| |
Main
Date: 09 Sep 2007 11:20:29
From: jim
Subject: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior components and a suspension front. I post this to assist any others facing the same choice in a 'flat foot on the ground forward crank geometry (Electra Townie's 'trademark' innovation) bike..
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 18:44:05
From: jim
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 11, 5:29 am, Aeek <aeeee...@tpg.com.au > wrote: > On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 11:20:29 -0700, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > >After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > >price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > >clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > > You obviously missed the #1 piece of advice - test ride them! Test road them...and the clear winner was the Trek Pure Sport. No contest.
|
| |
Date: 14 Sep 2007 13:22:27
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 14, 1:33 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote: > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > news:1189784911.357077.255710@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On Sep 14, 10:09 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > >>news:1189608018.112551.3610@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message > > >> >>news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... > > >> >> >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can > >> >> >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus > >> >> >> on > >> >> >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to > >> >> >> the > >> >> >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we > >> >> >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and > >> >> >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike > >> >> >> paths. > > >> >> > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential > >> >> > cyclists > >> >> > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > >> >> That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is > >> >> a > >> >> huge > >> >> umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of > >> >> cycling. > > >> > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't > >> > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an > >> > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. > > >> >> It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular > >> >> cycling > >> >> subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling > >> >> subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. > > >> > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate > >> > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. > > >> I know nothing about Trek's corporate pandering. > > > On Sept. 10, you referred to Trek as "an organization which promotes > > cycling". > > > Here's the post: > > >http://tinyurl.com/2a8tmn > > > That is what I am addressing as "corporate pandering". > > Sorry if it was confusing. > > I view any company that makes/sells bikes as an organization that promotes > cycling, I find that viewpoint rather incredible. Trek (for an example) is the maker of an industrial product, bicycles. That they "promote cycling" is purely a byproduct of the need to sell the product.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Sep 2007 13:39:13
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189801347.578141.235370@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 14, 1:33 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1189784911.357077.255710@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Sep 14, 10:09 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in >> >> message >> >> >>news:1189608018.112551.3610@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >>news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... >> >> >> >> >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you >> >> >> >> can >> >> >> >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a >> >> >> >> focus >> >> >> >> on >> >> >> >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights >> >> >> >> to >> >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What >> >> >> >> we >> >> >> >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes >> >> >> >> and >> >> >> >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike >> >> >> >> paths. >> >> >> >> > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential >> >> >> > cyclists >> >> >> > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? >> >> >> >> That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling >> >> >> is >> >> >> a >> >> >> huge >> >> >> umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of >> >> >> cycling. >> >> >> > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't >> >> > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an >> >> > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. >> >> >> >> It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a >> >> >> particular >> >> >> cycling >> >> >> subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling >> >> >> subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. >> >> >> > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate >> >> > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. >> >> >> I know nothing about Trek's corporate pandering. >> >> > On Sept. 10, you referred to Trek as "an organization which promotes >> > cycling". >> >> > Here's the post: >> >> >http://tinyurl.com/2a8tmn >> >> > That is what I am addressing as "corporate pandering". >> >> Sorry if it was confusing. >> >> I view any company that makes/sells bikes as an organization that >> promotes >> cycling, > > I find that viewpoint rather incredible. Trek (for an example) is the > maker of an industrial product, bicycles. That they "promote cycling" > is purely a byproduct of the need to sell the product. > > > I figure the more people who ride bikes the better. If the big companies > get more people riding I am happy! That said I am also fine with the sole > producers who handmake a fe bikes a year. > >
|
| |
Date: 14 Sep 2007 08:48:31
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 14, 10:09 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote: > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > news:1189608018.112551.3610@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message > > >>news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... > > >> >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can > >> >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on > >> >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the > >> >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we > >> >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and > >> >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. > > >> > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential > >> > cyclists > >> > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > >> That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is a > >> huge > >> umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of > >> cycling. > > > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't > > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an > > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. > > >> It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular > >> cycling > >> subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling > >> subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. > > > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate > > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. > > I know nothing about Trek's corporate pandering. On Sept. 10, you referred to Trek as "an organization which promotes cycling". Here's the post: http://tinyurl.com/2a8tmn That is what I am addressing as "corporate pandering". > If it has wheels, and if I > pedal hard enough if it is able to get me where I want to go I am happy. I > don't get frustrated when I company makes bike that isn't a perfect fit for > my needs. I figure that the marketplace will figure out what is going to > stay and what is going to not get a second chance
|
| | |
Date: 14 Sep 2007 11:33:28
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189784911.357077.255710@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 14, 10:09 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1189608018.112551.3610@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message >> >> >>news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... >> >> >> >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can >> >> >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus >> >> >> on >> >> >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to >> >> >> the >> >> >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we >> >> >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and >> >> >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike >> >> >> paths. >> >> >> > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential >> >> > cyclists >> >> > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? >> >> >> That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is >> >> a >> >> huge >> >> umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of >> >> cycling. >> >> > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't >> > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an >> > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. >> >> >> It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular >> >> cycling >> >> subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling >> >> subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. >> >> > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate >> > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. >> >> I know nothing about Trek's corporate pandering. > > On Sept. 10, you referred to Trek as "an organization which promotes > cycling". > > Here's the post: > > http://tinyurl.com/2a8tmn > > That is what I am addressing as "corporate pandering". Sorry if it was confusing. I view any company that makes/sells bikes as an organization that promotes cycling, just as I would view any company that makes/sells autos as an organization that promotes driving > > >> If it has wheels, and if I >> pedal hard enough if it is able to get me where I want to go I am happy. >> I >> don't get frustrated when I company makes bike that isn't a perfect fit >> for >> my needs. I figure that the marketplace will figure out what is going to >> stay and what is going to not get a second chance >
