Lousy-riding bikes

[Fishbike]

Here, on other forums and certainly in most bike reviews in magazines, most riders gush about how well his or her bike rides. Myself included! What makes a lousy-riding bike and what bikes have you owned/ridden that were inferior? Just curious because the superlatives are SO pervasive.

[bicycletricycle]

most bikes ride nice, especially when you just paid a whole ton of cash for them and when you are super excited about riding them.

bikes that have speed wobble are the worst.

[bobswire]

If you paid over $2000 you'll gush over the ride quality. :^)
Much like the stiffer frame myth.... http://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/10/03/science-and-bicycles-frame-stiffness/

But perhaps a Mod might want to put this thread in the correct forum of General Discussions. ;)

[Aaron O]

Bike with a great ride - bikes I own.
Bikes with a poor ride - bikes you own, or ones with paint jobs I don't like.

I can only answer this for myself - but to me, bikes that ride well tend to be stiffer tubesets and I like OS...but not to the point of most aluminum bikes. The right tires for the surface I'm riding on seems to make a huge difference as well.

[nooneline]

bikes used for a purpose they're not designed/built for. sprinting or cornering aggressively on a bike built to be an all-day rider, or, alternatively, doing a 6-hr ride on a crit bike. racing cross on a rando bike. etc.

[don'TreadOnMe]

Outside of some of the older, smaller Cervelos, I've not heard of a lot of bikes that just didn't ride/handle well.
I've had some framesets that didn't work for me, but that had to do with my fit on the bike not intersecting w/the frameset's best-handling set-up.

[Iowegian]

Yep, the wrong bike for the purpose is sure to cause problems. Bikes that I find to be bad riders usually either don't fit me quite right or just feel 'dead'. The latter usually occurs with touring frames (I'm a commuter) so perhaps they're supposed to be that way and I just need to load them up to enjoy them more. I also think a lot of it depends on weight distribution but maybe that comes back to fit.

[fourflys]

I don't like a bike that is set up too aggressive or feels "twitchy"... but, like shoes or saddles, this is all personal opinion and totally subjective...

[Fixed]

this one
old p.
found
cheers
http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=1015734&postcount=1

[biker72]

A couple of years ago I had a 1972 Schwinn Varsity that I bought on eBay for almost nothing. It was in great shape and needed just one tire and a general tune-up.

I was rather surprised how heavy and clunky it felt.

[BigDaddySmooth]

Here is my ranking of my rides, 1983-present-
1a) CSi
1b) Yamaguchi--although this would be my choice if I needed to go all-out.
1c) Della Santa
1d)) Strong foco steel
5) Tommasini genius tubing
6) Pegoretti Fina
7) Bianchi SLX
8) Bridgestone 500, 1983 vintage

1-1d are so close, #5 a hair behind, #6 a hair behind and, 7/8 were frames when I was young and dumb ('tho the fastest I ever rode...a 16 mile TT w/o bars at 25mph was on the down-tubed shifter Bianchi).

The way I look at is this-trying to say a bike rides bad is like saying, "I had bad sex last night." :banana:

[rugbysecondrow]

Surly Karate Monkey, just not a great bike at all. Really wanted to like it, but it sucked big time. Heavy, chunky to control, just not a score by Surly.

[Chance]

Just curious because the superlatives are SO pervasive.
Because many of us lack a wide range of perspective on which to judge.

[rain dogs]

Another thing to consider is fit. I dunno about you guys, but I've never had two bikes with exactly the same geometry. One feels nice in this way, another in another way. In fact, I've had bikes that are all different "sizes" as well.

Material differences for sure.... how harsh one rides over bumps and cracks vs how smooth, but that doesn't mean one is good or bad to me.

[bobswire]

Surly Karate Monkey, just not a great bike at all. Really wanted to like it, but it sucked big time. Heavy, chunky to control, just not a score by Surly.

Yeah but I li :banana: ke mine.

[rice rocket]

Does the difference of opinion come about from differences in references (what you've ridden before) or in preferences?

[rugbysecondrow]

Not sure Rice. The KM i had was an XL frame, so maybe that had something to do with it as Bob's is smaller.

[bicycletricycle]

+1 on K monkey being a POS

more like a boat anchor than a bicycle

i had a mondonico that was really flexy and then the bottom bracket kind of fell off of it. that sucked.

[tiretrax]

Before I bought my Orca, I tested a lot of bikes. I had a lot of expectation before I rode a Crumpton, but it felt dead. I was shocked and disappointed.

