oribikes

like Levy said, should all of the posts work correctly and for a long time (they, generally speaking dont) the LEV or static cable design would be better surely, BUT SINCE these posts have bigger more glaring issues than the inconvenience of setting up your cable so it isnt dragging on your tire when the post is down... the cable position, head or collar, cannot be considered a deal breaker in light of much bigger problems. its like saying your beef cow looks good... but the meat is horrible... levy just wants a steak.

when oiled and tightened up, the KS supernatural 150 can be lifted from the seat without it slipping upward in travel. when i first got it the collar and the nut at the bottom were a little loose, and it got those characteristic stanchion scratches... but since i've tightened everything up.... that scratch hasnt grown at all. +1 KS... +2 LEV!

are they making a saint mid-cage? i didnt think they were. sucks they didnt think to make the cage what a few mm longer so that it could wrap a 11-36... that ONE link you're talking about WAKI. 11-36 IS the reason to ride a 10s 1x over 1x9 IMO.

if pinkbike wasnt around i would be riding my 26"... alas, reading about 29ers. haha...

torx is the way to go. mr. allen, or whoever invented the hex?, im sure would agree that torx is better and should be the new standard. personally cant wait for torx standard as a mechanic

the government wants to remove liability for people being hurt on these trails... by making their own trails? i understand how it works, but why? if the state had no idea about these trails then why is it their responsibility to pay you when you break your sh*t? you could argue they should know about them, but why? you want them to spend more money of your money to hire a bunch of overpaid loons to 'oversee' everything that -the people who care about the area and its environmental soundness MORE than anyone who could be paid to do the same thing- are doing? people need to vote and get involved. WA state wants to take tax payer money to 1. tear down working responsible trails 2. build more trails in another area - why not hire one civil engineer who can sign off on trail builds for $40k/yr instead of spending a considerable bit more to build gov't trails and parks? WE ARE DOING A FINE JOB STFO. how is it not an option to sign a waiver saying 'if im found broken in half, it was my own fault, thank you' (in more legal terms) so that WA does not have to feel liability pressures? hire that civil engineer to wander around the trails and watch/guide volunteers into good enviro practices? how could guys like @retoid be against this? they couldnt. they do a good job already, and with a busy civil engineer and some waivers, WA could be liability free, the forests protected, the riders happy, the county generating income, volunteers busy (like they always have been). it seems so simple... am i missing something or how is something like this not implemented before WA destroys everything and sets a precedent for other states?