LoamtoHome profile

I see lots of carbon wheels break/crack so the argument that they outlast Al is kind of a myth.  A friend of mine went through 3 WR1 agent rims in a month.  I think an Al rim with some kind of an insert is the way to go.

The main issue I had with Cushcore was taking the tire on and off. If you can't plug a hole on a trail, you are out of luck as well. Better off running thicker casing tires imo.... 

the NukeProof ARD does look interesting as something additional.

Are these the same wheels that come on the Stumpy EVO?  Those Traverse wheels weigh in at 2.3 kgs.

he wasn't/isn't mainstream but his ideas are becoming that.  I'm just surprised it took this long but incremental changes is what the bike industry is all about.

Mondraker pushed the longer reach but geometry as a whole was pushed by Chris Porter.  He was doing shorter offsets, steep STA, super slack HTA before anyone.  Everyone is playing catch up.

https://www.santacruzbicycles.com/en-CA/news/344

No dig no roost!

just have to look at Instragram for the ding dongs

Stumpy Evo is 328mm.  Should come with 165mm cranks.

It's not the video.

Posted by: cyclotoine

pretty much agree with everything craw says. and while I am riding 75+ degree ST angle bike now, my next bike will be a Pole, because I want it steeper. My partner really appreciated the climbing benefits when she went from a 73 degree ST trail bike to a 75 and she is a hair under 5'8". So maybe 75-76 is good for average sized riders and it needs to be adjusted from there.

I think Forbidden is a great example of where the industry is going. Riders want more choice and we will increasingly see these small brands eat away at the custom and big brand market because they will offer bikes that have semi-custom geometry off the shelf with different seat tube angles and rear centers in each size. It means some bikes will get even more expensive, but we have seen that people are willing to pay for it. I would take a size-specific geometry alloy bike (Pole just happens to be making what I think will work best for me at 192cm) with a nice GX build over a carbon superbike any day (and then put really nice carbon wheels on it). That is what is going to be the best performance to cost ratio for me.

So I think we're going to see more of what Forbidden is going in terms of geometry offerings.

I also think tire damping is a thing and we will see more tire companies launching their ideas for it in the next few years. I think there is likely a lighter way to incorporate damping into the tire and that will be the way it goes, but we'll see.

I also think we reached peak hardtail popularity and it will not begin declining in popularity but always maintain a low-level market share.

Alloy wheels give a better more compliant ride.  Lots of hype on carbon and I think we will less of it in the future.

with all the technology in bikes, Fox and RS and figure out how to make CSU's that don't creak after a couple of weeks?

A trail like "Delayed Fuse"....  cheaper and easier to build natural trails than Flow trails.

I'm hoping for more natural trails and less "bike park" trails...

I suspect lots of people will be moving if ridership is 2x of what it is now....  too many moochers and freeloaders out there to sustain what we have.

MrSimmons can bark all he wants but you still can't ebike on DNV land and he knows it.

great trail!  I hope they maintain it better than Upper Dales.  It's going to get beat in the summer.

You know that on DNV managed land, e-bikes are not allowed and are considered the same as motorbikes..... Rocky Mountain Bikes was upset that during a demo last fall, they couldn't have ebikes. I think most people are unaware....

I think Instagram is worse than ebikes and strava....

Maxxis tires are great but pricey....  take a look at the new Michelins.  Great tires and good prices.  I believe the retail is around $75

Posted by: blackfly

Posted by: LoamtoHome

Metro just cares about the watershed, and not the trails. The liability angle is hogwash as parties are covered by the BC Liabilities Act.

I wouldn't go to court on that assumption.  If you are right, then explain why ALL man made features on Neds, as aforementioned even the smallest ones, were removed.  Natural features carry no implied liability since there is no way to show negligence, incompetence of construction or design etc...One thing to remember about liability:  it assumes a REASONABLY likely risk of injury, so on popular trails, Seventh say, if a feature is ridden ad infinitum and only one person is hurt, you could reasonably argue that it is indeed an accident, not from any other factor.   Have many accidents on a hard trail that is stunt laden such a defence would not hold up.  Lastly, I don't think DWV was going to use the Liabilities Act as a pillow in 1999 when all features were axed on Cypress due to one incident, albeit serious.  Since the injured party had a father that was a lawyer.....action/reaction.  In fact, the biggest reason for the "new flow" mantra is exactly litigious.  Very little reasonable risk is involved with smooth, flow trails (Upper Dales, Expresso) although encouraging high speeds as a factor would be an interesting angle.  

I wonder how it all works with surfing?

the wood work on Neds got taken down because it was old and rotten.  Stunts are still up on Salvation, Corkscrew, Boogieman, etc.