|Overheard at LBS: cross-post from Bicycling BB||TrekFurthur|
Nov 24, 2002 10:10 AM
|I thought this comment would spark some interesting discussion, especially with all the recent hoopla concerning the vehicles we drive:
"Mountain bikes are the SUV's of cycling."
Let it be known that the person who stated this remark is an AVID mountain biker--singlespeed and geared--and did not intend to disparage MTBing in any way. He was essentially referring to the idea that MTB's tend to be the common denominator among newer cyclists because of their outdoorsy appearance, their more upright posture (esp. with riser handlebars on even the lowest end bikes), and their extreme-sport/ultra-event connotations.
Now I'm all vaclimt--discuss amongst yourselves.
|True, but when I see Holly Homemaker or Peter Small riding. . .||js5280|
Nov 24, 2002 12:32 PM
|this in their business suit on the bike path, they'll look just as ridiculous as they do in their over-the-top SUVs. I like the new, recently suggested SUV acronym; Solely Urban Vehicle :-)
Still, I believe people have the right to spend their money and/or drive whatever they want. You have to be careful throwing stones, RBR is a glass house. How many of us truly need an ultra-light, race-ready, bike with all the trimmings? How many of us drool over those bikes and would buy one if we could afford it? Couldn't that be considered overkill too? Personally I don't have a big problem with the SUV itself, it's poor drivers I hate. In my experience; the bigger the car the bigger chance the person is an idiot. Commericial vehicles like semi's don't count, they are usally some of the best drivers on the road. As with any inanimate object, put it in incapable/irresponsible hands and it can become dangerous.
|When you see packs of teenagers riding these. . .||Sintesi|
Nov 25, 2002 11:28 AM
|down 60th street in Woodbridge, Queens the SUV comparison does seem appropo. I have witnessed this many times.|
|That Karpiel is a motorcycle without the engine (nm)||ColnagoFE|
Nov 25, 2002 1:58 PM
|re: Designed for off road but never gets dirty||Chainstay|
Nov 24, 2002 1:18 PM
|All analogies have their limits. This one is useful only to explain the difference in the intended terrain and the actual use to which some owners put their vehicles. I see a lot of casual cyclists riding expensive full suspension hardware on the paved bike path where I often ride my road bike. I doubt if they even know where the MTB trails are. This leaves the good single track to those that can ride. Such is the same with 99% of the SUV's, and that's good to. They could do a lot of damage off road if left to it.|
Nov 24, 2002 3:38 PM
|If the default now for new cyclists is the low-end mtb with twist shifters, that's gotta be a huge improvement over the previous standard...a Huffy Free Spirit with stem-mounted friction shifters! The nice thing about mtb-style bikes is that they make biking a lot more fun. People like my mother would NEVER venture on-road with her bike, but she'll ride up and down the stone towpath near her house all day long. On loose gravel, her wide-tired bike gives her a lot more confidence.|
Nov 24, 2002 5:50 PM
|I agree that MTB's make cycling more accessible. I just wish that more of those buyers that think a $2000 full suspension bike will be fast had the sense to buy a hybrid or a good hardtail with narrow tires. The bike would move more efficiently and they would enjoy it more. Another good option is a Cannondale Headshock where you can lock out the suspension for riding on the pavement.|
|Here's an SUB...||ColnagoFE|
Nov 25, 2002 1:55 PM