All things MTB

10416 posts / 0 new
Last post
lukasz
lukasz's picture

What's up with the Canyon AL Spectral? Geometry looks nearly identical to a Bronson. Spec is great, price is great. What am I missing?

https://www.canyon.com/en-us/mtb/spectral/spectral-al-6-0-ex

Also, I'm on the lookout for shopping season related MTB dealz for a bike in this category. If anyone sees anything, post it!

Thu, 11/23/2017 - 12:15
Viggen
Viggen's picture

There's nothing fishy about the Spectral and your not missing anything at all, both Spectral and Strive have been tested on many many occasions and are R E A L L Y popular bikes over in the EU/Sweden. Great bang for buck, pretty well specced compared to the competitors in the same price range.
It's a great start to some real mtbing, sure the fork isn't the fanciest Pike model but hey it's a decent fork from RS!

For me it comes down to personal stuff like:
- I hate SRAM brakes, don't like their feel and their Centerline rotors are pretty much garbage.
- Not at all fond of SRAM shifters, they just don't fit my hands ergonomically.

Whippin Skidz wrote:
This is tarck, there is a complicated solution to everything and we will endlessly discuss until an agreed upon solution has been tabled. This is out of your hands now.

Thu, 11/23/2017 - 17:07
liquify
liquify's picture

Damn, looks solid.
I’m gonna be selling my BMC trailfox tf02 soon for 2k if you like wagon wheels.

Thu, 11/23/2017 - 18:14
lukasz
lukasz's picture
(Reply to #9954)

Viggen wrote:
- I hate SRAM brakes, don't like their feel and their Centerline rotors are pretty much garbage.

I actually really liked the Guide Rs when I tried them on a demo bike this summer.

Thu, 11/23/2017 - 20:02
Rentable Faxmachine
Rentable Faxmachine's picture

I don't think I've ever owned a Centerline rotor that didn't have a noticeable bend. Their Level brakes are decent, but the stock pads don't have much bite.

Thu, 11/23/2017 - 23:35
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture

Debating between two very similar bikes...

2018 Timberjack NX1 27.5 vs 2018 Commencial Meta HT AM Origin
Both $1,099

The Commencial seems to be a lil more big boy w/t/r:

  • better stock tires
  • 30mm more travel
  • bigger rotors
  • higher BB
  • more progressive geom (I think)

The Salsa has this going for it (major for me):

  • rack mounts
  • 3rd bottle cage
  • prettier

I'm just getting started with MTB and prefer to slow-crawl up doubletrack. I probably don't need either of these. But which one would you buy if you were a noob?

Geometry (I am 6'5... comparing XL Salsa to XL Commencial)

HT
Salsa: 68.5
Comm: 65.0

ST
Salsa: 74.0
Comm: 74.0

Stack
Salsa: 627.0
Comm: 643.0

Reach
Salsa: 489.0
Comm: 470.0

Wheelbase:
Salsa: 1173.0
Comm: 1228.0

BB drop:
Salsa: 61mm
Comm: 40mm

Here are the parts differences....

Forks
Salsa: rockshox judy tk solo air 120mm boost
Comm: ROCK SHOX RECON RL, 150 mm, rebound, low speed comp to lock, boost

Brakes
Salsa: TEKTRO HD-M 290, hydraulic disc brake 180 mm / 160 mm
Comm: TEKTRO HD-M 285, hydraulic disc brake 200 mm / 180 mm

Drivetrain
(same): SRAM NX, 1 x 11 speed

Rims
Salsa: WTB SCRAPER i40
Comm: WTB SCRAPER i35

Hubs
(same): FORMULA, 32 holes, sealed bearings

Tires
Salsa: WTB Ranger 27.5" x 2.8"
Comm: MAXXIS REKON+ 27.5" x 2.8"

Weight
(same): ~29.5 lb

I believe they can both take dropper posts. Salsa seatpost is 30.9, Commencial is 31.6

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 16:59
euclid
euclid's picture
(Reply to #9957)

Nishiki wrote:
The Salsa has this going for it (major for me):

  • prettier

Case closed.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:20
liquify
liquify's picture

Salsa.
65* on the C-bike seems a bit much, especially given the fork (32mm). I guess they want it to be enduro-ready or something.