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 18:40:56
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 12, 1:24 pm, Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote: > On Sep 12, 11:57 am, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Sep 12, 9:40 am, Ozark Bicycle > > > <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote: > > > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... > > > > > >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can > > > > >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on > > > > >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the > > > > >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we > > > > >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and > > > > >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. > > > > > > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential cyclists > > > > > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > > > > That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is a huge > > > > umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of cycling. > > > > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't > > > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an > > > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. > > > > > It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular cycling > > > > subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling > > > > subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. > > > > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate > > > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. > > > Dude, after that advert with all the animated flowers and shit, I > > like--sped over to BP to fill up. God bless those good people! > > Guess I missed the animated flowers, etc. Please fill in the blanks > (whose advert, etc.?) Maybe it was somebody else, but I swear I think it was BP did an animated hippy dippy spot showcasing their environmental record. You know, greenwashing. Could have been a mash up of two in my head--who knows?! Then there's VW's recent hipster treatment: http://tinyurl.com/2ufmqv Which probably has nothing to do with any of this except that I find it amusing that a Swedish guy is doing a Swedish accent for a German car company.Vat?!
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 11:24:48
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 12, 11:57 am, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote: > On Sep 12, 9:40 am, Ozark Bicycle > > > > <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote: > > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message > > > >news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... > > > > >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can > > > >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on > > > >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the > > > >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we > > > >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and > > > >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. > > > > > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential cyclists > > > > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > > > That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is a huge > > > umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of cycling. > > > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't > > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an > > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. > > > > It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular cycling > > > subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling > > > subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. > > > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate > > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. > > Dude, after that advert with all the animated flowers and shit, I > like--sped over to BP to fill up. God bless those good people! Guess I missed the animated flowers, etc. Please fill in the blanks (whose advert, etc.?)
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 09:57:18
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 12, 9:40 am, Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote: > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message > > >news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... > > > >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can > > >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on > > >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the > > >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we > > >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and > > >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. > > > > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential cyclists > > > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > > That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is a huge > > umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of cycling. > > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. > > > > > It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular cycling > > subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling > > subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. > > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. Dude, after that advert with all the animated flowers and shit, I like--sped over to BP to fill up. God bless those good people!
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 08:11:09
From: jim
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
So much of this is totally OT and merely an excuse for soapbox lecturing and cajoling.
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 07:40:18
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote: > "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message > > news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... > > >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can > >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on > >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the > >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we > >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and > >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. > > > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential cyclists > > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is a huge > umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of cycling. Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. > > It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular cycling > subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling > subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate pandering to a "cause" is money well spent.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Sep 2007 08:09:20
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189608018.112551.3610@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message >> >> news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... >> >> >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can >> >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on >> >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the >> >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we >> >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and >> >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. >> >> > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential >> > cyclists >> > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? >> >> That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is a >> huge >> umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of >> cycling. > > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. >> >> It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular >> cycling >> subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling >> subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. > > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. > > I know nothing about Trek's corporate pandering. If it has wheels, and if I pedal hard enough if it is able to get me where I want to go I am happy. I don't get frustrated when I company makes bike that isn't a perfect fit for my needs. I figure that the marketplace will figure out what is going to stay and what is going to not get a second chance.
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 18:32:31
From: jim
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
In defense of Trek...advertising can boost sales to the point that costs of manufacture per unit can be significantly lower. The Trek Pure Sport is fairly priced compared to the comparable Townie, Giant and Specialized. Has anyone purchased the Trek extended warranty?
