TBH this whole forum could quite easily be classed as irrelevant. Distracting, entertaining, occasionally useful sure but generally irrelevant.

Shame on those that started that thread and those that made fools of themselves by posting stupid comments. I hope they are ashamed.

LOL

You aren't serious with that sort of comment are you? Really? Bloody hell? It's like listening to your outraged septagenarian aunty.

Irrelevant thread in the first place full of irreverant comments.

The STW sanctimonious and histrionic crowd doing their best to make more of something than it's worth bothering with. IMO if MF hadn't bothered voicing his "outrage" then that would have been best. But like someone said, some folks liked righting in to PoV too. Life a get, rearrange into a well known phrase ;-)

Give over and get on with something worth spending the time and energy on.

I couldn't do it, that amount of money on one bike is unjustifiable (to me).

However, I've always been tempted by a DeKerf Implant, if I were going to spend what would be daft money on one bike.

They're not particularly light, but that's probably not the point. It's no anchor though.

It isn't like-for-like (on price at least) but I much preferred my Dialled Alpine. But hey, (not that I paid new price) it's a couple of hundred quid more.

Mugboo's Summer (16") was mine and this is what it looked like at the time with 140 Pikes:

He's painted it and made it look all pretty now ;-)

Personally I found it a little wandery / flip-flop steering at 140 on steep climbs etc. Was better at 120 / 130 mm for climbing and general riding. Wound the forks out for max' skill compensation when descending ;-)

The thin shims supplied are only for preloading the rubber seals,

Really? I thought they were there to simply lift the top cover of the headset (with the integral rubber seal) to relieve a little of the potential friction.

but you may need a thin spacer under the stem to allow you to preload the entire headset.

Really? What's wrong with the underside of the stem bearing onto the headset assembly?

Also worth checking that your star nut is deep enough into the steerer as the top cap (especially Hope ones)can bottom out on them.

Depends whether you're using a star fangled nut or Hope Head Doctor. If it's the latter make sure expansion section is deep enough into the steerer and that it's secure. Agree the inner lips of Hope top caps can interfere if the steerer isn't deep enough within the stem.

Also, beware overtightening the standard Hope bolt (if it's the alloy version) easy to shear.

Lastly, although probably worth checking this first, are the cups seated all the way in the headtube of your frame and are they flush/level. Facing might be required, however, IME it's rarely necessary. Only thing I've had to do is sand off paint bulges.

HTH

Was a beautiful day (especially for October). Got quite a bit done, should be a map of the latest rideable route in Norwood up on the SingletrAction.org.uk website soon. One can also be found here: http://stagallery.teamfatknacker.co.uk/albums/userpics/10003/090906_Norwood_Trail.jpg

And what the hell, here it is in its full jpeg glory:

Mostly up in Norwood, clearing two substantial sections (one near the start, running parallel to the road , second was same as we worked on last month, pics etc can be found here: http://singletraction.frankencrank.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2940 and then trying to make the infernal bog passable / less likely to get you stinky right from the start of a ride. Pretty succesful I reckon.

Eleven people was a good turnout in the end and as always there aws a steady flow of riders throughout the day.

We do seem to have come away one rake short so if anyone happens to find one (detachable/inter-changeable hed type thing) please stash it somewhere same, look after it and/or get in touch (chairman@singletraction.org.uk).

Ta :-8

If you look in the document I mentioned, the difference between INcome and revenue for both "Major Recreational Destinations" and "Other Recreation and Dedicate Public Access" (i've grouped these because I assume they could both cover Trails stuff) is c.£10.8M.

Where does this come from? Us as the taxpayers ultimately as it's our tax dollar the Govt uses to prop up FE.

Why then pay extra (yes, I'm cynical, I think of it as "extra") for the rpivilege of riding trails on our land when we're already doing so, indirectly, through taxation.

Mr A, I don't quite get your point, unless you're assuming I don't want to pay for anything? Fair play, pay for facilities (showers, car park etc) within reason but not to "ride on the trails". I think others have made that point, at times, earlier in this thread and better than me.

Hey, it'd never work anyway so a lot of this is navel gazing ;-)

Dunno whether this has been mentioned but FC (England) recently ran a consultation on the longerm role of the Public Forrest Estate in England. Search in my recent posts and you'll find a link to it, plus the extensive discussion (or not ;-).

