Has anyone tried the Bigha?

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote: <snip>
> 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 http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Have you asked the reviewers? Have you read their
reviews? Was their anything in their reviews that you
disagreed with? Did they review any other bikes or trikes
and gave them positive reviews, and also failed to buy
one for themselves? Does that tell you a lot? Does that
tell you anything?
--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> Larry Varney wrote:
>
>> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>>
>>> Mark Leuck wrote:
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> I can think of a few hundred reviews of recumbents
>>>> where they didn't buy or say they would buy the bike
>>>> they were reviewing. Your statement is meaningless
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Speaking of meaningless, yesterday you wrote: "While I'm
>>> not wealthy I could indeed buy one. While price IS a
>>> factor it is just one of many otherwise we'd all be
>>> riding the cheapest bike available."
>>>
>>> You never answered if you have ordered it yet.
>>>
>>> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>>
>>
>> Didn't you understand what he wrote? It seems pretty
>> simple. He says that he isn't wealthy, but he could
>> afford a BigHA. He says that price is a factor, but
>> there are many others. He contends that if it were the
>> only factor, then we'd all be riding the cheapest bikes
>> available. 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.
>> And you keep demanding of everyone that either they
>> join you on your jihad against BigHA, or explain why
>> they haven't purchased the bike. So, fair's fair, I
>> guess: What bikes did you order yesterday? What bikes
>> did you not order? And why not? We'll be waiting for
>> your answers, and the reasons behind those answers.
>>
>
> I'm just curious about why people are so supportive and
> defensive about a bike that they themselves would never
> buy. And why won't they buy it? For the obvious reasons
> that it is way too expensive for a heavy bike, way too
> heavy for an expensive bike or it comes from a bunch of
> people who already have a bad reputation in the recumbent
> community. Take your pick. So why are you so defensive of
> this overpriced bike? Why do you want other people to
> spend a lot of money on something you would not?
>
> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>

I noticed you failed to answer the questions I asked. Why
didn't you? I guess not! That tells me a lot! And there
you go again, reducing a complex buying decision to just
two criteria: weight and price. If it were just a brick,
and you had a choice between it and another, identical
brick that weighed the same but was cheaper, then your
reasoning would be sound. Think about it. And I'm glad to
see that you're back to accusing me of being "defensive"
over this particular bike. Obviously, I'm not. I would be
saying the same thing about any other bike or trike -
there are more criteria involved than just weight and
price. Such as, the criteria *you* used when deciding not
to buy all of those bikes and trikes yesterday. Right? I
thought so! And as for my wanting other people to send
their money on something I wouldn't buy? Where did you
pull that out of? Have I ever, EVER, here or anywhere
else, recommended that anyone, ANYONE buy a BiGHA? No. So
tuck that weird accusation back where it came from. And
while you're cleaning up afterwards, perhaps you can
answer my questions. What bikes did you not buy
yesterday, and why not?

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

 

[Skip]

"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> 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.
>
If Slugger is over six feet tall I would suggest he check
out the RANS V2 which is much like the Tailwind with a 26"
rear wheel and a bit more length to it. New V2's are less
than $1,300.00 (a real bargain I think) which would leave
Slugger with $1,700.00 BiGHA dollars to invest.

skip

 

[Edward Dolan]

"skip" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:YN2dnYGlnI9IE1XdRVn-
> [email protected]...
> >
> > 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.
> >
> If Slugger is over six feet tall I would suggest he check
> out the RANS V2 which is much like the Tailwind with a 26"
> rear wheel and a bit more
length
> to it. New V2's are less than $1,300.00 (a real bargain I
> think) which would leave Slugger with $1,700.00 BiGHA
> dollars to invest.
>
> skip

I agree with you about the V2 which I also have in my
stable. However, the V2 is a much larger bike than the
Tailwind and I suspect RANS wants to keep the Tailwind a
medium sized bike, somewhere in between a SWB and a LWB. If
they made it in a larger size it would began to approach the
size of a V2.

My only complaint about the Tailwind and the V2 is all the
tiller you have to put up with because of the configuration
of the handlebars (I have the old style, original
handlebars). On the other hand, I do not like to reach for
the handlebars either which I understand would cut down on
the tiller. Tiller goes away at fast speeds, but at the
speeds I travel (slow) it can sometimes be annoying.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Mark Leuck]

"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?

>
> Speaking of meaningless, yesterday you wrote: "While I'm
> not wealthy I could indeed buy one. While price IS a
> factor it is just one of many otherwise we'd all be riding
> the cheapest bike available."
>
> You never answered if you have ordered it yet.

Why would you think I'd order one?

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I'm just curious about why people are so supportive and
> defensive about a bike that they themselves would never
> buy. And why won't they buy it?

I'm not pro or anti BigHa or the way the bike is being
marketed, I just refuse to pass judgement on a bike unless
I've ridden it. I've never been on many of the bikes people
talk about here but I don't /won't say bad things about it
unless I've been on the thing

> For the obvious reasons that it is way too expensive for a
> heavy bike,

How expensive should a heavy bike be?

> way too heavy for an expensive bike or it comes from a
> bunch of people who already have a bad reputation in the
> recumbent community.

How heavy should an expensive bike be?

Take your
> pick. So why are you so defensive of this overpriced bike?
> Why do you want other people to spend a lot of money on
> something you would not?

I suspect it only appears we are being defensive because you
are so offensive about the company itself and not the bike.

