# The difference between "rigid" and "fully rigid"



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

There is no difference.

No need to say fully rigid.
A bike with a suspension fork is called a hardtail.
A bike with a shock* is called a full suspension bike, unless someone is dumb enough to put a rigid fork on a FS frame.

Nobody would do that, so let's not even go there.
But if they did it'd be called a hard front.
Yeah, that's why you've never heard of one.
Nobody's that dumb.

Let's review:
[] Rigid
[] Hardtail
[] Full suspension

"Fully rigid" is redundant.
Whew... thanks for tuning in.
Needed to get that off my chest.
Another beer, please. {burp}

--sParty

*Coming up in lesson #2: the difference between a suspension fork and a shock.
Hint: there IS a difference this time.


----------



## fishcreek (Apr 10, 2007)

don't forget the soft tails..

and what category would the rigid bikes with suspension stem and seatpost fall??


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

can you do brakes and breaks for me too. 'mkay thanks and another beer for me!


----------



## SeaBass_ (Apr 7, 2006)

Rigid fork+Rigid frame+Suspension seatpost=*Rigid*

Rigid fork+Rigid frame+Rigid seatpost=*Full Rigid*


----------



## fishcreek (Apr 10, 2007)

SeaBass_ said:


> Rigid fork+Rigid frame+Rigid seatpost=*Full Rigid*


how about

rigid fork + rigid frame + suspension seat??


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Sparticus said:


> There is no difference.
> 
> No need to say fully rigid.
> A bike with a suspension fork is called a hardtail.
> ...


:thumbsup:
Redundant and repetitive. A fully rigid unsuspended two wheel pedal bicycle.

Though there were many suspension frames with rigid forks in the '80s and early '90s. First the small builders then Offroad (Girvin/aproFlex/K2) sold them as did Cannondale.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

fishcreek said:


> how about
> 
> rigid fork + rigid frame + suspension seat??


No change in terminology -- the labels above apply.
"Suspension" stems, seatposts & saddles are called "comfort accessories."
A "softtail" is a full suspension bike, just one without much travel.

Next question.

{burp}

--sParty


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

fishcreek said:


> how about
> 
> rigid fork + rigid frame + suspension seat??


Rigid bike, with a suspension post.


----------



## Sizzler (Sep 24, 2009)

Who are you who is so wise in the ways of science?


----------



## Timo (Jan 13, 2004)

Fully rigid would be with an erection......


----------



## agu (Jun 22, 2007)

+1,000,000 rep power for Sparty


----------



## allroy71 (Sep 28, 2007)

I can't believe that I have used the term "full or fully rigid" in the past. Now, I stand corrected!!


----------



## Glide the Clyde (Nov 12, 2009)

Well then, by Sparti's logic, we need to change full suspension and FS to just suspension and S because we all know that a front suspension only is a hard tail or HT. For that matter, we could just call it a tail or T since we would know a tail has front suspension and a rigid doesn't. vrrrrrrrrrt.

I tried to rep Sparti for this but I'm currently locked out until I spread some love to others first.


----------



## Loudpawlz (Jan 26, 2004)

Timo said:


> Fully rigid would be with an erection......


So fully rigid and and a soft tail would work nicely together, yes?:ihih:


----------



## jackspade (Jul 23, 2010)

Fully rigid only apply if your bike doesn't use rubber/air pressure tire or your knee and elbow doesn't have hinge*.

*(CMIIW because I use google translate)


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

This reminds me of a bike ride.

Most of my bikes are fully rigid until I go for a rigid rear and a front shock during the summers.

This thread reminds me of the threads started (mostly by me) for people to use the search function and read the FAQ. Nice to read and all, but won't change a damned thing.

I also have sMarty pounding Ninkasi Total Domination. I'm on my third Hop Czar (Bridgeport).


----------



## cactus (Dec 19, 2004)

Sparticus said:


> <snip>
> A bike with a shock* is called a full suspension bike, unless someone is dumb enough to put a rigid fork on a FS frame.
> 
> Nobody would do that, so let's not even go there.
> ...


wth is a hardfront...? a bike with a shock and a rigid fork should be called a hardhead.


