“this year has seen more rides with my kids in tow and even fewer ‘big days out’. It hardly seems fair to make them, with their rigid bikes and smaller wheels, ride a trail I’m cruising over on inches of rubber and suspension.”

It seams like there’s some missed learning opportunities in that statement :p

This should hopefully do the job though I imagine the blaster rifle mightbe a touch excessive.

You seem to have a misunderstanding of the purpose in getting a Ritchey steel frame. It’s not that they’re necessarily better than cheaper equivalents (though they may be in a lot of cases). It’s that it’s a Ritchey hand built frame in the original Ritchey colours so enthusiasts in their 30s/40s/50s+ can have the frame they always dreamed of having back in the day, when Ritchey was making frames the first time round, but couldn’t afford at the time. I’m sure they’re great frames but mostly they’ll be bought for nostalgia and coolness value as opposed to because they’re better than the competition.

Now if I could only convince keith Bontrager to build me a modern interpretation long travel steel hardtail like the frames he made back in the day….

Further to the above managed to semi disassemble it with a great deal of finesse and some luck too. Turned out it was one of the springs on the ratchet pawls had come unstuck. So once it was returned to it’s rightful position the shifter now works perfectly again and is reassembled and back in place.

So you really want the brand new latest and greatest, now. Except you’re not prepared to pay even close to RRP or import taxes?

This sound about right…

Bumpety Bump for the day shift

For the most popular press fit designs, notably PF86/92 & Sram’s PF30 the frame manufacturing tolerances are less than those required for threaded BBs.

The standard/s are inferior as:
– They require specialist tools to install and remove. Granted a standard BB does also require some specialist tools though a BB spanner is a lot less expensive than a bearing press and bearing removal tool.
– As a result of the fact the bearings are usually pressed straight in they’re more prone to be over loaded or slightly misaligned which results in shorter bearing life.
– The majority of systems use the bearings pressed directly into CF slieves on CF frames. This means if there are an manufacturing issues it’s not possible to do any re-alignment/modifications post factory e.g. tapping and facing a BB shell. The most obvious example of that is the Lapierre frames that all broke at the BB cause of a tolerance issue with the BBs.
– Factory cartridge bearings that haven’t been specifically manufactured for bike BB use, as used in a number of the systems, don’t have sufficient sealing to keep the elements out leading to reduced bearing life.
– It’s not possible to fit non ISCG chain guides with them.

As i said above I don’t buy into the supposed stiffness advantages for mtbs. Perhaps on higher end road bikes it makes a difference. Where also a lot the negatives in the system are negated to varying extents. There are also some manufacturers that refuse to use the new standards most notably Santa Cruz. They don’t seem to suffer any issues with lack of frame stiffness or design compromises as a result of refusing to use them.

My personal feeling is that initially most of these systems were developed for high end CF road bikes where the marginal weight savings and stiffness gains created by them were considered highly advantageous. In the process though the manufacturers discovered the BBs made designing and making the bikes cheaper and easier. So they started pushing the systems industry wide in the interests of essentially saving money. In the case of the vast majority of mtbers it’s created a large compromise which is being sold as an apparent advantage.

If the answer is to use ICEtech rotors or whatever then so be it, but how will you stop people replacing them with the same lightweight rotors they use on their MTBs?

Darwinism? Just the same way as people don’t drill mtb frames, cranks, etc. for racing the same way as was briefly popular in the mid 90’s.

christhetall – Member
Don’t think this has been covered on here (it’s getting heated on UKC), but I’m guessing it’s going to have an effect on MTB holidays at Morzine and Les Arcs

To be fair Bruce and French Erick are the only one’s getting really heated up. And at that French Erick is really just playing agent provocateur as he understands the local interests. Whereas Bruce, well he’s just mental really and there’s no surprise there.

