Has anyone tried the Bigha?

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> ...
> Mr. Varney has lost all perspective if he does not think price and weight
> are by far and away the most important considerations when it comes to
> buying a bike....

There is much more to it than those two criteria. For example, at the
time the Blackbent III was in production, it cost about $300 less than
the RANS Rocket and weighed approximately the same. However, the frame
quality and durability, component quality, seat comfort, weight
distribution, handling, and manufacturer warranty support were much
better for the Rocket than the Blackbent III. In my opinion, it was
obvious that the Rocket was a much better bike, both price independent
and price dependent. [1]

[1] For the record, I purchased (and still own) a RANS Rocket at the
time Recumbant (sic) Barn was still in business selling Blackbents.

--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> The RANS Tailwind is the most underrated recumbent out there. My only caveat
> is that if you are near 6 feet tall you might want to avoid it as it is not
> really designed for someone of that height. It will put too much weight on
> the rear of the bike. RANS should really make a larger size for us 6
> footers. I have an early version of the Tailwind however and it almost fits
> me although there is still a bit too much weight on the rear of the bike.

History in the making - Ed Dolan writes a post where I find nothing to
disagree with.

--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>>"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>[...]
>>>
>>>
>>>> Myself, I find it a real puzzler why you keep carrying on about this
>>>>one particular bike. It can't be just the price, as there are many that
>>>>cost more. It can't be just the weight, because there are many that
>>>>weigh more. So what is it? Is it really the simplistic weight/price
>>>>ratio, that seemingly ignores any other factors? Sure, there is one guy
>>>>on this list who claims that these are the only factors in choosing a
>>>>bike, but no one really takes him seriously on this.
>>>
>>>
>>>Mr. Varney has lost all perspective if he does not think price and
>
> weight
>
>>>are by far and away the most important considerations when it comes to
>>>buying a bike. The reason weight is so important is that it relates to
>>>almost every other quality of the bike. And weight is just plain
>
> important
>
>>>all by itself because you are going to have to push that bike around
>
> under
>
>>>your own power. The reason price is so important is that it relates to
>
> ...
>
>>>well, if I have to explain the importance of price to those of us who
>
> ride
>
>>>bicycles ... I don't believe there are any millionaires here. Most
>>>millionaires I have ever heard of wouldn't be caught dead on a bicycle
>
> (some
>
>>>few exceptions of course). Does The Donald (Trump) ride a bike - ever?
>>>
>>>Mr. Varney is trying to defend a bike that weighs 50 pounds and costs
>
> $3000.
>
>>>Is this the sort of guy you want reviewing recumbent bicycles? I'll take
>>>someone like Lorenzo who has his head screwed on straight and knows the
>>>value of a dollar. It is because of reviewers like Mr. Varney that I
>>>wouldn't be caught dead reading Bike Rider Online (or whatever the hell
>
> it
>
>>>is called). If you want to read sensible reviews of recumbent bikes,
>
> then I
>
>>>suggest RCN. Bob Bryant has some consideration for his readers as he
>>>realizes we are not all millionaires where price is no object. Mr.
>
> Bryant,
>
>>>unlike Mr. Varney, has enough sense to relate the price of a bike to its
>>>value. It is what is known as perspective, something that Mr. Varney
>
> totally
>
>>>lacks.
>>>
>>
>> Perhaps Mr. Dolan would actually read what I write, instead of just
>>referring to things that were never said.
>
>
> I am only reading what you are posting here on ARBR.
>
>
>> I have never referred to what are the "most important
>>considerations", just that weight and price are not the ONLY
>>considerations.
>
>
> Agreed. And I have said repeatedly that weight and price are the MOST
> important considerations. So where is the disagreement?
>
>
>> I have never said anything in defense of the BiGHA. Never. I have
>>never said anything complimentary about it, I have never advised anyone
>>to buy one, I have NEVER said anything in defense of it. Period. Read
>>what I write, OK?
>
>
> You are in effect arguing that one should consider the Bigha for purchase in
> as much as weight and price are not the ONLY considerations. I agree, but
> they are by far and away the MOST important considerations. That is why I
> would never defend the Bigha for possible purchase. In fact, I would
> strongly recommend against it.
>
>
>
>> You say I lack perspective. You lack the ability to read with
>>anything approaching comprehension. But I will have to compliment you on
>>writing such a long post, full of errors and lies, certainly, but
>>lacking in the usual vulgarity and curse words.
>
>
> Nonsense! I used the word "hell" in connection with Bent Rider Online. I
> always remain true to form. My readers expect no less of me.
>
> However, you could take a note from Mr. Bryant of RCN and try to relate the
> weight and price of a bike to its value. That is always the least you can do
> for your readers. Your opinions on other aspects are optional and easy to
> take or leave. I am never interested in reading any reviewer who does not
> have something to say about value as it relates to weight and price, at
> least when it comes to bicycles. You think the Bigha MIGHT be good value. I
> KNOW it is not! And I KNOW it is not based on weight and price alone.
>

