useless new bikes

[lowe1677]

Why now do so many bike makers like saracen,muddy fox diamond back etc etc make absolute c**p bikes with c**p components? what happened?

 

[stewlewis]

I guess because A,B,C company was bought out for the name alone to trade any old bikes in the hope that folks buy them as they've 'heard of' the brand.

 

[mikee]

its the recession mate , everythings dearer

 

[Charlieboy28]

Saracen are at least trying to stop the rot and are producing some seriously high end bikes like this beauty for £4899.

hopefully not too little too late and they can reverse the damage they did to the brand from the late 90's to the late noughties.

I must say it still puts me off buying one if i was in the market i would probably buy a different brand, shallow i know

 

[beagle]

Saracen are at least trying to stop the rot and are producing some seriously high end bikes like this beauty for £4899.

Saracen is Madison now, so same folk that do Genesis and Ridgeback.

I can't think of any 90s brand that's still what was. stewlewis hit the nail on the head, almost every brand has changed hands, often bought by companies aren't even primarily bicycle makers. Look at Dorel Industries for instance, even the higher end brands they own (Cannondale, GT) are shadows of their former selves.

 

[petitpal]

On a slight side note, but related - was chatting to my brother the other night about his £7K Basso road bike - dripping with Campag Super Record; he said that the bearings had failed in the rear hub after about 2 or 3 thousand miles (it's only a year or two old) vs the ones in his Shimano 600 hub that are about 20 or 30 yrs old and still going strong on his Bennotto. Bloke he talked to in the shop that repaired the Basso reckoned he'd seen quite a lot of similar failures.

Moral is - it's not just MTBs and it's not just the little manufacturers. Not sure if that helps.

 

[muddyfox_courier]

Well , you could get all conspiracy theorist and point out how through advertising we're brainwashed into buying stuff we dont need. planned obsolescence , percieved obsolescence etc.
New stuff looks good. Is it better?

I kinda touched on the serviceability of old bikes in my blog the other day. Here , i think..
http://www.stealbikes.blogspot.co.uk/20 ... d.html?m=1
.
Same goes for kettles.
You can pay £100 for a bloody kettle. If youre convinced you need one.
Are we improving?
In some ways , but when you cut into the bare bones of why we cycle , what really drives us , the bike itself is largely irrelevant in the analysis.
What is a car really for.
On the dual carriageway yesterday I was behind two Audis. One was an R8 in front of me , and to its side , a 10yr old TT.
The TT looked very dated next to the R8. Which is the desired effect.

I was in a 10yr old Focus.
We were all doing 2mph.

See. I got kinda conspiracy theorist....in the end

 

[Retro Cat]

Why now do so many bike makers like saracen,muddy fox diamond back etc etc make absolute c**p bikes with c**p components? what happened?

Karrimor used to make fantastic outdoor equipment bitd but since being taken over by cock and bull corp their gear's as much use as a chocolate fire guard :-(

1997 Karrimor Panther still going strong - me on the other hand...

 

[oldave]

"Well , you could get all conspiracy theorist and point out how through advertising we're brainwashed into buying stuff we dont need. planned obsolescence , percieved obsolescence etc."

Hardly a theory, simple fact of capitalism, especially of the global kind.

 

[We_are_Stevo]

...and what it all boils down to is; there has always been, and always will be, a market for what some people see as 'cr*p bikes with cr*p components...'