# Anybody think most new bikes are ugly



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

I do, especially after seeing this piece of crap, a Zaskar 100 9R Carbon Expert...

WTF...facepalm










I would take this gorgeous 90s Zaskar any day of the week over whats pictured above...










I guess my question is, and I'm using G.T as an example, but does anyone else feel similar about new bikes,


----------



## Fred Smedley (Feb 28, 2006)

Ya you have a point, but who looks at the bike while you are riding?


----------



## Glide the Clyde (Nov 12, 2009)

Personally, I think the original Ritchey mtb designs with the seat tube higher than the stack and long chain stays are ugly, same with the first Stumpys that copied the TR design. I also think every era of mtbing has had its ugly bikes, including today's designs. JMO


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

Fred Smedley said:


> Ya you have a point, but who looks at the bike while you are riding?


Probably the people who watch you go by, and sometimes me if Im downtown and ride by a window I see my reflection in. Sorry, that probably sounds trollish, and I really dont mean to be, but seriously, its like an ugly grirlfriend I wouldnt want to be seen with.


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

Malibu412 said:


> Personally, I think the original Ritchey mtb designs with the seat tube higher than the stack and long chain stays are ugly, same with the first Stumpys that copied the TR design. I also think every era of mtbing has had its ugly bikes, including today's designs. JMO


I agree, Im all for innovation, and the 80s brought us some killer bikes in the 90s, we learned alot, up to a point anyway. Im of the opinion thats one reason we have 29s, the envelope was pushed along time ago with 26 inch FS and HT bikes, thus also one reason we have Zaskars that arnt even made out of the same material, nevermind the looks. :nono:


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

My modern bike looks sweet, IMHO


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

It does...then again, cant really go wrong with moots. Important thing is you like it and have fun, regaurdless of what me or anyone else says..


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

jeffgothro said:


> its like an ugly grirlfriend I wouldnt want to be seen with.


Break up with your bike and get a prettier one. 

I like a lot of today's bikes. I like the Yetis, I like every single Soulcraft that has gone out his door. I like anything Inglis makes. Yes, I like BP's Moots. I love my modern rider.

Old bikes, new bikes, there's a bike for every curmudgeon in every era.


----------



## Machianera (Feb 5, 2011)

I like this:


----------



## Naturally Aspirated (Aug 17, 2011)

Out... most old bikes make me want to throw up. Not really, but they look really ghetto.


----------



## GMF (Jan 10, 2004)

I dunno... I think a lot if the ugliness comes from the graphics, and a lot of the boringness comes from the ubiquity and similarity of the carbon frames. But honestly, that sounds a lot like a neon splatter paint and steel hardtails back in the day. I don't really have any problem with the modern bikes other than what often feels like fabricating market differentiation and all these new "standards". FWIW, I think bikes like the new Ibis Mojo Carbon look pretty sweet. 

There is definitely a place for the classic metal tubed hardtail or full rigid bike, but that is decidedly a "vintage" thing that is flavored by the form follows function aesthetic of the time.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

Naturally Aspirated said:


> Out... most old bikes make me want to throw up. Not really, but they look really ghetto.


You just stepped into the lions den.
Sure there were plenty getto crap bikes put out back then....the thing is though, there still is. 
So what do you consider getto and what is your "grail" bike today?


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

Machianera said:


> I like this:


I don't. 

I like the stem. Otherwise it looks like it was sat on by someone too heavy.

But that's only my view, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as they say.

As for the original question, yeah, there is a lot of ugly bikes out there. I'm always amused by the marketing around hydroforming. "Our unique hydroforming process allows unprecedented manipulation of the tube profiles to provide a light and strong bike that has a look all its own".

Yet somehow they all look the same, go figure.

I like GTs but I have to admit that white thing could look better. The purple Zaskar is sweet.

Grumps


----------



## Drummerboy1975 (Nov 24, 2011)




----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

jeffgothro said:


> I do, especially after seeing this piece of crap, a Zaskar 100 9R Carbon Expert...
> 
> WTF...facepalm
> 
> ...


