[Closed] Form over function...would you want to ride an ugly bike?

You're pissed aren't you? 🙂

no, never

[url= https://c7.staticflickr.com/8/7475/28147480550_c44cf9b157_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://c7.staticflickr.com/8/7475/28147480550_c44cf9b157_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/JTicjN ]2016-07-20_01-11-14[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/91703444@N06/ ]20ston[/url], on Flickr

You're pissed aren't you?

History tells me that when I'm pissed function over form every time...

🙂

I have a remedy 29, it's not hideous but it is gangly and bulbous. I don't mind too much, since it's the best bike I've ever owned... My Trailfox had great lines but it just didn't ride as much to my taste.

Then again my Hemlock looked like some sort of dock crane or primitive swing bridge and I loved it too. And I owned an Ellsworth for a little while.

function over aesthetics everytime for me. it's a utility vehicle not a work of art.

[img] [/img]
3 x 10? check
26" wheels? check
1 1/8" uncut steerer? check
Questionable shock placement? check
Swoopy carbon? check

Virtually every mountain biker out there does so why be different? Remember being one of the gang is what makes a mountain biker.

It's irresponsible to start this thread before you have any pictures available. It creates an unsustainable level of fruitless anticipation.

Sounds like a right munter though.

yikes ox, that really is a ten pinter.

I'm not usually a bike tart, but it could look so good, before it was all cabled up and I had my old tyres on it it looked stunning..

Can't help but feel its a bit akin to having Margot Robbie turn up for a morning jog in a cocktail dress and asking her to change into something a bit more comfortable, like an old grey tracksuit...

Yes , I've had 3 Fives .

A five is never going to look pretty so you don't bother trying, you just use it as intended and what its very good at..

But the yeti could be so so pretty...

You could have gone 1x11 or 12 with potential for 10-50 on cassette. You'd not save much weight, but I agree 1x looks neater and collects less clag.

Lose the remote fork lockout, they're unnecessary and unreliable. Fast rolling 2.3" tyres are available.

It's good we all have different tastes and require different functions.
I'm a fan of a nice steel hard tail and a friend of mine recently bought Mondraker which I think are ghastly looking bikes, I think it's something to do with the bend in the top tube near to where it it joins the head tube.

Agree on Mondraker bikes, they seem to get reviewed well, but I too very much dislike the aesthetics, it's that bent top tube.

I'm also not very keen on bent downtubes, particularly at the BB end, head tube end I'm getting used to.

Also, seat tube braces, some are gopping, like on the Airdrop Edit, or On One DeeDar (though I don't think anyone thinks that looks good).

I do think this year's five looks ok though, best one to look at yet. I did like the four swingarm, but gone off it.

The bike looking half tidy is important to me, makes me more excited about and keen to ride it.

Can't help but feel its a bit akin to having Margot Robbie turn up for a morning jog in a cocktail dress and asking her to change into something a bit more comfortable, like an old grey tracksuit...

Dress, tracksuit, whatever, I'm on board.

I have a 5. With a Mudhugger fitted. I prefer function over form. TBH any bike I have is going to be brought down to ugly status once I climb aboard

Know what you mean about the tyres though, skinny ones just look 'wrong', as in not up to the job even though they're the best option in some cases!

Hang on...

Ah here it is.

[img] [/img]

It wasn't the hideousness that made me get rid of it though, it was the fact that it was a barely rideable bag of shite.

OTOH, ahead of the game on the plus sized tyres there with a 2.7

Ellsworth make bikes only a mother could love, but that thing up there ox posted... I've never seen anything like it! Great for comparing geometry though... what's my ETT...? Oh wait, it's painted on the side of it!

I take the approach I've never ridden a bike uglier than me so I don't really care what it looks like.

I ride a Nicolai.

Definitely function over form.

core - Member
Agree on Mondraker bikes, they seem to get reviewed well, but I too very much dislike the aesthetics, it's that bent top tube.

Glad I'm not the only one.... thought I was going to get lynched..

Dress, tracksuit, whatever, I'm on board.

Just like the Yeti she is a rare thing of beauty..

Infact she deserves to be named, so Margot sounds ideal...

Sounds like your build is just looking a little "cluttered" OP, it's no surprise your non-plussed as most of the promotional shots for such bikes tend to look cleaner and a bit more minimal.

But then you GIS it and get these two, similar bikes:

[img] ?1452017908[/img]

Which sort of screams
[img] [/img]

Or this:

[img] [/img]

Just a little Subtler and just looks...
[img] [/img]

If it does the job, and is nice to ride let someone else worry about the looks...

mine was aiming to look like the second one...I'll post a pic tomorrow so the masses can judge. It does look far too cluttered however.

