I see there's an XO-3 on ebay for $1,500. Laff riot.
On Apr 7, 5:08 pm, PATRICK MOORE <bertin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nonsense. The Xos were decent bikes but nothing special. I owned a '92 XO-1;
> my brother a '93 X0-2, and his then wife, a ditto X0-1. Nice, wouldn't mind
> having my '92 back, but hardly of collectible quality; my '73 Motobecane
> Grand Record is a better bike than the '92 XO-1 -- better tubing, better
> handling, more clearance for fenders and panniers, better rear load handling
> capacity (and the Motobecane was sold as a racing bike).
>
> I expect -- I've never owned or ridden one, just judging from the comments,
> including first hand comments from owners and riders -- that the RB-1s were
> the best of the Grant Bridgestone USA bikes.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 4:22 PM, cm <chrispmur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Call me crazy... but isn’t it possible that sometimes a bike is worth
> > putting on a pedestal, that it isn't "doomed" because of it? This is
> > probably one of the last, if not the last, new XO-1's. Sure it was
> > made to be ridden, but it wasn't ridden. It seems like it is now more
> > a part of bicycling history, than just a bicycle. I would love to go
> > to a museum someday and see an un-ridden XO-1. There are thousands of
> > bikes in musuems around the world and I think we are all the better
> > for it. I like museums of all sorts and to say something is doomed for
> > being in a museum seems to diminish the value of what museums do. I am
> > suprised there isn't discussion of buying it specifically to donate to
> > a musuem. I will donate $25 if someone seriously wants to get this
> > started.
>
> > Don't get me wrong, bikes are made to be ridden. There is nothing
> > worse than a new bike that doesn’t get ridden because it is too cold,
> > too wet, too rocky, etc. But maybe this is different...
>
> > +1 for this ending up in a museum. (Smithsonian would be so cool!)
>
> > Cheers
>
> > On Apr 7, 2:54 pm, Seth Vidal <skvi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Paul Sanders <clown.emp...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > That bike has an ironic destiny in store for it. It will likely be
> > purchased
> > > > by another collector, who will have paid a pretty penny for one of the
> > last
> > > > pristine versions. If they ride it, they'll ride it carefully...never
> > fully
> > > > testing it or enjoying it as frame designer originally intended.
>
> > > > It will likely live it's life on a pedastal. Perhaps one day it will be
> > > > passed on to another collector, and then wind up in a museum.
>
> > > > Could one say that bike is doomed?
>
> > > Nah, it's a bike. It is just an object. This one is a nice object and
> > > if someone wants it they can do whatever they want with it and it will
> > > be just fine.
>
> > > I don't believe you can disgrace or desecrate things. Only people and
> > > animals are harmed if they are not allowed to live up to their
> > > potential, in my opinion.
>
> > > things are just things.
>
> > > -sv
>
> --
> Patrick Moore
> Albuquerque, NM
> Professional Resumes. Contact resumespecialt...@gmail.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