The forests are ours, FC/FE are just tasked with managing them / delivering the objectives Govt put on them.

The Public Forest Estate is a significant resource publicly owned through the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. In this way, it belongs to everyone. The Government is committed to public sector ownership of and involvement in the managment of England's woodlands and their continuing to deliver public benefits

pp13

Section 4 "Paying for the Public Forest Estate" has some (incredibly) cursory figures for FC PFE (England) in 2007/08.

In summary – PFC Income = £61.1M, Expenditure £75.9M therefore Net Operating Cost = £14.8M.

The forests are ours, FC and FE are paid for by our taxes, they operate in a nominal commercial capacity and so manage to offset quite a bit of their "costs" by generating revenue but we still fund their operations to the tune of £10's of millions. And everyone wants to pay them more money?

Further, AFAIK, lots of development is funded initially (i.e. the CAPEX type stuff) by grants (usually out of European or other tax pots) i.e. our money again.

However, I accept that maintenance is funded (if it occurs), separately. But, by it's nature it is no way as much as construction costs. Better to give a little time and develop ownership and involvement than pay for someone else to do it (but that's an observation of modern society, yadda, yadda pfft!).

And yet lots of people also want to pay for the privilege of riding these self same trails?

Not me.

My viewpoint is from nearly a decade of trailbuilding (on and off FE managed sites) and liaison with FE. Don't get me wrong, I've had some great experiences and there are some great people and ultimately I/we are getting to build trails on land (albeit ours anyway) through there assistance and hard work (though not always, and that's yet another story – pfft! again ;-)

This is all AFAIK, I might have some details wrong. I'd welcome someone who knows better to correct me.

The consultation is now closed but the document which I've referred to is here http://www.forestry.gov.uk/england-estatestudy

Peace and love 8-)

There was a similar scheme for computers. It got stopped, because people were abusing it.

Really? I thought it was scraped because it wasn't delivering on its intended purpose i.e. to provide computers to people who would not otherwise buy them due to cost. As it happens it was mostly used by mid to well off middle class folks etc not "the poor".

Whether this is entirely true I am not sure.

If they grow up thinking that it's normal for Mum & Dad not to talk to each other or show any love or affection towards each other, or worse still, be aggresive towards each other, then that is possibly how they will behave in their relationships.

+1

Except replace "possibly" with "probably".

Sadly work prohibits vimeo :-(

Happily I know PT's are ace :-) Treat the berm like a roller on it's side, drive into it and float out. Spot the exit and let the bike and berm do the work under you. Have faith it'll hold you (which it will if it's built properly).

"Getting" how to ride a PT is just like first learning to ride a bike, once it starts to come it gets easier and easier.

Avoiding lots of squishy suspension, run rock hard tyres (something with less knobbles if poss') and flat pedals. All helps a bit, IMO.

PT's rock!

Should anyone bother asking what's happened to the wonderful Blue Pig you had/have?

Think it looks gopping and the colour is grim.

Mleh, it ain't my bike and looks don't matter a toss ultimately.

Be interesting to know how it rides but given most people tend to post their feedback after the oh-my-god-my-new-bike-i've-ridden-it-once-and-it's-ace first ride it's pretty irrelevant. Let us know in a month eh?

I'm 39. Trying to jump at Buck Wood (that we, SingletrAction and friends, built). I build trails at Stainburn ("probably the hardest man made trail inthe UK" ;-) and try to ride them.

I fractured a rib falling off the on the pump track (baby smooth, christ knows how) but I opened the fracture carrying on of my kids off Ilkely Moor. That's what really hurt and stopped me riding for weeks.

"Growing up", whatever that means, is greatly over-rated. I hope I'm still riding (as badly as I do) as long as some of the other buggers mentioned above.

I've been coming home dirty, sometimes bloody and occassionally a little busted for years. Sod it, life's too short to watch X factor and Strictly ;-)

Same as everyone else really. Got a Rothan for my oldest at 2, he's now on the bigger size Cnoc and I can even ride with him on the right trails at 4.5 years old now.

