Hock how long is that stem on the specialneeds ?

too long for my back nowadays… 😐

voluptuous 50s bike pin-up

and the bike from next door that could win a beauty contest any time

uuuuhhhh, a little thick make-up but definitely bike pron

Love Ringo’s (what is it?), the Blacksheep and that pink Singular looks spot on, too.

So what’s bike pron then? Being delicious? Over the top expensive? Exclusive? Rare? Exotic?
Probably craftsmanship, attention to detail, ingenuity and aestethics play a role.
Unattainability even? And yes, nice pictures help to appreciate it.

And is bike pron what you necessarily want to have in your shed? I don’t know, I like the pictures but I don’t necessarily want to live with them every day and here’s probably a parallel to the real pron. 🙂
What I like though is that some people can still build them and that some people spend their money on it and even ride them. For us all to admire them (the bikes) and to share the enthusiasm for them.

So the picture below is not meant to be bike pron but it’s probably the Cindy Crawford of my bike youth:

Germans Team Ultrastrong (the yellow stuff is solder, it’s fillet brazed, blasted and then clear coated)

too niche

I take it as a compliment! 😳

and Swiss Army Bikes are legend!

The new ones above look quite cool. Would make great every day commuter bikes, I guess.
The old ones are meant to be indestructible:

Can’t imagine how anyone could get through hilly Switzerland with them, though.

True bike porn IMO






by Donhou Bicycles[/url]

Appear to be Halo rims and a Rohloff hub – nice looking build nevertheless!

I know 😉 Sam!
I meant I would prefer that bike as SS and with Crest Hoops for the sake of an even more puristic look and ride.

Funny how the anachronistic flat stems and bars still resonate with me.
Must be the formative bike years in the late 80s/early 90s.

all sorted, pruned and and raked now
singletrack loop re-connected
walkers (in)voluntarily helping to compact the trail
which stays fairly dry – happy trails! 😀

You are assuming that changing the weight of your wheels will have a greater effect than changing weight elsewhere, please explain why.

Hi Crikey,

you answer a question with a counter-question, do you?

I didn’t assume anything in that post. I asked a simple question:
Would you choose the lighter wheel or the lighter frame?

If you care, give a simple answer to my question and we can take it from there.
If you don’t, keep arguing for the arguments sake.

Cheers!

Monark Long John

Larry vs. Harry Bullitt

What a r a c y beauty!

SS setup with Hope Hoops Crest -> perfect!

Al and Crikey:
a fairy comes along and you have a free wish to have either taken 500g from your wheels or from you frame. With no other than the weight effect. So no more or less flexibility, durability etc.

What would you choose?

Thanks!
That’s what I do then! 😉

I never bend/t a seat post apart from the one on my Raleigh Bomber. In a bomb hole.
But that maybe due to riding style and how much of the post is sticking out (it did stand out a long way with the Bomber – nasty scar).

So depending on that and alternatively to a used Thompson (good call!) you could try these:

£25 Carbon

£21 Charge in many colours

Ragley Spike is £23 at CRC

What MTB? magazine ran a seat post test in recent issue 130.
They recommend: Race Face Ride XC for £27 and Pro Koryak for £40 as best value, but also recommend Ragley Spike. Winner is FSA SL-K Carbon for £75 by the way.

EDIT oh 😳 thought nobody had replied yet…

do like Velorution! 😀

this used to be my school run tool:

THAT’s a sklack head angle by the way! 😛

so what the others said plus maybe

Tokyo Fixed Gear – this is rather urban bike themed

Herne Hill – specialized in commuter bikes[/url]

Look mum no hands – bike themed cafe come workshop or the other way round[/url]

and maybe the

Specialized Conceptstore Covent Garden ?!

GBP14X at wiggle[/url]

really like my Specilized The Captains, they roll nice on their middle ridge and are grippy in a good controlled grabby way in the corners, good weight (esp. S-Works version, fair price. 2.0 looks and feels like 2.25 elsewhere

Hi skywalker,

my “suspended/unsuspended” was more about handling than efficiency. That’s why I suggested a new thread. While dreading another outrage. 😕

Regarding your quick question:
I don’t think that – at least initially – the “insignificant” brigade doubted the effect of weight savings as such. The main point was whether it’s significantly beneficial to save a given weight at the wheels or e.g. the frame, wasn’t it?

So high-jacking your quick question – if I may – it could come down to:

Two MTB riders, same terrain, i.e. quite technical XC course with up/down and technical passages, identical fitness, body mass, muscle mass etc

Both bikes weigh 25lbs and have the same spec, apart from
– Bike A has a 1.5kg frame (though same stiffness etc.) and 2.0kg wheel set
– Bike B has a 2.0kg frame and a 1.5kg wheel set (again same stiffness etc.)

Who will be quicker over 10 miles?

Quite interesting thread actually! Let’s get a little more out of it.

