# Hard tails



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

I feel that hardtails are getting a bad rap from bike shops, magazines and big bike companies due to the fact that there is a slimmer profit margin on them. I have rode full suspensions extensively and just prefer a hardtail overall. I watched the olympics and all the fastest guys were still on hardtails. I know I'll get flak for saying it but unless your a freerider or a downhiller I think the hardtail is a simpler more elegant design. Is anyone on board with me? I still see many of the best guys and gals out on the trail on hardtails. What I fear is the bigger companies abandoning them to keep costs high then I will have no choice but to go back to full suspension. LONG LIVE THE HARDTAIL.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

I ride a hardtail. I love it. FS bikes are over rated.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

There's no need to fear anything in life, especially bicycle makers building rigid frames.

As long as one guy can't get over thinking he's faster than the next guy, there will be hardtails & rigids.

I ride rigids. ...and sometimes a hardtail. ...and sometimes any number of FS frames. Variety is the key to a long and meaningful relationship with this sport.


----------



## nick d (May 25, 2007)

I think they both have their place. I have a ht ss and two fs bikes and depending on what trail im going to i may pick one over another-or it may depend on how aggresively i feel like riding that particular day.

that being said my favorite bike is my 13 year old ht


----------



## verve825 (Mar 16, 2005)

*Hardtails, Marketing, and You*

I'm glad you posted this, as this is a topic I've been thinking about a lot recently. I ride hardtails exclusively- partly due to esthetics, partly due to their simplicity, and partly due to the lower weight.

There was a poll on the board a few weeks ago asking what kind of riding people did. As I recall, the vast majority of respondents were XC riders. This got me to thinking- although we see pictures and videos of people freeriding huge lines, hucking off big drops, and going really fast on 8" travel bikes, most of us actually ride more-or-less traditional cross-country singletrack.

I then started thinking about the cost of bikes- I own a truly superb Orbea carbon hardtail. The same component build on Orbea's 5" travel carbon FS frame results in a bike that costs more than $2000 more than mine did.

Let's be honest: full suspension mountain bike design is pretty mature. I know that R&D costs money; I know that carbon molds cost money; I know that rear shocks cost money. But I am equally sure that the cost of designing and producing a carbon FS frame is not $2k more than the cost of producing a carbon hardtail frame.

To be certain, bike companies are free to charge whatever they want and/or can get for their bikes. My feeling is that the mountain bike industry saw a significant downturn in the late 90s and early 2000s, partly due to Armstrong's success in the Tour and the resulting increase in the popularity of road biking. In turn, the mountain bike companies began emphasizing FS bikes, and, along with the advent of YouTube and gravity-related events and videos, the segment took off. It's fun to watch this stuff, an it's frequently inspiring.

Nonetheless, I think that many, many non-professional mountain bikers are riding bikes that are way too heavy, offer way too much travel, and cost way more than necessary, for the type of riding real people encounter on a daily basis. I've seen guys with 6", 42 pound bikes, huffing and puffing up trails where there is nothing bigger than a 12" drop for hundreds of miles in any direction. If they want to pretend to be Wade Simmons, that's their prerogative.

I'd simply like to encourage people to step back and assess the kind of riding they really have access to, and choose a bike accordingly. I suspect that without the DVDs and marketing campaigns swaying the purchasing decisions of many people, a great many more hardtails would be sold- and enjoyed. It's like the many people who purchase totally redundant, overkill 4X4 trucks, which may go off road one day a year, and simply waste gas and look silly the rest of the time.

I firmly believe that a hardtail is the perfect bike for 95% of the people, 95% of the time- for the other 5% of the time, work your ass off to get fit, ride the trail until you find the line, drink less beer and get fit enough to ride the trail, or- gasp- walk over a move you can't clean, rather than relying on shocks and technology to make life easy.

Regards,

jb


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

I think more than anything a DS rig is an image thing. I believe a 80mm equipped hardtail is all we need. These 5 and 6 inch trailbike are overkill. My old Kona Lava Dome (cromoly frame) was light and nimble and had no suspension and it is the best bike I have ever owned.


