Just to point out again to the OP that a lot of the lenses people try to use may be 60-70% VLT. That is a potentially bit iffy for night riding. If you can find some nearer the 85% like the Smiths then you will never notice any difference compared to clear lenses. I think most clear lenses themselves are 90% ish VLT.

In short, yes photochromatic lenses can be perfect for night riding as well as sunny rides but you need lenses with a wide operating range of light.

Photochromic lenses differ in how much light they let through across brands/ models so check the VLT range.

I have used both Smith and Uvex photochromatic glasses night riding for years and love them.

I went with Smith Reverb photochromatic glasses most recently as the fit (for me) was way better than any Oakley models and the arms are more dropped to be out of the way of helmet retention systems and straps. Thoroughly recommended.

The Smith photochromatic lens is 20-85% VLT for comparison to other you may be looking at.

eXotic straight leg forks are cheapest and decent enough.

The eXotic Carbon Monocoque are the ones I would go for if you don’t want to spend too much and can find Boost ones.

Kinesis Maxlight Boost are more expensive but nice.

In the same position recently I just went with some Salsa steel forks as they were far cheaper and more available (at the time). 400-500g penalty compared to the eXotic forks when the steerer was cut on both so not much between them really.

I would also think about hub swap and rebuild of the wheel you currently have (~£100 max?) as that would open you up to cheaper and more available non-Boost forks.

Personally I would be over the moon just getting out on the bike more, in more locations and have nowhere nearby that has trees left so that alone would be a novelty! We all have different expectations though :)

In the days of endless GoPro footage of every other ride out there… is the content of a trail/ location really a surprise? Certain places may be poorly built/ not worth the money/ not your thing but a quick YouTube search usually gives a pretty good flavour.

I’ve got one of these in my bits box waiting to go on a new build. Might have to rethink that now!

+1 on wanting to find a subtle (not Hope awful branding), black, 50mm length, 31.8 clamp stem that isn’t an absolute boat anchor!

There are loads of 35mm clamp stems, loads of weird lengths, loads of nice stems out of stock for eternity… any ideas?

The main thing for me is the contact/ platform/ whateveryouwanttocallit is so much more solid on road pedals and cleats. You also generally get a lot more (and easier) cleat adjustment to get them absolutely spot on setup-wise. It probably won’t change your life but nice light shoes with a rock solid interface on a road bike is a nice thing :)

That is all well and good… but does it still creak? :)

That Decathalon is barely water resistant according to the rating. I don’t have one but won’t expect it to do much, especially over time

That is good to know. Scottish Mountain Gear did a very tidy repair of an old eVent jacket. I wouldn’t be too worried about durability then.

Do people with the Castelli Idro Pro 2 or similar jackets get on ok with the stretch panels from a water proofness point of view or do you wish for a full ShakeDry jacket?

Is there an approved way of repairing ShakeDry or is there a company repairing this?

My main gripe with either of these is visibility and there is only one coloured ShakeDry jacket I can think of (Rapha Pink one).

How do the stretch panels work on the Castelli Idro Pro 2? Are they a weak link for water ingress?

If we are talking XC racing then look how much the top riders spend out of the saddle even on their short travel full sus race bikes.

I feel like the full sus benefit is grip in really technical climbs and descents. Not comfort as such or ability to stay seated. Sure you can but it isn’t the fastest way to ride a full sus in that terrain either.

If it is flatter and just a bit bumpy then get out the saddle, slightly bigger gear, maybe slightly lower cadence depending. A full sus doesn’t magically stop those horrible lumpy sections become a magic carpet- you’ll still lose momentum and feel the impacts if you are sat down like a sack of spuds.

My experience of most modern frames is that mech hangers and bolts breaking away first is a bit of a thing of the past. Of the current frames I have the CF hanger is one piece with the dropout/ stays, one is a meaty bit of aluminium as one piece with the SS sliders and the other has the hanger as part of the thru axle dropout which in turn bolt in to the frame. All are very rigid and definitely not made to breakaway. Not a given the hanger is designed to snap off beautifully saving the frame and pics definitely needed.

