|Raleigh's bad rap...||fatroadie|
Jun 30, 2002 3:07 PM
|I was thinking about buying a R700 (not if, just when...) and I got to thinking about why Raleigh has such a bad rap. I used to sell them at a bike shop, and I always thought they put together some of the best packages in the business. Sure they don't have the 16 lbs, $4000 Dura Ace/Carbon Fiber/Ksyrium SL laden bikes, but so what? Is it because they don't have the aforementioned that they get a bum rap?|
|re: Raleigh's bad rap...||Walter|
Jun 30, 2002 3:53 PM
|You know I have a late 90s Univega which is essentially a Raleigh and think it a fine bike. Their "Heritage" (or some similar word) Series with Columbus steel and Campy componentry are IMO desirble bikes. Current Raleigh is a long way from Nottingham, England but it's nice to see that they're treating the old names with some respect.|
|Nothing wrong with Raleigh||Mel Erickson|
Jun 30, 2002 7:32 PM
|I think they put out a good spec for a very competetive price. I think they're right there with Fuji et. al. with a very value conscious bike line. No, they don't have the sexy image and cutting (bleeding?) edge engineering. They just put together a good bike at a good price. Nothing wrong with that.|
|re: Raleigh's bad rap...||Mike P|
Jul 1, 2002 3:47 AM
|I had the R800 and loved it, until the frame broke. It had a little over 12,000 miles on it when I noticed a little crack in the R chainstay. Raleigh replaced the frame with a new Raleigh Professional. I do not have a problem with Raleigh. I do prefer the 800 to the Pro though. The aluminum 800 rode much better than the steel Pro does.
I test rode the 700 after deciding on the 800, to help decide on the size to order. The 700 was is nice ride, and for the money, you can't go wrong with it.