Just got my 2 year old girl a new Rothan (with brake). Think it's a worthwhile improvement (although the lad never knackered himself). But, once they get confident, they can really get speed up and braking with feet isn't always great ;-)

Trade in values for Rothans are low with Islabikes, c.30% (IIRC) and that's for v.good condition ones. The guy on their phones was dead straight though and recommended selling them on privately.

If I get round to it I'll probably flog the lad's old Mk1 (no brake).

I just couldn't get my head round the questions they were asking

I know what you mean. First read left me scratching my head. However, CTC / Colin Palmer sent me their response and it was good to just see the way they were thinking. In the end I submitted something that was probably half about public interest and half about MTB.

I did criticise several of the questions as being poorly presented/structured/limited options. Particularly the one "Do you feel we're value for money?". Thought the info on costs they provided was very leading. That and the fact to make any real judgement about whether they are good value relies on a much better understanding of their finances.

Thought better something than nothing. Although judging by the popularity of this thread ……….. :-S

Hey ho.

Pump track. Pump track. Pump track. Pump track. Pump track. Pump track.Pump track. Pump track.

Everything you need to know from the man himself:

http://www.leelikesbikes.com/ebook-welcome-to-pump-track-nation

Glad you liked it. Lots don't which in itself isn't an issue until they tell you how crap it is. It isn't crap, but it is the trail equivalent of marmite, real love or hate it stuff.

I've been building and riding there for donkeys. There are still plenty of bits I can't or don't ride. Cascade (which is the bouldery line after Hovis that you're supposed to ride the top of) and the Cyclopath (NS, Sponsored by Chevin) for example.

Hovis is still 50/50 whether I'll make it. Generally stay wide on the corner and low on the bike. There's a point (IME) where you're at the crux of the turn, probably just about to come out, the bars are turned quite hard and you're really nose down. I either come through with my heart in my mouth or come off over the bars ;-) Lots of folk seem to nose-endo off here. There's aclip on Youtube of two guys riding it qquite smoothly (but I can't access youtube from work). You don't need to hop round it but then this isn't ballet, if it works for you, do it ;-)

The trail is incredibly thrutchy so I imagine a lot of fatigue is down to that. And a bit of over-gripping ;-)

Don't leave it too long until coming again. It's a place where you can really progress with a second visit.

T 8-)

TBH I'm with Dasnut if his meaning was what I perceive, to paraphrase "better to ride a bike than read about riding one".

Mark – I can't tell, there's loads of smilies in there but you look, to me, as if you've gone off on one there almost as much as Mrs "Fizzy" did with you?

Hey ho 8-)

No worries, it just makes me realise our website is a bit sh1t and out of date ;-)

Hope you enjoy it.

If riding the Boulder Trail side (same side as the "Norwood Edge" car park) you have the Double Black Loop (Boulder Trail), Red Loop and Descent Line. Each one is relatively short but do them all and it'll fill some time.

Watch out for signs, especially on the climb back up from bottom of the wood / next to Dob Park Road. It's not the puch up that goes straight up hill which is well trafficked but mostly mud/soil. It's a (well eroded) stone track, v narrow and absolute lung ripper. The Descent Line joins into it about a third up from bottom. Two thirds up it hangs a right back into the woods, this is marked by painted white squares containing two black dots. It swings downhill and then climbs back up, popping you out of the woods about 100 yards higher than whewre you entered. Diddy bit of tech climbing back to car park.

Once you've done all those and if you fancy exploring there are a couple of lines (unofficial) that run almost straight downhill in the woods. Go stand on teh pile of aggregate in the car park, road on your left, car park on your right. Look into the woods and there is a track, follow this and then try and stick between the double black on either side. There are two potential lines but they're a bugger to explain. Both pop out eventually at the bottom of the woods.

There is a pump track just in the woods. within sight of the car park. It's quite tricky but do-able with determination and a bit of "nack". Please don't chew it to buggery ;-)

Norwood trails have indeed been a bit wrecked but there is a doable loop. A map and general banter about them can be found here:

http://singletraction.frankencrank.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2911

You just want stuff on the first page.

