#11
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
wrote in message ... wrote: Does anyone out there have any info on "landrider" bikes..pro or cons I think that most people who say that a bicycle is too difficult or confusing to shift either.... A. Have only ridden a bike from many years ago with friction shifting. B. Ridden a bike with poorly adjusted indexed shifting. Before I bought a good bicycle with indexed shifting, my only experiences were with a Huffy w/friction shifting, a Murray with a double chainring only, an old bike with a Sturmey Archer 3 speed, and finally single speeds with coaster brakes. An infomercial company could probably make money selling bikes with *indexed* shifting as the main selling point since many people don't realize the technology has changed over the years! I think the landrider is definelty aimed at those who have outmoded or outdated or just wrong ideas about bikes, that they're 'complicated' or 'fancy'. JUst this weekend there was an article about 'funny bikes' in our local paper, ie bents, electrics, cruisers, and other odd looking bikes, and why people like them. One woman said she liked her cruiser because she didn't want a 'fancy' mountain bike. Well, whatever suits her, she probably just rides the bike a few blocks here and there, but I'd hardly call my mountain bike fancy. And truthfully,with the shape some of our roads in the city,you're better off with a mountain bike. I'd be nervous going over a pothole or bump with one of those cruisers! |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
There seems to be an incredible amount of knee-jerk animosity for th
Landrider on bicycling enthusiast forums like this one. Oddly, i doesn't seem to come from first hand experience with this bike. I'l agree that it may be possible to find a better bike for the same or les money at a good bike shop. But, you know, we don't have a good bike sho in my community, and what Sears and Walmart have to offer here i pathetic. I have a Landrider, have used it daily since I got it, i holds up, it's a fun ride, I can adjust the cadence anywhere from abou 35 RPM to not quite 70 RPM. For the terrain in my valley where we hav very mildly rolling country, but at a tilt (about 200 feet difference i a mile of travel), the bike doesn't shift much and I'm pleased to rid at the level it puts me at. I'm not brain-dead, I don't find i difficult to use another method of adjusting a derailleur, I just happe to prefer riding the Landrider when I'm out looking for a photo I'm a video professional and a digital photography enthusiast, and i you posed a question about any number of television sets, camcorders o digital cameras that I'm sure many of you have, I find it difficult t imagine many of my peers giving you the verbal finger like I see here i this and other bicycle enthusiast forums By the way, when I was twelve I travelled from Colorado to St Louis on 3-speed Raleigh that cost me $12 at the local hardware store. Th following year, I two-wheeled from Central Kansas to New York and back The bike shouldn't have lasted the trip, but every night I heated a cu of oil and used it to clean and soak the chain. But I have no interes in doing that kind of ride now at age 60. Did I research my purchas thoroughly? Probably not. But I could afford the bike, it arrived almos immediately at my doorstep in the boonies, it went together easily an it's proving itself daily. That from someone who's touched one Peace - |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
Filmboard wrote:
There seems to be an incredible amount of knee-jerk animosity for the Landrider on bicycling enthusiast forums like this one. Oddly, it doesn't seem to come from first hand experience with this bike. I'll agree that it may be possible to find a better bike for the same or less money at a good bike shop. But, you know, we don't have a good bike shop in my community, and what Sears and Walmart have to offer here is pathetic. I have a Landrider, have used it daily since I got it, it holds up, it's a fun ride, I can adjust the cadence anywhere from about 35 RPM to not quite 70 RPM. ............. I'm a video professional and a digital photography enthusiast, and if you posed a question about any number of television sets, camcorders or digital cameras that I'm sure many of you have, I find it difficult to imagine many of my peers giving you the verbal finger like I see here in this and other bicycle enthusiast forums........... First let me say that I'm glad that your happy with your landrider an arent just using it for garage decorations. But let me explain th reason for the negative comments. The comments come from experience perhaps not first hand experience but experience just the same. I hav ridden enough bikes over the years to know what features are importan and which are just pure marketing hype. Shifting is not a big problem o todays average bike and adding a auto-shifting derailer is just anothe thing that will eventually need adjusting/fixing You also mentioned that your cadence ranges from 35 to 70 rpm's, bu what about people with bad knee's? I personally will get pain in m knees if I pedal slower than 70 rpm's for extended periods of time. I my case the auto-shifting bike would make biking painful an thus preven me from riding for more that about 30 minutes a day Since your a video professional I would hope that you would give a honest opinion when someone asks for it. For example, I'm planning o buying an expensive digital camera ($1000). Perhaps you could tell me i it's worth the money. It has 640 x 480 resolution (low I know) but really like this new "auto" zoom feature. I would like to take picture mainly for my family albumn and perhaps my bike clubs news letter Should I buy it Enjoy your riding : Dan - |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
Dan