But if you are just getting into dirt stuff, the Salsa will be solid. It is probably slacker than most hardtails and other such bikes most off us far too deep into mtb started on. Hell, until my first enduro bike, my first few mtb hta were 70 or 71.
Reach also looks better on the Salsa. I imagine the full tt measurement is bigger, too (it is). Probably better fit on salsa.
salsa can ss if you rip the dangler off, I think, given those dropouts.

So, yeah, probably Salsa (plus Commencal was soldout online).

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:21
JUGE FREDD
JUGE FREDD's picture

the Commencal is much more in the partybiek category

but kinda less progressive for an XL comparing across categories, the reach is more like today's designs in size L

the Salsa has long dropper compatibility issues because of the bend in the seattube (and the reamed length is even shorter, I've ridden one)

from watching my friends try it at a demo, I'd say the Salsa is solidly noob-friendly

It's a struggle, but you cut out his tongue, and his last words are "atmo atmo Atmo ATMO ATMOOOOOGORIHGGHRSHGGRLMGGMMGMgrrglegurglegrr....."
– akasnowmaaan

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:26
Todd
Todd's picture

Those bikes are not similar at all.
Comm looks like more fun

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:42
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture

Thanks everybody. Salsa it is. You all recommended it earlier in the year, but I'm sold now. I will try to get that REI discount and spend it on the rack-accepting salsa dropouts.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:42
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture
(Reply to #9962)

I am too noob to debate that. More evidence that the Salsa is for me

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:45
Viggen
Viggen's picture

Would buy Commencal over the Salsa, it's gonna be the must fun/easy to get your confidence up for the down parts of mtb:ing.
Those are the most fun parts in my mind.

Whippin Skidz wrote:
This is tarck, there is a complicated solution to everything and we will endlessly discuss until an agreed upon solution has been tabled. This is out of your hands now.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:47
JUGE FREDD
JUGE FREDD's picture

wait why the hell do you want to put a rear rack on it?

spend that money on feedbags if you don't own any, a dropper for it, and then some form of framebag

It's a struggle, but you cut out his tongue, and his last words are "atmo atmo Atmo ATMO ATMOOOOOGORIHGGHRSHGGRLMGGMMGMgrrglegurglegrr....."
– akasnowmaaan

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:49
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture
(Reply to #9965)

JUGE FREDD wrote:
wait why the hell do you want to put a rear rack on it?

spend that money on feedbags if you don't own any, a dropper for it, and then some form of framebag

My favorite riding is with touring bikes and I'm imagining riding up a moutain to another town on this some day. I might be dreaming. I want a framebag anyways like the cool guys... but this tubus rack is just sitting here

Viggen wrote:
Would buy Commencal over the Salsa, it's gonna be the must fun/easy to get your confidence up for the down parts of mtb:ing.
Those are the most fun parts in my mind.

But I'm scared to jump

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 17:58
eric_ssucks
eric_ssucks's picture

Jesus christ you're trolling us.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 18:00
liquify
liquify's picture

No, he is indicating that he won't need a terribly small, too rad for him mtb. Or, that the Salsa is the right bike for him.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 18:08
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture

I don't wanna jump. I get pleasure from trees and suffering. Jumping is too dangerous. I do not like Monster energy drinks either

Imagine this but neon orange with two full rear panniers. I cannot wait.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 18:11
yonderboy
yonderboy's picture

My 6'5" mtbro got rid of his Commencal MetaAM because the XL was too small. It seems to be a common complaint among the brand.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 20:02
deadforkinglast
deadforkinglast's picture

Outside of a straight up dirt jumper, I think we'd be hard pressed to find a worse hardtail for what you are describing than the Commencal, which is designed for fun.

Given that you seem to have a suffer-boner and equate having fun on a mountain bike with monster energy drinking bros, you may be better served by a different thread.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 21:13
ckd
ckd's picture

That Timberjack is a very cool bike, both in reality AND on the internet.

Spencer Raleigh, Medical Panini

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 21:24
blackholelectron
blackholelectron's picture
(Reply to #9972)

Nishiki wrote:
Imagine this but neon orange with two full rear panniers.

No thanks, I'm good!

Quote:
if you're happily shuffling between rural corn dog purchases at 14mph, how are your needs not being met?

