Opinion: The Machines Have Soul, Don't They?

Mar 18, 2015
by Mike Levy  
photo


There seems to be so much talk these days about looking past whatever bike you're on, avoiding the trailside chatter about what bike or component works well or doesn't work at all, and instead just really relishing on what I hear people call "the ride, maaan!" That expression is sometimes accompanied by a glazed over look in their eyes as terrible reggae music and hazy smoke radiate out from their truck, which is real shame given that there's great reggae music they could be bumping at the trailhead instead. Don't take my flippant attitude the wrong way, though, because I'm in it for "the ride, maaan!" as much as anyone else, but I don't feel the slightest bit guilty about getting a chubby over an exciting new (or old) bike. I also don't believe that I have any right to shake my head at anyone who does the same, or really does want to argue with me about 27.5+ wheels or why I think gearboxes are dumb.

Lusting about exciting and interesting gear does not take away from one's love for the sport or the amount of so-called soulfulness that they experience when riding bikes on singletrack, even if they do want to be on the latest wheel size. In fact, I believe that there are often so many great backstories to the bikes we ride, and especially the people who built and designed them, that the personalities of the machines themselves only add to the event.

Intense Bicycles

Intense's Jeff Steber poses with a prototype that he was tacking together on a Sunday back in 2012. Photo by Ian Hylands



Maybe I'm the one that's stoned, but I often find myself looking back at some of the bikes I've owned, or maybe only ever seen in old issues of Mountain Bike Action from the late '90s, and getting the same sort of wistful connection that I do when flipping through a classic car magazine at the supermarket. Sure, talking about a 1999 Giant ATX One DH bike in the same sentence as a Miura or bright red Dino is a stretch that's probably going to cause the car nuts out there to send me e-mails with only four letter words in them, but, at least for me, all three examples have a similar but different allure. There's no way I'll ever be able to see an ATX One and not think of Myles Rockwell's surprise victory at the 2000 World Champs in Spain (sure, Nico flatted, but a win is a win), and I have no shame in admitting that I cut out a full page magazine photo and taped it to the wall above my weight bench. His race bike was heavily modified, no doubt, but the production ATX Ones, with their skinny little down tube and boxy frame, have a pedigree to them that gives me goosebumps to this day. To me, that lump of aluminum, steel, magnesium and rubber that's now probably not worth much more than an entry-level hardtail has more soul ingrained in it than any rider who goes out of their way to tell me how much they're in it for ''the ride, maaan!''

bigquotesSome of the bikes I've spent time on feel more like classic cars to me now in that I remember them fondly, flaws and all, rather than forgetting about them when the next best thing came along. They're a bit like those one or two special exes you likely have that, while knowing that you're better off apart, you'll always look back and smile about.


Just like many other sports, mountain biking is blessed with plenty of colourful characters, and some of the most captivating of these are the people who have designed, and in some cases even built, the very machines that it seems fashionable to be so blasé about. Maybe it's because I've been very blessed by being able to dive into the backstories behind what most others only see as expensive toys that are designed to strip you of your hard earned money, which is so far from the case that it actually saddens me a bit. I don't care how much misdirected hate one has for any now-large company that's been very, very successful over the years, as I've been there to see engineers so proud of their latest creation that they're glowing like they've just seen their first child born when you ask them questions about their new bike.

Countless hours in front of computers, in the test lab, and on the trail - we could even be talking years' worth of man hours here - and now they're able to show the world what they've created. Yes, it's a bike, and yes, none of them are inexpensive, but clever minds have worked very hard to try and make it even better than the last one. And this applies to so many companies out there, from tiny garage builders to massive brands with whole departs devoted to what colours they'll be using in two year's time.

Kona Process 111 Photo by Amy McDermid

Identifying it as just another aluminum bike out of Asia would be selling the story behind Kona's remarkable Process 111 far too short. Photo by Amy McDermid



For the men and women who design and create the bikes we ride, these machines must surely have a bit of soul to them. Jeff Steber, the man who welded up his own Intense frames during those early years, might not seem to have much in common with the guy who's spent the last six months figuring out the ideal carbon layup for the 2015 Specialized Demo, and while those examples are separated by many years, I'd argue that there's a certain amount of passion to both acts. But hold on and let me explain myself before you call the hounds on me over that claim. The obvious difference between the two examples is that one has twenty-something years of memories behind it and the other is a shiny, technologically-heavy bike that makes it easy for jaded eyes to roll in their sockets. However, the similarities between the two examples may be more prevalent than you might first assume: I promise both designs were fuelled by equal parts passion and the desire to improve the breed, both were / are seen as being advanced examples of the breed when there were released, and both were mostly manufactured by human hands. Older bikes like those from Intense, Foes, Mantis and many other companies, pull at our heartstrings now, but don't be so shortsighted as to not realize that today's modern machines won't be doing the same thing in fifteen or twenty year's time. Or, if you're like me, maybe you're already appreciating the latest creations.