Still toying with idea of 1x11, but as mentioned in OP, its not that suited to how I like to climb. The Range isn't the issue, its the massive gaps that do my head in. I never feel like I'm in the right gear, or if I am, its shortlived until the next shift.

Looks far far better however, of that there is no doubt.

These things are transitory - in 6months you won't give a sh1t

Nice bike

I ride a Nicolai.

Definitely function over form.

Are you blind? The most beautiful bikes on the planet!

If you're bothered about riding an ugly bike, then you're spending too much time standing next to it rather than riding it. Even the ugliest bike looks much the same as any other bike when you're riding it. Personally I'd take a certain pride in riding a bike which is inherently ugly as a kind of inverse snobbery (I once had desires to own a Whyte Preston, and whilst I knew it was ugly that actually appealed to me).

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

What my bike looks like matters to me immensely.

I wouldn't ride a rubbish bike just because it looked good, but given a choice between decent-enough bikes I'll pick the one that looks [s]most offensively garish[/s] best. 8)

Northwind is still winning!

Something quite nice about out climbing or pushing someone down a trail who's on a fancy bike when you're on a ratter.

As long as you've taken the stickers off your carbon enves first...

If you're bothered about riding an ugly bike, then you're spending too much time standing next to it rather than riding it. Even the ugliest bike looks much the same as any other bike when you're riding it.

You've not seen the view from the cockpit yet Aracer. Its like a birdsnest out front, with a tiny tiny tyre always in view.

I'm pretty sure I responded to your original thread (when you were so chuffed having just bought the thing) saying it was damn near to make an ASRc ugly. I'm struggling to believe you've actually managed it.

This thread is useless without pics.

Easy, stick a camera on an out-front mount and ride wearing VR goggles.
You can then enjoy the ride without ever having to look at it 💡

Two paper bags would be cheaper.

Ambrose - Member
I ride a Nicolai.
Definitely function over form.

Call me biased, but I love the loo of them. Definitely prefer them to a lot of today's droopy down tubes.

Don't get me wrong, I love the look of my bike. I once met a German guy out in the Alps with another, older Nicolai. His was one of the originals. We were in geeky heaven, complementing each others bikes. Mrs Ambrose gave up and rode off.

there was a thread over on bikemagic that proposed the theory that the better looking the bike was proportional to the sex life of the designer. One of the conclusions was that Cy @ cotic was "getting loads".

It doesn't really matter what my bike looks like, it has me sitting on it, all red and sweaty.
It almost seems a shame to do that to a nice looking bike.

You could have gone 1x11 or 12 with potential for 10-50 on cassette. You'd not save much weight, but I agree 1x looks neater and collects less clag.

See, this is why I am *definitely* behind the times. A good 2x set up with a big ring and a granny ring and a normal sized cassette looks immeasurably better to me than a dinner plate cassette bigger than your rear disc, and a single twiddly front ring.

For a start your chain is almost always going to be in a sort of big/little combo which looks like you're always climbing.

And don't get me started on the looks of the rear mech you need to run to accomodate a 32/10-50 drivetrain 🙄

Give me 2x for looks any day 8)

Oh, but then I am considering clip on mudguards and Schwalbe Marathons for my super[s]fly[/s]commuter so I probably shouldn't be allowed to comment, it's going to look god-awful.

I'm with you 13th floor monk

Every time I ride 1*11 is get infuriates by its gaps.
To paraphrase James may- they have gaps big enough you could get another cassette in there......

Which is fine If you reach a climb and engage winch and then Drag your arse to the top.

I enjoy the climb as well as the down and part of that involves being able to select the right gear.

Equally - why a dropper on a bike like that yeti - I see why you'd have one on your gnarduro bikebut it seems these days you can't have a bike without a dropper. It's like folk forgot how to ride a bike.

😀

Careful Trail-Rat, I was just commenting on form of 1x11, wouldn't want to get dragged into an argument over function!

Haha. All the guys I ride with are 1*11. All I ever hear is "can't find the right gear " or "crunch"

And we seem to lose mech hangers more often also.

Definitely Function:

[img] :large[/img]

Luckily it's so f'ing fast, you don't have to look at it for long.... 😆

I've looked at changing my bikes for more modern functionally better models, but my riding abilities are fairly poor anyway, so I keep ending up with very pretty, classic looking steel bikes.

There's no point in obsessing about how an mtb looks.

They are all ugly until covered with a layer of encrusted mud.