A lot of what is getting discussed here in terms of improving accessibility just sounds to me like hand-holding and making things easier for people who can’t be bothered to find out for themselves. If I decide to take up a sport or activity because it looks interesting, I expect to have to put some effort into doing some research into it, not simply have everything spoon-fed to me. Why does mountain biking have to be different?

njee, we seem to have the almost identical view. Wonder why we seem to be the only ones?

Regards to my earlier comments about reduced access and increased restrictions coming with more mountain bikers, see most of California as an example (read about it on the MTBR forums, particularly the areas around Marin County), Vancouver’s North Shore area – hell, even Swinley Forest can fall under that umbrella.

I think we need to define a few things:

Cycling as a method of transport is very accessible, and I would argue that this is almost universally known, and there seems to be no kind of demographic restriction that I know of. Walk round any major urban area and you will see people from all different ethnicities, both sexes, and from bankers to street cleaners using bikes as transport. An increase in people using bikes as transport generally leads to an increase in funding in populated areas for dedicated cycle lanes, greater provision and awareness of cyclists amongst motorised traffic, and so on. This is a Good Thing.

Cycling as a recreational/leisure activity is very separate from this, especially mountain biking, and I still don’t see why it needs to promote itself as especially accessible? The benefits to the general population as a whole come from increased general cycle use, as opposed to specifically participating in it as a leisure activity.

Actually, it has been shown in the US that greater numbers of mountain bikers has, in the higher population density areas (like the UK), let to greater restrictions and reduced access. If you have an area that has no official mountain bike trails, if there are only a few mountain bikers then they can pretty much go where they like; if you suddenly get hundreds turning up then the areas available to them will get restricted – that seems to be how it goes.

Improved transport provision? Can you clarify that please?

Yes, I believe I made the point about the Dutch, but that’s cycling, not mountain biking. The thread is about mountain biking specifically, not cycling in general.

I still don’t see why mountain biking must be seen to be accessible?

More people mountain biking would not benefit me personally, no, so I’m quite ambivalent. I don’t care if anyone else rides a mountain bike or not. In fact, the recent swell in numbers simply seems to mean a greater number of thefts of high-end bikes as they are now more of a target, and greater numbers of people on the trails leading to less of a feeling of getting away from the world (which is mostly why I ride offroad as opposed to on the road). Why are either of those good things?

Ah, but you’re talking about cycling in general as a mode of transport, not mountain biking as a recreational activity. Very different situation there entirely.

Cycling in and of itself is very accessible, and everyone knows it – a basic bike is very cheap, and you can ride a bike as transport in any clothes you like, the Dutch certainly do. The benefits to society as a whole of greater cycle usage as a form of transport are well-proven; less time off work sick through better general health, more money put into funding cycling infrastructure, less cars on the roads, and so on – all of which benefit those who currently use a bike as transport.

What are the tangible benefits to people who already mountain bike as a leisure activity of more people getting involved?

Nobody’s really answered this yet – plenty of people suggesting why mountain biking might be perceived as inaccessible and ways to change that, but no real commentary on why that would be a good thing.

FWIW, I ride solo about 50% of my rides and in the company of one other friend for the other 50%. I couldn’t care less whether other people ride mountain bikes or not – it doesn’t affect my enjoyment of it. Sure, more people means more purpose-built facilities like BPW, Antur, Swinley and so on, but if they weren’t there I wouldn’t ride any less.

It’s all very well saying we need to get more people cycling, but I don’t see why that matters to anyone but the industry that makes money from it?

CRC have the Kona Entourage Deluxe in medium for only £1700 for the complete bike. TT is only 585 but reach is 430. Not sure on chainstay length or seat tube size though. A friend has the basic Entourage with a set of 180mm Vans on it and loves it.

Camber, scratch the FS itch.

£23

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/thor-enemy-goggle-2013/rp-prod16195

Seem to fit my 661 Comp just fine.

I feel your pain… Thinking about upgrading my Pitch from 150mm Sektor RLs to either Float 36s or Lyrik Solo Airs but finding a black 1 1/8″ pair is proving nigh on impossible.

Cube
Spirited Away (or any of the Studio Ghibli stuff to be honest)
Grosse Point Blank
Clerks

White OnZa Porcupines…

Personally I’d put a small P-clip on the screw for the BB-mounted cable guide and run it though that – will hold it out of the way of the chainrings but still allow it to move with the sus travel.

