Frame Kit vs. Basic Model?

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
Peter Clinch <[email protected]> writes:
> Mike Reed wrote:
>
>> I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
>> my Aeron at work.
>
> So if it's peerlessly comfortable you go to sleep on it, and have
> similar saddles and handrests in place of the chairs in your living
> room?

But beds and living room chairs aren't for riding, and bicycle saddles
aren't for sitting.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

 

[NYC XYZ]

Mike Reed wrote:
>
>
> I am 100% comfortable on my upright. I feel better on my bike than in
> my Aeron at work.

I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU MEAN!!! Those expensive $1,000 Aeron chairs
are extremely comfy, but the 'bent, wow, like an SMGTe, I could fall
asleep in!!!!

> You can't assume that just because you are
> uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.

But I do wonder why the SMGTe isn't more widely-mentioned...everyone
talks about Rans and Easy Racers, etc. They look like "garage-jobs"
done by engineering students. (Not a pejorative, that opinion, BTW.)

> I'd like to have a bent one day I think, but not as a replacement for
> anything.

I agree -- I can still see a need for my upwrong, which is very comfy
to me, my great Trek 1000c, with which I've done 800 miles in three
months of riding. But for those long trips now, it's gonna be 'bent
all the way, baby! The DF will be for stores and when running with the
wolves.

> I think it would be cool to get a faring and really tear it
> up on the flats. For the most part though, I like being able to hop
> hazards, cheat curbs, trackstand, climb Jester (Austin), etc on my
> upright (in complete comfort).

I think most folks would choose a 'bent if only 1) the knew about
'bents in the first place; 2) the costs weren't so prohibitive; 3) it
had sex appeal. There's a time and place for DFs, but "normally" (in a
"normative" rather than "descriptive" sense) 'bents would be the norm,
not the exception.

> -Mike

 

[Peter Clinch]

Tom Keats wrote:

> But beds and living room chairs aren't for riding, and bicycle saddles
> aren't for sitting.

But "100% comfortable" suggests there is no possible improvement to be
made. In which case it should be just as good as an armchair for
sitting on and not riding. It isn't, so there;s obviously some ground
lost somewhere despite the posted "100%".

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Peter Clinch]

NYC XYZ wrote:

> But I do wonder why the SMGTe isn't more widely-mentioned...everyone
> talks about Rans and Easy Racers, etc. They look like "garage-jobs"
> done by engineering students.

a.r.b.r is Americentric, those bikes are easier to get hold of in N.
America. In the UK nobody much talks about them because they're not
available, while there are, oooh, at least two shops in the country you
can test ride a Streetmachine at.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Victor Kan]

NYC XYZ wrote:
>>You can't assume that just because you are
>>uncomfortable on them that everyone else is too.
>
>
> But I do wonder why the SMGTe isn't more widely-mentioned...everyone
> talks about Rans and Easy Racers, etc. They look like "garage-jobs"
> done by engineering students. (Not a pejorative, that opinion, BTW.)

Presumably you're referring to widely in the U.S?

HPVelotechnik is in Europe and have very few stocking dealers in the
U.S. And even their cheapest models are up there on the recumbent
pricing scale once they get over The Pond.

Is it any wonder they're not as well known as brands with wider domestic
distribution and/or lower price points?

Having said that, I'd love to have an SMGTe or a Speed Machine. When my
taste decides that I want to have an USS bike that really works for me
(my legs are too short for my ActionBent Tidal Wave in stop and go
traffic), I'd put any of the HPV bikes right at the top of my list.

>>I'd like to have a bent one day I think, but not as a replacement for
>>anything.

> I agree -- I can still see a need for my upwrong, which is very comfy
> to me, my great Trek 1000c, with which I've done 800 miles in three
> months of riding. But for those long trips now, it's gonna be 'bent
> all the way, baby! The DF will be for stores and when running with the
> wolves.

