On cheap bikes...

[Zog The Undeniable]

My sister wanted me to "look at the gear adjustment" on her bike.
Transpires it's a £40 Universal bike acquired by mail order, actually a
present from the in-laws. I then found:

- handlebars had slipped round 90 degrees because stem bolt wasn't
tightened (factory fault)
- rear hub bearing had more slop than school semolina (factory fault)
- tyres lose all their air over a week (factory fault)
- saddle rocked because bolt not tight (factory fault)
- rear brake outer not seated properly in lever rendering brake
inoperative (probably my sister's fault since she put the wheels on when
it arrived)
- indexed gears don't upshift cleanly as freewheel and chainset have no
attempt at ramps or pick-up teeth (cheapskate design fault)
- headset loose (factory fault)
- both brakes off-centre and dragging
- one rear brake show fouling the tyre

I could go on, but you get the idea.

Question: why do people buy bikes for £40? Would they buy a new car for
£1,000 and expect it to be any good?

What kind of monkeys "assemble" these bikes?

How are they allowed to carry a BS6102 sticker (it did)?

On the bright side, it has alloy rims so maybe "widowmaker" chromed
steel rims have finally died. Let's hope so - I had some scary moments
in my youth when it rained.

[Simon Mason]

"Zog The Undeniable" > wrote in message
news:40d5a894.0@entanet...
> My sister wanted me to "look at the gear adjustment" on her bike.
> Transpires it's a £40 Universal bike acquired by mail order, actually a
> present from the in-laws. I then found:


I got one of these years ago in replacement (insurance job) for a bike that
got nicked . It was so bad I gave it away for nothing.

--
Simon Mason
Anlaby
East Yorkshire.
53°44'N 0°26'W
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

[John Hearns]

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:03:20 +0100, Zog The Undeniable wrote:

>
>
> Question: why do people buy bikes for £40? Would they buy a new car for
> £1,000 and expect it to be any good?
>
Hate to say it, especially as I've onwed several cars and expect to own
several more, but there is a whacking great proportion of a car's price
which is advertising.

anyone in this group know what the figure is?

[Tony Raven]

John Hearns wrote:
>>
> Hate to say it, especially as I've onwed several cars and expect to own
> several more, but there is a whacking great proportion of a car's price
> which is advertising.
>
> anyone in this group know what the figure is?

Urban myth. I pulled up the figures for General Motors here a little while
ago in response to that claim. They spend $2.3Bn a year on advertising on
sales of $200Bn so hardly a whacking great proportion.

Tony

[[Not Responding]]

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:25:09 +0100, "Tony Raven"
> wrote:

>John Hearns wrote:
>>>
>> Hate to say it, especially as I've onwed several cars and expect to own
>> several more, but there is a whacking great proportion of a car's price
>> which is advertising.
>>
>> anyone in this group know what the figure is?
>
>Urban myth. I pulled up the figures for General Motors here a little while
>ago in response to that claim. They spend $2.3Bn a year on advertising on
>sales of $200Bn so hardly a whacking great proportion.
>
>Tony
>

You did that in response to my post that something like $4000 (I
forget) is spent on advertising per car (by GM). Figures I pulled from
the Economist.

Don't know what else GM sells as well as cars but would expect most of
the $2.3Bn is on consumer product advertising.

[Tony Raven]

[Not Responding] wrote:
>
> You did that in response to my post that something like $4000 (I
> forget) is spent on advertising per car (by GM). Figures I pulled from
> the Economist.
>
> Don't know what else GM sells as well as cars but would expect most of
> the $2.3Bn is on consumer product advertising.

Well GM sells around 8-9 million cars and trucks so even if all their
advertising spend went on them and none on their financial services,
communications services, Hughes Aircraft Division, Locomotives etc etc that
would amount to about $300 per vehicle. As they do spend on advertising those
other activities one can safely assume that they spend a lot less than $300 a
vehicle and the Economist is wrong.

To get to the Economist figure the entire advertising spend of all GM
divisions would have to be spent on just over half the SUVs they sell and
nothing else.

Tony

[Tony Raven]

[Not Responding] wrote:
>
> You did that in response to my post that something like $4000 (I
> forget) is spent on advertising per car (by GM). Figures I pulled from
> the Economist.
>

Think I've found the source of your figure and its the rebates that are very
popular in the US. Most major makers offer cash back when you buy a new car
at the list price. So its not part of the price you pay but rather the
discount they are giving on new car purchase. The figure for General Motors
is around $4000.

The following from Bloombergs:
"U.S. automakers spent an average $3,710 per car and truck during the first
two weeks of December, according to Bandon, Oregon-based CNW Marketing
Research. General Motors spent $4,319 per vehicle, compared with Toyota spent
$2,726 and Honda $1,322 and Nissan Motor co. $1,588."

