UniChris

Maybe try treading it a bit more carefully - it's quite clear



You'd be surprised what I carry on a distance ride. And in terms of grocery shopping, adding 10-15% of ones body weight to the rolling load doesn't make that big a difference in utility cycling. Most economically disadvantaged folks in first-world countries are (unfortunately) grocery shopping in small quantities anyway, because they don't have the cash on hand to buy the larger quantities that have cheaper unit price - the "expensive to be poor" trap is quite comprehensive.

Not only - never having to resort to "two foot gear" is a privilege, not a right. But given that a $129 bike can have a flimsy 21 speed drivetrain, its clear that a solid but simpler 1-x-something is possible at twice that price.

Sounds like people in your area had better options than durable but heavy share bikes - which is a very good thing! But that's not true everywhere. If there were plenty of used good bikes available everywhere people needed them, that article wouldn't have been written.

You keep not reading what I actually wrote, and imagining something I didn't. The reason for avoiding something precision like index shifting, is that in avoiding it, you remove something that needs maintenance and adjustment to keep working right. "My bike doesn't shift right becomes" "I move the lever until it's happy". Maybe you can get a BSO's derailleur properly adjusted - the coop mechanic who posted in response to the article couldn't. More than a few bike touring folks opt out of index shifting for the same reason of having less to worry about in the field. But it's only one example of the whole theme of keeping things simple to keep them affordably functional.

UniChris

That's why I was suggesting moving the assembly out of the store and instead contract it to a community organization that can care a bit about bikes and do the work while sharing that knowledge. And also have them work from pallets of parts, rather than having to make a "bike" out of the contents of each kitted box, so that bad parts can be individually discarded rather than having to decide between using them or putting the whole "bike" in the store dumpster.

Those "return the whole thing" cases are already priced into the sticker price too - something obviously inefficient, that happens because a big box store isn't organizationally set up to do anything but sell and take returns (many of which end up in the dumpster).

Maybe. If you look through the thread, you'll see some people vehemently arguing that BSO's often aren't all that bad, and others arguing that they are deadly in their very existence. What is true is that they feature a lot of designing to the margins of plausibility, compounded by inconsistency in assembly, but also component manufacture.

Maybe. It's interesting if you read the reviews - the top critical one is from someone who got a flat tire and gives the impression that user unfamiliarity/expectation may be part of it. Then there are a bunch of negative ones that attack it over quality complaints, bearing issues, etc. Then you get to the positive ones - and IIRC every single positive review was from someone sent a free sample to evaluate.

It may actually have potential if one gets "a good one". But there are also things that might go quickly wrong that may not be immediately visible. It's especially the kind of thing where one year it might have been decent, and then another they substituted cheaper bearings/bearing surfaces and ruined it - and you'd never be able to tell what was going to have accelerated wear when looking at it in the store, but at most if you knew what you were looking for detect that something was already wrong before it had been ridden at all.

It is however along the lines of what I see as demonstrating that with more care to narrow it to the important features only (eg, drop the suspension fork and front derailleur) and manufacture them right, and then delegate assembly to those who actually know something, something is possible.

flangehead

I remember helping a man with a flat. He was trying to get to work. His pay was going to support his family. The tires on his BSO mountain bike were so rotten that I could see the inner tube. I pumped him up to 20 psi or so; I didn’t want the tire to fail.

As we move to bicycles for transport at scale and not just for the economically desperate, appropriate bicycles will be demanded (and supplied) as you see in other countries.

The original Streetsblog article was essentially an advertisement for co-ops. They serve a useful purpose for the transportation market as it stands today: dominated by people who can’t afford tires.

prj71

Even bigger yet is they are made with cheap inferior materials. Even if the department store had a competent person to assemble the BSO, quality materials aren't there.

jack pot 

... what you want is an AK 47 shaped like a bicycle

UniChris

Indeed!

sloppy12

this topic is what people with money talk about. "you know if the poor just had bikes" lol a car in this country is a sign of effort, making it, success (even a junk car).

the majority only see bikes as toys not transport. if you want to solve a problem that is the one to focus on. If bikes become a reasonable means of transport in this county all of sudden $500 bikes wont seem out of reach.