Me too. My DF road bike is pretty comfy now that I've tossed away the
comfort gizmos like a suspension seat post, split saddle and "body
geometry" handlebars w/ adjustable stem.

It can still be painful if I'm lazy and "sit too hard" on the saddle.

>>I think it would be cool to get a faring and really tear it
>>up on the flats. For the most part though, I like being able to hop
>>hazards, cheat curbs, trackstand, climb Jester (Austin), etc on my
>>upright (in complete comfort).
>
>
> I think most folks would choose a 'bent if only 1) the knew about
> 'bents in the first place;

Yep, and that's partly why fews mention the HPVelo SMGTe .

> 2) the costs weren't so prohibitive;

A decent 'bent can be had for < $700 these days.

> 3) it had sex appeal.

Folks who think 'bents aren't sexy haven't seen the Velokraft VK2, or
the Challenge Seiran, or a Carbent, or a Karl Swanson custome bike, or
<insert your favorite, aesthetically pleasing bents>...

There's a time and place for DFs, but "normally" (in a
> "normative" rather than "descriptive" sense) 'bents would be the norm,
> not the exception.
>
>
>>-Mike
>
>


--
I do not accept unsolicited commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.

 

[Peter Clinch]

NYC XYZ wrote:

> I'm not trying to penny-pinch here; just hate feeling taken advantage
> of. If this is industry practice, well, I guess I can tolerate it
> better, perhaps -- but that's why I ask y'all. I want to know.

Why not ask the guy you're dealing with? He knows what he does far
better than anyone else here. Had I really wanted to keep my V brakes
when Darth Ben upgraded them to HS-33s for me all I would've had to do
was ask. For most people getting the swapped-out stuff is just clutter
that won't get used and will waste space. You might be able to get
something for a 20" front fork on eBay but there again it may well not
be worth the time and effort it'll take up.

> I'm asking in earnest here; not being rhetorical at all. Like I said,
> I'd rather hash this out with you all now than ask him later

You're not doing business with us, you're doing it with him, so there's
nothing to "hash out" with us all, and what he says is what will be
available to you to take or leave as you see fit.

Why ask x unconnected people when what they say will have no ultimate
bearing on the answer of the 1 person that matters here?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
Peter Clinch <[email protected]> writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>
>> But beds and living room chairs aren't for riding, and bicycle saddles
>> aren't for sitting.
>
> But "100% comfortable" suggests there is no possible improvement to be
> made. In which case it should be just as good as an armchair for
> sitting on and not riding. It isn't, so there;s obviously some ground
> lost somewhere despite the posted "100%".

My shoes are comfortable, but I don't sit on them either.
Upthread Mike Reed says his bike is comfortable for him.
I take it he means the /whole/ bike, not just its saddle.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

 

[NYC XYZ]

Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> Why not ask the guy you're dealing with?

Well, he's trying to sell something, for starters. Also, like I said,
I wanted to find out what was "industry practice." As well, I didn't
want to seem like I'm haggling him. I'll still ask, but having had all
y'all's answers I wouldn't come across as some kind of "Socratic
gadfly," if you take my meaning.

> He knows what he does far
> better than anyone else here.

I didn't know that. Besides, there are a few folks in the bike
business here.

> Had I really wanted to keep my V brakes
> when Darth Ben upgraded them to HS-33s for me all I would've had to do
> was ask.

Okay, so it's not unreasonable, then, to ask to keep the stuff. Kinda
like handing my flat back to me, even though I have a new tube
installed by the shop.

> For most people getting the swapped-out stuff is just clutter
> that won't get used and will waste space. You might be able to get
> something for a 20" front fork on eBay but there again it may well not
> be worth the time and effort it'll take up.

I guess I'm a pack-rat and was thinking of some time in the future when
that fork might come in handy for a second or third 'bent! I'm already
eyeing the HP Velo Spirit as a nice "guest 'bent"...do you know
anything about it? Mainly, does the seat adjust such that I don't have
to fret with the chains if guests of different x-seams try out the
bike?

