A collection of bike mechanics, bike co-ops, and various nonprofit advocacy groups has started a campaign for more durable and repairable bikes.
The petition asks that the industry stop producing and selling bikes that won't last and can't be repaired: "These products are harmful to the environment, erode public confidence in the usefulness and joy of bicycles, and waste the money of the mostly poor and working-class people who buy them," it reads.
The differences are stark between the bikes made to last and those that aren't. Bikes that don't have long-term futures sometimes have design choices that prevent repairs such as riveted-on chainrings. One of the petition's early supporters, Mac Liman of Denver's Bike Together nonprofit shop and advocacy program, told
Bicycle Retailer and Industry News that over time, she's started to see more and more bikes with threads that strip immediately and frames that fall apart at the welds. She also said one of the first things she teaches new mechanics is how to spot the bikes that can't be fixed - criteria that is outlined in a
blog post about the issue.
The petitioners describe the practice of selling such bikes as predatory. All bikes sold are made to appear as if they'll be reliable, the petition explains, but the appearance of quality is deceptive, and nonprofit mechanics - particularly those who work at community bike shops designed to improve access to biking - are tired of telling their customers that their bikes are made too poorly to fix.
"Frankly, you should be ashamed of selling bikes to your customers that last 90 some riding hours," it continues.
The campaign was born from a discussion at last fall's Bike!Bike!, an annual conference for community shops, organizers, and advocates.
The petition's requests are as follows:
- Set a minimum durability standard for bicycles to last at least 500 riding hours before breaking down
- Design bikes to be serviceable and hold adjustment, with replaceable and upgradable components
- Stop creating and selling bikes that are made to fall apart
The petition is available
here.
Agreed. Cheap bikes can be really difficult to get working even ok-ish.
At my shop, I take department store bikes and remove all of the usable parts which can include wheels, pedals and some other useful parts. I use those parts to keep other basic children bikes rolling safely. I separate the rubber, steel and aluminum for recycling at our regional metal center. I keep a revolving library of quality children’s bikes that I give to any child that needs a big smile. I ask that they bring them back to me as they grow out of them and have been able to give some bicycles to three or more children over the years. After building a reputation for doing this, I find donated bicycles in my home driveway and at my shop on a regular basis so that I can continue the process. After a few years, I have noticed that in our small town, the community has begun to recognize the department store bikes as the junk that they are. I believe that I have changed the buying habits of our community so that we see fewer of the low quality and unsafe “bicycle shaped objects” being purchased or used.
Petitioning bike manufacturers to change their product is like asking a crack attic to stop smoking crack. It’s unrealistic to think that if somebody is making money selling junk the people are actually buying it that’s called economics 101. By demanding or asking them to change their products to make them betterThat the manufacture will actually do that.As far as the manufacture is concerned if they have to charge more than they’re not going to sell anymore and their profit will be lower so they’re just gonna thumb nose at the whole idea.
“Too posh for a crack den? Try out our executive crack attic!”
Buy once, Cry once
Good shit aint cheap and cheap shit aint good.
Can someone explain "Buy once, cry once"? What if you choose quality with the first purchase, why would you cry?
Speak with your wallet
my 4.5k ebike (dont hate, haven't the time to listen):
-motor died within 6 months
-rear hub bearings exploded within 6 months
-front brake seized due to overheat
-rear brake has now seized also due to overheat
-discs warped
-drivetrain is all bargain barrel sram NX
-dropper is budget model, supplied underpressurised by manufacturer, no word from bike shop to re-pressurise on delivery
-fork arrived with no air in order to fit into box, no mention of this from bike shop, or pump supplied- luckily I had one
-charging port and lock cover both rubber parts which fit loosely and fall out
-headset bearings supplied ungreased, rusted through within months
I repeat...this is a £4.5k bike!!
Motor was replaced on warranty from bosch.
everything else was described as 'wear and tear' and as such I had to pay to fix myself
It's a joke.