The last production mountain bike that really did it for me for the 1988 Romo Blizzard. But walking into my LBS and seeing an 853 Niner with that pretty fork makes me feel that all is not lost.


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

Geebus, that thing is beyond ugly!

Grumps


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> Geebus, that thing is beyond ugly!
> 
> Grumps


Which thing did you have in mind there, Grumps?


----------



## sbsbiker (Dec 1, 2007)

Sorry to disagree but I thought those purple GTs looked bad back then and look both dated and bad now. I never liked the seatstay design, and the cable set up was awful. 

I do like bushpigs new Moots! Classy!


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

Drummerboy1975 said:


>


I can't even process how that bike is pedalled when seated...


----------



## yo-Nate-y (Mar 5, 2009)

Step 1: hand on the grips
Step 2: feet on the pedals
Step 3: ??????
Step 4: BRAAAAAAAP


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

yo-Nate-y said:


> Step 1: hand on the grips
> Step 2: feet on the pedals
> Step 3: ??????
> Step 4: BRAAAAAAAP


Nice!


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

mainlyfats said:


> Which thing did you have in mind there, Grumps?


The partially dismantled motorcross bike, the one you questioned the pedalling of. Sorry, I wasn't clear on which bike I was commenting.

And again, it's only my view.

Are they 24" wheels on that thing!?

Grumps


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

Alot of NEW DH bikes I do like, I just dont like the HT and FS bikes out now days. What I find ugly most and alot of companys are doing it are the frames where he downtube bends before conecting to the headtube.

I dont like this DH bike pictured below...looks like Walmart meets Brooklyn Machine Works...










And I too had a modern bike, sold it a while back...


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

girlonbike said:


> Break up with your bike and get a prettier one.
> 
> I like a lot of today's bikes. I like the Yetis, I like every single Soulcraft that has gone out his door. I like anything Inglis makes. Yes, I like BP's Moots. I love my modern rider.
> 
> Old bikes, new bikes, there's a bike for every curmudgeon in every era.


I did, I broke up with my 2009 G.T. Peace 9R in favor of a 1994 G.T. Psyclone. :thumbsup:


----------



## jibbajabb (Feb 27, 2012)

I agree, I like the older ones myself.


----------



## KDXdog (Mar 15, 2007)

I'm not a fan of the bent down tube at the head tube connection.

I just looks like the bike was driven into a wall.

I know the reasons for it, I just don't like the way it looks.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

Some are ugly, some are pretty, era makes no difference.

I actually think that white GT looks sharp for what it is. Not so much the purple one.

Look of the bent downtube design kind of bugs me too, but I'm getting more used to it.


----------



## hairstream (Apr 20, 2008)

i think the modern fits into the lineup back there...


----------



## surly357 (Jan 19, 2006)

geez, what's not to like about the aesthetics of 'modern' bikes ?


----------



## redwing24 (Aug 16, 2008)

I like both, but old school all the way!!


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

KDXdog said:


> I'm not a fan of the bent down tube at the head tube connection.
> 
> I just looks like the bike was driven into a wall.
> 
> I know the reasons for it, I just don't like the way it looks.


I agree, but I find the bent downtube before the BB junction (ie: Giant Trance) even yechier.

Hehehe, some design graduate working on a CAD program at some bike company is thinking what a great job he's doing and grumpy old sods like me are yelling at the pages of the bike magazine to "just give us a triangle!"

Grumps


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

surly357 said:


> geez, what's not to like about the aesthetics of 'modern' bikes ?


Looks like it's hooked up to life support and someone hasn't made the decision to pull the plug.

Grumps


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> Looks like it's hooked up to life support and someone hasn't made the decision to pull the plug.
> 
> Grumps


Damn...I think we lost him...


----------



## guywitharitchey (Nov 29, 2011)

surly357 said:


> geez, what's not to like about the aesthetics of 'modern' bikes ?


Looks like the alien that attacked Sigourney Weaver

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## vylanous (Feb 28, 2012)

I dunno... these all beat those square tube atrocities that I see around.