> You're not doing business with us, you're doing it with him, so there's
> nothing to "hash out" with us all, and what he says is what will be
> available to you to take or leave as you see fit.

Think of this as a practice run, is all.

> Why ask x unconnected people when what they say will have no ultimate
> bearing on the answer of the 1 person that matters here?

But they do. I'm sure you don't respond knowing the sheer utter
futility of your thoughts before-hand.

> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[NYC XYZ]

Victor Kan wrote:
>
>
> Presumably you're referring to widely in the U.S?

Oh, yes -- hehe....

> HPVelotechnik is in Europe and have very few stocking dealers in the
> U.S. And even their cheapest models are up there on the recumbent
> pricing scale once they get over The Pond.
>
> Is it any wonder they're not as well known as brands with wider domestic
> distribution and/or lower price points?

Well, what I'd meant was even here, and on bentrideronline and the RCN
newsletter....

> Having said that, I'd love to have an SMGTe or a Speed Machine. When my
> taste decides that I want to have an USS bike that really works for me
> (my legs are too short for my ActionBent Tidal Wave in stop and go
> traffic), I'd put any of the HPV bikes right at the top of my list.

Hell yeah! I'm already checking out the ~US$1,500.00 as a future
"guest bike"...I'm gonna be a recumbent evangelist, by gum! Matter of
fact, I was going to do a second degree in mathematics or statistics,
but now the 'bent scene's got me so fired up I'm looking anew at
bicycling, namely, as a lifestyle, and it's gotten me seriously
interested in doing Urban Policy, vis-a-vis HPV transportation...I
think that's what I'll do my Master in now!!!!!!

> Me too. My DF road bike is pretty comfy now that I've tossed away the
> comfort gizmos like a suspension seat post, split saddle and "body
> geometry" handlebars w/ adjustable stem.
>
> It can still be painful if I'm lazy and "sit too hard" on the saddle.

Yeah, me too. I love the Trek 1000c, but the SMGTe is far above it!

> Yep, and that's partly why fews mention the HPVelo SMGTe .

Heh, well, I'd meant "even within the 'bent community."

> A decent 'bent can be had for < $700 these days.

Decent? Hmm...I guess...?

> Folks who think 'bents aren't sexy haven't seen the Velokraft VK2, or
> the Challenge Seiran, or a Carbent, or a Karl Swanson custome bike, or
> <insert your favorite, aesthetically pleasing bents>...

Right, that too! But the few times I've seen a 'bent in NYC it's with
chubby ol' fogeys on 'em, and absolutely never seen a female on one
yet.

>
>
>
> --
> I do not accept unsolicited commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
> legitimate replies.

 

[Peter Clinch]

Tom Keats wrote:

> Upthread Mike Reed says his bike is comfortable for him.
> I take it he means the /whole/ bike, not just its saddle.

And my point remains, if it's "100% comfortable" then that implies
no possible improvement anywhere, under any circumsatnces, at any
time. Anyone that thinks such a thing is kidding themselves, and
if that isn't what he meant it remains what he implied.

You can have something that is comfortable in an absolute sense,
but still less comfortable than an alternative in a relative sense.
Such is, IME, the case with a well set up upright bike and s
similarly well suited recumbent. The first is good, the second better.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Buck]

NYC XYZ wrote:
> The
> issue here is whether paying for a bike that includes a fork, then
> upgrading to a better fork for more money, means (or should mean) that
> I keep the old fork or get a discount. Someone else mentioned that the
> cost of the upgrade is actually cheaper than getting the upgrade later
> on, "separately," because that discount for the old fork, etc., is
> "built-in" to the cost of the upgrade at the initial POS...and that
> sounds reasonable, if that's how things really work...again, I don't
> know; just wondering, but seriously wondering, as we're talking big
> bucks here (for me, anyway).