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 21:34
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture

This is is borderline harassment and if it continues I wil be contacting the webmaster

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 22:16
yonderboy
yonderboy's picture

Just make sure you don't tell him you want to put ergos on your bike.

Mon, 11/27/2017 - 23:45
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture

I just typed Karate Monkey into the search bar and I'm thinking real hard about my life

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 01:41
cousinmosquito
cousinmosquito's picture
(Reply to #9976)

Nishiki wrote:
I just typed Karate Monkey into the search bar and I'm thinking real hard about my life

Nothing bad can come from having a Karate Monkey, apart from the regret when you finally sell it.

More wonderful than you can believe it

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 04:04
mdilthey
mdilthey's picture
(Reply to #9977)

Nishiki wrote:
I just typed Karate Monkey into the search bar and I'm thinking real hard about my life

KM's are awesome but so is that Salsa.

The Salsa will take a larger framebag which is awesome.

For what you're doing, you don't necessarily need front suspension, and you might enjoy rigid, especially if you went with a 27.5+ bike like the KM. Of course, suspension can be fun too. It's mostly fun when you go fast and it can make long, long rides easier. If you like climbing and crawling I prefer rigid.

A rear rack is fine to start, but plan to switch to soft bags soon. They're awesome.

Don't let anyone tell you how to live your life

26/M/41t N/W

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 10:46
Viggen
Viggen's picture

Max, I'm sorry but GTFO with that "you'll be fine on a rigid"-shit.

E V E R Y O N E benefits from a decent boingy fork up front. Even you.
You'll have more grip, comfort, corner ability, climbing comfort and I could go on and on and on. The thing claiming "rigid climbs better" is absolute bs, if that were true the whole fucking XC WC-circuit would ride fully rigid bikes...

Also fuck a rear rack+panniers on a "real" mtb, this aint pukebacking/poop-barning.
If bags are to hang on the frame: frame bags and butt rockets FTW.

This Karate Monkey is pretty legit and non JA built, apart from the art-is-anal L E A T H E R frame bag...
You could have fun on trails and also suffer on fire roads if that's what you like.

Whippin Skidz wrote:
This is tarck, there is a complicated solution to everything and we will endlessly discuss until an agreed upon solution has been tabled. This is out of your hands now.

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 14:38
oogens
oogens's picture

Vig is preaching the gospel. Insisting on a rigid bike when suspension tech is as good as it is now makes no sense. It's like when people on bikeforums would stick to their brakeless guns and insist it was a purer fixie experience or some such bullshit.

Don't get a rack

Do get a dropper

commencal looks more fun, but the slacked out head angle is probably gonna be a bit of a huge departure for a roadie, it'll only be good if you get an aggressive stance and get your weight on the front more.

karate monkey makes no sense since it's like $1400, and you'll need at least another $350 on the fork, and for nearing 1800 there's so many better options.

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 16:12
mdilthey
mdilthey's picture

Did not say better

Said “might enjoy”

It’s apples and oranges. Different riding experience entirely. I keep riding FS/Hardtails on shop demo rides and I find that I enjoy rigid. It’s challenging, it keeps me from going dangerously fast, it forces me to be more thoughtful about my lines and body position.

I never said it was better at anything.

Since Nishiki wants to ride fire roads, likes challenging, punishing rides, doesn’t want to go fast, and doesn’t want to jump, he might be an ideal candidate for the rigid lifestyle. Lots of people - thousands of people- really like that kind of mountain biking and lots of them ride the exact same way as described, myself included (ok, I do like a little jumping).

26/M/41t N/W

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 19:01
Rentable Faxmachine
Rentable Faxmachine's picture

Count me as one of those weirdos who likes rigid bikes. When I say "rigid" I really mean "Jones," though.

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 20:35
aerobear
aerobear's picture
(Reply to #9982)

mdilthey wrote:
Did not say better

Said “might enjoy”

It’s apples and oranges. Different riding experience entirely. I keep riding FS/Hardtails on shop demo rides and I find that I enjoy rigid. It’s challenging, it keeps me from going dangerously fast, it forces me to be more thoughtful about my lines and body position.

I never said it was better at anything.