----------



## knives out (Nov 23, 2007)

I love hardtails. I love full suspension bikes. I love road bikes. Bikes and the act of riding bikes is far better than, well, so many other stupid things I could spend my time doing.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

> I love road bikes


Someone call the moderators. We have an imposter here!


----------



## knives out (Nov 23, 2007)

Kona0197 said:


> Someone call the moderators. We have an imposter here!


It could be worse... at least I didn't say that I love 29'ers.


----------



## ClockworkLemon (Dec 26, 2007)

Its funny, but 18 months or so ago, I sold my old hard tail, which to be honest wasn't exactly a good bike, and bought a FS bike. It was the best thing I've ever done, as I started riding more, and started pushing myself to try harder stuff. The only thing I didn't like about it was riding to work (I was short on cash when I bought it, so I had to sell my old bike to cover the cost...).

Fast forward to a couple of weeks ago, when I finally got sick of riding the FS bike to work, and was looking for a relatively cheap hard tail for commuting. Having a few more spare dollars than when I bought my FS bike, I eventually settled on a considerably better bike than what I was originally looking for. The funny thing is, since I bought it, I haven't ridden the FS bike, as I'm having so much fun riding the hard tail (which surprised me, as even a couple of months ago I wouldn't have dreamed of going back to a hard tail).

Thing is, I don't see either bike as being "better" than the other. I like riding both of them, but for different reasons. The hard tail is so much nicer for climbing, thanks to being 1.5kg lighter, but the FS is a lot more comfortable to ride on rough tracks.


----------



## Bueno (May 26, 2009)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> I watched the olympics and all the fastest guys were still on hardtails.


For Cross-Country, usually used Hardtails. But Marathon a lot of guys ride on FS Bikes.. FS Bikes is made for riding rough terrain.. try to ride 50 miles on rough terrain.... and you will understand that FS bike is cool :thumbsup:


----------



## Coasting (Mar 26, 2008)

Im a firm believer in the hardtail.Theres been some great steel hardtails coming out of England in the last couple of years.Bikes that are well thought out, very functional and very involving


----------



## fop1 (May 5, 2008)

Kona0197 said:


> I think more than anything a DS rig is an image thing. I believe a 80mm equipped hardtail is all we need. These 5 and 6 inch trailbike are overkill. My old Kona Lava Dome (cromoly frame) was light and nimble and had no suspension and it is the best bike I have ever owned.


I disagree, hardtails do have their place, and don't get me wrong i rode a hardtail until 3 months ago and loved it, but as i got better and did bigger more technical trails my hardtail was not enough. You can't say that ds bikes are just an image thing just because you don't need or want them. And don't sit there and tell me that your hardtail can do everything a 5-6inch am bike can do, cause that's bs.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

A hardtail can do just about everything a FS rig can do. I have a DVD here with a guy that does the same insane stuff the big boys do like launching off a cliff but on a hardtail. It's been proven it can be done.


----------



## fop1 (May 5, 2008)

then please explain to me why everyone rides these if they are no better then a hardtail?


----------



## GrampBredo (Dec 18, 2007)

Kona0197 said:


> A hardtail can do just about everything a FS rig can do. I have a DVD here with a guy that does the same insane stuff the big boys do like launching off a cliff but on a hardtail. It's been proven it can be done.


I have 4 bikes: 2 rigids, a roadie, and a big FS bike. 
Ever tried downhill on a HT? I have...and it sucks. Just because it can be done doesn't mean its the best way to do it. Don't get me wrong though- I love hardtails, I even spend alot of saddle time on a rigid. But big bikes have their place.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Never said FS bikes do not have their place. Just pointed out it can be done on a HT as well. Geez.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Kona0197 said:


> A hardtail can do just about everything a FS rig can do. I have a DVD here with a guy that does the same insane stuff the big boys do like launching off a cliff but on a hardtail. It's been proven it can be done.


You're sadly not taking rider preference and comfort into the argument.

Also, you're not taking those who like and own both into account.

There's a reason HT's are still around and doing really well.

You're turning the category into a victim, when in fact, it is not. It is also profiting from advances in tubing technology and design.


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

Squishy boing boing bikes are comfort bikes, real men ride rigids!


