| Title: | Bicycling |
| Notice: | Bicycling for Fun |
| Moderator: | JAMIN::WASSER |
| Created: | Mon Apr 14 1986 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 3214 |
| Total number of notes: | 31946 |
I have the opportunity to buy a Ross 10-speed cheap. I
know nothing about the brand. What are the pros and cons
of owning a Ross? Should I go ahead and buy it. It's newer
than my Schwinn and probably in better shape.
Scott
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 78.1 | I liked mine | SOUSA::JBELL | Mon Jun 09 1986 13:20 | 15 | |
Years ago I got a Ross 10-speed. It cost $129 in 1978. It was my
first 10-speed bike (I was 15), and I believe it was the first year
that Ross made 10-speeds.
In general, it wasn't too bad for the price. The only real problem
was the seat; it was heavy. As time went by I upgraded things as they
wore out. I destroyed 3 wheels, 3 deraileurs, 2 seats, a set of brakes,
and numerous pedals.
By the time of its demise I had done some 8,000 miles on it, much
of the distance on Boston roads. In 1983 I ran into the back of
a car in Kenmore Sq. and bent the fork terribly. A year later the
frame itself broke while I was riding, probably due to my inexpert
frame repair skills. (It broke at the BB to seat tube joint and
I managed to ride it home.)
| |||||
| 78.2 | Ross's look pretty good | HARDY::CONNELL | Wed Jun 11 1986 13:30 | 11 | |
Over the last 5 years Ross has made an effort to shed the "kid's
bike" image, and make better quality stuff. I think they have done
so.
I would consider the Ross assuming:
- It is a reasonably new model
- It is in good shape (stored indoors and maintained well)
- The price is significantly better than a similar new bike
Chuck
| |||||