Rov_Scam
2mo ago
We do, but there aren't any Chinese brands with American equivalents that are sold for a fraction of the price. The "Chinese brands" are relatively obscure and are built to compete with American internet direct brands. You can't get anything basic from them like OP is looking for. There are also cheap Chinese bikes available on Ali Express but the listings don't mention any of the specs, which means they are likely the equivalent of the bikes you can get for $200 at big box stores that use extreme cost-cutting measures to get the price that low and aren't recommended for use as anything other than toys that you're willing to toss if they break—getting these repaired means paying more than the bike is worth to fix something that is likely to break again in the near future.
Chinese cars aren't this bad quality-wise, but I think the idea that Chinese EVs would dominate the US market but for tariffs is overblown. Yes, the BYD Seagull only costs $10,000 in China. No, it isn't anything an American would ever buy. It doesn't meet American safety standards without substantial modification, but that aside, the small size, 75 hp motor, and 150 mile range are nonstarters here. The bare-bones Mitsubishi Mirage is only $16,000 (and was $10,000 not that long ago), and it isn't exactly flying off the lot. the BYD Dolphin, essentially a Seagull modified to meet first-world safety standards, costs more like $25,000 and isn't exactly popular in markets where it's sold. I know this is a substantial digression but I hear this a lot about Chinese cars, but I'm just not buying it.
Rov_Scam
2mo ago
If your budget is only $200, then you can't be picky about features. Hell, if your budget is only $200, offer that for the Trek, because that's about as good as you can reasonably expect for that price. The public has for some reason come to expect that a relatively complex item with a lot of moving parts, some of which need to be machined, shouldn't cost more than $500. It's like expecting to get a decent new car for $10,000.
Rov_Scam
2mo ago
I think that one key difference is that your landscaper worked hard to be able to afford that 80k truck, and the fact that it's probably a business expense if he's using it for landscaping and he's making payments that come out of company revenues complicates matters further; relatively poor people who own businesses often have surprisingly expensive pieces of capital equipment or real estate that they wouldn't otherwise own. But even if that's your landscaper's personal vehicle, he didn't just get the money for it as the result of one meeting that didn't involve him doing anything other than making a few phone calls. Asking for preferential treatment during a bidding process probably doesn't result in much more work, if any, than the person with authority has to do anyway. Your landscaper probably does a lot more work for a lot less money in the normal course of business than a corrupt public official does. $2,000 requires at least a solid week of work for most people. There's obviously a premium if the work is illegal, but how much do small-time drug dealers make? What's the overall risk of being caught? The Homan case didn't even involve as much risk as a normal case—if Trump wins and he's in a position to act on the bribe, there's a good chance Trump will kill the investigation. If Harris wins or he doesn't get the position in the Trump administration, then there's no case against him because you can't bribe someone who doesn't have the power to do anything (I will gladly accept $50,000 from anyone here to give them favorable treatment in government contracts). When you break down all the contributing factors and ignore the moral dimension, it would be more surprising if he didn't do it for the relatively large sum of $50,000, which is a good chunk of most Americans' annual income.
