g-42

@mtmc99: The OG Reverb's update from finicky hydraulics to a simpler, more reliable design always seemed like it should be just around the corner, being such an obvious miss. Based on that, I'm not too sure...

@Canadmos: Agreed - my 210mm OneUp v2 has now withstood something like 4 years of 5+ rides a week under my heavy ass. The occasional cleaning (15 minutes), one "rebuild" (the kit costs $18 and consists of a wiper seal and a couple bushings and the job only takes a few minutes longer than the cleaning), and it's still working great. Value for money is pretty epic on that one.

Yep, rally coverage is a great guide for this. People love a good story, and a multi-stage event is full of good stories, with people making up time in sketchy sections of track, mechanicals throwing riders for a loop, competitors helping each other with parts and tools to keep each other competing, and so on. If done right, that could be an amazing media package - not for live broadcast, probably, but for the day after, to consume on Monday (there's a reason PB does "Movies for your Monday" - bored people in their offices are a ready audience).

Well, it happened in April, and it is plenty foolish...

@paja-tousek: Sorry, mis-typed - the T3 was sold in the US as the Vanagon (still rear engine/RWD). What are we on now, T7?

Looks like a VW Transporter (well, the passenger version of it). Doesn't look much like the old microbus anymore (they went front engine, FWD in the 90s with the T3, which was brought to the US as the Eurovan, and have had several generations since).

Agreed - proportion is hugely important. Gazelles really benefit from steeper STA climbing and longer rear triangle descending (so they're not way out there over the rear wheel). Apes benefit from longer front triangles and higher stacks. And then there's weight - as Christina pointed out, lighter riders aren't necessarily better off with beefy components (super stiff sidewalls and heavy wheels/tires don't buy them that much reliability but impose huge cost in terms of weight and sluggishness). What would be really handy would be bike reviews being done on more than just the one size (usually a L, sometimes a M) with generally the same size testers. Yep, it's a lot more work to test two or three different sizes of the same model with two or three sets of testers to see if they scale properly or if the smaller/larger sizes are severely compromised, but without that, there's just not a lot of value in a review for a person who's NOT 5'10" and 170# (and no, comments on "size specific chainstay length" don't make up for that). Some bikes tend to scale really well across the range - there's a lot of thought given to size specific suspension tunes, slightly different STA, appropriate stack height, maybe size specific rear triangle length. Others scale horribly.

Around here, nice kids bikes tend to hold a good amount of resale. We have hundreds of kids riding in after school bike clubs, and stuff sells to the next family as quickly as it's outgrown.

Thing is, while personal gnar declines, so does our tolerance for impact. I personally don't need to ride faster, and don't need to hit bigger stuff, than would be perfectly appropriate for, say, a typical 130mm trail bike. But man, my battered body appreciates some cush, so 150mm trail bike it is.

Damn, XC racers really are a different breed. That's some next level toughness there.