I’ve had 2.1 Nobby Nics and now 2.25 Rocket Rons.
Same, same really. The Nics were JUST good enough to get around the D2D course.
But rather in a controlled sliding way, not actually grippy.

I’ve seen more and more “center ridge” type tyres recently.
While these were positively tame and lame 10-15 years ago I quite liked Specialized The Captains because they rolled really well while being quite grippy at the same time. Didn’t sample them in really muddy conditions though and only as 29er.

So are there any further recommendations for a “grippier than Nobby Nic” tyre in slimy conditions with bearable rolling resistance which fits in a normal frame (so let’s say 2.3 max).

Is the centre ridge thing something that works (for you)?

Cotic wrap = one of the best decals around
(in terms of being graphically advanced, sophisticated branding, recognisable, original…)

Not sure about this one but they offer the Soul with a choice of decals.
They might be able to supply one of those to go over the wrap. Maybe?!

Anyway, I’m going to do it the other way round: wrap over old style decal.
‘Cos I love the wrap! 😛

Exactly!

Crikey (and all other “disbelievers” for that matter),

1.
which scenario would you personally prefer:
a) (crikey minus 1 kilo) plus crikey’s bike
b) crikey plus (crikey’s bike minus 1 kilo)
c) “bah, it doesn’t make a significant difference anyway, I don’t want any weight saving at all”

2.
Should you prefer a) I’d be curious to understand why.
Should you also prefer scenario b) where would you want the weight to be saved?
If you go for c) you’ll probably state that it’s a function of weight loss divided by money loss times training time in relation to grmpfmpfblah…

Personally – and given the financial resources at the time – I would always go for b) (hock plus (hock’s bike minus 1 kilo)) because it feels like a huge difference when my bike is suddenly almost 10% lighter while it doesn’t feel like a huge difference when I am 1.2% lighter.

I mean, am I the only one who sees a difference in the unit that is being moved around (the bike) and the unit that moves around (me). A light bike just feels great!

And I’d still argue the same principle is true for the rotational mass: there are units that just need to be moved along (e.g. the frame) and there are units which have to be spun up AND moved along.

We could also open a thread on unsuspended vs. suspended weight by the way… 🙂

Ignoring the discussion if the effect of saving rotating weight makes a significant difference or not…

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…and even the article referred to by crikey mentioned that rotational weight becomes more significant under acceleration. Off-roaders tend to accelerate quite a bit compared to roadies, right?! So what might not be significant in some circumstances might be (more) significant for the OP’s endurance race. While at the same time the wiki article stated that the measurable difference is not huge and can hardly be felt. 😐

So – really – make of it what you want or what you do indeed feel!

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…so ignoring that discussion for a moment – what I really don’t get are these repeated remarks on ‘rather loosing body weight and getting fit than spending money on parts’. Yes?! So what? Is this some sort of advisory board for naughty bikers? Bike watchers? Wouldn’t we and shouldn’t we all lose a few pounds? But was it the question? No, it wasn’t!

You could also always argue that one should just race for fun, enjoy the camaraderie and not worry about weight advantages at all…

…but that wasn’t the actual question! 🙂

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Back to the actual topic: I can feel it! I am a believer! And I am so so happy with my light-ish wheels (and tyres and tubes) as a result of this. It makes me fly! 😛

But thanks for trying, skywalker!
Much appreciated!

EDIT deleted the stuff on off-road being more about acceleration and less about aerodynamics

The other day I did my loop through the frosty local woods. One patch was half-thawed mud and it stuck like glue to my tyres -> man, could I tell that it makes a difference! While I can’t really tell if the bottle in my bottle cage is full or empty when riding.

Just sayin’.

So what I am reading out of this so far is that some:
– actually prefer lycra but wear baggies on top so that the public can’t see them wearing lycras
(which only sounds like a fetish while the intention is actually very caring and thoughtful)
– some wear baggies to protect their valuable lycras (now that’s a proper fetish!)
– like pockets (fair enough but why do you wear lycra under your pocket carriers?)
– deliberately want a 2nd layer protection against gravel and to separate mud
– some have leather skin and go commando (leather skin is a start but what about the other 2 issues?)
– some wear padded liners (fair enough)

Well, my impression is, that a lot of the hairy chested (and arsed) bikers on the trails (present company certainly excepted) would prefer the functionality of lycras and actually suffer from the bulky, chaffing extra layer that a baggy often is BUT feel uncomfortable with the peer pressure they are getting from the fashionista mafia out there. Style over function so to speak.

So why don’t you (EDIT no, certainly not you, they…) just man up and stand by your lycra?! 😕 😛

a 29er thread without much reason for arguing I guess:
everything you write tetsujin sounds as if 29er could be just the right thing for you!
So give it a (test) go!

😆

Hi cookeaa,

exactly!