There’s a lot of good info on this over on UKC from a bunch of MR guys. However as I understand it the sea king fleet is on it’s last legs. The UK govt. can’t afford to replace it. Secondly there are international maritime treaty responsibilities that have to be kept. This is actually the service that is being privatised. MR is being lumped in with this. Thirdly all of the companies bidding operate in this way in other jurisdictions and all will have ex military pilots flying these rescues so the idea the service will be inferior because of the pilots they’re using isn’t as relevant as people think. Finally the military’s requirement for SAR, and the practice that goes with it, is way below what they’re currently providing so the idea that 2 identical services will be required thus doubling the cost isn’t really true.

Though with all things like this as has been pointed out above ultimately the quality of service provided will come down to how well or badly the contracts are written.

Spokes are turned down, then heat treated solid aluminium bar not hollow. They’re actually remarkably strong. I’ve had a sizeable branch catch in my rear wheel which twisted and then snapped my rear derailleur. Barring a couple of small scratches there’s no obvious damage to them. As per Geetee I don’t believe in having nice stuff if you don’t use it properly. My I9 wheels get used regularly and used hard and i’ve no problem with that. They also still look very good whenever I go to the trouble of doing the in depth clean to get all of the spokes and nooks and crannies shinning too, so they’re certainly not fragile or easily damaged. The fact they happen to look extremely pretty as well as their functionality is just a big bonus as far as I’m concerned.

M6TTF – Member
Wouldn’t look so purdy after a few rides in the peaks – function over form round here I’m afraid

How do you figure that? They’re hard anodised alloy. No different to beloved Hope Tech components in terms of resistance to the elements/ability to stay pretty.

I’ve a pair of the previous models on Stan’s Archs. They’re about 1550 all in. Came with 4 replacement spokes. In nearly 2 years of ownership I think I’ve had to true them maybe 2 or 3 times. They’ve been well used and abused. Ridden probably twice weekly on average in all conditions and types of terrain. I’ve not had a problem with them. The freehub with it’s 3 degree engagement is a revelation. It was something that I thought was just a marketing gimmick until I used it, now I’m not sure I could live without it.

On the basis of my experience with them to date I couldn’t recommend them highly enough. If the new ones are 100 grams lighter and not only that but stronger, stiffer and better sealed so as to be more resistant to the elements then I reckon they’ll be even better value. As to the not that light, well they’re an all mountain wheelset not weight weenie XC wheels so it’s not really comparing like with like.

So basically my €0.02 is that they’re great and I’d happily buy an another pair next time I’m in the market for a pair of wheels.

The fox float’s going on On-one at the moment are an absolute steel at £300. Shim them down from 150 to 130 and they should be stiffer than the normal 150mm and exactly what you’re looking for.

I’d buy one of these[/url] if I was in your position

Industry Nine have just announced a new wheel set. They look very nice and apparently they’re about 100-150grammes lighter per set. Which is not an insignificant saving over the previous set. WANT!![/url]

Edit: 1420 grams for an AM wheelset that has a 23.4mm internal width rim. I Want them even more now.

Have a set of I9 XC wheels built onto Archs which are quite light, very pimp. Though if i’m entirely honest the Archs are too narrow so they do burp occasionally when set up with wider non tubeless ready tyres. If I were to change anything with them I’d like to try those Chinese CF rims to see if they’re any good, could probably also get round the rim width issue in the same process.

I still think the comparison is valid if only to assess how many UK riders are getting their kicks from Alpine resorts when maybe – just maybe – we can offer them something closer to home.

Though how many UK riders do actually go to the alps mtbing every summer? And how much of the attraction is based around the weather, the views, the vert, just telling their other non mtbing mates how hardcore they are for mtbing in the alps? As opposed to just the idea of good facilities closer to home?

mikewsmith – Member
Leave inners to the gravity and take the swoopy to GT.

Mountain biking will work as a business if it’s done right, as above tarantaise valley is awesome and has worked a few things out. Riding is riding and just because you don’t want the partake doesnt mean it wont work.

