Pnwpedal profile

Perfectly flat seems to fit that bill, at least for me.

I came from BMX and even though I've been on MTBs for 19yr some habits stuck around for way too long. One of those was riding on the ball on my foot. The rear edge of the pedal would wear a line in the shoe footbed, at the front of my arch, and cause pain. I just chalked it up to wearing out shoes. But after switching to a PNW composite pedal and moving my foot forwards on the pedal my feet and calves feel so much better on long rough descents. I kind of do a conscious dance of foot position changes, but our rides in SW WA and NW OR are mostly long climbs and long descents. So ball of foot for climbing, front part of arch for descending. So far it seems to be working.

I have both versions of revive and stand by them being the best damn post on the market. Also surprisingly easy to work on. Manitou rebranding one is such a smart move if they can sell enough to make it worthwhile.

I have no idea why this is a mystery... but I'll also vouch for the Bontrager hubs being made in-house at King. The man himself confirmed it to me, among other first hand evidence.

Bummercups?

The funny thing is that commercial construction has been dealing with pulling thousands of feet of wire at a time through conduit for over a century. Suck a pull string or push a fish tape through one way, attach the wire/cable, pull it through the other way. A shop vac and some masonry string makes this super easy.

Oh and for grip strength, the hand squeeze exercisers are always good. I just grabbed my gripprotrainer from the desk drawer to squeeze a bit.

Did you ride the same setup and terrain with and without the O-chain? I'm always curious to hear real world experience about that system.

Weight specific bars could be an interesting market option. Or at least call out the tested rider weight in the specs if the bar's flex is a selling feature. Physics can't be denied that flexy handlebars for a taller 200lb rider at 820mm width are not flexy for a shorter 120lb rider at 740mm...

Interesting..... Gotta do some research on those.

I probably am a bit, between praising compliance in certain parts but not wanting excess uncontrolled compliance in my suspension. My main gripe is that Rockshox initial high speed damping is rarely the most supple and adding a dollar of rubber bumpers only masks that harsh damping. I doubt Fox would try implementing a gimmick like this because they don't need to...

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: Pnwpedal

Yes, and no. I'm hesitant to dig into this but this is a civil audience who hopefully will see that I'm just posting some facts...

Sure, repeating rifles and handguns may have existed, but they can they really compare to modern handguns or say the ill maligned AR15? Could the average American have afforded one of those guns back then? And you mention no rules WRT buying guns, but society and how it functioned was vastly different then compared to today. I don't object to firearm ownership, but I tend to think the obsession over guns strikes me as a bit out of control. The problem is that the horses have already bolted from the barn and firearms are so ubiquitous that the problem will never be reeled in without a major shift in ideology in the US. Heck, even trying to implement some sort of national level regulations on background checks, licensing and training seems to be next to impossible. It's difficult to have a conversation on any sort of firearm control when such a large portion of the population is not even willing to entertain any reduction in their access to firearms. Enough politicians won't seriously consider it because it means too many lost votes. I get that it's part of the American identity, but something's going to have to give at some point.

FWIW I think most gun owners are relatively responsible people who don't have nefarious purposes in mind when it comes to their guns. However, responsibility can quickly go by the wayside when emotion and mental health gets in the way of rational thinking. That leads me to think that there isn't so much a gun problem as a society problem and unfortunately people have relatively easy access to guns to use to sort out their problems.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: RAHrider

Most polls done to give a sense of the breakdown of the country are of about 1000 people or so. I see the election as a poll of sorts. If you poll half the population, I think it is fairly safe to assume the other half that did not vote would fall along fairly similar lines. So if about 1/2 of voting Americans supported Trump, probably about 1/2 of non-voting America does as well.

As for the Abe thing, I agree it is a smaller portion but the fact that anyone would think Trump is a good president frightens me. He is racist, misogynistic and a bully. He is largely incomprehensible unless reading a teleprompt. He is a habitual liar and he has put US diplomacy back several decades.

I agree that letting Trump and his followers define America neglects the other 165 million people. That being said, I know there are lots of great Americans out there but it still doesn't mean I want to visit their country. For instance, I have never had a single problem with anyone I have ever met from Columbia, but I can tell you that I am not going down to Columbia any time soon. I can think of dozens of other countries to visit that are safer than the US and where the citizens more closely align with my values generally speaking. I used to think I shared values with most Americans but that is largely because I was getting a lot of information through media from places like New York/California. Now that I see more clearly how about 1/2 the US population thinks/feels I am less inclined to want to visit.

Fair point on the polls/voting issue, but I wonder if a lot of people stayed home simply because they didn't like either choice and therefore that 49/51 split wouldn't follow through as you suggest. I think if them Dems had run someone other than Clinton we wouldn't even be talking about Trump.

On the idea that people think Trump is good, it mystifies me, but is doesn't surprise me given the way US politics operates and how the avg American seems to think about politics. I know this sounds disparaging towards Americans and recognize that I have a limited view of things down there, but I sometimes find the thinking of the US (the avg American) to be frightenly shallow. I don't necessarily blame the individual though, more the system/society that they developed under.

First off, I'm grateful that we can have an intelligent conversation. On a US forum this would have quickly devolved into personal attacks, threats of violence/civil war, and no real discussion.

The world of today could not be fathomed in 1787. The American constitution is the ultimate foundation of our principles (as it should be in a Constitutional Republic) but there is debate over whether the intent should be followed, or a more modern interpretation. That's outside of my control beyond voting for politicians I believe in so I don't worry about it.

As far as the firearms themselves, the "AR15" of today (a 60 year old design that has become the basis of most modern rifles) is practically equivalent to the flintlock musket of the Revolutionary War - the ubiquitous rifle that most citizens can own. Not necessarily the best, but practical enough to get the job done. Applying the Second Amendment as intended, the right of a citizen to own them "shall not be infringed". (See the previous statement over Intent VS Interpretation)

I do agree that the average American has been conditioned to have a very shallow belief system. The quote of "buying things we don't need, with money we don't have, to impress people we don't like" applies far too often. There is a societal issue without a doubt. I have personally stepped away from watching any national/corporate news, especially the "talking head" style of political pundits giving their spin on the news (Fox, MSNBC, etc). I'll check local news for local events, and if a national event is serious enough it will pop up on one of these sources. Life is better that way. Like most Americans, I want to live my best and happiest life and contribute to a good life for my family. Unfortunately the quiet majority are vastly overshadowed by the loudest voices on the extreme ends of the spectrum...

Posted by: FLATCH

Posted by: blackfly

I ride Fromme regularly and see at least one or two zip up the road when I get out of D'yer Maker. I think since most new initiates that would buy them are likely to find the sticker shock too much to handle it would be for a limited few, but of the ones I have seen on Fromme: either older types that would be inclined to buy one; a noob with no idea (or whom zips up only to ride the road back down........seen this twice) or riders that motor up as fast as possible to avoid any heckling as they know acceptance is not common. Eagle, for example, allows motos there......have at it. But not Cypress, Fromme, Seymour, Burke or the Woodlot.

I ride mine at Burke and the Woodlot regularly. I ride a red Commencal, introduce yourself sometime.

Oh, and feel free to heckle, I find it laughable.

All I really do these days is heckle with a smile, mostly out of jealousy that I'm dying on long climbs and they're not. But I'll be happy once the trail is pointed downhill again.

Our only issue down here is the US of A is the legality of motorized VS non-motorized vehicles and trail access. It has yet to come to a head, but there is a potential that electric motorized bicycles could be detrimental for trail access on many trail systems that are strictly non-motorized. Until this becomes an actual issue I can't be a zealot against E-bikes like I instinctively wanted to be.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: Pnwpedal

.....

Great post and thanks for sharing. The only thing I'd add is that when the US constitution was written, guns, and access to guns, were very different from what exists now.

Yes, and no. I'm hesitant to dig into this but this is a civil audience who hopefully will see that I'm just posting some facts...

Repeating rifles existed at the time (what could be considered rudimentary versions of semi-automatic mechanisms), machine guns existed, repeating pistols existed. These were better than what any military had at the time and were available to anybody who wanted to buy them, with no laws to restrict access to anyone. There are far fewer gun owners per capita now (~30%) than there were in 1787.

Currently in the US, machine guns (full automatic) are effectively banned- the paperwork and costs involved are a legal barrier to entry for 99.99% of Americans. Everything else requires a relatively thorough background check to buy legally. Semi-automatic rifles are common and legal, starting at $400 or so for a cheap piece of junk, to $1500 or so for something "military grade" (though still not capable of full automatic fire, which is what militaries use), to whatever you want to spend for some boutique rifles. Cheap junk pistols start at $200, most are $400+, and go to up from there.

Firearms sales between individuals exist, but are rare. It's legally up to the seller to determine if the buyer can legally buy the firearm and can be held criminally liable if they aren't. This is what politicians like to call the "gun show loophole", because theoretically two people could meet at a gun show and exchange a firearm, but actual sellers at gun shows must be licensed dealers and submit background checks. Most people transfer guns through a licensed dealer (with a background check) if they want to sell it to another person.

Black market firearms exist (as they do in all countries), but I really have no idea about that.

BUT... continuing with the Second Amendment, a "well-regulated" (well trained, armed, and capable) "militia" (citizens, not affiliated with the government, willing and able to come to the aid of their country) are the ones who should wield all military power and the government cannot restrict this. That was the intent of our Second Amendment.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, just sharing what I know. For most Americans this system works. For some, there are greater issues at hand (drugs, gangs, mental health crisis, etc). We're not a perfect country, and some would argue that our freedom and unlimited potential for prosperity comes at a price.

This was an interesting post title to see on the front page of NSMB, to say the least.

I'll attempt to give a different point of view on this topic. Brief background: I'm mid-30s, grew up as a "country boy" in the US, military vet, politically I'm a slightly left-leaning libertarian (F#&K Trump; Tulsi 2020). I've traveled around the US, Canada, and Europe, and would gladly live in BC if property prices weren't so crazy. I've also been spending time deep in the PNW forests for my entire life.

In the western US, there are areas that get remote enough that you can run across people who don't want to be seen. I've encountered a handful of questionable situations in my life... sketchy drug operations and users, unhinged individuals who aren't happy to see you, people foraging for very valuable plants, etc. The odds of these types of encounters turning violent are small, but they exist.

Luckily 95% of MTB trails don't get this deep in the woods, and the traffic that our trails see discourages the aforementioned sketchy people from being near the trails. I never carry a gun while riding, the risk isn't there and the weight isn't worth it. But if I'm hiking, camping, exploring, etc, and I'm straying further and further from civilization, you bet I'm [legally and safely] armed. When you're 20+ miles away from the nearest town, have no cell reception, and can't rely on a PLB for any type of quick response, you have to weigh the odds of self-defense versus the risks you're taking.

A larger aspect is the American "gun culture" which is... significant. Our country was designed to give citizens self-reliance and power over the government, which was the primary motivation behind the Second Amendment (anyone interested should read the Federalist Papers for background and clarity on the intent behind our constitution. Our Founding Fathers would be appalled at the idea of America having a standing Army, and the federal government wielding power over the populous). While many urban areas in the US have abandoned this ideal, a huge majority of areas (by square mileage) depend on self-reliance to thrive and prosper. America is definitely at a crossroad between the wants/needs/desires/ideals of the urban populations versus the rural populations, as seen by our political soap opera of the last 8 years.

So yeah, this topic will absolutely be crazy and foreign to Canadians. Your country is generally safer, your people are generally nicer. You also happily have a fairly liberal (and very functional) Constitutional Monarchy for government, which appears to be indicative of Canadian ideals from what I've experienced.

I'm drinking tea and eating scones for breakfast today, I think I'll get back to that.