I also don't like twitchy bikes, so I vetoed the Pinarello Prince. One of the most stable and comfortable bikes was the Merckx MXL of the last year that Eddy owned the brand. I haven't tried one since Pinarello bought the brand.

[slowgoing]

Agreed that the MXL is fabulous. I'll never sell mine. But I also found it was not great at seated climbing up very steep grades. But why would anyone but me even try that with a sprinters bike, right?

[fixednwinter]

Outside of some of the older, smaller Cervelos, I've not heard of a lot of bikes that just didn't ride/handle well.


The spectre of the small Cervelo :(

Having ridden (and foolishly owned) the two smallest sizes of Cervelo in their older geometry, I can attest to how awful they rode. The rear stays were so short that it could barely accommodate a 23mm tire and the front-center was so short the toe overlap was downright scary. The bike had a very twitchy feel, especially when sprinting out of the saddle.

On paper at least, the current RS, R3 and R5 seems to be more sensibly designed.

[zap]

Ride for me is about performance. Does a bike skip more in a bumpy corner than my reference bike. How does it feel on textured roads.

Comfort is mostly in the position.

I will not lower tire pressure below 120psi to improve ride. That pressure is just right for handling at higher speeds.

Road bikes I currently own, Klein Q Pro Crabon rides great. My Look KG196 Monoblade rides stiff, too stiff for some roads. I spoke to a pro back then who raced a KG196 in the TdF that season and we agreed, the ride is just too stiff. Both handle great but again, the Look needs smooth roads.

Bike I used to own that rode ok but handled meh-rear too soft-Litespeed Ti.

Bikes that I've ridden that do not ride well-I really tried to like them.......

First gen Serotta Ti-Smiley's first Ti Serotta.
Serotta Atlanta
Serotta CSI

All the above ridden with my wheels and stem. I was surprised how harsh the ti rode, the csi was heavy and the Atlanta was just crummy.

Later Serotta Ti's rode better.

I'm in the market for a new bike and it's been a while since I've taken a demo bike home so if any builder has a 56 c-c with a 58 tt................let me know. :beer:

[bobswire]

+1 on K monkey being a POS

more like a boat anchor than a bicycle

i had a mondonico that was really flexy and then the bottom bracket kind of fell off of it. that sucked.

Both you and rugbysecondrow are larger guys than me (5.9" 147lbs) I ride a 16" KM as does that guy who suggested it to me.
Funny thing is on the mountain bike forum we had this same dispute with another larger guy who thought the KM sucked too.
The guy who suggested it to me Charlie raced his as a single speed and did rather well... 2009 Results

http://charlieridesabike2009results.blogspot.com/
Results (Cat1 40-49 unless otherwise noted)
Root 66 2009 Cat1 40-49 Overall Champion

Hopbrook Dam 13th

Winding Trails 6th

Winsted Woods 2nd

Singlespeed-A-Polooza 20th (Pro/ Expert)

West Hill Shop Race 3rd

Domnarski Farm 2nd

Pats Peak 4th

Hodges Village Dam 6th

Norcross Scurry 3rd

Bikes For Bovines 1st

Landmine 4th

Mt. Snow: Trail of Two Lakes 2nd

[rugbysecondrow]

Just think about how well he would have done without that pos bike.


;)

Both you and rugbysecondrow are larger guys than me (5.9" 147lbs) I ride a 16" KM as does that guy who suggested it to me.
Funny thing is on the mountain bike forum we had this same dispute with another larger guy who thought the KM sucked too.
The guy who suggested it to me Charlie raced his as a single speed and did rather well... 2009 Results

http://charlieridesabike2009results.blogspot.com/
Results (Cat1 40-49 unless otherwise noted)
Root 66 2009 Cat1 40-49 Overall Champion

Hopbrook Dam 13th

Winding Trails 6th

Winsted Woods 2nd

Singlespeed-A-Polooza 20th (Pro/ Expert)

West Hill Shop Race 3rd

Domnarski Farm 2nd

Pats Peak 4th

Hodges Village Dam 6th

Norcross Scurry 3rd

Bikes For Bovines 1st

Landmine 4th

Mt. Snow: Trail of Two Lakes 2nd

[bobswire]

Just think about how well he would have done without that pos bike.


;)

My thoughts exactly..... :beer:

[Waldo]

Are we talking about absolutely bad riding bikes or bikes that did not live up to high expectations and were, therefore, very disappointing? If it's the latter, there were some damn high-end frames that I owned, rode, and didn't care for.