----------



## sooner518 (Aug 1, 2007)

With my 4 inch FS bike, I am able to hit lines faster and I am able to climb steep, technical terrain better because my back tire stays on the ground. I am able to take bigger, more fun lines with less chance of a crash.

But in the end, it all comes down to one fact: I simply have more fun on my FS bike than I do on my HT.


----------



## xufima (Jun 4, 2009)

I'm riding a FS bike right now but I'm already saving and planning my next HT. There's just something about a HT, and the fact that I really don't need a FS bike.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> You're sadly not taking rider preference and comfort into the argument.
> 
> Also, you're not taking those who like and own both into account.
> 
> ...


OK you win this debate. Look at from another point of view. All I can afford is the HT I have. Thanks.


----------



## verve825 (Mar 16, 2005)

fop1 said:


> then please explain to me why everyone rides these if they are no better then a hardtail?


See post #5 above.


----------



## GNR (Oct 16, 2004)

*My hardtail comes and goes*

Like with most interests of mine...they change. I have several bikes, one of which is a hardtail singlespeed. I rode it exclusively last season and had a blast, and probably became a better rider. I also had a ton of fun on it.

This year, I haven't really touched it, mostly because I bought a 20mm thru-fork for a one of my FS bikes, and it is like a new toy that I'm playing with...so the other bikes including the hardtail stay hung up.

I've been thinking of going back to geared on the HT, and when I do, I will surely go a play with it again. I'm positive that my time on my SS, and my FS bikes, will have helped me ride better and have more fun on my 1X9 HT...isn't that the point of riding?


----------



## seat_boy (May 16, 2006)

It's like in Star Wars, when Obi Wan described a lightsaber as "not as clumsy or as random as a blaster, an elegant weapon, for a more civilized age." (I had to look up the quote, I don't really memorize Star Wars dialogue) FS bikes are blasters: you can blast down the trail indescriminately, not worrying about picking a good line. A hardtail is the lightsaber, taking more finesse to make it down the same trail.

Stormtroopers use blasters. Jedi use lightsabers. Take your pick.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

*Hardtails Rule ALL!*

Hardtails are the greatest things ever. They help develop skills, (as you can't just roll over sh1t like a bulldozer, hardtails make you take an active part in your ride) they are the most versatile of all types of bikes and for some reason, everything looks cooler on a hardtail than it does on a fully. Definitely on board with you, Tyler!


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Hardtail v. full-suspension debate? Cool!


It was either that, or:

1990 called. They want their topic back.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

What's happening????

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=528161


----------



## texacajun (Jan 20, 2004)

Seatboy & MB156, I think I'll respectfully disagree. Not everything goes downhill...except maybe internet arguements. :skep: When going UP ledgy, scree stuff my FS is the light saber and the hardtail is the edge of control trail destoyer. My 3" bike is light & nimble, the rear suspension keeps my rear wheel on the ground so I can slowly pick my lines and work my way up multi-ledges and loose climbs without spinning and throwing rocks everywhere. I CAN and DO ride my rigid SS on some of the same trails, but I have to hit them at higher speeds and lose traction (i.e. add to trail wear) much more often.

Also I'll agree with the marathon vs xc racer boi comments. Spend 4+ hours riding Down and UP the rocks & ledges of central texas in the triple digits and you'll see why most of us use FS bikes. It just makes for a much more enjoyable all day ride.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

No one forgot about hardtails, and there is no debate anymore between which is better, like in 1999, when the miserable old crabs ran the shows and trails. If HT's were dead, then we wouldn't have companies like Lapierre pushing their technology further.

This might end up being my next bike, if I go hardtail alongside my FS:


----------



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

Hardtails are the way to go.


----------



## GNR (Oct 16, 2004)

seat_boy said:


> It's like in Star Wars, when Obi Wan described a lightsaber as "not as clumsy or as random as a blaster, an elegant weapon, for a more civilized age." (I had to look up the quote, I don't really memorize Star Wars dialogue) FS bikes are blasters: you can blast down the trail indescriminately, not worrying about picking a good line. A hardtail is the lightsaber, taking more finesse to make it down the same trail.
> 
> Stormtroopers use blasters. Jedi use lightsabers. Take your pick.