As a former mechanic, I can also say that those bikes are straight hell to work on. Those bikes aren’t just a liability for consumers, but their poor materials make them a hazard to work on, as there’s a decent chance of catching a bur in your hand from the “quality” componentry on them
The reason for the subsidies in the auto (and aero, etc) industries is because of the domestic jobs those industries create, which drive economic growth. It won’t be until more manufacturing is evaluated for being on-shored that productive conversation can begin with governments to enact new subsidies. So thinking Chicken or the Egg, if market demand shifts to on-shore products, then manufacturers will notice and act - and a certain potential jobs volume threshold can be met to incentivize meaningful subsidy conversations.
So it all starts with YOU - and your buying decisions.
Especially with bike shortages now, I am regularly seeing bikes come into our shop and the customer excitedly says “I just got this for (insert price between $100-400)” and I just want to get it ‘tuned up’.” I am regularly telling people either it cannot be made any better that it is because of all things mentioned in the article but it is technically “safe” to ride OR it will cost $100-400 to fix it but it will still only be worth $40 or scrap metal, it won’t be tunable or serviceable in the future and it will only perform marginally well at its best.
Basically In the used low end market, you have either a seller who knows that they have shit and are taking ignorant buyers for a ride OR you have ignorant sellers and ignorant buyers. Either way, the person holding the cheap bike loses. One of the worst places to get a bike… Play It Again
The bike shop in my neighborood doubled it's staff six months ago and now everyone's laid off already, bikes are piling up, they're waiting for the parts.
When supplier countries are willing to throw away hundreds of thousands of bikes before ever using them, this petition doesn’t seem to be going anywhere.
What a joke. Lasted almost no time and sounded horrific. Went back to steel and haven't had to change it out yet.
Completely agree
Lots of goobers out their need to take a basic maintenance class and give the mechanics a break from your neglect!!
From what I understand, the newer Deore Linkglide stuff is heavier and made to last. That said, Deore is already proper mountainbikestuff and is probably not spec'd on the bikes in the article. Let alone Linkglide.
I often use that kind of budget Shimano products in my workshop (as well as Sunrace components) and without being extraordinary, they do the job and last between 6 months and 2 years depending on different factors (kilometers, maintenance, manner of riding/pedaling).
Sis is terrible, but tourney is fine.
I rode my 3x8 to the ground. Lasted almost 3000km.
The problem is that most people who buy bicycles in the low price range can't even do the most basic things themselves like changing a tube, or even pump up their tires.
And big stores, or online shops that sell those bikes often do a terrible job of adjusting the components, or tourqing everything to spec.
Oh, the $150 full suspension bike you got at Walmart wasn't durable? No shit. And you want bikes to have to pass durability certification? So basically, you want to add in an additional cost to produce a bike that will make the bike more expensive? Perfect - because bikes are so cheap now.
This petition is basically just people at bike shops saying they don't want to work on department store bikes. Which is totally understandable, and it's easily fixed without a petition. All they have to do is, when someone brings in a department store bike for repairs, say "no."
Oh and I recently had to spend $80 on a friends junker bike that had Hayes sole brakes. Yes they suck but it’s easy to get them to play well enough for family leisure riding. Nothing was wrong with them either, except the rubber plugs that seal the hydraulic system broke and I could not for the life of me find a replacement. In the end I got new units for both ends.
I mean I’ll sign a petition and I couldn’t agree more. I’ve tried to work on these single use bikes myself back in my bike shop days and for neighborhood kids. It’s basically impossible. Might as well try to ban selling all the cheap one use crap in the world. How about we start with single use plastic water bottles and work our way up from there.
The bikes they're talking about here are pieces of junk bought from a department store by brands you've never heard of with Mike Bear tires.
Cheap and durable--cranksets with riveted steel rings already exist. And they last miles and miles, typically.
