Official mountain biking thread
- Thread starter bakedpow
- Start date
- Featured
tomPietrowski
Active member
13455663:cydwhit said:
Yeah I'm running clipless. I use to race dh clipless so it just made sense to run them on this.
Your ru probably thinking of a post I had on fb yesterday but then deleted by mistake. I fell on a rock on my shin not a pedal. It's funny I can't walk but I can bike still
NinetyFour
Active member
From Lenzerheide today:
Nino is the sickest fucking dude going.
I did a complete teardown on my Shimano M780's today because I've never greased them once since factory new. Pretty amazed because they still looked brand new inside, even the grease. They've seen so much in the 'couple' of KM's I've stacked onto them; water, snow, mud, moondust, etc... I think they're just so well sealed due to the long threads on the nut, and the very soft chevron seal around the spindle. Would definitely recommend these bad boys for anyone looking for an ultimately durable pedal.
Nino is the sickest fucking dude going.
I did a complete teardown on my Shimano M780's today because I've never greased them once since factory new. Pretty amazed because they still looked brand new inside, even the grease. They've seen so much in the 'couple' of KM's I've stacked onto them; water, snow, mud, moondust, etc... I think they're just so well sealed due to the long threads on the nut, and the very soft chevron seal around the spindle. Would definitely recommend these bad boys for anyone looking for an ultimately durable pedal.
Scott0_robot0
Active member
So i just bought a 05 specialized big hit for 400 good deal? And i am having trouble finding a lower bracket to replace any help? Im new to biking so i dcidex to get the heaviest bike. Also best trails in cali?
ShredAZ
Active member
13456856:Tinga said:
Fat bikes + fat tires = fat surface area.
Their purpose is for sand, loose dirt, shale, and snow - essentially anything that needs that wider foot print or extra inertia to roll over.
Here in AZ, they are becoming just as popular as 29'ers. I ride with plenty of guys that swear by them. Most ride them rigid with clunker conversions...Totally different culture then I care for, but whatevs.
To say their only purpose is groomed dirt is undermining this new jump in bike tech. Does your opinion differ on 27.5+ tires? Same principle, slightly smaller package.
People said the same thing about 29'ers 6 years ago. Look at us now...
californiagrown
Active member
13457250:RockShoxTora said:
27.5+ will go the way of the old super wide DH tires. Though they are certainly more applicable to everyday riding than fatbikes.
Fat bikes are here to stay because they ride on snow, and make mellow smooth trails much more fun than they would be on your average MTB.
It used to be "pick a wheel size and be a dick about it!" Now it's "pick a wheel width and be a dick about it!".
Fat bikes in AZ are like hellbents innthe EC... Sounds fun to screw around on. Fun is fun, though your fun might be different than my fun depending on the time and place. Just bring some man sodas for post ride and everything else will work itself out.
FuckAllOfYou
Active member
13455322:NinetyFour said:
13455792:NinetyFour said:From Lenzerheide today:
Nino is the sickest fucking dude going.
Yeah, my saddle is "pointed downwards", i don't know the exact measurements cause I lost my fit sheet. I have pretty sizeable drop to my bars, which are also "slammed". I definitely can't ride a flat saddle anymore, not even on my road bike. My legs are just too long and I don't really want a huge bike, my 58 is big already and my large epic works fine.
And that race was too bad. Way too many flats that day and Jaro could just run off with that win.
LC.
Active member
This week has been good. Hot & dry (30-35C every day, over 2 weeks since any rain), but good.
Rode some tracks for the first time this year. This is as good as they get around here. Whistler it ain't:
But here's one of my favourite spots. 15 minutes' climbing off the lifts for about a 40 minute descent into Switzerland if you don't take any breaks:
Rode some tracks for the first time this year. This is as good as they get around here. Whistler it ain't:
But here's one of my favourite spots. 15 minutes' climbing off the lifts for about a 40 minute descent into Switzerland if you don't take any breaks:
Tinga
Active member
13456913:RockShoxTora said:
groomed ski trails are usually snow, not dirt.
Fat bikes are fine and people are having fun on them then keep it up.
For me personally When I am trail riding I like to go faster and you just can't do that on a 4" tire like you can on a 2.3" tire.