Since Nishiki wants to ride fire roads, likes challenging, punishing rides, doesn’t want to go fast, and doesn’t want to jump, he might be an ideal candidate for the rigid lifestyle. Lots of people - thousands of people- really like that kind of mountain biking and lots of them ride the exact same way as described, myself included (ok, I do like a little jumping).

Speed isn't dangerous when you have suspension, just FYI. No one is criticizing Nishiki, just let's be clear on what we're asking for. A good chunk of us posting in this thread enjoy riding technical trail and even enjoy going fast downhill on technical trail, which means we prefer a bike that's more "fun" in all conditions - not preventing us from going 'dangerously fast'.

The bike that is going to be ridden with a rack and panniers on fire roads isn't what many of us would call a mtb. It's a different machine and may not be as capable on trail, but fully capable of climbing fire roads if that's the intention. Gonna get a hell of a lot different feedback in the pukebacking thread if that's the intention, versus this thread.

No one suggested nishiki get a bike to go fast or go off jumps or anything. That's the confusing part. At no point was anyone suggesting these things, just offering up opinions between the two options he posted (which are very different bikes).

crowding wrote:
Every time i eat Dick's I just wind up disappointed that I'm not getting In-n-Out.

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 21:10
mdilthey
mdilthey's picture

I think saying the word "rigid" gets a few people foaming at the mouth.

When I talk about speed, what I'm trying to articulate is that the physical limitations of a rigid bike tend to speed-check my riding style to a pace that wouldn't be life-changing if I got into a crash. A full suspension bike allows the rider to carry faster over rough terrain, but also indirectly raises the stakes of a crash. Not the bike's problem, 100% about the rider. But like I said, my rigid bike tends to keep me at a pretty safe pace for my ability.

I probably shouldn't have even attempted to go there, though, since it's not really my point and I feel like people are confusing it as a perceived benefit.

Rigid is a riding style, just like fixed gear or singlespeed or CX or anything else. There's no one "best" way, just different styles. For the uses you're describing and the uses that rightfully dominate this thread, suspension is almost always the right call.

For "I dream of long-distance mountain touring" and "I love fire roads" and "I love suffering and punishing climbs" rigid is 100% a pretty decent recommendation IMO. Nishiki's planned usage is perfect for a rigid and the riding style seems to align with his preferences really well.

I don't feel like my advice is as far off as people are implying, and it's annoying that this conversation is derailing into "Max thinks Rigid is better?!" NO- I don't.

26/M/41t N/W

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 21:21
liquify
liquify's picture
(Reply to #9984)

mdilthey wrote:
Don't let anyone tell you how to live your life

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 21:36
drwelby
drwelby's picture

Too bad all the flat bar Advocate Seldom Seens are sold out, would be a good rackpacker.

Naturally, this bike is partially tarck's fault.

Tue, 11/28/2017 - 21:41
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture

Thanks for hashing this out. I've been a little trolly in this thread and I appreciate the real responses despite that.

I am a sucker for the steel idea: "buy this bike and give it to your kids 30 years from now" But with the riding I'd do I doubt the Salsa frame would have any trouble making it that long.

My big fears with suspension ownership:

1. I don't want to maintain this alien technology. I neglect and use up chains, I don't clean my bikes much, etc.

2. The previous generation of suspension bikes rapidly turning into paper-weights is a bit daunting for a cheap guy like me. I know this is because of the rapid evolution of MTB, but it is still off-putting.

I make decisions like this slowly, and will think on this for a while longer. thanks for the halp

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 13:21
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture
(Reply to #9987)

Rentable Faxmachine wrote:
Count me as one of those weirdos who likes rigid bikes. When I say "rigid" I really mean "Jones," though.

Are you the gravelbike.com guy??

"So it begins"
https://www.gravelbike.com/lazy-sunday-32/

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 13:22
oogens
oogens's picture
(Reply to #9988)

mdilthey wrote:
I think saying the word "rigid" gets a few people foaming at the mouth.

When I talk about speed, what I'm trying to articulate is that the physical limitations of a rigid bike tend to speed-check my riding style to a pace that wouldn't be life-changing if I got into a crash. A full suspension bike allows the rider to carry faster over rough terrain, but also indirectly raises the stakes of a crash. Not the bike's problem, 100% about the rider. But like I said, my rigid bike tends to keep me at a pretty safe pace for my ability.