Edit: also good point by another here that mech in the wheels is a recipe for a whole host of non warranty damage

Having been through so many different SS frames I would really recommend swinging or sliding dropouts. Others survive just fine with EBB’s but that wouldn’t be my first choice.

If you find a SS frame with “normal” geo, that doesn’t weigh a ton, has swinging or sliding dropouts and is actually in stock and available then please don’t post up here- I got so stuck trying to find anything that I went custom and that hurt really hurt my bike budget!

It is very hard to infer much about highly anaerobic efforts from HR.

Software tries to fancy things to overcome this but is limited too.

If you have a fancy Trainer that gives sensible and consistent power data ride to that.

Main point is don’t let any software heckle you especially when it is bobbins :)

I use a Bontrager Aeolus which is a similar idea. Half of the Trek Factory Racing Team do too so it can’t be such a daft idea :)

Use whatever saddle works best and don’t over think it :)

The Comp front tyre run with tubes is always going to feel horrible due to the rubber and pressure a tubed setup will have to be run at. Any Team Issue tyre run tubeless will feel a million times better regardless of tread.

There are two versions of the XR3 Team Issue. The older one looks grippy but in reality it is a bit of a nothing tyre. The idea was to have something in between the XR2 and XR4 in terms of grip but IMO it wasn’t meaty enough to add any real world noticeable grip over an XR2 and still managed to feel slower. Maybe a Summer XC front tyre at a push but I wouldn’t buy it again.

The newer XR3 is an XR2 they did for a while (the shallow tread version lots of tiny centre knobs) with some XR4 side knobs added (though not as deep as XR4 side knobs). The centre tread isn’t that grippy at all which kind of negates the extra side knobs- if the conditions allow for the central tread to be gripping ok then you aren’t going to notice of you have the XR2 or XR3 side knobs). This XR3 also adds quite a bit of weight over and XR2. They seem to market this XR3 as a tougher dry tyre rather than a inbetweener of the XR2 and XR4 like they did in the past which makes sense as the older XR3 didn’t seem to offer anything compared to their other tyres. So basically, if the newer XR3 is a tougher dry tyre then you need to step up to the XR4 if you want more grip on the front and much more of a mixed conditions tyre.

As an aside, Bontrager seem to have gone back to the older style XR2 which is miles better IMO- loads of volume for a stated size an nice square knobs quite spaced out. Not quite the same as the old ones but a better step in the right direction.

I am an XC mincer and hate tractor tyres but love the XR4 2.4. It is the right balance of everything for me. F&R is great as an all rounder in Winter and if we have a really dry spell then I may be tempted to put an XR3 on the back since I have one spare but more likely I’d just run an XR1 as it feels similar speed-wise but has way more grip in a straight line (have some of these spare too).

Bontrager tyres are fit an forget and a pleasure to set up tubeless so always seem to be my go to.

Yes, neoprene gloves keep all the rain out and keep you warm.

You didn’t mention needing to be breathable though ;) If you can cope with that then they are hard to beat

There is so much variation that you can only really try them on. Not many shops carry a lot of shoes in store so I went for the “buy a ton of shoes online and return them until finding one that seems perfect” approach (Shimano S-Phyre in the end which was way more than I wanted to spend but comfort is everything).

Generally speaking I found across a variety of models:
Shimano had wider forefoot, tighter rear foot (perfect for me as I want toe wiggle room but want them held nicely around the heel)
Bontrager had medium forefoot, wider heel/ rearfoot (toes a bit too snug and wide heel felt awful with tons of space)
Specialized had medium forefoot, tighter rear foot (nearly perfect but not enough toe space)
Giro had medium to tighter forefoot, medium rear foot (tight in the toes and a bit sloppy heels)
Bont had wide toe space, nice snug heels but mega high arch

They can probably claim there is 120mm travel available but it would take a monster hit. The stops at the end of the travel are probably pretty robust like that so when riding the fork feels “bottomless” and there are no clunks (plus points for interwebz reviews).

I feel like there has been a lot of focus (from reviews mainly which drives people’s perception) on forks needing to “sit high in their travel” and feel “racey” as @mudeverywhere mentioned so they are designed with that in mind.

