Talk:Schwinn Bicycle Company

src: i.ytimg.com

Video Talk:Schwinn Bicycle Company

More info?

This page could use a lot more info about the bicycles schwinn made. Particularly it skips over the late 1990s line which included some really incredible models made by Yeti Cycles. I think you should mention the Schwinn Homegrown series and more about the GT era.

Maps Talk:Schwinn Bicycle Company

Schwinn Sting Ray

I think I'll start a page about the Schwinn Sting-Ray

This article is pretty good but missing some stuff I remember from the book "No Hands: The Rise and Fall of the Schwinn Bicycle Company." In particular, Ignaz invented a new type of tire that was far more reliable (fewer flats) than previous tire.--Tdkehoe 14:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The picture of the green bike shouldn't be there. It's not a "21st century Sting-ray" because there basically was no such thing, except for a 50th anniversary limited edition released in 2013, and that looked like the original bike. This green bike is only somebody showing off something he made himself, not anything having to do with the Schwinn company. 108.12.55.229 (talk) 23:18, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I removed it. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:48, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

info box

I think there should be an info box--user:penubag

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Neutrality and sources tags added July 2007

I added the tags questioning the neutrality and indicating no sources. Right now, the article seems to be editorialising. If some of the more prejudicial statements are true, they need to be sourced. Right now (July 31), there are no sources listed for any of the article's contents. Anchoress 09:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

src: dailygazette.com

the name of company

Isn't the early name of the firm actually Arnold, Schwinn and Co. and NOT Arnold, Schwinn Bicycle Co? If this is to be a source of reference like wikipedia often is, the proper name should be used.

The source I have found this is "Schwinn Bicyles by Jay Pridemore & Jim Hurd 1996, Motorbooks International.

J. D. Pfaff (talk)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Sale to Pacific

An anonymous editor reverted my edit regarding Schwinn's move to mass market bikes from "This marked a major change from as America's preeminent bicycle manufacturer, to the Schwinn name become a marketing tool, now affixed to lower quality bikes." back to "From its heady days as America's preeminent bicycle manufacturer, the Schwinn name had become a marketing tool, now affixed to the product of another country." Saying "revert incomprehensible phrasing" I have two objections with this. First the "heady days" bit sounds un-encyclopedic. Second the fact that it is made in "another country" seems to either imply that another country can't make the same quality, or it's bad in and of itself to manufacture things outside the US. I'm changing it to a simplified version of my original edit as I think my objections are valid, I hope that's ok for everyone.--Keithonearth (talk) 19:41, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I reverted your edit back to the original sentence. I think you're reading way too much into a simple statement of fact, mainly that 1) Schwinn was once the dominant U.S. bicycle manufacturer, and 2) it now is used as a nameplate for bicycles designed and built overseas. In the original sentence, there is absolutely no imputation of low quality in such a statement, and none was intended (unlike your edit, which specifically refers to 'lower quality'). All the sentence conveys is a summation of Schwinn's undeniably earthshaking transformation from a bicycle designer and manufacturer once thought of as the very essence of 'American-made' to a simple 'legacy' brand name used (sometimes interchangeably) on bicycles produced overseas. What is 'un-encyclopedic' is a subjective matter, but at a minimum, sentences should reflect the facts and be phrased in comprehensible English. Since the original conclusory sentence was phrased in perfectly understandable English, and was a truthful summation of Schwinn's end as an independent manufacturer, there was no need to edit it in the first place.12.52.113.231 (talk) 20:23, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

As a non-American it seems pretty irrelevant that Schwinns were made in the US and now are not. Earthshaking is not how I would describe it. Was the only thing that made them special that they were made in the USA? Or was it not more about them being quality bicycles? It seems relevent to me that they were once good quality bicycles that I would be only to happy to ride myself, and now are low quality things that I avoid. I stand by my edit, and don't really think you've justified the reverting it.--Keithonearth (talk) 04:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Whether one is an American or not is irrelevant; what is relevant is that this is undeniably the story of an American company, with a long history of production in the USA - one that the company continually promoted over the years, and so well-ingrained that Schwinn faced serious sales resistance when it initially began selling (high quality - see Article) Schwinn-branded bicycles made by Panasonic in Japan in the 1970s. The Schwinn Bicycle Company and its management decisions have been continuously studied by economists, historians, and business schools as a classic example of once-dominant American corporations and their fall from positions as market leaders. Had you read any of the notable histories of the company, I cannot think but that this would have become immediately apparent to you. In particular, it is the story of what transpired to cause Schwinn to fall from the largest selling manufacturer of bicycles in the USA for 30+ years to a legacy nameplate on bicycles built by Pacific/Dorel in Taiwan and the PRC. That IS an earthshaking event, whether in terms of bicycle history, corporate history, or the economic history of the USA. The story of Schwinn is therefore not merely the story of any old American bicycle company. Your personal belief of what constitutes 'good' and 'low' quality, applied to an entire brand, is too vague to have any real meaning. Specific facts (with references) on quality issues regarding specific models at specific times (as others have done elsewhere in the article) might be useful, but you've supplied none. You seem intent on remaking the article according to your own assumptions regarding Schwinn bicycles you have experienced. But this is an encyclopedia entry, not a blog for individual anecdotes, and your personal opinion, like mine, is completely irrelevant to an article concerned only with the facts surrounding the history of Schwinn. 12.72.218.314 (Don 01) 20:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok Already, I'm not changing it. It's not important enough. I thought this was an article on a bicycle company, you seem to think it's an article on an American company. Both are true, whichever you prioritize is subjective.--Keithonearth (talk) 22:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Keithonearth. The language that was inserted was not neutral. I see that it has been removed. Stetsonharry (talk) 23:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I suggest that the last sentence of the introductory paragraph "Today, after declaring bankruptcy in 1992, it is a sub-brand of Pacific Cycle, owned by the multi-national conglomerate, Dorel Industries" be clarified. When is/was today - maybe change to read, in more recent times, or lately. Bankruptcy in 1992 - was there a more recent bankruptcy in 2001, was there a group called Questor Partners, and if so when did they show up. Pacific Cycle's webpage promotes "Schwinn" as a Brand - not a stub-brand. (One sentence). -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.183.224.2 (talk) 23:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