UniChris

No doubt about it.

But the article and this thread are specifically about the people who already want bikes - either by choice, or by necessity of no other option.

Pretending they don't exist is just proving you have nothing to contribute to this thread - your claims about car purchase were so clueless as to be hilariously comical, if they weren't so sad.

But feel free to start yet another thread about advocating that people consider bikes, as for climate issues that's indeed important too.

Reflector Guy

So this has become another of those kinds of threads where the OP browbeats anyone who doesn't agree with him?

I thought so.

sloppy12

I worked for 15 years at used car lots. My best friends family owned a used car lot. it takes next to zero effort in this country to go buy a car.

My comments about car ownership and purchase are real world. find me a bike shop that will let you walk out the door with a 1500-5000 bike with two pay stubs and $99 down and no credit check.

UniChris

Not to do so and then operate it legally.

Start with the federal documentation mandates to get even get a license - community forums regularly get posts from thoroughly middle class native-born people complaining about procedural difficulties there.

Then you need registration fees.

Then in all but a handful of states, you'll need to buy mandatory insurance coverage before you can register it...

Even if you've got a salesman / finance manager willing to give a car away without any evidence of likelihood to ever see a single payment, there are still huge obstacles.

Then you need a place to park it...

That's why desperation-forced utility cycling is a thing.

In ignoring those payed in cash, you're ignoring some of the major categories of economic desperation bike users.

Is that employment illegal? Probably. Does that mean one might as well compound it by driving an uninsured vehicle without a license? No.

sloppy12

seems like it.

I don't even really disagree. I just think its a used market solution. which is already covered pretty well anywhere there is a demand for it.

the environment and infrastructure for bikes are totally different topics. if you are one of economically disenfranchised that can only move around by bike those things are more than likely really low on your radar.

starkmojo

What this thread really brings home for me is how the income of Americans has stagnated. Realistically the cost of a basic bike (using the upthread quote of $89 for a bike in 1972 which is equal to $560 in 2021 greenbacks) is roughly the same as the minimum wage increase (the minimum wage was $1.25 in 1972 which is worth $7.87 now) BUT the cost of everything else has gone up more than the cost of inflation: Median house price in 1972 - $27,000 or $169,00 adjusted. Median house price 2020 was $289,000 or $6,676 in 1972 dollars.

Same is true for food, utilities etc. So while bikes in the commuter range have increased comparable to the minimum wage, nothing else has. In order to do that Bicycle manufacturing has largely left the US for China where wages (and worker living conditions) can be dismal.

So really the argument I left with is that we need to increase the minimum wage to reflect the total cost of inflation to pre-Reagan levels if we want Americans to buy better bikes.

I am all for it.

Ironfish653

So basically, your model is to have the bikes manufactured locally. (Assembled from components) and delivered to the stores complete and ready to ride?
I appreciate where you're heart's at, but there's a lot of things that don't scale when you try to apply the 'Co-Op' workshop model to a big-box retail supply chain.

That final delivery leg alone would introduce a whole lot of labor, expense and extra risk to the product. Bikes come in flat boxes because it's easier to transport them that way. They're usually mostly complete, as well. 'Final Assembly' as takes place in the stores is pretty much a matter of installing the front wheel, and attaching the (already assembled / cabled) handlebar and stem to the head tube. Maybe installing the saddle. (That's how BikesDirect does it, too) Even higher end bikes going to bike shops already have major subassemblies done by the factory. Very few retail bikes arrive at their sales destination as a bare frame, wheelset, and 'box of components'
Moving complete bikes without risk of damage takes a lot more time and care and equipment than just loading a pallet of boxes on to a delivery truck. THULE and Yakima have made very good business over the years, doing just that. So now you also need dedicated delivery vehicles, with appropriately licensed and insured drivers, as well as the operating costs of those vehicles.

Same goes for the 'workshop' with 'pallets of parts' idea. That's pretty much a production line. That's not really a thing that you're going to find a community outreach group that wants to take that on. Who will your assemblers be? Will they be paid a comparable wage to typical assembly work, or will they be working "for the good of the cause?" Have you ever worked on an assembly line? It's a tough thing to do day in and day out, and not everyone has the capability for it. In order to get people with the skills and mentality to do a good job, you've either got to have a good incentive, or get full buy-in on your goal.