Rov_Scam
2mo ago
Tri bikes aren't really made for riding around town; they're made for riding hard in races where you can't draft. They don't have traditional handlebars but "aero bars" where you lean so far forward your forearms sit on rests. The aggressive aerodynamic design means they aren't comfortable, don't climb well, and don't descend well since you don't have easy access to the brakes. They're made for getting an extra 5% speed advantage on closed race courses, not casual rides on roads with traffic where you're going to have to stop fairly regularly, not once at the end of the ride. In addition to the weight problem noted below, their disadvantages are numerous enough that some tri riders will use regular road bikes, especially if the course involves significant elevation change. On a group ride they would be annoying at best and dangerous at worst.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
I suck on phone keypads generally, so yes,. though my phone keypad isn't laid out like you're suggesting.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
I worked for an inventory service in college and we used machines that were nothing but a numerical keypad with a one-line LCD display, and asa result I'm one of the few people whose typing is mediocre but can scream on the keypad—I use it almost every time I need to put a number in, even if I'm typing something. So I couldn't imagine having a keyboard without one. To be fair, some laptops don't, which incidentally included the ones the supervisor used to download the data and run the reports, so they carried a usb keypad with them to make manual entry easier.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
Alt + 0151 will produce an em dash in whatever program you're using. Alt + 0150 will produce an en dash if you're brave enough to use it.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
The Supreme Court just ruled unanimously that the CRA is not a one-way street, and the same standards apply regardless of whether the plaintiff is a member of a minority group.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
For al milquetoast speaker the media networks memorializing him are suspiciously avoiding showing clips of him saying anything.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
You can talk about edge cases all you want, but there's a Chesterton's Fence element here too. Hostile work environment doctrine was introduced to prevent employers from evading discrimination laws by, say, hiring black people but making fun of them for their race at work so that blacks simply wouldn't want to work there. "You can work here, but it will be hell" doesn't exactly advance the aims of the Civil Rights Act. You can argue that in some instances courts have gone too far, but you can do that with respect to any doctrine. When discussing tradeoffs, guys being able to look at porn at work isn't going to win against making it difficult for women to be employed there.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
Maybe, but it's hard to tell. If I'm an employer I have reasons for not wanting employees to tell nigger jokes at work or request blowjobs from female staff regardless of the liability situation, and as a matter of public policy we don't want employers to encourage the above as an end-around to avoid anti discrimination laws. The law involves tradeoffs, and most people's desire to bring politics into non-political jobs, or hear about other people's politics, is outweighed by the desire to prevent real discrimination. Talking about the apparatus of oppression only makes sense in this instance if you're talking about the employer's interest, because there's no free speech guarantee when you're on somebody else's time.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
And you think that if the hostile work environment doctrine were removed then you'd feel free to speak your views? Or is this just the zeitgeist among people you happen to work for?
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
What do you want to say at work that you think you're being prevented from saying because of potential employer liability under "hostile work environment" standards? What makes you think than your employer would have no problem with you saying that even if the potential liability didn't exist?
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
It's not so much that they got bombed as it is the circumstances. If Israel bombs a country nobody likes or even is neutral about, it's a minor news item. It's different when they bomb a US ally with whom we have various agreements involving keeping a military base in their country and selling them advanced weapons. Even in the absence of a mutual defense agreement, one would expect that a "key strategic ally" would get more than a warning that another country would attack them.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
You might say that but I doubt the American government or indeed the American public would feel the same way. Media would report it as the only time the US mainland has ever been bombed and the first bombing of US territory since WWII. We would respond militarily, even if it was just a Doolittle-style raid to show we could do it.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
There seems to be a fundamental difference, though, between a traditional assassination and one using military means. If a foreign actor shot someone on American soil for political reasons it's different than them sending their air force in and bombing their house. One is a criminal act, the other an act of war.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
For a trained sniper, no, but I doubt the assassin was a trained sniper. For the typical guy with a scoped rifle who hunts deer a few weeks out of the year, anything beyond 100 yards is dicey enough that they'll think twice about taking the shot.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
This isn't a change in anything. There will always be a certain number of people on either side of the aisle who will celebrate violence against the other side, and the only thing that's different now than 15 years ago is that more of them are on the internet by virtue of fewer of them being too old to go on Reddit. I couldn't tell you the number of crabby old guys in bars who talked openly about the "ten cent solution" during the Obama presidency.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
I understand as much as I understand that none of these scenarios involving population bombs ever happen. I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that there will be at least 1 million Han Chinese in 100 years, which is more than double the population of Amish at present, a population that's doing incredibly well by your metrics.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
I guess next you'd also tell them that they can't take credit risk into account when issuing loans.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
I don't know that bringing up one of the largest countries in the world is a great idea when talking about a "death sentence" for an ethnicity.
Rov_Scam
3mo ago
Not really. Most medical records I look at have too much information, not too little, and that appears to be a consequence of computer programs that make it really easy to generate a ton of data ever yfive minutes. Office notes are usually pretty good, but if the guy was in the hospital it seems like they provide daily updated medication lists and ongoing reports of vital signs. Plus the complete record includes all the discharge instruction for how to care for your wound, etc.
Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention to your posts, but I got the impression you were looking to buy new for that price, since most people buying used don't have much option wrt features or brands, especially at the lower end of the used market. Maybe things are better where you are, but most of what I see on FB marketplace/CL is junk, and the specialist bike sites are more along the lines of "This year-old $6500 bike is a steal at $3000". It's for that reason that I usually steer inexperienced (i.e. if you have to ask) buyers away from used models, because they simply don't know what they're looking at or if they're getting a good deal. The one exception would be buying use from a bike shop, where they often have fairly-priced trade-ins that are guaranteed to be in good mechanical condition.
That last point is something to consider and take into account. Any 10–20 year-old used bike is going to need a chain, probably a rear cassette, probably tires, probably new cables. The parts aren't expensive and you can do the repairs yourself if you're willing to learn, but there can be specialized tools involved (that are cheap to come by), and if it's your first time doing this work you simply aren't going to get it dialed in the way it should be. there's also the issue that if you don't know what you're looking at, it's going to be difficult to even know what parts you have to order. It's usually along the lines of if you can find out what the bike originally came with you'll find out that they don't make that part anymore. They make a close-enough equivalent (actually several) that will be compatible provided that you make some minor adjustments. These are the kinds of things bike shops will do without even telling you but that can give you fits if you try to do it yourself. At that point, it's almost easier to just take it to a shop and have them do it, which will cost approximately what you paid for the bike, which is why I tend to recommend buying used bikes from a shop that paid a lot less for the bike itself than you would have and with parts, labor, and profit can sell it for approximately the same price as if you had bought it yourself and had the work done, which may sound like a wash but at least means you can take your bike home and ride it on Day One without any surprises. I'm not trying to say this to discourage you from buying used, because I generally think it's a great idea, especially for what you're looking for, but it's something to be aware of.
Now that I have a better idea where you're coming from, I can give you some detailed advice. Most people here have said that anything from a reputable brand will be good, and they're right, but it's useless information if you don't know what a reputable brand is, and there are a few caveats. The issue is making sure you get a "bike shop bike" and not a "department store bike", which is generally easy to do if you buy at a shop but harder on the used market due to a variety of factors. First, anything by the following brands, from any era, can be recommended without hesitation: Trek, Specialized, Giant, Cannondale, Scott, Norco (unless you're buying it in Canada), Co-Op (REI's house brand), and Kona. GT and Diamondback must be approached with caution, as they make both higher-end models and models that are sold at places like Dick's. I wouldn't recommend one unless you really know what you're looking at. Schwinn and Mongoose are in a similar boat as they used to be good brands until they got sold and deprecated by their new owners. The goodwill has been gone long enough that few people would even be fooled these days, and require some convincing that one from the 90s is actually a good purchase, but unless you're looking at something really old they're best to be avoided. Raleigh, Jamis, Fuji, and Nishiki seem to have had various identity crises over the years where they can't decide whether they want to be a legitimate brand or a budget brand; a used model could be a find or could be crap, and there's no way of knowing unless you already know. Brands like Huffy, Next, Murray, Roadmaster, or anything with the name of a pickup truck is department store crap and should be avoided at all cost, as is anything that weighs about a thousand pounds. Someone mentioned Motobecane and Gravity's ID bikes earlier. They're basically cobbled together from spare parts, and can be great value for money, though buying one used is asking for an adventure. People also mentioned other internet direct brands, and there are innumerable boutique brands that also make excellent bikes. While I obviously wouldn't want to discourage you from taking advantage of a deal on these, most of them specialize in Serious Mountain Bikes or Serious Road Bikes, not what you're looking for, and in any event you aren't likely to find one for cheap at a bike flea market.
As for what you are looking for, I'd recommend a hybrid. They kind of get a bad rap in the bike community because they aren't particularly great at anything, but for someone who wants to do relatively short rides on the road or easy trails they can't be beat. There's a reason why manufacturers sell more of these than anything else. To explain why you should get one, it's easier to explain why you shouldn't get something else. The road bike may feel better on the road, but there are two big caveats. The first is that the riding position is going to be more aggressive than what you're probably used to, and while that's a good thing for the long haul, if you're talking about ten miles max at this point then I don't know if it's worth it to get used to it. More importantly, they aren't made for riding off-road, period. I know you said you plan on riding on roads, but crushed limestone rail trails can present a challenge, and gravel is pretty much off limits. If I only have one bike in the quiver, I want something that will be able to handle a dirt road in a county park that small children can ride without hesitation.