----------



## rudymexico (Aug 14, 2010)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> I agree, but I find the bent downtube before the BB junction (ie: Giant Trance) even yechier.
> 
> Hehehe, some design graduate working on a CAD program at some bike company is thinking what a great job he's doing and grumpy old sods like me are yelling at the pages of the bike magazine to "just give us a triangle!"
> 
> Grumps


I am a fan of Double Diamond design, I am with you I want a triangle :thumbsup:


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> I agree, but I find the bent downtube before the BB junction (ie: Giant Trance) even yechier.


My total pet peeve there.

Curves with meaning or purpose? All good. But something that's putting the frame further into harms way?

"Hey look, we bought a nice new hydroform machine, let's see how many places we can manipulate the tubes now"

WTF? :skep:

And strangely the uniformity of double diamond steel frames from BITD, doesn't chafe me near as much as the same trait in crabon fibber....


----------



## trailville (Jul 24, 2006)

My main gripe is the modern rigid setup (which are getting more popular). A designed-for-suspension hardtail frame with a suspension-corrected rigid fork. So wrong.


----------



## broomhandle (Jul 27, 2006)

Drummerboy1975 said:


>


Holy F, I would be so embarsed to ride that. "uh, yeah its my 12 year old neighbors bike...."

and then ride off making motor bike noises....


----------



## jtmartino (Jul 31, 2008)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> My total pet peeve there.
> 
> Curves with meaning or purpose? All good. But something that's putting the frame further into harms way?
> 
> ...


I know for Giant bikes the DT bend is required to maintain appropriate geometry with the Maestro suspension design when under compression. I don't think they look very nice though.


----------



## tl1 (Dec 21, 2003)

*There's a lopt of unsightly bikes around*



IF52 said:


> Some are ugly, some are pretty, era makes no difference.
> 
> I actually think that white GT looks sharp for what it is.


...from all eras. I can't imagine why anyone would think that new GT Zascar looks ugly though.


----------



## Raptorguy89 (Feb 26, 2012)

No way!


----------



## unicornmusk (Mar 1, 2012)

hairstream said:


> i think the modern fits into the lineup back there...


You can tell a lot about a person by the guitar they play.

martin:thumbsup:


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

unicornmusk said:


> You can tell a lot about a person by the guitar they play.


As if the no color allowed wasn't a big enough hint.


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

unicornmusk said:


> You can tell a lot about a person by the guitar they play.
> 
> martin:thumbsup:


I saw that too...I had a Martin D28, was awesome, but sold it, still prefer my 14 year old 700$ Japan made Avarez Artist AD60BK over the Martin. I also have an newish unknown year butterscotch blond mexican Fender Telecaster...it totally rocks. :thumbsup:

SOLD









SOLD









MY BABY...YOU HAVE NO IDEA I LOVE THIS AS MUCH AS MY BIKE


----------



## unicornmusk (Mar 1, 2012)

Those are some beautiful git-fiddles. I have a martin dx1, simple yet great sound. I also have an epiphone dot that I have put a metal flake paint job and a bigsby tremolo bar on. Plus my peavey impact (strat clone, made in the usa greatly underrated) and my b.c. rich mockingbird for those metal moments. Like you I love my axes just as much as my bikes. I wish I was better at both.


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

unicornmusk said:


> Those are some beautiful git-fiddles. I have a martin dx1, simple yet great sound. I also have an epiphone dot that I have put a metal flake paint job and a bigsby tremolo bar on. Plus my peavey impact (strat clone, made in the usa greatly underrated) and my b.c. rich mockingbird for those metal moments. Like you I love my axes just as much as my bikes. I wish I was better at both.


Wish I was better at both too. Actually, I'm very happy with my bike skills...to a fault perhaps, dont get me wrong, I'm damn good, I consider myself at the very least expert class, if I didnt smoke cigys, pro mabie, and I'll back my mouth up, but I tend to flaunt it to much, I have a big head when it comes to bikes, my skills, and knowledge, and I tend to talk to much sh*t. <--------- (see above rant... lol )

Guitars, needs lots of work there, then again, guitar is sort of an ongoing thing as you know, at best I consider myself still intermediate, I'm at that stage where I'm finally starting to get decent at barre chords and all the little tricks like hammer-ons and pull-offs, I can play most things, with practice of course and little instruction. I took a couple years off from guitar, came back better than ever, (very common when take time off as you know), and I'm having a blast on guitar again. Point I guess, as you know, we all were novices once, its not how good you are, but that you have fun.