Cheap and serviceable--machining parts with precision to accept threaded bolts costs more, even if nominally so. Hard to meet the 'cheap' criteria in that case, though the definition of cheap is subjective. For example, pre-covid Kona had the Dew, a disc-brake urban bike with fender/rack mounts suited for commuting, gravel, and recreation paths. 3x8 Shimano Altus/Tourney, Formula standard hub sizing, non-threaded steerer, etc all for $599. How is that not a super capable, reliable bike all for just 600 dollars??
Is the argument being made that a $250 department store junker should deliver the perks and quality of it's $600 counterpart? If that's the case, I've said awesome, be my guest, bring that bike to market--we would all love to see it and purchase that bike, absolutely. Absent that product being available at that price point, I think it is on the consumer to educate themselves/retailers to sell the value of what the $600 bike offers.
This isn't me carrying water for Shimano or Sram, but their lower-end stuff is super decent once you get out of most department stores, and at what amounts to really fair prices absent covid retail reality.
As to your second point--who are you/me to tell a company (the one who has assumed all that initial risk in the first place and against statistical odds has succeeded) to tell them how they should run their business or what they should offer? 'You offer 8 shifters, you should just focus on making 3, the way *I* want, instead'. Right. Let's forget all about human psychology and marketing then I suppose. "Unnecessary increased complexities veiled as offering more options to the consumer." Yes, I agree with you here. But again, about that human psychology though...we're manipulated to want the 'next step up', the new shiny thing, what have you. It says "Shimano" in huge 1-inch letters on the chainstay of the Walmart bike, so it must be good, right? It's almost like making educated purchases would lead to improved outcomes... like I suggested above.
Assuming no market monopolies are present (those should absolutely be broken up), what is an individual to do? Write a strongly worded letter? Ok then, best of luck! In a market economy you can vote with your wallet and not purchase those goods or services. OR, you can produce a superior product and compete for market share. And that still works here, because Shimano is not Amazon or Microsoft... perfect example, Box components. They make GREAT stuff, and were doing quite well in the space, pre-covid. So yeah, actually they did "go ahead and spec out a shop to create some inexpensive parts made out of good materials...", and I'm sure that takes a lot of planning and dedication and assumed risk. Or, ya know, write a letter because then at least a person will *feel* good like they're doing something, I guess. (Insert Ralph Wiggum "I'm helping" meme here.)
Box makes ehh stuff but they still have at least 3 tiers of product and they're no more quality than offerings from S companies. Microshift does better and somehow they make a $13 derailleur that works. Sure, that's in the right direction but we're still working with tiers of product. Make one version, make it well, and you'll have a winner with less necessary tooling. You can bet that the margins are better on top spec parts though, so the system lives on. Big manufacturers have the money and influence to make one good product viable and less expensive. Small companies don't have as much leverage and it might be impossible.
But the main thing is that it truly is about what I—the consumer, in a market that only exists because people buy these products—want. I think if you were able to poll every bicycle buying person and ask them whether they want a crap bike that doesn't work and wears out immediately or a decent bike that costs a little more and lasts, they'd pick the latter knowing the consequences.
The problem is that the companies market to what makes them money, not what we actually want. At the extreme, selling someone who wants a good bike a junk K-mart bike isn't what they want, they just don't know and the options haven't been presented. We do vote with our wallets, but some people know nothing about the candidates and companies take advantage of that.
Even so, my argument is that a big company could bring prices down and quality up for the majority of people buying bikes, and it would still be profitable. But no! There are politics, there are logistical changes (which aren't easy), and there are people in power who think the system we work in benefits most people because it worked for them. It's a bigger issue than bikes, but you could do it and more people would be happy. Frig—you could still have top tier flashy electronic stuff for an absurd price. But it's really not about making the best product. It's about making products that make money.
Whatever. Thanks for reading my rant. Send me $2 million and I'll make it happen by next year. Actually, give me publicly funded healthcare first.