I am also not in favor of the 27.5+ I think it's a trend no one was asking for. I have yet to ride one and would gladly take the chance to ride one but I don't see myself selling my current trail bike for one.
ShredAZ
Active member
13457544:Tinga said:
That's fair!
It's not my flavor either. I'm a recent 29'er convert and haven't looked back. It only took my 6 years to make the plunge. I think a lot of bike tech that's come out recently is just a scheme for money. But these fat bikes have definitely caught on for whatever reason.
I think fat bikes have their place. Just not in between my legs.
kirbstopper
Member
13457250:RockShoxTora said:
Just because lots of companies are hopping on board doesn't mean it's here to stay. Bike companies have been creating these trends to make a quick buck off consumers who believe they're on the wrong wheel size or width, the wrong drivetrain ratio, the wrong size suspension, etc..
When in reality all these modern bikes will do everything your asking it to and more.
Fat bikes in particular are cool but only if youre on snow or sand. They're just inefficient elsewhere. So yes they have their purpose but I've been riding my bike in the winter commuting my whole life and have people still tell me I should only be using a fat bike.
Fat bikes will stay but the hype is already dropping on them.(see it first hand, work in a shop in whistler). 27.5+ and 29+ will die as its already been tried with a different wheel size. We've already found the most efficient width 2.2-2.5. But if your having fun on a chubby tire, more power to you.
Long story short, ride what you want it's all mountain biking.
ShredAZ
Active member
13457575:kirbstopper said:
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. The only point I'm trying to make is they serve a greater purpose than simply a groomed ski trail or around town.
The tech is still new, but catching on quickly. If you ride somewhere like our desert with nothing but loose shale everywhere, the wider foot print is appreciated.
division.bell
Active member
After a wait of over 4 months for some parts, my singlespeed build is finally moving forward again. Just got a box full of some brightly colored bits from Portland...I'll get a pic up once I've thrown a piece or two on the frame.
This, and all of the other recent fatbike bashing, is so far from accurate it's hilarious. I'm curious how much fat bike riding everyone has done in here since we're all experts on how terrible they are...
I'm obviously quite biased as I do own a fat bike and enjoy a regular (once a week) ride on dirt with my fat bike, because I think it's a complete blast and is far more versatile, efficient (it's a rigid bike with a massive traction patch combined with low pressures and tires that measure out to a 29" diameter. What inefficiency are you possibly referring to?) and enjoyable than I ever would have imagined when I was building it up. Yeah, there's a noticeable rolling bounce when hammering on hard surfaces with erratic pedal strokes, but when you are on dirt, or pedaling at a smooth and constant cadence, it's a non-issue.
Every single rider that I've had ride my bike has said the same thing. It's not for riding everyday, or everywhere, but it's a stupidly fun bike for anywhere you do take it, and yes, that most certainly does include your standard dirt mountain bike trails.
Quit fucking hating and just enjoy riding your own damn bike.
13457575:kirbstopper said:
This, and all of the other recent fatbike bashing, is so far from accurate it's hilarious. I'm curious how much fat bike riding everyone has done in here since we're all experts on how terrible they are...
I'm obviously quite biased as I do own a fat bike and enjoy a regular (once a week) ride on dirt with my fat bike, because I think it's a complete blast and is far more versatile, efficient (it's a rigid bike with a massive traction patch combined with low pressures and tires that measure out to a 29" diameter. What inefficiency are you possibly referring to?) and enjoyable than I ever would have imagined when I was building it up. Yeah, there's a noticeable rolling bounce when hammering on hard surfaces with erratic pedal strokes, but when you are on dirt, or pedaling at a smooth and constant cadence, it's a non-issue.
Every single rider that I've had ride my bike has said the same thing. It's not for riding everyday, or everywhere, but it's a stupidly fun bike for anywhere you do take it, and yes, that most certainly does include your standard dirt mountain bike trails.
Quit fucking hating and just enjoy riding your own damn bike.
kirbstopper
Member
13457772:division.bell said:
Last part of my post "Long story short, ride what you want it's all mountain biking."
cydwhit
Active member
This was good, and funny. I feel like it's bringing that dirtbag ski culture to MTB a little bit:
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/opinion-bad-advice-for-good-times-2015.html
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/opinion-bad-advice-for-good-times-2015.html
Tinga
Active member
13457772:division.bell said:
Rolling resistance is a huge inefficiency of fat bikes. with wide tires and low pressure, rolling resistance is huge. That's just physics.