> I'm not trying to penny-pinch here; just hate feeling taken advantage
> of. If this is industry practice, well, I guess I can tolerate it
> better, perhaps -- but that's why I ask y'all. I want to know. If
> you're paying $$$$ for a whole bike, and then pay some more $$$$ for
> all the upgrades, either you'd just get the framekit and pay for the
> upgrades or get the whole bike and keep "the old stuff" or get the
> whole bike and get a discount if the dealer keeps "the old stuff."
> Does that sound so controversial?

You are being silly about it. The only reason you are thinking this is
because you have seen the bike before the upgrades. Have you ever
purchased a new car? Did you ask for all of the parts that weren't
included when you bought the upgraded package? By your reasoning, when
you paid for the aluminum wheels, you ought to get the steel wheels
too. Just load them up in the trunk!

If you had already paid for the parts, then you might have a legitimate
gripe. When you get a new car stereo installed, you expect that they
will return the factory stereo to you. But when you buy the car and ask
for the premium stereo instead of the one that is in it, you don't have
the same expectation. What makes buying a new bicycle any different?
You are paying for the UPGRADED part and not for the original part.
This is the price difference between what he has to pay for the new
part, the cost of the installation, etc., minus the cost of the
original part.

If you want ALL of the parts, then pay the guy the extra money to keep
all of the parts.

-Buck

 

[Peter Clinch]

NYC XYZ wrote:

> Well, he's trying to sell something, for starters.

And? Business is a two way transaction.

> Also, like I said,
> I wanted to find out what was "industry practice."

That isn't really anything much to do with it. If he decides he'll
work other than "industry practice" then that's his business, and
that includes if it's against or for your favour.

>> He knows what he does far better than anyone else here.
>
> I didn't know that.

What? How can a Usenet group possibly know a bike dealer's mind
better than he does himself?

> Besides, there are a few folks in the bike business here.

And they will also reserve the right to run their business however
they want to. If they're out of order they'll pay in lost custom,
it's their call, just as it's the call of the guy you're dealing
with in this case.

> Okay, so it's not unreasonable, then, to ask to keep the stuff.

You can ask for a 90% discount if you like, as long as you're
prepared to take no for an answer. It's only towards unreasonable
to start arguing about it if he's said no.

> I guess I'm a pack-rat and was thinking of some time in the future when
> that fork might come in handy for a second or third 'bent! I'm already
> eyeing the HP Velo Spirit as a nice "guest 'bent"...do you know
> anything about it?

Yes, and for starters I know that with a 16" front wheel a spare
fork from a Streetmachine will be about as much use as a wax
fireguard... ;-)

> Mainly, does the seat adjust such that I don't have
> to fret with the chains if guests of different x-seams try out the
> bike?

The seat slides up and down the frame completely independent of the
drivetrain which stays a fixed length.

It's a very nice bike for immedaietly getting on and riding, and
the most immediately comfortable bike I've ever ridden (wouldn't be
so good over distance, with less weight taken on the back and more
aero drag). A cracking urban and short day tour bike.

>> Why ask x unconnected people when what they say will have no ultimate
>> bearing on the answer of the 1 person that matters here?
>
> But they do. I'm sure you don't respond knowing the sheer utter
> futility of your thoughts before-hand.

But they don't. If he says something that a Usenet group say
otherwise what do you do? Take him to court over it? It's his
decision, for his business regarding your custom. What anyone else
here has to say about it means nothing.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[NYC XYZ]

Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> And? Business is a two way transaction.

Right. So if he tells me that something is normal, how would I know,
really?

> That isn't really anything much to do with it. If he decides he'll
> work other than "industry practice" then that's his business, and
> that includes if it's against or for your favour.

Right. But I don't want to ask for something so contrary to "common
experience" such as to border on insult.

> What? How can a Usenet group possibly know a bike dealer's mind
> better than he does himself?

Wrong. I'm not trying to read his mind. I'm asking about what the
cycling community at large thinks of x, y, and z.

> And they will also reserve the right to run their business however
> they want to. If they're out of order they'll pay in lost custom,
> it's their call, just as it's the call of the guy you're dealing
> with in this case.

