| |
Main
Date: 23 Feb 2006 09:16:56
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Say, what's a framekit, exactly, compared to a basic model?
For the SMGTe, the description sounds almost the same, but with an
US$650 difference??
http://hpvelotechnik.com/shopping/preisliste13_e.html
Since I'm upgrading to hydraulic disc brakes, an air shock, etc., why
not just get a framekit?
And if I get the basic bike but upgrade anyway, right there and then,
should I expect to get my standard factory parts as well? I mean, the
basic model comes with V-brakes...I guess I should get them all the
same, right, only not installed on the bike, of course, since I'm
upgrading to the hydro-discs....
|
|
| |
Date: 26 Feb 2006 16:42:12
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> No.
Keep It Simple, Silly.
> And I told you what I'll tell you again in some more detail: the
> recumbent sales industry is such a small and finely spread
> industry, relying on rather maverick enthusiasts, that what the
> "industry standard" happens to be is not necessarily going to be
> what you encounter at your dealer.
Straw Man Argument.
Not what I was asking about.
KISS.
> If you go into a typical bike
> shop and ask for an SMGT the "industry standard practice" is to
> tell you "we don't do those", so that snippet of info isn't a big
> help, even if you want to know it.
> If you want to know what his business practices are and why then
> he's the one to ask.
Straw Man Argument.
KISS.
You're either being deceptive, or you've managed to confuse and deceive
yourself.
KISS, and you avoid Straw Man Arguments.
> Like I said, "flexibility of frame design". You can just use bent
> tubes to prevent the rider recling too far, but that introduces
> other penalties like higher step over height and weaker frame spar.
Specifically, I'm wondering why they didn't carry over the, um,
whachamacallit, that bit in the back of the frame which swings, that
thingamajig they have on the SMGT line, instead of a straightforward
design anyone else could have done. It'd be great to have designer
notes. I think one bike maker had just such notes on their website
once. Little things, nothing you could really study, but interesting
as promotional material.
> If you read HPVel's blurb on their original rear suspension design
> they highlight a very rigid rear triangle as a key point. The
> Spirit doesn't *have* a rear triangle, so it follows it's not a
> rigid one... Why is it the only cycle they do without one?
> Because it won't fit with the rest of the design is the obvious answer.
Um...what is a rear triangle?? Looking at the SMGTe and the Spirit
side-by-side, I suppose I can imagine what you mean, but I don't
understand why it wouldn't fit with the Spirit. I guess it's really a
matter of cost. The Spirit seems intended as a casual bike, which is
certainly the spirit in which I'll purchase it! No upgrades at all,
'cept mud-guards.
> So discuss it with someone really close to you who owes you service
> and a proper hearing and happens to be in the bike business.
> That'll be your dealer.
Goodness, this is so inane I've got to use that impolite word, "inane."
Why would I as the customer only listen to the salesman and no one
else?
> And not only will you get answers, you'll
> get to know the guy you're dealing with better and enjoy a better
> business relationship.
Goodness, this is so inane I've got to use that impolite word, "inane,"
again and repeat myself: why would I as the customer only listen to the
salesman and no one else?
> He will operate according to how his
> business works, and no other. It may well be that he'll agree with
> you where "the industry standard" doesn't. You'll never know if
> you don't ask him, and you still seem to be looking for excuses not to.
For Pete's sake, why would I as the customer only listen to the
salesman and not ask around? Does it hurt? Is it hurting you? You
seem to be looking for excuses to answer with non-answers.
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | |
Date: 27 Feb 2006 04:17:44
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1141000932.364815.317830@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> Peter Clinch wrote:
[...]
>> He will operate according to how his
>> business works, and no other. It may well be that he'll agree with
>> you where "the industry standard" doesn't. You'll never know if
>> you don't ask him, and you still seem to be looking for excuses not to.
>
> For Pete's sake, why would I as the customer only listen to the
> salesman and not ask around? Does it hurt? Is it hurting you? You
> seem to be looking for excuses to answer with non-answers.
You need to retire from this fray and leave Peter Clinch to the likes of me.
I truly understand him and how to deal with him. In short, we both know how
to go round and round the mulberry bush until one or the other of us gets
dizzy and falls. I will drive him mad before he can drive me mad. It is what
we old men are expert at.
The trouble is Old Pete kill filed me long ago because I took extreme
exception to his signature. We will never get beyond that until he changes
it. Of such mole hills are mountains made.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 27 Feb 2006 10:12:07
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> Keep It Simple, Silly.
That's what I was trying to do. Think about it...
My idea: spend 10 minutes talking to one person who can give you a
detailed answer of direct relevance to your personal situation, which is
then a springboard for any further issues you wish to investigate.
Your idea: spend a week or more in multiple conversations across 3
Usenet groups to get answers that may mean nothing in your particular
situation and have no context of what will actually happen with your
own bike as a basis.
Which of those is simpler? So if you want to KISS, take my advice,
because it keeps it simpler.
> Specifically, I'm wondering why they didn't carry over the, um,
> whachamacallit, that bit in the back of the frame which swings, that
> thingamajig they have on the SMGT line
If you have the overall immediately user-friendly configuration of the
Spirit then you can't put in a separate rear triangle without a fair bit
of extra work. The Cannondale recumbent went to those lengths, but as a
result it cost a *lot* more and weighed more than it needed to, and for
the sort of riding the bike is pitched at it's questionable about
whether that degree of engineering is really a desirable option.
> instead of a straightforward design anyone else could have done.
If "anyone" could have done it then "anyone" would. The Spirit has
consistently been reviewed towards the top of the compact pack. Bike
designs are a whole package, not isolated bits of design bolted together.
> It'd be great to have designer notes.
So ask the people who can give you a direct answer, HP Velotechnik, or
ask via one of their dealers, rather than wonder aloud on Usenet if you
/really/ want to know. KISS.
> Um...what is a rear triangle??
It's a triangular frame component at the rear of the bike. This is the
sort of thing where a guess will be right, like front forks being the
fork shaped things at the front...
> Looking at the SMGTe and the Spirit
> side-by-side, I suppose I can imagine what you mean, but I don't
> understand why it wouldn't fit with the Spirit. I guess it's really a
> matter of cost.
More cost, more weight, and, as you suggest something that could well be
over-engineering in the context of the whole bike.
> Goodness, this is so inane I've got to use that impolite word, "inane."
> Why would I as the customer only listen to the salesman and no one
> else?
Not what I'm getting at. Why should you listen to everyone else, but
not the salesman? He's a simple, single point of contact and if he's
worth a damn as a dealer then your satisfaction as a customer is of
paramount importance to him. He should be on your side, and he knows
more about his business and how he runs it and why than anyone else, and
he probably knows more about the bike than anyone answering you on
Usenet because he puts them together and sells them for a living. He is
an obvious *first* point of contact. So KISS should tell you that he's
where you start in this case, not where you end.
> For Pete's sake, why would I as the customer only listen to the
> salesman and not ask around? Does it hurt? Is it hurting you? You
> seem to be looking for excuses to answer with non-answers.
I'm trying to make it easy for you by directing you to the best place to
*start* when it comes to specific questions regarding your bike and how
it will be dealt with. If it really bothered me that you choose not to
do so I would just killfile you and move on, but I am trying to help you
by persuading you to /start/ your dialogue with the person who can give
you the most and most relevant information in the course of a single 10
minute 'phone call. And once you've had that conversation then you'll
be in a much better position to have a useful debate on Usenet. And
it's what KISS says you should be doing, if you really believe in it as
a good thing.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 26 Feb 2006 16:28:47
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
>
> Ah, but, for example, this bike's already got the V-brakes and standard
> front and rear suspension on it...if I upgrade to discs, etc., can I
> therefore expect to receive the V-brakes and suspension systems as
> well?
>
In a word, no, and if you really don't already know that you had better
have a long talk with the seller.
Regards,
Bob Hunt
|
| |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 20:49:14
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article <46b264Fa9s4nU1@individual.net >,
Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk > writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>
>> What exactly is wrong with Mike's bike?
>
> *No* bike, upright, recumbent, anything, can possibly be "100%
> comfortable" because there is never a situation where the requirements
> of being a bike don't compromise comfort to some degree. Thinking that
> a bike's comfort can never be improved under any circumsatnces is
> kidding yourself.
My own bike is a joy to ride, when I do so within its
limitations (I don't ride over loose egg gravel or
underwater.) It doesn't hurt me at all. No sore feet,
no sore bum, no sore back, no sore hands/wrists. If I
didn't ride, I'd be all gimped up with sciatica. I
wouldn't be surprised if riding was good therapy for
hip dysplasia too. You speak of comfort in a relative
sense. I've found a bicycle can be 100% comfortable
relative to a simple standing state. A bicycle can also
be 100% comfortable relative to a cracked toilet seat.
cheers,
Tom
--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
|
| |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 14:40:26
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>
> I am totally fed up with Peter Clinch promoting himself as a Medical Physics
> IT Officer (whatever the hell that is).
That was what Spock or Bones did on the old Enterprise.
> He is even a greater ego maniac than
> I am. This is intolerable to me. No one can possibly be Greater than the
> Great Ed Dolan.
Well, I'm a superegomaniac so I can tolerate the bifurcation in
consciousness which allows for different egos to manifest at different
times.
> I hereby challenge Peter Clinch to a duel to the death. Pistols of course at
> dawn down by the riverside.
I'd've thought you'd've done it with 'bents. It could be the Great
ARBR Rally of the Decade! Maybe you can distract him with a Rohloff
hub or a question about your local 'bent dealer.
> He will have to come to SW Minnesota as I am no
> longer up for any travel.
I'd take out the woman first. Hell hath no fury like a woman left all
alone. Flowers usually work.
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 14:32:31
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> Well I just thought it was pretty obvious
Dude, what's obvious is that I want to know what I want to know.
Answering my question by questioning why I should ever want to know
that is besides the point of the question and not an answer.
> that high gin low volume on
> products with a very limited choice of outlets is rather different
> business to low gin high volume on products you can pick up pretty
> much anywhere.
Ever heard of KISS?
I asked whether "x" was "industry practice."
KISS.
> Sorry. Should I point out that the earth is round and
> gravity pulls you down as well?
Yes, if we were discussing rocket science and I wanted to know what the
height is at which satellites orbit without propulsion on their part.
> They're free to go elsewhere to try that.
Pay attention. We're not talking about "elsewhere." Maybe you can try
another thread yourself?
> If the prices come down
> something has to give somewhere. Maybe the shop goes out of business,
> or the backup service isn't so good. You can't get something for
> nothing. Anything free is worth what you pay for it.
And the sky is blue. Except when it's not.
> You said you needed to know so you wouldn't insult him with stupid
> questions. It's all right to insult people you're /not/ paying money
> too with them though, so that's all right! ;-/ Do you think a Catrike
> dealer will give you a different answer because you're /not/ paying him
> money than if you are? If you do think that, why are you taking Buck's
> word for it, if you don't think that, why bother asking?
KISS.
Just want to know.
KISS.
> Then how are you going to make use of all these parts you'll have lying
> around? I mean, come on here... *surely* you can see a bigger fork leg
> is needed for a larger wheel? It's about as hard as realising that tall
> guys need longer legs on their pants...
Not if you're a bushman encountering trousers for the first time. I
never even knew bikes were fitted to the rider until just last year!
What can I say -- I always adapt, and accomodate so much sometimes I
miss out on the fact that maybe I don't have to work around something,
maybe something can work around me.
As for spare parts, I'll learn, as I have been. If you're tired of
teaching, I suggest you retire.
> Small wheels lose most of what disadvantages they have if connected to
> good suspension, as Dr. Moulton proved back in the 60s. They retain
> various advantages, such as more flexibility for the frame design,
> easier to turn and stronger.
> The rear suspension isn't so good because there isn't a very rigid rear
> triangle (which helps prevent suspension bob, AIUI), because other
> design factors on the bike preclude it.
I see the small wheel so rider position isn't forced to be too
reclined. I see OSS 'cause it's supposed to be an "easy" 'bent. I
don't see how you deduce the rear triangle as being not very rigid due
to other design factors.
It's a cute enough bike. I'll test ride one when I go pay the balance
on the SMGTe and upgrade even more; think I saw one in the showroom,
though red, and I'll for sure want a lemo yellow one (that red makes it
look "old").
> Though in the meantime, if you want to know what you'll get from your
> dealer, he's the best person to ask.
I've never asked about what I'll get from my dealer. I'm asking
whether what I think is reasonable as per how the bike business works.
KISS, KISS.
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | |
Date: 26 Feb 2006 10:02:28
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> Dude, what's obvious is that I want to know what I want to know.
> Ever heard of KISS?
No.
> I asked whether "x" was "industry practice."
And I told you what I'll tell you again in some more detail: the
recumbent sales industry is such a small and finely spread
industry, relying on rather maverick enthusiasts, that what the
"industry standard" happens to be is not necessarily going to be
what you encounter at your dealer. If you go into a typical bike
shop and ask for an SMGT the "industry standard practice" is to
tell you "we don't do those", so that snippet of info isn't a big
help, even if you want to know it.
If you want to know what his business practices are and why then
he's the one to ask.
> I see the small wheel so rider position isn't forced to be too
> reclined.
Like I said, "flexibility of frame design". You can just use bent
tubes to prevent the rider recling too far, but that introduces
other penalties like higher step over height and weaker frame spar.
> I see OSS 'cause it's supposed to be an "easy" 'bent. I
> don't see how you deduce the rear triangle as being not very rigid due
> to other design factors.
