MyRedTrek

I heard someone talk about being disappointed with getting a Huffy bike as a kid - their perception was it was a cheap knockoff of a Schwinn, which made me curious. Were Huffy bikes of that era as good as Schwinns?

The Golden Boy 

Schwinns were quality- their reputation was based on durability.

Huffy did not have that reputation.

cudak888 

Schwinn had boat-anchor frames made of thick rolled-and-welded steel that was then electroforged together into a frame. This 1920's approach to manufacturing was used right into the late 1970's even on their entry-level, "lightweight", so-called racing bicycles. They also had solid steel Ashtabula forks that could take a significant front end impact, though they're weak from the sides. Regardless of the drawbacks of making a bicycle this way, this meant a Schwinn could stand up to anything a youth or adult could throw at it and come out relatively unscathed.

Huffy (plus Murray and Columbia) had more conventional, thin, hi-tensile tubing, internally brazed at the ends. These frames - especially the ladies' models - are noodly and whippy. If you were a kid who ate the wall at the bottom of your neighborhood's steepest grade, chances are you'd bend the forks, kink the frame, and taco your front wheel. The Schwinn, though not without damage, might have ridden away.

Still, these represented two extremes of how to build a bicycle, neither of them ideal for a rider looking for something strong, but light, that wasn't a child's toy. This is why lugged steel frames made out of better hi-ten or cro-moly tubing ultimately won out in the 1970's and became the de-facto norm in the 1980's through the early 1990's. It's also why Raleigh tends to have a following in America (even for low-end tubed bicycles such as the Sports, Record, and Grand Prix, all of which will still outperform any electroforged Schwinn or noodlelike Huffy today with a few upgrades) as most people were introduced to decent lugged frames through Raleigh's offerings stateside.

Raleigh, of course, was one of the sloppiest of the mass-market manufacturers, and is not entirely worthy of the praise they often receive, but there was a time in the US when a Raleigh might have been your only local option - if you were so lucky - to get anywhere close to a proper bicycle.

-Kurt

Pompiere

Scwhinn bikes were built to last, and were priced accordingly. They had a dealer network and provide service and adjustments after the sale.

Huffy bikes were built to sell cheaply in box stores. They were frequently assembled in the back room by minimum wage teenagers. There was no service after the sale.

After Schwinn went out of business, their name was bought by a marketing company, so the Schwinn bikes you see now are more like what Huffy always has been.

RandolphCarter

In addition to what everyone else wrote, another key difference was Schwinn used better quality headsets, bottom brackets, and hubs.

Many of the Schwinn bikes from the 70s I've worked on had cranks, headsets and hubs that were usable after a clean and relube. The Huffys didn't.

52telecaster

I assembled about 8 million Huffy's, Murray's and Columbia's as well as many cheap Asian imports in department stores when I was grossly underemployed. First, none were of the quality of an electrofordged Schwinn. However they were not remotely similar in the 80s. The Huffy's we're the lightest and did come back with bent frames often. The Murray's were as heavy as Schwinn's only somehow less satisfying to ride. The Columbia's we're sometimes rideable and not horrible. When folks talk about the good old days of American bikes this is what I remember. As for the Asian imports, they were of course extremely low end at department stores but we're often sort of eye opening for the bike mechanic. They were more assembled, easier to true and usually worked better. Many also had lugged frames.

That's my experience. Btw to make a living you had to be able to assemble a minimum of 4 an hour.

RB1-luvr

Schwinn's chrome was superior to it's competition too.

etherhuffer 

Worse as a young kid in the 70's was being steeped in shame being seen riding a Huffy. Even as kids you could tell the quality difference.

bikemike73 

When I was a kid in the early 70s....Huffy was known as the worst quality bike, next to Iverson.

Schwinn was by FAR........ SUPERIOR to Huffy and Iverson...... as all have stated.

sd5782 

As a youngster, only the rich kids had Schwinns in my town. I shelled out my own paper route money and really wanted a Schwinn Manta Ray. The Sears 5 speed Spyder was maybe 20% less expensive, so I bought that. I do believe from later reading that it may have been Huffy made. It sure wasn’t the quality of a Schwinn, but held up decent and I learned how to maintain a bike.

smd4

I think my Free Spirit 10-speed was regarded better than a Huffy--and it sucked!

I guess it did the job though--I did have a lot of fun in those days. Ignorance was bliss.

thumpism 

I was lucky enough to have two Schwinns growing up, a 24" wheel Spitfire I got when six and a 3-speed Corvette when I was ten. I don't recall excessive pride about them, although the hand brakes on the Corvette proved advantageous when playing polo on empty parking lots. I do recall being envious of neighbor Gordon's English 3-speed when out on my maiden spin on the Spitfire.

SurferRosa

The first bike I "rebuilt" was a Huffy. Belonged to the neighborhood bully. The only bike I ever stole. For some reason, I thought I could avenge everyone and also make some cash by parting it out. Where I would sell these parts, I have no idea. Then everybody found out it was me, and I had to reassemble and return it. Had no clue what I was doing. Like a really ugly jigsaw puzzle. Couldn't ride it. I pushed it back to his house and left it in his front yard.

smd4

Then, you didn’t really rebuild it.

nlerner

And thus a Craig’s List bike flippah is born!

thinktubes 

Jump 5 trashcans on a huffy 10-speed and get back to me…

kunsunoke 

Huffy made bikes to hit specific department/catalog store price points. That was their business model. For the extremely casual rider (most people, even during the Bike Boom), and for those parents who desperately wanted to get their kids out of the house and away from television - a Huffy was good enough. Johnny wasn't riding crits, after all.

The bikes only had to last a few years. Once Johnny turned sixteen and got his driver's license, his bike instantly became extremely bogus, and would be consigned to the back of the garage, eventually to be sold to a neighbor for pocket change from that same garage.

And in another two to three years - when the cheap Shimano parts stopped working altogether - the bike would inevitably be tossed in the trash or donated.

Or they'd be trash-picked, then modified (similar to what hipsters do to good bikes).

Sometimes they'd even be jumped over garbage cans by those imitating Evel Knievel. Other times they'd be ghost-ridden into ponds or snowdrifts, or jumped off of docks in summertime, or smashed into each other in imitation of this event -
Or they'd be used in a pinch when Pops had the car and little sis needed to get to the corner bar to get a pack of smokes.

There aren't many Huffy bikes left in circulation. Very few were up to the task of survival through the ages. Every so often, though - someone opens up a time capsule.

t2p

I grew up in suburbs surrounded by mostly working class and middle class families

Schwinn bikes were considered expensive at the time - but it seemed many if not most kids / families in my neighborhood had Schwinn bikes ... they found a way to afford them

on my dead-end street there were six Sting Rays