That is what happens when companies make what they want or told to make and not what the consumer wants. Your logic of " companies market to what makes them money, not what we actually want" isn't entirely correct and historically inaccurate. Companies will try to anticipate what consumers will want and market to that but if they miss, they go out of business or take a huge hit financially, All the talk on this forum and fireside chats at every bike event about if I designed a bike is much akin to Homer Simpson designing a car
www.wired.com/2014/07/homer-simpson-car
The other FACT of bike parts today is they are infinitely better then they were 35 years ago when I started riding mountain bikes, even the cheapest trash bike these days have better shifting and brakes than 99% of bikes from 1990! there is no denying that.
Companies are making what people want in the price points they can afford, I totally agree that Big Box stores selling bikes isn't great for our industry and to get people to look at bicycles as real vehicles and not toys. Could those bikes be better, absolutely but will people who shop for bikes at Walmart pay more than $200 for a bike, most likely not. So Walmart is filling a void.
Honestly the best thing our industry can do is stop being such snobbish dicks when a new person comes into your store. Maybe if you explain why buying a better bike at a higher price point will benefit that consumer you will be surprised with the sale. Too many bike shops, and I have been in and sold to hundreds of them! have a very elitist attitude and that telegraphs so poorly to consumers.
On a side note, nothing stops you from raising 2 Million these days, like crowdsourcing, make it happen! only you can improve your life, government surely can't. And you know the old saying is, if you want to make a million in the bike industry start with 2 million!! ha
Just asking for a different emphasis. Quality rather than quantity and profit. Priorities. Let me know when the big corporations get rid of poverty btw.
Before responding any further I want to be clear that I largely agree with your stance here. In an era where it's so often profits-before-people, it seems like it would be a homerun if a company just stepped up and made great stuff at a modest price, their profit margins be damned. I remember rumors that at one point in the past Transition would order a given number of bikes a year to cover their costs, and once they sold out they just cut their office hours in half and hit the trails more. That sounds rad! To the best of my knowledge they don't operate like that these days, but I would be curious what the motivation to change is--is it greed? Or is it that they have to grow to remain competitive in an ever evolving industry? Knowing that they want to be able to actually retire someday? I really would like to know. Could a non-profit (501x) bike company be feasible?
In terms of bikes, I still stand by my previous views--a disc-brake Kona Dew that was going for $600 seemed like a really fair, decent deal. In the shop our cost was like $469? That's a whole-ass, working, dependable bike for not a lot of profit for either the shop or Kona. Off the top of my head Trek had something similar at that time. I imagine quite a few companies did. 'Economies of scale' might be the answer.. On the other hand, the comments section wasn't exactly jumping for joy when Pon Holdings bought Dorel Sports, yeah?
The fact that people buy what is essentially junk at $250 from the department stores is on them unfortunately. You don't know what you don't know, and if you don't spend the time to increase your knowledge on a given topic, well... "a fool and his money are soon parted" as the saying goes. As for publicly funded healthcare in the US, shall we start a pool--US healthcare, or you and I ride mountain bikes on Mars, which happens first?
Oh and cut it out with the carbon balance bikes.
@mikealive
@VicSandrin
You three:
Well done with having a discussion on the internet that contains differing opinions without resorting to attacking each other, dead serious. Nice to see this kind of thing when people so often get so aggressive behind their keyboards.
(I am a hobby mechanic and often work on friends bikes)
I'm a bit shocked reading this if I'm honest as anything I've used (frame and components) have been rock solid and would have said the quality of parts I've used are incredible for the abuse they go to with the UK winters especially (fingers crossed it stays that way).
So just curious to hear others experiences?
The Scott gambler in the photo threw me off a bit.
It's tough because they're basically asking brands to stop selling awful chinese bikes that ultimately companies are thriving off of because they fly off the shelves at 200 dollars or 400 dollars and the margins are probably decent considering... The labor they are using.
I think the important concept they are pushing isn't NECESSARILY stop making awful bikes in china. It's more so that we need a lower limit on what cost cutting measures you can take. The chintzy 3x drivetrains with riveted rings? Get rid of them. Make bikes single speed or a low range 1x that actually functions and can be repaired without a larger investment.