If you read HPVel's blurb on their original rear suspension design
they highlight a very rigid rear triangle as a key point. The
Spirit doesn't *have* a rear triangle, so it follows it's not a
rigid one... Why is it the only cycle they do without one?
Because it won't fit with the rest of the design is the obvious answer.
> I've never asked about what I'll get from my dealer. I'm asking
> whether what I think is reasonable as per how the bike business works.
So discuss it with someone really close to you who owes you service
and a proper hearing and happens to be in the bike business.
That'll be your dealer. And not only will you get answers, you'll
get to know the guy you're dealing with better and enjoy a better
business relationship. He will operate according to how his
business works, and no other. It may well be that he'll agree with
you where "the industry standard" doesn't. You'll never know if
you don't ask him, and you still seem to be looking for excuses not to.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 06:35:18
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1140855191.413715.140160@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
> >> ...
> >> If anyone here is Johnny NoComm I think it is gotbent. He was always very
> >> sympathetic to that crew of human scum. They knew all about sock puppets,
> >> just like gotbent does.
> >
> > Now you are contradicting yourself, O Grate One.
> >
>
> No, when someone like gotbent posts to a newsgroup and references sock
> puppets, port scans and other esoterica, then I know we are dealing with
> human scum. You and I do not do those sorts of things. Why do you make
> excuses for those who do? The worst offender of all time in this regard was
> your good buddy Ed Gin....
If you think "gotbent" is Ed Gin, you have much to learn. Hence the
contradiction.
--
Tom Sherman
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 10:49:06
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1140878118.130908.34860@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1140855191.413715.140160@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >> If anyone here is Johnny NoComm I think it is gotbent. He was always
>> >> very
>> >> sympathetic to that crew of human scum. They knew all about sock
>> >> puppets,
>> >> just like gotbent does.
>> >
>> > Now you are contradicting yourself, O Grate One.
>> >
>>
>> No, when someone like gotbent posts to a newsgroup and references sock
>> puppets, port scans and other esoterica, then I know we are dealing with
>> human scum. You and I do not do those sorts of things. Why do you make
>> excuses for those who do? The worst offender of all time in this regard
>> was
>> your good buddy Ed Gin....
>
> If you think "gotbent" is Ed Gin, you have much to learn. Hence the
> contradiction.
No, I don't think gotbent is Ed Gin. He is not nearly repulsive enough for
that. However, there are similarities due to his newsreader and various
other associations.
You think I want to learn anything about this human scum? You have indeed
much to learn if that is the case. Anyone who forges names and addresses is
a criminal and beyond the pale. That is what Ed Gin did. I don't think
gotbent ever did that to his credit.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 09:46:09
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1140878118.130908.34860@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1140855191.413715.140160@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >> If anyone here is Johnny NoComm I think it is gotbent. He was always
>> >> very
>> >> sympathetic to that crew of human scum. They knew all about sock
>> >> puppets,
>> >> just like gotbent does.
>> >
>> > Now you are contradicting yourself, O Grate One.
>> >
>>
>> No, when someone like gotbent posts to a newsgroup and references sock
>> puppets, port scans and other esoterica, then I know we are dealing with
>> human scum. You and I do not do those sorts of things. Why do you make
>> excuses for those who do? The worst offender of all time in this regard
>> was
>> your good buddy Ed Gin....
>
> If you think "gotbent" is Ed Gin, you have much to learn. Hence the
> contradiction.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman
>
Wot? The Dolan thinks I'm Ed Gin? FOK NO! I'm way better looking than Ed
Gin, and lots slower too. We do share a taste for black stout though. Hey
Dolan, don't forget to wash those socks from time to time or else they start
to stink....hmmmmm, you do stink though so maybe soap isn't the answer.
Not Ed Gin
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 10:39:01
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"gotbent" <gofast@golow.com > wrote in message
news:1140882306_5027@sp6iad.superfeed.net...
[...]
> Wot? The Dolan thinks I'm Ed Gin? FOK NO! I'm way better looking than Ed
> Gin, and lots slower too. We do share a taste for black stout though. Hey
> Dolan, don't forget to wash those socks from time to time or else they
> start to stink....hmmmmm, you do stink though so maybe soap isn't the
> answer.
>
> Not Ed Gin
You are a Monkey Islander which is as close to Ed Gin as you can get. You
apparently know all about sock puppets, port scans and how to forge names
and addresses. How do you differ from Ed Gin in all essentials?
People who feel the need to bath each and every day are morons. I used to
die laughing at all the fools who would go on and on about hot showers and
other nonsense when they were doing week long tours. Cleanliness is NOT next
to Godliness. It is nowhere in the grand scheme of things. But gotbent (an
anonymous coward like all Monkey Islanders) is precisely such an idiot. He
no doubt would prefer to take a HOT shower not once a day, but twice a day.
God, he must be a real stink bomb beside being an anal obsessive type.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 06:30:50
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Peter Clinch who is a Medical Physics IT Officer [1] wrote:
> ...I point out that the earth is round and gravity pulls you down as well?...
Really? I was under the impression that gravity was a mutual attraction
between different bodies of mass. Down is a concept based on an
arbitrary frame of reference [2]. I was also of the understanding that
the object known as Earth was geoid shaped, not round.
[1] Not really relevant, except it annoys The Grate One.
[2] But the hominids on the geoid shaped object have found it
convenient to use a convention where the direction towards the center
of mass of the geoid is "down".
--
Tom "Pedant" Sherman
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 10:20:49
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1140877850.051364.234980@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
> Peter Clinch who is a Medical Physics IT Officer [1] wrote:
>> ...I point out that the earth is round and gravity pulls you down as
>> well?...
>
> Really? I was under the impression that gravity was a mutual attraction
> between different bodies of mass. Down is a concept based on an
> arbitrary frame of reference [2]. I was also of the understanding that
> the object known as Earth was geoid shaped, not round.
>
> [1] Not really relevant, except it annoys The Grate One.
I am totally fed up with Peter Clinch promoting himself as a Medical Physics
IT Officer (whatever the hell that is). He is even a greater ego maniac than
I am. This is intolerable to me. No one can possibly be Greater than the
Great Ed Dolan.
I hereby challenge Peter Clinch to a duel to the death. Pistols of course at
dawn down by the riverside. He will have to come to SW Minnesota as I am no
longer up for any travel.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Feb 2006 21:21:51
From: Jim
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:a7-dnZEIdu51Hp3ZRVn-iA@prairiewave.com...
>
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1140877850.051364.234980@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Peter Clinch who is a Medical Physics IT Officer [1] wrote:
>>> ...I point out that the earth is round and gravity pulls you down as
>>> well?...
>>
>> Really? I was under the impression that gravity was a mutual attraction
>> between different bodies of mass. Down is a concept based on an
>> arbitrary frame of reference [2]. I was also of the understanding that
>> the object known as Earth was geoid shaped, not round.
>>
>> [1] Not really relevant, except it annoys The Grate One.
>
> I am totally fed up with Peter Clinch promoting himself as a Medical
> Physics IT Officer (whatever the hell that is). He is even a greater ego
> maniac than I am. This is intolerable to me. No one can possibly be
> Greater than the Great Ed Dolan.
>
> I hereby challenge Peter Clinch to a duel to the death. Pistols of course
> at dawn down by the riverside. He will have to come to SW Minnesota as I
> am no longer up for any travel.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
Ah, Ed was it only yesterday you were pining to go to Timbuktu?
Too the main point, will you need a second?
Jim C
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Feb 2006 04:05:38
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Jim" <jcgc50@cox.net > wrote in message
news:lfuMf.187812$oG.126100@dukeread02...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:a7-dnZEIdu51Hp3ZRVn-iA@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1140877850.051364.234980@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> Peter Clinch who is a Medical Physics IT Officer [1] wrote:
>>>> ...I point out that the earth is round and gravity pulls you down as
>>>> well?...
>>>
>>> Really? I was under the impression that gravity was a mutual attraction
>>> between different bodies of mass. Down is a concept based on an
>>> arbitrary frame of reference [2]. I was also of the understanding that
>>> the object known as Earth was geoid shaped, not round.
>>>
>>> [1] Not really relevant, except it annoys The Grate One.
>>
>> I am totally fed up with Peter Clinch promoting himself as a Medical
>> Physics IT Officer (whatever the hell that is). He is even a greater ego
>> maniac than I am. This is intolerable to me. No one can possibly be
>> Greater than the Great Ed Dolan.
>>
>> I hereby challenge Peter Clinch to a duel to the death. Pistols of course
>> at dawn down by the riverside. He will have to come to SW Minnesota as I
>> am no longer up for any travel.
>
> Ah, Ed was it only yesterday you were pining to go to Timbuktu?
>
> Too the main point, will you need a second?
I will get a yahoo out of the local saloon to be my second if I can sober
him up. In the event I am shot dead, I have decided to come back as a Great
Sequoia Tree where I will lord it over all creation.
I would urge anyone who has any idea of adventure in their life to get it
over with before they turn 40. After that, it is too late. As much as I
would like to cross the Sahara by camel caravan to Timbuktu, I fully realize
it is never going to happen. I should have done it when I was about 30 or
so, but I was too busy at the time hiking in and out of the Grand Canyon -
and communing with the mighty Sequoia Tree in that National Park of the same
name there in the Sierra Mountains of California.
Regards,
--
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 00:13:11
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
> ...
> If anyone here is Johnny NoComm I think it is gotbent. He was always very
> sympathetic to that crew of human scum. They knew all about sock puppets,
> just like gotbent does.
Now you are contradicting yourself, O Grate One.
--
Tom Sherman
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 02:53:49
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1140855191.413715.140160@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> ...
>> If anyone here is Johnny NoComm I think it is gotbent. He was always very
>> sympathetic to that crew of human scum. They knew all about sock puppets,
>> just like gotbent does.
>
> Now you are contradicting yourself, O Grate One.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman
No, when someone like gotbent posts to a newsgroup and references sock
puppets, port scans and other esoterica, then I know we are dealing with
human scum. You and I do not do those sorts of things. Why do you make
excuses for those who do? The worst offender of all time in this regard was
your good buddy Ed Gin. My God, do you have no standards at all?
Jon Meinecke is a skunk and a weasel, but he does not hit below the belt
like your good buddy Ed Gin does. Your only sin is that you do not take
scoundrels on like they ought to be taken on. All your sins are sins of
omission, not commission. I urge you to get some courage.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 00:01:57
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
> ...
> I do not see any reason why newsgroups should be so culturally deprived all
> of the time. Wayne Leggett, the Poet of ARBR, would drag us all down to his
> abysmal level if I would let him. I doubt he has ever even heard of T.S.
> Eliot. I think there was recently a movie made about his life that I would
> like to see if and when it ever shows up on TV....
Does this movie about Wayne Leggett also feature LoGo Trikes?
Or has The Grate One tripped over an indefinite pronoun?
--
Tom Sherman
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 02:39:43
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1140854517.888749.13750@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan the Grate wrote:
>> ...
>> I do not see any reason why newsgroups should be so culturally deprived
>> all
>> of the time. Wayne Leggett, the Poet of ARBR, would drag us all down to
>> his
>> abysmal level if I would let him. I doubt he has ever even heard of T.S.
>> Eliot. I think there was recently a movie made about his life that I
>> would
>> like to see if and when it ever shows up on TV....
>
> Does this movie about Wayne Leggett also feature LoGo Trikes?
>
> Or has The Grate One tripped over an indefinite pronoun?
Certain assumptions as just assumed. No one in their right mind would ever
make a movie about Wayne Leggett, the Poet of PooP on ARBR! The very thought
of it sends me into hysterics. Give me a break!
By the way, Great Ones like Myself can never make any mistakes. That would
indicate a deficiency of intellect. But I must admit we Great Ones are often
distracted, so mere slips are possible from time to time.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 22:23:31
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> Compare like with like.
Well, no one was saying it was apples and oranges until just recently.
> For example, many cycle shops in the UK
> you can expect to haggle a fair bit off, at least in terms of free
> accessories, on a high end bike. My recumbent dealer won't do this
> and says so up front. Is that unreasonable? According to
> "industry standards" perhaps, but he's playing a very different
> game to almost all ther bike shops in the UK, and he's got a lot of
> happy customers queueing up to do repeat business.
So there you are then. Only you might've said that in the first place.
> So is he being
> reasonable? According to industry convention no, according to
> happy customers, yes.
No, I'm sure those happy customers would be even happier to have a
decent chance at lower prices (haggling).
> You appear to think you must before you're happy to ask him about
> anything.
I want to know. How's that "I think I must know before x, y, and z"?
> Well, if that's all you want then fine, just don't expect it to be
> of any actual /use/.
Utility is a separate though related issue, but one which you raise.
> You've got $4K of deserving being treated
> with due consideration like a reasonable adult by your dealer, why
> not take advantage of that fact? He's on your side if he's worth
> dealing with at all.
He bikes one of them Velomobile thinggys, so he sounds cool. The local
postman is a fan; he trikes and had stopped by to pick up a part,
parting with a hearty pat and recommendation. I just don't want to be
asking something like asking him to sacrifice his firstborn, is all. I
don't care about annoying y'all here on usenet; but he's got my bike
right now, and I'd rather keep him on my side if all it means is I do
some recon first.
> I had two choices of where to buy it in the UK, one of which was 80
> miles away and the other 450. So there wasn't much shopping around
> to do, but I was impressed by the service and apparent integrity of
> Ben, I liked the bike, so I was happy to buy it there. I've been
> back and bought other bikes since.
Very good. I'm glad there are folks who are nice to you.
