Why Don't I like the 'good' bikes?

[Charlieboy28]

oooh blimey
never going in there again

 

[legrandefromage]

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the qualitles of a good steel frame, I've spent time on a Dave yates, and an explosif, but I don't lust after them.

I don't feel a hankering for Kleins (never have), and have never even mustered a passing fancy in titanium (except, strangely, for the dynatech lugged frames).

I find myself looking dreamily at lavadomes and clockworks. If anyone has a Rocklobster lying around, let me know.

Exceptions I have: Trek OCLVs, GT LTS (not exactly breathtaking), San Andreas' and Amps. All, in there own way, mass-produced, and less than exclusive.

I don't want XTR. XT is good, but DX was always adequate. I simply don't need Kevlar beaded tyres.

Anyone else feeling this?

Only my Zaskar has the XT it came with - every other bike is mostly DX or lower - all my bikes except the GT and the Overbury's cost very little to put together, the fun was finding them and rescuing a presentable bike from the clunge. And even the Pioneer was low cost compared to its equivalent new and the budgets some members have available for their projects.

But, 'a good steel frame' can be found on even the most humble model showing a budget rear mech or pressed steel chainset. Many quality frames where used throughout the range from the base model up to a high spec model.

Kleins are as hard as nails to ride and are physically suited to certain types of rider, someone used to the twang of steel would probably think his teeth will shatter.

What you feel is perfectly normal, but unfortunately, for whatever reason, this thread has opened opened up a few fault lines.

*EDIT - I found the Lavadome a bit heavy when compared to other Kona frames, a Kilauea being the most highest ranking of the 7 I've owned

 

[Ycawsfach]

There's a big difference between criticising a bike and implying that it shouldn't be on this site, and a fine line between criticising a person's bike and criticising his taste, and nothing to do with any chips on anybody's shoulder. We all have views on what constitutes a good or bad bike, but if they're retro (13 years or older ??) then they have an equal right to be here.

If you think Raleigh Mustangs or Muddy Fox Streetfinders don't deserve to be on this site don't read the thread. Personally I never read a thread with the word Kona in it - not inverted snobbery as I know they are mostly good bikes, they just don't do anything for me.


Where is the readers' wives section :shock: :shock: :shock:

 

[legrandefromage]

So thats all its down to. You are pissed because somebody criticised a bicycle. A bicycle that has no place back then or now as a credit worthy piece of equipment and was sold (and still are) to unsuspecting customers as the be all and end all of cycling? And just because its old doesnt make any better either just more rose tinted bullshit over common sense.

 

[sinnett177]

Personally I like lower end retro bikes just as much as the higher end ones.

The thing with high end bikes is that you must build them up with top end equipment or they just don't sit right, it would be a sin for example to build a Manitou FS with Shimano SIS and RST forks. Yet, with the lower end bikes the world is your oyster, you can build them with practically anything, from the very lowest components to the very best. You can paint them as you please, put disc mounts on, mix the old with the new and no one will loose any sleep over it. You do similar things with a top end bike and people start getting upset, no that their opinion is any more valid than your own.

Those of you who wish to dismiss lower end bikes on this site, should think again. There is a great deal of fun to be had with them and surely fun is the reason we choose to be here. For me 'if it's old school it's in'.

 

[Dr S]

Oh no, we are back to White Dog Shite again.

 

[Charlieboy28]

thats a very interesting point you have made one of the unresolved mysteries of the modern age, where has all the white dog poo gone??

 

[coomber]

Its something they have taken out of dog food young man. Hence no more white dog turds.

Least when white it was easier to spot (if no snow)

 

[Charlieboy28]

is that true adrian or are you having me on, i thought it was becuase poor people used to feed their dogs bones from the butchers, was it really a chemical, it used to come out dry and powdery,
there still used to be the stinking brown nasty stuff you get today then how come

 

[gerryattrick]

And I thought it was shite from a white dog.

This will sort the problem out.