----------



## CB2 (May 7, 2006)

A friend of mine races X-Terras. To get ready for that season he'll do a few XC races. One race he showed up on a Specialized Epic with a rigid fork.


----------



## Schmucker (Aug 23, 2007)

Fully Rigid is Viagra hard.


----------



## SlowerThenSnot (Jul 16, 2004)

Timo said:


> Fully rigid would be with an erection......


hardee har har


----------



## Godless Communist (May 8, 2007)

Allow me to stir the pot by simplifying the taxonomy further: rigid and weak.


----------



## mattbryant2 (Apr 19, 2005)

This reminds me of the dinglespeed thread in which Sparty apologized for trolling, although I do share his disdain for redundancy.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

mattbryant2 said:


> This reminds me of the dinglespeed thread in which Sparty apologized for trolling, although I do share his disdain for redundancy.


I still lose sleep over that.

--sParty


----------



## TroutBum (Feb 16, 2004)

And still, tent poling has not been added to the tags field.

Jus sayin'


----------



## J. Fragera (Apr 16, 2008)

Godless Communist said:


> Allow me to stir the pot by simplifying the taxonomy further: rigid and weak.


That, sir, is simply uncalled for.

*but funny


----------



## CHUM (Aug 30, 2004)

i hate you sparty.....

for making me realize i am a doofus...and wanting to give you positive rep....

fugger...


----------



## zaskaranddriver (Oct 14, 2009)

Sparticus said:


> A bike with a shock* is called a full suspension bike, unless someone is dumb enough to put a rigid fork on a FS frame.
> 
> Nobody would do that, so let's not even go there.
> But if they did it'd be called a hard front.
> ...


KHS was.


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

Godless Communist said:


> Allow me to stir the pot by simplifying the taxonomy further: rigid and weak.


Also: slow and fast.


----------



## longhaultrucker (Jan 24, 2007)

Ummm..............so yer saying a rigid bike isn't a hardtail?


----------



## smilinsteve (Jul 21, 2009)

Sparticus said:


> There is no difference.


That's NOT what she said!


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

I haven't read but Sparty's first post so if this has been mentioned please ignore...but what would you call a bike with a suspension fork, rear shock, suspension seatpost, and one of those vintage suspension stems? A fully full suspension? or just stupid?


----------



## byknuts (Aug 9, 2008)

tequila and a lace thong in your teeth.


----------



## Manicmtbr (Jan 26, 2004)

I need rep power, so let me influence the angry mob here in exchange for rep.

Waltworks Custom Fork - - Rigid

Surly Karate Monkey - - Fully Rigid

The difference is amazing. Now go ahead and up my rep power.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

sasquatch rides a SS said:


> I haven't read but Sparty's first post so if this has been mentioned please ignore...but what would you call a bike with a suspension fork, rear shock, suspension seatpost, and one of those vintage suspension stems? A fully full suspension? or just stupid?


The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind.

Next question?

--sParty


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Manicmtbr said:


> I need rep power, so let me influence the angry mob here in exchange for rep.
> 
> Waltworks Custom Fork - - Rigid
> 
> ...


Upped yours.

--sParty


----------



## Manicmtbr (Jan 26, 2004)

Sparticus said:


> Upped yours.
> 
> --sParty


Up yours too! Oh, I mean Thank You!


----------



## M_S (Nov 18, 2007)

Yo I wuz thinkin bout gettin some new front shox for my full squish what do you guys recommend?


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

Hey Sparty up my repz  pleaze


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

sasquatch rides a SS said:


> Hey Sparty up my repz  pleaze


Upped yers.

--sParty


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

I still don't get this rep thing...I don't see any upped rep for me


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

How do I know who sent me rep if they don't say in the comment?


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

sasquatch rides a SS said:


> How do I know who sent me rep if they don't say in the comment?


It shall remain a mystery...

--sParty


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

sasquatch rides a SS said:


> ...but what would you call a bike with a suspension fork, rear shock, suspension seatpost, and one of those vintage suspension stems? A fully full suspension? or just stupid?


Heavy.


----------



## J. Fragera (Apr 16, 2008)

shiggy said:


> Heavy.


As in "Whoa, Doc! This is _heavy_!"?