I get 70mm travel out of my 100mm SIDs on a good day. If I drop the air pressure then they are just more mushy to the point where they go no more (~70mm). So I think the advice with the SIDs above to get the start of the fork travel feeling how you want is the way to go because you ain’t changing the end of the travel!

Hunt are pretty quick to reply to questions so best check with them.

As far as I recall, the end caps or axles are not interchangeable but there’s nothing stopping you use a Hope style Boost adapter kit.

How do they look with no air in? My older SIDs were exactly the same and apparently it is a “design feature” to ride how people expect a SID to ride or some BS. I’m not sure on the 35mm SIDs but there is probably a bump stop in the legs to help at full compression. Mine was very long and even with no air in I was getting around 85mm on a 100mm SID. Trimming it helped a bit but didn’t make too much difference. There were no bottomless tokens in BTW either.

I can see the hydraulic fittings idea going down a storm with most frame builders… the others will charge an arm and a leg to make it happen :)

I like the idea of the bolt on HT rub protectors :)

The bolt on cable guides can be much more discreet than the pic in the thread with the massive chunks of alu sticking out everywhere.

Swarf did a nice cable entry taking the rear shifter and rear brake through the TT and down the stays

Engligh also take the cables in to the TT rarther nicely

Personally I’d have external routing using those Al clips that can take 2, 3 or 4 cables. Visually it just doesn’t bother me vs the faff of internal cables ……. Plus I’d rather the tubes didn’t have all those weakness spots for the sake of wanting clean lines ……

Cheers @jameso that mirrors my thoughts. Think I’m on the right path now :)

That looks awesome!

Don’t start me on fannying around with custom paint jobs now :D

I went for the Whisky non Boost forks in the end.

Pricey, but incredible I have to say!

Mine are 615g cut which was a pleasant surprise after reports they were closer to 800g. I replaced the DT Swiss axle that I had so many hang ups about, with a Whisky bolt thru that was very hard to find and I had to source from the States (38g).

The supplied expander is also a really nice design (quite unique I would say) and doesn’t budge around like so many light expanders can do.

I completely disagree with people who feel all rigid forks are the same. These are head and shoulders above the steel, Exotic and Kinesis forks I had previously in terms of comfort, damping and handling. Same bike, same tyres, same pressures… they are genuinely hard to tell apart from my SIDS (set up with 15% sag) on all but the very roughest, fastest descents (of which there are not too many and are short lived around me). That sounds like a bold claim, but for for the type of riding I have locally then are incredible an no where near as jarring or harsh as other rigid forks I have had. I can see what all the hype is about now :)

Just putting that out there in case anyone else was fannying around with over thinking rigid forks like I did :D

^ That was definitely in my external routing plans.

I reckon that is how I will go on the underside of the TT, rather than full internal or brake only (AXS style). A bit more flexibility and it would only be the dropper routing that is additional to the very cleanest routing.

I’m debating if the dropper routing should be left off completely as an ASX dropper is more feasible in my future plans than running gears or being able to afford an AXS drivetrain. Even the internal dropper routing in the down tube is a bit of an eye sore if not in use IMO with the 3 unused ports (I realise I am being mega picky). Hmmm…….

I appreciate that is a fair point on wireless stuff and the future. My original idea was rear brake cable routing only as it was my dream to have a completely clean frame. I’m getting talked in to making it more flexible (partly the builder and partly my wife rolling her eyes at the original idea)

Yep already got tyre clearance on the list.

Big seat tubes to fit droppers and steep seat tubes can’t help comfort I reckon

Thinking about it external under top tube for brake and derailleur and internal for the dropper down the downtube.

Yep that’s what I have arrived at so far.

In SS mode there is just a brake cable under the TT and down the NDS seatstay. Dropper ports should be nicely blanked.

Geared, the routing isn’t too higgeldy piggeldy. I still don’t like the cross of the two cables under the TT but it is probably hidden quite well.

Dropper cable entry in a similar position to JoeBristol’s to take the dropper through the downtube instead of externally is hard to beat I reckon

This, on top of the DT not underneath where they will smacked by rocks.