> Well think about it for a couple of minutes... if you jack the
> front of the bike up far higher than it's designed that will pretty
> obviously affect things like the rake and thus quite possibly the
> handling. If you have rim brakes it will really help if the pads
> go somewhere near the rims of the wheels. Not rocket science.
Not mechanically-minded. I'm still trying to digest clipless pedals
and such. But I thought Ed Dolan the Grate was group moderator.
> What's wrong with 16" wheels? The Spirit is arguably a much better
> urban bike than the SMGT, which is right as that's what it's
> designed for, and not what the SMGT is designed for. Why is that
> "crummy"?
16" don't sound like a lot of travel, though I can imagine why they
went with that for the front wheel. But I don't understand why the
rear suspension seems compromised, compared to the SM line.
> Not where your personal intellectual interest lies, where actually
> getting the business done is concerned. My impression, perhaps
> false, is you were interested in actually progressing the
> transaction and learning exactly what you'd get, rather than what
> you might get in other places. It remains the case that the best
> person to tell you what you can expect from your dealer is your
> dealer, no matter /how/ much you argue or research otherwise.
And with that, I abandon you to your tautologies.
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 13:12:16
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> So there you are then. Only you might've said that in the first place.
Well I just thought it was pretty obvious that high gin low volume on
products with a very limited choice of outlets is rather different
business to low gin high volume on products you can pick up pretty
much anywhere. Sorry. Should I point out that the earth is round and
gravity pulls you down as well?
> No, I'm sure those happy customers would be even happier to have a
> decent chance at lower prices (haggling).
They're free to go elsewhere to try that. If the prices come down
something has to give somewhere. Maybe the shop goes out of business,
or the backup service isn't so good. You can't get something for
nothing. Anything free is worth what you pay for it.
> I want to know. How's that "I think I must know before x, y, and z"?
You said you needed to know so you wouldn't insult him with stupid
questions. It's all right to insult people you're /not/ paying money
too with them though, so that's all right! ;-/ Do you think a Catrike
dealer will give you a different answer because you're /not/ paying him
money than if you are? If you do think that, why are you taking Buck's
word for it, if you don't think that, why bother asking?
> Not mechanically-minded.
Then how are you going to make use of all these parts you'll have lying
around? I mean, come on here... *surely* you can see a bigger fork leg
is needed for a larger wheel? It's about as hard as realising that tall
guys need longer legs on their pants...
> 16" don't sound like a lot of travel, though I can imagine why they
> went with that for the front wheel. But I don't understand why the
> rear suspension seems compromised, compared to the SM line.
Small wheels lose most of what disadvantages they have if connected to
good suspension, as Dr. Moulton proved back in the 60s. They retain
various advantages, such as more flexibility for the frame design,
easier to turn and stronger.
The rear suspension isn't so good because there isn't a very rigid rear
triangle (which helps prevent suspension bob, AIUI), because other
design factors on the bike preclude it.
> And with that, I abandon you to your tautologies.
Though in the meantime, if you want to know what you'll get from your
dealer, he's the best person to ask.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 01:09:28
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1140848611.337699.258600@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Peter Clinch wrote:
[...]
> He bikes one of them Velomobile thinggys, so he sounds cool. The local
> postman is a fan; he trikes and had stopped by to pick up a part,
> parting with a hearty pat and recommendation. I just don't want to be
> asking something like asking him to sacrifice his firstborn, is all. I
> don't care about annoying y'all here on usenet; but he's got my bike
> right now, and I'd rather keep him on my side if all it means is I do
> some recon first.
The main thing is not to annoy me. You can annoy Peter Clinch all you want.
He is from the UK and has been a thorn in my side like forever. I have never
recovered from his damnable signature. One of these days I am even going to
go to his website and find out just how crazy he is.
[...]
>> Well think about it for a couple of minutes... if you jack the
>> front of the bike up far higher than it's designed that will pretty
>> obviously affect things like the rake and thus quite possibly the
>> handling. If you have rim brakes it will really help if the pads
>> go somewhere near the rims of the wheels. Not rocket science.
>
> Not mechanically-minded. I'm still trying to digest clipless pedals
> and such. But I thought Ed Dolan the Grate was group moderator.
I only kick in when I think assholes need to be corralled. I do not waste
much time discussing bikes and other minor stuff like that. By the way,
Peter Clinch is not bad as long as he stays on the subject. But never allow
him to get off topic. At that point you will quickly discover that he is an
idiot, a moron and an imbecile all rolled into one.
[...]
>> Not where your personal intellectual interest lies, where actually
>> getting the business done is concerned. My impression, perhaps
>> false, is you were interested in actually progressing the
>> transaction and learning exactly what you'd get, rather than what
>> you might get in other places. It remains the case that the best
>> person to tell you what you can expect from your dealer is your
>> dealer, no matter /how/ much you argue or research otherwise.
>
> And with that, I abandon you to your tautologies.
Well Hell Yes! That is what we do best here on ARBR. I am pretty damn good
at it myself. Only Mr. Sherman goes to the point usually. The rest of us
like to beat around the bush as much as possible. Mr. Varney of Old Kentucky
was a past master at this also until he got totally disgusted by me. He is
now only to be found on BROL where my types are not welcome.
We here on ARBR will lead you around in circles until you get dizzy and fall
from grace. You have been warned!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 22:08:51
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Wigger, pleeze. Better take yo' Wonder Bread ass back to the 'burbs
'fore I shows you how ya got bent.
gotbent wrote:
> Yo homey, I thought you'd figure those comments were pretty over the top and
> meant as humor. It looks basically like you have the erudite exterior, but
> you are brimming with anger inside. WTF! If you want a bunch of ass kissing
> toadys to play with go over to BROL. You can be the new Pietro the Putz over
> there. I find you amazingly free with insults, like Ed Dolan. Arre you his
> sock puppet? Maybe you are really Johnny NoComm with another phony nom d'
> net. Enjoy the Streetmachine. Enjoy the face to face haggling match at the
> bike shop. Be cool when you reply to this, because you are in electric limbo
> to me and no longer exist. Pfffffttttt.....gone.
>
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 21:40:25
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article <4697ccFa4jqmU1@individual.net >,
Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk > writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>
>> Upthread Mike Reed says his bike is comfortable for him.
>> I take it he means the /whole/ bike, not just its saddle.
>
> And my point remains, if it's "100% comfortable" then that implies
> no possible improvement anywhere, under any circumsatnces, at any
> time. Anyone that thinks such a thing is kidding themselves, and
> if that isn't what he meant it remains what he implied.
What exactly is wrong with Mike's bike?
> You can have something that is comfortable in an absolute sense,
> but still less comfortable than an alternative in a relative sense.
> Such is, IME, the case with a well set up upright bike and s
> similarly well suited recumbent. The first is good, the second better.
This is all sounding rather axiomatic to me.
cheers,
Tom
--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 12:54:05
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> What exactly is wrong with Mike's bike?
*No* bike, upright, recumbent, anything, can possibly be "100%
comfortable" because there is never a situation where the requirements
of being a bike don't compromise comfort to some degree. Thinking that
a bike's comfort can never be improved under any circumsatnces is
kidding yourself.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 18:22:50
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
gotbent wrote:
>....what is the most asshole friendly toilet paper you can cram into a pannier....
"Killer B Asswipe [TM]" of course. ;)
[Stirring the pot]
--
Tom Sherman
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 18:07:30
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> ...
> But I do wonder why the SMGTe isn't more widely-mentioned...everyone
> talks about Rans and Easy Racers, etc....
What is a "Rans"?
--
Tom Sherman - 1999 RANS "Wavewind" [1] and 2000 RANS Rocket
[1] <http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Sherman.htm >..
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 13:38:24
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> It doesn't really make any odds. He's telling you what he's
> offering, if it's with or against, better or worse than industry
> practice doesn't alter that.
I want to gauge how reasonable his offer is. Like with price
comparison. Just for my own information. You know, knowledge,
curiosity, the life of the mind and all.
> You're not in the trade, why should you be expected to know?
Who said I am "expected" to know? But I do want to know.
> Which tells you what the cycling community at large thinks, not
> what your dealer thinks. You're dealing with him, not the cycling
> community at large.
Yes, but what I want to know is what the cycling community thinks.
> And not actually getting any further forwards with how you deal
> with the transaction in hand, because it's purely in the hands of
> you and your dealer.
Uh, no, actually. I see now how this is industry practice, and I see
the logic behind it. I remain a happy usenet reader. Is something
troubling you?
> So what's the magic level that /is/ serious? It will very much
> depend on the dealer and the customer and their relationship, and
> nobody else can tell you what that is.
Of course they can. Presumably you shopped around before you bought
yours where you bought yours. Pete, are you picking up The Grate One's
bad habits, like idle sophistry?
> You could just read the specs, of course...
Actually, I didn't know that bike forks are so dependent on wheel size,
so specs made no sense until your explicitly pointing the fact out.
> Not "Wow!!!!!!!!" at all. I want a bike that does long tours with
> handling unaffected by heavy luggage, the SMGT does that better
> than the Spirit, so I have an SMGT. The SMGT is too laid back to
> be immediately comfortable for most riders on their first recumbent
> trip, even with the seat cranked up as high as it'll go.
Oh wow, it was love at first sight and recline for me!
> The
> Spirit can be set up like a car seat, which is the sort of angle
> people are familiar with and happy controlling vehicles at.
Yes, I do agree. If only it was so crummy in comparison to the SMGTe
(16" wheel?!). But still a great guest bike. Can't wait to get it!!!
> It's a
> soft seat which comforms immediately to the rider and on a short
> trip that's more important than more rigid support spread over a
> larger area.
Yeah, and with a breathable mesh back! Very nice.
> "More immediately comfortable" means what it says,
> "immediate" doesn't tell you how you'll feel after 4 hours riding
> into headwinds over a poor road.
First impressions count for a lot, given human psychology. I'm sure
it'll hold up well under those circumstances, too.
> Right, you're free to take your business anywhere you want, so talk
> to other HP Velotechnik dealers and see what they'll give you in
> comparison.
Asking around is asking around. It's more helpful for me to ask a
cycling newsgroup than dealers whom I don't expect to purchase from --
too far away, I've already commited money to this dealer, etc.
> What Usenet's opinion on the matter is remains
> irrelevant, though they may be able to point you to other HPVel
> dealers, or suggest alternatives to the SMGT handled by dealers
> they particularly recommend.
I find it astounding that YOU keep insisting on what's relevant to ME
where my interest lies!
> Not really, I'm trying to get you to talk to the people that
> actually matter, which is a useful piece of advice IMHO, where my
> telling you whether I think it's right or not that you get a pair
> of forks back is irrelevant. You'll note I haven't said whether
> you should get a pair of forks back.
You'll note, I hope, that you deemed your own advice useful, which
proves my initial strategy of asking on usenet -- indeed, proves it to
you yourself!
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 22:05:29
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> I want to gauge how reasonable his offer is. Like with price
> comparison. Just for my own information. You know, knowledge,
> curiosity, the life of the mind and all.
Compare like with like. For example, many cycle shops in the UK
you can expect to haggle a fair bit off, at least in terms of free
accessories, on a high end bike. My recumbent dealer won't do this
and says so up front. Is that unreasonable? According to
"industry standards" perhaps, but he's playing a very different
game to almost all ther bike shops in the UK, and he's got a lot of
happy customers queueing up to do repeat business. So is he being
reasonable? According to industry convention no, according to
happy customers, yes.
> Who said I am "expected" to know?
You appear to think you must before you're happy to ask him about
anything.
> Yes, but what I want to know is what the cycling community thinks.
Well, if that's all you want then fine, just don't expect it to be
of any actual /use/. You've got $4K of deserving being treated
with due consideration like a reasonable adult by your dealer, why
not take advantage of that fact? He's on your side if he's worth
dealing with at all.
> Of course they can. Presumably you shopped around before you bought
> yours where you bought yours.
I had two choices of where to buy it in the UK, one of which was 80
miles away and the other 450. So there wasn't much shopping around
to do, but I was impressed by the service and apparent integrity of
Ben, I liked the bike, so I was happy to buy it there. I've been
back and bought other bikes since.
> Actually, I didn't know that bike forks are so dependent on wheel size
Well think about it for a couple of minutes... if you jack the
front of the bike up far higher than it's designed that will pretty
obviously affect things like the rake and thus quite possibly the
handling. If you have rim brakes it will really help if the pads
go somewhere near the rims of the wheels. Not rocket science.
> Yes, I do agree. If only it was so crummy in comparison to the SMGTe
> (16" wheel?!).
What's wrong with 16" wheels? The Spirit is arguably a much better
urban bike than the SMGT, which is right as that's what it's
designed for, and not what the SMGT is designed for. Why is that
"crummy"?
> I find it astounding that YOU keep insisting on what's relevant to ME
> where my interest lies!
Not where your personal intellectual interest lies, where actually
getting the business done is concerned. My impression, perhaps
false, is you were interested in actually progressing the
transaction and learning exactly what you'd get, rather than what
you might get in other places. It remains the case that the best
person to tell you what you can expect from your dealer is your
dealer, no matter /how/ much you argue or research otherwise.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 13:08:52
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Buck wrote:
>
>
>
> You are being silly about it. The only reason you are thinking this is
> because you have seen the bike before the upgrades. Have you ever
> purchased a new car?
No. I hope you'll be around when I do. =D
> Did you ask for all of the parts that weren't
> included when you bought the upgraded package? By your reasoning, when
> you paid for the aluminum wheels, you ought to get the steel wheels
> too. Just load them up in the trunk!
I get the sense that this works like with ordering computers -- the
base model includes CD-ROM, say, but a DVD-/+R(W) upgrade doesn't
include the CD-ROM as well. That's what y'all mean?
