I didn’t know about that YT Wicked though. It’s not as nice as the spec on my bike which cost me 500 quid more to build but damn! I know what bike me and my old man are going to put our money together for to buy my younger brother!

You could definitely get it down to 29lbs, perhaps more. My mega weighs 32 lbs. Gonna swap to a Deville fork (having said that travel adjust is really useful)…there goes 500 grams….tioga saddle….there goes another 100 grams…kcnc seatpost…there goes another 100 grams off my build…R1 brakes…there goes 240 grams…

etc

If I wanted to go nut’s I could then save a lb by chaging my slx groupset.

I decided early on I’d rather pay less money for the frame and more money on parts. Why? Suspension performance, unsprung weight savings and mass centralization. The people telling you that you should buy a lighter frame are ill informed, if you are on a budget and can get a heavier cheaper frame but light and strong wheels or a lighter frame and heavier cheaper wheels then purchasing the lighter frame is IMO the wrong choice.

Lastly geometry comes is very important, not many bikes have geometry that are as suited to pointing downhill as the Mega (that inclues Ibis Mojo hD’s, Nomads, Yetis, Orange 5s). The geometry is really rather different to a lot of bikes and in the Mega’s case it works wonderfully. If you are an XC weight weenie though it is definitely a downhillers play/all day bike and not a trail bike….it’s for those DHers who want to explore places that don’t have uplifts.

Having said that it pedals well for a single pivot and feels lighter than it is when climbing….I caught some cyclocrossers on it round a trail about a week ago. I can easily ride it on 30-40km rides.

Sorry my initial post was worded rather badly, late at night etc. Well, there have been a few arguments raging about whether leatt braces cause thoracic spinal damage and increased head injuries.

This is not a proper study, as there would be so many holes in the data it would never stand up to journal scrutiny and I can’t be arsed to set up a website with all the required legal documents for such a study without knowing what the interest in participation would be. What I wanted was just to develop an idea to start a bit of discourse in the mtb world…basically just me having a bit of fun. I was going to post the data back up on here afterwards.

I have yet to see any independent body actually test neck braces and develop a standard, I had hoped the MTB world could put pressure on the relevant bodies to do so. If you guys would like a more official study, then by all means be my guest and help me create a website that has all the relevant legal information and suggest any ideas you have.

How many of you would genuinely go to all the effort to participate read and sign some legal documents? If a lot of you would then I’ll eat my hat and will set about building a website.

also for anyone else. Don’t do this with Springer Spaniels, the mental cases that they are.

Springer Spaniel – “What’s boss doing on this weird contraption….wait where’s he going….hang on let me catch up…..I’m gonna overtake the ****…thinking he can out run me…the bastard…..caught him…..oooooh loook a pheasant….ATTACK!!!….screech BANG!”

I see TJ is on the butt end of people not understanding the scientific process as usual. You know if it wasn’t for us anal retentive scientists, you guys wouldn’t have suspension forks that tracked the ground properly. In fact you’d still be throwing turnips at witches.

He wasn’t arguing with me, we were having a discussion. One that I found rather interesting because if answers were found to my questions then potentially cycling could be safer for road users.

Just looking at the rest of that paper at the bottom entitled “
Arguments against helmet legislation are flawed”. Have you read it? What are your thoughts?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1410864/ Here we go.

http://www.pinkbike.com/video/146846/ linky to the floodgate mod. People have been removing the floodgate to improve small bump sensitivity, sram even encouraged them as can be seen over at pinkbike.

Thanks for the link TJ….interesting.

Because he’s a medic. I’m not a medic but a biomedical scientist. We are an odd bunch that find this sort of thing interesting.

It’s why you don’t die at the age of 40.

damn it! so do any of you guys actually know what the floodgate mod is?

Okay will have a look TJ. It’s rather interesting actually especially if randomized case controlled studies have shown a benefit but public health studies have not. Finding the reason for that might get one a publication and a bit of attention in the academic world! :D

I’ve got some friends who are epidemiologists at the John Radcliffe hospital. I’ll track them down and get some advice. Time to nerd out and read my epidemiology textbook. I like a challenge. I’ll have a think about this subject over the next few days and post my thoughts.

I’ve come across similar public health topics before, where case control studies show a benefit but public health studies do not. It’s a distant memory but I seem to remember that health benefits can be lost in a large population because of the increased amount of variables inherent a large population. (However if there have been randomized case controlled trials done on helmet usage then there is something seriously odd going on)

Basically some people are doing something that may negate the protective affects of the helmets and are messing up the data. If you could find the cause of that you could potentially address it and lower the amount of injuries.

I don’t know much about this topic though at the moment.

I think may be a problem related to the type of user. In populations that are keen experienced cyclists that are road aware then I bet there would be an increase in safety as these types of cyclists may know that helmets have their limitations, when compared to similar cyclists who do not use them.

