Potential dumb question.

Quoted message said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy to
a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10 speed.
They all ride good enough that I rotate between them and any one is good
enough to put in a 100 mile day if I have the time for the ride.
My main pack and trail bike weighs about 75 pounds fully loaded and I
don't care except maybe on a long mountain uphill, but that just means
more exercise for me. That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to it,
I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG wagon,
and way out of cell phone range.
Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart? A hundred dollar bike is no big loss, but killing a $3,000 Trek
would hurt.

Just taking a wild guess here, but...

Why are you using a monitor larger than 480 x 640 resolution, when you could
see everything by just using the scroll bars?

If you can come up with a reasonable answer to that one, you can probably
answer your own question about bikes.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Bill said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy
to a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10
speed. They all ride good enough that I rotate between them and any one
is good enough to put in a 100 mile day if I have the time for the ride.
My main pack and trail bike weighs about 75 pounds fully loaded and I
don't care except maybe on a long mountain uphill, but that just means
more exercise for me. That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to
it, I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG
wagon, and way out of cell phone range.
Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart? A hundred dollar bike is no big loss, but killing a $3,000 Trek
would hurt.
??????????????
Bill Baka

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 +10dB
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TROLL-O-METER

I think th eonion says it all:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/study_38_percent_of_people

Bill said:

I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to
it

....you're a strange old recluse that little children run away from even in
street clothes?

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy to
a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10 speed.
They all ride good enough that I rotate between them and any one is good
enough to put in a 100 mile day if I have the time for the ride.
My main pack and trail bike weighs about 75 pounds fully loaded and I
don't care except maybe on a long mountain uphill, but that just means
more exercise for me. That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to it,
I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG wagon,
and way out of cell phone range.
Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart? A hundred dollar bike is no big loss, but killing a $3,000 Trek
would hurt.

Just taking a wild guess here, but...

Why are you using a monitor larger than 480 x 640 resolution, when you could
see everything by just using the scroll bars?

If you can come up with a reasonable answer to that one, you can probably
answer your own question about bikes.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

1024x768 is too high?
Nobody uses 640x480 anymore and I got the monitor from a friend who
thought LCD would be nice.
Simple, cheap, works.
No problem. Same for bikes. Better to ride than work to pay for one.
Bill Baka

Bill said:

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that
costs under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an
$85 Huffy to a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn
Super Sport 10 speed. They all ride good enough that I rotate
between them and any one is good enough to put in a 100 mile day if
I have the time for the ride. My main pack and trail bike weighs about
75 pounds fully loaded and
I don't care except maybe on a long mountain uphill, but that just
means more exercise for me. That's a good thing for me, a better
workout. I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get
down
to it, I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with
no SAG wagon, and way out of cell phone range.
Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they
fall apart? A hundred dollar bike is no big loss, but killing a
$3,000 Trek would hurt.

Just taking a wild guess here, but...

Why are you using a monitor larger than 480 x 640 resolution, when
you could see everything by just using the scroll bars?

If you can come up with a reasonable answer to that one, you can
probably answer your own question about bikes.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

1024x768 is too high?
Nobody uses 640x480 anymore and I got the monitor from a friend who
thought LCD would be nice.
Simple, cheap, works.
No problem. Same for bikes. Better to ride than work to pay for one.
Bill Baka

Mensa Whoosh. Sheesh.

Bill "you tried, Mike" S.

Bill said:

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy to
a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10 speed.
They all ride good enough that I rotate between them and any one is good
enough to put in a 100 mile day if I have the time for the ride.
My main pack and trail bike weighs about 75 pounds fully loaded and I
don't care except maybe on a long mountain uphill, but that just means
more exercise for me. That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to it,
I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG wagon,
and way out of cell phone range.
Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart? A hundred dollar bike is no big loss, but killing a $3,000 Trek
would hurt.

Quoted message said:

Just taking a wild guess here, but...

Quoted message said:

Why are you using a monitor larger than 480 x 640 resolution, when you could
see everything by just using the scroll bars?

Quoted message said:

If you can come up with a reasonable answer to that one, you can probably
answer your own question about bikes.

Quoted message said:

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

1024x768 is too high?
Nobody uses 640x480 anymore and I got the monitor from a friend who
thought LCD would be nice.
Simple, cheap, works.
No problem. Same for bikes.