From a nuts-and-bolts perspective, unless you limit your production to a single model per facility, you're going to start getting into inventory and production control issues. I spent a couple of decades in production and assembly, and model change-overs are the riskiest part of a production day, as far as the possibility of making errors goes.
Unless your production model is for each assembler to get a frame and 'build sheet' then 'shop' the required components from 'the pallets'
How many bikes is this operation going to supply per week/month/season? How will you account for period of high seasonal demand?

Now, I can see this <somewhat> working if, instead of supplying a big-box retailer, your Cooperative Bike Factory is also the point of sale. That would add some overhead, but also cut out all the final transportation leg. You'd need to locate it where these unbanked, car-less potential customers live however.

sloppy12

I am pretty sure by everything you just said you don't really know any poor people. lol Or how the poor get cars.

Ironfish653

Well, it takes about the same amount of labor to manufacture a cheap bike as it does a 'good' bike. The only thing you can control is the cost of the materials used.
That Schwinn Ranger 26, and my Cannondale F-1000 have almost the exact same part count (ignoring the suspension forks) Both of them are stereotypical MTB's with V-brakes, and cable operated 3x7/8 shifting. It wouldn't take any more time to build up one of them or the other. Why is the Cannondale 5X more expensive than the Schwinn? It all comes down to the materials and components used. (I'm sure the USA-built 'Dales' frame was much more labor intensive to make, but that bike also weight half of what the Schwinn does)

'Assembly' on a department store bike is even less intensive than you realize, pretty much just installing the front wheel and the (already assembled and cabled) handlebar on to the stem.
The contract assemblers get paid by the piece, so there's no incentive for them to check anything that isn't glaringly obvious, and there certianly isn't time or space for anything more than a basic function check, let alone a test-ride.

Trakhak

My guess, after reading the sentence in question a few times, is that UniChris meant that manufacturers should use higher-quality steel to build more-durable rear derailleurs for entry-level bikes and should offset the added expense by refraining from installing front derailleurs on those bikes.

It appears that those three-speed rideshare bikes are heavy but well-built bikes, designed to be durable enough for many miles of use without frequent maintenance being needed. If there are hundreds or thousands of them being retired from service and essentially discarded, Uber, etc., should be able to get substantial tax write-offs by donating them to bike coops in areas where low-income people, non-binary and otherwise, can buy them for a reasonable fee that would serve to support the bike coop.

In other words: at least some low-income people in the U.S. want or need affordable and reliable bikes. Coincidentally and concurrently, companies that were renting large numbers of rideshare bikes want out of the business. Two birds, one stone. I'm sure that it can't be that easy. What am I missing?

By the way, that "ship pallets of frames and pallets of parts for assembly in the U.S." idea---don't see that working, to put it politely.

Koyote

Yep.

If you want the bikes to be as affordable as possible, you have them assembled overseas, where labor costs are much lower. OP's fantasy about "camps" where people assemble their own bikes, or some such scheme, would likely only raise assembly costs since you would need people to teach, manage, and correct the unskilled bike assemblers.

UniChris

I'm thinking local within a couple of miles. So for example, NYC's citibike system does some of their re-balancing using trailers pulled by a bike (okay it's an e-thing but still). And that's hauling a bunch of tank-like share bikes. In a lot of places loading 4 - 6 in a pickup truck may be what happens. In some places things may be close enough that you could ride them over and walk back.

I've done small volume assembly of some of the products I've designed in other industries, yes.

One of the base assumptions is that this isn't a constant flood of bikes to be built, but rather relatively low numbers built up as needed to re-stock the store's very limited storage and showroom space - could be 3 one week, 20 the next.

Bike co-ops are already doing this sort of work, via a combination of volunteer and trainee effort. My thinking was to get them better parts to work with, and an opportunity for their trainees to make a business of it.

Indeed, you'd need to keep a very limited range, and a high degree of parts commonality - really I'm thinking a 20, a 24 and a 26, and make them all in say, bright green.