Han Solo used a blaster, and he was pretty cool. Jedi also can't get chicks, so I'll have to give this analogy some more thought before I accept it.


----------



## GNR (Oct 16, 2004)

*Cheers*

What's is going on with your front brake housing...I'm sure you've been asked, but I don't get it.


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

There is also the cost thingie, dont wanna spend much - get a HT, well those can be expensive too but you can get cheap frames.


----------



## Bueno (May 26, 2009)

*Swiss Power Team Bikes:*

Scale as used at Olympic Games in Beijing
Spark as used at marathon worlds in France

http://www.scott-swisspower.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=20&Itemid=27

What did you say about fastest guys ?


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

Bueno said:


> *Swiss Power Team Bikes:*
> 
> Scale as used at Olympic Games in Beijing
> Spark as used at marathon worlds in France
> ...


:skep:


----------



## Mr Wheeler (Mar 14, 2008)

One more for the HT!!
I agree that 95% of the people dont need FS, if not even more.
Not that FS dosent have his advantages but moust of the people would feel their cons much more and I do have a brain so I can do the math.
+1 -5 = -4 simple as that for moust.

Not un english speeker evidentli


----------



## clark54 (Dec 4, 2008)

Only time I dislike my HT is when I blasting down a rooty downhill and its like I'm having a seizure I'm shaking so much, other than that I love my HT. It's light, simple, and good on climbs.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Mr Wheeler said:


> One more for the HT!!
> I agree that 95% of the people dont need FS, if not even more.
> Not that FS dosent have his advantages but moust of the people would feel their cons much more and I do have a brain so I can do the math.
> +1 -5 = -4 simple as that for moust.
> ...


I think this thread needs to move over to the VRC forum, ca. 1992.

I'm still surprised no one has cited "classic NORBA geometry" yet.


----------



## The Red (Mar 15, 2009)

The biking and bike clothing industries are tied together... HTs push the sales of padded bike shorts.. end of argument, they'll exist as long as the bikes 

Aside from that.. having never ridden an FS.. and only just really starting some real mtb lifestyle changes, the FS began outside of my price range. It was hard enough to buy an msrp $690 Haro bike on sale for $450.. no wonder this sport remains outside of the reach of so many who would enjoy it.

The cost of getting into mtb is astronomical when compared to other, more popular, sports. I've since spent a lot more on my bike.. but it boggles the mind to think of what one could get with just that initial $450 investment with respect to other sports. 

There will always be HT and FS.. why? Because Chevy will never drop the Cavalier or Corvette.. if all Chevy made was Corvettes, then the price of one would plummet.. 

Lastly.. I am riding my HT and enjoying it quite a bit, and no manner of "FS is better" bickering will change what I experience unless I let it change the way I feel.. and that goes vice-versa too.. 

If your sincere effort is to get people to appreciate an HT more, then give an honest try to appreciating FS. If what you're really looking for.. are converts.. then end it here, because you'll just entrench both sides.... take your lessons from those who mixed politics with religion..

So.. to both.. if you want to see the raw, un-emotionally-obstructed worth in one (your own) style, try and let your suspension of judgment experience the worth in the other.

What DO you like about FS Tyler Kiefer?


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

Nat said:


> What's happening????
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=528161


jealous you didnt think of it eh?

though on topic, i LOVE my new hardtail...its b!tchin and chicks dig it


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> I watched the olympics and all the fastest guys were still on hardtails.


Who cares? I ride a hardtail (in addition to others), but seriously, who cares about what is "fastest"? That's marketing hype that manufacturers and bike shops have been pushing on riders from day one. Is the "fastest" bike what everyone needs? The Nissan GT-R posted the best production car times at nuremburg at one point, so I guess we all need a GT-R? If johnny-racerboy wins a race on some bike, what the hell does that have to do with me? There are bikes now made for people and riding that have nothing to do with racing. Despite the best efforts of people and manufacturers, there are still some riders that even "want to race" these types of bikes, such as monster cross, all-mountain races, super-g, and so on. Back when MTB was fresh, dealers and manufactuers seemed to push "race bikes" on all the consumers. If you were serious about mountain biking, you HAD to have an XC race bike. Luckily we've progressed past that point and there are bikes made now that people can RIDE instead of race. I want to ride down a certain line because I can, I want to ride up a hill on my heavy bike because it's challenging, I don't want to be held back by some fragile XC racing machine or what may be "fastest" in terms of overall time. I just want to ride and have fun.

