Enduro/AM - The Weight Game

PB Forum :: Pinkbike Groups
Enduro/AM - The Weight Game
Author Message
flag Axxe
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 10:07 Quote
iggzdaloc wrote:
Sounds like you don't know how to turn bud

Yeah, sure. Did you pat yourself on the back while typing that?
flag Axxe
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 10:08 Quote
Tsoxbhk wrote:
Axxe, average riders are faster than they have ever been. And it's not like people's skills are coming along that fast. Plain and simple new bikes are faster than old bikes. Meaning current geo is faster than bikes of the past. Just because you cannot corner does not mean everybody else is in the same boat.

Not everything is a race. And I just love the arrogance. I think it’s you who needs a knuckle dragging barge to get a fast line.
flag R-M-R
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 10:28 Quote
Axxe wrote:
Tsoxbhk wrote:
Axxe, average riders are faster than they have ever been. And it's not like people's skills are coming along that fast. Plain and simple new bikes are faster than old bikes. Meaning current geo is faster than bikes of the past. Just because you cannot corner does not mean everybody else is in the same boat.

Not everything is a race. And I just love the arrogance. I think it’s you who needs a knuckle dragging barge to get a fast line.

The arrogance is assuming your handling preferences equate to inherent design superiority.

A more stable bike can go faster. Whether that makes it better is subjective. Similarly, a less stable bike, as you prefer, can be more agile. Again, whether that makes it better is subjective.

Length is one of the ways to make a bike more stable. Length - and stability in general - are not inherently good or bad. Most people seem to agree that current bikes, which are more stable, are more enjoyable, as evidenced by the popularity of current geometry. Thus:

1. There is no inherent superiority of more vs. less stability.
2. Your preference is in the minority.

Nothing wrong with an agile bike. It's not my preference, but I'm glad they exist for folks who like them. Let's not equate our preferences and beliefs with inherent truth.
flag Axxe
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 10:34 Quote
No, I do not assume anything about my preferences. You just got triggered.
Shorter wheelbase and smaller wheel bikes are more maneuverable. That is a fact. It is an inherent trait that happened to align with my preferences.
It is only one of many design traits, but it is one.
flag Arnoodles
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 10:44 Quote
Trying to argue with axxe is inherently bad.
flag R-M-R
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 10:47 Quote
Axxe wrote:
No, I do not assume anything about my preferences. You just got triggered.
Shorter wheelbase and smaller wheel bikes are more maneuverable. That is a fact. It is an inherent trait that happened to align with my preferences.
It is only one of many design traits, but it is one.

If we assume less maneuverability is equivalent to more stability, which I would say is accurate within the parameters of best-practice bike design, then yes, you did equate your preferences to inherent superiority:

Axxe wrote:
Less maneuverability is inherently bad.

Not everyone who disagrees with you is "triggered".
flag newbermuda
O+
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 10:59 Quote
Arnoodles wrote:
Trying to argue with axxe is inherently bad.

its like an argument with bblb but about a topic that no one else would argue about
flag swan3609
O+
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 11:03 Quote
My 26" DJ bike with carbon wheels is way more maneuverable than my XL Enduro 29er and even my XL Hardtail 29. Maybe that's what Axxe should ride from now on. I know the times I rode the DJ on trails, it scared the shit out of me because it was so "maneuverable" at speed.
flag tom666
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 11:14 Quote
Axxe wrote:
R-M-R wrote:
Axxe wrote:
There is absolutely no way around longer wheelbase. It was and will be less maneuverable.

Yes, but that's not inherently a bad thing.

Yes, it is inherently a bad thing. How bad, that is personal.

I think you're wrong and RMR is right.

It's a spectrum and no position on that spectrum is inherently bad, only a different compromise that may or may not suit particular people and riding locations etc.

As you increase wheelbase you gain stability and lose manoeuverability. I would argue that it's only slow speed manoeuverability you lose really - once you're going fast a 20, 50 or even 100mm increase in wheelbase is not significant at all to what corners you can make.

If you ride slow pedally XC you probably want that 2012 geo - you don't need very much stability so you might as well go short. If you ride fast open trails though there will be a very different perception of what is a good compromise - you want that downhill bike wheelbase because slow speed handling is not valuable to you, but stability is.
flag whitebirdfeathers
O+
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 11:31 Quote
sosburn wrote:
Arnoodles wrote:
Trying to argue with axxe is inherently bad.

its like an argument with bblb but about a topic that no one else would argue about

Axxe models himself after BBLB but does a poor imitation.
flag its-chris
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 11:31 Quote
To be honest, since I tried longer bikes, I have never looked back into short wheelbase / reach numbers
flag sherbet
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 11:54 Quote
His avatar represents his opinions pretty well.
flag Soupherb
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 11:56 Quote
sherbet wrote:
His avatar represents his opinions pretty well.

He is ok really, try giving him a cookie & he may surprise you

Give him credit, he stays put
flag dingus
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 12:07 Quote
whitebirdfeathers wrote:
sosburn wrote:
Arnoodles wrote:
Trying to argue with axxe is inherently bad.

its like an argument with bblb but about a topic that no one else would argue about

Axxe models himself after BBLB but does a poor imitation.

He's the Bud Lite bblb.
flag ajax-ripper
Posted: Oct 26, 2019 at 12:25 Quote
Arnoodles wrote:
Trying to argue with axxe is inherently bad.
I just skip over his posts now and pretend he doesn't exist.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.048928
Mobile Version of Website