Re: Why is Shimano so hated by some?

> On 29 Nov 2003 02:50:57 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chalo) wrote:
> > 2)  Shimano make lots of  weak, breakage-prone, quick-wearing, and
> > non-serviceable parts for the lowest possible cost, then proceed to
> > charge just as much as the market will bear.

The mysterious BVM wrote:
> I used to think that Phil Wood hubs were really good, until I bought
> some. In 1-2 years I had to send them back to the factory for
> servicing. For orders of magnitude less I now use Ultegra hubs. They
> don't get corroded even in winter salted streets conditions. They
> easily go 2 years. The UN-72 BBs were pretty lame, but then so were
> the Phil Woods. The Ultegra BBs are not quick-wearing. What wears
> longer?


If I might ask, what occurred with your Phils? It's been a 
while since they were non-user-serviceable, BTW.

I commonly see 25 and 30 year old Phil equipment that's 
still running well, less normal wear.  We'll pop in  new 
bearings and send 'em  off for another couple of decades.

The worst problem I've ever experienced with a Phil product 
was in 1999, trying to get a BB out of a 1980 Zeus to move 
it to a new frame.  Had to cut the mounting rings away there 
was such deep corrosion. The BB still spun well.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971