Raleigh Max Cromo 3
ba...@bf.u-net.com
I am looking to buy the above, anybody have an opinion about this
particular model.
David Yellin
In article <3531691e...@news.u-net.com>, ba...@bf.u-net.com writes
>I am looking to buy the above, anybody have an opinion about this
>particular model.
Magazine reviews have it that it's unnecessarily heavy because of the
oversize tubing but it's an amazing amount of quality kit for the money.
As it happens :) I have a 19 inch April 1997 model going spare - it was
my wife's as an introduction to MTBing, to see if she liked it. She did
and now has a Klein Attitude...so the Cromo can't have been bad.
The bike's immaculate; email me if you're interested, the poor thing is
just sitting in my study getting dusty.
Regards
--
David Yellin
trickster
In article <3531691e...@news.u-net.com>, ba...@bf.u-net.com writes
>I am looking to buy the above, anybody have an opinion about this
>particular model.
--
tric...@galaxycorp.com
www.galaxycorp.com/trickster
Myra Van Inwegen
trickster <tric...@galaxycorp.com> wrote:
>In article <3531691e...@news.u-net.com>, ba...@bf.u-net.com writes
>>I am looking to buy the above, anybody have an opinion about this
>>particular model.
>SHITE.
Well, now wasn't that a useful reply? If it's shite, how about telling
us why, and what's a better choice in the price range.
--
-Myra VanInwegen
Myra.Va...@cl.cam.ac.uk http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/mvi20/
Shaun C. Murray
In article <6gvk4o$jif$1...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, mv...@sprat.cl.cam.ac.uk says...
>
>trickster <tric...@galaxycorp.com> wrote:
>>In article <3531691e...@news.u-net.com>, ba...@bf.u-net.com writes
>>>I am looking to buy the above, anybody have an opinion about this
>>>particular model.
>>SHITE.
>
>Well, now wasn't that a useful reply? If it's shite, how about telling
>us why, and what's a better choice in the price range.
HEAVY SHITE...
...is the full review I think though 'BADLY WELDED' probably goes in there
somewhere. ;-)
No really. Overbuilt Chro-mo MTB's went out in the early 90's.
Shaun
Andy Dingley
On Mon, 13 Apr 1998 01:25:02 GMT, ba...@bf.u-net.com wrote:
>I am looking to buy the above, anybody have an opinion about this
>particular model.
Is that the one with the silly oversized downtube ? Make it aluminium
shaped, to hide the fact that it's otherwise a perfectly nice steel
frame ?
Daft idea IMHO - Good bike (and good value) spoiled by the extra
weight the fat tubes brings with them. You can do better.
--
If Thomas Crapper had meant men to leave the seat down,
he would have fitted it with a gas spring.
trickster
In article <6gvk4o$jif$1...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Myra Van Inwegen
<mv...@sprat.cl.cam.ac.uk> writes
>trickster <tric...@galaxycorp.com> wrote:
>>In article <3531691e...@news.u-net.com>, ba...@bf.u-net.com writes
>>>particular model.
>
>Well, now wasn't that a useful reply? If it's shite, how about telling
>us why, and what's a better choice in the price range.
--
tric...@galaxycorp.com
www.galaxycorp.com/trickster
ba...@bf.u-net.com
On Tue, 14 Apr 1998 23:03:06 +0100, trickster
<tric...@galaxycorp.com> wrote:
>Cos I dont give a monkeys about raleigh or people who wish to buy one.
Whats your problem?
Why bother replying with such SHITE (as you would say) comments as
above.
trickster
In article <3534f7dd...@news.u-net.com>, ba...@bf.u-net.com writes
Constructive Critisism. Or my view into why I hate Raleigh's.
1. Shite Frames
2. Shite Components
3. Probably the same on most bikes of the same category but douled up
with a rip of price.
--
tric...@galaxycorp.com
www.galaxycorp.com/trickster
Chris
>--
>tric...@galaxycorp.com
>www.galaxycorp.com/trickster
>Constructive Critisism. Or my view into why I hate Raleigh's.
>
>1. Shite Frames
Why? Which materials are you talking about? Or is it because they aren't
called by strange names Zaskar or Mini Mula etc. Strange that they seem to
do well in competition.
>2. Shite Components
What! Shimano are shite? So how come the majority of manufacturers use them
>3. Probably the same on most bikes of the same category but douled up
>with a rip of price.
Somehow I think your judgement is a little off track here, have you looked
at the prices of the bikes in the same catagory. They are all around the
same price. Also Raleigh tend to give a better level of component for a
given price. Take a look at the magazines, they very rarely slate a Raleigh
MTB.
I hate it when someone slags of a companys complete product line. Yes
individual products might be poor but not the whole line.
Raleigh have been around for a long time, lets see how long those other
trendy bike named companies stand the test of time.
Chris...
Myra Van Inwegen
My only experience with Raleigh MTBs is looking through a series of
brochures on them in a John Lewis. The line included full-suspension
bikes, and I felt that most if not all of them were much much more
oriented toward people who wanted to look cool rather than actually
have a machine that provides a good ride. Rather than providing a
really good frame, good wheels, good components etc, they added
springs. This is stupid.
I don't know about this Raleigh Max Cromo 3, but oversized CroMo
tubing???? Adds nothing but weight. Oh, and looks like oversized
aluminum tubes, great. This is the *frame* of the bike, its heart and
soul, the one part of the bike that really defines the bike. You can
replace all the other parts on a bike, but when you replace the frame,
you have a different bike. And the frame of this bike is made worse so
it can look better. No thanks, I'll stick with more sensible bikes.