Or, let me put it this way: Any douche on a 23lb hardtail can ride up a mountain. Where's the challenge in that? Can you do it on a 42lb bike? This reminds me of a conversation I had with a local bike-rep here before a race. This was recent, and I don't race very often, but asked me how heavy my bike was (28lbs) he told me about how they had gotten some all-mountain type bike down to 27lbs for the production bike. I didn't say this, but I was thinking in my head, "Do you have ANY idea how many people I'm going to pass on 27lb or lighter bikes?". The rider makes a much bigger difference. The result (7th) wasn't too bad. Could I have a faster bike? Yes. Do I care? No.

This can go on all day. You don't need disc brakes (on your car). You don't need 200hp, you don't need a truck, you don't need to tow a boat, you don't need lots of things. There may be other reasons why people choose XC hardtails, they may be in a part of the country where there are no mountains and it just doesn't make a lot of sense, or they may just stick to one kind of XC-riding and never venture to any of the other subsets. There could also be some significant and valid cumulative trauma issues assocated with hardtail/rigid riding in certain terrain or doing certain types of things (drops, jumps, etc).


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Jayem said:


> The Nissan GT-R posted the best production car times at nuremburg at one point, so I guess we all need a GT-R?


Yes! More importantly, we need to go do some laps on The 'Ring.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

The Red said:


> The cost of getting into mtb is astronomical when compared to other, more popular, sports. I've since spent a lot more on my bike.. but it boggles the mind to think of what one could get with just that initial $450 investment with respect to other sports.


You're kidding right?

450 won't buy you skis, boots and poles, not to mention the required clothing, gas used, and lift tickets.

450 won't buy you a motorcycle/pwc/snowmobile

Golf isn't a sport, so nix that one.

450 probably won't buy you a canoe/kayak

etc...

Maybe you mean sports like baseball or something, where you NEED a team and other support. Biking shouldn't be compared to that.

Seriously, what are these other, more "popular" sports? How many people actually do things like football, soccer and baseball past their 20s? You may be talking about "popular sports" in terms of sitting in front of a TV and "watching" sports, which is the way most people like "sports", but otherwise as far as getting a return on an investment, I fail to see any other sports that give you back as much.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

I've always compared mountain biking to gym memberships and while the initial cost in that light is still high, if one keeps a bike for a while, the costs are not terrible spread over the years. I like keeping bikes for years, rather than turning them over every 1-2 years, so it can work out. Costs are high, but they are still relative.

Maybe the DW RFX will finally woo me off my old RFX, but to get rid of it like some do is a waste. It works great, feels great, and deficiencies are not the bike's fault. They are my fault. We're currently working on planning a multi-stop vacation in the Alps, Italy, then France. Many of these courses are rated for mid-20 pound hardtails (even displayed specificially in the pics), and who cares if we're riding 34 pound bikes? It's the challenge. On top of that, we can still make it up, and we will blow those guys away on the way down. However, it's the fun of our own rides, not competing with other groups that have nothing to do with us.


----------



## Bueno (May 26, 2009)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> and who cares if we're riding 34 pound bikes?


Guys, why your compare XC HT with DH/FR FS bikes (34+ pounds) ??? I.e. lets look at same Scott models Scale(HT) and Spark(FS) ... Scale 40 (11.45 kg / 25.22 lbs) vs Spark 40 (12.35 kg / 27.20 lbs) - the difference ONLY 900g - is it to much ? Have you ever ride on *XC* FS bikes ??? I turned from my Scale (HT) to CUBE (FS) ..And I can say that when I ride on level road I feel myself like on hardtail .. I don't feel swinging... but rear shock works ! I lost maybe 1-2km/h of my average speed compared with HT...but I became much faster on rought trail !! ... And It's great .. Now I ride more Off-road , more hard stuff.. FS is cool !! :thumbsup:


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Bueno said:


> Guys, why your compare XC HT with DH/FR FS bikes (34+ pounds) ??? I.e. lets look at same Scott models Scale(HT) and Spark(FS) ... Scale 40 (11.45 kg / 25.22 lbs) vs Spark 40 (12.35 kg / 27.20 lbs) - the difference ONLY 900g - is it to much ?* Have you ever ride on XC FS bikes ??? *I turned from my Scale (HT) to CUBE (FS) ..And I can say that when I ride on level road I feel myself like on hardtail .. I don't feel swinging... but rear shock works ! I lost maybe 1-2km/h of my average speed compared with HT...but I became much faster on rought trail !! ... And It's great .. Now I ride more Off-road , more hard stuff.. FS is cool !! :thumbsup:


Yeah, I've even reported on my rides in the past here.

I've also noted how I preferred my heavier bikes on several grounds, including pedaling up a hill, to my lighter, sub 25 pound FS. It's perhaps physiology, but much like the "victimized" HT, it's a preference.

I won't address your assessment of the feel and performance of an mtb on road.


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

Jayem said:


> You're kidding right?
> 
> 450 won't buy you a motorcycle/pwc/snowmobile
> 
> Golf isn't a sport, so nix that one.


However you would get _a single_ whackstick and probably a few balls.


----------



## The Red (Mar 15, 2009)

Jayem said:


> You're kidding right?
> 
> 450 won't buy you skis, boots and poles, not to mention the required clothing, gas used, and lift tickets.
> 
> ...


I was thinking along the lines of Raquetball, Tennis, Table Tennis, Archery, Darts, Basketbal, Handball, even Paintball.. and the obvious Soccer, Football, Baseball, Running. Whether you think of them as sports or not is irrelevant, if they are accredited games played as sports with recognized leaders, no matter how localized. Even Golf, Triathlons, and "shooting" sports require less investment to enjoy them.


----------



## ae111black (Dec 27, 2008)

you know what........I prefer my ht for everything but trailriding (rough technical stuff) for that I use my prophet....... I'm accually building a rigid SS He-He....... Say good by to my wrists.........


----------



## johnnypecans (Jan 5, 2009)

The color orange is the _best_ color. You people who like other colors are just fooling yourselves.


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

I much prefer a hardtail over a squishy for many reasons. I have owned both, MANY of both, I also cannot make up my mind what i want, because of my back issue.
I have two herniated discs and have had since 93. A hardtail really strengthens my back muscles, but after some time, my back starts to ache because of the pounding from a HT.
Then I go out and buy a squish. then I ride the squish and my back feels great...but after some time , again, my back muscles start to weaken, and it aches more.... so back on the HT... I currently do not ride a squish, only HT and SS HT, b ut i know myself within a few weeks, usually halfway through the season is when I notice its time to get a different bike if I want to continue riding...really friggin sucks


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

The Red said:


> I was thinking along the lines of Raquetball, Tennis, Table Tennis, Archery, Darts, Basketbal, Handball, even Paintball.. and the obvious Soccer, Football, Baseball, Running. Whether you think of them as sports or not is irrelevant, if they are accredited games played as sports with recognized leaders, no matter how localized. Even Golf, Triathlons, and "shooting" sports require less investment to enjoy them.


lol, you realize for most of those "sports" you need huge buildings or developed facilities? Again, how many people past their 20s really do things like soccer, football, baseball? What kind of leagues are we talking about?

How many of those things REQUIRE a partner or a team? You just can't go "do" those sports at all.

Table tennis? Well you got me there I guess.

Shooting sports require less money to get into? You don't even know what you are talking about here. You can get a gun for 450, but not a competative target pistol, not to mention the rounds you have to constantly buy. Are you thinking at all when you make these suggestions?

One thing I find interesting is that all of those other "sports" you mention (except running) REQUIRE a team, a group, a partner, and so on. Mountain biking can include that, but it doesn't require it. You can just go and mountain bike. You don't need to bring your team, you don't need to pay a fee, you don't need to buy bullets or paintballs, you just show up with your bike and ride. Not the case with all of those things you listed, unless I guess you have a "team shooting" scheduled this afternoon.


----------



## queevil (Feb 17, 2009)

Jayem said:


> Shooting sports require less money to get into? You don't even know what you are talking about here. You can get a gun for 450, but not a competative target pistol, not to mention the rounds you have to constantly buy. Are you thinking at all when you make these suggestions.