Tony

[[Not Responding]]

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:03:39 +0100, "Tony Raven"
> wrote:

>[Not Responding] wrote:
>>
>> You did that in response to my post that something like $4000 (I
>> forget) is spent on advertising per car (by GM). Figures I pulled from
>> the Economist.
>>
>
>Think I've found the source of your figure and its the rebates that are very
>popular in the US. Most major makers offer cash back when you buy a new car
>at the list price. So its not part of the price you pay but rather the
>discount they are giving on new car purchase. The figure for General Motors
>is around $4000.
>
>The following from Bloombergs:
>"U.S. automakers spent an average $3,710 per car and truck during the first
>two weeks of December, according to Bandon, Oregon-based CNW Marketing
>Research. General Motors spent $4,319 per vehicle, compared with Toyota spent
>$2,726 and Honda $1,322 and Nissan Motor co. $1,588."
>
>Tony
>

The word "spent" seems rather odd in that context.

[Martin Wilson]

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:31:45 +0100, "Simon Mason"
> wrote:

>
>"Zog The Undeniable" > wrote in message
>news:40d5a894.0@entanet...
>> My sister wanted me to "look at the gear adjustment" on her bike.
>> Transpires it's a £40 Universal bike acquired by mail order, actually a
>> present from the in-laws. I then found:
>
>
>I got one of these years ago in replacement (insurance job) for a bike that
>got nicked . It was so bad I gave it away for nothing.

Jesus, what insurance company was that? Assuming the bike stolen was
pretty reasonable its pretty awful to get some sterling house type
monstrosity as a replacement.

Mind you I see people riding these cheap taiwanese or chinese
universal type bikes everyday where I live and people seem happy
enough with them. I suspect if it wasn't for the fact that bikes are
stolen so often they might get themselves better bikes but many people
seem resolved now to using cheap bikes to deter thieves. Lets face it
there can't be much of a resell value for a bike costing £40-70 new on
the blackmarket. £10-15 I suspect and a lot more hassle what with
hiding it etc. Vermin like this would be much better off shoplifting
down the local shopping arcade.

[Paul - xxx]

Zog The Undeniable typed:

> - handlebars had slipped round 90 degrees because stem bolt wasn't
> tightened (factory fault)

Why is this a factory fault ? Many bikes come delivered with handlebars
turned round .. even from the best LBS'

> - rear hub bearing had more slop than school semolina (factory fault)

General mechanical overview and adjustment before riding ..

> - tyres lose all their air over a week (factory fault)

Could be .. but could sis have also punctured the wheels when she put them
on ?

> - saddle rocked because bolt not tight (factory fault)

General mechanical overview and adjustment before riding ..

> - rear brake outer not seated properly in lever rendering brake
> inoperative (probably my sister's fault since she put the wheels on when
> it arrived)

General mechanical overview and adjustment before riding ..

> - indexed gears don't upshift cleanly as freewheel and chainset have no
> attempt at ramps or pick-up teeth (cheapskate design fault)

The bike was £40, what do you expect, XTR slickness ?

> - headset loose (factory fault)

General mechanical overview and adjustment before riding ..

> - both brakes off-centre and dragging
> - one rear brake show fouling the tyre

General mechanical overview and adjustment before riding ..

> I could go on, but you get the idea.

The bike's £40, what do you expect ?

> Question: why do people buy bikes for £40?

'cos they're cheap, look flashy and maybe for some people it's all they can
afford and/or they simply don't know any better ...

> Would they buy a new car for
> £1,000 and expect it to be any good?

I dunno, would they ? I bought a car for £230 and it was excellent .. I
also bought a bicycle for £800 that was crap .. the sale price of an item
doesn't always reflect the quality of the components or the whole .. ;)

> What kind of monkeys "assemble" these bikes?

The same as on any other factory assembly line.

> How are they allowed to carry a BS6102 sticker (it did)?

That would depend on what BS6102 tests for or covers. In my experience BS
numbers are more of a paperwork and arse-covering exercise than an actual
aid to quality.

> On the bright side, it has alloy rims so maybe "widowmaker" chromed
> steel rims have finally died. Let's hope so - I had some scary moments
> in my youth when it rained.

Heheheh, I'd agree with that, though have you looked closely at the Teflon
brake blocks .. ;)

--
Paul ...

(8(|) ... Homer Rocks

[Simon Mason]

"Martin Wilson" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:31:45 +0100, "Simon Mason"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Zog The Undeniable" > wrote in message
> >news:40d5a894.0@entanet...
> >> My sister wanted me to "look at the gear adjustment" on her bike.
> >> Transpires it's a £40 Universal bike acquired by mail order, actually a
> >> present from the in-laws. I then found:
> >
> >
> >I got one of these years ago in replacement (insurance job) for a bike
that
> >got nicked . It was so bad I gave it away for nothing.
>
> Jesus, what insurance company was that? Assuming the bike stolen was
> pretty reasonable its pretty awful to get some sterling house type
> monstrosity as a replacement.
>

Lloyds TSB

It was the old "they don't make that model any more, but here's the latest
equivalent" routine.


--
Simon Mason
Anlaby
East Yorkshire.
53°44'N 0°26'W
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

[Martin Wilson]

>> Jesus, what insurance company was that? Assuming the bike stolen was
>> pretty reasonable its pretty awful to get some sterling house type
>> monstrosity as a replacement.
>>
>
> Lloyds TSB
>
>It was the old "they don't make that model any more, but here's the latest
>equivalent" routine.

