I just got a new bike for my son (he's going to secondary school and needs a better bike), and was surprised to see how many kids' bikes came without fenders. What's up with that? Who wants a serious bike without fenders?
Of course most bikes still come with fenders, but that's also a major limitation for this device: you've got to remove your rear fender. Maybe this device acts somewhat as a fender, but the site says you can't use it in heavy rain, exactly when you need that fender the most.
Being cynical I would say it is yet another way to upsell.
Here in Germany if you want to get a cheaper bicycle, other than flea markets, usually they make you mount the pedals yourself, doesn't have fenders, lights might also be missing, depending on the offer.
Oddly in the UK pedals are a legally required to be included with any new bike sold. Well, technically it's pedal reflectors that are required, but they obviously need pedals to mount to.
Are you looking at performance road bikes? Fenders and lights are removed for weight savings, and for pedals there are multiple clip-in systems, you are supposed to install the pedals that match your chosen system.
If, however, they are doing that for commuter bikes...
I guess that’s the reason you don’t understand why bikes are sold without these things. €400 gets you a very, very, very low-end new bike, like just one step above “unsafe to ride”.
You often don’t get pedals on new bikes because you have your favorite pedals that work for you and anything that’s included with the bike goes straight to the bin, because it’s useless trash. You don’t get fenders, because you don’t usually use those on any kind of sporty bike. They’re heavy, they don’t usually work that well, they are often hard to use in bikes with suspension with longer travel or and they can rattle or simply break and fall off if you ride hard. You don’t get lights and reflective elements, because they’re heavy plastic crap that breaks and falls off. If you often ride at night, you probably own some kind of night gear, high powered LEDs, reflective stickers or spokes…
And obviously once that is the norm for “bikes” in general, then why not save a few cents on supermarket bikes.
> €400 gets you a very, very, very low-end new bike, like just one step above “unsafe to ride”
I don’t agree. After my last bike was stolen I decided to buy the cheapest Decathlon had to offer - 240 - for getting around town and there’s nothing unsafe about it. It’s heavy and has cheap components but everything works fine for light city cycling.
You’re probably right, I’d trust a cheap Decathlon bike not to be unsafe. But they’re really exceptional in this regard, most non-Decathlon gear at cheapest-Decathlon prices is trash.
I don't need to be educated on the increasing lack of customer service for anything below 2000 euros, having got my first bicycle in 1984, upgraded to a cycling one in 1986, had plenty of others since then.
And from all places I lived in Europe, only around here this upselling seems to be a thing.
I think it’s just “cheap bikes”. Nobody wants to work on or with cheap bikes. And bikes are getting more and more expensive (quite fast). A solid bike built with brand name components is quickly approaching 2000€.
“Cheap” meaning low-end, not actually cheap for people to buy with their salaries. Bikes are, unfortunately, surprisingly expensive nowadays, and the market isn’t doing great.
I wonder how good the lock has to be, or the break cables and wire frames cutter resistant, for it to be worthy of leaving alone while shopping on the city centre.
When i was young all bicycles came with mud guard (then called "fenders") front and rear. Now they seem to be anathema.
Every bike I rode w/o fenders put a stripe of mud up my back!