Right. So I'm asking around, comparing notes on how businesses are
run, whether it strikes different dealers differently or not.

> You can ask for a 90% discount if you like, as long as you're
> prepared to take no for an answer. It's only towards unreasonable
> to start arguing about it if he's said no.

Wrong. Asking for a 90% discount is not the sign of a serious
customer. If you need this explained to you, then I'll have to
cross-post to alt.what.the.hell.?.! too. =)

> Yes, and for starters I know that with a 16" front wheel a spare
> fork from a Streetmachine will be about as much use as a wax
> fireguard... ;-)

Ah, thanks -- just goes to show that the only stupid question is the
one which doesn't get asked.

> The seat slides up and down the frame completely independent of the
> drivetrain which stays a fixed length.

Yes, thanks, I'd just read the details carefully myself, too. Sounds
ideal for a guest bike!

> It's a very nice bike for immedaietly getting on and riding, and
> the most immediately comfortable bike I've ever ridden (wouldn't be
> so good over distance, with less weight taken on the back and more
> aero drag). A cracking urban and short day tour bike.

THE MOST IMMEDIATELY COMFORTABLE???? Holy chromoly, I thought the
SMGTe was the most immediately comfortable! And you have an SMGT, and
you can still say that about the Spirit??? Wow!!!!!!!!!

> But they don't.

But they do to me, and you're asking me.

> If he says something that a Usenet group say
> otherwise what do you do? Take him to court over it?

Um, dude, you ever heard of price comparison?

Same logic.

If you seriously need that explained, I suggest you write Consumer
Reports and tell them they're wasting precious wood pulp.

> It's his
> decision, for his business regarding your custom. What anyone else
> here has to say about it means nothing.

Which statement is obviously belied by your continued responses, unless
you're feeling a bit post-modern at the mo'? I mean, heck, if God
wanted us to tour cross-country, He would've installed us with wheels
in the first place, nu?

> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[gotbent]

I think that when you buy an upgrade, you are paying the difference in price
between OEM item cost and the upgrade cost. It's like buying a car and
getting leather seats as an option. You get the leather seats. They don't
give you the cloth seats that come on the base model. If your dealer has the
bike in stock and it's not built up, then you're paying for the frameset and
parts and labor beyond a normal bike-out-of-the-box set-up charge. Don't
forget that the $80.00 retail gizmo might only cost the bike maker $11.38 so
don't expect much of a discount off of the $275.00 retail gizmo you want as
an upgrade. Besides, you're buying near 4 kilobucks worth of bike. Don't
disappoint us by turning into a snivelly cheapskate ******* after pumping us
for a couple of fokking weeks asking our advice about everything from the
value of high precision ceramic bearings and what is the most asshole
friendly toilet paper you can cram into a pannier for the great across the
country ride to christin the streetmachine. Buy the foker already.




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

 

[NYC XYZ]

gotbent wrote:
> I think that when you buy an upgrade, you are paying the difference in price
> between OEM item cost and the upgrade cost. It's like buying a car and
> getting leather seats as an option. You get the leather seats. They don't
> give you the cloth seats that come on the base model.

Not having ever bought a car, I don't know about that. It just seems
logical that if you get your flat fixed by them installing a new tube,
you should also get your old flat tube back, too. Likewise, the fork
is already paid for, it's right there on the bike, why don't I get it
"back" as well?

But okay, if it's as you say, with the OEM model and so forth, okay, I
can see the logic of not "getting it back" -- it wasn't ever mine in
the first place, really, given the difference in price, etc.

> If your dealer has the
> bike in stock and it's not built up,

It's already built-up. It's a "floor model."

> then you're paying for the frameset and
> parts and labor beyond a normal bike-out-of-the-box set-up charge. Don't
> forget that the $80.00 retail gizmo might only cost the bike maker $11.38 so
> don't expect much of a discount off of the $275.00 retail gizmo you want as
> an upgrade.