[Gummee]

I think the worst riding bike I've owned has been a Bontrager Road Lite. Dead. You'd think it would be responsive, etc. but no, it just had a dead feel.

One of the best riding was a carbon s-works mtn bike. Followed closely by an s-works e-5 AL frame.

In the middle are a bunch of steel bikes that did OK.

M

[johnnymossville]

I think my Scott CR1 rides like crap. It's harsh, and feels worse than my aluminum Cannondales did, but it's super light and all I have at the moment so I love it.

Someday I'm gonna have a bike that rides like or similar to my old steel road bike I had in college, (Reynolds 531 based) That thing felt perfect to me.

[Birddog]

I will not lower tire pressure below 120psi to improve ride. That pressure is just right for handling at higher speeds. .
Zap, IMO that's a creed that you should consider relaxing. Lowering tire pressure from 120 to about 100 might be one of the best moves I've ever made for ride quality and that includes handling at any speed.

[rnhood]

I don't quite understand that tire pressure either, unless you're riding time trials. Just seems a bit high to me.

[JLP]

I had a single speed Kogswell that just felt dead to me. I have no idea why, but I just couldn't stand it.

I also just donated a 28" Indian Hercules rod brake Raleigh replica that I tried really hard to love, but it didn't do it for me.

[charliedid]

Surly Karate Monkey, just not a great bike at all. Really wanted to like it, but it sucked big time. Heavy, chunky to control, just not a score by Surly.

What were you expecting?

[Hard Fit]

I had an early Trek 2300 that was impossible to ride no-handed. I enjoyed the bike, but you had to pay attention to keep going straight.

[rdparadise]

...The way I look at is this-trying to say a bike rides bad is like saying, "I had bad sex last night." :banana:[/QUOTE]

You had bad sex last night???? :no: :butt:

Anyway, regarding this topic when I first got back into cycling as an adult I bought a Trek 2200 that had 3 carbon fiber tubes bonded to aluminum lugs and a steel fork (vintage 1993-1994). That sucker was scary on downhills over 35 mph. I finally had to squeeze the top tube with my knees while descending to maintain stability.

Another area which some bikes have an issue is where the front wheel overlaps your toes when peddling. I've seen some bikes with this issue and it is definitely a safety issue if you ask me.

That's my 2 cents on this topic.

Bob

[khjr]

The right tires for the surface I'm riding on seems to make a huge difference as well.

When I first built my Tommasini, I hated the ride for several thousand miles. Very twitchy at low speeds, hard to ride hands free, spooky on high speed descents. Then, I wore out the 20C wide tires I had built it with and went up to 25C. The difference was night and day! Stable, smooth, and I can even steer it hands free through turns. What a difference a little trail, or at least pneumatic trail, can make. I've loved the bike ever since.

[joosttx]

I rented a Specialized Roubiax with an ultregra build while I was in Hawaii this summer. I have not ridden carbon fiber in a long time so I was excited to ride the bike but honestly concerned the experience may cause an indentity crisis. What if I liked this CF mass produced bike over my custom bikes? Oh lord my whole cyclist indentity would be turned upside down? Kidding aside the Roubiax was the absolutely worst bike I have ever ridden. Harsh, tracked poorly, cornered poorly, and felt cheap. It did climb well but everything else it did sucked. I was surprised to learn is was a 3K + bike. Wow , Specialized must be printing a mint, yo. In full disclosure the bike was a little big but I doubt that was the major reason for all its problems.

[Kontact]

I've noticed several usual reasons for "bad" bikes:

Clunky materials. Straight gauge steel or oversized aluminum seatstays are nobody's friend.

Bad geometry. While Cervelo dropped the ball on their small bikes of old, small bikes seem to be a headache for a lot of companies - Cervelo just blundered through the problem worse than most. But most of the geometry complaints I've heard of come from people that "designed" (or borrowed) the geometry of their custom made frame.

Squirlyness. Bikes that don't feel good at high speeds. This can be a fork rake issue, flexy frame (TVTs), high BBs or just crummy fit. But no one likes feeling like every descent may end in a messy way.

[fogrider]

I have an old bike that fit great and rode great for years, then one day high speed wobble...very scary!!! since I don't think I'll be getting the bike up to 55 mph any time soon, I'm still riding it. I also had a stem that was flexy which drove me nuts. a lot of a good riding bike has to do with matching the bike with the rider. a flexy bike to me might be plenty stiff for someone that is 40 pounds lighter. I've been on bikes that was too stiff and beat me up, bikes with brakes that were not up to par, some bikes that just felt slow (heavy wheels, slack geometry with slow handling).