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 16:04:24
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 11, 5:52 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com > wrote: > > So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can > > start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on > > practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the > > road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we > > don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and > > Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. > > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential cyclists > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? Nice try, Mike, but way, way off target. My "vision" is for cycling to be a far more mainstream, everyday activity, *not* something done only in special garb, with $3k+ plastic bikes and only on "special" bike paths and lanes.
|
| | |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 16:14:42
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
>> > So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can >> > start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on >> > practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the >> > road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we >> > don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and >> > Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. >> >> Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential >> cyclists >> who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > Nice try, Mike, but way, way off target. My "vision" is for cycling to > be a far more mainstream, everyday activity, *not* something done only > in special garb, with $3k+ plastic bikes and only on "special" bike > paths and lanes. No, I think I hit that one out of the park. : >) --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189551864.797625.181280@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 11, 5:52 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> > wrote: >> > So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can >> > start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on >> > practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the >> > road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we >> > don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and >> > Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. >> >> Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential >> cyclists >> who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > Nice try, Mike, but way, way off target. My "vision" is for cycling to > be a far more mainstream, everyday activity, *not* something done only > in special garb, with $3k+ plastic bikes and only on "special" bike > paths and lanes. > > > >
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 12:15:00
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 11, 11:02 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote: > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in messagenews:1189523886.570443.241080@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > On Sep 11, 8:46 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > >>news:1189507798.354754.232890@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On Sep 10, 10:58 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > >> >>news:1189474072.256201.32490@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > >> >> > On Sep 10, 8:44 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in > >> >> >> message > > >> >> >>news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... > > >> >> >> > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually > >> >> >> >> > identical > >> >> >> >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > >> >> >> >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, > >> >> >> >> > that > >> >> >> >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon > >> >> >> >> > superior > >> >> >> >> > components and a suspension front. > > >> >> >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > >> >> >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > >> >> >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, > >> >> >> >> as > >> >> >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > >> >> >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > >> >> >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > >> >> >> I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, wouldn't your > >> >> >> disdain be better directed at organizations that make it harder to > >> >> >> bike > >> >> >> instead of organizations that promote biking? > > >> >> > Which "organization that promotes biking" are you referring to? > > >> >> Trek- > > >> > This is a joke, isn't it? > > >> Not on my part. > > > Trek "promotes biking" to serve their narrow, commercial interests in > > the same way Anheuser-Busch promotes "safe drinking": cynically. Any > > company that positions something like the Portland as a commuter has > > zero credibility in the realm of bicycles-as-transportation. > > I am sure that Trek can do things better but why the negative focus on the bike industry? So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. > Aren't there other companies/organizations/industries that are bigger threats to biking?
|
| | |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 22:52:46
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can > start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on > practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the > road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we > don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and > Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential cyclists who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? And why does it matter that it might be a "toy" anyway? What's so bad about "toys?" Do you have a fit every time someone spends more than $250 for a stereo receiver? Do you blow a gasket when a family member buys anything other than the cheapest-possible car? Do you furnish your apartment or house with cheap bean bags for chairs and milk cartons for corner tables, because anything else is an un-needed extravagance meant to impress someone? --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
|
| | | |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 06:45:13
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com > wrote in message news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you can >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a focus on >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights to the >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What we >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes and >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike paths. > > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential cyclists > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling is a huge umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of cycling. It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a particular cycling subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling subgroups instead of cycling's true foes.
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 08:18:06
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 11, 8:46 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote: > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > news:1189507798.354754.232890@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Sep 10, 10:58 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > >>news:1189474072.256201.32490@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On Sep 10, 8:44 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in > >> >> message > > >> >>news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... > > >> >> > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > > >> >> >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually > >> >> >> > identical > >> >> >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > >> >> >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, > >> >> >> > that > >> >> >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon > >> >> >> > superior > >> >> >> > components and a suspension front. > > >> >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > >> >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > >> >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, > >> >> >> as > >> >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > >> >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > >> >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > >> >> I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, wouldn't your > >> >> disdain be better directed at organizations that make it harder to > >> >> bike > >> >> instead of organizations that promote biking? > > >> > Which "organization that promotes biking" are you referring to? > > >> Trek- > > > This is a joke, isn't it? > > Not on my part. Trek "promotes biking" to serve their narrow, commercial interests in the same way Anheuser-Busch promotes "safe drinking": cynically. Any company that positions something like the Portland as a commuter has zero credibility in the realm of bicycles-as-transportation.