Oh yes, I did think of that. I'd mentioned in one of the other threads
that I work as a buyer; I deal with sales people all the time. Oddly
enough, I feel empowered to haggle on another's behalf, but not on my
own. Nice Guy Syndrome and all.

> Besides, you're buying near 4 kilobucks worth of bike. Don't
> disappoint us by turning into a snivelly cheapskate *******

Funny you think I'd be a cheapskate, considering that I am, as you
recognize, paying retail at $4.5K. I hope you don't design 'bents.
You might hurt someone with your notion of cause-and-effect.

> after pumping us
> for a couple of fokking weeks asking our advice about everything from the
> value of high precision ceramic bearings and what is the most asshole
> friendly toilet paper

Speaking of which, you've got foam on your lips. Please wipe with your
favorite brand.

> you can cram into a pannier for the great across the
> country ride to christin the streetmachine. Buy the foker already.

I've already put down $$$. What part of that did you miss?

> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

 

[NYC XYZ]

Buck wrote:
>
>
>
> You are being silly about it. The only reason you are thinking this is
> because you have seen the bike before the upgrades. Have you ever
> purchased a new car?

No. I hope you'll be around when I do. =D

> Did you ask for all of the parts that weren't
> included when you bought the upgraded package? By your reasoning, when
> you paid for the aluminum wheels, you ought to get the steel wheels
> too. Just load them up in the trunk!

I get the sense that this works like with ordering computers -- the
base model includes CD-ROM, say, but a DVD-/+R(W) upgrade doesn't
include the CD-ROM as well. That's what y'all mean?

> If you had already paid for the parts, then you might have a legitimate
> gripe.

Whoa, who's griping? Not me, I'm askin'. The only gripes I hear are
those who moan at the question. So tune out. It's okay. I won't miss
what I don't know.

> When you get a new car stereo installed, you expect that they
> will return the factory stereo to you. But when you buy the car and ask
> for the premium stereo instead of the one that is in it, you don't have
> the same expectation. What makes buying a new bicycle any different?
> You are paying for the UPGRADED part and not for the original part.
> This is the price difference between what he has to pay for the new
> part, the cost of the installation, etc., minus the cost of the
> original part.
>
> If you want ALL of the parts, then pay the guy the extra money to keep
> all of the parts.

Ah, okay, this is a succinct answer. Thanks!

> -Buck

 

[Jon Meinecke]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote
> Jon Meinecke wrote:
>> "Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>Is coffee really /that/ much harder to buy because Starbucks give you
>>>options beyond cream and sugar?
>
>> To buy, perhaps somewhat harder,-- more information to communicate,
>> more possibility of misunderstanding and more possibility of fulfillment
>> error. I asked for a "double-what's-it-extra-foamy" not an
>> "extra-what's-it-double-foamy"... %^)
>
> Though the fact remains that I can walk in and say "Black coffee please!"
> and get a black coffee PDQ...
>

Ah, but will you get what you want/expect?

Decaf or caffeinated? Columbian or Kona? 12oz, 32 oz? %^)

But yes, if you buy a standard configuration, bike or coffee,
it is indeed a short order. Seeing the forest for the trees
can become an issue, though, when custom configurations
come into play.

None of my recumbent bike buys have been complicated.
All were "off-the-rack" purchases and customization (minor)
to my likening came later.

Jon Meinecke

 

[Peter Clinch]

NYC XYZ wrote:

> Right. So if he tells me that something is normal, how would I know,
> really?

It doesn't really make any odds. He's telling you what he's
offering, if it's with or against, better or worse than industry
practice doesn't alter that.

> Right. But I don't want to ask for something so contrary to "common
> experience" such as to border on insult.

You're not in the trade, why should you be expected to know?

> Wrong. I'm not trying to read his mind. I'm asking about what the
> cycling community at large thinks of x, y, and z.

Which tells you what the cycling community at large thinks, not
what your dealer thinks. You're dealing with him, not the cycling
community at large.