Well thats me warned off Lloyds TSB insurance for life. Its like
having your car stolen and being given a trabant or having your top
end Sony tv replaced by a low end Beko model.

[Duncan Gray]

My girlfriend bought me one of these as a surprise last Xmas. It was a
surprise, I hadn't been on a bike for years and it was probably 40 years
since I got a new one for Xmas.

Her theory in spending that sort of money is, lets see if he takes to
cycling, if not then it's not too big an outlay.


My experience:

I couldn't produce such a catalogue of faults. The bike is mostly solid, but
you have to do a careful spanner check once you unpack it.

I've had the screw thread strip on the pedal into pedal arm joint, possibly
partly my fault from trying to force the bike into the back of the car. It
was of course the right pedal which went, so a replacement chainset had to
be obtained.

I've also had to replace the front brake arms as the spring in one failed.

Before anyone asks, no I couldn't be bothered trying to get replacements on
warranty, it would have taken too much time and hassle.

My main dislike about the bike is, as Zog mentions, the cheapskate indexed
gears which seem to have a mind of their own. They have the habit of
upshifting of their own accord when I'm working hard on a climb, which can
be more than a little annoying.

Since I was taking the bike for a few days touring Speyside last month, I
took it to get a proper service at my local bike shop. Nice chap, not at all
sniffy about working on the cheapo bike. The result was that the gears were
more stable for a while, though it's getting bad again.

The bike itself stood up to 5 days in Speyside well though, including a
mixture of road and off-road routes. Next time I'm there I'll hire a better
bike locally for a proper thrash throught the forest. I was scared to push
it very hard at all over the rough bits.

Despite having paid more for maintainance in 6 months than the original cost
of the bike, I'm not dissatisfied with it. I accept you get the quality you
pay for. Once I get some money together I'll buy a much better bike. I've
also persuaded myself that the way my bike doesn't freewheel downhill nearly
as fast as everyone elses means I'm getting more exercise for my money.
Would I recommend one to anyone else though? That's a different question.

Anyway, bet you didn't expect anyone here to admit to having one of these
bikes.

--
Duncan Gray

homepage - www.duncolm.co.uk
also www.mountaineering-scotland.org.uk
The Mountaineering Council of Scotland

[Ambrose Nankivell]

In ,
Duncan Gray > typed:
> My main dislike about the bike is, as Zog mentions, the cheapskate
> indexed gears which seem to have a mind of their own. They have the
> habit of upshifting of their own accord when I'm working hard on a
> climb, which can be more than a little annoying.

That's hopefully easily solved. There should be something visible that
tightens the gear shifter (the bit on the handlebars), and that's got loose.
Simply tightening this should stop the upshifting problem.

A

[Zog The Undeniable]

Duncan Gray wrote:

> I couldn't produce such a catalogue of faults. The bike is mostly solid, but
> you have to do a careful spanner check once you unpack it.

Unfortunately my sister and brother in law have few tools and no
mechanical knowledge whatsoever. It's very scary.

[Zog The Undeniable]

Paul - xxx wrote:

> Zog The Undeniable typed:

>>Would they buy a new car for
>>£1,000 and expect it to be any good?
>
>
> I dunno, would they ? I bought a car for £230 and it was excellent .. I
> also bought a bicycle for £800 that was crap .. the sale price of an item
> doesn't always reflect the quality of the components or the whole .. ;)

No, you misunderstand me. Would you buy a NEW (as in unused) car for
£1,000? Of course you wouldn't, it would be a pile of poo. Likewise, a
new bike for 40 quid is bound to be rubbish - an XT rear mech costs more
- but you could pick up a sound, if unfashionable, s/h one for that price.

[Doki]

Martin Wilson wrote:
>>> Jesus, what insurance company was that? Assuming the bike stolen was
>>> pretty reasonable its pretty awful to get some sterling house type
>>> monstrosity as a replacement.
>>>
>>
>> Lloyds TSB
>>
>> It was the old "they don't make that model any more, but here's the
>> latest equivalent" routine.
>
> Well thats me warned off Lloyds TSB insurance for life. Its like
> having your car stolen and being given a trabant or having your top
> end Sony tv replaced by a low end Beko model.

I dunno. Last I heard Sony tellys were being made in Spain and all had
shocking geometry...

[Duncan Gray]

"Ambrose Nankivell" > wrote in message
...
> In ,
> Duncan Gray > typed:
> > My main dislike about the bike is, as Zog mentions, the cheapskate
> > indexed gears which seem to have a mind of their own. They have the
> > habit of upshifting of their own accord when I'm working hard on a
> > climb, which can be more than a little annoying.
>
> That's hopefully easily solved. There should be something visible that
> tightens the gear shifter (the bit on the handlebars), and that's got
loose.
> Simply tightening this should stop the upshifting problem.
>

Oh I've tried. It's not loose, it's as tight as it gets.
I suspect the cable may be a bit too elasticy.