> If you had already paid for the parts, then you might have a legitimate
> gripe.
Whoa, who's griping? Not me, I'm askin'. The only gripes I hear are
those who moan at the question. So tune out. It's okay. I won't miss
what I don't know.
> When you get a new car stereo installed, you expect that they
> will return the factory stereo to you. But when you buy the car and ask
> for the premium stereo instead of the one that is in it, you don't have
> the same expectation. What makes buying a new bicycle any different?
> You are paying for the UPGRADED part and not for the original part.
> This is the price difference between what he has to pay for the new
> part, the cost of the installation, etc., minus the cost of the
> original part.
>
> If you want ALL of the parts, then pay the guy the extra money to keep
> all of the parts.
Ah, okay, this is a succinct answer. Thanks!
> -Buck
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 13:01:03
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
gotbent wrote:
> I think that when you buy an upgrade, you are paying the difference in price
> between OEM item cost and the upgrade cost. It's like buying a car and
> getting leather seats as an option. You get the leather seats. They don't
> give you the cloth seats that come on the base model.
Not having ever bought a car, I don't know about that. It just seems
logical that if you get your flat fixed by them installing a new tube,
you should also get your old flat tube back, too. Likewise, the fork
is already paid for, it's right there on the bike, why don't I get it
"back" as well?
But okay, if it's as you say, with the OEM model and so forth, okay, I
can see the logic of not "getting it back" -- it wasn't ever mine in
the first place, really, given the difference in price, etc.
> If your dealer has the
> bike in stock and it's not built up,
It's already built-up. It's a "floor model."
> then you're paying for the frameset and
> parts and labor beyond a normal bike-out-of-the-box set-up charge. Don't
> forget that the $80.00 retail gizmo might only cost the bike maker $11.38 so
> don't expect much of a discount off of the $275.00 retail gizmo you want as
> an upgrade.
Oh yes, I did think of that. I'd mentioned in one of the other threads
that I work as a buyer; I deal with sales people all the time. Oddly
enough, I feel empowered to haggle on another's behalf, but not on my
own. Nice Guy Syndrome and all.
> Besides, you're buying near 4 kilobucks worth of bike. Don't
> disappoint us by turning into a snivelly cheapskate bastard
Funny you think I'd be a cheapskate, considering that I am, as you
recognize, paying retail at $4.5K. I hope you don't design 'bents.
You might hurt someone with your notion of cause-and-effect.
> after pumping us
> for a couple of fokking weeks asking our advice about everything from the
> value of high precision ceramic bearings and what is the most asshole
> friendly toilet paper
Speaking of which, you've got foam on your lips. Please wipe with your
favorite brand.
> you can cram into a pannier for the great across the
> country ride to christin the streetmachine. Buy the foker already.
I've already put down $$$. What part of that did you miss?
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 16:19:57
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Yo homey, I thought you'd figure those comments were pretty over the top and
meant as humor. It looks basically like you have the erudite exterior, but
you are brimming with anger inside. WTF! If you want a bunch of ass kissing
toadys to play with go over to BROL. You can be the new Pietro the Putz over
there. I find you amazingly free with insults, like Ed Dolan. Arre you his
sock puppet? Maybe you are really Johnny NoComm with another phony nom d'
net. Enjoy the Streetmachine. Enjoy the face to face haggling match at the
bike shop. Be cool when you reply to this, because you are in electric limbo
to me and no longer exist. Pfffffttttt.....gone.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 21:35:00
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
All top posters are idiots!
The stupid lout does not attribute either!
"gotbent" <gofast@golow.com > wrote in message
news:1140819542_3661@sp6iad.superfeed.net...
> Yo homey, I thought you'd figure those comments were pretty over the top
> and meant as humor.
You do not have brains enough to attempt humor. Leave that to those of us
who know how to use it. Even NYC is a hundred times better than you in that
department.
It looks basically like you have the erudite exterior, but
> you are brimming with anger inside.
Try some erudite exterior yourself why don't you. I am convinced you are an
idiot. Prove me otherwise, why don't you?
WTF! If you want a bunch of ass kissing
> toadys to play with go over to BROL. You can be the new Pietro the Putz
> over there.
You would rather have the likes of Ed Gin here and his monkey islanders no
doubt. NYC is saving this freaking newsgroup from slobs like you.
I find you amazingly free with insults, like Ed Dolan. Arre you his
> sock puppet? Maybe you are really Johnny NoComm with another phony nom d'
> net.
NYC has a glimmer of intelligence the same as I do. That is why you find us
offensive. Why should we allow idiots like you to have the free run of this
newsgroup. You are the one who belongs over on BROL, not us who are free in
our comments and who tell it like it is.
If anyone here is Johnny NoComm I think it is gotbent. He was always very
sympathetic to that crew of human scum. They knew all about sock puppets,
just like gotbent does.
Enjoy the Streetmachine. Enjoy the face to face haggling match at the
> bike shop. Be cool when you reply to this, because you are in electric
> limbo to me and no longer exist. Pfffffttttt.....gone.
You bet, f*** you too! And f*** your Newsfeeds.Com with its "Total Privacy
via Encryption." If I were a scum bag like you I would want to be as private
as possible too.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 12:39:04
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> And? Business is a two way transaction.
Right. So if he tells me that something is normal, how would I know,
really?
> That isn't really anything much to do with it. If he decides he'll
> work other than "industry practice" then that's his business, and
> that includes if it's against or for your favour.
Right. But I don't want to ask for something so contrary to "common
experience" such as to border on insult.
> What? How can a Usenet group possibly know a bike dealer's mind
> better than he does himself?
Wrong. I'm not trying to read his mind. I'm asking about what the
cycling community at large thinks of x, y, and z.
> And they will also reserve the right to run their business however
> they want to. If they're out of order they'll pay in lost custom,
> it's their call, just as it's the call of the guy you're dealing
> with in this case.
Right. So I'm asking around, comparing notes on how businesses are
run, whether it strikes different dealers differently or not.
> You can ask for a 90% discount if you like, as long as you're
> prepared to take no for an answer. It's only towards unreasonable
> to start arguing about it if he's said no.
Wrong. Asking for a 90% discount is not the sign of a serious
customer. If you need this explained to you, then I'll have to
cross-post to alt.what.the.hell.?.! too. =)
> Yes, and for starters I know that with a 16" front wheel a spare
> fork from a Streetmachine will be about as much use as a wax
> fireguard... ;-)
Ah, thanks -- just goes to show that the only stupid question is the
one which doesn't get asked.
> The seat slides up and down the frame completely independent of the
> drivetrain which stays a fixed length.
Yes, thanks, I'd just read the details carefully myself, too. Sounds
ideal for a guest bike!
> It's a very nice bike for immedaietly getting on and riding, and
> the most immediately comfortable bike I've ever ridden (wouldn't be
> so good over distance, with less weight taken on the back and more
> aero drag). A cracking urban and short day tour bike.
THE MOST IMMEDIATELY COMFORTABLE???? Holy chromoly, I thought the
SMGTe was the most immediately comfortable! And you have an SMGT, and
you can still say that about the Spirit??? Wow!!!!!!!!!
> But they don't.
But they do to me, and you're asking me.
> If he says something that a Usenet group say
> otherwise what do you do? Take him to court over it?
Um, dude, you ever heard of price comparison?
Same logic.
If you seriously need that explained, I suggest you write Consumer
Reports and tell them they're wasting precious wood pulp.
> It's his
> decision, for his business regarding your custom. What anyone else
> here has to say about it means nothing.
Which statement is obviously belied by your continued responses, unless
you're feeling a bit post-modern at the mo'? I mean, heck, if God
wanted us to tour cross-country, He would've installed us with wheels
in the first place, nu?
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 21:16:09
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> Right. So if he tells me that something is normal, how would I know,
> really?
It doesn't really make any odds. He's telling you what he's
offering, if it's with or against, better or worse than industry
practice doesn't alter that.
> Right. But I don't want to ask for something so contrary to "common
> experience" such as to border on insult.
You're not in the trade, why should you be expected to know?
> Wrong. I'm not trying to read his mind. I'm asking about what the
> cycling community at large thinks of x, y, and z.
Which tells you what the cycling community at large thinks, not
what your dealer thinks. You're dealing with him, not the cycling
community at large.
> Right. So I'm asking around, comparing notes on how businesses are
> run, whether it strikes different dealers differently or not.
And not actually getting any further forwards with how you deal
with the transaction in hand, because it's purely in the hands of
you and your dealer.
> Wrong. Asking for a 90% discount is not the sign of a serious
> customer.
So what's the magic level that /is/ serious? It will very much
depend on the dealer and the customer and their relationship, and
nobody else can tell you what that is.
> Ah, thanks -- just goes to show that the only stupid question is the
> one which doesn't get asked.
You could just read the specs, of course...
> THE MOST IMMEDIATELY COMFORTABLE???? Holy chromoly, I thought the
> SMGTe was the most immediately comfortable! And you have an SMGT, and
> you can still say that about the Spirit??? Wow!!!!!!!!!
Not "Wow!!!!!!!!" at all. I want a bike that does long tours with
handling unaffected by heavy luggage, the SMGT does that better
than the Spirit, so I have an SMGT. The SMGT is too laid back to
be immediately comfortable for most riders on their first recumbent
trip, even with the seat cranked up as high as it'll go. The
Spirit can be set up like a car seat, which is the sort of angle
people are familiar with and happy controlling vehicles at. It's a
soft seat which comforms immediately to the rider and on a short
trip that's more important than more rigid support spread over a
larger area. "More immediately comfortable" means what it says,
"immediate" doesn't tell you how you'll feel after 4 hours riding
into headwinds over a poor road.
> Um, dude, you ever heard of price comparison?
>
> Same logic.
Right, you're free to take your business anywhere you want, so talk
to other HP Velotechnik dealers and see what they'll give you in
comparison. What Usenet's opinion on the matter is remains
irrelevant, though they may be able to point you to other HPVel
dealers, or suggest alternatives to the SMGT handled by dealers
they particularly recommend.
> Which statement is obviously belied by your continued responses
Not really, I'm trying to get you to talk to the people that
actually matter, which is a useful piece of advice IMHO, where my
telling you whether I think it's right or not that you get a pair
of forks back is irrelevant. You'll note I haven't said whether
you should get a pair of forks back.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 12:11:39
From: Buck
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> The
> issue here is whether paying for a bike that includes a fork, then
> upgrading to a better fork for more money, means (or should mean) that
> I keep the old fork or get a discount. Someone else mentioned that the
> cost of the upgrade is actually cheaper than getting the upgrade later
> on, "separately," because that discount for the old fork, etc., is
> "built-in" to the cost of the upgrade at the initial POS...and that
> sounds reasonable, if that's how things really work...again, I don't
> know; just wondering, but seriously wondering, as we're talking big
> bucks here (for me, anyway).
> I'm not trying to penny-pinch here; just hate feeling taken advantage
> of. If this is industry practice, well, I guess I can tolerate it
> better, perhaps -- but that's why I ask y'all. I want to know. If
> you're paying $$$$ for a whole bike, and then pay some more $$$$ for
> all the upgrades, either you'd just get the framekit and pay for the
> upgrades or get the whole bike and keep "the old stuff" or get the
> whole bike and get a discount if the dealer keeps "the old stuff."
> Does that sound so controversial?
You are being silly about it. The only reason you are thinking this is
because you have seen the bike before the upgrades. Have you ever
purchased a new car? Did you ask for all of the parts that weren't
included when you bought the upgraded package? By your reasoning, when
you paid for the aluminum wheels, you ought to get the steel wheels
too. Just load them up in the trunk!
If you had already paid for the parts, then you might have a legitimate
gripe. When you get a new car stereo installed, you expect that they
will return the factory stereo to you. But when you buy the car and ask
for the premium stereo instead of the one that is in it, you don't have
the same expectation. What makes buying a new bicycle any different?
You are paying for the UPGRADED part and not for the original part.
This is the price difference between what he has to pay for the new
part, the cost of the installation, etc., minus the cost of the
original part.
If you want ALL of the parts, then pay the guy the extra money to keep
all of the parts.
-Buck
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 11:16:50
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Victor Kan wrote:
>
>
> Presumably you're referring to widely in the U.S?
Oh, yes -- hehe....
> HPVelotechnik is in Europe and have very few stocking dealers in the
> U.S. And even their cheapest models are up there on the recumbent
> pricing scale once they get over The Pond.
>
> Is it any wonder they're not as well known as brands with wider domestic
> distribution and/or lower price points?
Well, what I'd meant was even here, and on bentrideronline and the RCN
newsletter....
> Having said that, I'd love to have an SMGTe or a Speed Machine. When my
> taste decides that I want to have an USS bike that really works for me
> (my legs are too short for my ActionBent Tidal Wave in stop and go
> traffic), I'd put any of the HPV bikes right at the top of my list.
Hell yeah! I'm already checking out the ~US$1,500.00 as a future
"guest bike"...I'm gonna be a recumbent evangelist, by gum! Matter of
fact, I was going to do a second degree in mathematics or statistics,
but now the 'bent scene's got me so fired up I'm looking anew at
bicycling, namely, as a lifestyle, and it's gotten me seriously
interested in doing Urban Policy, vis-a-vis HPV transportation...I
think that's what I'll do my Master in now!!!!!!
> Me too. My DF road bike is pretty comfy now that I've tossed away the
> comfort gizmos like a suspension seat post, split saddle and "body
> geometry" handlebars w/ adjustable stem.
>
> It can still be painful if I'm lazy and "sit too hard" on the saddle.