You're absolutely right; I would give you an honest opinion when asked even on your hypothetical camera. Something on the order of. . "So from what I understand as the primary specifications of you hypothetical camera. . . If you have intentions of mainly producin photos for email and the web, a 640x480 camera with a large acquisitio chipset (which I expect you'll find in a camera of that resolution wit a $1000 price tag) will actually give you better color quality image than a 4-megapixel with a tiny acquisition chip. On the other hand i your bike club newsletter is printed by a commercial printer, you'l find that the printer will likely require an image of a minimum of 20 dpi (dots per inch) at whatever image size you want to use in th newsletter and will probably even request a 300 dpi image. Now if you 640x480 pixel camera has a large chip, it will probably store thes images at about 144 dpi, so you will be able to have 6"x4.5" uncroppe images in your newsletter that look fairly nice (proportionally smalle at 300dpi). If it uses a tiny chip and stores images at 72 dpi, you uncropped images will only be able to be a little over 3"x2" in you newsletter without looking pixelated; that's something you'd want t keep in mind, as it may be a reason to look for a camera that has larger pixel resolution. As to the auto-zoom feature (I bet you though they don't exist, Dan, but they do). If the feature sounds good to you and you can afford it, go for it. The two that I've used allow you t have the camera memorize a face or other feature in the veiwfinder, b drawing a box around it, and then the auto-zoom feature keeps th framing fairly accurate as the memorized subject moves closer an farther from the camera. The framing will not always be as aesthetic a framed by a good professional photographer, but some do a decent job Because of the nature of the beast, an auto-zoom lens will b considerably more expensive than a manual or standard power zoom Hopefully if enough people who have interest in this feature demonstrat their interest through purchases and information requests, the cost wil eventually come down as the quality improves, and more people ca benefit from this technology I get asked for a lot of advice on cameras and that's about the way m responses really come out. But I doubt that I would respond by saying "What you're looking at is an overpriced, low-quality, ill-conceive solution to a problem that doesn't exist; the last time I thought abou how to use a manual zoom must have been with my first 35mm camera som 45 years ago. Come on, auto zoom is way exagerated and a false claim Zooming isn't really a big issue, This is more of a gimick than anythin else. Stick with a manual or power zoom camera, they are much mor reliable and better quality. I can't believe how much they charge fo those automated cameras, based solely on the gimmick that it make things 'easier' for the gullible! It's because I love photography that can't let you use this Piece O' S---. Any decent camera shop could sel you a better camera for less money. Dan, I feel I've made my point. If you don't agree, then I won't labo over this issue. Thanks for your response - |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
Filmboard wrote:
As to the auto-zoom feature (I bet you thought they don't exist, Dan, but they do). If the feature sounds good to you, and you can afford it, go for it. .......... ........ Dan, I feel I've made my point. If you don't agree, then I won't labor over this issue. Thanks for your response. Good response, and you've made your point. After going back and readin my original post I guess it was somewhat condesending, I'm not trying t put anyone's choices down. But it still doesnt change my opinion on th benifits of the bike itself. Bottom line, as I've stated before, havin a mechanism that auto selects my cadance is not desirable for mos cyclists. In my case it actually would cause great discomfort to m knees and therefore would limit my riding time. Not to mention th possible problems in getting it serviced if need be And BTW, no I didn't know that camera's had auto-zoom. But that' very cool. : Dan - |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
Dan, I can tell you're a decent guy. I just felt that there's a kind o
anger in the bicycling forums; perhaps it comes from cyclists being target on the road every day. Perhaps the group as a whole doesn't lik people who bike in their chinos as opposed to Spandex. And it's not jus this forum I was the producer of a 13-week PBS series that ran in 95-96 about th Internet. On the program we solicited email comments about the show. O the whole we got a lot of positive comments but there seemed to be rather large contingent of negative email from people claiming we wer misrepresenting the Internet experience, among other things. I requeste a statistical analysis of the email responses, and a pattern screame out at us; I'll never forget these numbers, because I use them i marketing talks all the time. The negative email responses were abou 35% of all email received. Of the negative responses 93% were fro people with AOL in their email address. Of the positive responses, onl about 7% were from people with AOL ISP accounts. I'm convinced to thi day, that something about the AOL Internet experience during that tim period had something to do with those extreme ratios. I've had a bit o the same concern about all the cycling forums I've haunted lately The unfortunate thing is that, having seen the vitriolic feedback abou Landrider bikes, I'm afraid to pose the question I started searchin forums for advice on. I guess I need to start a cycling forum for th casual rider as opposed to the serious hobbyist or professional Forum leader out there. . . I promise I'll stop with the long posts - |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
"Filmboard" wrote in message .. . || | Forum leader out there. . . I promise I'll stop with the long posts. | | "Forum leader"? You misunderstand - a lot. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
Filmboard wrote:
The unfortunate thing is that, having seen the vitriolic feedback about Landrider bikes, I'm afraid to pose the question I started searching forums for advice on. I guess I need to start a cycling forum for the casual rider as opposed to the serious hobbyist or professional. Bah. Ask already. I doubt your question can be much sillier than many I've seen asked. Heck, I doubt it's sillier than many I've asked. This is a fairly civilized group. Why, we haven't roasted and eaten anyone for weeks. Forum leader out there. . . I promise I'll stop with the long posts. Have you considered getting a newsgroup reader? -- Dane Jackson - z u v e m b i @ u n i x b i g o t s . o r g "If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he next comes to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey (1785 - 1859) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|