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

Shiggy - I will rep you with my awesome level 8 rep power if you can get On One to make a batch of some rigid steel forks (specifically 26" in Moss Green). My wife's bike is unrideable until I get a fork. And not just any fork, but a matching fork for her MG Inbred.


----------



## forkboy (Apr 20, 2004)

How's about
Steel or Ti fork and frame and tubeless @ <20psi = Rigid
Carbon or Aluminum fork and frame with tubes at ~40PSI = FULLY rigid....


----------



## aka brad (Dec 24, 2003)

This is the difference in pictures; BTW America is always fully rigid..


----------



## amishscum (Nov 12, 2006)

Tell us about chain stretch.


----------



## aka brad (Dec 24, 2003)

amishscum said:


> Tell us about chain stretch.


Chains don't stretch


----------



## johnnyb (Jan 21, 2004)

Sparticus said:


> No change in terminology -- the labels above apply.
> "Suspension" stems, seatposts & saddles are called "comfort accessories."
> A "softtail" is a full suspension bike, just one without much travel.
> 
> ...


This one ain't. Used to be a fun ride too. (frame broke)


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

johnnyb said:


> This one ain't. Used to be a fun ride too. (frame broke)


Now THAT'S a hard front!

Er... was.

--sParty


----------



## Sherwin (Feb 15, 2008)

"Hard front".. now that is funny. esp at my age.


----------



## nuffink (Feb 21, 2010)

My next bike's going to be a hard front. Sparticus, you could be the catalyst that sparked the revolution.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

nuffink said:


> My next bike's going to be a hard front. Sparticus, you could be the catalyst that sparked the revolution.


I'm obviously a rep ho... upping anyone's is a great way to express gratitude. 

Plus it pisses umarth off, though he'll never admit it. :ihih:

--sParty


----------



## nuffink (Feb 21, 2010)

Consider your rep upped. Wait 'til the hipsters get wind of the hard front. The ebay market for ancient Cannondale Raven frames is going to go wild.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

nuffink said:


> My next bike's going to be a hard front. Sparticus, you could be the catalyst that sparked the revolution.


actually I think hard front is properly termed "hardnose" as in the opposite to "hardtail" although why it isn't hard head...oh wait never mind on that train of though.


----------



## Orkje (May 3, 2006)

Slightly OT, perhaps, but since this is about terminology: I adore it how many native speakers of English run "(handle)bar*s*" and "fork*s*" on a bike


----------



## johnnyb (Jan 21, 2004)

rockcrusher said:


> actually I think hard front is properly termed "hardnose" as in the opposite to "hardtail" although why it isn't hard head...oh wait never mind on that train of though.


I'm going with hardnose!


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

I vote Hardhead.

And HT shall become known as hard***. I'm going to ride my hard*** hard*** hard as **** this weekend.


----------



## johnnyb (Jan 21, 2004)

p nut said:


> I vote Hardhead.
> 
> And HT shall become known as hard***. I'm going to ride my hard*** hard*** hard as **** this weekend.


One vote for Hard***!
lulz


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Orkje said:


> Slightly OT, perhaps, but since this is about terminology: I adore it how many native speakers of English run "(handle)bar*s*" and "fork*s*" on a bike


+ rep.

--sParty


----------



## jackbombay (Nov 15, 2010)

A+ Would read again!



Going to have to check out the LBS for a 1 1/8" rigid fork to turn the old marin into a hard front.

I know hard nose is more technically correct, but hard front is more awkward, which appeals to me.

If things go well we're going to need a hard front forum here.


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

fully rigid, Bridgett


----------



## highdelll (Oct 3, 2008)

Sparticus said:


> Nobody would do that, so let's not even go there.
> But if they did it'd be called a hard front.
> Yeah, that's why you've never heard of one.
> Nobody's that dumb.


Man, I owned a hard front :madman:
But hey, It was the '70's ya know 

Royce Union Mach-3


----------



## fishcreek (Apr 10, 2007)

you can still rock your rigid bike and enjoy a bit of suspension with the pantour suspension hub. website shows it comes in half inch or an inch of suspension for the front, and half inch suspension for the rear hub. not sure if anyone tried it on a mountain bike though


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

I can't think of another place they can hide suspension. 