[Ray]

I've had my share of bikes. Some rode well enough, some rode real well, and a few have been sublime. I've only ever had one bike I just never wanted to ride after the first few shakedown rides. It was a Jamis Aurora from about 1999. I bought it primarily as a touring bike, and if you put enough weight on it, it wasn't terrible - not as rock solid as a really good touring bike, but it not too unpleasant at normal riding speeds. But it was marketed as an all-rounder and I tried to use it as such a and it really sucked. It was a tank and accelerated as such, its steering was awful, it would take until next Tuesday to initiate a turn. It wasn't particularly stable going in a straight line either - I could never ride it no-handed. I just pretty much hated it except for a two week fully loaded tour I did on it and I didn't love it then, but that was the one time I didn't hate it. I didn't keep it long I don't think, maybe six months. Just a miserable bike to ride in almost any situation.

Then when my daughter was 14 or 15, she was sort of bitten by the cycling bug but just had a crummy mountain bike to ride so I went looking for more of an all-purpose bike for her and she was and is a small girl/woman, so it was tough to find a road or AR bike that would fit her. And she ended up liking, wouldn't you know it, a Jamis Aurora - I think a 47. I bought it for her then - she's nearly 24 now and its still her primary mode of transportation, all faded and beat up. She loves it. She's ridden a few nicer road bikes and commented on how light and quick they felt, but she's never wanted to replace it. And for her typical uses on it, no reason she really should, but she can definitely afford a nicer touring type bike these days, but its still working for her... Go figure.

-Ray

[rugbysecondrow]

What were you expecting?

Not to ride like a pos. I built it as an multiple purpose bike, trailer pulling, light trails, neighborhood rig, something that could take SS or Geared components. The problem with it is that I think Surly tried to make it able to do too much that it did nothing good. It was crappy and unpleasantto ride in all the above circumstances. I was comparing it to a redline mono-9 29er, so thy should have been in the same ball park. Anyway, I had it about two weeks before it was out the door.

[palincss]

Not to ride like a pos. I built it as an multiple purpose bike, trailer pulling, light trails, neighborhood rig, something that could take SS or Geared components. The problem with it is that I think Surly tried to make it able to do too much that it did nothing good. It was crappy and unpleasantto ride in all the above circumstances.


What was the nature of the crappyness and POSness? Is there a single word that would describe its objectionable character?

[Dekonick]

What was the nature of the crappyness and POSness? Is there a single word that would describe its objectionable character?
POS v.s.crappyness - I see the same word in there... shyte :)

I don't think Paul has issue with Surly... he has a travelers check and I think he likes it... for what it is. I had a cross-check and liked it. If I just want a bike that can be 'trashed' and not make you cry, Surly has good choices. They will not replace a better frame, but have a place in the stable IMHO. Good beaters...

Just my opinion.

Something mentioned earlier - bikes that feel unsafe at speed... I gotta say my Serotta Colorado CR, Hors Categorie (BEST BY FAR for bombing hills), and Bedford tourer all feel great going down hill. Wobble at speed would scare the shyte out of me... but I have never experienced that with a quality bike and good wheels (good wheels to me = 28+ spoke count OP or similar)

Whoops - gotta run.... :crap:

[charliedid]

Not to ride like a pos. I built it as an multiple purpose bike, trailer pulling, light trails, neighborhood rig, something that could take SS or Geared components. The problem with it is that I think Surly tried to make it able to do too much that it did nothing good. It was crappy and unpleasantto ride in all the above circumstances. I was comparing it to a redline mono-9 29er, so thy should have been in the same ball park. Anyway, I had it about two weeks before it was out the door.

So in two weeks you pulled a trailer, set it up as a SS, a geared bike, and rode it around the neighborhood and on some trails and decided it was a "pos" in all those scenarios? How do you use the Redline the most, and what do you prefer about it compared to the pos?

