@gordimhor – sorry, didn’t mean it to come across that way. I genuinely feel Scotland should have the choice and have the right to choose, and you should get your ref. I was just basically saying, I want Scotland to have it and make their choice so that we can move on either way.

@seosamh77 – ‘ps there’s only 3 area of the uk that don’t run a deficit’ I know that, i said so in my last post? I’m not from the SE by the way, I wasn’t trying to say I’m rich and I subsidise you. Apologies if it came across that way, I meant no offence or disrespect. I have read your arguments, but I have also read other people’s. As usual in politics and economics, people spin figures to suit their argument. For example, you and eat the pudding are saying quite different things from genuine sources. It brings me back to my earlier point: have a referendum and your say and see how everyone else feels.

Happy Christmas to all!!

@gordimhor – I literally said they have the democratic right to choose? I’m in favour of the ref.

@seosamh77 – as I understand it, and I may be wrong, Westminster sends more money to Scotland than Scotland pays back in taxes (much like most other areas of Britain other than SE). Therefore, if Scotland were independent Westminster would have more net money.

@poah – this is what I keep asking myself as an Englishman. Give the Scots their ref. If they want to stay, great, but then leave the independence stuff for a long time this time rather than demanding it again 5 years later (I accept with Brexit they should get another go as circumstances have changed since 2014). If they want to go l, also fine, it’s their democratic right. I think it would be a shame, but there would be a silver lining as English taxpayers would almost certainly save a bit of money.

Only way to end the debate, have the indyref2!

Checking back in after a few days off. Clear like with Brexit no one on here is going to persuade someone with opposing views that leave or remain is correct.

Although the parameters are very different, the two choices boil down very similarly to Brexit:

Leave – risk (but by no means guarantee) short term to medium term economic issues offset by potential long term improvements and decision making, preferred identity and greater control of your own country’s destiny.

Remain – avoid risk but keep status quo that many people are unhappy / bored with so the issue will keep coming back.

What decision you make is determined by how much of a risk taker you are. More control of your own destiny and future rewards coupled with potential economic problems or less political control but a more stable economy (at least in the short to medium term)?

I never said I thought the SNP were centrist?

I think my definition of centre left and hard right are probably different to many of yours. To me, centre left was Blair. Corbyn, momentum and McDonell are considerably more left than that. To me, hard right is BNP, not the new government that includes many more working class and young MPs. Not saying I’m right and you’re wrong, just offering a different perspective.

I would also argue that many others in the wider world agree with this, I don’t know many people who would describe Corbyn and McDonell as centre left like the comment above.

As a centrist I didn’t have 2 choices. Labour under Corbyn is/was very left wing, pretty much socialist. I agreed with the Lib Dems more, but the revoke the referendum without a say was abhorrent to me. If they had offered a second referendum I probably would have voted them, even though I didn’t like Swinson.

Regardless, my point was there were many complex reasons why people voted Tory. Racism, nationalism and xenophobia were not mine or many others.

The other problem with a lot of comments on here is to lump all Tory voters together, or all SNP etc.

Have some of you actually met any Scottish or English Tories? I’m tired of being described as racist, sexist, nationalist and unkind. Im not.

Governments, ideologies, voting intention are all very complicated. There are dozens of different types of Tory just as there different types of Labour and SNP supporters.

People need to be more respectful. This thread has evolved into a micro version of the national debate, and it shows why the country can’t heal. More extreme voices are drowning out the centrists. I think most Brits are centrist, but we didn’t have a choice.

Quote from above:

I’d also put the question back to you, why will trade between Scotland and rUK disappear?
I thought the post Brexit uk was all about trade?

I think you’re right. I was referring to some arguments I had read in response to a Scottish referendum, and was just asking questions really, not arguing against you. I’m in favour of indyref2. I personally predict that trade would carry on fine as I said in my original post, just like I think it will for the wider UK with the EU after Brexit.

Still, it doesn’t really marry up to what Sturgeon has been saying. She can’t credibly claim that leaving the EU would be bad for the UK economy due to uncertainty etc, but then on the other hand claim leaving the UK would be totally fine. Scotland does a lot more trade with England than the EU. She seems to apply the same logic differently to Brexit and Scottish independence to me. So, either she is overestimating the damage of Brexit, or underestimating the potential dangers of independence.