And the full suspension bikes around 500 USD definitely needs to stop. Those frames are NOT made for the tolerances of a linkage with a shock that isn't supporting itself with any progressive curve at all. It's just slamming into itself every time and the welds near that linkage are gonna give every time.
Basically, stop trying to make daily driver bikes "mountain bikes". MTBers know to just run a single speed hardtail for going around the city or just starting out on flat 'trails'. I'm sure there is also a lot of arguments similar to this for cheap road bikes and e-bikes and everything else.
The only bike that you can actually get good and proper around 500 is a BMX bike and a single speed/fixed gear bike. With only slight compromises, that most won't notice. Those are fine and tremendous for entry level riders.
I have a Giant Sedona that I use for running errands or if I know I'm locking up outside and can't use my MTB... They put this stupid coil fork on it that does nothing but add weight. As well as a 'suspension seat post' that simply doesn't work. I'd have much preferred a rigid seat post with less things to go wrong and a rigid fork that was lighter and more predictable. Thankfully its 2x and not 3x. I think 3x needs to go but companies want to use the worst cassettes possible so riveted 3x rings make the range work. But 2x with lower range is still plenty fine for most riders.
My son has a newer 20” Trek mtb that we bought off Craigslist. It has a nice frame and replaceable components. However, it came with a “suspension” fork which I’m sure made it more expensive. It has no rebound and weighs a metric ton. I would much prefer just a regular rigid fork but it appears nobody makes a replacement fork.
This is a very serious issue that is only going to get worse.
Cheap bikes often allow less affluent people to get into cycling but when basic stem bolts snap it’s just dangerous, years ago I worked in a UK bike store a major brand was selling kids bikes where instead of hub bearings it had axles that rotated on a washers what kind of evil person designs & approves that?
We all have had the people that say how much? I could buy a cheap car or Moto for that !
To which you say yes but it wouldn’t be a good one.
Mechanics can upgrade bolts etc but wierd non standard axles etc will kill a repair & the chance to encourage a person to upgrade down the track.
A certain “high end” S manufacturer makes components that have a very light action but explode derailers too quickly.
So yes it’s not just the cheap stuff.
Car companies don't make cars that will need thousands in repairs a few years later, but somehow this is an acceptable practice for bikes? Further proof that the profit goals of large bike companies don't reflect the needs of the average consumer.
It's unreasonable to expect shops to adjust service charges based on the serviceability of the bike, especially when the cheap stuff ends up taking longer
It goes on and on. Overall, bikes are probably higher quality than cars.
BMW has entered the chat...
Shaming companies in front of consumers will do nothing because it’s what we’re already doing. Instead we need to identify and promote real alternatives in the price range people are willing to pay. If that means telling everyone with $150 that a beach cruiser is their only good option then so be it - because they would in fact be better off than most bikes at that price.
I don’t know what the answer is-it’s likely higher cost, more weight or both.
Unfortunately bikes built to last wouldn’t sell as well. Gumby’s would be upset to have to ride a bike a couple of pounds heavier to the coffee shop once a week.
For consumers just looking for cheap, reliable transportation-good luck. Folks who buy a $250 WalMart bike both don’t know better and may not be able to buy a $600 bike. I don’t see a good answer here.
But it’s still a several hundred dollar bike.
Shock manufacturers: Don't make parts that blow up after 40 hours of riding and require a $150+ service.
Frame manufacturers: Don't make frames that blow up shocks after 40 hours of riding.
Bearing manufacturers: Don't make bearings that turn to dust immediately.
My point here is simply that there are some very expensive things that instantly need service. Yes, everything will break eventually but we're not trying to avoid that yet.
It's just that we need to get a baseline (how about standardized?) going so that people aren't tricked into buying stuff that doesn't or can't work well to begin with.