|
| | |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 09:02:00
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0195_01C7F452.6A7051F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in = message news:1189523886.570443.241080@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 11, 8:46 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in = message >> >> news:1189507798.354754.232890@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On Sep 10, 10:58 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in = message >> >> >>news:1189474072.256201.32490@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> > On Sep 10, 8:44 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> = wrote: >> >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote = in >> >> >> message >> >> >> >>news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > After doing research on various forums...given the = virtually >> >> >> >> > identical >> >> >> >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has = become >> >> >> >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the = rider, >> >> >> >> > that >> >> >> >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon >> >> >> >> > superior >> >> >> >> > components and a suspension front. >> >> >> >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a = path >> >> >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear = mech? Get a >> >> >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore = for $15, >> >> >> >> as >> >> >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, = the Trek >> >> >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. >> >> >> >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. >> >> >> >> I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, = wouldn't your >> >> >> disdain be better directed at organizations that make it harder = to >> >> >> bike >> >> >> instead of organizations that promote biking? >> >> >> > Which "organization that promotes biking" are you referring to? >> >> >> Trek- >> >> > This is a joke, isn't it? >> >> Not on my part. >=20 > Trek "promotes biking" to serve their narrow, commercial interests in > the same way Anheuser-Busch promotes "safe drinking": cynically. Any > company that positions something like the Portland as a commuter has > zero credibility in the realm of bicycles-as-transportation. > I am sure that Trek can do things better but why the negative focus on = the bike industry? =20 Aren't there other companies/organizations/industries that are bigger = threats to biking? ------=_NextPart_000_0195_01C7F452.6A7051F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" > <HTML ><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1" > <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16525" name=3DGENERATOR > <STYLE ></STYLE> </HEAD > <BODY > <DIV > </DIV> <DIV >"Ozark Bicycle" <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com" >bicycleatelier@oza= rkbicycleservice.com</A >>=20 wrote in message <A=20 href=3D"news:1189523886.570443.241080@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com" >news:= 1189523886.570443.241080@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com</A >...</DIV> <DIV >> On Sep 11, 8:46 am, "Frank Drackman" <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:frankdr...@yahoo.com" >frankdr...@yahoo.com</A>>=20 wrote:<BR >>> "Ozark Bicycle" <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com" >bicycleatel...@oza= rkbicycleservice.com</A >>=20 wrote in message<BR >>><BR>>> <A=20 href=3D"news:1189507798.354754.232890@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com" >news:1= 189507798.354754.232890@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com</A >...<BR>>><BR= >>><BR>>><BR>>>=20 > On Sep 10, 10:58 pm, "Frank Drackman" <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:frankdr...@yahoo.com" >frankdr...@yahoo.com</A>>=20 wrote:<BR >>> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com" >bicycleatel...@oza= rkbicycleservice.com</A >>=20 wrote in message<BR >>><BR>>>=20 >>news:1189474072.256201.32490@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...<BR>&g= t; ><BR>>>=20 >> > On Sep 10, 8:44 am, "Frank Drackman" <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:frankdr...@yahoo.com" >frankdr...@yahoo.com</A>>=20 wrote:<BR >>> >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com" >bicycleatel...@oza= rkbicycleservice.com</A >>=20 wrote in<BR >>> >> >> message<BR>>><BR>>> = >>=20 >>news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...<BR>&g= t; ><BR>>>=20 >> >> > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:landot...@gmail.com" >landot...@gmail.com</A>> = wrote:<BR >>>=20 >> >> >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <<A=20 href=3D"mailto:jim...@netzero.net" >jim...@netzero.net</A>>=20 wrote:<BR >>><BR>>> >> >> >> > After = doing=20 research on various forums...given the virtually<BR >>> >> = >>=20 >> > identical<BR>>> >> >> >> > = price of the=20 two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become<BR >>> = >>=20 >> >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable = for the=20 rider,<BR >>> >> >> >> > that<BR>>> = >>=20 >> >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice = based=20 upon<BR >>> >> >> >> > superior<BR>>> = >>=20 >> >> > components and a suspension=20 front.<BR >>><BR>>> >> >> >> Suspension = front=20 serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path<BR >>> >> = >>=20 >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? = Get=20 a<BR >>> >> >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I = just=20 picked up a new Deore for $15,<BR >>> >> >> >>=20 as<BR >>> >> >> >> good as anybody pootlin' = around could=20 ever need. Besides, the Trek<BR >>> >> >> >> = factory is=20 powered with the flesh of babies.<BR >>><BR>>> >> = >> >=20 Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype.<BR >>><BR>>> = >>=20 >> I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, = wouldn't=20 your<BR >>> >> >> disdain be better directed at = organizations=20 that make it harder to<BR >>> >> >> bike<BR>>> = >>=20 >> instead of organizations that promote = biking?<BR >>><BR>>>=20 >> > Which "organization that promotes biking" are you = referring=20 to?<BR >>><BR>>> >> Trek-<BR>>><BR>>> > = This is=20 a joke, isn't it?<BR >>><BR>>> Not on my part.<BR>> = <BR >> Trek=20 "promotes biking" to serve their narrow, commercial interests in<BR >> = the=20 same way Anheuser-Busch promotes "safe drinking": cynically. = Any<BR >>=20 company that positions something like the Portland as a commuter = has<BR >>=20 zero credibility in the realm of = bicycles-as-transportation.<BR >></DIV> <DIV > </DIV> <DIV >I am sure that Trek can do things better but why the negative focus = on the=20 bike industry? </DIV > <DIV >Aren't there other companies/organizations/industries that are = bigger=20 threats to biking?</DIV ></BODY></HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0195_01C7F452.6A7051F0--