Yeah, me too. I love the Trek 1000c, but the SMGTe is far above it!
> Yep, and that's partly why fews mention the HPVelo SMGTe :-).
Heh, well, I'd meant "even within the 'bent community."
> A decent 'bent can be had for < $700 these days.
Decent? Hmm...I guess...?
> Folks who think 'bents aren't sexy haven't seen the Velokraft VK2, or
> the Challenge Seiran, or a Carbent, or a Karl Swanson custome bike, or
> <insert your favorite, aesthetically pleasing bents>...
Right, that too! But the few times I've seen a 'bent in NYC it's with
chubby ol' fogeys on 'em, and absolutely never seen a female on one
yet.
>
>
>
> --
> I do not accept unsolicited commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
> legitimate replies.
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 11:05:57
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> Why not ask the guy you're dealing with?
Well, he's trying to sell something, for starters. Also, like I said,
I wanted to find out what was "industry practice." As well, I didn't
want to seem like I'm haggling him. I'll still ask, but having had all
y'all's answers I wouldn't come across as some kind of "Socratic
gadfly," if you take my meaning.
> He knows what he does far
> better than anyone else here.
I didn't know that. Besides, there are a few folks in the bike
business here.
> Had I really wanted to keep my V brakes
> when Darth Ben upgraded them to HS-33s for me all I would've had to do
> was ask.
Okay, so it's not unreasonable, then, to ask to keep the stuff. Kinda
like handing my flat back to me, even though I have a new tube
installed by the shop.
> For most people getting the swapped-out stuff is just clutter
> that won't get used and will waste space. You might be able to get
> something for a 20" front fork on eBay but there again it may well not
> be worth the time and effort it'll take up.
I guess I'm a pack-rat and was thinking of some time in the future when
that fork might come in handy for a second or third 'bent! I'm already
eyeing the HP Velo Spirit as a nice "guest 'bent"...do you know
anything about it? Mainly, does the seat adjust such that I don't have
to fret with the chains if guests of different x-seams try out the
bike?
> You're not doing business with us, you're doing it with him, so there's
> nothing to "hash out" with us all, and what he says is what will be
> available to you to take or leave as you see fit.
Think of this as a practice run, is all.
> Why ask x unconnected people when what they say will have no ultimate
> bearing on the answer of the 1 person that matters here?
But they do. I'm sure you don't respond knowing the sheer utter
futility of your thoughts before-hand.
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 14:41:16
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
I think that when you buy an upgrade, you are paying the difference in price
between OEM item cost and the upgrade cost. It's like buying a car and
getting leather seats as an option. You get the leather seats. They don't
give you the cloth seats that come on the base model. If your dealer has the
bike in stock and it's not built up, then you're paying for the frameset and
parts and labor beyond a normal bike-out-of-the-box set-up charge. Don't
forget that the $80.00 retail gizmo might only cost the bike maker $11.38 so
don't expect much of a discount off of the $275.00 retail gizmo you want as
an upgrade. Besides, you're buying near 4 kilobucks worth of bike. Don't
disappoint us by turning into a snivelly cheapskate bastard after pumping us
for a couple of fokking weeks asking our advice about everything from the
value of high precision ceramic bearings and what is the most asshole
friendly toilet paper you can cram into a pannier for the great across the
country ride to christin the streetmachine. Buy the foker already.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 20:20:11
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> Well, he's trying to sell something, for starters.
And? Business is a two way transaction.
> Also, like I said,
> I wanted to find out what was "industry practice."
That isn't really anything much to do with it. If he decides he'll
work other than "industry practice" then that's his business, and
that includes if it's against or for your favour.
>> He knows what he does far better than anyone else here.
>
> I didn't know that.
What? How can a Usenet group possibly know a bike dealer's mind
better than he does himself?
> Besides, there are a few folks in the bike business here.
And they will also reserve the right to run their business however
they want to. If they're out of order they'll pay in lost custom,
it's their call, just as it's the call of the guy you're dealing
with in this case.
> Okay, so it's not unreasonable, then, to ask to keep the stuff.
You can ask for a 90% discount if you like, as long as you're
prepared to take no for an answer. It's only towards unreasonable
to start arguing about it if he's said no.
> I guess I'm a pack-rat and was thinking of some time in the future when
> that fork might come in handy for a second or third 'bent! I'm already
> eyeing the HP Velo Spirit as a nice "guest 'bent"...do you know
> anything about it?
Yes, and for starters I know that with a 16" front wheel a spare
fork from a Streetmachine will be about as much use as a wax
fireguard... ;-)
> Mainly, does the seat adjust such that I don't have
> to fret with the chains if guests of different x-seams try out the
> bike?
The seat slides up and down the frame completely independent of the
drivetrain which stays a fixed length.
It's a very nice bike for immedaietly getting on and riding, and
the most immediately comfortable bike I've ever ridden (wouldn't be
so good over distance, with less weight taken on the back and more
aero drag). A cracking urban and short day tour bike.
>> Why ask x unconnected people when what they say will have no ultimate
>> bearing on the answer of the 1 person that matters here?
>
> But they do. I'm sure you don't respond knowing the sheer utter
> futility of your thoughts before-hand.
But they don't. If he says something that a Usenet group say
otherwise what do you do? Take him to court over it? It's his
decision, for his business regarding your custom. What anyone else
here has to say about it means nothing.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 08:48:38
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article <468qb6F9j8igU1@individual.net >,
Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk > writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>
>> But beds and living room chairs aren't for riding, and bicycle saddles
>> aren't for sitting.
>
> But "100% comfortable" suggests there is no possible improvement to be
> made. In which case it should be just as good as an armchair for
> sitting on and not riding. It isn't, so there;s obviously some ground
> lost somewhere despite the posted "100%".
My shoes are comfortable, but I don't sit on them either.
Upthread Mike Reed says his bike is comfortable for him.
I take it he means the /whole/ bike, not just its saddle.
cheers,
Tom
--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 20:07:49
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> Upthread Mike Reed says his bike is comfortable for him.
> I take it he means the /whole/ bike, not just its saddle.
And my point remains, if it's "100% comfortable" then that implies
no possible improvement anywhere, under any circumsatnces, at any
time. Anyone that thinks such a thing is kidding themselves, and
if that isn't what he meant it remains what he implied.
You can have something that is comfortable in an absolute sense,
but still less comfortable than an alternative in a relative sense.
Such is, IME, the case with a well set up upright bike and s
similarly well suited recumbent. The first is good, the second better.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 08:00:32
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Mike Reed wrote:
>
>
> I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
> my Aeron at work.
I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU MEAN!!! Those expensive $1,000 Aeron chairs
are extremely comfy, but the 'bent, wow, like an SMGTe, I could fall
asleep in!!!!
> You can't assume that just because you are
> uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
But I do wonder why the SMGTe isn't more widely-mentioned...everyone
talks about Rans and Easy Racers, etc. They look like "garage-jobs"
done by engineering students. (Not a pejorative, that opinion, BTW.)
> I'd like to have a bent one day I think, but not as a replacement for
> anything.
I agree -- I can still see a need for my upwrong, which is very comfy
to me, my great Trek 1000c, with which I've done 800 miles in three
months of riding. But for those long trips now, it's gonna be 'bent
all the way, baby! The DF will be for stores and when running with the
wolves.
> I think it would be cool to get a faring and really tear it
> up on the flats. For the most part though, I like being able to hop
> hazards, cheat curbs, trackstand, climb Jester (Austin), etc on my
> upright (in complete comfort).
I think most folks would choose a 'bent if only 1) the knew about
'bents in the first place; 2) the costs weren't so prohibitive; 3) it
had sex appeal. There's a time and place for DFs, but "normally" (in a
"normative" rather than "descriptive" sense) 'bents would be the norm,
not the exception.
> -Mike
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 19:27:45
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1140796832.648033.53890@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
> Mike Reed wrote:
[...]
>> I'd like to have a bent one day I think, but not as a replacement for
>> anything.
>
> I agree -- I can still see a need for my upwrong, which is very comfy
> to me, my great Trek 1000c, with which I've done 800 miles in three
> months of riding. But for those long trips now, it's gonna be 'bent
> all the way, baby! The DF will be for stores and when running with the
> wolves.
NYC has got this essentially right. Uprights are for short hops about town.
You are normally on them for a matter of minutes, not hours - certainly not
for days at a time.
When I was a kid I had a bike of course, but I do not think I ever rode it
for more than a few minutes at a time. I think that is how kids still ride
their bikes. It is only when you become an adult and want to do more
extended kinds of bike rides that you discover just how uncomfortable they
are.
For week long tours, a reucmbent is the only thing that makes any sense. I
actually feel sorry for all those poor slobs who are on uprights. They
suffer needlessly. A recumbent would solve all their discomfort problems
forever more.
>> I think it would be cool to get a faring and really tear it
>> up on the flats. For the most part though, I like being able to hop
>> hazards, cheat curbs, trackstand, climb Jester (Austin), etc on my
>> upright (in complete comfort).
>
> I think most folks would choose a 'bent if only 1) the knew about
> 'bents in the first place; 2) the costs weren't so prohibitive; 3) it
> had sex appeal. There's a time and place for DFs, but "normally" (in a
> "normative" rather than "descriptive" sense) 'bents would be the norm,
> not the exception.
NYC has got it right again. I am surprised anyone so young can be so st.
He is way ahead of the game. The rest of you should get on board. To put up
with pain and discomfort on a bike ks you as stubborn and kind of stupid
really. I tried to hang in there on my upright until I decided the damn
thing was never going to be comfortable, no matter what I did to it. Once I
got into recumbents, I never looked back.
Uprights are nothing but torture racks. Why go to Hell before you die? Get a
recumbent and learn what Heaven is like!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 16:34:20
From: Victor Kan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
>>You can't assume that just because you are
>>uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
>
>
> But I do wonder why the SMGTe isn't more widely-mentioned...everyone
> talks about Rans and Easy Racers, etc. They look like "garage-jobs"
> done by engineering students. (Not a pejorative, that opinion, BTW.)
Presumably you're referring to widely in the U.S?
HPVelotechnik is in Europe and have very few stocking dealers in the
U.S. And even their cheapest models are up there on the recumbent
pricing scale once they get over The Pond.
Is it any wonder they're not as well known as brands with wider domestic
distribution and/or lower price points?
Having said that, I'd love to have an SMGTe or a Speed Machine. When my
taste decides that I want to have an USS bike that really works for me
(my legs are too short for my ActionBent Tidal Wave in stop and go
traffic), I'd put any of the HPV bikes right at the top of my list.
>>I'd like to have a bent one day I think, but not as a replacement for
>>anything.
> I agree -- I can still see a need for my upwrong, which is very comfy
> to me, my great Trek 1000c, with which I've done 800 miles in three
> months of riding. But for those long trips now, it's gonna be 'bent
> all the way, baby! The DF will be for stores and when running with the
> wolves.
Me too. My DF road bike is pretty comfy now that I've tossed away the
comfort gizmos like a suspension seat post, split saddle and "body
geometry" handlebars w/ adjustable stem.
It can still be painful if I'm lazy and "sit too hard" on the saddle.
>>I think it would be cool to get a faring and really tear it
>>up on the flats. For the most part though, I like being able to hop
>>hazards, cheat curbs, trackstand, climb Jester (Austin), etc on my
>>upright (in complete comfort).
>
>
> I think most folks would choose a 'bent if only 1) the knew about
> 'bents in the first place;
Yep, and that's partly why fews mention the HPVelo SMGTe :-).
> 2) the costs weren't so prohibitive;
A decent 'bent can be had for < $700 these days.
> 3) it had sex appeal.
Folks who think 'bents aren't sexy haven't seen the Velokraft VK2, or
the Challenge Seiran, or a Carbent, or a Karl Swanson custome bike, or
<insert your favorite, aesthetically pleasing bents >...
There's a time and place for DFs, but "normally" (in a
> "normative" rather than "descriptive" sense) 'bents would be the norm,
> not the exception.
>
>
>>-Mike
>
>
--
I do not accept unsolicited commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 16:30:17
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> But I do wonder why the SMGTe isn't more widely-mentioned...everyone
> talks about Rans and Easy Racers, etc. They look like "garage-jobs"
> done by engineering students.
a.r.b.r is Americentric, those bikes are easier to get hold of in N.
America. In the UK nobody much talks about them because they're not
available, while there are, oooh, at least two shops in the country you
can test ride a Streetmachine at.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 07:58:45
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article <468nvgF9vmkgU1@individual.net >,
Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk > writes:
> Mike Reed wrote:
>
>> I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
>> my Aeron at work.
>
> So if it's peerlessly comfortable you go to sleep on it, and have
> similar saddles and handrests in place of the chairs in your living
> room?
But beds and living room chairs aren't for riding, and bicycle saddles
aren't for sitting.
cheers,
Tom
--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 16:27:58
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> But beds and living room chairs aren't for riding, and bicycle saddles
> aren't for sitting.
But "100% comfortable" suggests there is no possible improvement to be
made. In which case it should be just as good as an armchair for
sitting on and not riding. It isn't, so there;s obviously some ground
lost somewhere despite the posted "100%".
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 07:50:29
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Buck wrote:
>
>
> You are forgetting the costs of labor to install all of these upgrades.
> The labor has already been spent on configuring the bike as it
> currently sits. Often when they upgrade parts at point of sale, the
> upgrades are being charged to you for near their cost with little or
> nothing thrown in to cover the additional labor.