The bikes we ride are just machines that are designed to do a job, and that's a fact that is hard to reconcile with the knowledge the passionate people have poured their heart and soul out to define the bike's character on the trail. No two bikes are the same, are they? Two different 150mm bikes have very different personalities and ask different things of their owner, which is something that comes about by many hands and minds figuring out how they want their new baby to behave. When you look at it that way, I think you'd be crazy not to think that there's a bit of soul in every bike, which is something that helps you enjoy ''the ride, maaan!'' even more.

Posted In:
Stories


Author Info:
mikelevy avatar

Member since Oct 18, 2005
2,032 articles

94 Comments
  • 67 6
 I liked that one Mike! Everyone has their Sauron ring of power, an item that we cast our soul into it. When I touch my carbon bike it goes: ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul, bash hashtag, you shall never live up to my performance, I seee youuuuuuuu!
  • 18 1
 "bash hashtag" you're a hilarious bastard waki
  • 3 0
 one ring to rule them all and in the darkness bind them
  • 4 1
 one chainring to rule them all?
  • 2 1
 One rim to rule them all?
  • 25 1
 When I started riding in the early 90s I was the envy of all my friends. I converted my Raleigh to have quick release on both wheels and I had a pink Mt Zefal shoulder pack, top tube pad and pump. I loved that bike and rode all over the county on it and enjoyed every second. Time passed on. I got a Cannondale in 95 that I put a Club Roost riser bar on and again it was sweet. In the late 90s I was riding a bike shop own brand frame with RST Moto 3.5s, dx v brakes etc. I did everything on that. Rode miles, did DH, jumped my biggest jumps (big!), my highest drops(6ft+), my best urban night rides etc. Life could not have been better. Yes I aspired to own a Mountain Cycle San Andres but it was never an option so I did not worry about it.
Fast forward 15 years and I have a Tracer 275 in the garage with 160mm plus a hardtail and a roadbike. The other day I pussyed out of a bike length double on the Intense because it looked a bit scary. Now I just want a shiny bike with ace bits and worry that my cranks are a couple of years old.
My point is this. I love mountainbiking and have done it for years and always will. However, even though I name my current bikes and get them out of my van hoping everyone else around will be thinking 'lucky bugger', I have long past the point of true pure enjoyment. Those early days when your elastimer forks and v brakes were the nuts. When riding meant riding not furiously cracking off about 12000 differant hub sizes, wheel sizes, tyre sizes, blaa blaa blaa. It still can be that. Any bike today is a billion times more capable than any of my old bikes above. Its what you the rider puts into it. It might be time for a mindset reajustment and to go play out on my bike with friends like the old days ☺
  • 5 0
 This ^^^. I was the same as this. Back in the day this and I remember that, always reminiscing about The good old days, when literally nothing mattered and you rode anything!. but over the past few years I've struggled to find the same joy and connection that I had back way when!. Only in the past year have I started to get my mojo back and fall back in love with my sport. And I feel that I did this by trying my old mentality of The bike doesn't matter, the wheel size doesn't matter and the trail or destination doesn't matter. Just to be out and to experience it raw again. I went out at the weekend on my 04 heckler Am build and was ragging it down some black run downhills, wrong shocks, semi slick tyres and an old vbrake style rear rim. One guy actually giggled at my wheels calling them tiny!. You know what, I set off in front of him, lashing that little bike down the trail and left him with his new 27.5 enduro machine in the dust of my semi slick tyres :-). Got to the bottom and waited a good 20seconds for him to appear behind me. he rode past me with a gobsmacked look on his face and I just grinned back at him. One of the best days out in years was ragging an old bike down trails it's not meant for with parts that are definitely not meant to take that abuse. And it felt like mountain biking again, even down to buckeling the back rim like I did every other day back in the 90's :-). My tip, go back to basics..
  • 2 0
 Even though I'm exactly the same as you, try not to care less whats under me. The problem is when your 'friend' gets old and beyond repair, then the reality and negativity hits you. You may not want anything better, you just want the basic stuff. Then it hits you is to get exactly the same stuff its now over double the price atleast.
  • 1 0
 I've found joy in buying and selling bikes. I keep a nice hardtail to ride day to day. Then I have another bike of high value that I sell regularly or swap depending on what I feel like riding. Sometimes I wonder if it's a bit soulless to trade on some of the amazing bikes I've had but then I remember how much Joy I take in restoring a tired bike to its former glory or hitting the dh bike after months of only having an XC. I remember the big hit I bought that somehow was completely full of sand and mud, the bright yellow nuke proof scalp I built from scratch and broke my self falling off more times than I should have. I remember that I can spot the brand and model of pretty much every bike I see from its shape and colour scheme and I remember ever bike I've owned and ridden. The soul is there and it's not always just the ride. I don't get sentimental about a bike but it's safe to say bikes are in my soul.