Suspension spokes?


----------



## fishcreek (Apr 10, 2007)

nvm, how about suspension pedals.


----------



## boomn (Jul 6, 2007)

p nut said:


> I can't think of another place they can hide suspension.
> 
> Suspension spokes?


I think they want me to use my arms and legs as suspension?! Not sure though because that just doesn't sound right. Why would I buy a bike that doesn't do those things for me??


----------



## jackbombay (Nov 15, 2010)

fishcreek said:


> you can still rock your rigid bike and enjoy a bit of suspension with the pantour suspension hub. website shows it comes in half inch or an inch of suspension for the front, and half inch suspension for the rear hub. not sure if anyone tried it on a mountain bike though


 It does minimize unsprung weight


----------



## Manicmtbr (Jan 26, 2004)

p nut said:


> I can't think of another place they can hide suspension.
> 
> Suspension spokes?


I hear that less psi in the tires works like suspension. Not sure I believe it though


----------



## Mighty Matt (Apr 22, 2009)

What I have found with most bikes is that there is some flex, those bikes are rigid. So if someone has a bike that is so stiff there is no flex (like a bike on viagra of sorts) does that possibly constitute their need to call it ( I can,'t believe I am posting these two words in consecutive order) fully rigid?


----------



## Mamoulian (Jun 30, 2008)

As soon as I saw the subject of this post I figured it was just bait for an ISuckAtRiding reply..... I read this forum too much...


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Mamoulian said:


> As soon as I saw the subject of this post I figured it was just bait for an ISuckAtRiding reply..... I read this forum too much...


Fully rigid meets virgin tight.

--sParty


----------



## raganwald (Mar 1, 2011)

p nut said:


> Suspension spokes?


With very few exceptions, all bicycle spokes are suspension spokes. The tension on the spokes stretch them, and the hub "hangs" from the top of the rim while the bike is being ridden. The weight of the rider will stretch them a little further and in theory at least a bump would cause additional stretch.

Back in the day when I was building road wheels and Jobst Brandt was the absolute authority on wheel design, we selected butted spokes with more stretch when building durable wheels, specifically so that in use they would have a little give when encountering small bumps or other momentary forces.

Today's MTB wheels seem much stiffer, and I imagine that the amount of "travel" provided by spoke stretch would be negligible in comparison to suspension forks, wheels, or even the flex of the rear triangle.


----------



## Mamoulian (Jun 30, 2008)

Sparticus said:


> Fully rigid meets virgin tight.
> 
> --sParty


+Rep for you sir. And +Rep to ISAR for not posting on this thread yet... :thumbsup:


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

raganwald said:


> With very few exceptions, all bicycle spokes are suspension spokes. The tension on the spokes stretch them, and the hub "hangs" from the top of the rim while the bike is being ridden. The weight of the rider will stretch them a little further and in theory at least a bump would cause additional stretch.
> 
> Back in the day when I was building road wheels and Jobst Brandt was the absolute authority on wheel design, we selected butted spokes with more stretch when building durable wheels, specifically so that in use they would have a little give when encountering small bumps or other momentary forces.
> 
> Today's MTB wheels seem much stiffer, and I imagine that the amount of "travel" provided by spoke stretch would be negligible in comparison to suspension forks, wheels, or even the flex of the rear triangle.


So in essence, we're all riding fully's. +rep for nullifying sparty's thread.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

p nut said:


> So in essence, we're all riding fully's. +rep for nullifying sparty's thread.


Tried to + rep you for pointing that out but I've already given you too much digital love recently. I'm spreading it around like crazy so I can get back to upping the folks who deserve it most, but I'm starting to feel like a rep ho.

Meanwhile just know it's the thought that counts, p nut.

So bottom line this time "= rep."

--sParty


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Hey ISAR: I ordered a cog, like, five years ago and still haven't gotten an email confirmation!! What's the deal?!!


(maybe he'll post now)


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

Sparticus said:


> but I'm starting to feel like a rep ho.
> 
> --sParty


Starting to feel like a rep ho?! If you made a nickel for every time you wrote "+ rep" you could finally afford that uvula reduction surgery to get rid of that pesky gag reflex.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

umarth said:


> Starting to feel like a rep ho?! If you made a nickel for every time you wrote "+ rep" you could finally afford that uvula reduction surgery to get rid of that pesky gag reflex.