>
> What labor is involved? Well, you mention suspension and upgrades to
> disc brakes. They have to order, receive and prep all of the parts. The
> new front shock will likely need the steering tube cut. If you went
> with cable-actuated discs, they may be able to re-use the cables, but
> most likely they will have to cut new cables and housings for the
> brakes. Since the sizes of the previous cables are pretty specific, the
> "old" ones will likely end up in the trash. If you went with hydraulic,
> then they have no choice but to run new hydraulic tubing.
Well, sure, and there's his electric bills and rent, on top of it
all...but at what point does that become "my responsibility" as a
customer? You charge what you charge; I pay what I can afford. The
issue here is whether paying for a bike that includes a fork, then
upgrading to a better fork for more money, means (or should mean) that
I keep the old fork or get a discount. Someone else mentioned that the
cost of the upgrade is actually cheaper than getting the upgrade later
on, "separately," because that discount for the old fork, etc., is
"built-in" to the cost of the upgrade at the initial POS...and that
sounds reasonable, if that's how things really work...again, I don't
know; just wondering, but seriously wondering, as we're talking big
bucks here (for me, anyway).
> Once the installation process is complete, then everything has to be
> adjusted so it works properly. In all, you are talking about several
> hours worth of additional labor that has to be paid for. Remember, the
> initial costs for configuring the bike were already added into the
> price and the original labor for setup is essentially lost.
Well, this is what I'm wondering -- the labor is always factored into
the cost, isn't it? Does any bike dealer list labor as a separate line
item when selling a bike, a whole bike? HP Velo's own official price
list, previously linked, explicitly states that prices include labor,
installation!
> Don't begrude the dealer keeping the parts. It helps him recoup the
> additional cost of getting your butt on the bike. He hopes that later
> you will come in and buy something more profitable like additional
> upgrades and accessories.
Please believe me when I say that I am paying full retail as it is. I
did not haggle him at all, and he's going out of business soon! But
fair is fair: if I'm paying for the option which comes with a fork, and
I elect to upgrade the fork, well, why should he keep the old fork
while charging me for the option which comes with a fork?
I'm not trying to penny-pinch here; just hate feeling taken advantage
of. If this is industry practice, well, I guess I can tolerate it
better, perhaps -- but that's why I ask y'all. I want to know. If
you're paying $$$$ for a whole bike, and then pay some more $$$$ for
all the upgrades, either you'd just get the framekit and pay for the
upgrades or get the whole bike and keep "the old stuff" or get the
whole bike and get a discount if the dealer keeps "the old stuff."
Does that sound so controversial?
I'm asking in earnest here; not being rhetorical at all. Like I said,
I'd rather hash this out with you all now than ask him later and make
it seem like I'm trying to take advantage of him when I'm just being
logical about it, I think.
> -Buck
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 16:37:00
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> I'm not trying to penny-pinch here; just hate feeling taken advantage
> of. If this is industry practice, well, I guess I can tolerate it
> better, perhaps -- but that's why I ask y'all. I want to know.
Why not ask the guy you're dealing with? He knows what he does far
better than anyone else here. Had I really wanted to keep my V brakes
when Darth Ben upgraded them to HS-33s for me all I would've had to do
was ask. For most people getting the swapped-out stuff is just clutter
that won't get used and will waste space. You might be able to get
something for a 20" front fork on eBay but there again it may well not
be worth the time and effort it'll take up.
> I'm asking in earnest here; not being rhetorical at all. Like I said,
> I'd rather hash this out with you all now than ask him later
You're not doing business with us, you're doing it with him, so there's
nothing to "hash out" with us all, and what he says is what will be
available to you to take or leave as you see fit.
Why ask x unconnected people when what they say will have no ultimate
bearing on the answer of the 1 person that matters here?
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 07:22:01
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> Yes, but OTOH no more so than cars. You don't buy a Ford Taurus, end of
> story, you select the model from the range and then you decide on
> options. People seem to manage with that, and have done for years.
Oh God...when I finally have a family, etc., I'll see you on
alt.rec.cars.duh....
> Is coffee really /that/ much harder to buy because Starbucks give you
> options beyond cream and sugar?
Actually, yes -- I had no idea until Starbucks (blush) that folks had
cream in their coffee!
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 07:18:42
From: Mike Reed
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
We on ARBR no
> longer have any interest in uprights, knowing how uncomfortable they are,
> but it may be that in time many of you presently on uprights will come
> around to recumbents.
I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
my Aeron at work. You can't assume that just because you are
uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
I'd like to have a bent one day I think, but not as a replacement for
anything. I think it would be cool to get a faring and really tear it
up on the flats. For the most part though, I like being able to hop
hazards, cheat curbs, trackstand, climb Jester (Austin), etc on my
upright (in complete comfort).
-Mike
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 19:05:52
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Mike Reed" <waterrockets@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1140794322.151831.244260@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> We on ARBR no
>> longer have any interest in uprights, knowing how uncomfortable they are,
>> but it may be that in time many of you presently on uprights will come
>> around to recumbents.
>
> I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
> my Aeron at work. You can't assume that just because you are
> uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
[...]
It is just a matter of time. One day you will decide that your good and
faithful upright is just causing you too much discomfort. You will most
likely discover this on a very long all day kind of ride. At that point you
will either think of giving up cycling altogether or look around for a more
comfortable type of bike. As you will not longer care so much about being
fast all the time, you will have to consider a recumbent as the only
possible solution to the discomfort problem. I actually envy you when you
reach this station in your life because shopping for a recumbent is just
about the most fun you can possibly have.
I grow old . I grow old .
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
T.S. Eliot - The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 05:41:03
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article
<k96dndxK-JjoMGLenZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@prairiewave.com >,
"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote:
> "Mike Reed" <waterrockets@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1140794322.151831.244260@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > We on ARBR no
> >> longer have any interest in uprights, knowing how uncomfortable they are,
> >> but it may be that in time many of you presently on uprights will come
> >> around to recumbents.
> >
> > I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
> > my Aeron at work. You can't assume that just because you are
> > uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
> [...]
>
> It is just a matter of time. One day you will decide that your good and
> faithful upright is just causing you too much discomfort. You will most
> likely discover this on a very long all day kind of ride. At that point you
> will either think of giving up cycling altogether or look around for a more
> comfortable type of bike. As you will not longer care so much about being
> fast all the time, you will have to consider a recumbent as the only
> possible solution to the discomfort problem. I actually envy you when you
> reach this station in your life because shopping for a recumbent is just
> about the most fun you can possibly have.
>
> I grow old . I grow old .
> I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
>
> T.S. Eliot - The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock
Let us go down certain half deserted streets;
Streets that follow like an argument of insidious intent.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 06:55:55
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article
<jack-6D8B76.21410324022006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com >,
Michael Press <jack@abc.net > wrote:
> In article
> <k96dndxK-JjoMGLenZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@prairiewave.com>,
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote:
>
> > "Mike Reed" <waterrockets@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1140794322.151831.244260@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > Edward Dolan wrote:
> > >
> > > We on ARBR no
> > >> longer have any interest in uprights, knowing how uncomfortable they are,
> > >> but it may be that in time many of you presently on uprights will come
> > >> around to recumbents.
> > >
> > > I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
> > > my Aeron at work. You can't assume that just because you are
> > > uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
> > [...]
> >
> > It is just a matter of time. One day you will decide that your good and
> > faithful upright is just causing you too much discomfort. You will most
> > likely discover this on a very long all day kind of ride. At that point you
> > will either think of giving up cycling altogether or look around for a more
> > comfortable type of bike. As you will not longer care so much about being
> > fast all the time, you will have to consider a recumbent as the only
> > possible solution to the discomfort problem. I actually envy you when you
> > reach this station in your life because shopping for a recumbent is just
> > about the most fun you can possibly have.
> >
> > I grow old . I grow old .
> > I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
> >
> > T.S. Eliot - The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock
>
> Let us go down certain half deserted streets;
> Streets that follow like an argument of insidious intent.
x^
tedious
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Feb 2006 00:25:52
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Michael Press" <jack@abc.net > wrote in message
news:jack-6D8B76.21410324022006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
> In article
> <k96dndxK-JjoMGLenZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@prairiewave.com>,
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote:
[...]
>> I grow old . I grow old .
>> I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
>>
>> T.S. Eliot - The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock
>
> Let us go down certain half deserted streets;
> Streets that follow like an argument of insidious intent.
Ah, yes ... a fellow connoisseur!
I do not see any reason why newsgroups should be so culturally deprived all
of the time. Wayne Leggett, the Poet of ARBR, would drag us all down to his
abysmal level if I would let him. I doubt he has ever even heard of T.S.
Eliot. I think there was recently a movie made about his life that I would
like to see if and when it ever shows up on TV.
In a college literature class we spent an entire two weeks on this single
poem. I was new to modern poetry, having read only the poets of earlier
centuries, so it came as quite a revelation to me that anything modern could
be so good. This particular poem has always stayed with me for some reason.
I think it is because I share the same view as Eliot on man and the 20th
century.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 17:37:47
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:k96dndxK-JjoMGLenZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>
> "Mike Reed" <waterrockets@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1140794322.151831.244260@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > We on ARBR no
> >> longer have any interest in uprights, knowing how uncomfortable they
are,
> >> but it may be that in time many of you presently on uprights will come
> >> around to recumbents.
> >
> > I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
> > my Aeron at work. You can't assume that just because you are
> > uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
> [...]
>
> It is just a matter of time. One day you will decide that your good and
> faithful upright is just causing you too much discomfort.
When I'm 86 years old? There's a guy that rides locally who's 85 and loves
his Gios. If he can ride an upright and be comfortable at 85 then there's
hope that I will, too.
Greg
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 21:02:08
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote in message
news:11vvd7c11qidh42@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:k96dndxK-JjoMGLenZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> "Mike Reed" <waterrockets@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1140794322.151831.244260@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >
>> > We on ARBR no
>> >> longer have any interest in uprights, knowing how uncomfortable they
> are,
>> >> but it may be that in time many of you presently on uprights will come
>> >> around to recumbents.
>> >
>> > I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
>> > my Aeron at work. You can't assume that just because you are
>> > uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
>> [...]
>>
>> It is just a matter of time. One day you will decide that your good and
>> faithful upright is just causing you too much discomfort.
>
> When I'm 86 years old? There's a guy that rides locally who's 85 and
> loves
> his Gios. If he can ride an upright and be comfortable at 85 then there's
> hope that I will, too.
>
> Greg
Yes, I know a few types like that too. I call them Iron Men. I am not one of
them and most likely neither are you. You have to keep up your athleticism
in order to be comfortable on an upright. Most of us will not keep up our
athleticism after a certain age. It just becomes too tiresome to do it. At
that point, you will began to see the advantages of a recumbent.
I grow old … I grow old …
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
T.S.Eliot - The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 15:47:36
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Mike Reed wrote:
> I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
> my Aeron at work.
So if it's peerlessly comfortable you go to sleep on it, and have
similar saddles and handrests in place of the chairs in your living
room? Doubt it... My uprights are comfortable: I use a Brompton for
more trips by number than I use my 'bent, but the 'bent is *more*
comfortable and that's a fact. The longer the journey the bigger the
advantage, even though the Brompton is /not/ uncomfortable.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 06:45:16
From: Buck
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> Oh, actually, he's got the bike already. You know, the ol' "display
> model deal" LBSes do...though it looks new enough. He's got it already
> upgraded, modestly, and I was like, hmm, why not just go all the
> way....
> Ah, but, for example, this bike's already got the V-brakes and standard
> front and rear suspension on it...if I upgrade to discs, etc., can I
> therefore expect to receive the V-brakes and suspension systems as
> well? He's charging the full basic bike price, on top of the upgrades
> -- again, all from HP Velo's own list.
You are forgetting the costs of labor to install all of these upgrades.
The labor has already been spent on configuring the bike as it
currently sits. Often when they upgrade parts at point of sale, the
upgrades are being charged to you for near their cost with little or
nothing thrown in to cover the additional labor.
What labor is involved? Well, you mention suspension and upgrades to
disc brakes. They have to order, receive and prep all of the parts. The
new front shock will likely need the steering tube cut. If you went
with cable-actuated discs, they may be able to re-use the cables, but
most likely they will have to cut new cables and housings for the
brakes. Since the sizes of the previous cables are pretty specific, the
"old" ones will likely end up in the trash. If you went with hydraulic,
then they have no choice but to run new hydraulic tubing.
Once the installation process is complete, then everything has to be
adjusted so it works properly. In all, you are talking about several
hours worth of additional labor that has to be paid for. Remember, the
initial costs for configuring the bike were already added into the
price and the original labor for setup is essentially lost.
Don't begrude the dealer keeping the parts. It helps him recoup the
additional cost of getting your butt on the bike. He hopes that later
you will come in and buy something more profitable like additional
upgrades and accessories.
-Buck
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 23:07:18
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article <1140746746.947622.49270@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com >,
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > writes:
>
> Tom Keats wrote:
>> ...
>> I for one am not annoyed. But I am beginning to get the
>> impression recumbents are more about [thinking aboug] buying
>> than riding. Oh, well. Maybe they just require so much more
>> pre-purchase decision analysis....
>
> Or maybe it is one (1) particular person who likes to ask a lot of
> questions?
Well, with the confusing myriad of options with which NYC XYZ
appears to be confronted, I guess it's understandable.
But I think it does serve to illustrate how recumbent bicycles
are so complicatedly un-standard. Is it even possible to define
a "typical" recumbent bicycle? I think this could be one of
those things that is at once both a strength and weakness.
> The last three (3) recumbents I obtained came looking for me, so there
> was no pre-purchase analysis.