Read what I have written, Dolan. I have NEVER said anything about the
BiGHA being of good value or not. Period. I have never defended it.
Period. I have never argued for the purchase of it. Period. If you are
reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet you claim I have written
what I have not, then how are we to interpret that? Simple mistakes,
repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate fabrications? Which are you
going to own up to?

--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
<snip>
> Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer the question or we will know
> what a wife beater you are. So why do you think people should pay twice
> as much as the competitive price for a slow heavy comfort bike? What are
> your criteria that makes a Bigha worth $3000? The sterling reputation of
> the people who make it?
>
> Lorenzo L. Love
Read carefully, Love. I have never defended this bike. I have never
said anyone should buy it. I have never said it was worth $3000. You may
use this pathetic "so why do you think..." ploy, but everyone sees
through it. You and Dolan play the same, tired game, and it's just
incredible to think that neither of you realize that everyone is on to you.


--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Wolverine]

Larry Varney wrote:
> Lorenzo L. Love wrote: <snip>
> > Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer the question or we will
> > know what a wife beater you are. So why do you think people should pay
> > twice as much as the competitive price for a slow heavy comfort bike?
> > What are your criteria that makes a Bigha worth $3000? The sterling
> > reputation of the people who make it?
> >
> > Lorenzo L. Love
> Read carefully, Love. I have never defended this bike. I have never
> said anyone should buy it. I have never said it was worth $3000. You
> may use this pathetic "so why do you think..." ploy, but everyone
> sees through it. You and Dolan play the same, tired game, and it's
> just incredible to think that neither of you realize that everyone is
> on to you.
> --
> Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
> http://home.fuse.net/larryvarneyhttp://home.fuse.net/larryvarney


Ah Larry, I see you have been pulled into the mud. No matter how much
cold water you pour on it by trying to right the wrong, you won't get
clean again until you get out of the mud hole. But hey, a romp in the
mud pit was fun as a kid, so here I go with you Larry. I will limit
myself to two points that always come up, weight and price. Weight: Yes,
for bikes, because you have to exert yourself at times to use them,
weight is a factor, even if you are not into speed. Beach cruisers are
nice. At the beach. Not so much so huffing it up a hill, riding long
distances, starting and stopping. Fifty pounds is alot of weight for any
bike period. It seems to have been designed by a group of furniture
makers instead of bike builders. It is as if they took handfuls of stuff
they wanted on a bike and threw it on a frame, and THEN weighed it. Were
the carbon fiber fenders a late attempt to reign in the design? Too
little, too late. I agree that sometimes the weight issue is overblown
when it comes to bikes. A few pounds up or down the scale means alot to
an enthusiast, amateur or pro but the laymen probably wouldn't notice a
small difference in weight. But fifty pounds is fifty pounds, there has
to be a high point, a peak, and if fifty pounds isn't considered near
the too darn heavy end of the scale, it is awfully close to it. Water,
travel bag with food, tubes and some gear puts it over the top for the
newbie that they are targeting. Try getting your bent legs with that
thing. Price: I agree that price can be extremely subjective. I would
not look down on anyone who bought one, but for me personally it isn't
worth the price. It is not alone in that catagory either. The dual
suspension, SWB, dual 20" wheeled Altitude recumbent bike cost over four
grand. Subjective, my opinion, the bike ain't worth it. So price by
itself doesn't damn the bike. The price and the weight together make you
look harder at the alternatives that are lighter, cheaper. Another
observation of the debate that remains constant is the cross arguments
that go like this: Everybody who criticizes it hasn't rode it and
everybody who defends it won't buy one with their own money. Some truth
on both sides. There, I'm done. Not directing this at anyone, just some
thoughts, just sticking my food in the mud like you Larry. Well, I 'm
off to the showers. Peace



--

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer the question or we will know
> what a wife beater you are.