For similar reasons I would recommend against hardtail mountain bikes—if most of your riding is going to be on the road, and you don't have any intention of doing serious off-roading, a mountain bike isn't the best choice. The wide, knobby tires they're equipped with don't perform well on pavement and if you don't change them immediately you will soon enough, since asphalt wears them down quickly. Of more serious concern, though, is that these will probably have some kind of front suspension that will require its own maintenance and is another thing prone to breaking, except the bike is unrideable with blown out suspension forks and replacements are really expensive. Some hybrids will come with suspension forks to make things seem sportier; avoid these as well, for similar reasons. It's actually more imperative to avoid hybrids and low-end hardtails with front suspension because the cost of the forks takes up a significant proportion of the total cost of the bike, and requires sacrifices elsewhere. The forks are usually of low quality and will be the first thing to break, especially after 10 years. If you are considering a bike with suspension at all, only buy RockShox or Fox products and run from anything Suntour. A fully rigid mountain bike might be worth looking at, with the caveat that you'll want road-appropriate tires.
I'd be remiss if I didn't mention gravel bikes, since others have. While this would be a good option, combining road bike geometry with a stouter frame and wider tires to handle the off-road better, they are a relatively recent development and have only become popular in the past ten years, and only within the last five or so at consumer-friendly price points. For full disclosure, these are great and this is what I use for all my road riding, rail-trail cruising, touring, and light gravel riding. The isue for your purposes is that there isn't likely to be anything available at the price you're looking to pay. A bike that sold for $2,000 in 2019 isn't going to lose 90% of its value in 6 years. If by some miracle you can find one, go for it.
Since you're likely getting a hybrid, a word of caution about what kind of hybrid you want. I've seen the term used for everything from old-lady comfort bikes to wannabe mountain bikes. I'd recommend something on the sportier side, with the cautions about suspension. These used to occasionally be marketed as "fitness" or "sport" bikes. You want to make sure that the riding position is similar to a mountain bike with you leaning fairly far forward and a fairly low rise to the handlebars. Some hybrids have handlebars with a lot of rise, favoring a mre upright riding position, but this puts too much pressure on your asshole. I'd also add that bike fit is more important than the bike itself.
I bought a brand new gravel bike last year. Before that I was riding a 1999 Cannondale hybrid that had seen thousands of miles and one partial rebuild. I was looking at parts for rebuild number two and was beginning to doubt the wisdom of sinking money into something that should be hanging on a wall by now, but it worked for what I needed it for and I didn't want to spend the money one a new one, or a new to me one. Then I was looking at my REI dividend statement that had been ballooning for years and now stood at $750 or so, and I had been using it to make minor purchases like chain lube because I hadn't had any major equipment needs in five years. Then I saw an ad that a $1200 gravel bike was on sale for $999, which meant that I could get a brand new bike for only about $300 out of pocket. Though I admit that's not a typical reason.
Certain enthusiasts need to have the newest and baddest shit that will be a failed, forgotten experiment in five years, though I guess that's not typical, either. The real reason is that buying new is just easier for the kind of money involved. Spend $200–$300 on a used bike and another $200 on parts and labor to get it up to spec and you aren't too far off how much you could get a comparable new bike for. The process involves a lot less friction than buying used, because you can just go to stores and test ride bikes and talk to a knowledgeable salesman about what would be best for you and go from there. When you're ready to buy, the bike is going to be there, and you pay with a credit card. Buying used means you need a certain amount of knowledge to know what you're looking for, can mean driving around and testing one bike at a time at a guy's house, which guy probably can't be of much help to you. You have to know what you're looking for in terms of mechanical issues. If you don't make a decision right away, the bike might not be there when you call again. You're going to need to give a stranger cash and be stuck with the purchase. No warranties will carry over to you. If it's a dud you could be out a lot of money. I bought the most expensive bike I own used, but for the casual rider looking at a first purchase, it's not something I'd recommend.
More options
Context Copy link