> Right. So I'm asking around, comparing notes on how businesses are
> run, whether it strikes different dealers differently or not.

And not actually getting any further forwards with how you deal
with the transaction in hand, because it's purely in the hands of
you and your dealer.

> Wrong. Asking for a 90% discount is not the sign of a serious
> customer.

So what's the magic level that /is/ serious? It will very much
depend on the dealer and the customer and their relationship, and
nobody else can tell you what that is.

> Ah, thanks -- just goes to show that the only stupid question is the
> one which doesn't get asked.

You could just read the specs, of course...

> THE MOST IMMEDIATELY COMFORTABLE???? Holy chromoly, I thought the
> SMGTe was the most immediately comfortable! And you have an SMGT, and
> you can still say that about the Spirit??? Wow!!!!!!!!!

Not "Wow!!!!!!!!" at all. I want a bike that does long tours with
handling unaffected by heavy luggage, the SMGT does that better
than the Spirit, so I have an SMGT. The SMGT is too laid back to
be immediately comfortable for most riders on their first recumbent
trip, even with the seat cranked up as high as it'll go. The
Spirit can be set up like a car seat, which is the sort of angle
people are familiar with and happy controlling vehicles at. It's a
soft seat which comforms immediately to the rider and on a short
trip that's more important than more rigid support spread over a
larger area. "More immediately comfortable" means what it says,
"immediate" doesn't tell you how you'll feel after 4 hours riding
into headwinds over a poor road.

> Um, dude, you ever heard of price comparison?
>
> Same logic.

Right, you're free to take your business anywhere you want, so talk
to other HP Velotechnik dealers and see what they'll give you in
comparison. What Usenet's opinion on the matter is remains
irrelevant, though they may be able to point you to other HPVel
dealers, or suggest alternatives to the SMGT handled by dealers
they particularly recommend.

> Which statement is obviously belied by your continued responses

Not really, I'm trying to get you to talk to the people that
actually matter, which is a useful piece of advice IMHO, where my
telling you whether I think it's right or not that you get a pair
of forks back is irrelevant. You'll note I haven't said whether
you should get a pair of forks back.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[NYC XYZ]

Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>
> It doesn't really make any odds. He's telling you what he's
> offering, if it's with or against, better or worse than industry
> practice doesn't alter that.

I want to gauge how reasonable his offer is. Like with price
comparison. Just for my own information. You know, knowledge,
curiosity, the life of the mind and all.

> You're not in the trade, why should you be expected to know?

Who said I am "expected" to know? But I do want to know.

> Which tells you what the cycling community at large thinks, not
> what your dealer thinks. You're dealing with him, not the cycling
> community at large.

Yes, but what I want to know is what the cycling community thinks.

> And not actually getting any further forwards with how you deal
> with the transaction in hand, because it's purely in the hands of
> you and your dealer.

Uh, no, actually. I see now how this is industry practice, and I see
the logic behind it. I remain a happy usenet reader. Is something
troubling you?

> So what's the magic level that /is/ serious? It will very much
> depend on the dealer and the customer and their relationship, and
> nobody else can tell you what that is.

Of course they can. Presumably you shopped around before you bought
yours where you bought yours. Pete, are you picking up The Grate One's
bad habits, like idle sophistry?

> You could just read the specs, of course...

Actually, I didn't know that bike forks are so dependent on wheel size,
so specs made no sense until your explicitly pointing the fact out.

> Not "Wow!!!!!!!!" at all. I want a bike that does long tours with
> handling unaffected by heavy luggage, the SMGT does that better
> than the Spirit, so I have an SMGT. The SMGT is too laid back to
> be immediately comfortable for most riders on their first recumbent
> trip, even with the seat cranked up as high as it'll go.

Oh wow, it was love at first sight and recline for me!

> The
> Spirit can be set up like a car seat, which is the sort of angle
> people are familiar with and happy controlling vehicles at.