Im calling out E13 here. I bought a bike decked out with their stuff and in two years have had to replace every part. The carbon cranks failed (not replaced under warranty), the chain guide broke (twice), the cassettes are made of cheese and are eye wateringly expensive and the rear hub has had the internals replaced 4 times because the pre-load wont stay tight for more than half a ride...to the point that Im getting the wheels rebuilt on new hubs because its wrecking the frame. Its a single example of a high end manufacturer providing a shoddy offering.
Ill offer another. I have a Shimano Alivio rear mech on a 27 year old bike, has never needed any maintenance. I bought an XTR mech two years ago and have had to replace it already because the part that has prematurely worn isnt replaceable. Again no warranty.
We should also ask why some manufacturers can build bikes with frame pivots, bushings and bearings that last years and some frames need them replacing every year?
And we need to get away from cheap is crap and understand that expensive can be crap too. Deore is cheap and it is hands down more robust than its more expensive cousins.
We need to get to to the point where everything is repairable.... but we cannot count on the bike industry because it relies on redundancy to make profit. We need to see regulation.
Anyway, good luck with that. Maybe it'll have a knock-on effect or it won't.
The rest of the problems mentioned are just a matter of finances. The cheapest bike we produced was for 150 euro in retail price total. Its not for me, its not probably for you too, but its for a people in eastern countries, villages, where the monthly income is in between 200-300 euro and they need to buy something on which they can go to work. Yes, you can put Shimano Deore/Alivio instead of Altus/Acera, aluminium instead of steel components, but then the price of the bike wont be 150 euro but 200+ euro. For those people its easier to buy a new crankset and derailleur for 10 euro each every 2-5 years and the bike will be rideable again yet for "us" this bike will probably be dangerous to even sit on.
If you petition for a minimum durability standard, please also include a maximum price for such standard as well. Unfortunately, without a maximum price standard, the petition is just saying "If you can't afford a good bike, don't ride a bicycle."
Without the maximum price standard, this petition seeks to price the majority of the bicycle-buying public out of the market.
I believe there is a time and place for a cheap $250 department store bicycle. Have you seen what a 14 year old boy will do to a bike these days? Whether it's $250 or $1,000, they will trash the thing because they won't take care of it. So the $1,000 bike will need $500 in parts in a year. And the $250 bike is disposable. The parents are out $1,500 in one scenario and $500 in the other (2 x $250 bikes).
Cycling is one of the most important aspects of my life and has been since I was in middle school and I still have literally never spent over 1.6k on a bike. Like many of us, I started working at bike shops in order to be able to support this expensive passion.
on the other hand.. there are too many poor countries in the world unfortunately, and probably many of those cheap bikes find their customer, who is very happy to own them..
i fix what i call quality bike ( the alu and v brakes with a shimano 24 gears is a minimum ) under that ? , there is a chance my tools won t like it and if my hand slip on a cheap bolt, i will create new words heavier that those monstrosity.
I did recommend few Halfords bikes to some of my clients, they are still riding them with a minimum of maintenance and help them to upgrade when it was time to invest in a better and well deserved bike, for the records I did own 11 specialized Hardrock...cheap fork, parts, but, i made many kms Daily with the right tyres, pedals and cockpit little change,
But Agreed on those P.O.S. they are death trap too .
Entry level equipment needs longer maintenance intervals.... A ferrari might need new shocks every 10k km, but I damn well hope by commuter wouldnt.
20 year old trek road bike commuter, dura ace full spec, in its lifetime only replaced the chain once and pads.
1 year old carbon mid/high end enduro bike: DT Swiss always out of true, already one chain (came with SX chain on GX drivetrain), dropper lever had to get replaced on day one, fork needs servicing even though I’ve ridden it less than 100km (Lyrik Select+), wheels come out of true every second ride (Dt Swiss)
Brand New Aggressive Hardtail Mid Spec: wheel out of true, only 4 rides and trued after first ride, rear rotor already died
Dirt Jumper: Marz DJ3 died after one ride, no warranty replacement, aside from that bombproof
Mid spec down country, owned since 2019: Few chains, few chainrings, Fork serviced a few times, truing wheels very rarely, a lot of rotors and pads
Commuter to go through sketchy areas: everything had to be replaced at some point aside from the frame
I agree 100% that the practice of selling these cobbled together piles of trash to unsuspecting customers is predatory and needs to stop.