I probably shouldn't have even attempted to go there, though, since it's not really my point and I feel like people are confusing it as a perceived benefit.

Rigid is a riding style, just like fixed gear or singlespeed or CX or anything else. There's no one "best" way, just different styles. For the uses you're describing and the uses that rightfully dominate this thread, suspension is almost always the right call.

For "I dream of long-distance mountain touring" and "I love fire roads" and "I love suffering and punishing climbs" rigid is 100% a pretty decent recommendation IMO. Nishiki's planned usage is perfect for a rigid and the riding style seems to align with his preferences really well.

I don't feel like my advice is as far off as people are implying, and it's annoying that this conversation is derailing into "Max thinks Rigid is better?!" NO- I don't.

you basically post any time someone shows interest in a non-downhill bike with "but whattabout the rigid bikes"?

when you're just starting out, just get a bike that is as close to an all rounder you can get. Don't know where Nishiki lives, but I've never had a problem finding suffer when heading out to the mountains, the suspension doesn't really change that. The rigid is fine once you get an idea of the riding you like doing, not the riding you think you'll like doing. I similarly wouldn't tell him to go out and get a dirt jumper, because it's a stupid bike that you decide you want, nobody tells you to get one.

for what it's worth, i bought a rigid iro 29er when I was deep into fixies, rode it twice on the fire roads, and decided mountain biking was no fun. Put it off for another 4 years until I got on a bike with suspension. Now I know which trails that bike could have been okay on, and better get the technique for riding and such. I'd argue rigid would benefit more from airtime to get over rocky patches and such, and probably needs a more aggressive riding style than a full suspension.

Get a bike that's more capable than you are, so you grow as a rider (since the bike can't grow for shit).

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 13:52
Rentable Faxmachine
Rentable Faxmachine's picture
(Reply to #9989)

Nishiki wrote:
Are you the gravelbike.com guy??

Yeah.

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 13:58
Face
Face's picture
(Reply to #9990)

mdilthey wrote:
Max thinks Rigid is better?!

Mr. Pubes wrote:
i fear that you are so lost in your own asshole that you may never be found again. do you have a flare gun? send for help.

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 14:06
iwillbe
iwillbe's picture
(Reply to #9991)

oogens wrote:
mdilthey wrote:
I think saying the word "rigid" gets a few people foaming at the mouth.

When I talk about speed, what I'm trying to articulate is that the physical limitations of a rigid bike tend to speed-check my riding style to a pace that wouldn't be life-changing if I got into a crash. A full suspension bike allows the rider to carry faster over rough terrain, but also indirectly raises the stakes of a crash. Not the bike's problem, 100% about the rider. But like I said, my rigid bike tends to keep me at a pretty safe pace for my ability.

I probably shouldn't have even attempted to go there, though, since it's not really my point and I feel like people are confusing it as a perceived benefit.

Rigid is a riding style, just like fixed gear or singlespeed or CX or anything else. There's no one "best" way, just different styles. For the uses you're describing and the uses that rightfully dominate this thread, suspension is almost always the right call.

For "I dream of long-distance mountain touring" and "I love fire roads" and "I love suffering and punishing climbs" rigid is 100% a pretty decent recommendation IMO. Nishiki's planned usage is perfect for a rigid and the riding style seems to align with his preferences really well.

I don't feel like my advice is as far off as people are implying, and it's annoying that this conversation is derailing into "Max thinks Rigid is better?!" NO- I don't.

you basically post any time someone shows interest in a non-downhill bike with "but whattabout the rigid bikes"?

when you're just starting out, just get a bike that is as close to an all rounder you can get. Don't know where Nishiki lives, but I've never had a problem finding suffer when heading out to the mountains, the suspension doesn't really change that. The rigid is fine once you get an idea of the riding you like doing, not the riding you think you'll like doing. I similarly wouldn't tell him to go out and get a dirt jumper, because it's a stupid bike that you decide you want, nobody tells you to get one.

for what it's worth, i bought a rigid iro 29er when I was deep into fixies, rode it twice on the fire roads, and decided mountain biking was no fun. Put it off for another 4 years until I got on a bike with suspension. Now I know which trails that bike could have been okay on, and better get the technique for riding and such. I'd argue rigid would benefit more from airtime to get over rocky patches and such, and probably needs a more aggressive riding style than a full suspension.