  • 1 0
 haha, I remember the club roost bars being soo sick.. with the cross bar, across the rise for strength...
  • 24 3
 I couldn't agree more - when you think of the skill and effort that goes into making the bikes we ride, they almost seem like a steal. It's not just the bikes, though - someone had the idea to turn around the knobs on my HRIIs, someone else came up with the CNC schedule that cut out my stem... A complete modern mountain bike is an expression of the work and creativity of a massive number of people.
  • 2 9
flag game (Mar 19, 2015 at 0:59) (Below Threshold)
 turn around the knobs on HRIIs? sounds like a bad idea unless you're climbing muddy hills and never using your brakes
  • 2 0
 Look at an original high roller. Then look at an HRII. The ramps are on the other side of the crown lugs.
  • 1 0
 The HR 1 sucked, lets just not talk about that tire. high roller 2s have sharp braking edges and chamfered accelerating edges, hence the high roller part. Turn this around and you get a slippery chamfered braking edge and a slow rolling but grippy sharp accelerating edge on the knobs. you throw away the tires ability to brake and roll fast, for the sake of traction while pedalling with this setup.
  • 1 0
 @game with you man, my rear tire used to be a high roller in the dry season, high tractioner in the wet season
  • 20 0
 The idols in the ancient temples had souls because the people believed in them. Even dollars have value because we agree they do.
My dark blue 90’s nishiki Manitoba with an rst fork and old school trigger shifters had a name, and was my companion on many adventures. Right up until I broke my back and had to take a few years off, it was my baby. Years later when I pulled it out and threw better wheels and a manitou fork (dropped the weight by a few lbs to be sure) and put my wife on it it felt like moving in next to an old friend.
I name my bikes and I customize them. They are more than a machine, and I have a certain idolotrous love for them.
Read boy's life by Robert McCammon or It by Stephen King and you'll see the magic of a bicycle. Hi ho silver, away!
  • 5 0
 I want to know what you named your bike
  • 16 1
 Sorry. It's a secret just between me and her.
  • 3 0
 no other way to describe a bicycle other than how McCammon does in boys life, I have the page book marked.
  • 1 1
 @talotell, you and I usually agree but in this case we'll have to disagree, I honestly haven't been able to reach that point with my bikes. Everytime I sell a bike or a component I just let it go, my friends are always like..."you are a soulless motherfu#@&r how could you let that bike go?" it happened yesterday while selling a fork and a handlebar. They have history, I agree with that, but if I feel some emotion toward an inanimate object I see it as purely nostalgia and is emotionally healthier to let it go, if it is the time to go. Detach to what you're afraid to lose learn you must, Yoda said once.
I will take a look at the McCammon recommended book, it might tweak my standpoint.
  • 2 0
 I understand where you are coming from. I upgrade parts every chance i get and try to get a good deal on the old parts. What i am taking about is a little different. The bike becomes a symbol for all of the learning, all the growth, and all the discovery you shared with it during that time of your life. On that nishiki I learned about braking and line choice on rutted old fire roads. I gained freedom and a set of strong legs and lungs. I used to sing during the mile long ascent to my cousin's house. I even imagined it was my flying Japanese robot (I know I am a dork). I wouldn't trade it for my current rig, but I can tell you I wouldn't mind being able to go back to that time once in a while, just to enjoy being young and learning it all again.
  • 3 0
 I named my bike Trogdor.
  • 3 0
 The berminator!
  • 15 0
 It's a shame people get defensive over what they like to believe is the "right way to be a mountain biker". I just love to absorb it all and enjoy the sport/lifestyle/culture/whatever. Sometimes I love to spend some time drooling over the latest and greatest tech, sometimes not. Just the same, there's room in our sport for the Fest Series, FMB, Enduro series, World Cup, etc... Calling stuff out for not being "core" or some crap according to you is just crazy. At the end of the day it just boils down to enjoying bikes, do that however you please, but let's not crap all over another person's way of enjoying them.
  • 5 1
 Agreed! They are this way because they are emotional noobs when it comes to their biking. They need other people to tell them what is the right thing to do, and enemies to see what they don't want. Submission to peer group full of similar lost souls creates anxiety that is projected on enemies. The answer is inside, it's a freaking tough question "why do I ride" and one must dig into it, blow through cliches of "having fun", "overcoming fear and weakness" bladi bla.