That's pretty much how I get my rides, too. Actually, it's
often more like I get the parts I need for free -- as long
as I also take the discarded complete bike to which they're
attached. Now, if somebody would just put out a perfectly
good copper bain-ie (w/ enamel inserts) with their trash ...
cheers,
Tom
--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 10:08:55
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> Well, with the confusing myriad of options with which NYC XYZ
> appears to be confronted, I guess it's understandable.
> But I think it does serve to illustrate how recumbent bicycles
> are so complicatedly un-standard.
Yes, but OTOH no more so than cars. You don't buy a Ford Taurus, end of
story, you select the model from the range and then you decide on
options. People seem to manage with that, and have done for years.
Is coffee really /that/ much harder to buy because Starbucks give you
options beyond cream and sugar?
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 07:46:33
From: Jon Meinecke
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
> Tom Keats wrote:
>
>> [...] recumbent bicycles are so complicatedly un-standard.
With apologies to Euell Gibbons: "Have you looked at a recumbent
bicycle lately? Many parts are standard..." %^) Recumbent purchasing
may be like _Stalking Wild Asparagus_!
But, there are a number of "off-the-rack" recumbents available. Many
people want to go into a store, ride a bike, and buy that bike as
configured. Others want to tweak and perfect a custom configuration.
Nothing wrong with either approach. Some vendors/manufacturers cater
to one approach or the other.
Configuring and buying a recumbent is only as complicated as one
makes it,-- well, somewhat more complicated because of often
limited availability.
"Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk > wrote
> [...]
> Is coffee really /that/ much harder to buy because Starbucks give you
> options beyond cream and sugar?
To buy, perhaps somewhat harder,-- more information to communicate,
more possibility of misunderstanding and more possibility of fulfillment
error. I asked for a "double-what's-it-extra-foamy" not an
"extra-what's-it-
double-foamy"... %^)
With more choices, to decide *what* to buy,-- well Toffler wrote about
this 30+ years ago... %^P
Jon Meinecke
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 15:49:28
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Jon Meinecke wrote:
> "Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote
>>Is coffee really /that/ much harder to buy because Starbucks give you
>>options beyond cream and sugar?
> To buy, perhaps somewhat harder,-- more information to communicate,
> more possibility of misunderstanding and more possibility of fulfillment
> error. I asked for a "double-what's-it-extra-foamy" not an
> "extra-what's-it-double-foamy"... %^)
Though the fact remains that I can walk in and say "Black coffee
please!" and get a black coffee PDQ...
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 15:09:22
From: Jon Meinecke
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk > wrote
> Jon Meinecke wrote:
>> "Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote
>>>Is coffee really /that/ much harder to buy because Starbucks give you
>>>options beyond cream and sugar?
>
>> To buy, perhaps somewhat harder,-- more information to communicate,
>> more possibility of misunderstanding and more possibility of fulfillment
>> error. I asked for a "double-what's-it-extra-foamy" not an
>> "extra-what's-it-double-foamy"... %^)
>
> Though the fact remains that I can walk in and say "Black coffee please!"
> and get a black coffee PDQ...
>
Ah, but will you get what you want/expect?
Decaf or caffeinated? Columbian or Kona? 12oz, 32 oz? %^)
But yes, if you buy a standard configuration, bike or coffee,
it is indeed a short order. Seeing the forest for the trees
can become an issue, though, when custom configurations
come into play.
None of my recumbent bike buys have been complicated.
All were "off-the-rack" purchases and customization (minor)
to my likening came later.
Jon Meinecke
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 03:38:28
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:6bbmtd.ao5.ln@vcn.bc.ca...
> In article <1140746746.947622.49270@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>> Tom Keats wrote:
>>> ...
>>> I for one am not annoyed. But I am beginning to get the
>>> impression recumbents are more about [thinking aboug] buying
>>> than riding. Oh, well. Maybe they just require so much more
>>> pre-purchase decision analysis....
>>
>> Or maybe it is one (1) particular person who likes to ask a lot of
>> questions?
>
> Well, with the confusing myriad of options with which NYC XYZ
> appears to be confronted, I guess it's understandable.
> But I think it does serve to illustrate how recumbent bicycles
> are so complicatedly un-standard. Is it even possible to define
> a "typical" recumbent bicycle? I think this could be one of
> those things that is at once both a strength and weakness.
>
>> The last three (3) recumbents I obtained came looking for me, so there
>> was no pre-purchase analysis.
[...]
Yes, NYC can be a bit annoying with all his very elementary questions, but
he is saving ARBR from itself. So I would ask that you here on RBM have a
bit of patience. As soon as ARBR gets back on its feet, we will leave you to
yourselves. Remember this - all newsgroups need newbies. They perish
without them.
Most of us on ARBR have spent many years riding uprights and so we know
where you are at, but you do not yet know where we are at. We on ARBR no
longer have any interest in uprights, knowing how uncomfortable they are,
but it may be that in time many of you presently on uprights will come
around to recumbents. When you do, we will be here for you just like you are
here for us now.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 18:18:31
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> Say, what's a framekit, exactly, compared to a basic model?
For an upright bicycle, a frame kit is usually the bare frame and
possibly the fork (and headset) since all other components are
"standardized" to some extent and are readily available from multiple
sources.
Recumbent frame kits typically include the seat,
handlebars/riser/steering linkage, and chain management devices since
these are usually proprietary and not interchangeable between
manufacturers and/or models.
--
Tom Sherman
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 18:05:47
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> ...
> I for one am not annoyed. But I am beginning to get the
> impression recumbents are more about [thinking aboug] buying
> than riding. Oh, well. Maybe they just require so much more
> pre-purchase decision analysis....
Or maybe it is one (1) particular person who likes to ask a lot of
questions?
The last three (3) recumbents I obtained came looking for me, so there
was no pre-purchase analysis.
--
Tom Sherman
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 14:11:07
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article <11vs0rr60hqjced@corp.supernews.com >,
"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > writes:
>> And if I get the basic bike but upgrade anyway, right there and then,
>> should I expect to get my standard factory parts as well? I mean, the
>> basic model comes with V-brakes...I guess I should get them all the
>> same, right, only not installed on the bike, of course, since I'm
>> upgrading to the hydro-discs....
>>
>
> Why don't you ask tham rather than annoy Usenetizens?
I for one am not annoyed. But I am beginning to get the
impression recumbents are more about [thinking aboug] buying
than riding. Oh, well. Maybe they just require so much more
pre-purchase decision analysis. If I had that much money to
spend and so much trouble deciding how to spend it, I think
I'd just spring for a full set of professional copper cookware.
mmmm ... chafing dish ...
cheers,
Tom
--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 10:04:09
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> I for one am not annoyed. But I am beginning to get the
> impression recumbents are more about [thinking aboug] buying
> than riding.
Sad, as that's IMHO a bad way to go about it. The way to make decisions
IME is best left down to Actually Riding. It's a bit like hi-fi, you
can spend weeks and weeks going through options and features on paper,
or just spend a morning listening to a few. The first is what a lot of
people /do/, the second is easier and also works better...
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2006 04:51:57
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk > wrote in message
news:4683rhF9rtoqU1@individual.net...
> Tom Keats wrote:
>
>> I for one am not annoyed. But I am beginning to get the
>> impression recumbents are more about [thinking aboug] buying
>> than riding.
>
> Sad, as that's IMHO a bad way to go about it. The way to make decisions
> IME is best left down to Actually Riding. It's a bit like hi-fi, you can
> spend weeks and weeks going through options and features on paper, or just
> spend a morning listening to a few. The first is what a lot of people
> /do/, the second is easier and also works better...
>
> Pete.
Old Pete of the UK is out to lunch as always.
Relying on yourself to the exclusion of outside data and opinion is
ignorance of the first rank. You must always get as much information as you
can get from others and then digest it as best you can. I would never rely
on myself to have a correct opinion about anything. I am way too st for
that. Nor do I trust my own experience least of all.
I urge all of you ignoramuses to never rely on yourselves. That way lies
madness. It would be best if you came to the Great Ed Dolan to get his
opinion, but you should also get many other opinions. The one thing never to
do is to think that you know what is best - because the likelihood is that
you don't.
That is why there are many publications and other sources available for you
to read and use as you see fit. I would never think about buying any hi-fi
gear without getting lots of data and other opinions. Good grief - this
thinking and doing for yourself is strickly for idiots.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 23:21:09
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
In article <rtbltd.284.ln@vcn.bc.ca >,
tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article <11vs0rr60hqjced@corp.supernews.com>,
> "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> writes:
>
> >> And if I get the basic bike but upgrade anyway, right there and then,
> >> should I expect to get my standard factory parts as well? I mean, the
> >> basic model comes with V-brakes...I guess I should get them all the
> >> same, right, only not installed on the bike, of course, since I'm
> >> upgrading to the hydro-discs....
> >>
> >
> > Why don't you ask tham rather than annoy Usenetizens?
>
> I for one am not annoyed. But I am beginning to get the
> impression recumbents are more about [thinking aboug] buying
> than riding. Oh, well. Maybe they just require so much more
> pre-purchase decision analysis. If I had that much money to
> spend and so much trouble deciding how to spend it, I think
> I'd just spring for a full set of professional copper cookware.
>
> mmmm ... chafing dish ...
Buy them one at a time. Instead of that new saddle, an
evasée. Totally versatile. Frying, sauces, poaching,
reducing. Curved sides match the profile of your whisk.
Get the large size; it is not to big for small jobs.
--
Michael Press
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 15:12:51
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:rtbltd.284.ln@vcn.bc.ca...
> In article <11vs0rr60hqjced@corp.supernews.com>,
> "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> writes:
>
> >> And if I get the basic bike but upgrade anyway, right there and then,
> >> should I expect to get my standard factory parts as well? I mean, the
> >> basic model comes with V-brakes...I guess I should get them all the
> >> same, right, only not installed on the bike, of course, since I'm
> >> upgrading to the hydro-discs....
> >>
> >
> > Why don't you ask tham rather than annoy Usenetizens?
>
> I for one am not annoyed. But I am beginning to get the
> impression recumbents are more about [thinking aboug] buying
> than riding. Oh, well. Maybe they just require so much more
> pre-purchase decision analysis. If I had that much money to
> spend and so much trouble deciding how to spend it, I think
> I'd just spring for a full set of professional copper cookware.
>
Same here, I'd buy some professional cookware, too, since cooking is one of
my other hobbies and I've spent plenty on bikes recently. Oh, wait, I'd buy
that cookware after a Canon 30D. No, no, wait, after a 30D and a new
computer. Yeah, that's it.
Greg
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 13:45:14
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Werehatrack wrote:
>
>
> If you order the bike with the upgrades, the dealer will most likely
> place the order with the manufacturer for delivery with those upgraded
> parts already included, rather than taking an assembled unit from
> stock and replacing the components.
Oh, actually, he's got the bike already. You know, the ol' "display
model deal" LBSes do...though it looks new enough. He's got it already
upgraded, modestly, and I was like, hmm, why not just go all the
way....
> If you talk to the dealer, I
> suspect you'll discover that the upgrades can only be ordered at the
> upgrade price when the bike order is placed; to add them on later most
> likely will cost more unless the dealer is confident of being able to
> recover enough from the sale of the take-offs to cover the difference.
Thanks for the tip...I'll have to find out now; he went by that
official HP Velo price list for the bike he currently has (just the one
SMGTe), so I'm expecting just those prices for the upgrades.
> Not get them to begin with, if the ordering process is as I suspect it
> must be.
Ah, but, for example, this bike's already got the V-brakes and standard
front and rear suspension on it...if I upgrade to discs, etc., can I
therefore expect to receive the V-brakes and suspension systems as
well? He's charging the full basic bike price, on top of the upgrades
-- again, all from HP Velo's own list.
> Chances are good that if you ordered a frameset, the dealer would
> order that from the factory. Depending upon a number of factors,
> though, the dealer might be willing to make you a deal of some sort on
> the showroom model with bits removed or replaced...but you'll have to
> discuss that with them; speculation is pointless.
Well, I just want to know what's "industry practice," is all, before he
either BSes me -- not that I have any reason to distrust this
particular fellow -- or I ask something so exorbitant it borders on
insult.
> If that's your plan, then the frameset seems like the appropriate
> choice. You'll still end up discarding the rear shock and the front
> fork, and you probably stand to do better selling the removed bits on
> eBay than trying to get a price reduction for their removal from the
> package. (Unless that's a 26" front wheel, though, the stock fork
> will probably bring very little at auction, and even if it's
> mtb-useful, that model of fork is not highly prized for mtb use.)
Ah, I was actually thinking of just having the parts around for my own
possible future use.
Hmm...I hate to bug this guy with all these "constant" changes, but I
guess here's another "stop the presses!" order from me.
Then again, it's US$4,500.00 he's getting...sigh! I wonder if the
price will ever go down on an SMGTe bike....
> --
> Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
> Some gardening required to reply via email.
> Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 23:53:41
From: Werehatrack
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
On 23 Feb 2006 13:45:14 -0800, "NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com >
wrote:
>Then again, it's US$4,500.00 he's getting...sigh! I wonder if the
>price will ever go down on an SMGTe bike....
An indelicate observation: The resale price of *any* new vehicle,
human-powered or otherwise, tends to take a dramatic dip as soon as
the rear wheel crosses the plane of the exit door of the dealership.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 13:28:07
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
gotbent wrote:
>
> Without going to hpvelo website to check, I would recommend the DT Swiss air
> shock. It is way better than either DNM that they offer as stock and the one
> they offer as the cheaper upgrade; lighter and easier to adjust and a
> couple of hundred bucks more. I replaced the DNM (the one with the coil
> spring and secondary air chamber) that was on my Speedmachine with the DT.