To be honest comparing most alpine resorts let alone super resort areas like the Tarentaise to any UK situation is a complete misnomer. In the Tarentaise area there is literally hundreds of millions, if not billions, in uplift infrastructucture which sits idle for 6-8 months of the year. This doesn’t even take into account the real estate and other commercial amenities that also sit idle outside of ski season. This will be similar, if not on as vast a scale, in almost all major ski areas/resorts. Since the day most of these resorts opened they’ve looked at ways to operate the equipment/make a return on their investments throughout the year as opposed to just through the ski season. Up until the advent, or more realistically the boom, of mtbing most of them relied on a small amount of walkers using occasional uplift services and in the rare exceptions like Chamonix which is an Alpine climbing Mecca where climbers also using the infrastructure.

So with all of that in mind the comparison with the UK is moot. As in most alpine locations the local community/operators are desperate to get extra income outside of ski season. With mtbing it requires minimal additional investment in comparison to what’s all ready been invested to add an extra selling point to the area to bring in mtbers. They also have the advantage of better weather and bigger everything terrain wise.

I’m not saying there isn’t a case somewhere in the UK for a super trail centre with masses of trails of all abilities, that are permanently maintained, that also has an uplift serice and all the other facilities that people want. I’m just saying comparing it to Alpine resorts is wrong as their situation from a business and infrastructure perspective is entirely different.

http://www.trailbadger.com/ is probably your best bet.

Why aren’t they getting angry on the blower to the distrbutor saying “how come CRC can sell this for 45 quid when our price to the customer is 70? That’s costing us footfall and margin every day!” ?

The other thing CRC is able to do because of the size of their operation is to go to Taiwan, China, etc. and buy OEM components direct off of bicycle manufacturers. So if you’re say pacific cycles and you’ve got, oh i dunno, 3,000 extra xt cranksets from last year. You’ll sell them on to CRC direct at cost or a tiny mark up which is significantly down on most shops trade price let alone retail. Then taking into account the scale of their operation, business model and fixed overhead spread they can sell them on at a small mark up which is still a good profit over all though in the process they go really quickly as they’re massively reduced compared to RRP.

As to Rose’s prices well firstly Rose are a manufacturer too so they probably deal with Shimano direct instead of adding in distributor margins. Secondly they’re also probably the biggest high end bicyle retailer in Germany a country of 82 million people so they’ll have huge buying power. All of these add to reduce their price. Plus the Vat thing as pointed out further up the thread.

bikebouy – Member
I reverted back to Tubes. Having run for 3 years (on previous 29erSS) having had no issues, my new stead has burped twice, luckly near home, so for reliability stakes back to Tubes for me, and having rode hard all weekend on them I’m somewhat relieved I did.

I don’t understand this. If your tyre burps you just stop at the side of the trail and pump it up a bit more. The implication I’m getting from this post is that you’ve automatically assumed that running tubeless you now no longer need to bring a pump with you. Which seems just silly especially considering going tubed one should at a bare minimum bring a puncture repair kit and a pump with you.

Yes tubeless can be a faff to change tyres but isn’t that bad with practice. As to the advantages well they role better they’re much less likely to puncture and you can run em at lower pressures so get better grip. In saying that sometimes they do puncture which is why it’s always advisable to bring a spare tube and a pump with you when out for a ride which is what i did before anyway. I’ve also rarely seen a situation where a tubeless set up has a had a major problem that wouldn’t have been a problem for someone riding a tubed setup.

Seems about right…

Smaller width tubes will usually work in large width tyres. However in doing so the tubes are usually more stretched e.g. the rubber’s thinner after it’s been done. As a result of which they tend to be more prone to punctures. Though it’s more than possible.

I’ve a camelbak Octane 18x designed for adventure racing more so than biking. As a result of which I find it better as it doesn’t move about as much cause that would be counter productive for hill running. This is a major upside for me personally. Plus as well as that it has all of the features you’d expect from a high end camelbak pack.

Had a couple of days with Darren from lavatrax in Tenerife last week, can’t recommend him highly enough. Fantastic terrain with everything from XC to 2,000m 40km all mountain descents. Did 2 rides with him both had a fantastic variety of terrain with about 2000m of descent. Plus for mtbing I reckon canaries are probably the most weather safe option that’s easily accessible from Europe in the northern hemisphere at that time of year.

SC Chameleon should take just about all the abuse you can throw at it and will comfortably take 150 forks.

