BSO

[rowan 46]

I saw a collection of vintage cycles at a rally a while back, all of them were called bicycles all of them were beautifully maintained. some of them looked a lot more dangerous than argos bikes. Is there evidence that bso's put people off cycling? I have driven them all my life whenever I have asked others why they don't cycle,the majority answer that it's because of the dangers of traffic or they have a car, or they can't be bothered. Only once Have I come across somebody having a bad mechanical experience of a bso which put them off all bikes. It strikes me that a person who can only afford a cheap bike shouldn't be looked down because of it. A bso is a bike it may not be as good as the high end ones but properly maintained it will get you there. We don't call people who don't drive high end sports cars. people who drive car shaped objects so why the disparaging term for cheap bikes. My guess is most of us started on these bikes so why the shame.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Vintage bikes may well be more dangerous than modern bikes.
BSO's have a reputation of failing very quickly after limited use. As for the car comparison a BSO would be like a brand new 4x4 being sold for a few £1000. Would you buy one of those?
I know a few people who rode BSO's. Once they had ridden an entry level MTB they did not want to ride their bike again.

I saw a collection of vintage cycles at a rally a while back, all of them were called bicycles all of them were beautifully maintained. some of them looked a lot more dangerous than argos bikes. Is there evidence that bso's put people off cycling? I have driven them all my life whenever I have asked others why they don't cycle,the majority answer that it's because of the dangers of traffic or they have a car, or they can't be bothered. Only once Have I come across somebody having a bad mechanical experience of a bso which put them off all bikes. It strikes me that a person who can only afford a cheap bike shouldn't be looked down because of it. A bso is a bike it may not be as good as the high end ones but properly maintained it will get you there. We don't call people who don't drive high end sports cars. people who drive car shaped objects so why the disparaging term for cheap bikes. My guess is most of us started on these bikes so why the shame.

 

[festival]

A young lady came in the shop today with an apollo phaze about 6 months old.
She was about 5'2" and had been sold a 20" model by our friends at halfrauds, used it 3 times a week to ride to collage and a little local use about town.

The breaks were completely knacked and the rest of the bike in a sorry state, partly her fault for not looking after it, but mainly poorly put together & just a substandard product.

The point is, this bike is advertised as, 'Was £319.99 now £189.99' What a joke (she paid £219.99) and people are buying this rubbish and others like them thinking they are getting something worthwhile at a bargain price, while in fact if you compare wisely you are getting something worth about £150.

I know some people have a tight budget but how do you educate people away from these BSO's when you can get something like the giant revel 3, currently £240

 

[rowan 46]

Vintage bikes may well be more dangerous than modern bikes.
BSO's have a reputation of failing very quickly after limited use. As for the car comparison a BSO would be like a brand new 4x4 being sold for a few £1000. Would you buy one of those?
I know a few people who rode BSO's. Once they had ridden an entry level MTB they did not want to ride their bike again.

the point I am making is that these things are bikes not bike shaped objects eg you can get on them and ride them. I have only ever had chap bikes, never has one failed on me unless I have abused it by not maintaining it . I have never been a mountain biker so I can imagine that these cheap bikes may not be safe for mountains but I have never heard of a properly maintained bike failing as a runabout, and as a kid I used to go miles on my cheap bike.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Cheep does not a BSO make. Poor quality components and shody workmanship make a BSO.

I'm going to sleep now.

 

[rowan 46]

Cheep does not a BSO make. Poor quality components and shody workmanship make a BSO.

I'm going to sleep now.

goodnight sleep well

 

[Cubist]

Yep, you're failing to allow us the distinction between a good cheap bike, which we all recommend and endorse, and a crap bike with poor quality, poorly functioning components. Your posting style appears to be one of slightly confrontational inverted snobbery, in which case you are wasting your time on a generally informative, friendly and helpful forum. The bike snobs don't hang out here. You've sent Angel to bed which is a rarity to be honest. He did try to explain what we mean by the term!