Yes, I do agree. If only it was so crummy in comparison to the SMGTe
(16" wheel?!). But still a great guest bike. Can't wait to get it!!!

> It's a
> soft seat which comforms immediately to the rider and on a short
> trip that's more important than more rigid support spread over a
> larger area.

Yeah, and with a breathable mesh back! Very nice.

> "More immediately comfortable" means what it says,
> "immediate" doesn't tell you how you'll feel after 4 hours riding
> into headwinds over a poor road.

First impressions count for a lot, given human psychology. I'm sure
it'll hold up well under those circumstances, too.

> Right, you're free to take your business anywhere you want, so talk
> to other HP Velotechnik dealers and see what they'll give you in
> comparison.

Asking around is asking around. It's more helpful for me to ask a
cycling newsgroup than dealers whom I don't expect to purchase from --
too far away, I've already commited money to this dealer, etc.

> What Usenet's opinion on the matter is remains
> irrelevant, though they may be able to point you to other HPVel
> dealers, or suggest alternatives to the SMGT handled by dealers
> they particularly recommend.

I find it astounding that YOU keep insisting on what's relevant to ME
where my interest lies!

> Not really, I'm trying to get you to talk to the people that
> actually matter, which is a useful piece of advice IMHO, where my
> telling you whether I think it's right or not that you get a pair
> of forks back is irrelevant. You'll note I haven't said whether
> you should get a pair of forks back.

You'll note, I hope, that you deemed your own advice useful, which
proves my initial strategy of asking on usenet -- indeed, proves it to
you yourself!

> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Peter Clinch]

NYC XYZ wrote:

> I want to gauge how reasonable his offer is. Like with price
> comparison. Just for my own information. You know, knowledge,
> curiosity, the life of the mind and all.

Compare like with like. For example, many cycle shops in the UK
you can expect to haggle a fair bit off, at least in terms of free
accessories, on a high end bike. My recumbent dealer won't do this
and says so up front. Is that unreasonable? According to
"industry standards" perhaps, but he's playing a very different
game to almost all ther bike shops in the UK, and he's got a lot of
happy customers queueing up to do repeat business. So is he being
reasonable? According to industry convention no, according to
happy customers, yes.

> Who said I am "expected" to know?

You appear to think you must before you're happy to ask him about
anything.

> Yes, but what I want to know is what the cycling community thinks.

Well, if that's all you want then fine, just don't expect it to be
of any actual /use/. You've got $4K of deserving being treated
with due consideration like a reasonable adult by your dealer, why
not take advantage of that fact? He's on your side if he's worth
dealing with at all.

> Of course they can. Presumably you shopped around before you bought
> yours where you bought yours.

I had two choices of where to buy it in the UK, one of which was 80
miles away and the other 450. So there wasn't much shopping around
to do, but I was impressed by the service and apparent integrity of
Ben, I liked the bike, so I was happy to buy it there. I've been
back and bought other bikes since.

> Actually, I didn't know that bike forks are so dependent on wheel size

Well think about it for a couple of minutes... if you jack the
front of the bike up far higher than it's designed that will pretty
obviously affect things like the rake and thus quite possibly the
handling. If you have rim brakes it will really help if the pads
go somewhere near the rims of the wheels. Not rocket science.

> Yes, I do agree. If only it was so crummy in comparison to the SMGTe
> (16" wheel?!).

What's wrong with 16" wheels? The Spirit is arguably a much better
urban bike than the SMGT, which is right as that's what it's
designed for, and not what the SMGT is designed for. Why is that
"crummy"?

> I find it astounding that YOU keep insisting on what's relevant to ME
> where my interest lies!

Not where your personal intellectual interest lies, where actually
getting the business done is concerned. My impression, perhaps
false, is you were interested in actually progressing the
transaction and learning exactly what you'd get, rather than what
you might get in other places. It remains the case that the best
person to tell you what you can expect from your dealer is your
dealer, no matter /how/ much you argue or research otherwise.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/