Looks great but it’s clearly a comparatively hideously expensive piece of infrastructure for a set of cycle lanes. Whilst it’s obviously a brilliant solution I couldn’t imagine something like that being built in possibly more than 3 or 4 countries, if even.

First super lightweight Klein Adroit’s were in excess of £3k they came out around 91/92. Mid way through the 90’s it was easily possible without difficulty to spend in excess £1.5k on a high end rigid frame. So when thinking about how far mtbs/ing have progressed in terms of technology and design over that period I don’t think £6k for the top end is that out of order. In fact I’m pretty certain if you set your mind to it one could easily build a bike that cost in excess of £10K.

Granted and agreed. To be honest I think my previous points are far more relevant/significant. Just saying the only 3 rides line in real life context is not exactly the most truthful.

Sum – Member
If the neighbour’s infant rode his Fisher Price trike into your car wheel and then you found a whopping crack all the way down the side of your car wing, would you not question the workmanship of your car?

Again, back to the OP, we’re not talking about a high-speed stack or a bike failing after years of abuse, we’re talking about whether a bike frame should withstand a simple toppling-over incident on it’s fourth outing

Actually the OP described falling over whilst stuck into his SPDs. This means his entire weight came with him in the fall. Now if there was any sort of sharp edge/rock that his sing arm contacted in the fall this would probably be a massive point load in an axis that the frame wasn’t designed to take.

The thing about slow speed crashes versus high speed crashes (Caveat: where it isn’t a big drop/jump landing) is often times in a higher speed crash the rider is usually no longer with the bike versus a slow speed like the OP described wouldn’t necessarily be that unusual for the rider still to have all of his mass connected with the bike. Which means the point loads for the frame to take are much higher.

The way the OP has described it sounds like it probably would have left a large mark on many’s a frame let alone a lightweight XC race machine which has been designed for minimum mass rather than extra robustness.

Finally another point to make is the OPs 4 rides example is a bit superfluous considering he’s openly stated he’s done 2 x 24hr races on it and another race. Which considering the previous 2 being 24hr races it probably wouldn’t be beyond the realm of possibility to assume it was another endurance race. These combined are probably equivalent to about 3-6months continuous riding for the average rider. As opposed to just 3/4 rides old. Mind in saying that I would certainly expect a new frame to last longer than that but just saying the only 3 rides line is a little bit untruthful considering most really high end race bikes probably only get ridden for a couple of hours a week at most.

Is it possibly because they’ve been sh!te live. (As someone that saw them in Dublin on Thursday night and at a festival in 95)

bwaarp – Member
BOS customer service

http://www.mtb-news.de/forum/showthread.php?t=571561

Nice

Very useful thread in German there, explains things perfectly….

If you know anyone heading to the states this is an exceptional deal on a santa cruz chameleon http://www.competitivecyclist.com/frame/2012-Santa-Cruz-chameleon-5156.html

Bertie and the blood transfusion guy

Bertie getting his own back

There also seems to be a large proliferation of well I had this bike in the 80/90/00’s and I never saw another one where i live so it’s got to be rare. How many Dekerfs, Paces and Proflexes have all ready been mentioned? Let alone short run regular bikes in odd sizes that were never reproduced in great numbers cause they didn’t sell. Only reason I mentioned my old trusty was cause I bought it in the US back in the mid 90’s and as far as I know they never sold them in Europe.

I had a 1992 Bridgestone MB-2

Santa Cruz Chameleon

Around late 1980-early 90 Got a 1987 specialiazed hardrock off of my uncle who owned a bike shop at the time (and the specialized agency, which I’m sure he’s since regretted giving up). Rode that for about 3-4 years and then bought a 1992 Bridgestone MB-2 whilst on holidays in the US with my parents. That bike was a thing of beauty. It got stolen a few years later but I managed to get it back after one of my riding buddies at the time spotted it. Was quite lucky as it had been resprayed but it was so unique it was still quite recognizable. After I got it back I rode it for many years till the chainstay gave out. Still have the frame in the garage and often consider getting it fixed and returning it to it’s former glory frame colour and all.