Basically, go out of the car park to the road. Opposite the car park entrance there's a timber gate into the woods (Norwood Edge) on the other side of the road. Go through this and about 10 or 20 m in on the track. A trail breaks off left and you should see yellow flagging tape int he trees. You can follow this and the shitty map on the forum thread for a nice old-skoll-woods ride with some techy sections. Not all sections are clear of brash, so if in doubt follow the map rather than the flags.

If you still have time and inclination there is a skills progression / jumpy-type spot in Thackley with a pump track.

This thread will let you find it:

http://singletraction.frankencrank.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=2831

Totally different type of thing but still a bit of fun. Guess it all depends where you're returning to.

Hope that helps. Have a good ride. I might be around with a bike / dog / sprog. Say hi.

If you haven't been before then approach it with an open mind and be prepared for some right challenging / super-tech' XC sort os stuff. It's not like many other places. I'd start Norwood, Red Loop (NB: there's a techy log / skinnies line off the last berms, you'll see it), Descent Line then BOulder Trail. Basically you get warmed up for the hardest one (BT). The only thing to watch is BT is not fast at all. Stayed relaxed, look ahead and roll through stuff.

I always fancied a coil for it but TBH, just to see what it was like. However, the HT gets more hammer so I'd rather buy forks for that than rear for the Spot.

£150 posted? Open to offers.

DHX Air 5 and I'll throw in a seal kit. Meant to change them after getting it unstuck but haven't had chance / inclination / need.

Comes with the fitting hardware to go in a Turner 5 Spot.

Think it's a 2006 or 07 model, but not sure (and wouldn't know how to tell). Had very little use.

Happy to discuss – email timsellors[at]googlemail.com

You need a 7.5" eye to eye with 2" stroke. Eyelet reducers are 21.8mm width
with 6mm hardware. If you ride aggressively and don't mind the weight
penalty then go coil, either DHX or hi-zoot CaneCreek. If wanting another
air shock then get the Rp23, amazing shock.

Thanks

Jarett
Sales@Turnerbikes.com

Although it was for a 2006 / faux bar Spot.

Just email them, always dead helpful IME.

I changed to a Pushed RP23 from TFT. Better than the DHX that came off it. Saying that if you want a DHX I have one for sale.

no – it's the retailers responsibility not the manufacturers

Apologies for sloppy terminilogy, it is indeed the retailer :-)

While things do break, they should last a specific amount of time. The acceptable length of time is 1 year hence warranties being 1 year.

I got bored reading the thread so don't know if anyone else picked it up already, however, manufacturer's warranty does not affect statutory rights.

Stat' rights state it needs to be fit for purpose and last a reasonable period (paraphrasing). If you spent £1.5k on a frame and it broke a day, week or even six months outside the man' warranty period they (man')still have a legal obligation to sort you out (their options vary, check the regs).

That's perfectly reasonable, to think any product should only rightly last 1 year and/or is designed to do so is non-sensical verging on the daft :-)

I've got an Alpine in Leeds. Think it's a 15.5/22, it's purple. You are welcome to try it (Fox 36 Talas, big tyres type of build).

timsellors@googlemail[dot]com

You would have to do the running around, fetching etc as I am notoriously unreliable at making rides and have umpteen other things to do. But a borrow is fine 8-)

First ride euphoria review from a serial bike swapper. Just like new climbing boots, IME, they were always good for a grade harder first time out ;-). Be interested to hear what you've got to say about it after a month / decent number of rides.

20" are gate-esque in my eyes but if you need a 20" frame then it's irrelevant. Tyres and forks wouldn't be my choice but sounds like you're changing them anyway.

Only times I've tried big wide bars it's either meant brayed knuckles in the trees or the position / reach / fit got all f'ed up. Is there something about the BP that's specifically intended to make them work or is it a trend thing?

Refering to yourself in the third person – odd :-S

Chevin Cycles

All Terrain Cycles

Both around Leeds / West Yorkshire but both have websites / can be called and talked to.

Hora – yet again you illustrate you really don't know what the funk you're talking about.

