blinkpike

"More esoteric" write-in poll options: 1) High pivot needs to be the norm. Especially as wheels have gotten larger, so now most bikes have an axle path that's moving forward through the entire range. And by high pivot, I mean if there isn't an idler pulley mounted several inches above the center of the bottom bracket, then the pivot isn't high enough. 2) Noseless saddles. The front half of 99% of mountain bike seats is worthless. See the Duopower Arrow or anything from BiSaddle for example. But even those are an inch or two longer than they need to be. So anyway if you see a guy riding an older high-pivot downhill bike with a single-crown, full-range cassette, dropper, and a noseless saddle, that might be me. There aren't enough high-pivot options that aren't downhill bikes. But older DH bikes are not far from modern enduro geometry, and bikes are just collections of interchangeable parts, so it all worked out.

Is this going to be on the new Blue Steel line? I heard it was huge, and Nico had a hand in building it, but I didn't realize it Fest huge. Might have to make the trip out there...

Yes.

@pmhobson: I agree that ranked-choice is better in theory, approval voting just has the advantage of being very easy to explain and understand. Being a mathematically inclined nerd, I want RCV,, but being fed up with two-party polarization I'd still be delighted to see the US switch to approval voting. And any time I have a chance to influence a poll at work or elsewhere I will harass the poller until they switch from radio buttons to checkboxes. :)

aka "approval voting" As in, "I approve of 12, 30 and 34 winning this election." This how ballots should work. "Pick one" is just plain dumb.

The key making Boa last is refrain from tightening them too much. And by "too much" I mean "enough to stop your feet from floating around in them." I have a pair that I liked until I figured that out. Now they're just my everyday walking around shoes, because I don't like sloppy footwear for any form of sports.

@freestyIAM: I guess my Jedi didn't use the "patented Canfield balance formula" then because the pivot starts well above top of the chainring - which is why it has an idler. That design kicks ass. It's the only bike I've ridden that truly rides differently. Aligning the pedaling force with the IC is marketing speak for putting the IC at the top of the chainring. Because the top of the chainring is where the pedaling forces come from. With millimeters of deviation as the suspension compresses. The rest is just marketing hype. Don't fall for it.

Looks like the effective pivot point is roughly where the top of the chainring would be, making it behave pretty much like every other bike. The cool thing about the Jedi is that the effective pivot point is much higher, hence the rearward axle path, hence the better bump handling, longer wheelbase at full compression, etc. It even climbs well (other than the weight that comes with a DH bike of course). It's weird how half the industry is catching on to high (effective) pivots and half is still stuck in the low pivot mindset.

@Kirky86: You ever seen a BMW turn signal light up? Me neither.

@nismo325: Surely. A gearbox will add about 2kg. (A chain system would add about half that to a conventional frame anyway.)