I don't mean it's wrong, it is natural, most of us go through it so it should be widely understood, but if someone rides for 10 years, spends lots of time reading about MTB, watching movies and still throws crap at some people who act or rather OWN something that goes against his/hers beliefs, then something is wrong... these days there is so much avaliable media material covering all colors of MTB allowing everyone to have an insight what motivates certain people to do certain things in certain way that lack of perspective is just disturbing.
  • 6 0
 I would have assumed the internet would have enlightened and united peoples..instead it seems to fragment us into smaller and more disparate sub genres as well as encourage radicalism on either side of the fence.. which is the core of many of the problems we are facing today.
  • 4 1
 Sorry for making myself a statue here @buspilot, but this is what I am trying to preach since a year or so - that there is no point in chosing common sides. I end up being told that I am just babbling and that I should say whether some wheel size is bad or not, whether religion is bad or not according to this idea that one should have balls. It seems that people must have something tangible. As a result of this, in any long run confrontation, people naturally run out of arguments, because ,for fks sake, everything is relative, and it is exactly there where people insert science as a higher force determinig everything and it seems that science is always on the side of latest innovation, people criticizing it are uninformed trolls. If you don't like carbon for whatever reason you have - you are a troll not understanding science and engineering behind it. I don't like the way carbon scratches and so what?! I should still say it is awesome for the greater good while I find it repulsive for non-structural reasons. People want to know what is best, they must identify themselves with common best to have a point of reference... I could go on and one. The matter of a fact is that everything is relative and just because some thing can be true for a limited number of people does not mean that there are not differences in other subjects within that arrangement. In this way we feel that wheel size unifies us, that as soon as you say 26" FTW it means that you are a good rider, liking to throw whips, true to original values of MTB, but Jesus freaking Christ tell me first what are those values, you don't know, you don't fkng know, and I assure you that you are very likely to find that subconscious vision of yours among people who ride 29ers. It's all a mix, we are a bloody soup damn it! Big Grin
  • 5 0
 "It's been said that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could re-create the works of Shakesphere. Now, thanks to the internet, we know thats not true." Lol.

With that said, every bike is basically a "snapshot" of the cumulative effort of everyone that designed it. It's neat to see what the trends were or what they were thinking when they made it. I also enjoy the riiiiddddee maaaaannnn....
  • 3 0
 Excellent article @mikelevy . As one who has been on both sides of the equation (working in the industry & as consumer) I wholeheartedly agree with these sentiments. I still love my first Bontrager Race Lite (that I busted my butt to buy as a teenager). It lead me into the industry where I worked for said company for a time. I then followed one of the owners to a new company that started 3 doors away, assembling a fancy new boinger bike called the Tazmon. Having worked closely with and learned from the amazingly talented men & women that created these wonderful machines has given me a very real appreciation for them. And as @WAKIdesigns so masterfully pointed out, it doesn't matter that the directions of these two companies, or the products they manufacture, have turned out to be so different from one another, because in the end it's all a wonderfully blended soup of flavors that can appeal to all.
I do own a carbon 160mm squish rig that I absolutely love. I also love my circa '93 Hunter SS in much the same way. It's about the unique personalities they exhibit. I love all the new trick bits and reading about them (yes, even hub widths and wheel sizes), however I also still lust after John Tomac's old 1990 C-26, canti's and all.
Enjoy the soul of the sport, and don't poo on another's parade simply because they look at things differently. Cheers!
  • 6 0
 Is it the bikes of yor that we crave or the memories & feelings that we had when we rode them? I started mountain biking on advice from my doctor to strengthen my legs & keep in shape for skiing. My old crappy CCM was my 1st real mountain bike & I guess looking back, the sense of adventure of trying something new as well as finding a rush that was similar to skiing is what got me hooked. Fast forward 25 years but also with hindsight, yep I had as much fun back then as now but goddamn I wish I was still 25... Wink
  • 2 0
 I'm 100% with you. Bikes is fun because of the adventure... an excuse for exploring new places, for a road trip, for meeting new people, for staying in shape or getting good at something and pushing your boundaries. They're just a tool that you use for a great time. My allen keys don't have a soul and I don't give them names either and the bike does nothing by itself when it's left in the garage.
  • 1 0
 You put it better than I could PLC07, a bike is just a unanimated collection of machined parts. I've had 10 different bikes over the years, all had their strengths & weaknesses but the common factor in all was the fact that they rolled on 2 wheels, were powered by me & got my ass off the couch. Can I remember how each rode individually? Only if I really tried, but I can remember where each took me & how much fun it was (& still is).
  • 6 0
 This is a really good piece. There is a reverse-snobbery that exists on the trail that essentially says 'unless you're a sponsored rider, you should be making do with an old, entry level bike.' I just don't buy into that thinking. My bike isn't just something I ride - it's something I admire. Every day, as I walk through my garage to my car, I'll stop and admire the curves, the paintwork - the whole damn shooting match. Helps keep the romance alive.