Whelp Lorenzo is going skitzo I see

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> > I suspect it only appears we are being defensive because you are so
> > offensive about the company itself and not the bike.
> >
> >
>
> So you are quite happy to buy something at an inflated price from a
> group of people who have previously walked away from contracts,
> warranties and product support?

If its a decent bike sure, there's more to it than the price. I purchased
the Vision and lost 50 pounds, lost another 20 so far on the Baron and now
blow away most other bikers.

If I can do even a fraction of that on a BigHa then the price of the bike is
dirt cheap.

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:

> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer the question or we will
>> know what a wife beater you are. So why do you think people should pay
>> twice as much as the competitive price for a slow heavy comfort bike?
>> What are your criteria that makes a Bigha worth $3000? The sterling
>> reputation of the people who make it?
>>
>> Lorenzo L. Love
>
> Read carefully, Love. I have never defended this bike. I have never
> said anyone should buy it. I have never said it was worth $3000. You may
> use this pathetic "so why do you think..." ploy, but everyone sees
> through it. You and Dolan play the same, tired game, and it's just
> incredible to think that neither of you realize that everyone is on to you.
>
>

I count twenty posts where you 'aren't defending the Bigha'. Just what
are you doing? Do you think it is worth $3000? Would you buy one for
$3000? These aren't hard questions.

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mark Leuck wrote:
> > "Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>>Would you spend more than $3000 for a Segway? No but many have
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>He's not a reviwer, just a guy who hasn't rode a bike since he was in
> >>collage and never a recumbent, just the type Bigha is targeting.
> >
> >
> > Exactly so whats the problem?
>
> No problem for Bigha, people who know nothing about recumbents are their
> target market. But would anyone who is experienced with recumbents buy
one?

We haven't seen that here yet but that doesn't mean someone experienced with
recumbents hasn't. Even if they don't why is that a big deal? BigHa doesn't
have to cater to the recumbent crowd any more than Giant does with the
Revive. If they choose to target another market they can do that. Any
recumbent manufacturer would do the same thing if they could sell more
bikes.

> > Why would you think I'd order one?
> >
> >
>
> So when you say you could, you could if you would but you won't because
> you won't.

No I never said I would, what I won't do is cut down a bike without riding
it first, something neither of us have done yet

>I could pay twice what something is worth too, but I'm not
> quite dumb enough to do so. I guess you're not either.

I bet you've bought a lot of things for twice the money

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mark Leuck wrote:
> > "Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >
> >>Haven't you been paying attention? The question to all reviewers: Has
> >>any one of them liked the Bigha so much that they paid $3000 for one of
> >>their own? So far, zero. Positive reviews but not a single one thought
> >>it was worth their own money. That tells me a lot.
> >>
> >>Lorenzo L. Love
> >
> >
> > I see that with almost every review of every brand
> >
> >
>
> Yes. They need to be very careful to not be too critical or they lose
> their source of free review products. How many reviews have you seen
> that says this bike is not worth it's price, don't buy one? Reviewers
> who depend on free products can't afford to do that.

I doubt any reviewer would say not to buy a bike unless it has a critical
flaw in the manufacturing or design and since you aren't a reviewer I doubt
you know what they go through with the review process

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Because if you didn't give a fair and impartial review, you wouldn't be
> working for Consumer Reports for long. Consumer Reports, because they
> buy the product and are not dependent on the manufacturers for free
> products, can insist on fair reviews. Who does that for recumbents?

So what you are saying is anything a reviewer who receives free bikes is
meaningless?

 

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> Larry Varney wrote:
>
>> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer the question or we will
>>> know what a wife beater you are. So why do you think people should
>>> pay twice as much as the competitive price for a slow heavy comfort
>>> bike? What are your criteria that makes a Bigha worth $3000? The
>>> sterling reputation of the people who make it?
>>>
>>> Lorenzo L. Love
>>
>>
>> Read carefully, Love. I have never defended this bike. I have never
>> said anyone should buy it. I have never said it was worth $3000. You
>> may use this pathetic "so why do you think..." ploy, but everyone sees
>> through it. You and Dolan play the same, tired game, and it's just
>> incredible to think that neither of you realize that everyone is on to
>> you.
>>
>>
>
> I count twenty posts where you 'aren't defending the Bigha'. Just what
> are you doing? Do you think it is worth $3000? Would you buy one for
> $3000? These aren't hard questions.
>
> Lorenzo L. Love
> http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>