Why do you think road tires are super skinny and run high pressures?
If you put a fat bike next to a bike with 2.3 tires the 2.3 bike is going to roll faster.
now some people aren't always looking for all out speed and that's fine. it sounds like they really enjoy the fat bikes and that's great. Just realize that fat bikes aren't going to be winning any races in the near future.
ShredAZ
Active member
13458002:Tinga said:
Ever tried climbing with tires pressurized to 40PSI vs one pressurized to 22PSI?
But I would win on the 22PSI despite said increased rolling resistance.
Same for the decent. You might get more speed on concrete running a straight line with firm tires, but the increased resistance gives you more responsive traction which will you give you more control in loose conditions.
Fat bikes have their purpose.
It's impossible to excel in every category. Period.
californiagrown
Active member
13458174:RockShoxTora said:
From what I've seen, fatbikes make unfun terrain more fun, and fun terrain less fun.
Seems like a good tool to have in the bag if biking is your thing- kinda like taking the pow skis out for a groomer day during a dry spell. It's good to mix it up sometimes.
Then again I gape hard on bikes so what do I know?
On another note, I'm really thinking about picking up a 2015 giant reign off PB. it's a lot of money, but its also a lot of bike. Maybe too much?
californiagrown
Active member
13458256:Tinga said:
I want a bike I can pedal up, but is really good at descending. I live in the pnw so descents can get rowdy, and I'll also be taking it to lift accessed stuff a few times a year.
BUT I'm hesitant to get a bike I have to go mach Looney on to enjoy. I still want to have fun on mellow trails and I'm afraid the reign is too geared towards ground hugging speed down gnar.
Basically I want a slack trail bike with 6+ inches of travel that can climb okay, handle the steep, fast, gnarly stuff, can handle the bike park well, but is also playful enough to flick around a little bit.
It's also gotta be a 29 or 27.5 because I'd plan on keeping it for quite a while and don't want to have to search out rare 26" parts.
I'm 6'4" 200lbs, currently ride a 2011 stumpy fsr and would classify myself as upper intermediate for the pnw, maybe advanced.
Thoughts?
californiagrown
Active member
13458305:GANDALF said:
That angle makes it look like you were trying to manual-pump througg the rollers and back tire slide out?
You okay? More importantly, is the bike okay? Haha
cydwhit
Active member
13458506:californiagrown said:
The new reign, 2015, is apparently a bit of a different beast but I can comment on the 2010 and the 2013. I'm 6' 175lbs on the 2013 Reign, size large and it's pretty dang perfect for me. I'm from the PNW but am now in Bozeman where the trails are not as gnarly as I'm used too. It's still super fun, even on mellow single track where 6" are overkill. It also is super fun on full on DH trails, I haven't jumped it much but I'm riding Teton Pass this weekend so I should get a better idea of free-ride performance then. That said, I hear the new Reign is a longer, slacker, more DH oriented beast so it might suit you better to get a Trance X or something.
And pictures, because I've been pretending to be a bike model and not a photog recently, definitely more comfortable behind the lens but the riding is pretty fun out here...
View attachment 775417
View attachment 775416
View attachment 775415
The Reign is a super capable bike. I had one last year and miss that bike every time I see a picture.
I pretty much had two set ups and just swapped the parts depending on what I was trying to do that day. Long-ish rides with lots of ups and downs I had a FOX CTD rear shock and a Talas 34. Bike park and days I knew I would be mostly descending I threw on a rear coil and beefier coil fork.
No AM/Enduro rig will be able to handle a bike park like a DH bike can though. Braking bumps will knock your teeth loose on all-mtn rig but are still super fun.
I pretty much had two set ups and just swapped the parts depending on what I was trying to do that day. Long-ish rides with lots of ups and downs I had a FOX CTD rear shock and a Talas 34. Bike park and days I knew I would be mostly descending I threw on a rear coil and beefier coil fork.
No AM/Enduro rig will be able to handle a bike park like a DH bike can though. Braking bumps will knock your teeth loose on all-mtn rig but are still super fun.