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Sep 2007 03:02:50
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Decision Day ..Why....: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport vs. Trek Lime
|
In article <1190020872.600053.56860@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com >, jim <jimr18@netzero.net > writes: > Enjoy riding and keep a > happy (and safe) smile on your faces. Thank you all once again. My smile is never safe. In fact, it often gets me into trouble. :-) :-) But you've got yer whip, 'n that's good. Maybe lay your ears onto Eazy-Z's tune: SWITCHEZ as you cruise around ... "motherfucker shoulda stayed his ass home ..." There's another hip-hop tune that I like, where the lyrics go some thing like: "what'cha know about strets, what'cha know about debts, [something] [something] where my Mossberg's at ..." I think it's by TimbaLand, and some guy named Rey Gime. cheers, Tom -- Nothing is safe from me. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Sep 2007 02:21:12
From: jim
Subject: Decision Day ..Why....: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport vs. Trek Lime
|
O.K. After much debate...research...and yes...actually trying out the Electra Townie, Trek Lime and the Trek Pure Sport...it became clear and obvious as to which bike I much preferred. Forgetting the specs...just sitting and then riding...the Trek Pure Sport was the definitive 'winner' in my personal contest. Comfort and capability were the deciding factors. I made my purchase yesterday...and I spent about an hour cruising around the area. That hour only confirmed the correctness of my decision for me, personally. The Trek Pure Sport handled extremely well, is very very comfortable and has the geometry to make me feel very secure and happy. I'd like to thank everyone, on this and other forums, that helped contribute to my decision through their well considered and knowlegable input. Enjoy riding and keep a happy (and safe) smile on your faces. Thank you all once again.
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 03:49:58
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 10, 10:58 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote: > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > news:1189474072.256201.32490@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Sep 10, 8:44 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > >>news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > > >> >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually > >> >> > identical > >> >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > >> >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > >> >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > >> >> > components and a suspension front. > > >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > >> I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, wouldn't your > >> disdain be better directed at organizations that make it harder to bike > >> instead of organizations that promote biking? > > > Which "organization that promotes biking" are you referring to? > > Trek- This is a joke, isn't it?
|
| | |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 06:46:42
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189507798.354754.232890@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 10, 10:58 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1189474072.256201.32490@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On Sep 10, 8:44 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in >> >> message >> >> >>news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually >> >> >> > identical >> >> >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become >> >> >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, >> >> >> > that >> >> >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon >> >> >> > superior >> >> >> > components and a suspension front. >> >> >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path >> >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a >> >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, >> >> >> as >> >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek >> >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. >> >> >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. >> >> >> I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, wouldn't your >> >> disdain be better directed at organizations that make it harder to >> >> bike >> >> instead of organizations that promote biking? >> >> > Which "organization that promotes biking" are you referring to? >> >> Trek- > > This is a joke, isn't it? > > Not on my part.
|
| | | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 19:40:19
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 15, 6:24 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com > wrote: > >> I'm with you on your sentiments. It still seems silly for someone to > >> pick out Trek or one of the other large bike companies as being somehow > >> villanous for selling bikes. > > > Geez, why don't you read through the entire thread and see what was > > *actually said* and the context in which it was said? What seems silly > > at this point are your completely off the mark comments. > > Perhaps you could clear this up by a summation of your feelings on the > matter? > Sure. Trek, along with Cannondale, Giant , Specialized, etc., are makers of an industrial product; in their case, that product happens to be bicycles. IOW they are manufacturers and resellers, not organizations that "support cycling" (as Mr. Drackman seemed to feel they are). They are not evil nor villanous, but rather large businesses doing "what is necessary" to sell their industrial product and increase their market share.
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2007 19:29:58
From: Aeek
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 11:20:29 -0700, jim <jimr18@netzero.net > wrote: >After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical >price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become >clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that You obviously missed the #1 piece of advice - test ride them!
|
| |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 18:27:52
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 10, 8:44 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote: > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... > > > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > > >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > >> > components and a suspension front. > > >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, wouldn't your > disdain be better directed at organizations that make it harder to bike > instead of organizations that promote biking? Which "organization that promotes biking" are you referring to?