 

[Hashim El Amin]

> Sure, that's why Consumer Reports only pays full retail
> for the products they review. Anyone who's livelihood
> depends on free review products, whether on loan or
> otherwise, has to be very careful not to be too critical
> or he won't get any more free review products. I'll ask
> again: Of those six reviews, how many of the reviewers
> liked it so well that they were willing to pay $3000 of
> their own money for it? No one? Gee, what a surprise!
>
> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>
> "You can fool half of the people all of the time and
> that's enough to make a good living."
> W.C. Fields

If I worked for Consumer Reports and reviewed a Bigha, the
bike wouldn't have been paid for with MY money! My employer
bought it and therefore I would be unable to legitimately
guage any value to it with respect to its price. What's
more, I'd be getting paid to ride it, since Consumer Reports
pays me to right these reviews. So what would I have to be
unhappy about?

 

[Mark Leuck]

"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

 

[Edward Dolan]

"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?

Ms. 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.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Larry Varney]

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 have never referred to what are the "most
important considerations", just that weight and price
are not the ONLY considerations. 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 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.

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

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Hashim El Amin wrote:
>>Sure, that's why Consumer Reports only pays full retail
>>for the products they review. Anyone who's livelihood
>>depends on free review products, whether on loan or
>>otherwise, has to be very careful not to be too critical
>>or he won't get any more free review products. I'll ask
>>again: Of those six reviews, how many of the reviewers
>>liked it so well that they were willing to pay $3000 of
>>their own money for it? No one? Gee, what a surprise!
>>
>>Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>
>>"You can fool half of the people all of the time and
>>that's enough to make a good living."
>>W.C. Fields
>
>
> If I worked for Consumer Reports and reviewed a Bigha, the
> bike wouldn't have been paid for with MY money! My
> employer bought it and therefore I would be unable to
> legitimately guage any value to it with respect to its
> price. What's more, I'd be getting paid to ride it, since
> Consumer Reports pays me to right these reviews. So what
> would I have to be unhappy about?

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?

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

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

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.

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

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Edward Dolan]

"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.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Mark Leuck wrote:
> "Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>I'm just curious about why people are so supportive and
>>defensive about a bike that they themselves would never
>>buy. And why won't they buy it?
>
>
> I'm not pro or anti BigHa or the way the bike is being
> marketed, I just refuse to pass judgement on a bike unless
> I've ridden it. I've never been on many of the bikes
> people talk about here but I don't /won't say bad things
> about it unless I've been on the thing
>
>
>>For the obvious reasons that it is way too expensive for a
>>heavy bike,
>
>
> How expensive should a heavy bike be?
>
>
>>way too heavy for an expensive bike or it comes from a
>>bunch of people who already have a bad reputation in the
>>recumbent community.
>
>
> How heavy should an expensive bike be?
>
> Take your
>
>>pick. So why are you so defensive of this overpriced bike?
>>Why do you want other people to spend a lot of money on
>>something you would not?
>
>
> 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?

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

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

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?

>
>
>>Speaking of meaningless, yesterday you wrote: "While I'm
>>not wealthy I could indeed buy one. While price IS a
>>factor it is just one of many otherwise we'd all be riding
>>the cheapest bike available."
>>
>>You never answered if you have ordered it yet.
>
>
> 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. 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.

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

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:
> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>
>> Larry Varney wrote:
>>
>>> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mark Leuck wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> I can think of a few hundred reviews of recumbents
>>>>> where they didn't buy or say they would buy the bike
>>>>> they were reviewing. Your statement is meaningless
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of meaningless, yesterday you wrote: "While
>>>> I'm not wealthy I could indeed buy one. While price IS
>>>> a factor it is just one of many otherwise we'd all be
>>>> riding the cheapest bike available."
>>>>
>>>> You never answered if you have ordered it yet.
>>>>
>>>> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>>>
>>>
>>> Didn't you understand what he wrote? It seems pretty
>>> simple. He says that he isn't wealthy, but he could
>>> afford a BigHA. He says that price is a factor, but
>>> there are many others. He contends that if it were the
>>> only factor, then we'd all be riding the cheapest
>>> bikes available. 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. And you keep demanding of everyone
>>> that either they join you on your jihad against BigHA,
>>> or explain why they haven't purchased the bike. So,
>>> fair's fair, I guess: What bikes did you order
>>> yesterday? What bikes did you not order? And why not?
>>> We'll be waiting for your answers, and the reasons
>>> behind those answers.
>>>
>>
>> I'm just curious about why people are so supportive and
>> defensive about a bike that they themselves would never
>> buy. And why won't they buy it? For the obvious reasons
>> that it is way too expensive for a heavy bike, way too
>> heavy for an expensive bike or it comes from a bunch of
>> people who already have a bad reputation in the recumbent
>> community. Take your pick. So why are you so defensive of
>> this overpriced bike? Why do you want other people to
>> spend a lot of money on something you would not?
>>
>> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>
>
> I noticed you failed to answer the questions I asked.
> Why didn't you? I guess not! That tells me a lot! And
> there you go again, reducing a complex buying decision
> to just two criteria: weight and price. If it were just
> a brick, and you had a choice between it and another,
> identical brick that weighed the same but was cheaper,
> then your reasoning would be sound. Think about it. And
> I'm glad to see that you're back to accusing me of being
> "defensive" over this particular bike. Obviously, I'm
> not. I would be saying the same thing about any other
> bike or trike - there are more criteria involved than
> just weight and price. Such as, the criteria *you* used
> when deciding not to buy all of those bikes and trikes
> yesterday. Right? I thought so! And as for my wanting
> other people to send their money on something I wouldn't
> buy? Where did you pull that out of? Have I ever, EVER,
> here or anywhere else, recommended that anyone, ANYONE
> buy a BiGHA? No. So tuck that weird accusation back
> where it came from. And while you're cleaning up
> afterwards, perhaps you can answer my questions. What
> bikes did you not buy yesterday, and why not?
>
>

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 http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[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

 

[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

 

[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