Lorenzo, read my posts. What good things have I said about the BiGHA?
In what post did I say it was worth $3000? In what post did I ever
advise anyone to buy one? These aren't hard questions, either, Lorenzo.
I didn't think I would need to tell you this again, but apparently I
do. What I have been doing, over and over and over again, is pointing
out that there are more criteria when it comes to buying a bike - and
many other things, too - remember the food comments? No? - than just
price and weight.
But I am glad to see that you finally admit that I haven't been
defending the BiGHA. I hadn't counted the posts, but it probably is more
effective at convincing you when you did it yourself.
--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > ...
> > Mr. Varney has lost all perspective if he does not think price and
weight
> > are by far and away the most important considerations when it comes to
> > buying a bike....
>
> There is much more to it than those two criteria. For example, at the
> time the Blackbent III was in production, it cost about $300 less than
> the RANS Rocket and weighed approximately the same. However, the frame
> quality and durability, component quality, seat comfort, weight
> distribution, handling, and manufacturer warranty support were much
> better for the Rocket than the Blackbent III. In my opinion, it was
> obvious that the Rocket was a much better bike, both price independent
> and price dependent. [1]
>
> [1] For the record, I purchased (and still own) a RANS Rocket at the
> time Recumbant (sic) Barn was still in business selling Blackbents.

I am the sort of person though who would have bought the Blackbent if I had
been in the market for a SWB at the time. I would have taken my chances with
it and trusted that I could fix anything that went wrong with it. But I
would have lost as apparently there were problems with the frame itself.
However, I have many recumbents that I paid bottom dollar for and they have
worked out just fine for me. The differences between a bottom dollar
recumbent and a top dollar recumbent (yes, I have a few of those too) do not
seem all that great to me, most especially if I am not into speed. Weight is
not critical unless you are into speed, but still there can only be a few
pounds difference, not 20 pounds as in the case of the Bigha. Unfortunately
for me, price is always critical and I will admit I have been burned every
now and then by mostly going for the least cost product.

I have noted over the years that when it comes to quality bikes there is a
point at which you get maximum value for your money. If you pay less, you
get cheated, and if you pay more you also get cheated. That is why at any
given time there is a price point or range which is popular. The Bigha is
off the scale of value for price. It is a real no brainer not to buy it.

If I were still into uprights and I just wanted a bike for running around
town I would go to Wal-Mart and get their special for $55. and I would be
perfectly happy with it. I would only want a better bike if I am into
performance - which mostly I am not anymore. Most cyclists are not into
performance and just about any old bike will do what they want a bike to do.
It is really only those who are into performance or who have more money than
brains who need to spend an extravagant amount of money on a bike.

All recumbents are outrageously expensive compared to uprights in my opinion
but we all know the reason for that. If recumbents were a mass market item
like uprights, they could be equally as cheap. However, that is never going
to happen because of other inherent problems connected with recumbents. It
may be that the semi-recumbent could become a mass market bike but that
remains to be seen.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > The RANS Tailwind is the most underrated recumbent out there. My only
caveat
> > is that if you are near 6 feet tall you might want to avoid it as it is
not
> > really designed for someone of that height. It will put too much weight
on
> > the rear of the bike. RANS should really make a larger size for us 6
> > footers. I have an early version of the Tailwind however and it almost
fits
> > me although there is still a bit too much weight on the rear of the
bike.
>
> History in the making - Ed Dolan writes a post where I find nothing to
> disagree with.

Mr. Sherman and I are both long time readers of RCN (I have every issue
going back to the beginning, except for the very first issue which I somehow
seemed to have missed) and so are more knowledgeable than those who are not
long time readers of RCN. The very best articles that the editor of that
publication (Bob Bryant) ever writes are those where he reviews on a regular
basis aspects of the different kinds of recumbents. That kind of information
is priceless and is easily worth the subscription price to RCN alone.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Curtis L. Russell]

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:24:38 GMT, "Lorenzo L. Love"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>So did you buy a Bigha? No? Join the crowd.