|
| | |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 20:58:12
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189474072.256201.32490@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 10, 8:44 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >> >> > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: >> >> >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually >> >> > identical >> >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become >> >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that >> >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior >> >> > components and a suspension front. >> >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. >> >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. >> >> I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, wouldn't your >> disdain be better directed at organizations that make it harder to bike >> instead of organizations that promote biking? > > Which "organization that promotes biking" are you referring to? > Trek
|
| | | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 05:14:07
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 15, 6:17 am, catzz66 <catz...@threeletterservice.com > wrote: > Frank Drackman wrote: > > > I know that my view is extremely simplistic. I really believe that biking > > is such a small segment of the transportation, or even > > sporting/entertainment, industry that any company that wants to sell bikes > > or bike accessories has to promote cycling to develop the market. You would > > probably say that they only do it to support their selfish interests, and > > you would probably be right, but I don't care about that. > > > I care that more people ride bikes. Pink Barbie bikes with tassels, great. > > Fixies on the street without brakes, bring them on. Racer wantabees with > > $9K carbon fiber speed machines, paceline away. Retro Lug Heads who must > > only use the correct type of twine, come on in. > > > Hopefully at some point in the future bikes will mainstream transportation > > in the U.S. and then we can have an intelligent discussion concerning how > > the different factions are helping or hurting the cause. > > I'm with you on your sentiments. It still seems silly for someone to > pick out Trek or one of the other large bike companies as being somehow > villanous for selling bikes. Geez, why don't you read through the entire thread and see what was *actually said* and the context in which it was said? What seems silly at this point are your completely off the mark comments.
|
| | | | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 23:24:10
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
>> I'm with you on your sentiments. It still seems silly for someone to >> pick out Trek or one of the other large bike companies as being somehow >> villanous for selling bikes. > > > Geez, why don't you read through the entire thread and see what was > *actually said* and the context in which it was said? What seems silly > at this point are your completely off the mark comments. Perhaps you could clear this up by a summation of your feelings on the matter? --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189858447.950183.256250@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 15, 6:17 am, catzz66 <catz...@threeletterservice.com> wrote: >> Frank Drackman wrote: >> >> > I know that my view is extremely simplistic. I really believe that >> > biking >> > is such a small segment of the transportation, or even >> > sporting/entertainment, industry that any company that wants to sell >> > bikes >> > or bike accessories has to promote cycling to develop the market. You >> > would >> > probably say that they only do it to support their selfish interests, >> > and >> > you would probably be right, but I don't care about that. >> >> > I care that more people ride bikes. Pink Barbie bikes with tassels, >> > great. >> > Fixies on the street without brakes, bring them on. Racer wantabees >> > with >> > $9K carbon fiber speed machines, paceline away. Retro Lug Heads who >> > must >> > only use the correct type of twine, come on in. >> >> > Hopefully at some point in the future bikes will mainstream >> > transportation >> > in the U.S. and then we can have an intelligent discussion concerning >> > how >> > the different factions are helping or hurting the cause. >> >> I'm with you on your sentiments. It still seems silly for someone to >> pick out Trek or one of the other large bike companies as being somehow >> villanous for selling bikes. > > > Geez, why don't you read through the entire thread and see what was > *actually said* and the context in which it was said? What seems silly > at this point are your completely off the mark comments. > > > >
|
| |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 03:40:13
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 9, 10:17 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com > wrote: > >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > >> Nope. That was considered, but there's a shortage of fuel lately. > > > Cannondale, Specialized and Trek used up the world supply in the past > > coupla years??? > > Cute. I'm sure it was unintentional that you snipped out the relevant (to > rbr) part of my reply. > It might have been relevant to rbr, but you only posted it to rbm, Mike, so it went into the void.
|
| |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 20:06:05
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 9, 9:27 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com > wrote: > >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > >> > components and a suspension front. > > >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > Nope. That was considered, but there's a shortage of fuel lately. Cannondale, Specialized and Trek used up the world supply in the past coupla years????
|
| | |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 03:17:06
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
>> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. >> >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. >> >> Nope. That was considered, but there's a shortage of fuel lately. > > Cannondale, Specialized and Trek used up the world supply in the past > coupla years??? Cute. I'm sure it was unintentional that you snipped out the relevant (to rbr) part of my reply. --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189393565.354312.141600@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 9, 9:27 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually >> >> > identical >> >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become >> >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that >> >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior >> >> > components and a suspension front. >> >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path >> >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a >> >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as >> >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek >> >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. >> >> > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. >> >> Nope. That was considered, but there's a shortage of fuel lately. > > Cannondale, Specialized and Trek used up the world supply in the past > coupla years???? > > > >
|
| |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 20:04:20
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 9, 9:10 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote: > On Sep 9, 9:06 pm, Ozark Bicycle > > > > <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote: > > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > > > > > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > > > > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > > > > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > > > > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > > > > components and a suspension front. > > > > Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > > > bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > > > new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > > > good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > > > factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > My bad, I was thinking of Dick Cheney's heated pool. Dick Cheney on a Madone......a marriage made in {insert reality of your choice}
|
| |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 20:02:29
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 9, 9:10 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote: > On Sep 9, 9:06 pm, Ozark Bicycle > > > > <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote: > > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > > > > > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > > > > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > > > > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > > > > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > > > > components and a suspension front. > > > > Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > > > bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > > > new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > > > good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > > > factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > My bad, I was thinking of Dick Cheney's heated pool. Dick Cheney on a Madone......a marriage made in {insert reality of your choice}
|
| |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 02:13:59
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 9, 5:12 pm, Steve Gravrock <use...@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote: > On 2007-09-09, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > > bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > > new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > > good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > > factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > Hey, at least it's a renewable resource. <g,d&r> Here at Swift Fuel, we're as committed to the environment and family planning as you are!