Side note, Back in the day (BMX days 1975-2000) I was always wanting to out due my friends, truth be told, some where braver than I and did bigger badder stunts, jumps, etc than me, or stuff I just couldnt do...but you know what...we sure had fun nonetheless. Nothing ment more to me than riding with my friends and jumpimg our bikes and just having a good ol' time.

Peace...and rock on bro! :thumbsup:


----------



## hairstream (Apr 20, 2008)

taylor.


----------



## rigidftw (Mar 21, 2010)

I like my new one, too. especially the drivetrain


----------



## trodaq (Jun 11, 2011)

I like all kinds of bikes from all different eras. That being said the purple Zaskar is just butt ugly to me


----------



## Canyon139 (Feb 29, 2012)

I much Prefer the look of new mountain bikes but I'm young and have grown up with them. Having said that I used to hate the look of triathlon bikes but now that I understand why they look like that I quite like them...I guess I'm just weird!


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

rigidftw said:


> I like my new one, too. especially the drivetrain


Sweet. Looks likes a Shimano 600 rear derailleur? What shifter are you using for that. looks like it's on the left side. How many gears at the rear and what range?

Is there another thread for this weapon that answers the above I can look at? Sure is an interesting set up and one I like the look of.

Grumps


----------



## rigidftw (Mar 21, 2010)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> Sweet. Looks likes a Shimano 600 rear derailleur? What shifter are you using for that. looks like it's on the left side. How many gears at the rear and what range?
> 
> Is there another thread for this weapon that answers the above I can look at? Sure is an interesting set up and one I like the look of.
> 
> Grumps


yep, rd-6400 and the matching front derailleur. shifter is an 8speed suntour xc pro swinging the rd over a cs-m737 
i wanted to use an xt thumbshifter at first, but that was just way to chunky on either side of the brakelever. so i put on the suntour thumby and was surly pleasantly surprised when it worked perfectly. i had to carve a little, though. the rubber of the shifter wasn't quite clearing the head of the brake lever clamp's screw.
there's no other thread on it. i posted a pic in the on one bike thread, but no one seemed to care 
cheers


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

It's a set up I'd like to try, a road cassette and derailleur in a 1x configuration. Always up for an alternative gearing.

So you have the 8sp shifter flipped and under the left hand bar, yeah?

Grumps


----------



## rigidftw (Mar 21, 2010)

correct.


----------



## Loey (Nov 19, 2011)

trailville said:


> My main gripe is the modern rigid setup (which are getting more popular). A designed-for-suspension hardtail frame with a suspension-corrected rigid fork. So wrong.


Suspension corrected ridgid. A mountain bike oxymoron!
I like older bikes though I've seen some beautiul new ones. I think suspension makes bikes look less like bikes


----------



## Hurricane Jeff (Jan 1, 2006)

*Cast your vote*

Here is my 2012 Santa Cruz Blur XC carbon and my 1982 Specialized Stumpjumper.
Which one is more beautiful to you?

Its amazing how far and how different bikes look, in just 30 years.


----------



## datawhacker (Dec 23, 2004)

not to mention maintenance complexity and that the one on the left probably costs 5 times as much.


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

Hurricane Jeff said:


> Here is my 2012 Santa Cruz Blur XC carbon and my 1982 Specialized Stumpjumper.
> Which one is more beautiful to you?
> 
> Its amazing how far and how different bikes look, in just 30 years.


Did you buy either because they were beautiful?


----------



## datawhacker (Dec 23, 2004)

I'd buy one of these because its beautiful


----------



## Tripp88 (Feb 12, 2012)

Enough said!!


----------



## Hurricane Jeff (Jan 1, 2006)

Function over form everytime, but it does'nt hurt that they are both beautiful! Both are state of the art in 1982 and 2012 though, and I love both of them equally.


