juliocampos

theres so much interesting little factors that come into play and thats why i believe this is a great poll right now. from mentions like improving the used market by providing hardware for older frames and making bikes last a little longer, making used bikes safer. that also might lead to an opportunity for recycling all the damaged materials from factories and stuff like that. theres all the concerns and hidden details regarding "limited lifetime" and all that. my question is: are brands willing to make whats "right" or "best for the customer" if they had to spend more money, have more work and slightly increase the risk of less profit to do so? when specialized made the enduro EVO model, it lasted in production line for around 4 years but had warranties allowing for 5 and 3 years for rocker arm and rear triangle. they discontinued it in 2016 so in 2017,18,19 there was lots of people around the world that didnt had replacements parts available for these bikes and still specialized didn't think that giving them a new frame was a fair option, unfortunately. as a previous 2015 enduro evo owner, that was the worst warranty experience that people could possibly have. my best warranty experience so far was trek. i ride mostly two bikes right now and thats why they're both from trek. a lot of healthy improvements can be made here. perhaps we should try getting brands just a little closer to their customers in some ways?

so considering 3 riders with 3 different lines: lets say Boggs, Riddle and Genon boggs got the most natural, technical, least touched terrain. solid consistency and amplitude, carried his own moto inspired moves and style, but no spin combos; Riddle got a steep, well shaped terrain, went big, has clearly put the necessary attitudes and efforts to earn his spot in this event aside being a rookie, also carried his own style throughout the day but no spin combos too; Genon has one of the most well shaped venues on the event, has put some serious opposite variantions on very scary features with his solid consistency aswell, but also no spin combos. i wonder if this is still judged based on slopestyle elements or if freeride already has its own path of judging riders? given the fact these 3 people had very minor improvements in score while showing their unique characteristics.. is a poorly executed flip table over a huge shaped kicker worth more points than a opposite 360 out of a flat gap? are the judges relying on actual line choice, efforts and uniqueness shown by each rider or they just care about how much spin combos can be thrown in a row? like, does style and trick/spin variety even counts these days?

worderful to see so much special features and specific settings when it comes to gravity riding. anyone else wonders why his session is not a high pivot one? :)

i believe sam is actually the one trying to keep it real and theres a lot more to show than it actually is allowed to show. that is due a lot of reasons like most riders being generously sponsored, which would require more manipulation about the content they produce and the contents where they might appear. so, lets say a well sponsored rider gets a banger lap of interest to a lot of sponsors or brands included in an event, and also the event page is interested. there's contracts, media output limitations and a ton of pressure from all sides. whos posting it first?

i think 40mm less travel is already far out of the original status legacy :( isn't this a reasonable time to comeback with the enduro EVO line?

i wish i had no complaints but i actually do. brazil could have bigger mountains but it dont thanks to nature's will. but i also wonder... are mountains and earthquakes up for trades these days? hahah