http://www.southcoastbikes.co.uk/Dont-Buy-a-Cheap-Bike
Would you support legislation on bicycles that had these provisions:
- Bicycles must be built to a minimum standard of quality
- Bicycles must only be sold in retail if they are either second hand or sold by a bicycle retailer.
- If you sell a model of bicycle that is deemed to be under the aforementioned minimum quality your business will be fined.
Basically this legislation although loosely defined would aim to prevent the sales of BSO's (bike shaped objects) which are dangerous, deter people from becoming cyclists and contribute to pollution by rusting away in landfills.
Most of these BSOs are sold in KMART and other big chain stores and they're usually shitty bmx or mountain bikes.
>>898990
This is stupid. It would not hurt the large chains shitting out crap bikes, it would hurt the guy with a small operation. It just adds more red tape and increases costs.
>>898997
Wrong, the bill could be written in such a way that it does not unfairly stigmatize the small operations. The small operations aren't selling shit bikes anyway and any increase in cost would easily be offset by the large chains having to exit the market.
>>899000
Large chains would not exit the market but simply start complying with your standards
>>899002
I'm not sure that I agree with your assertion. Would it actually be worthwhile to them if they did that? Would they continue to be able to make money as well?
Even if they did do it I'm sure they'd end up selling bicycles like this: http://www.amazon.com/Takara-Kabuto-Single-Speed-Road/dp/B017IYG45A
I find those types of bicycles would be far more enjoyable to the beginner cyclist than a shitty mountain bicycle or shitty hybrid.
I think a large part of why people are resistant to use bicycles to commute are because they don't have confidence in their bicycles, as someone who had only ridden BMX and shitty mountain bikes from kmart until a few years ago I wrongly assumed that bicycles weren't a very good form of transportation.
Even if it does force the chain stores to comply to a minimum set of standards then it's only a good thing in the end.
And I'm not so sure that it would have a negative effect on the smaller operations as the large chains don't typically do bicycle repairs and with more people riding there will be more repairs.
>>898990
I work part-time at Halfords, one of the big bicycle selling chains in the UK. Halfords sell a lot of BSO and some decent bikes too. However, as far as I know, the children BSO's are the best money maker for the company. Thing is, children don't use the bike for commuting to nurseries and whatnot. Even BSO survives a child abusing it. Everyone's happy - company made profit, children get their bikes, parents did not spend a fortune.
Anyhow, when adults buy BSO's it's entirely different matter. I could not recollect how many times I have seen same shitty bikes coming back to the stores with the same shitty problems, like shattered (loose bearing) BB's and rear hubs (after about a month's use). Makes us all cringe all the time, but we replace those parts under warranty, wasting resources, time, etc. Halfords even came up with a thing called Bike Care Plan - free labor cost for a year if you buy a part from them. Ca-ching! Fucking ridiculous. Everyone who's buying a shit bike and is smart enough can abuse ad nauseum.
"I don't want to spend too much on bike" is the logic that most people have and this is something that company like Halfords sees an opportunity in. It kinda damages them, but whatever, I don't think the companies are going to let this one slide easily.
>>899019
>be in halfords
>avoiding children trying to rip skids into displays/other bikes in the store
>making sure not to trip on all the shit littered about the floor
>gaze in awe at the ridiculous prices for some proper shit tier tires
>>898990
>- Bicycles must only be sold in retail if they are either second hand or sold by a bicycle retailer.
I don't see why. There is a difference between a poorly put together bike and a shit bike. Poorly put together bikes are, for the most part, the same as an unassembled bike in that you need to either put it together properly yourself or take it to your local LBS shop to be put together properly. By all means, encourage good standards for any bike being sold, but they don't have to come properly assembled, and who you buy it from don't have to assemble it properly.
This is a shitty bill proposed by a shitty LBS shill.
The problem with Walmart tier bikes is their assembly and the amount of grease, and low precision make them had to tune perfectly. Not that they're impossible to make serviceable.
>>899078
#retardalert
>>899019
How does it feel conning people into buying "accessories"?
>>899101
I just don't fucking do it. The management always "pushes" us though, but my excuse is always just that I offer, they refuse. You work for them as well?
>killing cycling
Cycling is dying? Then why has cycling become noticeably more popular over the course of the last decade in all the English-speaking countries?
The idea that crappy bikes are what keep people from riding is silly, no matter which country you look at, cycling reached the zenith of its popularity and mass appeal long before the arrival of the mass-produced Asian BSO.
Bicycles, as popular vehicles for the masses, were displaced by the mass adoption of automobiles. The thing that discourages cycling today is that most of the developed world reshaped it's cities, laws, and infrastructure to favor automobiles over all other modes of transport. If you want cycling to come back in a big way, there is only solution, and that is to follow the example of the Netherlands in the 1970's and develop massive public support for remaking public space as multi-modal and safer for all users regardless of how they travel.
>>899104
I know a few people who work for them, a common theme is how important accessories are to sell.
