Comments on: Xtracycles banned in California?

By: Mohjho

Mohjho — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 20:50:52 +0000

So let me get this straight, the xtracycle is not banned, but the delivery components are? Maybe the poster should be a little more specifice when he publishes hot news flashes.
“I’m sure it has something to do with red colored tape” only spreds disinformation.

By: Paul Rivers

Paul Rivers — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 06:15:19 +0000

I’m glad to see that California’s laws have been effective. They prohibit products with lead in them, so lazy manufacturers who otherwise wouldn’t mind throwing lead into landfills which eventually end up on our water supply have to clean up their act in order to sell their product.

Why on earth is there lead in little plugs that you take out and immediately throw away? I can’t even begin to think of a good reason, but I’m happy to see that California’s laws are obviously having their desired effect – keeping lead out of our environment and landfills, despite manufacturers who are lazy or just want to save a buck or two by using products that (completely unnecessarily) have lead in them.

By: Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:25:58 +0000

Jeremy, thanks for chiming in…how ridiculously silly about those plugs, but glad to hear you’re addressing their lead content (?). Please keep us in the loop and thanks again for clarifying things for us.

By: Jeremy at Xtracycle

Jeremy at Xtracycle — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:22:50 +0000

There is no lead anywhere in the Xtracycle Free Radical product itself, or the paint.
The lead is in the plastic in those little plugs that you take out and throw away when you unpack the Free Radical kit. We are dealing with this issue right now, and we will keep you posted on the situation.

In the meantime, if you live in California, you can order directly from us. Our distributer is removing the plugs manually, so they will be shipping to dealers again soon as well.

By: climbinskier

climbinskier — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 21:33:34 +0000

LAME!

By: Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:49:49 +0000

Dominic!!! Folks might read that and think you’re serious!

By: Dominic Dougherty

Dominic Dougherty — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 18:53:32 +0000

Oh they live overseas… so they’re not important.

By: Dman

Dman — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 18:21:00 +0000

Wayne: You’re right, if the lead is in the paint it’s not a big deal to the end user.

But what about all the people working in the manufacturing of the product?

By: Wayne Myer

Wayne Myer — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:45:18 +0000

@Paul: This is why laws and policy are so poor in attempting to mandate “common” sense.

The idea of Prop 65 obviously is a matter of harm reduction, but it is nearly impossible to write all of the possible contexts that require consideration and exception. Whatever amount of lead could possibly be in an Xtracycle (if it is the paint, it’s still a miniscule amount) is offset by the health benefits of cycling.

And just because the article doesn’t say what you want it to say does not mean the article is somehow off-base. I think the sentiment here is that the net cast by the law is so far and wide that it starts to cause harm by capturing the very entities that are striving to improve the whole situation.

Yes, hopefully the folks at Xtracycle can resolve this matter and attain compliance in a financially reasonable and timely fashion.

By: Paul Rivers

Paul Rivers — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:14:31 +0000

Well, now you’re thinking like a manufacturer. Their product has lead in it, there’s a law that stops you from selling it, what’s the problem? *obviously* it isn’t a bicycle with lead in it, no, the problem is the law because you don’t care what happens to the people who use your product or the environment when it’s thrown out if it costs you money.

Sorry to be a little over the top, but seriously – shouldn’t the article be saying “Why the hell does an Xtracycle have lead in it, and why did the people who made the Xtracycle keep making a product that contains lead?”.