----------



## 83stumpjumper (Feb 14, 2011)

The MTB's from the early 80's have class and look like works of art. The bikes of the last 15 years look ugly, especially anything with full suspension. The bikes of today are far superior in taking on the trails over the original bikes, but they look like utility machines, not like a friend you love to ride.


----------



## mbkot (Oct 5, 2009)

How about the Gull-Wing door cars? 1954 MB 300 SL, Bricklin SV-1, the all ss DeLoriean DMC-12, there are more. Some where kind of ugly, some are still great looking. Every period has its "ugly products". 

I think mine is functionally perfect - looking beautiful


----------



## jtmartino (Jul 31, 2008)

mbkot said:


> I think mine is functionally perfect - looking beautiful


You're an a$$ for making me so jealous this early in the day!

Beautiful bike. *sigh*


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

I'm not a big fan of all the spacers above the stem but that's a decent looking modern bike. :thumbsup:


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

What's with the hoopty brakes on that thing though


----------



## pixelrausch (Jul 25, 2009)

ride perfect


Crema Cycles 01 by PIXELRAUSCHdup, on Flickr


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

I hate this bike on so many levels...

I litterally almost get angry looking at it!!!

Fortunatly I dont think these will ever catch on, they are just too big for most practical applications.


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

jeffgothro said:


> I hate this bike on so many levels...
> 
> I litterally almost get angry looking at it!!!
> 
> Fortunatly I dont think these will ever catch on, they are just too big for most practical applications.


World champ stripes - nice.


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

jeffgothro said:


> I hate this bike on so many levels...


It's just a 29er with a midget. 

Grumps


----------



## rudymexico (Aug 14, 2010)

KDXdog said:


> I'm not a fan of the bent down tube at the head tube connection.
> 
> I just looks like the bike was driven into a wall.
> 
> I know the reasons for it, I just don't like the way it looks.


I really do not understand the curved down tube, i have seen modern suspension bikes with a straight downtube. It looks more like marketing than engineering. Can anyone explain


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

rudymexico said:


> I really do not understand the curved down tube, i have seen modern suspension bikes with a straight downtube. It looks more like marketing than engineering. Can anyone explain


Larger welding surrface to increase stregnth.


----------



## GMF (Jan 10, 2004)

I think some 29ers and long travel bikes need it because their DTs are more vertical. 

The bent tube actually reduced weld surface area by making it more of a perpendicular joint vs. a more angle miter joint. 

I'm with the "it's mostly marketing" thing, too... and I also don't like it.


----------



## car bone (Apr 15, 2011)

jeffgothro said:


> I do, especially after seeing this piece of crap, a Zaskar 100 9R Carbon Expert...
> 
> WTF...facepalm
> 
> ...


the first one looks kinda sleek and refined actually, but it looks like the wheels are too big? The second one is no beauty queen either. No slope on the top tube and too thick tubes.

I like the classic look but it has to be a slight slope in the top tube, has to be tapered banana fork, has to be thing steel tubes, then I'm game. Those 15-20 year old steel rigids with banan forks rides like a dream. 90-95 seems to be the golden years for me.


----------



## car bone (Apr 15, 2011)

Tripp88 said:


> Enough said!!


God damn thats ugly!


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

car bone said:


> God damn thats ugly!


Yeah. But you know those touring bikes that have a place to keep spare spokes? Well, this takes it one step further by providing a place to zip tie spare rims. Very innovative.

...but beyond ugly.

Grumps


----------



## Root Beer (Mar 10, 2011)

The new bikes are like NASCAR...rolling advertisements. My new Giant...I stopped counting at at 24 logos on the bike...

Today, you have so much to read on a bike. Even the damn tires have all sorts of writing. 

Brand/model/size that should be in the mold anyway.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> Yeah. But you know those touring bikes that have a place to keep spare spokes? Well, this takes it one step further by providing a place to zip tie spare rims. Very innovative.
> 
> ...but beyond ugly.
> 
> Grumps


HAH!!

Also, I agree with Root Beer. Logos are too large.


----------



## Jon Richard (Dec 20, 2011)

I thought my old Trek 950 singletrack with it's lugged frame and straight tubes was extremely smart looking. I now own a Titus El Guapo with the new fangled formed tubes and I find it very sleek appearing.

