worst designed bike ever?

[elPedro666]

Re: Re:

Boosh, and LGF cracks it!!!!!!

Sorry but I have to strongly disagree - that isn't a bike. Abomination.

The MF is a ballsed-up version what was a pretty genius design and I really like the 'Dale.

We can do better than this! Kirk was going to be my shout though, godawful, hateful things.

 

[munkey_bwy]

i have to put in the 'penny farthing'

 

[velomaniac]

Re:

I disagree on URT. If it was pointless why was it not short lived. Most issues with any system are usually pointed out pretty quickly but the faults of URT were never deemed really bad issues. Loads were made by many different manufacturers and we're not talking the BSO builders. In fact you can still get URT designs from a few small high end builders. The GT iDrive system is in fact a development of URT. Personally I love them and have never found them pointless. Only thing that happened were better designs came along thats just evolution. If riding a Klunker was seen as pointless by the vast majority and the minority gave it up as a pointless idea there would not be mountain biking in the first place !

The Raleigh Activator II is pretty bad but it was built to a price and a worst design should not really sell by the bucket load but Activators and URT's are very common.

 

[legrandefromage]

No, the Activator was just a cynical marketing ploy - trying to 'give full suspension to the masses'

21.1mm stem inside a 1 1/8 steerer, ineffective 'suspension' front and rear, gash gear shifting and heavy monkey metal parts that broke or bent after a few rides.

I've no opinion on URT designs but know for a fact that some were designed to work better with the rider sitting down - that got lost in translation somewhere when the first test rider stood up on the pedals.

 

[velomaniac]

You sure it was a 1 1/8th head tube, I had a Raleigh Alaska for a bit and the head tube looked like 1 1/8th but when you tried to fit a new headset cup you discovered the new style was too big 34mm cup outer diameter. Old school BMX with 21.1mm threaded steerers that Raleigh punted out were 32.7mm cup OD. So technically despite looks I reckon the activator probably had an old school BMX 1" oversized headset. Which unfortunately makes it an even cheaper throw together design.

I'm not disputing its a bad bike, a very bad bike, possibly the grandaddy of mtb BSO's but it still sold in big numbers.

 

[legrandefromage]

So it sold in big numbers - so what. So does anything cheap passing itself off as something better than it is.

Its that sort of marketing that actually reduces participation in cycling

Back to my velvet room...

 

[velomaniac]

The quality of build and materials used are rubbish but is the Activator the worst design. Looks pretty conventional to me, probably handles OK in an undamped bouncy, short travel way much like high end early full sussers. If Raleigh had spent more money, given it a full chromolly frame with better than bottom level components it'd probably be viewed as little more than an attempt to build a mass market full sus. Nope its not the worst design just a very poorly executed production bike created to part cash from punters pockets; punters who were not being educated by those in the know sufficiently that they took their cash else where.

 

[Fudd]

And as an extension of the URT design by being rigid when standing and plush when sitting, I give you the Softride -

 

[ferrus]

Re:

Couldn't you have picked another example instead of a Breezer!
I believe Joe had a bad back when he came up with that - for which it's probably quite appropriate. Possibly.

 

[ultrazenith]

An E stay version of that softride would be fantastic!