Once again jealousy rears its ugly head.

Sad.

--sParty

P.S. - rep.


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

Sparticus said:


> Once again jealousy rears its ugly head.
> 
> Sad.
> 
> ...


What is sad that at the rate of my repping, I can't rep you again for years....


----------



## Jonesy33 (Mar 18, 2008)

I think many of you are missing the hidden value to having multiple redundant ways of saying that your bike has no suspension int he front or the rear.

Picture this scenario:
Setting--You and your wife int he garage, she is giving you a hard time about all of the bikes you have...
WIFE: "What's the difference between this bike and that bike, they both look almost exactly alike?!?!?"
YOU: "Well, dear, this one is 'rigid', this one is 'FULLY-rigid', this one is 'unsuspended.'..."
WIFE:"Hmmm... well what about those two over there?!?"
YOU: "One is 'front suspension' the otehr is a 'hard-tail.'... big difference dear."

See, redundancy in naming conventions is not always a bad thing!


----------



## SlowerThenSnot (Jul 16, 2004)

Jonesy33 said:


> I think many of you are missing the hidden value to having multiple redundant ways of saying that your bike has no suspension int he front or the rear.
> 
> Picture this scenario:
> Setting--You and your wife int he garage, she is giving you a hard time about all of the bikes you have...
> ...


Best reason so far! however being single this doesn't matter to me much


----------



## Mighty Matt (Apr 22, 2009)

Redundancy is a wonderful thing, even when spelled wrong.










Crap picture never showed up. 
Maybe this will work


----------



## jmmUT (Sep 15, 2008)

aka brad said:


> This is the difference in pictures; BTW America is always fully rigid..


Not always true.

Almost half of America is semi-rigid after last call every weekend.


----------



## Bro (Dec 20, 2010)

*New category?*

Today I thought of a new description to add alongside the likes of rigid and hardtail and suspension --

"Adjustable rigid." Or "single-use suspension." It's like a suspension fork that's breathed its last, so that it compresses but has issues rebounding without a sharp upward tug on the bars. Don't ask how I figured that one out. :sad:


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

I had a '70s Kawasaki BMX with rear-only suspension. It was my first SS trail bike and I rode lots of singletrack on it. I've got the frame in my garage.










Cannondale also had some rear-only suspsension designs in the '80s. I've got a playboy in my garage with one that's got the '80s combo of purple and neon green, and I found this one here on MTBR in the vintage forum:










Not that it's a good idea or anything...


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

Fast Eddy said:


> I had a '70s Kawasaki BMX with rear-only suspension. It was my first SS trail bike and I rode lots of singletrack on it. I've got the frame in my garage.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think at the time those were referred to as hardnoses. All in the vein of the SE Descender and the boulder bikes gazelle.


----------



## unicrown junkie (Nov 12, 2009)

Rockcrusher, I was just jabbering with my co-worker about the old school rear suspensiopn BMX bikes made in the 70s, his brain cramped up and couldn't figure it out. Here you post a pic, thanks!

I remember the Descender and the magazine Bicycle Guide(I made their "thumbs down" section once), do you remember the Dominator as well? It had a crazy fork, four small blades that came back together at the dropouts. 

I love this thread and am glad I found it since I ride rigid. Just the past year I have had to refer to it as "all rigid" since most people don't understand what I mean when I say just rigid. The first thing they ask is "what type of suspension fork you using?"....sigh.....


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

unicrown junkie said:


> Rockcrusher, I was just jabbering with my co-worker about the old school rear suspensiopn BMX bikes made in the 70s, his brain cramped up and couldn't figure it out. Here you post a pic, thanks!
> 
> I remember the Descender and the magazine Bicycle Guide(I made their "thumbs down" section once), do you remember the Dominator as well? It had a crazy fork, four small blades that came back together at the dropouts.
> 
> I love this thread and am glad I found it since I ride rigid. Just the past year I have had to refer to it as "all rigid" since most people don't understand what I mean when I say just rigid. The first thing they ask is "what type of suspension fork you using?"....sigh.....