There is no way to identify BSOs. Ive seen people buy $200 road bikes off Amazon and get thousands of miles of use out of it with only minor upgrades. A decent road bike should not cost $700
>>899105
This.
BSO bikes are still popular among the "undesirables" or what we refer to as scum too, or people who cannot afford a better bike and don't have any knowledge about the used offers. No matter what they ride, it still helps to promote cycling.
>>899108
It is because they don't make too much by selling bicycles, they make a lot more from accessories and all of that shite. It's like a gaming market: microsoft/sony made (and still making?) their consoles without making any money on it, but they made that money back on selling video games. I believe the same applies to halfords strategy.
If it wasn't for BSOs I wouldn't have gotten into cycling as early as I did, perhaps not at all as I wouldn't have had the previous experience to tell me that I loved cycling and that it was worth buying better bikes.
Not only is there a significant lack of decent children's bikes (by that I mean the same quality as adult bikes, they're more than adequate for children) but higher prices would also mean less parents would buy them, no one wants to buy their kid an expensive bike that'll get trashed and only ridden for a short time before it needs changing for a larger size.
However, if this legislation applied only to bikes designed for adults then it would make more sense, although it would still be unfair to all those people for which a BSO does them fine and they may even rely on. In the end I don't really see the point, why would you want to stop other people having something that doesn't affect you? If you're educated enough and need something better then that's what you get, no one's forcing you to buy a BSO.
>>898990
I don't know nuts about the UK but this would be a shit law in the USA.
the people who buy the sub-$100 bikes at department stores would never spend $400+ for the lowest-priced ones at a real bike shop.
(especially when it's a bike for a little kid, that is likely to get destroyed or outgrown in 1 year anyway)
this law would only result in cheap bikes not being sold, it wouldn't help dedicated bike stores one bit
>>899019
>labor
Fuck off yank
>>899116
I come from a background where people say "You paid for a bike how much? I could have bought a car for that much!" The price was 600 euros, btw. I know the feel of riding a BSO too damn well.
If it wasn't for those BSOs we wouldn't know how to appreciate good things.
Also, we could all descend into the pits of how greed and capitalism hikes the prices up and how cheap it would be if it wasn't for profit, but businesses are there to make money, not help people. That is the world we are living in.
>>899123
>I come from a background where people say "You paid for a bike how much? I could have bought a car for that much!" The price was 600 euros, btw
>car
>600 euros
You might be able to buy a scarp worthy Geo Metro for that price.
As far as I know Germany is the only place that regulates bicycles. But it's not from a consumer protection perspective, rather part of the same laws that govern signal lights and bumpers on cars and trucks. Because we're all on the same road together. The 'minimum standard of quality' that they have in mind might not might not find support amongst the fixie-riding hipsters around here.
>Yes; if you ride on the street a full set of real lights are necessary. And no blinking, cause I say so!
>>899132
Germany doesnt have streetlights, so those laws only affect bike lights
>>899132
They have similar laws about reflectors in the UK but no one listens or enforces them.
>>898990
>>899132
I work for a major bicycle company in North America. We have reflector laws on all bikes, big box or not.
Most bike shops take them off of highend bikes, cause they look like shit. Bikes have to come with 2 brakes. Alot of IBD take off the front brakes with BMX off (dirt jumpers) as they do with DJ mtbs.
France has a strange law. Bikes have to come with a battery powered front light. No rear is needed though. Again, IBDs chuck that piece of shit in the garbage; consumers dont even see or know what safety things come or are needed with the bikes. In other words. walmart, kmart, cdn tire, all those fuckin places should not be allowed to sell bikes. even though they pay my salary, there a ridiculous to deal with. fuckin hate them.
I think the going rate for building a bike is around $4 american, in canada around $8 cdn. Mexico stores...I think they are around $1 american. People should know this. To be honest, the bikes are not terrible. In fact, some are quite good for the average rider. It is how they are assembled. Like anything, when put together from the beginning like shit, it will forever be shit. Think houses, cars, electronics.
>pic unrelated
>>899137
I do believe the reflector laws only relate to new bikes, perhaps used bikes being sold by businesses. Once you have the bike there's nothing preventing you from removing them.
>>898990
lesslaw,, notmore!
,,pic> Fiberglass filled PVC frame.,, where will i fit?!
,,bent the tubes over a hotplate,, heat, bend ,cool with wet rag, glue, pull sting/fiberglass rope thru, fill with epoxy.
,,realy bouncy!
>>899132
>>899141
"Bicycles are sporting goods or children's toys, not vehicles". Most of us here would disagree, but that's the public perception the law is built around. As long as it's not flammable, poisonous, have small parts that could be a choking hazard, or unlicensed cartoon characters on it, the gov. could not care less. If you want a bit more functionality you will need to see to it yourself.
>>899121
:^)
>>899159
im the one you are responding too who works in the industry. I put a stop to something product design tried to make. that fucking seat on the back....wow. so dangerous. I said "leave that fucking thing in the sun for a few months, like a kid toy would be. watch the lawsuits roll in." they questioned me a couple of times and i said if they roll that out, i would roll out from my office with a resignation. It is true what you say.