That might be good for a full sus but looks massively messy on a hardtail

If it wasn’t internal routing, I’d put the rear brake on top of the downtube by the bottle cage. Keeps it more symmetrical with the front brake’s cable loop.

My Alu Procaliber has the rear brake and dropper cable running down the down tube to the left of the bottle cages. I actually really like it but the rear gear cable then becomes the one that doesn’t fit the same theme and is hard to find a place for. In the case of the Trek, the rear gear cable is inside the downtube, then comes out by the BB, under the BB and under the chainstay. I’m keen to avoid loops like this BB one if possible.

I did the whole AXS thing, then all you’ve got left is the rear brake hose

My original plan was rear brake cable guides only to be super clean, mainly for SS only. But the cost of a custom frame doesn’t leave much for AXS goodies and I have a nagging feeling that one day I may wish for gears and a cheaper dropper (unlikely but…).

@joebristol I like that. The dropper routing is what I had in mind so it is nice to see this for real. I would also want the cable to come out ahead of the seattube and re-enter the seat tube low down like you requested (but didn’t get).

I originally typed “no smart arse AXS comments” in my OP but deleted it ;) :D

I should also add that I massively despise cable and clutter in general so SS is the real answer of course ;) There are just too many cables on a modern bike and that is without rear suspension or any lockout cables!!!

That does make sense.

I guess if you cross the shifter and brake cable immediately behind the headtube then that forces the cables to hug the head tube and rub more though??? To take Cotic as an example, they seem to cross the cables more towards the middle of the top tube.

I am not a fan of dealing with internally routed cables either but once done it looks a million times nicer I agree!

I am not set on externally routed cables aside from maybe the brake cable… more thinking of the cost and the builder’s sanity :)

22-32 on a 26er (assuming 2.1 tyres) is virtually identical to 32-50 on a 29er (assuming 2.3 tyres). Going from a 32t chainring to a 36 is a pretty minimal change in how the easiest gear would feel.

But the size of the front ring only matters when in perspective to the cassette and I don’t think many people will not be able to get up a hill on 34 – 50 but can on a 32 – 50 (1 GI)

Completely agree. A lot of this stuff seems to be in the mind. Climbing is generally pretty tough and a few extra teeth don’t really change that :)

I know you like a good rabbit hole to dive down :D

If you are trying to replace the cables on the AXS then you have properly gone mad :D :D

30-40 soundz well pro :D

It always amuses me that you can talk to one group of MTBers and they can see 36-50 as potentially too hard a gear to climb in for crazy powerful pros only, whilst if you talk to a SS group of MTBers about 32-20 (pretty much 36-22) you are a weakling :D

@kryton57 you definitely need SRAM AXS…. then you would be able to choose your chainring by analysing the time spent in each sprocket and maximizing your time in the middle of the block for full pro points :D

Thread has gone way OT :D

This is a bit of a cadence question really and then an understanding gearing question

In theory lower cadence stresses the NM system more and higher cadence stresses the CV system more.
https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/what-to-consider-when-finding-your-ideal-cycling-cadence/#:~:text=low%20cadence&text=Low%20cadence%20may%20require%20less,cost%20at%20lower%20power%20outputs.

So basically if your lowest gear is too hard you muscles are going to be your limiter not your CV system (massive over simplification but more or less right).

If your gears are too “easy” you risk not being able to go fast enough on flatter sections.

Your other question was; is a 36t chainring and a 50t largest sprocket inappropriate for a non-Pro ? Not at all!

36-50 is still “easier” than 32-42 which is what most people were more than happy cranking heavy ol’ enduro bikes up before the dinner plate cassettes got extended further. In fact your 36t ring with a 50t sprocket is more like 30-42 which was considered really spinny not too long ago. Funny how our perceptions change ;)

Oval makes it a bit different but in simple terms I reckon an average fitness rider should be able to get up anything with your gearing and not have to go too deep

All that cost and effort to go on a ride with 30psi in your Minions :D

Really good write up and a great look in to these spokes that one wouldn’t normally find. Happy Trails!