Now I see the light. A 16 year old still fond of the logic of an 8
year old. He must have been a winner a couple of years ago on the
playground...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> <snip>
> > Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer the question or we will know
> > what a wife beater you are. So why do you think people should pay twice
> > as much as the competitive price for a slow heavy comfort bike? What are
> > your criteria that makes a Bigha worth $3000? The sterling reputation of
> > the people who make it?
> >
> > Lorenzo L. Love
> Read carefully, Love. I have never defended this bike. I have never
> said anyone should buy it. I have never said it was worth $3000. You may
> use this pathetic "so why do you think..." ploy, but everyone sees
> through it. You and Dolan play the same, tired game, and it's just
> incredible to think that neither of you realize that everyone is on to
you.

I don't believe Mr. Varney and I will ever connect on any issue in this
lifetime. He is a literalist. I do not get hung up on any particular words
or even particular statements. I go for the overall sense of what is being
said and I infer intention. I can do this because I read like a general
reader and not like some kind of confounded specialist who looks at every
word or statement separately. But Mr. Varney could be a more careful writer.
He is always saying conflicting things and not making it clear exactly where
he stands. Thus, the misunderstandings are all over the place. What he needs
to do is focus sharper on exactly what he is saying and not ramble so much.
He also needs to make it clear what his intentions are. Intentions are at
the core of what most writing is about after all.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The RANS Tailwind is the most underrated recumbent out there. My only
>
> caveat
>
>>>is that if you are near 6 feet tall you might want to avoid it as it is
>
> not
>
>>>really designed for someone of that height. It will put too much weight
>
> on
>
>>>the rear of the bike. RANS should really make a larger size for us 6
>>>footers. I have an early version of the Tailwind however and it almost
>
> fits
>
>>>me although there is still a bit too much weight on the rear of the
>
> bike.
>
>>History in the making - Ed Dolan writes a post where I find nothing to
>>disagree with.
>
>
> Mr. Sherman and I are both long time readers of RCN (I have every issue
> going back to the beginning, except for the very first issue which I somehow
> seemed to have missed) and so are more knowledgeable than those who are not
> long time readers of RCN. The very best articles that the editor of that
> publication (Bob Bryant) ever writes are those where he reviews on a regular
> basis aspects of the different kinds of recumbents. That kind of information
> is priceless and is easily worth the subscription price to RCN alone.
>

I've been reading RCN for years now, too, and I agree - lots of great
information in that magazine. And, not to denigrate Bob Bryant's
expertise and range of experiences, but you do have to be wary of one
thing: sometimes what you might interpret as being an objective, factual
analysis of "basic aspects of the different kinds of recumbents" might
be tainted with some subjective, maybe even subconscious, bias. Some of
us feel more comfortable on swb, some on lwb. Some prefer ASS, some
prefer USS. So when you start talking about those "basic aspects", our
own preferences will have a way of coloring the "facts".
It's always preferable, whenever possible - and it sometimes isn't -
to check things out for yourself. I still remember (it was a long time
ago) how it was common knowledge that swb bikes were twitchy and hard to
handle, and that lwb was definitely the way to go. I accepted that fact
for several years, riding my Infinity. And then I had a chance to take a
brief ride on a Vision.
It took all of about 15 minutes to realize that the "facts" were
wrong, that swb were not "twitchy". At least, not this one. So, maybe
others weren't either. Shortly after that ride, I bought an Haluzak
Horizon, followed by a string of several other swb recumbents. And guess
what? They weren't twitchy at all.
Just a long-winded way of saying that generalizations can deliver a
lot of valuable information, but they can also mask some misconceptions
and biases as well. Read the reviews, listen to the "experts", but when
at all possible, check it out for yourself.

--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[...]
> Read what I have written, Dolan. I have NEVER said anything about the
> BiGHA being of good value or not. Period. I have never defended it.
> Period. I have never argued for the purchase of it. Period. If you are
> reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet you claim I have written
> what I have not, then how are we to interpret that? Simple mistakes,
> repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate fabrications? Which are you
> going to own up to?

Lorenzo has already answered you. Take off your blinders and open your ears.
Here it is once again:

"I count twenty posts where you 'aren't defending the Bigha'. Just what
are you doing? Do you think it is worth $3000? Would you buy one for
$3000? These aren't hard questions.