But these types of cyclists are not not your average user and so other factors may decrease their efficacy in other cyclists. Perhaps that could be addressed.

As to the problem of putting off people from riding. Could we not develop some sort of lid with ballistic gel in it, that hardens up when impacted. You could put it in a beanie and it could also be sold to other users such as epileptics/syncope/avnrt patients who have to hear bulky headgear that never quite resemble proper beanies.

Edited my post TJ.

I found them. It appears the types of journal articles supporting your arguments are public health type epidemiological surveys and not case-controlled. So perhaps helmets are not a benefit for overall public health but may be of benefit for certain types of cyclists.”

Mmmm maybe I could do this for my Medical Statistics Msc

TandemJeremy, references please? Got journal articles to back up our claims? Having difficulty finding them on NCBI.

EDIT: Found them. It appears the types of journal articles supporting your arguments are epidemiological and not case-controlled. So perhaps helmets are not a benefit for overall public health but may be of benefit for certain types of cyclists.

Look I don’t care whether helmet usage makes some fatties decide not to use a bicycle and then die due to a myocaridal infarction as a result.

The point that heavy helmet usage increases disease is besides the point.

What needs to be asked is whether helmet usage reduces the rate of TBI’s suffered by keen cyclists in population groups that cycle with a helmet compared to a control population that cycle without helmets.

Problem **** solved. Why? Because if it can be proven that helmets do in fact reduce the amount of TBI’s, you can then wage a campaign to try to make helmets cool. Perhaps manufacturers could… say…… push the BMX pisspot lid design for urban commuter use etc.

what doesnt? I guess what I meant was….is that has the normal Mission Control damper with the floodgate been revised for the 2010+ models? Because the damper I have is physically closer to the DH damper instead of the one pictured in the link.

If it has been revised does this affect the floodgate mod causing an adverse outcome?

I ask this because I think I may have effectively turned my damper into the DH damper considering that it seems different to previous revisions. If you swap out the Mission Control damper with the floodgate for the Mission Control DH damper you also have to swap the rebound assembly for the one that goes with the DH assembly.

Meh bit pissed off about this tbh. If this is the stock tune the bike isn’t for aggressive enduro like it’s made out to be, the shocks been setup for mincers who just ride a 6 inch travel bike round Coed-Y-Brenin. It’s been setup very very plush (if it isn’t ****) for people who don’t ride quick enough to need a stiffer setup.

I might put a Bos Vip’R on it if it comes back the same. Although when I used to run a Totem and a DHX5 on the same bike it felt whack, so I’m not sure I really want to mix and match F/R shocks again.

Yeah heres the clincher im 11.5 stone and if I run 180 psi I get about 35 percent sag.

Blown seals?

……I didn’t think you could buy a worse shock than a DHX5 :mrgreen: D@mnit I hate Rock Shox. It’s a false economy buying cheap Rock Shox off CRC. Being a student I’m starving as it is, I can’t afford BOS. I’ve had dodgey Totems with no compression adjustment and blown seals, dodgey Domains etc.

Do they all come like this, I’ve had so many things I’ve had to send back with this build. I don’t want to send this shock back and get it back with nothing done to it, can any tuners rip it apart and give it more mid-stroke compression support?

Yup the elastomer was installed. My LBS was on the phone to Silverfish for about an hour going through all the possible solutions. The BB shell was well within tolerance.

nope all 3 1mm spacers were added and there was still 2mm of play. Silverfish decided this wasn’t normal. SLX cranks ordered, RC’s going back to CRC.

I’ll have a talk to my LBS see if they tried those spacers. Thanks for the help anyway guys, especially Bikewhisperer and robdeanhove. Whatever Arsehide_Twinkie.

Yeah that’s it, late at night but I’m not using a 68mm BB

Hmmm, I couldn’t see that in my own instructions. Neither could my LBS and that potentially means Silverfish are talking out of their arses as well.

No, the cranks were assembled with the correct amount of spacers. One spacer for a 73mm BB. If I had a 68mm BB I would have to use 2 spacers. Silverfish decided that there was something wrong if I had to use 2 spacers for a 73mm BB. As I said, I went through the build with Silverfish over the phone, then had my LBS go through it with Silverfish on the phone. Just to make sure I wasn’t being a nonce.

If that’s the case? Damnit lol, I should have just bought the 9 speed M665 in the first place.

I bought a set of Racefaces because I needed a 24/36 bash 10 speed setup for my Nukeproof Mega. My LBS is offering to send them directly back to Silverfish for a warranty however I purchased them from CRC, should I just send them back to CRC for a refund. Possibly order a 9 speed SLX setup and the Raceface chainrings. (Don’t trust them with a second pair of cranks)?