You ever pull that trailer on your Bedford Racer ;-)

[Gummee]

I rented a Specialized Roubiax with an ultregra build while I was in Hawaii this summer. I have not ridden carbon fiber in a long time so I was excited to ride the bike but honestly concerned the experience may cause an indentity crisis. What if I liked this CF mass produced bike over my custom bikes? Oh lord my whole cyclist indentity would be turned upside down? Kidding aside the Roubiax was the absolutely worst bike I have ever ridden. Harsh, tracked poorly, cornered poorly, and felt cheap. It did climb well but everything else it did sucked. I was surprised to learn is was a 3K + bike. Wow , Specialized must be printing a mint, yo. In full disclosure the bike was a little big but I doubt that was the major reason for all its problems.
Huh. Your experience is diametrically opposite mine.

Funny how that works.

M

[Joel]

Thankfully I've only owned one that was a real stinker.

1975 Raleigh Professional - the silver black color. The color was not the stinker. The handling was. This was the "fastback" design that had a very tight rear triangle and a fork rake that spanned half the length of a jumbo jet.

Cornered like a slug on the front and steriods on the rear. Completely skittish. Virtually impossible to ride no handed.

Terrifying in a crit...

Bad flashback.

End of post...

[Chance]

Caad 3.

[Elefantino]

Caad 3.
Nah. Compared to the 3.0cs, the Caad 3 was a plush ride.

The 3.0s, with their huge tubes, were absolutely brutal to ride over anything but 50 miles. Anything longer than that and your backside felt like Kevin Bacon's in "Animal House."

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_UbR1vwNbrw8/TK0FePZ0eMI/AAAAAAAAANw/4dFG6B6Mx7s/s1600/Animal+House+(24).jpg

[rugbysecondrow]

So in two weeks you pulled a trailer, set it up as a SS, a geared bike, and rode it around the neighborhood and on some trails and decided it was a "pos" in all those scenarios? How do you use the Redline the most, and what do you prefer about it compared to the pos?

You ever pull that trailer on your Bedford Racer ;-)

Not SS, but yes, the rest of them.

It is a crappy bike, I think I have described what I dislike about it, why and what I think about it. Agree, disagree, I dont care. Go buy one and enjoy.

Not my Bedford racer, but yes, my Bedford sport tourer...it does a great job.

[charliedid]

Not SS, but yes, the rest of them.

It is a crappy bike, I think I have described what I dislike about it, why and what I think about it. Agree, disagree, I dont care. Go buy one and enjoy.

Not my Bedford racer, but yes, my Bedford sport tourer...it does a great job.

I feel ya, and it's fine you didn't care for the way the bike handled. It is a bike designed on compromise and that should be understood. Criticizing the weight is a non starter, as I assume it didn't gain any weight after you bought it? ;-) If you bought it sight unseen and didn't test ride it, fair enough and so be it.

That said, I still think it is unfair to call it a POS based on things you should have known and are in part extremely subjective. Now, if you had gotten the sucker home, threw your leg over it and went out merrily down the bike path and the head tube fell off....different story. The internet is full of clowns and experts and expert clowns, and I fear that this sort of information spreads far and wide and eventually becomes truth when it's really just one guy's opinion.

Catch my drift?

Peace

[rugbysecondrow]

Well hell, this whole thread about lousy bikes could be misconstrued then. In fact, any opinion expressed other than positive could be taken the wrong way so nobody should speak ill, right? That doesn't make sense.


Being heavy and riding heavy is something different.

This whole thread invites subjectivity, so I am not sure why you have a hard on for my opinion, but oh well. I love my Surly travelers check and wanted to love this bike, it was the opposite of love. It was/is a lousy bike, hence my post in this thread.

I feel ya, and it's fine you didn't care for the way the bike handled. It is a bike designed on compromise and that should be understood. Criticizing the weight is a non starter, as I assume it didn't gain any weight after you bought it? ;-) If you bought it sight unseen and didn't test ride it, fair enough and so be it.

That said, I still think it is unfair to call it a POS based on things you should have known and are in part extremely subjective. Now, if you had gotten the sucker home, threw your leg over it and went out merrily down the bike path and the head tube fell off....different story. The internet is full of clowns and experts and expert clowns, and I fear that this sort of information spreads far and wide and eventually becomes truth when it's really just one guy's opinion.

Catch my drift?

Peace

[Bob Loblaw]

Dept store bikes.

But I have never ridden any bike whose ride couldn't be dramatically changed for better or worse by swapping out the wheels and/or tires.