Cheers!

hock

😯 yeah, I can SEE what you mean, Matt !!! 😆
what a suitable name for the topic, by the way – outandabout… 😉

Rather on the expensive side but an interesting alternative as they have diverse support and compression functions and come in more and less insulating versions:

CW-X

I’ve got the 3/4 Insulator Stabylix version and am pretty happy, thinking of getting the none-Insulators for the warmer season. They don’t come with a pad though.

Your shoe choice seems pretty racy your pedals rather not.

I think the Specialized Rimes could suit you which are a mix and now available on these shores.
Official list price is 30 quid above your budget, though.

Specialized Rime MTB Shoe

Elsewise and as mentioned Shimano AM45 might be a good choice (style, test reviews, What MTB magazine ranking…).

16″ On One Inbred 29er with On One Carbon fork old XTR disc brakes and 160mm rotors Thomson post and stem crests on Hope Evo2s salsa carbon bars 280gr saddle s-works captains schwalbe extra leicht tubes rotor cranks KMC gold and singlespeed: 10.5kg or 23.16lbs

Why are people suggesting RS4’s and other similarly dull cars. Get something badass

Errrm… I mean, I really don’t care so much about looks but I definitely wouldn’t want to be seen in one of those modifieds with corrupted handling and nonsense ornamental pseudo “aero” battens!

500bhp is all good, but what is it good for when the rest is just bling? Heavy bling as such?!
It’s cruel! An Impreza wants to be kept in an adequate free-range way.
It might even get muddy once in a while! 😯

People are calling MX5s and Boxsters etc girly cars but for me these pimped beauty queens are the real automotive tarts .

EDIT Sorry for the outburst. Just my personal opinion taste. But really… how can they… 😥

P.P.S.: you could also get yourself a copy of the evo Performance Car Heroes and/or Track Day mag books for inspiration and advice.

evo mag book Performance Car Heroes
evo mag book Guide To Track Days

Both feature all the right (2nd hand) cars and have buying guides for the most relevant ones.

P.S.: E39 M5 is nice but will feel like a barge compared to any actual sports car!
I really like them but it’s just 300 to 500 kg more than most of the others mentioned here.
Don’t get me wrong they can still be fun and fast. But in a different way.

Compliments for the lady who roughed it with her MX5! 🙂

Cayman sounds like a good solution for you! It’s got the everyday, the long-haul, the bad weather, the B-road and the track day covered. A save bet really.

Avoid tiptronic (neuters the car) and big 19″ wheels (wooden on B-roads, 18″ better, 17″ best but look feeble).
Nice to have: sportchrono pack – it comes with a silly clock on the dash but more importantly gives you an ESP sport option with more leeway (standard, sport, off).

Compared to the MR2 and MX5 it will feel more solid, has more grip and might feel less engaging at legal speeds as a result. Upside: it’s actually fast on a track and not just fun.

Enjoy the test ride I’d say! 🙂

————————————————————————————–

Then again, you can always drive a grown-up car when you are older! 😈
At least go for a test-ride with an Elise/Exige/VX220, too! 😛

All the best!

993/996 if you want a sports car, E55 if you want a cruiser, M3 for something in the middle.

yep, spot on that!

Track-wise you could also consider something more youngtimer-ish like Porsche 968 CS or BMW E30 M3
I also like the VX220, Megane R26 and Exige proposal.
Imprezas maybe? Integra Type-R, Clio renaultsport AND something silly for the track (Caterham Classic)?!
Avoid tiptronics on Porsches! PDK is okay but too new to be within your budget.

Then again what do you really want from it? Outright pace, brute power or handling finesse? Do you give a damn about image and looks or does that play a part, too? Fun starting at licence friendly low speeds or competitive track day speed? Should Ms Ox be happy (in terms of ride, perceived safety, practicality, image…) on the passenger seat or is she used to worse?

Lotus Evora?! But north of your budget (>30k).

Good luck!

3) Kate Bush’s early material was really quite good

+1
totally agree!
🙂

Totally agree, PJM1974!
968 and Boxster underrated. Everyday and track worthy.
I’d rather have Elise/Exige or Caterham than a Radical as track toys, though.

It’s just nice when the practical car provides some fun, too.
And that’s where it becomes interesting because you can find really good cars for little money.
I had an E30 325i 4door for a while. It took the kids to nursery in the morning and “commuted me” to work. Its fun started at (licence friendly) low speeds and it was absolutely OK (if not ultimately fast) on track days and fast B-road stuff. It was fantastic fun on snow with good winter tyres and its LSD. The engine is legendary.
Downside: fuel consumption and rust.
But what a fantastic few years! Rust in peace!

While I wouldn’t recommend an E30 as ‘the practical car’ today (age, rust, passive safety) I believe that later 3 Series and 1 Series BMW still provide fun driving interaction and fair practicality. And the 320d, 120d versions have punch and economy covered in spades.

I hear a Golf 5 GTI and the Octavia RS is good, too.
Maybe not on a track, though.

Shall we move this thread to the ‘chat’ section now?
Or straight to pistonheads?

Over and out.