Yeah, I'm about to get that Swiss Air shock, too. What do you think of
a MEKS AC upgrade on the front? Same easier to adjust advantage, too.
I'm most likely to go whole hog after all, for all Pete Clinch's advise
(oops!), but I'm curious as to opinions.
> I
> also changed out the Magura Clara calipers with Magura Louise. I hated the
> Claras. They squealed and rubbed the rotors and finally the piston seals
> started to leak. They work fine with the old Clara levers that were on the
> bike. I don't know why Hp offers a Maggy that's used on full-on downhill and
> freeride mountain bikes.
What do you think about the Magura ta hydraulic disc brakes?
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 17:29:59
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
"NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1140730087.884687.173920@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> gotbent wrote:
>>
>> Without going to hpvelo website to check, I would recommend the DT Swiss
>> air
>> shock. It is way better than either DNM that they offer as stock and the
>> one
>> they offer as the cheaper upgrade; lighter and easier to adjust and a
>> couple of hundred bucks more. I replaced the DNM (the one with the coil
>> spring and secondary air chamber) that was on my Speedmachine with the
>> DT.
>
> Yeah, I'm about to get that Swiss Air shock, too. What do you think of
> a MEKS AC upgrade on the front? Same easier to adjust advantage, too.
> I'm most likely to go whole hog after all, for all Pete Clinch's advise
> (oops!), but I'm curious as to opinions.
>
I have a Speedmachine. The front susp fork is 'built-in', not an add on so I
don't have experience with the MEKS, or Ballistic or whatever else has been
scavanged from the MTB world. White Bros. builds what is considered to be a
fine after ket 20" susp fork, suitable for single and tandem bents for
about 700USD. Also no first hand experience with one.
>> I
>> also changed out the Magura Clara calipers with Magura Louise. I hated
>> the
>> Claras. They squealed and rubbed the rotors and finally the piston seals
>> started to leak. They work fine with the old Clara levers that were on
>> the
>> bike. I don't know why Hp offers a Maggy that's used on full-on downhill
>> and
>> freeride mountain bikes.
>
> What do you think about the Magura ta hydraulic disc brakes?
Just Clara and Louise knowledge. Clara=old=rubs, squeaks. Julie ok so
far.There is a mtb review site that you could check out for reviews on all
kind of stuff like disk brakes and lights and so forth.
>
>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
>> News==----
>> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000
>> Newsgroups
>> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 11:30:50
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Werehatrack wrote:
>
>
> A lot less than a complete bike, both in terms of money and what's
> present.
Well, of course, but is there some standard definition of "framekit"?
Obviously it includes the frame...and then? I ask 'cause the SMGTe
framekit seems to be pretty much the whole bike, save for the wheels.
> Nothing that isn't mentioned is included; at the very least, there are
> no shifters, ders, wheels, or brakes. Buying those components new
> would likely set you back more than $650 for equivalent kit at retail.
Wow, really? Never figured those components so expensive if they're so
standard-entry-level-throwaway....
> Ders and shifters at a minimum, perhaps?
I'm getting some Shimano XT or other stuff....
> No. The upgrades are explicitly priced as *upgrades* to a complete
> bike. They are most decidedly not a la carte parts to pick and choose
> separately. The upgrade prices represent the *difference* in price
> between the standard and upgraded kit.
HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry, whoa!!
As it is, I'm to take delivery late next month on a souped-up SMGTe...I
was wondering if I should have the dealer build from a framekit for me
instead of ripping apart a basic bike and adding the upgrades....
I don't get something, though: I'm being charged for the basic bike
model. Upgraded brakes are extra. What does the dealer do with the
included brakes, forks, rear suspension, etc.???
> I'd contact the seller and see if they have an appropriate package
> available.
The guy has a complete bike. Very nice as is, but I was thinking of
going whole hog on this thing once I test rode it -- SOOOOOOOOOOOOO
COMFY!!!! I can see myself doing some coast-to-coast tour on this
SMGTe!!!! Always wondered about busting my balls (literally!) on an
upwrong during a x-country ride....
What would you say is an "appropriate package" for someone who's gonna
upgrade brakes, derailleurs, and all suspension?
> --
> Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
> Some gardening required to reply via email.
> Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
|
| | |
Date: 27 Feb 2006 18:10:00
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Damn, you say that with such earnesty! I think you out-do the Grate
One himself.
I'll be picking up the bike as early as this weekend, or in another
month, mostly depending on whether and when this dealer decides to
return my phone calls and e-mail.
Thanks for all your help, and thanks to all the gang on these
newsgroups. The first training ride for the 145-miler in May is this
Saturday!!! I'll have to do that one on an upwrong. =(
Peter Clinch wrote:
> NYC XYZ wrote:
>
> > Keep It Simple, Silly.
>
> That's what I was trying to do. Think about it...
>
> My idea: spend 10 minutes talking to one person who can give you a
> detailed answer of direct relevance to your personal situation, which is
> then a springboard for any further issues you wish to investigate.
>
> Your idea: spend a week or more in multiple conversations across 3
> Usenet groups to get answers that may mean nothing in your particular
> situation and have no context of what will actually happen with your
> own bike as a basis.
>
> Which of those is simpler? So if you want to KISS, take my advice,
> because it keeps it simpler.
>
> > Specifically, I'm wondering why they didn't carry over the, um,
> > whachamacallit, that bit in the back of the frame which swings, that
> > thingamajig they have on the SMGT line
>
> If you have the overall immediately user-friendly configuration of the
> Spirit then you can't put in a separate rear triangle without a fair bit
> of extra work. The Cannondale recumbent went to those lengths, but as a
> result it cost a *lot* more and weighed more than it needed to, and for
> the sort of riding the bike is pitched at it's questionable about
> whether that degree of engineering is really a desirable option.
>
> > instead of a straightforward design anyone else could have done.
>
> If "anyone" could have done it then "anyone" would. The Spirit has
> consistently been reviewed towards the top of the compact pack. Bike
> designs are a whole package, not isolated bits of design bolted together.
>
> > It'd be great to have designer notes.
>
> So ask the people who can give you a direct answer, HP Velotechnik, or
> ask via one of their dealers, rather than wonder aloud on Usenet if you
> /really/ want to know. KISS.
>
> > Um...what is a rear triangle??
>
> It's a triangular frame component at the rear of the bike. This is the
> sort of thing where a guess will be right, like front forks being the
> fork shaped things at the front...
>
> > Looking at the SMGTe and the Spirit
> > side-by-side, I suppose I can imagine what you mean, but I don't
> > understand why it wouldn't fit with the Spirit. I guess it's really a
> > matter of cost.
>
> More cost, more weight, and, as you suggest something that could well be
> over-engineering in the context of the whole bike.
>
> > Goodness, this is so inane I've got to use that impolite word, "inane."
> > Why would I as the customer only listen to the salesman and no one
> > else?
>
> Not what I'm getting at. Why should you listen to everyone else, but
> not the salesman? He's a simple, single point of contact and if he's
> worth a damn as a dealer then your satisfaction as a customer is of
> paramount importance to him. He should be on your side, and he knows
> more about his business and how he runs it and why than anyone else, and
> he probably knows more about the bike than anyone answering you on
> Usenet because he puts them together and sells them for a living. He is
> an obvious *first* point of contact. So KISS should tell you that he's
> where you start in this case, not where you end.
>
> > For Pete's sake, why would I as the customer only listen to the
> > salesman and not ask around? Does it hurt? Is it hurting you? You
> > seem to be looking for excuses to answer with non-answers.
>
> I'm trying to make it easy for you by directing you to the best place to
> *start* when it comes to specific questions regarding your bike and how
> it will be dealt with. If it really bothered me that you choose not to
> do so I would just killfile you and move on, but I am trying to help you
> by persuading you to /start/ your dialogue with the person who can give
> you the most and most relevant information in the course of a single 10
> minute 'phone call. And once you've had that conversation then you'll
> be in a much better position to have a useful debate on Usenet. And
> it's what KISS says you should be doing, if you really believe in it as
> a good thing.
>
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 20:52:51
From: Werehatrack
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
On 23 Feb 2006 11:30:50 -0800, "NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com >
wrote:
>
>Werehatrack wrote:
>> ...The upgrades are explicitly priced as *upgrades* to a complete
>> bike. They are most decidedly not a la carte parts to pick and choose
>> separately. The upgrade prices represent the *difference* in price
>> between the standard and upgraded kit.
>
>HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>Sorry, whoa!!
>
>As it is, I'm to take delivery late next month on a souped-up SMGTe...I
>was wondering if I should have the dealer build from a framekit for me
>instead of ripping apart a basic bike and adding the upgrades....
If you order the bike with the upgrades, the dealer will most likely
place the order with the manufacturer for delivery with those upgraded
parts already included, rather than taking an assembled unit from
stock and replacing the components. If you talk to the dealer, I
suspect you'll discover that the upgrades can only be ordered at the
upgrade price when the bike order is placed; to add them on later most
likely will cost more unless the dealer is confident of being able to
recover enough from the sale of the take-offs to cover the difference.
>I don't get something, though: I'm being charged for the basic bike
>model. Upgraded brakes are extra. What does the dealer do with the
>included brakes, forks, rear suspension, etc.???
Not get them to begin with, if the ordering process is as I suspect it
must be.
>> I'd contact the seller and see if they have an appropriate package
>> available.
>
>The guy has a complete bike. Very nice as is, but I was thinking of
>going whole hog on this thing once I test rode it -- SOOOOOOOOOOOOO
>COMFY!!!! I can see myself doing some coast-to-coast tour on this
>SMGTe!!!! Always wondered about busting my balls (literally!) on an
>upwrong during a x-country ride....
Chances are good that if you ordered a frameset, the dealer would
order that from the factory. Depending upon a number of factors,
though, the dealer might be willing to make you a deal of some sort on
the showroom model with bits removed or replaced...but you'll have to
discuss that with them; speculation is pointless.
>What would you say is an "appropriate package" for someone who's gonna
>upgrade brakes, derailleurs, and all suspension?
If that's your plan, then the frameset seems like the appropriate
choice. You'll still end up discarding the rear shock and the front
fork, and you probably stand to do better selling the removed bits on
eBay than trying to get a price reduction for their removal from the
package. (Unless that's a 26" front wheel, though, the stock fork
will probably bring very little at auction, and even if it's
mtb-useful, that model of fork is not highly prized for mtb use.)
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 14:42:29
From: gotbent
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
snip >
> What would you say is an "appropriate package" for someone who's gonna
> upgrade brakes, derailleurs, and all suspension?
>
>> --
Without going to hpvelo website to check, I would recommend the DT Swiss air
shock. It is way better than either DNM that they offer as stock and the one
they offer as the cheaper upgrade; lighter and easier to adjust and a
couple of hundred bucks more. I replaced the DNM (the one with the coil
spring and secondary air chamber) that was on my Speedmachine with the DT. I
also changed out the Magura Clara calipers with Magura Louise. I hated the
Claras. They squealed and rubbed the rotors and finally the piston seals
started to leak. They work fine with the old Clara levers that were on the
bike. I don't know why Hp offers a Maggy that's used on full-on downhill and
freeride mountain bikes.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 11:21:31
From: NYC XYZ
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
Kill two turds with one post.
G.T. wrote:
>
>
> Why don't you ask tham rather than annoy Usenetizens?
>
> Greg
>
> --
> "All my time I spent in heaven
> Revelries of dance and wine
> Waking to the sound of laughter
> Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 18:58:57
From: Werehatrack
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
On 23 Feb 2006 09:16:56 -0800, "NYC XYZ" <jack_foreigner@yahoo.com >
wrote:
>
>Say, what's a framekit, exactly, compared to a basic model?
A lot less than a complete bike, both in terms of money and what's
present.
>For the SMGTe, the description sounds almost the same, but with an
>US$650 difference??
>
>http://hpvelotechnik.com/shopping/preisliste13_e.html
Nothing that isn't mentioned is included; at the very least, there are
no shifters, ders, wheels, or brakes. Buying those components new
would likely set you back more than $650 for equivalent kit at retail.
>Since I'm upgrading to hydraulic disc brakes, an air shock, etc., why
>not just get a framekit?
Ders and shifters at a minimum, perhaps?
>And if I get the basic bike but upgrade anyway, right there and then,
>should I expect to get my standard factory parts as well?
No. The upgrades are explicitly priced as *upgrades* to a complete
bike. They are most decidedly not a la carte parts to pick and choose
separately. The upgrade prices represent the *difference* in price
between the standard and upgraded kit.
>I mean, the
>basic model comes with V-brakes...I guess I should get them all the
>same, right, only not installed on the bike, of course, since I'm
>upgrading to the hydro-discs....
I'd contact the seller and see if they have an appropriate package
available.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2006 10:48:26
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?
|
NYC XYZ wrote:
> Say, what's a framekit, exactly, compared to a basic model?
>
> For the SMGTe, the description sounds almost the same, but with an
> US$650 difference??
>
> http://hpvelotechnik.com/shopping/preisliste13_e.html
>
>
> Since I'm upgrading to hydraulic disc brakes, an air shock, etc., why
> not just get a framekit?
>
> And if I get the basic bike but upgrade anyway, right there and then,
> should I expect to get my standard factory parts as well? I mean, the
> basic model comes with V-brakes...I guess I should get them all the
> same, right, only not installed on the bike, of course, since I'm
> upgrading to the hydro-discs....
>
Why don't you ask tham rather than annoy Usenetizens?
Greg
--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons
|
|
