Much like Stu Francis when he would exclaim about his grape crushing desires, I'm furious beyond the ken of mortal man/insanely irate/angry/slightly peeved/in reality don't really care much but thought I would grump anyway about Thorn bicycle manufacturers.As you might have noticed me mention dozens of times, we're probably getting a tandem in the near future. As Thorn seems to be quite a big name in the world of tandems (At least as much as someone can be given their limited appeal) I was having a browse through their website and was a bit pissed off with the way they worded their writings.
Now, this isn't so much about Thorn individually as my dislike for certain forms of advertising and general self-promotion. There's a part of their brochure which is entitled 'Who could now seriously choose 700c for tandems?'. Funnily enough, Thorn doesn't make any 700c wheeled tandems and the wording of that title may as well be 'You're nothing but a dickwad if you choose anything other than a 26" wheel tandem'. They also mention about other companies using 'inappropriate' components on their tandems and how 700c tyre side wall failure is 'very common' and 'dangerous' with many 700c wheeled tandems. What the hell does 'very common' mean? That's just scaremongering. To me 'very common' would be 'practically every journey' but it could mean 'one in every couple of hundred tandems experience this' to someone else. What a load of bollocks! I just can't stand companies trying to scare people into buying their products and I also don't like that crap about slagging off other companies. If your company isn't good enough to stand on the merit of its own product(s), you shouldn't be making anything. It really bugs me when a company has to resort to putting down the competition (Even if not directly by name) in order to make sales. I know it's a 'cut-throat business' and all but that's just pathetic.
Nonetheless (Despite all my moaning) I imagine Thorn makes pretty good bikes, even if I reckon there is a bit of 'paying for the name' with them.
2 comments:
I think you may have this backward:
I don't believe Thorn knocks 622 mm tandems because they don't make them; Rather, I think Thorn doesn't make them because they think they're not a good idea.
I rather tend to agree with him on this point, for most tandem applications.
See: http://sheldonbrown.com/tandfat.html
This is a chronic issue for retailers...should we stock products we don't like just to give customers a choice, or should we explain why we don't like something and risk having it interpreted as sour grapes.
I've met Robin Thorn, and own one of his Raven bikes, and I have complete confidence in his integrity.
I know what you mean but it strikes me the wordage they use could be a bit more positive than it is. It's only right to express one's opinion and positives about one's own product(s) but the manner in which it was written seemed to be a bit dismissive and almost (For lack of a better word) slightly 'bitchy' in relation 700c tandem wheels, as if someone would be an idiot for choosing them.
Having read the article you linked to, it mentions about 700c wheels being fine for tandem usage so long as they've got plenty of spokes. Surely this helps in the argument for 700c being a perfectly reliable and safe tandem option? This is an option I felt the Thorn brochure dismissed. It wasn't anything in relation to the quality of Thorn's product. I'm sure their bicycles are excellent. It was purely in reference to the wording used in their brochure.
Post a Comment