>>899142
The front, rear, and pedal reflectors are a legal requirement if you're riding at night. But yes, I've never heard of that law being enforced.
>>899169
>>899168
Hey, >>899169 might be on to something. Well, do you guys wear bland, drab, olive-colored clothing?
>>899178
I love these brakes, why aren't they made anymore? I used to have a beater with them and it was comfy as fuck.
>>899184
they are great brakes, expensive to properly manufacture these days. this bike is smooth as clean, fit, air-stripped pussy
>>899206
>properly manufactrue
>dia compes
wut
>>899206
way different
>>899019
What bikes are worst?
I was once duped into buying a Carrera Zelos. Tourney is shit!
Are the frames bad or just shit components slapped in from every side?
>>899288
Every single apollo/trax and carreras with tourney brifters. Yes, you bought the shit, son, but it's the components mostly. Frames are alright, all made in same factories in Cambodia, some higher end ones are from Taiwan.
Everything else they sell is pretty much OK as long as it does not have a suspension (below £500 mark). Anything above £500 suspension or not is going to be average to good, because it is always better to buy bikes online, if you know exactly the size/components you need.
>>899141
>I work for a major bicycle company in North America. We have reflector laws on all bikes, big box or not.
>Most bike shops take them off of highend bikes, cause they look like shit. Bikes have to come with 2 brakes. Alot of IBD take off the front brakes with BMX off (dirt jumpers) as they do with DJ mtbs.
you must be in Canada, that's not what US laws say.
in the USA, the CSPC laws only apply to bicycles sold new and complete. "complete" means ridable, so any [high-end] bikes that don't come with pedals or a saddle are not required to follow CSPC rules. That is why there's no reflctors.
CSPC rules do say that a bike needs 2 hand brakes if it does not have a coaster brake, but the braking effectiveness standards are pretty lame. Fixies are included under the coaster-brake rule, tho most cheaper ones do have a hand brake.
Department store bikes in the USA are mostly assembled in China, FYI. If you order one and don't pay for assembly you get it still in the box, just like Wal-Mart does.
It varies with different models but typically: the front wheel is zip-tied to the frame, the handlebar assembly is zip tied to the frame and the pedals are not installed. Everything else is already supposed to be hooked up and working.
,,,
It is popular to criticize "idiot wal-mart bike assemblers" but many people who put the bikes together are told to do ONLY those things specified as being necessary--and not adjust anything else, as it's supposed to be adjusted properly already. (after all, these dept store employees are not trained bike mechanics) The only thing they are supposed to alert their manager about is if there are any parts that appear missing.
Also: most US states have laws requiring bicycle reflectors and at least suggesting lighting, but those laws are almost never enforced.
>>898990
"There should be a law!"
No, there shouldn't. Stfu and let people buy what they want
>>899845
This.
We don't need more rules are regulations.
>Bicycles must be built to a minimum standard of quality
That's going to stifle innovation and increase the minimum cost of bicycles. Many lifelong bicycle riders start off on very poor quality bicycles. By denying people the opportunity to buy and ride them, you will be reducing the amount of people who are exposed to quality.
>Bicycles must only be sold in retail if they are either second hand or sold by a bicycle retailer.
As it is written, that is a tautology. Assuming that by 'bicycle retailer' you meant 'a business that exclusively sells bicycles and related paraphernalia', I am completely opposed. If a business has developed successfully in other markets and wants to apply its skills to bicycles, there's no reason why the consumer shouldn't be allowed to pass judgement on how well they are doing. A great example of this is Halfords: they are a car parts and accessory company that started selling BSOs and other outdoor activity items. Eventually they started servicing the bikes and selling bicycle parts and accessories, drawing in more advanced cyclist customers. Now they sell quality bicycles at very competitive prices, which makes up a significant portion of their turnover.
>If you sell a model of bicycle that is deemed to be under the aforementioned minimum quality your business will be fined.
Most civilised countries already have provisions which protect the consumer in the event that goods sold are of unmerchantable quality. A law specific to bicycles is unnecessary.
>>899112
>A decent road bike should not cost $700
Why not?
>>899357
>many people who put the bikes together are told to do ONLY those things specified as being necessary--and not adjust anything else
Agreed, and of course they also are 99% likely to have too much shit to do and not enough time in which to do it.
>>900810
>reducing the amount of people who are exposed to quality
*exposed to bicycles
derp
>>900810
I agree as the idea about specific bike retailers is the same as laws regarding car dealerships... if you look into that you will be shocked that cars arent just car shaped objects from most.
>>900937
Please try again, my Japanese friend.
>>899002
win-win as far as I'm concerned
>>900937
Exactly, they shouldn't be able to sell unsafe pieces of shit to unsuspecting noobs. They scare away FAR more people from cycling than they introduce to cycling.