I haven't a bias for new vs. old but rather judge individually. Many of the new bikes are, in my opinion, not well executed in the looks department. My El Guapo does bend toward the head tube but is straight at the BB junction, plus it has a straight seat tube which to my eyes balances the swoopiness of the curved tubes.

Maybe doesn't do anything for some, but this bike draws my eye-


----------



## kenjihara (Mar 7, 2006)

I think that many of the newer bike designs are very beautiful, as are many of the older ones. 
The GT triple triangle design, in my opinion, was not a pretty design. It is awkward and unbalanced to my eyes. I am of the opinion that it was just a slick marketing ploy; a way to visually differentiate their product from other frames on the market. Given this intention, they certainly succeeded. In addition they frequently had a decent race team back then, as I recall. 
But in my opinion the extra tubing and weight are without merit. The shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Shorter tubes are stronger and lighter; that's physics. The idea that the frames were significantly stiffer in the rear? I doubt that, and if it is the case, it isn't tangible for riders of my weight / style.

I like a cleaner aesthetic, which is why I am a Bontrager super-freak.



jeffgothro said:


> I do, especially after seeing this piece of crap, a Zaskar 100 9R Carbon Expert...
> 
> WTF...facepalm
> 
> ...


----------



## kenjihara (Mar 7, 2006)

bushpig said:


> My modern bike looks sweet, IMHO


It's a modern bike, but really it's a classic frame design, just stretched for 29r config and with slightly wider diameter tubes. I wouldn't classify it as a modern bike so much as a modern interpretation of a classic design. And hell yes it looks sweet.


----------



## kenjihara (Mar 7, 2006)

broomhandle said:


> Holy F, I would be so embarsed to ride that. "uh, yeah its my 12 year old neighbors bike...."
> 
> and then ride off making motor bike noises....


"It's a toolbox; you take the tools for the job." - Robert deNiro in Ronin

I'll bet this bike rocked at downhill in it's day. Just never ridden that style, so no use for it. I don't think it's ugly, maybe foreign to me.


----------



## iamkeith (Feb 5, 2010)

kenjihara said:


> It's a modern bike, but really it's a classic frame design, just stretched for 29r config and with slightly wider diameter tubes. I wouldn't classify it as a modern bike so much as a modern interpretation of a classic design. And hell yes it looks sweet.


Ironically, even Moots don't actually look like this anymore. So this isn't even a good example. For 2012, they re-designed the entire line with the express intention of making them more ugly (ie.: appealing to mass-market, they-woudn't-make-the-tubes-curvy-unless-there-was-some-advantage, tastes. But you can still get an Eriksen....


----------



## Loey (Nov 19, 2011)

kenjihara said:


> I am a Bontrager super-freak.


Me too!


----------



## kenjihara (Mar 7, 2006)

Loey said:


> Me too!


...then thou art truly righteous.

Keith "Brother Grumpy" Bontrager is pretty much my Oprah.


----------



## Loey (Nov 19, 2011)

kenjihara said:


> ...then thou art truly righteous.
> 
> Keith "Brother Grumpy" Bontrager is pretty much my Oprah.


I put him up somewhere with Buckminster Fuller


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

kenjihara said:


> The shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Shorter tubes are stronger and lighter; that's physics. The idea that the frames were significantly stiffer in the rear? I doubt that, and if it is the case, it isn't tangible for riders of my weight / style.
> 
> I like a cleaner aesthetic, which is why I am a Bontrager super-freak.


That is one of the reasons for the "triple triangle" ...stiffness and strength.

Ahhh...Bontys, very appealing bike visually, I used to own a pre-trek OR frame. Very tempted to buy another. But, I like the way GT ride better so I probably wont.



> it isn't tangible for riders of my weight / style.


When I bought my Bonti, I used almost all the parts off my GT Psyclone (17 years ago) on the Bonti and the Bonti was heavyer..so, I think the Bonti might be a heavyer frame, thus why it might suite your riding more. (I weigh 160lb myself - so most frames work for me).