Sorry don’t know how to quote but in response to:

ideas that Scotland can’t afford independence are nonsense.

I’m not saying you are wrong, I’m not sure, but aren’t Scotland dependent on money from the Barnett formula every year to meet their annual spending? I also read somewhere that 60 to 70% of their trade us with England and Wales, and only 10 to 20% is with the EU. Also, Scotlands budget deficit is much higher than Englands, I think 6 or 7 times higher. Again, no link so not sure, but if the above is correct surely this would mean that Scotland would struggle to afford independence and maintain their current public spending and tax ratio. Finally, there is an element of doubt that the EU would definitely let Scotland rejoin after they leave next year, although if it came to that I really hope they would. I would have thought something would have to give based on these simple economics, but I’ll happily concede I’m no expert and may be wrong.

As I said on the GE thread, as an English Conservative voter I can’t understand why Westminster won’t give the Scots their referendum as soon as possible. We are leaving the EU, but it isn’t what most Scots want and by forcing them to leave with us seems unfair. It also allows Westminster to begin trying (heavy emphasis on trying) to heal the country and move forward rather than staying in this terrible state we have been in. The UK is already split by Brexit, it doesn’t need dividing by English/Scottish relations too. I would personally like the Scots to stay, but this is based on friends and tourism, not economy. But, if Scotland wants to leave it is their choice and genuinely good luck to them. I personally predict it will make them worse off, but I accept it is their choice to make. Either way, it is a win win for Westminster. If Scotland vote to stay, it definitively puts the question to bed, and we can try to build a better and even closer relationship post Brexit. Boris would legitimately be able to claim he had been democratic and heal the division (unless of course Nicola wants a third one again by 2025). If they vote to leave, also a win. The Scots are happy and I’m fairly certain the English will be financially better off (Barnet formula etc). This could benefit the Tories as they could reallocate the money sent to Scotland to all the areas of England, Wales and NI helping their new potentially temporary supporters (especially in the North of England and Wales). Besides, even if they did leave the UK, I think we would still have good relations and no hard border. Just like leaving the EU, it is in both sides interests to keep relations cordial and trade going – so that is what will happen. So, overall indyref2 actually benefits all sides involved and should in theory benefit us all.

As an English Conservative voter, I believe the Scots should be given their second referendum. I can’t understand why we would or should deny it. Its a win win. The Scottish electorate get their say. If they vote to remain in the UK, they prove pretty decisively they want to stay as there would be two confirming votes in a decade, and Sturgeon would have to leave it alone. If they vote to leave, good on them and good luck, it’s their decision. I personally think it would ruin them, but it’s not my say and if its what they want, go for it. It won’t hurt England at all if they do leave (certainly not in the long run), if anything we’ll probably be slightly better off thanks to the Barnet formula.

Thanks for the suggestions so far. Interested in the sonder and the vagabond. I wonder if some of the other ones would be tough enough for proper offroading. Not really keen on 27.5 ones as I’ve got loads of 29er tyres in the shed. Any others people have tried?

Is anyone running 140mm forks on the 29er camber? The rule of thumb from Specialized is 20mm extra than standard, but as the evo and standard frame are exactly the same except for travel they come with, it is not clear whether the maximum you can run is 130 or 140mm. Any one tried/got an official answer? Thanks.

Thanks Brant, going to get saving!

Really interested in one of these…. it may have been said before, but a quick search hasn’t yielded anything on my screen – how long is the warranty on the frame?

There will always be niner at least….

The pricing also made many of the comments ridiculous. The top 650b bikes all cost closer to £3000 and the top 29ers cost closer to £2000. For a fair test the price needs to be similar. For example, the complaints against the camber Evo (apparently needs a longer fork to rectify the dreaded ha problem) and the t129 (flexy wheels) could easily rectified with an extra £500 to £1000. I’m sure it was a case of justifying what they had already decided.

I’m not about to cry was just wondering. Apologies to those offended.

I agree with many of the comments above, it was the contradiction of almost everything they said that I found so ridiculous. They banged on about head angles and actually said that 67 was perfect but 68 was rubbish, but then said that their favourite money no object bike was the Santa Cruz 5010 which has, you guessed it, a 68 head angle! Pure drivel. Still it made me laugh.