On the other hand, I don't doubt that Raleigh does make some good
bikes. My officemate bought their top of the line touring bike after
serious research, and he was convinced that it was the best on the
market for what he wanted to pay.
> What! Shimano are shite? So how come the majority of manufacturers use them
Shimano makes good parts, Shimano makes junk. Manufacturers use them
because they have a huge range, and because they're virtually a
monopoly. Can you completely spec a bike with non-Shimano parts? Maybe
but it would cost an asonishing amount of money.
Tim Hall
On 17 Apr 1998 15:02:52 GMT, mv...@sprat.cl.cam.ac.uk (Myra Van
Inwegen) wrote:
well not this first bit, but..
>> What! Shimano are shite? So how come the majority of manufacturers use them
>
>Shimano makes good parts, Shimano makes junk. Manufacturers use them
>because they have a huge range, and because they're virtually a
>monopoly. Can you completely spec a bike with non-Shimano parts? Maybe
>but it would cost an asonishing amount of money.
Manufacturers also use Shimano so they can say "and it's got Shimano
xyz widgets" and Joe Public thinks "Wow, Shimano, I've heard of them,
it must be good". Fooled me any way.
Tim
Chris
My response was more a defence of Raleigh not the model of bike. But Ok the
Raleigh Max is one over weight bike, but it is not really an off-road bike
and I don't think Raleigh would say it is. By the feel of it, its around
35lbs or more!
Shimano components? You're right they have good and bad. Again you wouldn't
want to use their lower grade components off-road. Raleigh don't just use
Shimano on their bikes. There are some components that cost more then the
equivalent weight in gold, but most of them are more for posing with.
Chris...
Myra Van Inwegen wrote in message <6h7qus$rkh$1...@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>...
>My only experience with Raleigh MTBs is looking through a series of
>brochures on them in a John Lewis. The line included full-suspension
>bikes, and I felt that most if not all of them were much much more
>oriented toward people who wanted to look cool rather than actually
>have a machine that provides a good ride. Rather than providing a
>really good frame, good wheels, good components etc, they added
>springs. This is stupid.
>
>I don't know about this Raleigh Max Cromo 3, but oversized CroMo
>tubing???? Adds nothing but weight. Oh, and looks like oversized
>aluminum tubes, great. This is the *frame* of the bike, its heart and
>soul, the one part of the bike that really defines the bike. You can
>replace all the other parts on a bike, but when you replace the frame,
>you have a different bike. And the frame of this bike is made worse so
>it can look better. No thanks, I'll stick with more sensible bikes.
>
>On the other hand, I don't doubt that Raleigh does make some good
>bikes. My officemate bought their top of the line touring bike after
>serious research, and he was convinced that it was the best on the
>market for what he wanted to pay.
>
>> What! Shimano are shite? So how come the majority of manufacturers use
them
>
>Shimano makes good parts, Shimano makes junk. Manufacturers use them
>because they have a huge range, and because they're virtually a
>monopoly. Can you completely spec a bike with non-Shimano parts? Maybe
>but it would cost an asonishing amount of money.
Andy Dingley
>Can you completely spec a bike with non-Shimano parts?
I very nearly did this a couple of weeks ago. Quite by chance I built
up a good-quality reasonable-price MTB and then realised I hadn't
bought a single Shimano component for it. The parts were bucket
shopped from what I had and what was going cheap, with no real plan to
it at all; Gripshifts, Sachs Centera mechs, Tektro V brake on the
front, ten quid Onza HO on the back, Cro-Magnon cassette, Sovos
sealed-bearing hubs (40 quid), old Suntour crankset (another 40 quid,
again from the Edinburgh sale).
Then I realised I didn't have a BB for it. Damn. Foiled at the last
hurdle. Does _anyone_ make something that's remotely as good as a
UN72 and costs under 50 quid ?
--
A drowning surrealist will not appreciate a concrete lifebelt.
DavBinks
You get what you pay for, no more, no less.
Buy a cheap bike and that's what you'll get - a cheap bike.
Buy a better bike, and that's what you'll get.
The competition amongst manufacturers of anything (not just bikes) is such that
they don't stay in business for long if they charge a lot for not much.
Generally speaking, the more you pay, the more you get.
Yes you can argue that on a scale of 1 - 10, one bike *for the same money*,
might be 7.5 and another 7.6, or 7.4, but there really won't be much
difference.
Buy up to the limit of your budget (and perhaps a bit more) and decide what
best suits you in that price range.
Remember though, that some bikes have a good frame, but cheaper bits, others
have a cheap frame, but better bits.
Given the choice, go for the one with the better frame is my advice.
The frame will last longer than the bits, which can be changed one by one as
they wear out.
Dave Binks. Leicestershire Road Club
If God had meant us to walk, he would not have invented the bike.
Simon Bowns
>What! Shimano are shite? So how come the majority of manufacturers use them
shimano make good and bad components
--
Simon Bowns
Please tell me if you don't recieve this message
Shaun C. Murray
In article <3539b9c9...@news.demon.co.uk>, din...@codesmiths.com
says...
>
>Then I realised I didn't have a BB for it. Damn. Foiled at the last
>hurdle. Does _anyone_ make something that's remotely as good as a
>UN72 and costs under 50 quid ?
Yeah, a UN52. Ooops!
RaceFace do a BB under 50 but really I see no point in anything other than a
UN52.
Shaun
blackpi...@gmail.com
> I am looking to buy the above, anybody have an opinion about this
> particular model.