BL

[tannhauser]

I rented a Specialized Roubiax with an ultregra build while I was in Hawaii this summer. I have not ridden carbon fiber in a long time so I was excited to ride the bike but honestly concerned the experience may cause an indentity crisis. What if I liked this CF mass produced bike over my custom bikes? Oh lord my whole cyclist indentity would be turned upside down? Kidding aside the Roubiax was the absolutely worst bike I have ever ridden. Harsh, tracked poorly, cornered poorly, and felt cheap. It did climb well but everything else it did sucked. I was surprised to learn is was a 3K + bike. Wow , Specialized must be printing a mint, yo. In full disclosure the bike was a little big but I doubt that was the major reason for all its problems.

I'm no Big S shill, but they know bikes. This is either trolly or completely off base.

[Peter P.]

My first mountain bike: a 1984 Specialized Rockhopper.

I knew the industry hadn't settled on ATB geometry yet but I wanted to get out on the trails so I bought one.

It's glaring fault was the long, 18" chainstays. The bike would just lose traction so easily on uphills, despite a full knobby tire.

2. A custom sport touring bike of origin I won't mention. It's not that the bike overall rode like crap; it's just that the bike felt like it was hard to initiate turns whether by steering or leaning, even at speeds below 25mph. It was tolerable but odd.

[drewski]

this one
old p.
found
cheers
http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=1015734&postcount=1


That is a really crazy design. Looks like they are trying to go after the unicycle/hipster market.

Thanks for sharing.

Andrew

[blantonator]

Surly Karate Monkey, just not a great bike at all. Really wanted to like it, but it sucked big time. Heavy, chunky to control, just not a score by Surly.

my Surly 1x1 rides like a dump truck. I hate it and am selling it soon.

[c-record]

A couple that rode like turds: 80s Faggin, that was a flexy, speed-wobbling wonder. Almost crash if you tried to sprint.

Probably any Vitus I've thrown a leg over. I know-didn't slow Kelly down.

90s Concorde with Thron tubing. Harsh and lifeless.

Whoever commented on the Pinarello Prince being a twitchy bike, my experience was much different. In owning and riding that bike I loved the way it handled, I'd put it on the slower end of the steering twitchiness scale. 55 MPH on curvy descents were no problem and I really enjoyed many things about the Pinarello.

Someone insulting the CSI? That's grounds for banning!

[zap]

snip

Someone insulting the CSI? That's grounds for banning!


Not the first time either........but I'm still here.

My wife has one of the very rare tig welded CSI frames and loves it. Mind you, it's so small that some of the thicker ends got mittered off so it's a light frame.

[Jeff N.]

Caad 3.Absolutely. Beats you to death. Jeff N.

[jmeloy]

Are we talking about absolutely bad riding bikes or bikes that did not live up to high expectations and were, therefore, very disappointing? If it's the latter, there were some damn high-end frames that I owned, rode, and didn't care for.
I've had this hapen as well. Had a real beauty built and when I rode it it just seemed to be a struggle. I'd ride the same route as I'd ride my other bikes and i would come back just much more tired than when I'd ride one of my others. Finally decided that maybe the geo just didn't suit me as well.

[soulspinner]

Well hell, this whole thread about lousy bikes could be misconstrued then. In fact, any opinion expressed other than positive could be taken the wrong way so nobody should speak ill, right? That doesn't make sense.


Being heavy and riding heavy is something different.

This whole thread invites subjectivity, so I am not sure why you have a hard on for my opinion, but oh well. I love my Surly travelers check and wanted to love this bike, it was the opposite of love. It was/is a lousy bike, hence my post in this thread.

Same reaction to me saying my old masterlight was harsh. To big boys its great, but THAT steel 740 gram fork was stiff. Heresy I know, start the depth charges, Im rigged for silent running on aux power.......

[stuckey]

I had a custom build four or five years back. The chain rubbed the drop-out and stay in the smallest cog, the fork came with the threads messed up, there was red overspray all over the black, the fenders fit like crap, he forgot the wire loops on the fork, fork rake was not what I wanted, and so on. To top it off it just rode badly, it felt like it was surging like a car running out of gas. I cannot really explain it, it just rode terribly.

[christian]

What was the nature of the crappyness and POSness? Is there a single word that would describe its objectionable character?I won't presume to speak for Rugby, but when I rode one, I found the whole experience "trucklike" - the bike was heavy and lifeless and would crash through bumps and irregularities -- like an oversprung, lightly loaded dump truck. I decided against buying one, whereas it had been one of those "I have got to get one of these" when reading the specs - 29er, can tour, could fit Rohloff, etc. But you know my preference for lighter, whippier bikes, so no real surprise there. Any surprise is actually how much I like my 22 lb MXL.