Coolwall October 2011 - Entry Level Groupsets

[Carge]

I started with 300LX...

Pedantic as it may be, this is about the groupsets below, which weren't a patch on 300-500LX.

Pedantic as this may be, you didn't pick on the last guy to mention that he started with 300LX.
I was quite aware of EXACTLY what the scope was - and was merely suggesting that irrelevant of cool or incool, we all owe a debt to low end groupsets, that enabled us all to get started in this wonderful FRIENDLY sport
:roll:

 

[Drencrom]

OK!!!

 

[jax13]

my point is simply that in the right situation, on the right bike and with the right reasoning, they can be considered cool by those who appreciate the picture as a whole'

Any examples you can post up?

physical examples - no. and to be honest i can't be bothered scouring the readers bikes section for one either!

as i have repeated many times, to me, a low end frame on low-end parts being ridden hard at any opportunity is cooler by a long chalk than a boutique wall hanger.

they might not ride as nicely, they might not look as good but the way it is being used as a practical instrument determines its appeal to me as i prefer function over form and have a soft spot for the underdog!

 

[GoldenEraMTB]

As if I would've considered voting anything but uncool; getting struck with a non-drive side arm of a 200gs crankset, sealed the deal. Bollocks- that smarts!

not cool :evil:

 

[Coleman]

When I had my first mountain bike (a townsend) it had 15 speed un-indexed gears. The mustangs of the time were similarly equiped. Then the darker coloured mustangs came out, 18 speed, indexed gears, and above them were bikes with 200GS - cool then? No better than what I had but NOT COOL and not what I aspired to - I gradually replaced my parts with stuff from mid range which was arguable 'not cool' back then, (apart from my XT thumbies and road rear mech ).

So as for the groupsets 70/100/200GS - Not Cool in my book and thats how I voted.

As for the people that ride them today - Cool.

 

[Drencrom]

as i have repeated many times, to me, a low end frame on low-end parts being ridden hard at any opportunity is cooler by a long chalk than a boutique wall hanger.

I'd be inclined to agree, but that doesn't make the groupset itself in anyway cool to me, which is after all what the vote is for.

Low-end bikes is another hot potato altogether, which is my point.

Going by some of the posts it seems that people are taking this as a poll for bikes equipped with 70/100/200GS groupsets, whereas I'm taking the vote to mean the parts themselves - nothing else.

 

[jax13]

Going by some of the posts it seems that people are taking this as a poll for bikes equipped with 70/100/200GS groupsets, whereas I'm taking the vote to mean the parts themselves - nothing else.

this is true, although most things we deem cool would actually be uncool if they were sat against a plain background without some form of intended application to use as context for the vote.

oh, and the board has already spoken on this one...

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/?p=1497

 

[drcarlos]

The mash up of bit's (Shimano light action, Lee-chi, SR Sakae, Diacompe) on my Raleigh Maverick was cooler than any of the toilet low rent groupsets that came later.
Having a dad who was an engineer meant anything that was plastic covered steel got cast to one side when choosing (meaning that I got a Holdsworth MTB as it had full Deore MT-60 rather than the Later '89 Courier Comp with some Exage Country parts) too, good advice though.

Carl.

 

[taffy]

dirty grey, skiddy pants uncool.

 

[W W Biffta]

seriously uncool, anything under 300lx was junk that probably put more ppl off cycling than got them interested
now acera-x, mc11 circa 94, works great, looks like m737 kit.