----------



## kenjihara (Mar 7, 2006)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> Yeah. But you know those touring bikes that have a place to keep spare spokes? Well, this takes it one step further by providing a place to zip tie spare rims. Very innovative.
> 
> ...but beyond ugly.
> 
> Grumps


...sorry, so the concept here is that if you taco a rim, assuming a quantity of your spokes are also not damaged, you're supposed to just pull over and whip out your spoke wrench and... build a wheel in order to continue your ride? I think I'm just going to try the "potato chip stomp". If that doesn't work, I'm going to use my feet or my cell phone. I thought this was one of the big reasons behind disc brakes, being able to ride with your rim a bit out of true?


----------



## kenjihara (Mar 7, 2006)

jeffgothro said:


> That is one of the reasons for the "triple triangle" ...stiffness and strength.
> 
> Ahhh...Bontys, very appealing bike visually, I used to own a pre-trek OR frame. Very tempted to buy another. But, I like the way GT ride better so I probably wont.
> 
> When I bought my Bonti, I used almost all the parts off my GT Psyclone (17 years ago) on the Bonti and the Bonti was heavyer..so, I think the Bonti might be a heavyer frame, thus why it might suite your riding more. (I weigh 160lb myself - so most frames work for me).


I weigh 160 lbs also. When I bought my Bontrager Privateer I weighed about 145 lbs. I have several Privateers and two Race's. I don't think any of them weigh less than 24 lbs or more than 26 lbs.

I have a long engrained preference for steel bikes. This preference is engrained and I nourish it daily. I guess I could try and get one disco -light, but I don't know that I'd notice the difference. I have one with mostly XTR that I've never weighed, and I have one planned which needs paint with a 1-1/8" head tube and a coil-sprung 3.5 ish lb Rock Shox Judy SL to go with it, I guess I could try and get that one light but I don't know that I'd notice the difference.

The frames are elegant, with a wishbone stay and slim tubes and geometry that works.

What I like about my Bontragers is the geometry, the way that they fit me; the balance. The quick steering, the way that I feel like I'm steering more with my elbows and less with my shoulders, the way that the bike climbs, and the way that the tires break together when I'm skidding into a corner.

...That, and the way that I've been flogging my first Privateer hard since 1997 and never broken the frame.


----------



## kenjihara (Mar 7, 2006)

...


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

kenjihara said:


> ...sorry, so the concept here is that if you taco a rim, assuming a quantity of your spokes are also not damaged, you're supposed to just pull over and whip out your spoke wrench and... build a wheel in order to continue your ride? I think I'm just going to try the "potato chip stomp". If that doesn't work, I'm going to use my feet or my cell phone. I thought this was one of the big reasons behind disc brakes, being able to ride with your rim a bit out of true?


I think he was being facetious.


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

girlonbike said:


> I think he was being facetious.


That.

Besides, there's no section of straight tubing long enough on that thing to keep a few spokes.

Grumps


----------



## freemarketryan (Apr 15, 2012)

yes


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

kenjihara said:


> What I like about my Bontragers is the geometry, the way that they fit me; the balance. The quick steering, the way that I feel like I'm steering more with my elbows and less with my shoulders, the way that the bike climbs, and the way that the tires break together when I'm skidding into a corner.


Those are some of the reasons why I like my GT's the fit, the ride, its almost as if the 18" Psyclone was especially built for me - almost like a custom boutique MTB you might have *"MADE" *. . :thumbsup:

I'm glad I had the opportunity to own/ride a Bontrager - Great bike to, and thats awsome man, it sounds like you love yours as much as I love mine - RIDE ON bro!!!


----------



## jon777 (Mar 30, 2008)

jeffgothro said:


> I do, especially after seeing this piece of crap, a Zaskar 100 9R Carbon Expert...
> 
> WTF...facepalm
> 
> ...


I think so too. That full suspension bike has a really ugly clean white finish to it and I hate how it is able to pretty much go anywhere, paved road, all mountain epic rides, go fast on the downhill and etc.

That purple road bike is the shiznit though! It won't be capable of going to the mountains but who cares. It will take me to my local grocery store and back and as long as I stay on the paved sidwalk I should be fine with those brakes.