Quoted message said:

Better to ride than work to pay for one.

This says everything.

Quoted message said:

Bill Baka- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Quoted message said:

Bill said:

Better to ride than work to pay for one.

This says everything.

I work for myself these days.
Working is optional.
That says it.
Bill (no pointy haired Dilbert boss) Baka

In article <[email hidden]>,

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy to
a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10 speed.
They all ride good enough that I rotate between them and any one is good
enough to put in a 100 mile day if I have the time for the ride.
My main pack and trail bike weighs about 75 pounds fully loaded and I
don't care except maybe on a long mountain uphill, but that just means
more exercise for me. That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to it,
I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG wagon,
and way out of cell phone range.
Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart? A hundred dollar bike is no big loss, but killing a $3,000 Trek
would hurt.

Just taking a wild guess here, but...

Why are you using a monitor larger than 480 x 640 resolution, when you could
see everything by just using the scroll bars?

If you can come up with a reasonable answer to that one, you can probably
answer your own question about bikes.

480x640? Posh! In my day we could see only one line at a time
and were grateful.

--
Michael Press

" I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy

Quoted message said:

to a $300+ Pacific

---------
durable, as long as you can still pedal you'll never be stranded.
---------
That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
---------
I have a couple of heavy crappy bikes too, but I have better line,
"Lance could win this race riding this bike." Or another one I use, "This
bike is like lifting weights, so when I ride my real bike it feels like it
weighs nothing." But since I've thankfully left the competative cycling
mode, I use your "workout" line too. Heavy is ok, if you only want to ride
30 miles for a workout, as opposed to having to ride 80 just to break a
sweat.
----------

Quoted message said:

Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart?

----------
There are no stupid questions in rbt, only controversial ones.

Bill said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy
to a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10
speed.

I think that because many of us have worked in shops, we know of
durability problems with low-end BSOs (bike-shaped-objects). Most
notably, the dangers of thin stamped & pinched dropouts. Of the bikes
you describe, I'd guess only the Huffy falls into that category.
Schwinns from the '70s are the Rasputin of Bikes. You might hate them,
but do what you will to them, and you just can't kill them.

Quoted message said:

I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to
it, I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG
wagon, and way out of cell phone range.

All the more reason to ride something reliable.

Quoted message said:

Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart?

Not at all. Just don't pretend that it's just as good as a more
expensive, more solidly built model.

And don't call me for a ride when your Huffy's dropout pulls out of
the seatstay.

Michael Press said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy to
a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10 speed.
They all ride good enough that I rotate between them and any one is good
enough to put in a 100 mile day if I have the time for the ride.
My main pack and trail bike weighs about 75 pounds fully loaded and I
don't care except maybe on a long mountain uphill, but that just means
more exercise for me. That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to it,
I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG wagon,
and way out of cell phone range.
Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart? A hundred dollar bike is no big loss, but killing a $3,000 Trek
would hurt.

Just taking a wild guess here, but...

Why are you using a monitor larger than 480 x 640 resolution, when you could
see everything by just using the scroll bars?

If you can come up with a reasonable answer to that one, you can probably
answer your own question about bikes.

480x640? Posh! In my day we could see only one line at a time
and were grateful.

Did you work with nixie tube displays in the very early '70s?
Bill

Callistus Valerius said:

" I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy

Quoted message said:

to a $300+ Pacific

---------
durable, as long as you can still pedal you'll never be stranded.
---------
That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
---------
I have a couple of heavy crappy bikes too, but I have better line,
"Lance could win this race riding this bike." Or another one I use, "This
bike is like lifting weights, so when I ride my real bike it feels like it
weighs nothing." But since I've thankfully left the competative cycling
mode, I use your "workout" line too. Heavy is ok, if you only want to ride
30 miles for a workout, as opposed to having to ride 80 just to break a
sweat.
----------

I ride 80 pounds of water and food for the 80+ mile trips that I am
totally on my own. I do have a fresh creek for water (pre-housing) but
we all have to eat. Pedaling the bike and me to 3,000 feet burns off a
lot of that food and water weight.
Bill Baka

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart?

----------
There are no stupid questions in rbt, only controversial ones.

Hank Wirtz said:

Bill said:

Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy
to a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10
speed.