Lorenzo L. Love"

Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are doing? Is the Bigha good
value or is it not? That is what all these posts on this thread are about.
Try to cut to the quick of something for just once in your life why don't
you? Either do that or confine your conversations on this newsgroup to lost
souls like Jon Meinecke. He never likes to get to the substance of anything
either.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>><snip>
>>
>>>Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer the question or we will know
>>>what a wife beater you are. So why do you think people should pay twice
>>>as much as the competitive price for a slow heavy comfort bike? What are
>>>your criteria that makes a Bigha worth $3000? The sterling reputation of
>>>the people who make it?
>>>
>>>Lorenzo L. Love
>>
>> Read carefully, Love. I have never defended this bike. I have never
>>said anyone should buy it. I have never said it was worth $3000. You may
>>use this pathetic "so why do you think..." ploy, but everyone sees
>>through it. You and Dolan play the same, tired game, and it's just
>>incredible to think that neither of you realize that everyone is on to
>
> you.
>
> I don't believe Mr. Varney and I will ever connect on any issue in this
> lifetime. He is a literalist. I do not get hung up on any particular words
> or even particular statements. I go for the overall sense of what is being
> said and I infer intention. I can do this because I read like a general
> reader and not like some kind of confounded specialist who looks at every
> word or statement separately. But Mr. Varney could be a more careful writer.
> He is always saying conflicting things and not making it clear exactly where
> he stands. Thus, the misunderstandings are all over the place. What he needs
> to do is focus sharper on exactly what he is saying and not ramble so much.
> He also needs to make it clear what his intentions are. Intentions are at
> the core of what most writing is about after all.
>

Nonsense. Do not blame the writer for the inabilities of the reader.
You claim that you read for "intention", and yet you admit that you do
not "look at every word or statement separately". How do you read,
Dolan, without looking at each "word or statement separately"? And how
do you find I am "always saying conflicting things", if you don't read
the words or statements separately?
The truth is, I have not being saying conflicting things. And yes, I
know you will not actually post what I have written to support your
claims - it's much easier to make an accusation without support.
Read what I write. If you do that, you will cut down on your
misunderstandings dramatically. Don't try to guess what someone's
"intentions" are: read what is written. And, that includes all the words
and statements. If you disagree with what has been written, fine. But
don't mistake inferences for facts - they can be wrong.
If you have a question about something I've written, if you "infer"
my "intentions" are one thing but my words and statements say something
else, then ask. Say you are unclear on what I'm saying, that you don't
understand my point. I will do my best to make it clear to you.

--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> [...]
>
>> Read what I have written, Dolan. I have NEVER said anything about the
>>BiGHA being of good value or not. Period. I have never defended it.
>>Period. I have never argued for the purchase of it. Period. If you are
>>reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet you claim I have written
>>what I have not, then how are we to interpret that? Simple mistakes,
>>repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate fabrications? Which are you
>>going to own up to?
>
>
> Lorenzo has already answered you. Take off your blinders and open your ears.
> Here it is once again:
>

The question was asked of you. Here it is again:
If you are reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet you claim I have
written what I have not, then how are we to interpret that? Simple
mistakes, repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate fabrications? Which
are you going to own up to?

> "I count twenty posts where you 'aren't defending the Bigha'. Just what
> are you doing? Do you think it is worth $3000? Would you buy one for
> $3000? These aren't hard questions.
>
> Lorenzo L. Love"
>
> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are doing? Is the Bigha good
> value or is it not? That is what all these posts on this thread are about.
> Try to cut to the quick of something for just once in your life why don't
> you? Either do that or confine your conversations on this newsgroup to lost
> souls like Jon Meinecke. He never likes to get to the substance of anything
> either.
>

The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what criteria are used
to judge the value of any bike - or anything at all. I have pointed that
out, countless times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has counted them. And
yet, you can't seem to understand what I've written.
Would you really like to "know what [I'm] doing"? OK, here it is
again: I am pointing out that the value of a bike is not just pounds per
dollar - there are more criteria used than that. As to the relative
weights of those criteria, that will vary among the individuals. Racers
will care more about the weight, for example, than the color. Components
used is also another variable - some people would opt for cheaper stuff,
as they would just install some pedals and things they already have.
Some people value the ready-to-ride aspects of a delivered product,
rather than having to assemble it themselves.
These are all criteria that are used in judging the value of a bike.
This is what I have been saying. Do you understand it now? If not, I can
cut-and-paste the past few paragraphs and put them in another post.

--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney