157DH creates symmetrical spoke angles. SupahDupah157Boost™ doesn't. It's a gimmick trying to solve the inherent weakness of 29 inch wheels, and it fails to do so, adding also a wider rear end.
So there you have it, we need to kill Trek before it lays eggs. Preferably with fire.
Well, I can't reply to you directly for some reason Drew. I'm not stating they "suck when compared to all of the other brands/models". I guess I'd like them to be updated... A bigger diameter master cylinder for instance, or some leverage magic... I don't know. Their quality is superb, as you know. They just got a little underpowered for the big wheels and fast speeds this new century has brought upon us.
The problem isn't with the E4s vs the V4s, it's when you are used to Shimano's brute power or some other contenders' manners. The Hopes become disappointing when you see by yourself how much finger muscle you need to develop to simply get closer to the performance of the SRAM, Formula, Hayes, Shimano and TRP units.
The Shimano master cylinder bore tends to ovalize, thanks to the lack of surface treatment and the off-center push on the piston by the ServoWave mechanism. Sometimes you would also find deep scratches in the MC wall after just a few months, because the piston gets so mangled by the SW link it scores the inner bore. Then the seals aren't able to hold the oil anymore, and the dreaded wandering bite point appears.
If Shimano would start anodizing the MC after machining it, as SRAM/Formula/Hope/etc do, their brake levers would be much more longevous.
I've always felt the Mino Link was more of a marketing gimmick than a real improvement. Half a degree if change in the geometry? I can achieve that playing with the tire pressure or the shock's SAG.
When I had a chance to swing a leg over the previous version a friend bought a few months ago, it didn't provide a significant change in the bike's handling. More of a mind game than a true geometry change if you ask me. Or maybe you need to an EWS level rider to acknowledge such subtle alterations.
If you feel like nerding out Ridemonkey style (sorry for the spam AJ!) you can take a look at this spreadsheet:
You'll find piston diameters, MC dimensions, and even brake fluid recommendations for a lor of brakes, along with some mix and match combos of levers and calipers of different brands/models.
Thanks for the thorough explanation. I understand our base circumstances are way different, you ride a lot more often and on several bikes, while I ride my only bike once or twice a week, so it's easier to have everything on hand and always in the same backpack.
Hey Drew, here comes the insidious question: why the heck do you carry a helluva backpack if you are going to strap the water to the frame????
My reasoning for wearing a non minimalist backpack is to use the water bladder as a sort of cushion when things don't go right, and also to carry my tools and stuff (I'm kind of a prepper biker, the obvious mechanic of my crew). This also lightens the bike and allows me to better handle it when stuff gets rowdy. A well distributed load in a tightly packed backpack trumps any water bottle in my book, and I might be evangelizing here, but splitting the load between the rider and the bike on anything but bikepacking really puzzles me...
I have to admit I entered this post with hopes of finding Hopkins doing his amazing moves on an all mountain bike. Just watching him ride on a gravel grinder left me wanting more. Loving the cinematography, but I still feel like after watching him do so much on the Dream ride series this video doesn't make the cut for me.
Hey Pete, thanks for the sympathy. You certainly looked for the farthest country in the continent to find your beloved one didn't you?
My family was also tragically touched by the violence of our last de facto government.
And as you say, it's a difficult subject to address, even today.
As I said above, I don't have an answer, although I'm really interested in helping us all find one.
I completely understand the reasons you brought in. And I posted the current situation, but not a solution, since I don't have one. I thought of opening up the dialogue to find out other views of this issue, and I sincerely think we should be able to make the ends meet.
Truth to be told, none of the American independence movements would have started without the beach head of the US war against England. It showed the rest of the American nations it was possible to build a country of their own, away from the colonial powers of the time.
The Advent of the Cold War era and the Communist menace fired up some of the nastiest state terrorist acts of our history. And Henry Kissinger was the US establishment champion who laid out the dirtiest interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine back in the 60s and beyond.
I'm not holding anyone here responsible for those acts, it would be the same as going to Germany right now and slap someone in the middle of the street simply because they might have had a Nazi relative. But I still maintain there is merit in discussing this kind of things.
Yes, but at the same time and derived from The Monroe Doctrine (later expanded by Rutherford Hayes when the Panama canal was built, and even later by Roosevelt to address not only the USA territory but also "their interests", namely those of the USA industries in the continent) the expression "America for the Americans" was created to reinforce the idea of the USA dominance over the region. In these times when significant efforts to abolish colonialism and asymmetries are gaining traction, I think the introduction of this discussion is pertinent.
I don't know if you are aware of the atrocities comitted under the Operation Condor, or the horrendous torture methods taught at the School of the Americas by the US military to the South and Central American repressive forces.
In this context, the appropriation of the America name certainly hits some open wounds, as you might see.
Anyway, I recon this is quite a stretch from Dave's current (and excellent) piece. Thanks for the opinion exchange though!
The Monroe Doctrine called for a US reign/governance over the whole American continent. The identification of the US population as "Americans" was hence formalized and universalized by the mainstream media.
Dave, I know this might be pulling the rope too hard, but the more I read your article, the more it came into my mind. The mainstream media has naturalized calling the USA residents "Americans", in accordance to the Monroe Doctrine dated back in the 1820s. Even you Canadians do, when you're the first country by surface in the continent.
As an Argentinian -a country which happens to be in America too- I feel it's derogatory and a blatant cultural appropriation case. And many other (mostly South American) residents do. You might not see that one because it's been mainstreamed since, well, 1821. As with many microaggressions, they are built into the language in such a strong manner it makes almost impossible to tell them apart from the rest of our speech.
Again, I understand this is quite a stretch from the question you address in your piece. But I still think it deserves to be highlighted.
Thanks again for giving us something to think about. I love the way you guys here at NSMB rattle our thinking cans.