Re: [CR]Meaning of "G" (as in good condition used)?

(Example: Framebuilders:Richard Moon)

Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:52:21 -0500
From: "Chris Beyer" <beyerc@mailserver.volvo.com>
To: Mark Bulgier <mark@bulgier.net>
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]Meaning of "G" (as in good condition used)?
References: <C102531FB711D411B5B90060B0A4687605E501@MAIL>


Mark, et al:

Unless the seller is legally blind, I think it's unethical to offer something which is functionally useless (except as a paperwight) as "G". If it's someone from the list, I would expect them to take it back with apologies, and without resentment.

Yout opinions may vary......

Chris Beyer (Hooray! the new Mercian has arrived!) Bloomfield, NJ

Mark Bulgier wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I'm kinda new to the marketplace of vintage stuff, and I was wondering if
> there were commonly agreed-on definitions for the conditions of used stuff,
> especially G and VG.
>
> This is prompted by me receiving a used chainring I bought unseen. It was
> listed as "G" and I thought that meant in good riding shape, but it's got
> such worn teeth that I suspect few on this list would ride it.
>
> I'd appreciate it if those of you with some extra time on your hands would
> go look at http://bulgier.net/pics/Our_Pics/Bike/WornRing.jpg and tell me
> what you think - am I too picky, or would you consider sending it back?
> Seller charged $20, which is a good enough deal for a SR 42 ring with miles
> left on it - would you ride it?
>
> It's not a big deal, this is more out of curiosity about what other people's
> expectations are.
>
> Mark Bulgier
> Seattle, WA USA