- I have 2, they're great bikes that came with great parts. ASI has their house brand (Oval), just like Trek & Spec. do, and Shimano is pretty universal. So that leaves design. I haven't ridden carbon Fuji's, but they do seem to have stepped up their game with the newest models.

oldbobcat

In that company, I thought Fuji was the stodgy one, at least until the end of the '70s. The Team and Pro were pretty nice. Univega was cool because Ben Lawee always had that Italian aesthetic going, and Bridgestone had Grant Petersen before he went total retro-grouch. Japanese Fujis were always well made but to me they lacked curb-appeal. As if they were designed by a committee that didn't really know what it was going after.

Actually, I'm quite fond of Fuji's Roubaix line. I think it's one of the best road bikes available at this kind of price. It's the ill-conceived hybrids like the Absolute, the off-target mountain bikes, the flat foot disaster called the Saratoga, and the ultra-low-end Newest range that get my scorn. They reflect an attitude of follow the leaders, source the cheapest components, and beat them on price even if the package doesn't work as a whole.

Fuji probably makes more money licensing the Roubaix brand to Specialized than it does selling Roubaixs, but that's OK by me. It's a cool bike.

oldbobcat

Geox-TMC, Netapp-Endura, Caja Rural-Seguros RGA on the Pro Continental side have been sponsored by Fuji.

nbourbaki

Thanks, the Absolute 2.0 is what I ride. I don't get the hate for this bike or Fuji in general. Care to elaborate on why the Absolute is ill-concieved?

mynameistaken

Ok, lets be honest here... wearing spandex and road cycling is not cool (unless you are peter sagan). what type of bike you ride only matters on the inter webs.