I think that because many of us have worked in shops, we know of
durability problems with low-end BSOs (bike-shaped-objects). Most
notably, the dangers of thin stamped & pinched dropouts. Of the bikes
you describe, I'd guess only the Huffy falls into that category.

The Huffy was actually a high end Target bike in 1994 when I bought it
for my daughter. It even has removable square BB cranks.

Quoted message said:

Schwinns from the '70s are the Rasputin of Bikes. You might hate them,
but do what you will to them, and you just can't kill them.

Not yet, at least.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to
it, I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG
wagon, and way out of cell phone range.

All the more reason to ride something reliable.

Quoted message said:

Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
apart?

Not at all. Just don't pretend that it's just as good as a more
expensive, more solidly built model.

That's why I carry enough food and water to pack the bike out until I
can get a cell phone signal and SAG ([censored]) wife ride home.

Quoted message said:

And don't call me for a ride when your Huffy's dropout pulls out of
the seatstay.

I've already replaced the BB, rear wheel (bearing races were gone),
front wheel bearing set, seat, crank set, and more, but it still rides.
Bill Baka

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bill said:

Michael Press said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

> Why is it that everyone on these bicycle groups rates a bike that costs
> under about $500 as a junker? I have 3 mountain bikes from an $85 Huffy to
> a $300+ Pacific, one old Motobecane, and one Schwinn Super Sport 10 speed.
> They all ride good enough that I rotate between them and any one is good
> enough to put in a 100 mile day if I have the time for the ride.
> My main pack and trail bike weighs about 75 pounds fully loaded and I
> don't care except maybe on a long mountain uphill, but that just means
> more exercise for me. That's a good thing for me, a better workout.
> I don't try to look like a TdF contender because when you get down to it,
> I have to pack along all my food and water for the day with no SAG wagon,
> and way out of cell phone range.
> Am I in the wrong for buying cheap bikes and riding them until they fall
> apart? A hundred dollar bike is no big loss, but killing a $3,000 Trek
> would hurt.
Just taking a wild guess here, but...

Why are you using a monitor larger than 480 x 640 resolution, when you could
see everything by just using the scroll bars?

If you can come up with a reasonable answer to that one, you can probably
answer your own question about bikes.

480x640? Posh! In my day we could see only one line at a time
and were grateful.

Did you work with nixie tube displays in the very early '70s?

Nixie tubes! What we would have given for nixie tubes.
We had to key in the programs on the
face of the computer with our noses, because our
fingers had already been rubbed raw.

--
Michael Press

Michael Press said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bill said:

Did you work with nixie tube displays in the very early '70s?

Nixie tubes! What we would have given for nixie tubes.
We had to key in the programs on the
face of the computer with our noses, because our
fingers had already been rubbed raw.

I hate to admit using those bit by bit entry switches.
Ow, I think I'm feeling my Arthritis now.
Bill Baka

Michael Press said:

Nixie tubes! What we would have given for nixie tubes.
We had to key in the programs on the
face of the computer with our noses, because our
fingers had already been rubbed raw.

Psshaw! You kids with your "computers"! In my day we had
abacuses. Made from solid stone. And we had to gnaw them
from stone with our teeth, because we didn't have any tools.

And we liked it!
Greg

--
=========================================================
"I don't know, I don't care,
and it doesn't make any difference."

(Jack Kerouac)
---------------------------------------------------------
My Photos-
http://www.gsevans.com/photography/

My Blog-
http://www.gsevans.com/blog/

Greg Evans said:

Michael Press said:

Nixie tubes! What we would have given for nixie tubes.
We had to key in the programs on the
face of the computer with our noses, because our
fingers had already been rubbed raw.

Psshaw! You kids with your "computers"! In my day we had
abacuses. Made from solid stone. And we had to gnaw them
from stone with our teeth, because we didn't have any tools.

And we liked it!
Greg

You had teeth?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

----------

I ride 80 pounds of water and food for the 80+ mile trips that I am
totally on my own. I do have a fresh creek for water (pre-housing) but
we all have to eat. Pedaling the bike and me to 3,000 feet burns off a
lot of that food and water weight.
Bill Baka

------------
Forget eating In&Out burgers while riding, I usually eat KFC, much
easier. Just tie the bucket to your stem and drape the bucket over the
front handlebars.