I don't care if it's a non-drive side picture…
I’ve stared at it for a while, and I’m really really struggling to find anything wrong with it.
apart from the Fox forks obv. which would have to be changed. and may struggle to get others with a Kashima coating (for colour matching purposes).
but yeah, very very nice.
polished finish can still look good.
oh, and the silly edge/edve/enve stickers are a bit naff.Posted 4 years agoTheArtistFormerlyKnownAsSTRSubscriber
Hmm, I’m torn…
I look at it and my immediate reaction is, ‘ooh – that’s nice’
Then, I study it and can’t decide
Then I look at that rear triangle and think it looks shit
Then I study it and think I quite like it, in an industrial kind of way.
One thing I do reckon though – it won’t look half as nice in a bigger framePosted 4 years agoChunkyMTBMember
theblackmount – Member
“Anyone else think those DW links are just ugly? It just looks like they’ve fitted the wrong rear triangle.”
Nail on head. Another dissenter here.
But then it’s a Turner so it must be good – right?
Why would it not be good then? Or do you buy bikes purely on looks and standing around in the car park value?Posted 4 years agorobinlaidlawMember
Disclaimer – I own a DW link 5 Spot.
It looks fine, and it’s a bike I’d like to own but DW link Turners aren’t brilliant looking. It’s actually just as well it’s a non-driveside photo, Turners look better that way as you can’t see the weird looking elevated stay on the drive side.
Based on what my 5 Spot is like I’m quite sure it’ll be great to ride, near indestructible and very well supported by Turner but other companies make better looking bikes. I’d still seriously consider one, but I’d also seriously consider a Pivot Mach 6.
One thing I do reckon though – it won’t look half as nice in a bigger frame
That’s at least a medium in the photo. Turner use very dropped top tubes with a long seat tube and a brace. The stand-over barely changes between the sizes and it stops the larger sizes looking too ungainly.Posted 4 years ago
I know this thread is all a bit tongue-in-cheek, but with the vast number of very capable bikes out there the aesthetics ends up being an important – no, essential – part of the purchasing decision for many of us.
For my last bike purchase I demo’d a handful of bikes, narrowed it down to 2 that were more than good enough for my needs, but chose the one that looked that best and had the (in my opinion) best “car park factor”. Conversely I dismissed the “big brand” bike manufacturers like Giant and Trek simply because of the fact they aesthetically left me cold.
The DW link Turners are just downright ugly though 🙂Posted 4 years agoAlexSimonSubscriber
I’ve always had a soft spot for Turners.
Most of the carbon 650b bikes around look nearly identical to each other and they’re made in Taiwan (possibly by the same factory).
I like that DT is still making these in the US and I think this is a particularly good looking version of Turner.
If I was to buy a bike today without test riding any, the Burner would be the one I’d order.Posted 4 years agohaggis1978Member
I like it very much. Wouldnt swap my Blur LTc for it either though as its amazing and i cant see it being any better. Having said that i have an old Horst Link Flux which is amazing and as a result when the Blur dies i will be purchasing another Turner. One thing that annoys me though is it looks like a pain in the ar$e to clean round about those linkages. My Blur isnt the easiest to clean round its top linkage and that looks just as bad. No i dont use a pressure washer and yes i do use brushes.Posted 4 years agotheblackmountMember
>Why would it not be good then? Or do you buy bikes purely on looks and standing around in the car park value?<
Simple really. The OP finds it an attractive looking bike and having also seen one in the flesh I don’t. It may ride well but that’s a different issue.Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘I don't care if it's a non-drive side picture…’ is closed to new replies.