Get a bike that's more capable than you are, so you grow as a rider (since the bike can't grow for shit).

<3

All music is just the Eagles with different geometry.

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 14:29
Mr. Pubes
Mr. Pubes's picture

i mean rigid is pretty fine. holds the wheel. a little bumpier. nbd.

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 14:43
cousinmosquito
cousinmosquito's picture
(Reply to #9993)

Nishiki wrote:
Thanks for hashing this out. I've been a little trolly in this thread and I appreciate the real responses despite that.

I am a sucker for the steel idea: "buy this bike and give it to your kids 30 years from now" But with the riding I'd do I doubt the Salsa frame would have any trouble making it that long.

My big fears with suspension ownership:

1. I don't want to maintain this alien technology. I neglect and use up chains, I don't clean my bikes much, etc.

2. The previous generation of suspension bikes rapidly turning into paper-weights is a bit daunting for a cheap guy like me. I know this is because of the rapid evolution of MTB, but it is still off-putting.

I make decisions like this slowly, and will think on this for a while longer. thanks for the halp

Start rigid and get a decent fork later if you think you need it, and can be arsed maintaining it.

More wonderful than you can believe it

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 14:46
mdilthey
mdilthey's picture
(Reply to #9994)

oogens wrote:

you basically post any time someone shows interest in a non-downhill bike with "but whattabout the rigid bikes"?

I haven’t posted in this thread in months. We had one other conversation about rigid bikes about 3-4 months ago. Nishiki has literally said “I don’t want suspension.”

Should we just pretend rigid bikes don’t exist? Is that the endgame?

26/M/41t N/W

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 14:47
Nishiki
Nishiki's picture

You know, on second thought, I think I'll just go hiking

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 16:20
JUGE FREDD
JUGE FREDD's picture
(Reply to #9996)

mdilthey wrote:
oogens wrote:

you basically post any time someone shows interest in a non-downhill bike with "but whattabout the rigid bikes"?

I haven’t posted in this thread in months. We had one other conversation about rigid bikes about 3-4 months ago. Nishiki has literally said “I don’t want suspension.”

Should we just pretend rigid bikes don’t exist? Is that the endgame?

there are incredibly few rigid bikes that aren't just really shitty flat bar road bikes from a modern MTB perspective — in XL sizes even the hardtails have cockpits that are 4" longer and wheelbases 12" longer than your trumped up crosschecks

Jones is really the only one making smart rigid bikes, and those are a completely different animal geometry-wise

It's a struggle, but you cut out his tongue, and his last words are "atmo atmo Atmo ATMO ATMOOOOOGORIHGGHRSHGGRLMGGMMGMgrrglegurglegrr....."
– akasnowmaaan

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 17:07
akasnowmaaan
akasnowmaaan's picture

Max, go try to find a rigid consumer bike. Hint: you can't. Nobody makes them.*

Want to know why nobody makes them? They are bad. They beat the hell out of your hands and forearms (great way to get RSI), they are harder to control, they are less forgiving, and they make you go slower. They are an intellectual challenge, but people don't want intellectual challenges. They want to crush gnar.

You know who rides rigids? Over-thinking bike connoisseurs that build bikes by hand. *Or fat bikers, because the only rigid off the shelf bikes out nowadays are fat.

Should have said it was just a cross check with different geometry. - Todd

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 17:16
drwelby
drwelby's picture

Naturally, this bike is partially tarck's fault.

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 17:42
drwelby
drwelby's picture

Naturally, this bike is partially tarck's fault.

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 17:48
Viggen
Viggen's picture

A thing you also say Max is that rigid bikes also makes you (as in you, the person Max) not go "dangerously fast" as to injure yourself seriously.

But then again every half decent mtb even with "sub-Deore level" hydro brakes "out-brakes" your mechanical disc brakes by a thousandfold so...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Also that sweet sweet suspension fork keeps your front tyre tracking better, when braking/slowing you down as to not go dangerously fast :*

Whippin Skidz wrote:
This is tarck, there is a complicated solution to everything and we will endlessly discuss until an agreed upon solution has been tabled. This is out of your hands now.

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 18:11

Pages