Also, on the same page but slightly less of an outrage- Size XL "Upper Entry Level" hardtails coming with wet noodle forks that would hardly be suitable for a 120lb youth rider. If the rider needs an XL, I promise they also need a stronger fork.
Bike Shaped Objects are one of the reasons moew people dont cycle. They spend 100 - 200 hrs on a dogsh*t supermarket bike and conclude that cycling is no fun at all, its hard work and dangerous.
BSOs repel people from cycling!
Take these people and put them on a resonable, not flash just well designed and well built bike and its like some miraculous realisation
OH wow, your/this bike is SO nice to ride, its SO easy.
No, friend, Your supermarket BSO is a bag of shit and should be legislated against.
Geometry costs nothing to get right, FFS!
No, because you can't.
---------------------------------
Industry standard moving forward should be that all bikes, okay racing bikes elite bikes exempt, bikes for kids, road, mountain all new bicycles sold need to have built in lights, front white and rear red. Bikes are for transportation and should not be sold without lights.
-------------------------------
*can be built into the bike frame, not adapted to a bike frame making them more theft resistant (and perhaps less desirable as at least some would be shaped for individual brands)
*lower cost for industry to buy them have them made en masse.
*can be made for dynamo power more easily if made by manufacturer not as an after market.
*improve safety, reduce crashes
Many people bike around without lights on, such as in cold months when it gets dark earlier people are surprised by early sunset and 'forget' lights. or had them stolen. or the mount broke. or the battery is dead.
*for current bikes, someone buying new could bring in their lights to show proof during the sale, as a way to transition into manufacturers taking this on.
---yes of course battery pack is rechargeable via mini USB
My only real concern is the fork options available for 800-1200 LBS level hardtails. Suntour has to be able to put a decent bushing in for $5 more per fork that won’t feel like the headset is missing bearings.
Sincerely,
Middle Class MTBers who have been exploited by Corporate profit models, Covid supply chain conundrums, and excessive money printing.
I use wax on my chains, spend 8 (minimum) hours a week riding off road and put a lot of torque through my drivetrains. I haven’t had to replace cassettes due to wear in a very long time. Touchwood.
It would be also nice to realize that we are somehow used to (not really I know) bikes pricing. Everyday regular normal guy whould think your 10 000 USD rig is a F1 or Nasa grade, while you know you could spend twice more on a bike.
1. Is there any way to vote against the petition? Simply saying - to downvote it.
2. Is there any petition to make all bikeshops fire all those incompetent mechanics who can only swap components and who actualy are useless when it comes to actualy FIX something?
Thank you.
A petition is only as good as the attention it gets and waves it makes. Not necessarily the 'legitimacy' it requires... Such as asking for where I literally live. I don't wish to give ANYONE that information... Let alone some random group trying to make bicycles better. What does that have to do with my house m8
Reading comprehension: F
I understand why they need the info, but nowhere on the website do they state how it will be used. It doesnt even say that they wont use it for any purposes other than this petition. They could be doing anything with it.
Petition all you want, but you cannot simply bi4ch your way for free stuff (more quality for less) unless you're living on recruit difficulty.
^ bomber bike!
But it would suck to ride
What about forks which are supposed to be serviced every 50 hours?
Fastest local guy where I live is 130 lbs soaking wet and breaks frames, blows out rear shocks etc. because he rides 15-20k miles a year and puts out over 5w/kg sustained.
If you think a clean, well maintained bike will last forever, ride more and get those watts up!!
Please PB, enough with the cross posting of Outside+ content that was written for, and already posted on, Bicycle Retailer, Cycling tips, or LinkedIn ffs, in place of actual mtb content that I come to PB for. I can go read BRAIN or cycling tips on my own, thank you very much.
