>>1180490they're considered reputable as a brand. They've been around a long time and AFAIK never sold-out their brand into crap like e.g. Mongoose. Beyond that I don't know specifics, but through lurking, a lot of /n/ does say
>>1180500Among the big name reputable brands
>Giant>Cannondale>Specialized>Trek(I'm forgetting several more)
the frames at the given riding style and price point are going to be legit. the componentry (wheelset, drivetrain, brakes etc) is going to be packaged different ways, and all that stuff is not made by the bike brand. So, as long as you're shopping good stuff, brand is less important than the overall package and pricing.
I'm oversimplifying but
tl;dr yeah, Fuji is good, but there's no reason to focus on them especially unless the package and deal is better than other good brands
also we use /bbg/ for shopping
>>1174456 post what is asked for in the OP
>>1180447grease
and
tighten
chainring
bolts
>>1180521in THIS context, "old school 27s" was the standard of the time which was larger than 700c. You can still get some good tires for them, I run Schwalbe Marathon Greenguards in that size, they're great. I wouldn't call the size a dealbreaker for your fit on that frame. I think overall, adjusting your saddle height and stem height could compensate for the difference in wheel size. it was considered a universal size for its time.
fyi when you see 27" in MODERN context, (I think more accurately it's 27.5") it means 650b which is SMALLER than 700c. The system is retarded due to 70 years of marketing schemes, trends and standards, but Bead Seat Diameter/ISO is the universal measurement. pic related is a confusing chart, but you can see how 27 means several different things but the ISO--the second number in mm--is the "real" size.