But note that bike co-ops try to do this kind of thing when their feed is overwhelmingly eclectic, narrowed only by the point at which they start declining / throwing away what is just too oddball.

Of course, you should be able to buy them there, too. Or build your own there under guidance, if you can spend the time to do so. But it's important that they be in the big box store. Ideally with signage about how they were assembled at the co-op and what hours you can drop in there for help.

Hyper local would indeed be the point - the article was from an NYC perspective. Elsewhere such as where I am now Walmart and adjacent larger of the two local grocery stores are roughly a 40 minute walk, 50 if you do it from the center of town. I prefer to ride or drive there for efficiency, but I walk it sometimes. Come to think of it, there are some vacant storefronts in that plaza - though realistically, it's situated for the convenience of drivers, it would make more sense for a bike co-op to be more central.

UniChris

There's still final assembly, which is done on site in the back room of the store today - and done quite badly.

What it makes sense to do at the factory vs. what should be done on site has tradeoffs - I do think doing more of it at the point of use makes it more possible to keep faulty components out of the bikes (vs trashing the entire bike worth of parts), but that's something to be evaluated during the actual running of such an endeavor.

If you'd read a bit more carefully, you'd have seen that the "camp" was a distinct endpoint from the path into stores, justified not on product economics but as the selling of an experience. The market for experiences is actually huge - both among adults, and among parents looking for a place to park their kids other than in front of the xbox. Indeed it would cost money - quite a bit more than the value of the bike built. But the point of that path isn't to become the owner of a bike, rather to become the owner of the experience of having built a bike, or at least gotten the teen out of the house for a week in some relatively benign direction.

That's why for example they'd have hand-built wheels - to maximize the experience, even though any budget bike destined for the store is of course going to have ones machine built in a factory half a world away.

(Co-ops routinely replace spokes and true wheels - the irony is that it's actually a lot easier for a newbie to build a wheel from all new undamaged parts, than it is to true a beat up one)

Ironfish653

Corporate Inertia. The bikeshare companies could get a write-off whether they donated or scrapped them; Donating them would require contacting the co-ops and community groups (it would probably take several to handle dozens / hundreds of bikes) and arranging to have them transported and distributed. Any time you pick something up and move it, it costs money, especially if you need to hand-load it. Bulk waste collection doesn't care, it's mechanized, they just want to know where it is and how big the load is. Pay once and they haul it away.

On the other side of that coin, if I was a Co-Op bike mechanic, I'd be wary of taking on a bunch of ex bikeshare bikes. They use a lot of tamper-resistant fasteners to prevent vandalism, and the dockless bikes also have GPS/App-controled locks to prevent unauthorised use, so you'd have to defeat / convert all of that stuff, which requires time, and specialized tools that you typically don't find in any bike shop.

tyrion

The rent-a-bikes that I've seen had lots of proprietary parts (e.g. weird wheel/frame interfaces) and I think the point was to make scavenging parts from them futile. So if a miscreant stole the wheels off of one, the wheels wouldn't work on any other bike.

downhillmaster

Best thread ever.
OP reads an uniformed and ridiculous article that states that there is a ‘critical bike-equity barrier’ and he then surmises all on his own that the ‘unbanked’ need a quality $200 bike.
Nevermind that the unbanked represent only 5% of the population and half of them have plenty of money to buy a $500 bike. They are simply unbanked because they don’t trust banks or don’t want to pay bank fees.
Also never mind that there are many other options out there for very serviceable $200 bicycles.
SJW’s are so cool

guachi

Asking why we don't have a better, simpler, cheaper new bike is like wondering why a simple, cheap new car doesn't exist. And neither exists for the same reason - there's a used market sucking up all the demand at that price point.

BNSF

Oh, but there COULD be simple, cheap new cars. There SHOULD be. Trainees and volunteers could lovingly assemble them from bulk shipments received from abroad. Assembled locally, of course, as demand necessitates, so inventory and storage would be minimized. People would come to build the cars not for the money but for the adventure and experience of doing so just for the satisfaction. Obviously it's better than just parking oneself in front of the TV all day. Pay's the same either way so why not?