Hi All,
I concur with the subjective nature of ride quality. And remembering a conversation I had nearly two decades ago with a product designer at one of the mid sized (then) bike companies, so did they. When I asked why their marketing material and catalogs never mentioned their bike's fine ride and handling qualities, the response was something like this, paraphrased I'm sure, "Greg, we'd get killed. And we'd be laughed off the showroom floor by aluminum and composite builders. You can't quantify ride quality. All you need is one magazine review, or in your case one customer, to dispute it and you've got yourself a pissing match. Things like weight, geometry, aerodynamics, stiffness, those can be quantified and compared from bike to bike, wheel to wheel, whatever. But the days of ride quality as a marketing tool are gone. You can't say 'this bike rides 9 and that one rides 6', but you can say, print, advertise etc, that 'this bike weighs 18 pounds and that one weighs 21 pounds.' And that carries a lot of weight in terms of marketing. Everyone has to gravitate to that comparison or they are left back at the pissing match."
And here we are. Look at what constitutes a 'great' bike today! At least in the mass market.
Greg Overton Denver, Colorado
Quoting oroboyz@aol.com:
>
> Andy wrote:
>
> << Attempts to place a value or description on bike handling can be
> like trying to compare art work. We do it all the time but it
> doesn't really mean much. >>
>
>
> Well said!
>
> It always amuses me when one of us makes a statement like "X brand
> rides like crap" or "Nothing rides like a Y brand!".
>
> Or worse, when someone places a judgment; "What an idiot! Can you
> believe he thinks that Z brand is a great riding bike?"
>
> Rider's expectations vary widely and are totally personal.
>
> One person's "responsive" is another fellow's "twitchy".
> "Stable" is someone else's "sluggish", etc.
>
> And then there is fit... Short torsos won't like long top tubes,
> light folks won't like stiff frames (or maybe they will!)
> Everybody brings their own set of expectations and preferences...
>
>
> Dale
>
>
>
> Dale Brown
> Greensboro, North Carolina USA
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew R Stewart <onetenth@earthlink.net>
> To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org; loudeeter@aol.com
> Sent: Sun, Jan 31, 2010 12:28 pm
> Subject: Re: [CR] Was: gios frames, Now: How bikes ride
>
>
> To add to Lou's post.
>
> Frame size, wheels and rider build also have major effects on bike
> handling. Our bias further confounds any description we can write
> and how another reads into it. Like speedman's wobble being present
> and problematic for one rider yet another on the same bike might not
> experience any.
>
> Attempts to place a value or description on bike handling can be
> like trying to compare art work. We do it all the time but it
> doesn't really mean much.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: <loudeeter@aol.com>
> To: <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 12:19 PM
> Subject: [CR] Was: gios frames, Now: How bikes ride
>
>> I personally have a difficult time commenting about the ride of a
>> >particular brand unless I know for sure whether the bike was built
>> custom >or "off-the-rack". If it was custom, but the reader
>> doesn't know that, >then commenting about the ride gives the
>> impression that most bikes of that >brand are built with that
>> particular geometry, tubeset, etc. If it was >from that builder's
>> standard issue bike geometry, then the comment may have >more
>> credibility and merit. Unless you know for sure the history of the
>> >bike, it makes for interesting reading, but really doesn't tell
>> us the >whole story. Not calling anyone out here, but just a
>> comment in general >about classifying bikes by their ride. Lou
>> Deeter, Orlando FL USA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Andrew R Stewart
> Rochester, NY