|
| |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 02:10:15
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 9, 9:06 pm, Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote: > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > > > > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > > > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > > > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > > > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > > > components and a suspension front. > > > Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > > bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > > new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > > good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > > factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. My bad, I was thinking of Dick Cheney's heated pool.
|
| |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 19:06:44
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote: > On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: > > > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > > components and a suspension front. > > Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > factory is powered with the flesh of babies. Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Sep 2007 15:30:32
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 14, 3:39 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com > wrote: > "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > news:1189801347.578141.235370@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Sep 14, 1:33 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message > > >>news:1189784911.357077.255710@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On Sep 14, 10:09 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in > >> >> message > > >> >>news:1189608018.112551.3610@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > >> >> > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message > > >> >> >>news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... > > >> >> >> >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, you > >> >> >> >> can > >> >> >> >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a > >> >> >> >> focus > >> >> >> >> on > >> >> >> >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same rights > >> >> >> >> to > >> >> >> >> the > >> >> >> >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. What > >> >> >> >> we > >> >> >> >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek Limes > >> >> >> >> and > >> >> >> >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to bike > >> >> >> >> paths. > > >> >> >> > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of potential > >> >> >> > cyclists > >> >> >> > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? > > >> >> >> That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO cycling > >> >> >> is > >> >> >> a > >> >> >> huge > >> >> >> umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions of > >> >> >> cycling. > > >> >> > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't > >> >> > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an > >> >> > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. > > >> >> >> It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a > >> >> >> particular > >> >> >> cycling > >> >> >> subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other cycling > >> >> >> subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. > > >> >> > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token corporate > >> >> > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. > > >> >> I know nothing about Trek's corporate pandering. > > >> > On Sept. 10, you referred to Trek as "an organization which promotes > >> > cycling". > > >> > Here's the post: > > >> >http://tinyurl.com/2a8tmn > > >> > That is what I am addressing as "corporate pandering". > > >> Sorry if it was confusing. > > >> I view any company that makes/sells bikes as an organization that > >> promotes > >> cycling, > > > I find that viewpoint rather incredible. Trek (for an example) is the > > maker of an industrial product, bicycles. That they "promote cycling" > > is purely a byproduct of the need to sell the product. > > I figure the more people who ride bikes the better. If the big companies > get more people riding I am happy! That said I am also fine with the sole > producers who handmake a fe bikes a year.- Perhaps we view the concept of "promoting cycling" differently. I certainly do not see the act of producing bicycles as equating with "promoting cycling".
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Sep 2007 16:43:36
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189809032.231433.275380@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 14, 3:39 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1189801347.578141.235370@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On Sep 14, 1:33 pm, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in >> >> message >> >> >>news:1189784911.357077.255710@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> > On Sep 14, 10:09 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in >> >> >> message >> >> >> >>news:1189608018.112551.3610@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On Sep 12, 8:45 am, "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >> >>news:2%EFi.26422$eY.21118@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net... >> >> >> >> >> >> So we should stand on the curb and applaud instead? Sorry, >> >> >> >> >> you >> >> >> >> >> can >> >> >> >> >> start without me. What cycling in the US needs is more of a >> >> >> >> >> focus >> >> >> >> >> on >> >> >> >> >> practical, useful bikes and on cyclists having the same >> >> >> >> >> rights >> >> >> >> >> to >> >> >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> >> road and same responsibilities on the road as do motorists. >> >> >> >> >> What >> >> >> >> >> we >> >> >> >> >> don't need are future garage-dust-gatherer toys like Trek >> >> >> >> >> Limes >> >> >> >> >> and >> >> >> >> >> Portlands. Nor do we need efforts to relegate cyclists to >> >> >> >> >> bike >> >> >> >> >> paths. >> >> >> >> >> > Why do you try so hard to discourage the huge number of >> >> >> >> > potential >> >> >> >> > cyclists >> >> >> >> > who don't share you own narrow vision of what cycling is? >> >> >> >> >> That is what I am trying to understand in this thread. IMO >> >> >> >> cycling >> >> >> >> is >> >> >> >> a >> >> >> >> huge >> >> >> >> umbrella and it makes more sense to support the other factions >> >> >> >> of >> >> >> >> cycling. >> >> >> >> > Trek Corporation, and other large bicycle manufacturers, aren't >> >> >> > "factions of cycling". They are the manufacturers/resellers of an >> >> >> > industrial product, which, in this case, happens to be bicycles. >> >> >> >> >> It seems clear that OB views himself as an advocate for a >> >> >> >> particular >> >> >> >> cycling >> >> >> >> subgroup but I feel that he