Bike snobbery - or is it?

[serottabob]

ive had some loverly bikes over the years, always had the best gear that i could afford, etc etc,,now im older just wish i kept all of it,,,,never brought it to be better or or think im better than others that i use to ride with, since ive stumbled back onto this site ive enjoyed looking at the bikes that have been built ok ive a interest in higher end bikes but that dont mean i cant appresiate the work and time that someone has put in finding all original parts for there bike,,,if people think im a snob for having xtr fitted instead of dx well thats up to them,,

ps havnt read snobs book,,

 

[IDB1]

There'll always be folk who think they have the best bike in the world. . . bought new for £2.55 from Halfrauds in 1998. . . and refuse to listen to anything to the contrary..
You can lead a horse to water and all that..

The 'job' of my venerable RB peers surely is to, initially, try to teach BSO identification. Then adopt the role of guide and steer the course of the unenlightened on to the righteous path of Retro.
If that fails there's always the firing squad..

 

[MADJEZ]

But who's to decide ? Seems like LGF is labelling anything under £500 (to
pick a figure) as a BSO.

A base model by Giant/Specialised/GT etc is certainly a world away from
what I would consider a 'proper' BSO. IE something from ASDA that was
£50 new.

While base and lower models might not be of interest to everyone I'm
sure I'm not the only one who likes to see a nicely kept GT/Kona/Marin
or whatever.

And again it's Retrobike NOT Retro(horrendously expensive)bike.
There's room for everyone.

 

[IDB1]

But who's to decide ? Seems like LGF is labelling anything under £500 (to
pick a figure) as a BSO.

I'd be surprised if that were the case tbh..

He (lgf) once replied to my 'what makes a bike a BSO' question..
It's buried in off topic somewhere I think but it gives a couple of tell-tale signs.. none related to purchase cost.

 

[MADJEZ]

He (lgf) once replied to my 'what makes a bike a BSO' question..
It's buried in off topic somewhere I think but it gives a couple of tell-tale signs.. none related to purchase cost.

Think you mean this one !

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=113553

I was merely trying to say that a cheap bike by a decent manufacturer
while being made down to a price isn't necessarily a bad bike. And
certainly isn't a BSO. My trusty GT Outpost Trail while not brimming with
quality components is still going strong after 12 years because it was
solidly built and well put together. Not thrown together with its forks on
back to front !

 

[velomaniac]

To me bike snobbery is someone veiwing anything below a price/quality/kudos point as rubbish in comparison to what they own or aspire to !

I like a very broad church of bikes which include BSO's if there's something I like about them. I wont tell anyone that this or that is good or bad but I will say that in my experience my opinion of this or that bike is whatever

Unless you have experienced something can you really hand on heart say that A or B is beneath contempt.

 

[marin man]

In my experience people will slate things that they have never owned just to try and justify why they dont want one or havent bought one.....maybe because it is cheap and seen as "beneath" them...or maybe becuase they cant afford it......

(no snobbery intended)

 

[We_are_Stevo]

While base and lower models might not be of interest to everyone I'm
sure I'm not the only one who likes to see a nicely kept GT/Kona/Marin
or whatever.

+1 for that...

It's all very well for people to stand up (metaphorically) and say the whole point of Retrobike is to display the bikes we aspired to BITD and everything else is just rubbish - but what about the 14-year-old back in '75 with his nose pressed up against the window of the bike shop next to the Newsagent where he did his paper round? What did he aspire to?

(a Raleigh Record as it happens...)

All those low-end bikes from Raleigh (yes, I did once covet my mates Activator!), Falcon, Peugeot, Dawes, Emmelle, Ridgeback et al looked nice enough then - and still had to be saved for out of pocket money, odd jobs, paper rounds, fruit picking etc.

Don't forget either we didn't have the internet (wots that?) to feed our appetites - nor was advertising and marketing so blatantly targeted at such a young audience. In fact, if you didn't have the change spare from saving to buy a glossy bike mag the only window on the world of cycling WAS the LBC...

When I got back into cycling in the late '80's it was with a second hand Emmelle - because I didn't know any better, and Christ it was heavy! That was followed by a Falcon which was slightly lighter, then I went back to the same LBC that was now run by the two sons of the original owner.

I bought an early red Marin Palisades Trail from them (earning the nickname 'Mr Marin' in the process which still sticks whenever I see them over 20 years later!) which was a revelation in comparison.

I later bought a plain pearl-white Cro-Mega frame from them and built it up from their vast stock of spares (when LBCs would actually strip a bike and sell the parts...) and shortly after my Scott. The Scott was only a Montana but it seemed like a Thoroughbred compared to the rest!

Now even the A'stars' attract a degree of snobbery on here, and the Marin would be laughed out of sight! Why?

Why do people turn their noses up at 'anything by Kona,' or 'anything by Marin,' Specialized etc, etc?

Ah yes, that great British snobbery that dislikes anything 'mass produced' and led to the death of the greatest motorcycle industry in the world, for example...?


If the same snobbery extended to the Classic Car world there'd be no Minis or Morris Minors to admire at the shows, no Ford Cortinas, no Vauxhall Vivas...

My own preference is for Konas in general, Explosifs in particular - but I still like the Carrera that was posted yesterday by a 'Newbie...'

 

[mikeekim89]

In the end isn't it what you like most important. Not the opinions of others. I've owned real BSOs. Bottom line name brands mid range and high end rides.

I like most of everything I ride and have ridden. The component quality is down to preference and cash-flow. Your frame preference material and design. It's what you feel suits and you like for the bike you have. Again disregarding others opinions. If your only in it to soothe your ego with others acceptance. Shouldn't you ask yourself why you really NEED that ego boost?

My own opinion is that you get what you like personally. Put on it what you feel works best for you and get out on it. Have fun. That's what it's there for.

(I'm not entirely sure how much on point I stayed as I kind of just kept typing. )

 

[We_are_Stevo]

I think that's more to do with poor after sales service - like the riders you see wearing their cycle helmets tipped up on the back of their head or, horror of horrors, back to front!

Oops! Out of context here! Sorry...