And when I'm on the trail the bike always feels amazing. Any time it doesn't it's the fault of rider not machine. Sure, there are times when I'm at a race and I'll be passed by some kid who clearly has more talent and guts than I possess, who's riding some clapped out old piece of junk but that embarrassment passes and I still love my bike. If you can afford it, why the hell not?
  • 10 1
 I really want to hear why do you think gearboxes are dumb?
  • 5 1
 Whoa hold on now. I really really like reggae
  • 5 0
 I really hope gearboxes will be the future!
  • 2 1
 Weight and efficiency.... nothing wrong with modern derailleurs. When was the last time you broke one?
  • 4 3
 @jaydawg69, you're grossly misinformed or part of the corporate profit machine, especially when it comes to the statement about efficiency & how there's "nothing wrong with modern derailleurs". You must ride like a cvnt. :/ Even weight's can be pretty comparable. Comparing a derailleur to a gearbox is like comparing an EV to a gas car. Anyone that's not a total tard knows the older one's not better & why & that it should disappear, but the idiots & profiteers will always highlight some perceived flaw that hasn't had nearly the refinement & therefore opportunity to be evolved out that the old has.

The resistance to gearboxes here is the same as the resistance to EV's in the car world. Eventually the better technology will win out because someone that cares enough about doing things better instead of for profit will collect all necessary resources to do so. The bike world just needs its own Elon Musk to send $hitmano & $CAM back to the dark ages where they belong, or force them to do it right like most of us know they've been long capable of doing if they really cared about making better bikes. Rich giant corporations making silly claims about why they can't do a job when smaller companies with less resources yet far greater passion for their craft can do it is a major contributing factor to much of what is so disgusting about the world we live in. $hitmano & $CAM are as corrupt as GM & Chrysler.
  • 2 1
 Your rant was pretty funny but was just a rant and your comparison an EV to a gas car is way off. I don't see any data to back it up your statement. When was the last time you broke your derailleur?
  • 2 0
 Wow someone actually took the bait
  • 1 0
 @jaydawg69 It's been a few years for me, I stopped snapping derailleurs when I went Saint. I still do have a bunch of broken derailleurs from past 3 seasons here though, as I service friends' bikes too.

The problem isn't as much with durability, although it IS still one of the most fragile parts, but the chain rattling all around the place (Shadow+ was a huge step forward to remedy this, but not a fundamental solution), the derailleur being unsprung weight, proper setup sensitivity are all flaws of the design. Not to mention CONSTANTLY bent hangers. Unless you ride Expresso all the time. I'm not saying a gearbox is the ultimate solution to world hunger, but it could sure take shifting on a MTB to a whole new level.

I didn't mean to start a flame about gearboxes, I just want to hear why would people think a derailleur is better, because I feel like the derailleur is a ridiculously outdated idea as it is right now.
  • 1 0
 The derailleur has been around for a very long time but as soon as something that has been proved to be better (weight & efficiency), it will continue to be refined. I had a Hammerschmidt years ago and that was a heavy pos. I would be all for something new but I think it's decades away if ever.
  • 5 0
 might have already been brought up, but are carbon bikes going to have the longevity of alloy ones? in 15 - 20 years are any, that haven't been hoarded and never ridden, still going to be useful for riding? or will they be decomposing wall hangers?
  • 1 0
 every material will have a shelf life Tim. Depending on it's lifestyle that it's been lead down will determine how long it stays functional for.
  • 1 0
 @TimBigHitFSRII

Carbon fibre theoretically has an infinite fatigue life, but what tends to happen is the resin eventually degenerates due to environmental exposure and this then causes the overall composite structure to fail.
  • 3 0
 also interested to know the fatigue life of carbon bikes vs alu
  • 2 0
 to compare fatigue life, you would have to completely replicate the exact same conditions and tolerances to both frames. it could be done in a lab on the machines that run exactly the same course into both break/crack or become unrideable. this genuinely would be an interesting test to be done. They've done the tolerance comparison testing a few years ago and carbon came out on top by at least three times the max velocity weight.
  • 1 0
 I wonder if fatigue life of carbon is better than alu, why none of the manufacturers mentioned about that, which could be a selling point right? or maybe they just want to keep us uneducated so we change frame every 2-3 years
  • 1 0
 @shuwukong

carbon fibre composites behave like cromoly steel alloys in that they don't accumulate fatigue stresses with repeat loading (within the intended design load i.e. not massive crash impacts), which has always been an issue for aluminium alloys

See the extent the aerospace industry goes to with airframes made from aluminium alloys, they are very strict on logging flight time, stress events, and have a programme of managing stress / cracking in airframes.