I get that all the time too. It usually goes like this at the end of a ride:

THEM: whew that was some descent eh, you were really flying (editor's note: this is what they mean with whatever they say or so I believe) can't believe you are on a hard tail.
ME: rigid. 
THEM: yeah that is what i said
ME: no no front suspension either
THEM: you don't have a fork!? I didn't even look at that. What the hell man?
MY BUDDY: he's got no gears either...
THEM: What the hell? You are insane.
ME: no I am just lazy.

So yeah rigid suits me fine and single speed so much the better because frankly i am lazy and prefer to spend my valuable free bike time riding my bike not wrenching.

I do not remember the dominator although the name rings a bell. Post a picture if you can!


----------



## BBoy (Nov 2, 2009)

I give up on telling people that I am running a rigid, especially to those who only talk about plush and inches on their sus. 

THEM: What ride are you on?
ME: A HARDTAIL with a HARD FORK!


----------



## Mighty Matt (Apr 22, 2009)

Are we really going to bring this topic back from the dead. I thought Sparty had cleared up the whole issue a while ago.


----------



## wheeliam (Feb 16, 2011)

here's what a fully rigid bike looks like..

no air inflated tires to give you suspension


----------



## monzie (Aug 5, 2009)

Arise zombie thread! 

Who's responsible for bringing this coup de stupid sParty back? Neg rep for you. 







Joking, I don't neg rep people.


----------



## Bro (Dec 20, 2010)

monzie said:


> Arise zombie thread!
> 
> Who's responsible for bringing this coup de stupid sParty back? Neg rep for you.


It was "Fast Eddy." I'll take credit for killing the thread the first time 'round, though.


----------



## trailof (Mar 18, 2010)

Since this has been brought back up...

I've seen a lot of posts using "ridged" instead of "rigid". Does that mean their bike is like a ribbed condom or??

"Fully ridged, for her pleasure"...


----------



## unstuckpilgrim (Nov 29, 2005)

Fully rigid is still 23% more macho than regular ol' rigid, when used in e-conversation. Having no mechanical difference does not change this.


----------



## tims5377 (Oct 20, 2010)

Suspension spokes can be single use suspension!
They call it a taco


----------



## monzie (Aug 5, 2009)

I'm rigid for her pleasure. 

Thanks for killing this the first time Erik. If my grammar section passes David C's scrutiny it shall be awesome. Keep a lookout in the MTBR Glossary thread for my ranting.


----------



## balance_fit (Jul 5, 2010)

Fully rigid isn't redundant if one applies the 'simplicity paradox': a rigid bike may look simple but requires a great deal of ability to ride...no plowing into things, line reading, body english, etc. So, whoever rides a rigid bike does it by virtue of fully engaging the body into the ride. Then, the bike deserves the 'fully' next to the rigid so that it evokes a wholesome meaning to the experience...geeee, I'm sweating, gimme a beer !


----------



## Bro (Dec 20, 2010)

balance_fit said:


> Fully rigid isn't redundant if one applies the 'simplicity paradox': a rigid bike may look simple but requires a great deal of ability to ride...no plowing into things, line reading, body english, etc. So, whoever rides a rigid bike does it by virtue of fully engaging the body into the ride. Then, the bike deserves the 'fully' next to the rigid so that it evokes a wholesome meaning to the experience...geeee, I'm sweating, gimme a beer !


So..... Could you explain that via non-hipstery-******rist-existentialist crap stuff?


----------



## monzie (Aug 5, 2009)

He's the Chief CEO of the Department of Redundancy Department.


----------



## johnnyb (Jan 21, 2004)

erik1245 said:


> So..... Could you explain that via non-hipstery-******rist-existentialist crap stuff?


Elbows loose, knees bent and go with the flow!


----------



## SlowerThenSnot (Jul 16, 2004)

johnnyb said:


> Elbows loose, knees bent and go with the flow!


Only way to ride any bike let alone rigid


----------



## johnnyb (Jan 21, 2004)

SlowerThenSnot said:


> Only way to ride any bike let alone rigid


Can you imagine fully rigid being elbows and knees rigid too? :eekster:


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

I haven't read past posts to see if this was mentioned, but, besides the horrible sensation of your brake levers shifting down when you hit a bump, here is a nice front suspension solution for you full rigid fellows.