is misguided by attacking other >> >> >> >> cycling >> >> >> >> subgroups instead of cycling's true foes. >> >> >> >> > You seem to be the perfect example of how a bit of token >> >> >> > corporate >> >> >> > pandering to a "cause" is money well spent. >> >> >> >> I know nothing about Trek's corporate pandering. >> >> >> > On Sept. 10, you referred to Trek as "an organization which promotes >> >> > cycling". >> >> >> > Here's the post: >> >> >> >http://tinyurl.com/2a8tmn >> >> >> > That is what I am addressing as "corporate pandering". >> >> >> Sorry if it was confusing. >> >> >> I view any company that makes/sells bikes as an organization that >> >> promotes >> >> cycling, >> >> > I find that viewpoint rather incredible. Trek (for an example) is the >> > maker of an industrial product, bicycles. That they "promote cycling" >> > is purely a byproduct of the need to sell the product. >> >> I figure the more people who ride bikes the better. If the big companies >> get more people riding I am happy! That said I am also fine with the >> sole >> producers who handmake a fe bikes a year.- > > Perhaps we view the concept of "promoting cycling" differently. I > certainly do not see the act of producing bicycles as equating with > "promoting cycling". > I know that my view is extremely simplistic. I really believe that biking is such a small segment of the transportation, or even sporting/entertainment, industry that any company that wants to sell bikes or bike accessories has to promote cycling to develop the market. You would probably say that they only do it to support their selfish interests, and you would probably be right, but I don't care about that. I care that more people ride bikes. Pink Barbie bikes with tassels, great. Fixies on the street without brakes, bring them on. Racer wantabees with $9K carbon fiber speed machines, paceline away. Retro Lug Heads who must only use the correct type of twine, come on in. Hopefully at some point in the future bikes will mainstream transportation in the U.S. and then we can have an intelligent discussion concerning how the different factions are helping or hurting the cause.
|
| | | | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 06:17:37
From: catzz66
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
Frank Drackman wrote: > > I know that my view is extremely simplistic. I really believe that biking > is such a small segment of the transportation, or even > sporting/entertainment, industry that any company that wants to sell bikes > or bike accessories has to promote cycling to develop the market. You would > probably say that they only do it to support their selfish interests, and > you would probably be right, but I don't care about that. > > I care that more people ride bikes. Pink Barbie bikes with tassels, great. > Fixies on the street without brakes, bring them on. Racer wantabees with > $9K carbon fiber speed machines, paceline away. Retro Lug Heads who must > only use the correct type of twine, come on in. > > Hopefully at some point in the future bikes will mainstream transportation > in the U.S. and then we can have an intelligent discussion concerning how > the different factions are helping or hurting the cause. > > I'm with you on your sentiments. It still seems silly for someone to pick out Trek or one of the other large bike companies as being somehow villanous for selling bikes. It is not a monopoly, a charity or the government. If someone thinks their prices are too high, there are plenty of other sources to choose from, including always buying used or building his own.
|
| | |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 06:44:02
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message news:1189390004.434183.81980@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 9, 3:19 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net> wrote: >> >> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior >> > components and a suspension front. >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. > > I don't understand the attitude. As a bicycle devotee, wouldn't your disdain be better directed at organizations that make it harder to bike instead of organizations that promote biking?
|
| | |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 02:27:34
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
>> > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical >> > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become >> > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that >> > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior >> > components and a suspension front. >> >> Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path >> bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a >> new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as >> good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek >> factory is powered with the flesh of babies. > > Really? I thought it ran on bullshit and hype. Nope. That was considered, but there's a shortage of fuel lately. Apparently much of the world supply is being used on rbr. --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
|
| |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 14:37:02
From: Mike Schway
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
In article <1189362029.272211.310600@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com >, jim <jimr18@netzero.net > wrote: > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > components and a suspension front. > I post this to assist any others facing the same choice in a 'flat > foot on the ground forward crank geometry (Electra Townie's > 'trademark' innovation) bike.. Maybe there are changes in the 08 line, but my wife's 07 Townie 21 has a suspension fork. --Mike -------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Schway
|
| |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 20:19:31
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On Sep 9, 1:20 pm, jim <jim...@netzero.net > wrote: > After doing research on various forums...given the virtually identical > price of the two units ($30 MSRP price difference), it has become > clear that if both units are equally comfortable for the rider, that > the Trek Pure Sport has to be the better choice based upon superior > components and a suspension front. Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek factory is powered with the flesh of babies.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 22:12:15
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: Conclusions: Electra Townie 21 vs. Trek Pure Sport
|
On 2007-09-09, landotter <landotter@gmail.com > wrote: > Suspension front serves mainly to weight down the bike on a path > bicycle. Don't like the name silkscreened onto the rear mech? Get a > new one, they're dirt cheap. I just picked up a new Deore for $15, as > good as anybody pootlin' around could ever need. Besides, the Trek > factory is powered with the flesh of babies. Hey, at least it's a renewable resource. <g,d&r >
|
|