I've seen first hand (as a bicycle workshop manager) aluminium alloy frames used for even mild cycling like city hybrids, develop cracks after 5 years as a result of fatigue stresses accumulating over time - every small bump / knock / load increases this accumulation
  • 1 0
 i see @hampsteadbandit, any idea what kind of environmental exposure actually degrades the resin? is it sunlight? scratch?
  • 1 0
 @shuwukong

Its exposure to ozone, ultra violet even high humidity with concentration of saline (living near the sea), in addition to chemical cleaners, greases used in bicycles.
  • 3 0
 I like to think I am a soulful mountain biker but I am a gear head at heart. My past few cars have been upgraded, by myself, for more power and better handling, my PC I built myself and have carefully over clocked it and, even before I had taken delivery of my new bike, I was picking out new parts. I just like shiny things and I like to know my equipment is far beyond my capabilities. But then all of my cars, PC and bikes have had a soul. They spoke to me, had personalities and I miss them all like old friends.
  • 6 0
 My old Big Hit was a total pig. Yet I loved it with all it's flaws because it was special. Nice article
  • 3 0
 2 machines I'm getting buried with. My 99 gsxr iv had since I was 19. That's been crashed rebuilt and ragged to death and never let me down, and my kona cadabra which is the same, kona got me the mtb bug proper and both got me through the very dark times and stress. They have a soul to me. Cuz without them I wouldn't be here.
  • 4 1
 Went into a surf shop once and saw the Al Merrick boards (with numerous imperfections as theyre handmade) were 3x as much as the chinese made ones. Not knowing this at the time I asked the guy why the price difference, he replied with 'The Merrick has soul man'. Loved that. I look at aluminum bikes the same way. Carbon bikes are more expensive and are a superior bike on paper but when I hold one in my hand it feels disposable, kind of like a chinese made surfboard.
  • 2 0
 Love this article. All bikes have a soul. When you get that feeling of being at one with your bike, taking on everything a mountain can throw at you, it doesn't matter how old or how pricy your bike is, or what you wear or where you ride.
  • 2 0
 Rocky Mountain RM7, my favorite bike I've ever owned, the back end was always baggy and flexy, I snapped the swingarm twice, snapped the headtube off once (ouch), all replaced under warranty (thanks Rocky) and it finally had to retire when cracks started appearing in the headtube again.... but the frame is still hanging in my garage, just loved that bike, despite its faults.
  • 2 0
 I think this is a tough one to call. @WAKIdesigns does make a good point about emotional noobs, but on reflection I'd be lying if I said I was fine just getting stoked on biking like the rest. Personally I really feel a lot of the issues people talk about (products and bling) is because of the changing demographic of mountain bikers; increasingly older and wealthier people who totally dig buying the best. It's now an affluent pastime and we probably knew this before but at the same time experienced some sort of disconnect.

It's just basic polarisation and it's very typical of modern society. In my experience I find that people who mock other bikes on the trail tend to have very shiny brand new kit; I've never had a guy riding a Deore groupset diss me! I find it hard to get stoked on the mutual joy of riding when that happens - but it's just the norm.
  • 1 0
 No doubt that a bike can feel like it has soul and it seems a lot of bikes today are lacking in that area. I've been riding since '93 and what was special about the early days was that basically everything was an experiment. Every bike and component was so unique and often the brainchild of just one or two people who were deep in the sport. So much of what was made was not just a machine for adventure, but a physical representation of the culture and soul of the sport and people who were making it live. We still have that today, but it's in the hands of those small garaginistas (as Jerry Vanderpool likes to say) who are hand crafting cutting edge culture with nothing but a few tools, a torch, and passion. The big company, carbon look-a-like bikes are more a representation of marketing, planned obsolescence, and committee thinking. We can still have bikes with soul, but we just have to look a little harder and maybe spend a little more to find them.
  • 1 0
 For me it's the freedom of how versatile my bike is. Think about it... You look upon a vast mountain range and know ( depending on fitness ) that your beautiful machine is going to help you conquer that. All you need is her and your skill, but let's be honest, with modern bikes it's mostly her doing the hard work
  • 3 0
 For myself, anything on wheels has soul. I can't remember any significant memory or event that I ever arrived at or was introduced to that didn't involve 2 whls or four.
  • 5 0
 Does a 27.5+ semi-fat bike with next gen hubs also have a soul?
  • 1 0
 It does if you love it.
  • 2 0
 some people love 'em a little chubby
  • 5 0
 ...and that is why we are marketing targets, gentleman
  • 1 0
 For me, it's the 1998 GT STS Lobo DH. Much like the Lambo Countach that every pre-teen had a poster of back then, I found out much later that in both cases that they were actually horribly handling pieces of garbage. They both still hold a place in my heart, though.
  • 1 0
 My first full suspension bike (and last carbon bike) was a `96 Trek Y with fancy stuff like White Industries cranks, Tune BB and aluminum crank bolts.