If you’re serious about that, you haven’t got the wrong bike – you’ve got the wrong missus..

Q: Do you ever see any of these frames with decent components as a new bike?
A: No, and there’s a reason for that…

Go with what everyone above is telling you to do. If your budget doesn’t stretch to a decently usable FS, then don’t get a cheap crappy one. Maybe keep an eye out for a Giant Yukon FX1/2/3? Think the frame on them is pretty decent quality, faux-bar suspension.

I thought it was just me…! Hate waking up from that dream…

I don’t know about stiff, but my SS Nanos certainly don’t spin easily, which is how it should be IMO.

Cratoni Shakedown?

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=73031

Cratoni C-Maniac?

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=70486

Riding into a parked car because you were looking behind you, then hoping no-one’s watching as you pick yourself up off the floor.

Never – tried it once, hated the feel of having one of my senses removed. I like having time with my thoughts when I ride, music would just interrupt that.

Leftie, and the only thing I’ve ever had a problem with is the smudging ink issue at school. I’d say other than avoiding that, and using scissors/mouse with the right hand, he shouldn’t really have any problems.

Personally:
Two-handed bat/racquet/club sports (golf, cricket, baseball) I play right-handed, one-handed ones I play left-handed. Use scissors and a mouse with my right hand naturally, watch goes on left wrist. Feel more comfortable in a RHD car. Right-footed, skateboard goofy, but push with front foot (which is wrong). Right-foot forwards feels more natural on a bike with the pedals level too. Suppose I’m kind of ambidextrous then…!

Went on Wednesday, in the rain, pretty slippery. Wouldn’t hold out too much hope for safe dryness tbh..

So surely the answer is two bikes then? n+1 and all that.. I do have a rigid ’93 Diamond Back to complement the Pitch..

And that’s why I don’t use bike shops.. ;-)

150mm travel isn’t that overbiked really; I ride pretty much the same area on a Spesh Pitch and hardly ever bother with ProPedal or lockout.

AlFa! FGS, spell it properly…

*Alfa ;)

Tough choice though…

How “on a budget” are you? I recently picked up a 2009 Giant Trance X5 complete bike for the OH, totally factory spec, for £375. Maestro system is the same as is used today.

Stock setup on 2011 Pitch Pro – 24/36 with 11-34T – seems fine to me.

Yeah, I thought that you only used spacers on external bearing BBs as well… Have found a FB conversation between a guy and Giant UK’s Service Centre which seems to suggest that the original BB should be 68x126mm so I reckon I’ll give that a crack.

Labyrinth

Mech has been removed, cleaned, checked for damage, refitted in the original position parallel to chainrings, limit screws are both would out and cable is disconnected. No dice!

I’ve stripped and rebuilt several bikes so I generally know what I’m doing but this is the first thing that’s ever gotten me stumped!

Yeah, I used to have an ’09 X4 and that shifted perfectly so struggling to see what’s going on here – it’s like the front mech isn’t retracting close enough to the frame but I’ve no idea why.

Flats.

I’m 36 and only just learning drops, jumps and stuff. Buying a 6″ FS has helped with the confidence though!

Did you even read the thread!? ;)

I think it’s being claimed that the top Diamond Back Axis came in at around 23.5lbs and was about £900, hence where that start point came from. I certainly remember that the ’93 Kona range had components selected for weight as opposed to just fitting a full Shimano groupset. Yes, bikes from then would have been a lot more fragile, hence why I was trying to show that you can get a better bike for your money these days, comparing like for like (hence rigid).

Either way, we’re not allowing inflation…!

Did think about the Boardman Urban Team but it seems to have been replaced by the HT TeamR and I can’t find that for sale anywhere.

Maybe CX bikes have taken the place of oldschool rigid MTBs?

SS so doesn’t count – needs gears, sorry!

True, but the point was made that technological advancements should cancel out the inflation of price. ISWYM about ultimate lightness not being as big a goal anymore though.

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/cycling-membrane-jacket-7-black-id_8217675.html

£30

Sizes a little small though, I’m 6′, 190lbs and have a Euro XL/USA L. Great jacket though.

EDIT: Sorry, just seen they’re out of all but Small. Might be worth seeing of your local Decathlon has any.