~Gotama~
Member
One more question:
I usually ride XC, but sometimes I like to mess around on pumptracks and small jumps. When I do, I find that my seat post gets in the way and doesn't go down very far like it would on a jumper. When I have it up for normal trail riding, there is about 7-8 inches of post inside the tube, and I'm thinking about trimming it shorter so that it can function both as an efficient trail bike and passable "fun" bike. Are there any blatant issues with trimming down the post? How much should I leave below my highest riding height? What's the best way to do it?
I usually ride XC, but sometimes I like to mess around on pumptracks and small jumps. When I do, I find that my seat post gets in the way and doesn't go down very far like it would on a jumper. When I have it up for normal trail riding, there is about 7-8 inches of post inside the tube, and I'm thinking about trimming it shorter so that it can function both as an efficient trail bike and passable "fun" bike. Are there any blatant issues with trimming down the post? How much should I leave below my highest riding height? What's the best way to do it?
division.bell
Active member
13458863:~Gotama~ said:
Yup, if you have that much extra seapost in the seat tube, cut it down. Being able to slam your saddle for pump tracks, jumps, descents, etc. will be a huge and worthwhile benefit to your riding in those areas.
You'll need a minimum of 100mm of seatpost remaining inside your seat tube (below your seatpost collar) at the highest point you set your saddle for your XC riding to protect your frame from seat tube blowouts.
A pipe wrench, or a hacksaw with guide are your best bets. I have used both and they work well. I personally have a pipe wrench that I picked up cheap from Home Depot.
division.bell
Active member
13458506:californiagrown said:
2016 Stumpy 650B has 150mm of front and rear travel and is a perfect bike for our area. I took the 29er version which has 140mm front and 135mm of rear travel to Tiger on Tuesday morning and didn't need any more bike or even use all of my travel on a ride from the top down OTG/FR/JR/NWT to the lot. I've ridden the expert carbon 650b, expert carbon 29er and elite aluminum 29er around here now and am a huge fan of both wheelsize versions and the overall platform in general, and will be ordering a high end 29er for myself when it becomes available, hopefully later this month. I know a lot of people that had their minds changed once they spent some time on this new Stumpy.
I'd also look at the Bronson and Nomad, both 650b with 150mm and 165mm travel respectively. I've ridden the new Nomad but not the Bronson yet. It didn't climb as well as the Stumpjumpers did, but I didn't expect it to either. Would be a killer bike for Tiger and other more lengthy and technical descending, but would not be my bike of choice for some of the more traditional and tight singletrack in our area.
I also know quite a few people running Enduros, both 650b and 29er's in our area. From mellow xc singletrack to Stevens riding, that bike can take it. Overkill obviously on mellower terrain much like the Nomad above, it also offers 165mm in the 650b form, but has 155mm for the 29er; but is worth it on the descents either way you run it.
I've also spent some time on the Tallboy LT 29er with 135mm of travel and was very impressed. I know a few people in Bend that are on this bike and ride it for XC and endurbro races with shit eating grins every time they ride it. Bummer that Santa Cruz is out of stock until early 2016 when they hopefully upgrade the frame with a new rear triangle and moved pivot bearings. There are some in stock at local dealers but ordering a new one is out of the question until 2016 from my understanding.
Lots of bikes out there worth checking into, but the bikes listed above are some of what I've ridden recently on trails in our area.
division.bell
Active member
13458885:byubound said:
I prefer a precise and clean cut to one rough cut by hand. But that's just me.
Plus with a guide, you can focus on consistent strokes as well as firm and even pressure versus where the blade is wandering. Again, just my personal preference.
division.bell
Active member
13458197:californiagrown said:
Triple post.
Pretty much nailed it. It's a quiver bike. One to have for the intended days, and the 'why the fuck not?' days. Much like the feel of slashing a deep turn on massively rockered pow skis, the traction and feel of a fat bike is addicting.
My only counter would be that I have not yet found terrain that it didn't make more fun and/or interesting. Not the ideal or perfect bike for everywhere, but it does make every ride fun. Once I get new wheels and throw a Bluto on it, I will take it to Tiger, but I'm not sure I'd survive my normal day at Tiger on a rigid fat bike. Could be worth a try though.