needs a duc 32 for the full Mav finish 
Bike Forum
An "Ugly" of bikes?
-
Posted 11 months ago #
-
Personaly i would not buy an awefull looking bike, to me the look of a bike matters. I would never ever buy a bike that i hated the look of, how ever it rode, Why would anyone want to go out ridding on a bike they did not like the look of.But then why would anyone spend spend 2 - 3K on a bike that didnt ride well.
Each to there own thats what i say.I agree entirely, but again I shall say it... Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. But I would NEVER buy a bike purely based upon looks no matter how nice I thought it looked.
When I first saw a Maverick back in about 2001 my thoughts were along the lines that it looked like it was trying to be different for the sake of being different. If that makes sense? I wouldn't have called it ugly at all, just thought it looked more complicated than it needed to be, But this was also before I even began to understand the reason behind the design and the rear suspension axle path.
Looking into how the suspension works, it makes sense to have the frame designed in such a way as it is, it's actually less complicated than it looks cos essentially the shock is now one main spar of the rear triangle. So it's kind've "form follows function", but in an intricate and highly detailed way.
And then I rode one... To quote Tazzy above...
based on the fact (according to tazzipedia and 20 years experience of riding mountain bikes ) that the person who usually owns an odd bike will have gone through a whole host of standard mtb's before finding one the suits their needs rather than what some bloke in a shop or magazine told them they needed to be on trend
I've ridden LOTS of full sus MTB's, some good, some bad, many very average, but the moment I first swung a leg over a Maverick and pedalled I knew I had to have one! And that was back in 2003 when they were still £2500 for a frame only! It took a few years wait and a chance immaculate 2nd hand ML7 to get my first one back in Feb 2007, but since then nothing else will do... They are a very distinctive ride, and they by no means suit everyones riding style, but for those of us that they do suit they're the cream of the crop!
Posted 11 months ago # -
Nothing wrong with Mavericks, I love my ML7. Now Jeff Jones, he does make an ugly bike!
Posted 11 months ago # -
Mboy my latest fugly bikes all built, although I'll still take the pee out of your URT Maverick
Though I reckon I'm going to have to take your advice and get the 120mm forks for it
Posted 11 months ago # -
Nothing wrong with Mavericks, I love my ML7. Now Jeff Jones, he does make an ugly bike!
I'm not going there either... No, I don't own a Jones (god I wish I was that loaded!), but I have had a brief go on one... Again, won't be for everyone, but it does ride very nicely for those it appeals to.
Mboy my latest fugly bikes all built, although I'll still take the pee out of your URT Maverick
Wouldn't call that fugly mate, about the best looking bike you've had I reckon! Longer travel forks and some biiiiig rubber will make it look even tastier though!
And you can take the pee out of my Maverick all you want, but I can bore you for AT LEAST twice as long with all the information about how it is NOT a URT design, how the rear axle path moves exactly parallel with the front axle path, how the suspension stiffens less than 7% when standing as opposed to seating (so naff all in reality), and how the suspension only moves because of forces acting on it from the ground (rider induced pedal bob is non existent on a Maverick!)... See!
Posted 11 months ago # -
And you can take the pee out of my Maverick all you want, but I can bore you for AT LEAST twice as long with all the information about how it is NOT a URT design, how the rear axle path moves exactly parallel with the front axle path, how the suspension stiffens less than 7% when standing as opposed to seating (so naff all in reality), and how the suspension only moves because of forces acting on it from the ground (rider induced pedal bob is non existent on a Maverick!)... See!
Yeah but I just love getting you started on it!
Posted 11 months ago # -
It's got uglier!
Yes, that is a Thomson layback run back to front, so my saddle angle is now correct, and yes those are 762 wide flat bars and a double and bash on an XC bike...
Posted 1 month ago # -
You poor (m)boy
Posted 1 month ago # -
that looks ace, but then most of my bikes also fall into the " uglier than an orange 5 rider" category
Posted 1 month ago # -
That seat post and tube looks like it needs a snake charmer to keep it under control!
Posted 1 month ago # -
That seat post and tube looks like it needs a snake charmer to keep it under control!
Comment of the day... Brilliant!
Posted 1 month ago # -
They don't call me snake hips for nothin'!
Posted 1 month ago # -
A collection of ugly bikes is known as a 'helpdesk'
"a helpdesk of 5's and pronghorns came past"
Posted 1 month ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
