#41
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
\"El Paisano\ wrote:
Sorry for being unclear. I paid $70 for my Olympus Stylus Epic (no zoom) point-and-shoot film camera. Is there another camera at that price-point that would be superior? I ask this question because most of the people reading this group could point you to a superior bike for the same amount you paid for the Landrider. Matthew Nope. Have no recommendation for a better camera in that price range you've done great, because you stuck to film in that low-end range. An I'm sure you don't have a better recommendation for the bike that bought from Sears in that price range (which is a true pile of junk Look back in this thread, though. Do you see anyone coming forward wit a single recommendation. Don't try to alter my point, which I reiterate in the prior message. I think this group is negatively over-reactiv about a bike for it sounds to me they have no personal knowledge. No on offered a suggestion for a better bike. But there were criticisms tha it comes in only one frame size, which is not true. There wer criticisms about the weight, which I've found plenty of other bikes tha weigh the same or more as mine. I'm happy with my Landrider, it gets m out; I've admitted I may have been able to do better, but I can affor it, so what's the big deal - |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
Filmboard wrote: \"El Paisano\ wrote: Sorry for being unclear. I paid $70 for my Olympus Stylus Epic (no zoom) point-and-shoot film camera. Is there another camera at that price-point that would be superior? I ask this question because most of the people reading this group could point you to a superior bike for the same amount you paid for the Landrider. Matthew Nope. Have no recommendation for a better camera in that price range; you've done great, because you stuck to film in that low-end range. And I'm sure you don't have a better recommendation for the bike that I bought from Sears in that price range (which is a true pile of junk. Look back in this thread, though. Do you see anyone coming forward with a single recommendation. Don't try to alter my point, which I reiterated in the prior message. I think this group is negatively over-reactive about a bike for it sounds to me they have no personal knowledge. No one offered a suggestion for a better bike. But there were criticisms that it comes in only one frame size, which is not true. There were criticisms about the weight, which I've found plenty of other bikes that weigh the same or more as mine. I'm happy with my Landrider, it gets me out; I've admitted I may have been able to do better, but I can afford it, so what's the big deal? The best point(s) you make about your bike a 1) YOU like it 2) it gets you out Can't argue with that. In Vancouver BC this year and last year at least, bike shops are selling beach cruiser bikes like there's no tomorrow. I'd never consider one, but I believe "each to his own taste" should always apply. I hope you continue to enjoy the ride. Bernie |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
BanditManDan wrote:
First let me say that I'm glad that your happy with your landrider and arent just using it for garage decorations. But let me explain the reason for the negative comments. The comments come from experience, perhaps not first hand experience but experience just the same. I have ridden enough bikes over the years to know what features are important and which are just pure marketing hype. Shifting is not a big problem on todays average bike and adding a auto-shifting derailer is just another thing that will eventually need adjusting/fixing. You also mentioned that your cadence ranges from 35 to 70 rpm's, but what about people with bad knee's? I personally will get pain in my knees if I pedal slower than 70 rpm's for extended periods of time. In my case the auto-shifting bike would make biking painful an thus prevent me from riding for more that about 30 minutes a day. Since your a video professional I would hope that you would give an honest opinion when someone asks for it. For example, I'm planning on buying an expensive digital camera ($1000). Perhaps you could tell me if it's worth the money. It has 640 x 480 resolution (low I know) but I really like this new "auto" zoom feature. I would like to take pictures mainly for my family albumn and perhaps my bike clubs news letter. Should I buy it? Enjoy your riding Dan. I'm curious ... have you ever actually seen one in person ? Not the autobike, which from what I understand had parts that weren't as good as what they are putting in the landrider. Even if its easier to shift from one gear to another, it is still daunting to some to know when to shift or what to shift to .. How do you explain to a new person what is first, second .. etc on a bike with 6 on the back and 3 on the front (18) ? That part still isnt simple. -- |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
"jj3pa" wrote Even if its easier to shift from one gear to another, it is still daunting to some to know when to shift or what to shift to .. How do you explain to a new person what is first, second .. etc on a bike with 6 on the back and 3 on the front (18) ? That part still isnt simple. I've instructed a couple of newbies (kids, first time adults) thusly: 1. Normal riding, leave it in the middle up front. 2. Make gross changes with the front rings (Uphill = smaller, downhills = larger) 3. Adjust up and down with the back. If it's getting too hard to pedal, go to the next bigger one in the back. Too easy to pedal? Go to the next smaller. - Due to the instant feedback through the feet and legs (pedalling way too hard or easy), they know instantly if they've shifted to the wrong gear. ("Brain - Don't do that next time!") They figure it out soon enough. Pete |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
"jj3pa" wrote in message ... Even if its easier to shift from one gear to another, it is still daunting to some to know when to shift or what to shift to .. How do you explain to a new person what is first, second .. etc on a bike with 6 on the back and 3 on the front (18) ? That part still isnt simple. Gimme a break. If shifting gears on a bicycle is too tough for you, have one of the eight year olds in your neighborhood explain it to you. Dave |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
Pete wrote:
"jj3pa" wrote Even if its easier to shift from one gear to another, it is still daunting to some to know when to shift or what to shift to .. How do you explain to a new person what is first, second .. etc on a bike with 6 on the back and 3 on the front (18) ? That part still isnt simple. I've instructed a couple of newbies (kids, first time adults) thusly: 1. Normal riding, leave it in the middle up front. 2. Make gross changes with the front rings (Uphill = smaller, downhills = larger) 3. Adjust up and down with the back. If it's getting too hard to pedal, go to the next bigger one in the back. Too easy to pedal? Go to the next smaller. - Due to the instant feedback through the feet and legs (pedalling way too hard or easy), they know instantly if they've shifted to the wrong gear. ("Brain - Don't do that next time!") They figure it out soon enough. Pete I think this pretty much sums up what I wanted to say. I was able to teach my kids how to shift with no problems at around the age of 7. But I do think my kids are gifted, or at least smarter than most of the adult population. Dan. -- |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
Does the Landrider understand about headwinds and hills, or does it select a
gear based on what some absentee designer thought would be best "on average?" |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
landrider
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|