Just came across this the other day


----------



## Glide the Clyde (Nov 12, 2009)

sasquatch rides a SS said:


> I haven't read past posts to see if this was mentioned, but, besides the horrible sensation of your brake levers shifting down when you hit a bump, here is a nice front suspension solution for you full rigid fellows.
> 
> Just came across this the other day


Yeah, if we were still riding quill stem technology.


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

I meant for those fully rigid riders with quill stems who can't find a suspension fork :lol:


----------



## ancient rascal (Mar 2, 2010)

Timo said:


> Fully rigid would be with an erection......


+ 1...........................................................................^ that ! :eekster:


----------



## Bro (Dec 20, 2010)

johnnyb said:


> Elbows loose, knees bent and go with the flow!


I thought of an inappropriate, immature innuendo when I saw those words. Too late to un-think it.



sasquatch rides a SS said:


> I meant for those fully rigid riders with quill stems who can't find a suspension fork :lol:


I'm fully rigid. And. Uh. I use a quill stem on my "newest" bike too...


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

erik1245 said:


> I'm fully rigid. And. Uh. I use a quill stem on my "newest" bike too...


Okay


----------



## balance_fit (Jul 5, 2010)

erik1245 said:


> So..... Could you explain that via non-hipstery-******rist-existentialist crap stuff?


 Maybe like this: rigid bike = full rider :thumbsup:


----------



## balance_fit (Jul 5, 2010)

Now, fellow riders, please define this: rigid or fully rigid?
I initiated my mtb days on one of those. :nono: Dangerous. 
Still keep the stem as a collector's item...


----------



## Bro (Dec 20, 2010)

balance_fit said:


> Now, fellow riders, please define this: rigid or fully rigid?
> I initiated my mtb days on one of those. :nono: Dangerous.
> Still keep the stem as a collector's item...


Partial rigid. It's the equivalent of a squishy seat post.


----------



## Jonesy33 (Mar 18, 2008)

balance_fit said:


> Now, fellow riders, please define this: rigid or fully rigid?
> I initiated my mtb days on one of those. :nono: Dangerous.
> Still keep the stem as a collector's item...


It's the sh*tbike.... in a class all its own...


----------



## unicrown junkie (Nov 12, 2009)

I've tried finding a picture, but no luck on the 'net so far. They stopped making the frame in 1986, iirc. If I can get a hold of a buddy of mine in Bend he might have a pic of it since he was sponsored by them at that time.

As to our frame choice, I sure like it but am now finally ready to put a "dualie" in our garage. Won't be for me, my spouse is only five years into riding and she started at 48! Last week while we were doing the Lower Dungeness Trail here on the Olympic Peninsula in Washington, she was getting bounced all over the place on her '91 Hoo Koo E Koo with 1.25" Evolution front end. 

I admired her tenacity, but I could tell that she wasn't having as much fun as she normally has, and in the long run I want her to ride more with me, not less. So, after twenty five years of off-roading on a rigid Stumpie, its finally time to update. 

Wish I could SS, but dannnnng my legs would be screamin' bloody murder!


----------



## cebeas (Jan 27, 2009)

I like to be technically correct so here goes--

Not that I would ever throw a leg over one but a friend of mine has a Slingshot.
Not a soft tail -- no front suspension
Certainly not rigid
Might be an interesting SS

For wussy girls.


----------



## Bro (Dec 20, 2010)

cebeas said:


> I like to be technically correct so here goes--
> 
> Not that I would ever throw a leg over one but a friend of mine has a Slingshot.
> Not a soft tail -- no front suspension
> ...


For hipster ******bags who want to ride what nobody else is riding.

Or for people who are jealous of other people who get to ride Slingshots....


----------



## unicrown junkie (Nov 12, 2009)

The Slingshot! Wow, there is one over at a LBS I saw last week hanging in the rafters. I remember when they came out circa '89 or so. Wasn't Jimmy Deaton one of their first riders?

As for rigid, just did the Lower Dungeness River trail this weekend. Flying down on the fire road at 40 on my '89 Stumpie Team, now that's the old days!


----------