The fox forks that are regarded as bad are the Evo spec ones as opposed to the better factory ones.

All the mags seem to hate fox these days (I in fact agree on that one, I’ve always preferred the feel of rockshox, but that is personal).

Northwind – I agree with you about advertising, but the 650b thing and the complete nonsense about bikes’ strengths and weaknesses was a bit much. They made out that if a trail bike didn’t have 650b wheels, an exact 67 degree ha and a 10mm stem it was crap. And then went on to award a bike with a rubbish spec (they particularly hated the fox 32 on it) as bike of the year, despite banging on the bike of the year having to be killer value.

Bump.

I saw a Spearfish at Swinley yesterday and I thought it looked lovely (although too xc for my tastes – it looked fast and the rider was in full Lycra!). On an unrelated note, is your name taken from the original Italian Job?

Thanks chaps!

Cheers guys. Apparently the c guide vo2 works well without a cable running under the chain stay.
http://www.evanscycles.com/products/bionicon/cguide-v02-ec040588?country=GB&currency=GBP&utm_content=mkwid__pcrid_17321847296_kword__match__plid_&gclid=CPnYk7mTrL0CFTTItAodjxwA_g#features

For anyone interested Specialized UK got back to me and said you can run up to a 130mm fork on the Camber 29er. The rule was up to 20mm more travel than standard on most of their bikes.

Thanks for the responses guys. Think I’ll email specialized to check then about 130mm ones. If not 120mm should do.

I can confirm that the Camber 29er is an ace all rounder. I was initially put off by the 70 degree ha but as with many bikes the actual ride goes beyond the numbers. I even used mine on the downhill runs at chatel last summer and it was fine!

Good review. I’ve come to similar conclusions.

Camber frames (2013) are now £500 at bikescene. Really good all round trail bike, especially at that price! Not sure what sizes they have.

Bump

The smaller companies are gambling less in many ways – its the bigger ones who seem to backing just one horse. Giant are putting all their eggs in the 650b basket (more or less) and Specialized on 29er. One of them is going to have to change a lot in the next two or three years and look silly.
I’m just hoping that companies aren’t going to replace 29 as well as 26 with 650b – I’m lanky and like my big wheels!

What tougher 29er tyres for the Alps??

I have recently got an alloy Camber comp 29er. Coming from a zesty, I too found 29 inch wheels took a while to get used to. As someone said above, Specialized bikes are long and low, and my xl frame came with a 110mm stem as well, which made it handle awfully. However, one month on, after fitting a 50mm stem and wider bars and getting used to the differences of riding a 29er (for me this has mainly involved leaning the bike over more when cornering and staying in a more neutral position on descents) I love it! It is faster everywhere (for me) and I find it handles really well.

I would give it some time and try a shorter stem.

One thing I would like change would be a slightly longer fork (120/130mm) because the confidence the bike inspires could do with more! As a light lanky rider 110mm at the back is enough. Not sure what would happen to the warranty if you did want a bigger fork though… Anyone know?

Thanks guys loads of good stuff. Will get a hold of passports map then if I can…

I’ve got a Specialized Camber 29er, its a brilliant trail bike. I bought the alloy comp model and I ride it on all the same trails I used to ride my Zesty on. Very capable for 110mm travel. I had a look at the Epic as well, just out of interest and it certainly looked/felt spindlier although it was obviously lighter. Depends if you want racy or trail I guess.

Just ordered one. Excited. Good point about the name…

I’m seriously interested in getting a 29er trail bike. Have you 29er owners found them suited to aggressive trail riding (i.e Lake District descents, Peaks etc)? I don’t mean big jumps etc, but rocky descents where the bike takes a pounding. I was thinking about the new Specialized Camber.

I do like the look of the Canyon, amazing spec, but it has fair bit less travel – think 110mm instead of 127mm. Do you think it would be tough enough for rough trail riding?

You guys get yours yet? I’m still considering one, but need a test ride. What other trail 29ers are there for between £1500 and £2000? I want something that can handle the Lake District and the Peaks, but I can’t afford something like a Transition Bandit 29er. I like the new Camber but it seems a bit XC for the Lakes and the more rocky areas I ride.

Cheers guys!