I guess my question is, and I'm using G.T as an example, but does anyone else feel similar about new bikes,


----------



## rigidftw (Mar 21, 2010)

definitely not ugly, right?


----------



## kenjihara (Mar 7, 2006)

To be fair...
I prefer rim brakes. Lightweight, easy to tune, mechanically simple, not that expensive. I prefer butted cromoly steel frames, which are reasonably light with different fatigue limits than aluminum and deliver a more resilient, less harsh ride. I prefer traditional double diamond frames because geometrically they solve the problem of joining the component elements with the strongest structure using the least amount of unnecessary tubing. I like straight bars and bar ends rather than riser bars, so I have leverage that helps me get traction to the rear wheel when I climb rather than the perceived leverage at the ends of a longer bar. To be fair, I cut an inch off each of the ends of my bars anyway. And I like the elegant appearance of slimmer tubing. The curves in todays tubing add strength by distributing the stress of a juncture between tubes across greater surface area, something Bontrager used butterfly gussets to solve instead.


----------



## rudymexico (Aug 14, 2010)

+1 on kenji's comment


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

rudymexico said:


> +1 on kenji's comment


+another1. add a rigid fork to that.


----------



## xmessenger (Aug 13, 2010)

I personally find the real early MTBs to be ugly. Like the ones from the beginning to the late 80s early 90s then spawned one of my favorite bike eras-the early/mid 90's. The pinnacle of high end steel frames produced in a very competitive environment. I have(my only bike) is a 1992 Rocky Mountain TeamComp in a Porche silver with a set of old Kona triple butted project 2 and a mix of 90's parts. Its simple and beautiful. This frame was hand built in Vancouver whereas now you have to pay big bucks for a bike built here back then there were loads making frames from Brodie to Bontie, and the weight is respectable for steel even by todays standards.


----------



## Loudviking (Oct 23, 2011)

kenjihara said:


> To be fair...
> I prefer rim brakes. Lightweight, easy to tune, mechanically simple, not that expensive. I prefer butted cromoly steel frames, which are reasonably light with different fatigue limits than aluminum and deliver a more resilient, less harsh ride. I prefer traditional double diamond frames because geometrically they solve the problem of joining the component elements with the strongest structure using the least amount of unnecessary tubing. I like straight bars and bar ends rather than riser bars, so I have leverage that helps me get traction to the rear wheel when I climb rather than the perceived leverage at the ends of a longer bar. To be fair, I cut an inch off each of the ends of my bars anyway. And I like the elegant appearance of slimmer tubing. The curves in todays tubing add strength by distributing the stress of a juncture between tubes across greater surface area, something Bontrager used butterfly gussets to solve instead.


+ rep, will continue to ride the"Old bike".:thumbsup:


----------



## ducktape (May 21, 2007)

Lately yeah completely agree with OP.

Remember when you were a kid riding a Wall-mart shitter of a bike and on your dream list was some unobtanium brand? Well I've lost the riding passion for a bit in the last year or so and browsing on the net now and then there just isn't that unobtanium bike to strive towards ( doesn't matter if it's a realistic $1k or unrealistic $5k). Not to mention in the hardtail department 29ers have taken over so much that if you want a half decent 26er your choices from each brand are rather narrow indeed if you want something above just entry level.

Lately I'm finding myself looking more and more at those vintage mtb's and even road bikes. Got a 2000 model Brodie Kinetic to do up for starters and I reckon she's lighter than the Repco Superlite Roadie I was given recently!!!!


----------



## LARRYJO (Aug 7, 2007)

I like my "new" bike.
Rides better then any bike that I have ever owned but it was made just for me.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

broomhandle said:


> Holy F, I would be so embarsed to ride that. "uh, yeah its my 12 year old neighbors bike...."
> 
> and then ride off making motor bike noises....


That's a Brooklyn. It was an experimental bike. I'd ride it.


----------



## tl1 (Dec 21, 2003)

*There's not one bike in this thread*

...as beautiful as that new white GT. Please, just stay away from the bad acid you old hippies!


----------



## awun (Jul 22, 2011)

To be honest I have a hard time even looking at most new FS bikes but there are some simple elegant FS designs out there


----------

