Move to end the BSO.

[nickyboy]

A £99 bike is fine if what you want to do is ride around the park, ride to the local shop, take it to the seaside with the family and ride along the promenade

Most people who by £99 bikes have no desire to do more that this. They serve a purpose and allow people to ride a bike who otherwise probably wouldn't

 

[matticus]

A £99 bike is fine if what you want to do is ride around the park, ride to the local shop, take it to the seaside with the family and ride along the promenade

But it's more likely to break down, ruining that nice family outing.
And may rust to bits before the kids are old enough to not want to ride with their mum any more.

Surely you can see how a better bike makes this stuff better?

 

[Alex321]

But it's more likely to break down, ruining that nice family outing.
And may rust to bits before the kids are old enough to not want to ride with their mum any more.

Surely you can see how a better bike makes this stuff better?

I don't think any of us would disagree with that.

But the point being made was that the people who will buy a £99 bike and use it might not buy a £300 bike. So it means more people getting on bikes, and some of them will enjoy it enough to then get that better bike.

 

[tyred]

But it's more likely to break down, ruining that nice family outing.
And may rust to bits before the kids are old enough to not want to ride with their mum any more.

Surely you can see how a better bike makes this stuff better?

Not everyone has more to spend or cannot justify spending more for something they only use a few hours a year.

I know some will say buy second hand but it's not for everyone.

Last year for example, I bought a tatty but well maintained and perfectly usable Raleigh Vitesse for a tenner from a market stall and it is considerably better to ride than a catalogue MTB but I was only able to get this bargain because I have mechanical skills and knowledge and knew exactly what I was looking at. Most people don't have that knowledge so are scared of second hand bikes so will buy new.

Also, I like the way my bargain Raleigh rides but many inexperienced cyclists would be afraid of the DT shifters, twitchy steering and would struggle with the racing gearing. They would feel happier riding around the park on a mountain bike.

 

[matticus]

(as I posted earlier ) bringing in standards would make the 2nd-hand market much more robust.

Folks are happy buying 10yo rusty/tatty motor cars for transporting their famliy at 70mph - I'm sure they would buy 5yo bikes from a reputable bike-shop if that was "normal".
So they might need LESS cash outlay than at Argos, and the long-term costs would certainly be lower.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Cyclechat seems to have an extreme on either wing.

"You shouldn't have one because I can't afford one or don't want to pay for one or don't do the type of riding that suits one or because you're slower than me and I haven't got one".

"You shouldn't be able to get a cheap bike because unless you spend a reasonable amount of money and intend becoming a proper cyclist you have no business riding a bike at all".

 

[Alex321]

Cyclechat seems to have an extreme on either wing.

"You shouldn't have one because I can't afford one or don't want to pay for one or don't do the type of riding that suits one or because you're slower than me and I haven't got one".

"You shouldn't be able to get a cheap bike because unless you spend a reasonable amount of money and intend becoming a proper cyclist you have no business riding a bike at all".

There are some of us in the middle as well

If somebody can buy a much more expensive bike than me, good for them. And eventually, good for me - top end bikes are what drive innovation, which eventually trickles down to the rest of us.

And if dead cheap bikes get people on them who wouldn't otherwise, that is also a good thing (so long as they meet basic safety standards, which they must in the UK).

 

[Arrowfoot]

This particular topic has stumped me. If something is dangerous or a rip-off I can understand why it is a concern. I think we should have empathy and realise that not all of us have the means to get a decent bike that last. I have seen cheap bikes brighten a kid's day. These bikes actually come with an aluminium frame that are more than decent. The group set is where the issues.

Instead of a petition, may an educational video how to replace with decent parts so that is enjoyable to ride and last longer. Or a petition to raise funds for a proper educational video on upgrading a BSO bike.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Or a petition to raise funds for a proper educational video on upgrading a BSO bike.

Nobody other than the small percentage of cyclists for who it is a sport or a hobby has any more intention of upgrading their bike any more than they have of upgrading their washing machine. A bike is just a "Thing" which does a job.

 

[nickyboy]

But it's more likely to break down, ruining that nice family outing.
And may rust to bits before the kids are old enough to not want to ride with their mum any more.

Surely you can see how a better bike makes this stuff better?

Better bikes are more expensive bikes. Other than us CC nerds, a bike is a bike is a bike. So if it's £99 it's better than £199

There is a market for £20 second hand bikes for sure...those who can't afford a £99 bike. But the idea that occasional cyclists would pay £99 for a second hand bike when they can get a new one from Argos for same price is way off the mark

 

[tyred]

(as I posted earlier ) bringing in standards would make the 2nd-hand market much more robust.

Folks are happy buying 10yo rusty/tatty motor cars for transporting their famliy at 70mph - I'm sure they would buy 5yo bikes from a reputable bike-shop if that was "normal".
So they might need LESS cash outlay than at Argos, and the long-term costs would certainly be lower.

A car has to pass an annual safety check and you do not have the option to buy a new car from Argos for the price of an old Escort. It was a big part of the way Lada marketed cars in the '70s and' 80s about having a new car for the price of an old one and it worked at the time.

What has changed in the motoring world since then is that any car built in the past 30 years or so is unlikely to have serious structural rust or major mechanical defects. In 1985, a ten year old car could very easily be completely rotten and full of fillers or have engine problems and Lada and the others played on that.

Modern bikes, no matter what the cost still need quite a bit of TLC to keep them happy and there is no safety check. The majority of bike shops don't want to sell inexpensive bikes as they can make more money selling to club cyclists who are perfectly willing to get the wallet out.

 

[matticus]

What has changed in the motoring world since then is that any car built in the past 30 years or so is unlikely to have serious structural rust or major mechanical defects.

Do you not think this is a good thing for car owners? Why wouldn't it be good for bike owners?

 

[All uphill]

I think there is a point being missed here.

Cheap bikes, for most uses, do not have any need for suspension. Fitting suspension makes the bikes more expensive, heavier and less functional.

Unfortunately it seems that the market sees them as desirable.

So I, for one, am not saying put up prices, I am saying improve function and reduce price.

I seriously think good labelling could help by informing customers of the weight category of the bike they are looking at.

 

[tyred]

Do you not think this is a good thing for car owners? Why wouldn't it be good for bike owners?

Of course it is but the same hasn't happened in the cycle trade.

You need a traditional hub geared roadster with chaincase and hub brakes to have a low maintenance bike but they're not fashionable any more (but are in places with a lot of utility cyclists).

 

[matticus]

Of course it is but the same hasn't happened in the cycle trade.

You need a traditional hub geared roadster with chaincase and hub brakes to have a low maintenance bike but they're not fashionable any more (but are in places with a lot of utility cyclists).

That may be partly because there is no drive for minimum quality - which is what this thread is all about :-)

And wouldn't it be good to shoot for more utility cyclists?