After over 10 years on the last one, I built my most recent bike over last winter. The first thing it got was a lobotomy. Aluminum frame, SLX crank, XT brakes. I tried hard to resist making it unique, but not better. It's there to ride.
  • 1 1
 It doesn't surprise me that Levy thinks gearboxes are dumb, but I'd hardly want Levy of all people to be an advocate for the concept. It wouldn't do the idea any favors. :/

All the industry needs is a power big (rich) enough to back a project by someone that actually cares about building better bikes & the derailleur will die just like the hugely inefficient CRUDE oil powered cars will. When the people that don't profit from failures & unsatisfactory performance (the vast majority of people) can actually get their hands on substantially better technology (which gearboxes are) then they'll use it. They'll buy it. If you don't believe me all I have to do is point to 26" wheels, 20 mm axles. Anything that's better than what's trend set by the industry at the time. If the industry that makes the shit agrees on what shit will flood the market, then that's how far the choice extends.
  • 2 1
 If you could offer to the average rider who only cares about the quality of the ride & the reliability of what they ride (as opposed to some profitable interest), a properly designed & competitively priced gearbox bike, with even 25% of the refinement that the derailleur system has had over the last 100 or w/e years the gearbox would win almost every single time, especially in the long run. Some people are afraid of what they don't understand, or afraid of adaptation/learning, especially if it can't be done with baby steps, but sometimes & this is one of those times, it all would be worth it to face those fears. It's not even that the advantages of gearboxes are so great that makes it the insurmountably better way to do the off-road bicycle drivetrain, it's the inherent disadvantages suffered by the crude, clunky, grossly obsolete derailleur that can never be refined out because a derailleur will always be a derailleur. It will always be a perpetual (profitable) fail. I made my bike a single speed because I hate them so much.

I ride trials, street, DJ & whatever industry bred trend whore term you wanna put on trail riding of any kind all on one gear with no problems. I miss the gears, I could use 5 or 7 but I don't miss what I'd have to sacrifice to use a derailleur ever again.
  • 6 1
 Why are gear boxs dumb?
  • 6 0
 Biggest complaint usually is the lower efficiency, personally I call bs on that. When they are measuring they are using brand new gear, how much efficiency is lost after a few miles and everything is muddy etc. A pinion with a belt drive I can pretty much guarantee will over the life span of the bike be way more efficient and cause alot less headaches. Pretty inefficient when a rear mech gets blown to bits and you are walking home
  • 4 7
 Less efficient, heavier, more expensive, less repairable, more proprietary and they generally shift like crap.
  • 3 6
 Also if your rear mech gets blown up you can usually set it up as a single speed to get you home. What happens when you snap a torque regulator in your shiny £1000 hub gear? You are walking home and you won't have a bike for a month while it goes back to the manufacturer to get fixed.
  • 6 1
 Gearboxes are not worse, they are the future. 100% reliable, maintenance free, not that much extra friction and the list goes on. Besides, the extra weight would be added to the bike's centre of mass, so no big deal there. And they shift real good, maybe @Patrick9-32 had a bad experience...
  • 5 0
 @Patrick9-32 havent heard a really word person that has been on either an alfine setup or pinion that has had any issues. I suspect there is a reason we put in gearboxes in cars, motos and generally anything that is used for transporting humans on wheels.

And a new Alfine hub is around 200$ for me to buy from Sweden, hardly expensive to keep a spare that you will likely not ever have to use any way.

But what would happen with SRAM and Shimano if we didnt need any of their drive train parts?

Heck they could do it as Honda did their last season with a rear mech in a box concept, same parts but out of the way and we get shifting while coasting and all the other benefits.
  • 5 0
 It's just his opinion. The 'stuff' Patrick lists are refutable and nothing more than uneducated opinion (you ride a ss bike and a bike with hussefelt cranks, I've ridden several gearbox equipped bikes and have rebuilt a planetary gearbox for a cnc machine........). Everyone's entitled to one. But hey, let's make up imaginary parts to break like 'torque regulator' and pretend we know what we are talking about. lol. imagine if the automotive or motorcycle industry was so fixated on a disposable transmission that is intrinsically more complicated in reality than some internal gearboxes (it's pushed as 'simple' but pay attention to how much is actually going on in terms of parts, pivots, a ratcheting rear hub, etc). If Shimano or Sram stepped up and put effort into a gear box (all we need is 10ish gears), we've have them out next season. But disposable and gearbox aren't synonymous.
  • 6 0
 Word! Next bike will be a handbuilt steel high pivot with a gearbox, would go Zerode if they could get with the program on geo side but until that happens I am on the hunt! Nicolai looks super sweet but holy bananas price tag
  • 3 0
 I've owned several Nicolai bikes. They are worth the money if you want an extremely well made, durable bike that works very well. But yes, they are expensive. I'd like a pinion next bike.
  • 3 3
 Ok, so I can see I have raised some hackles here so...

1- @Caiokv Nothing mechanical is 100% reliable. Gearboxes might breakdown less often but when they do breakdown they will not be able to be fixed by a home mechanic.

2- @johan90 All of your examples with motors can't really be applied to bicycles as weight and efficiency are not anything like as much of an issue as you have power to spare. Alfine 8 hubs don't really have the range to replace a derailleur drivetrain, even a 1x system on their own.