 

[summerdays]

My biggest problem with BSO's are for children ... look at the ones locked up in your local school during the day ... some of them are appalling ... such as pink/purple painted wheel rims on which the brakes don't work or a child's bike with a seat post so short that you can only adjust the height of it by 1 inch - how few children are only going to grow one inch in the two of three years that we normally expect a bike to last.

 

[rowan 46]

I admit to being slightly confrontational. In my defence I am slightly irritated by the term bso. If you mean rubbish bike say so and say why. I found the term in the forum sticky on acronyms It doesn't say bso is a bike made with inferior parts and is not fit for purpose. it just says bike shaped object and leaves the latitude for bike snobs to put their bit in. I have been cycling since I was a kid and admit I have not the expertise or experience of most of you. It is just that I think a bike is a bike. some are good some are bad but I don't think bso is a helpful term to new people the only use I can see is for bike snobs to look down their nose at cheap machines. It's a good bike or a bad bike but not a bso

 

[jefmcg]

[..]whenever I have asked others why they don't cycle,the majority answer that it's because [..] they can't be bothered.

I think this is the the thing: they don't realise how difficult it was to pedal and keep the bike in working order was because of their bike, and assume that bikes are the problem.

Should we call them POS bikes?

EDIT: though this thread does suggest that the acronym list could do with some editing

 

[Nebulous]

I don't have an issue with the term bso. Like you though I would have a problem if it was used purely to mean cheap.

Like many words we all bring our own prejudices and agendas to the party. Take the phrase 4x4 for instance. To a farmer it often means a utilitarian vehicle which takes him places and in conditions where other vehicles would struggle. To an eco warrior it can mean a fully loaded high end vehicle used only for the school run. To many cyclists it means a bully who uses the size of their vehicle to intimidate.

Here's some useful information on BSO's bike mechanic view here's a newspaper article about a problematic Asda ad own-goal ad

I have also seen discussion about a TV programme highlighting the dangers of supermarket bikes, though I cannot find it at the moment. I've also seen a claim that the average supermarket bike travels about 45 miles in its lifetime, though why that is could be open to debate.

I'm pretty much a reverse snob. I try to buy clothes without logos or labelling, and I have been quite dismayed at the cost of cycling since I took it up more seriously. Nevertheless I do have a concern about the fitness for purpose of many mass market bikes.

 

[rowan 46]

I have to say that things have changed since I was a kid. when I was young most bikes were made in Britain by skilled workers to fairly strict quality controls. I imagine like everything else 90% of them are made in the pacific rim with most of the skilled workers making the more expensive machines. Leaving the cheaper ones being made by not so skilled workers. I certainly agree that cheap supermarket bikes are probably not suitable for mountain biking and bmx.
Thanks to all who contributed I was reading another forum where it was clear that many of the cyclists who posted were brand tarts and bso is synonymous with bikes that are not from the named brands. I am delighted to find a forum that is friendly and welcoming to those of us who can't afford high end bikes ie: me. It's just I was a little dismayed to to see the same term in this forum and am glad to find out it's my misunderstanding this time

 

[Lien Sdrawde]

Are the Decathlon £100 mtb's considered BSO's as I was going to get my daughter one for her nearly 2 mile commute? Seems to have shimano bits on it?

 

[ian turner]

Are the Decathlon £100 mtb's considered BSO's as I was going to get my daughter one for her nearly 2 mile commute? Seems to have shimano bits on it?

That was part of a £100 mountain bike review on the gadget show and was rated the best and decent value for money.

I reiterate my earlier observation about the large aldi/lidl cycling gear fan club on this forum. If they were bike snobs they'd be strictly assos.
How do you drive a bike ?I'm starting to suspect the OP is a :troll:

 

[abo]

I was afraid of that. Is it an appropriate acronym to have in a forum devoted to the furtherence of general cycling?

Yes. They're shite and I know because I had one. I went through three replacements and even the last one needed daily adjustment of the brakes and gears, and if I hadn't managed to get Halfords swapped for something proper I'd probably have thrown it in the Tees by now and never ridden a bike again out of sheer frustration.