src: 1.bp.blogspot.com

Labor problems

A crucial passage on Schwinn's labor troubles was attributed to a bicycle website, which clearly does not meet the standards of WP:RS insofar as industrial and labor issues are concerned. I've removed a dubious sentence, attributed to that website, saying that Schwinn workers wanted parity with auto workers. If true, it can be restored with attribution to a reliable source. Other statements attributed to the website have been given "source needed" tags. Stetsonharry (talk) 23:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

src: 1.bp.blogspot.com

Scooters

I just found out that Schwinn also makes scooters, and I see that it is also on their website. There should probably be a section about this. I'll try and write it later if I have time. --Mintrepublic (talk) 00:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

and roller blades

I just got pair of roller blades from good will, pretty good condition though. But I didn't see anything on rollerblades made by schwinn anywhere on wikipedia.71.94.63.105 (talk) 06:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

src: www.cxmagazine.com

New Schwinns for 2011

There's an all new Schwinn line for 2011. http://reviews.roadbikereview.com/blog/first-look-2011-schwinn-bicycles/ Bizzybody (talk) 05:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

src: 3.bp.blogspot.com

Fillet brazed frames

The article has no mention of Schwinn's fillet brazed frames, produced from 1938 through 1978. http://www.sheldonbrown.com/schwinn-braze.html They were assembled by hand with much labor put into smooth radiusing all the joints, making the frame appear as if it were a single piece of metal. Bizzybody (talk) 05:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

src: i0.wp.com

lighter steel alloys

"More and more cyclists, especially younger buyers, began to insist on lighter steel alloys, responsive frame geometry, aluminum components, advanced derailleur shifting, and multiple gears."

Steel alloys all weight the same:

4130: 7.85 g/cc A36: 7.85 g/cc

What modern steel alloys have to offer is a much higher yield strength which allows the manufacturer to use less material. Strefli3 (talk) 19:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

URL uncertainty

In the Infobox, the website is listed as follows (other than the placeholder punctuation to prevent automated link generation in order to protect inexperienced readers, if there are any reading this):

• http(colon)(slash)(slash)www(dot)schwinnbike(dot)com

The actual clickable link in dispute is in the Infobox in the article, of course--for those who have experience in looking these things up.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the search engine result I found was:

• www.schwinnbikes.com (Note there happens to be an 's' in this version; none in the former)

Could someone please verify this? I doubt the current URL in the Infobox happens to be a malware/phishing scheme, but you can't be too careful, right? Especially on Wikipedia, where many people not aware of the potential for incorrectly listed URL's will click without even blinking. P.S. I am very puzzled why the new link I've submitted based on the search result won't automatically turn blue; the first retained blue in one spot or another until I removed every bit of punctuation based on previewing my edit for this discussion. I only ask because I would expect the genuine one (I assume it's legit) to turn blue rather than the first one, if any were to change at all. Thanks, 67.182.237.57 (talk) 23:36, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Google "domain name search", and compare:

• http://who.godaddy.com/whois.aspx?domain=schwinnbike.com&prog_id=GoDaddy
• http://who.godaddy.com/whois.aspx?domain=schwinnbikes.com&prog_id=GoDaddy

They're the same site, same owner. Just spelling variants that both point to schwinnbikes.com. So just add the missing S to the infobox. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

1992

I feel like the 1992 bankruptcy should be more prominent, including at least a mention in the opening paragraph. It was really a completely different company after that. Compare, for example, General Motors, which devotes the last paragraph of the lead section to the 2009 reorganization, and AT&T, which actually has a separate article for the pre-2005 company. Kendall-K1 (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

It was easy to mention the bankruptcy in the lede, but I don't know how to make it more prominent without it receiving undue weight. The section that describes it is already about the biggest section in the article. -AndrewDressel (talk) 17:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Schwinn Bicycle Company. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130514091409/http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/charm/CHARM%20proceedings/CHARM%20article%20archive%20pdf%20format/Volume%2013%202007/170-179_petty.pdf to http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/charm/CHARM%20proceedings/CHARM%20article%20archive%20pdf%20format/Volume%2013%202007/170-179_petty.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130514091409/http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/charm/CHARM%20proceedings/CHARM%20article%20archive%20pdf%20format/Volume%2013%202007/170-179_petty.pdf to http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/charm/CHARM%20proceedings/CHARM%20article%20archive%20pdf%20format/Volume%2013%202007/170-179_petty.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929134543/http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=192439 to http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=192439

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.--InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:27, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Source of article : Wikipedia