1- A bike that costs £150 and lasts 3 months and then has to be thrown away and replaced completely
2- A bike that costs £300 and lasts 5 years with £50-100 spent each year to keep it running nicely
Option one, total cost over 5 years - £3000
Option two, total cost over 5 years - £550-800
The cheaper initial outlay option is appealing to those who don't know bikes because the £150 bike is sold as a bike the same as the £300 option.
It’s apparent you know not how poor people live, the choices they face nor the decisions they have to make on a daily basis. When you only have $100 left to find transportation until next paycheck, The luxury of weighing your options is what they look forward to once getting past the poverty line. That extra money goes to feeding the family or paying bills, not buying a better bike, that just not on the radar. and some people want to eliminate that option for them? But you wouldn’t know that because you’re on a MTB forum debating whether affordable product should be thing. I’ve been poor and grew up on cheap bikes because that’s what I was able to afford as a kid who had to work just to be able to buy myself clothes for school and transportation to get to school.
2- You are also on a forum debating whether affordable product should be a thing.
Nobody is arguing against affordable products. What we are arguing against is predatory practises of producing shit that is not fit for purpose and selling it to people who think they have no other choice.
Those of us who know bikes know that if you have $100 to spend on a bike a second hand machine will be 50 times better than a brand new bike at that price point if the $100 second hand bike was an ok machine when it was new. The people these makers of bike shaped objects target for their scam don't know that.
Buying the cheapest bike brand new because it is all you can afford is currently significantly worse financially long term than buying second hand. If making and selling shit bikes that can't even last 3 months of commuting wasn't a thing then the option of buying a used bike would not only still be there but it would be far better as all the second hand bikes available would be repairable, decent machines.
I wouldn't argue that everybody in this forum is at a point of higher privilege than those who are not on this site, so those voices are never heard. I would love to see you try and make your point in South central L.A to the people who are actually riding the shitty bikes that take them from A to B, whether they are collecting cans or working at McDonald's. Those peoples minds do not go the some direction as those of us who live and breath bikes as leisure. they will never see bikes the way we do. To them it is not about buying power or longevity of they're bikes. they just want to survive, and a bike, shitty or not, makes things much easier for them to do that.
I'm sorry but this petition should be taken down immediately and re-worked. I was fully intending on signing a petition and supporting this ideology... But what the f*ck does this have to do with my personal information that is REQUIRED to sign.
These people are compromising their movement in a HUGE way by being so out of touch with reality. I was just going to sign with 123 f*ckyou street and 8675309 but no... They need to look in the mirror and realize how stupid this decision was.
Take it down. Re-do the petition. Take out address and phone number. And probably zip code and city while you're at it. You can have my e-mail (which i know you will send dumb spam messages to but I can block those easy)... And you can have my state/country info.
Other than that, you're morons. Out of touch. And I hope it is just moronic and not intentionally scummy like trying to add people's personal info to mailing/cold call lists for political groups which I HAVE HAD HAPPEN BEFORE. Sadly, I tried to work with a Los Angeles cycling advocacy group and they gave my info to every left wing politician in the state... Blatantly without my knowledge or permission.
So if that's your goal. SOD OFF. But if it was just a narrow minded, short sighted decision fine... Take it down. Re-do it without people's personal info. You donuts...
Also what tangent have you gone off of with the roads I drive? We're literally talking about a petition asking for my home address for some reason... What are you on, m8?
I didn't sign this because I think that demanding durability is an oversimplification of the problem. I'm happy to sign a petition with a goal, scope and outcome that are more realistic and might have a positive impact.
They need to use a recognized petition website (that has systems to combat botting) instead of this google forms nonsense. All you need is an e-mail account that uses a confirmation message. Boom, validated. I'll happily give out my e-mail and click to confirm. But not my phone or where i literally live... (which are required entries for this)
As this is also a deliberate concern!