3- @atrokz 1- I haven't updated my PB profile in a while, my new bike has 10 whole gears. They shift perfectly, it is pretty dope. 2- I have ridden plenty of hub and gearbox gear systems from alfines, rohloffs, pinions Nuvincis etc and they all shift either poorly or reluctantly, especially when pedalling. (other than the Nuvinci which, other than being a little heavy at the shifter is ok but just weird as it has no steps between gears and you can select any ratio) 3- Rohloff hubs have nylon torque regulator pins which are designed to break if you over torque the hub to stop you damaging the gears. I imagine other internal gears have similar things too. That was just an example of something that could go wrong. 4- Shimano make the alfine 8 and the alfine 11, Sram make the G8, the dual drive and I think one more, there isn't a conspiracy from them to not make the things, people just aren't buying them.

I am sorry I pissed you guys off but I hope you can see that I wasn't just spewing unfounded bullshit. I hope you have a good day
  • 5 0
 You have ridden, or you have pushed on around in a parking lot? Actual tests indicate there isn't much of a difference in terms of resistance (efficiency) once the seals break in, and a dirty drivetrain pretty much cancels out advantage. The Rohloff is one of the most reliable systems on the planet, far surpassing any other bicycle drivetrain by tens of thousands of miles. In fact, I'd say it's proven itself quite well. The Alfine is a hub gearbox, just like the rohloff, and is a stopgap for what we really want. If Shimano presented a real IGB in partnership with a major frame mfg, you better believe people would scoop it up. The time is ripe in this world of $10k bikes.
  • 3 0
 I would just love to get a gearbox tucked in the middle of my frame, no more deraileur haging from my frame!
  • 1 0
 @Patrick9-32 I see your point but I doubt anyone but a XC rider would notice any impact of a slightly more inefficient drivetrain, we the "yo bro" crowd dont time runs or care if the bike is just passable on the climb. We want to bomb down and a few % points less efficient drivetrain is not of a real world concern, when we have 6 plus suspension and 2.3+ wide tires.

The Alfine 11 has 400% something range I believe, which is more than I currently have with my 34-11 spread and I cant imagine that it couldnt be increased.

Best compromise I think would be Honda's solution on their RN01, SRAM and Shimano could continue to sell pretty much the same components but we get better reliability and better performance, sure they wont sell as many mechs but still for the most part they can continue to cash in.
  • 2 4
 @Patrick9-32, you're one of those people, like the common religitard, that are too uninformed & straight up dumb to realize how uninformed & straight up dumb you are. The more you know, the more you (should) realize you don't know. Do you know what market those $hitmano & $CAM hubs are targeted at? They make those hubs for commuter/city/strolling kinds of bikes that would never see a broken derailleur anyway. They are cheaply built & do their job better than a derailleur would, yet a derailleur is far more suitable in those applications than on an off-road bike.

Arguments about moto & auto not needing to be concerned about weight & efficiency are also pretty ignorant & dumb. Performance, cost & wear & tear are all tied to weight, no matter the vehicle. The only place that argument carries any "weight" is with something like a tractor where you want weight for traction & performance is a secondary concern.

If derailleurs were a good idear for anything besides profitability they'd be used on motos & autos too. Those machines have so many more things to fail, they don't need shitty drivetrain parts for profits.

A gearbox doesn't go in the rear wheel it goes in the frame, where the BB is. That's the right place for it & for the center of mass of the rig in general. Low & centered. If you wanna argue that road bikes & even XC bikes are fine with derailleurs that's not a "horrible" argument, but on more aggressive bikes, especially DH (where your weight argument breaks down even further) with all the violence the drivetrain is subjected to, derailleurs are almost as dumb as the Bible. The other thing a derailleur provides is tensioning for variable chainstay lengths caused by clunky, gimmicky concraptions deliberately convoluting the suspension process to market something new/different to masses of moron tech wieners.
  • 5 0
 so angry...
  • 1 0
 I would never get a tattoo of a person. I have my dirt jump bike on my ribs. I think that says a lot about where my commitments and priorities lie.
  • 1 0
 I was expecting something metaphorical about the bike having a soul. I think you are saying personal choice should make you happy. Not what others tell you makes you happy.
  • 2 0
 That was good but you got me very curious about gear boxes care to explain why you think they are dumb?
  • 2 0
 Jahman everyting is ayereet!
  • 1 0
 Congratulations Mike! You managed to post without SRAMs cock in your mouth for once.
  • 2 0
 I definitly speak to my bike
  • 1 0
 This is perhaps too much for me. I love my bike but i dont think it has a soul
  • 1 0
 Bikes doesnt have souls.... its what you make of it....
  • 1 0
 too much reggae
  • 1 1
 Bang on.







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.057883
Mobile Version of Website