No offence like ;-)

currently have an Alpine (15/21) but find the TT too short in slow technical spots…

Is a short TT not an advantage in these situations? I thought longer TT's on average were good for stability and stretch. I fully realise these assumptions may not be technically correct ;-)

But then again we can always find an excuse to but another bike / frame / bit of kit ;-)

So anyway I cycled in with my son today, and made sure he locked his bike in the bike shed (instead of being a wimp and locking it outside the school in the street) Teacher comes up and makes disaproving comments to my son, saying does he know the school rule. I step in and say we live too far to walk, and that it would obviously be stupid to leave the bike in the street when there is a perfectly good cycle rack here and if there is a problem they can call me. I am really hoping they will call , but i suspect that they will instead take it out on my son, and I will have to cause a stink tomorrow.

Why did you do it like this? Why didn't you talk to the school in the first place, rather than creat a situation where you've now put your son between you and the school. Daft way to do it IMO. A agree the policy isn't great but you don't seem to know exactly why they have it, which seems a poor start to getting something sorted.

The guys that are felling trees at the moment could easily cut us a trail and charge us for using it.

If only it were that simple 8-)

Vacant land being the operative words.

Not particularly, there are all sorts of landowners and all sorts of driving factors. Keeping an open mind might help more stuff get done, in the end.

On the other-hand, there are many, many places where some permissive bridleways or extra RoW access would greatly improve the trail network.

I couldn't agree more.

Finally, Wharncliffe was a doomed attempt to create a "trail centre" atmosphere near the Peak but I always chose to head out to the Peak than 'cliffe for my XC kicks. ('cliffe was always a laugh on the big bike though)

Don't think the local guys ever wanted to create a "centre" per se. They did want to create a trail though and that would have been brilliant. There might still be some hope but there are always hurdles to overcome. I hope it'll be a great "linked up" place to ride (rather than being patchy sections of good and bad trail).

I'd advocate that it would be better to get more trails (not necessarily centres) developed across a broader spectrum of land rather than just in forests. Which leads onto getting RoW classified properly for use, which would spread impact and open up wider areas, reducing the frequency and density of users per area ……. Don't. Get. Me. Started ;-)

Examples of private landowners doing trails include Tinshill (Llandegla), United Utilities (Gisburn) and stuff up in Scotland (I can't remember the specific ones). Even local authorities are doing it (a bit) e.g. Lee Quarry (Lancashire CC).

And nayhow, why pick quarries as venues? Lee was developed (IIRC) simply because it was vacant land owned by Lancashire CC, not specifically because it was a great place to build trails. TBH the constraints of the highwalls etc introduce plenty of their own problems (less usuable area, difficult access and workign conditions etc). There's probably greater technical (drainage) and safety issues associated with such sites.

Wharncliffe would be great but there are issues with getting it done with FE. Even the Peak Park people recognise its potential.

You don't need forestry land, you just need a landowner/s willing to let trails be developed on their property (and accept all the other things that go with doing so).

Deside forestry land is usually our land, FE/FC are the quango set up by Government to manage it on behalf of the nation.

Don't. Get. Me. Started ;-)

Like NBT said, the Peak doesn't need anything that will attract yet more people into an already heavily used and (IMO) congested area.

Facilities on or around the Peak would be more likely. We tried and tried at Wharncliffe but so far haven't had much luck. Besides, how the funk do people think "trail centres" happen. Magic pixies? Get off your arse and do something yourself.

A rant from a weary and cynical (volunteer) trail builder 8-)

Stainburn.

But then I would say that, wouldn't I ;-)

Same thing happened to me about two months ago in North Leeds. Snapped the shields off the (cast) handles, pulled the eurolocks out with a set of molegrips. 3 am on a Friday morning. Me, the wife and both little kids asleep upstairs. Big black labrador (soft as sh1te) downstairs.

Cleared the quick and easy stuff from the table in the back room including wallets, keys, laptop, camera, Ipod and the wife's Zafira. Had to shift my old T plate Honda to get the Vauxhall but dumped it round the corner.

Copper said the locks and handles were sh1te and pointed me in the right direction. You can get snapsafe's off the web pretty cheap. Same with the handles. Whilst there's plenty of ways to get in better to make the ones they seem to like more awkward and slower.

And as for this:

Well thanks for bringing that to a wider audience, just as the dark nights arrive, why not mention that euro profile locks are also fitted to ………………………………………………………………………………………….as well.

Muppet.

It isn't the OP that's a muppet.