True. $450 won't even get you covered to shoot IDPA. In that sport you don't need a uber expensive target pistol but you still need gear, ammunition and entry fees. So what else is there that you could get into for $450? Benchrest? No. Small bore rifle? Not if you want a rifle that's competative. Trap and Skeet? Most shotguns will do for leisurely, once in a while outings but again to be truly competetive means that it's an equipment race. IPSCA? Hell no.

You could pay $5k for a mountian bike plus another thousand for nice gear and accesories and it would still be far cheaper than most competetive shooting sports in the long run. I'm no expert on anything but trust me, I've been down this road and it was an expensive one.


----------



## nuclear_powered (Apr 18, 2007)

You know in _Lost_ how Desmond had to type in a code and press enter every 108 minutes or the world will end? Sometimes I wonder whether the thing that actually triggers the countdown each time is the moment someone starts a Hardtail vs Full-Suspension thread on a mountain bike forum.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

nuclear_powered said:


> You know in _Lost_ how Desmond had to type in a code and press enter every 108 minutes or the world will end? Sometimes I wonder whether the thing that actually triggers the countdown each time is the moment someone starts a Hardtail vs Full-Suspension thread on a mountain bike forum.


....


----------



## stevegreer (Jan 31, 2009)

All good points. The bottom line is that each rider has his/her own preference. Just like with any other debate, i.e., Ford vs. Chebby, Musclecar vs. Ricer, Jessica Alba vs. Jessica Biel (who's hotter? Alba gets my vote!). There will always be die hard FS riders and there will always be die hard HT riders. Each one serves its own purpose. I love my Giant Yukon, but I also would love to one day own myself a Trek Fuel EX as well. For the riding that I do on the trails that are available to me a hardtail works just fine though.


----------



## BikingGod (Feb 11, 2009)

*I prefer Hardtails.*

My friend, and I both ride hardtails, and would not trade them for an fs bike. We both like the simplicity of the design, and the fact that with my $400 base model hardrock I have beaten multi thousand dollar full suspension bikes up hills. Plus I have taken my hardtail to great rock gardens, some jumps, drops (small ones), and some easy to intermediate downhills. You know, not real downhilling, but big hills with lots of loose rocks so on... So bottom line is that for what I do I really just prefer a hardtail. Plus the name sounds cool. Hardtail!


----------



## GrantB (Jan 10, 2004)

stevegreer said:


> For the riding that I do on the trails that are available to me a hardtail works just fine though.


True. For me the full suspension bike is the "Aspirational Bike" as it is super adequate for anything I can get to in less than an hour from home. I love it for the one or two times a year I do (for me) super long rides in the hilly north of our state. I ride it other times, too, but truly the hard tail gets it done everywhere I ride regularly.


----------



## Rev Bubba (Jan 16, 2004)

*I might have been until yesterday....*

I took my aluminum Chameleon for a ride on some technical trails yesterday and did not ride as well as I usually do on my FS. I have always been a strong proponent of the hardtail but reality set in as I bounced from rock to rock and was almost catapulted into a tree.

Tonight I plan to ride my Independent Fabrication steel hardtail. That is an entirely different animal. Light and fast but still it does not allow me to ride the same places I can on my FS.

So, even though my hardtails (counting the road bike) out-number my FS by four to one I honestly think if I had just one bike, I would be better off on an FS.

What can I say? I'm getting old and the hardtail just beats me up more than this old body needs to be beat up (I'll be sixty on 6/21). If I want to continue to ride over 100 days a year for the next twenty years, I have to make some compromises.


----------



## The Red (Mar 15, 2009)

Jayem said:


> lol, you realize for most of those "sports" you need huge buildings or developed facilities? Again, how many people past their 20s really do things like soccer, football, baseball? What kind of leagues are we talking about?
> 
> How many of those things REQUIRE a partner or a team? You just can't go "do" those sports at all.
> 
> ...


Are your mountain bike trails not developed and upkept ? are preserves, parks & park facilities not immense, expensive developments? and dont argue they are not for mtb alone, cuz neither is a gym or YMCA.

So what if the sports require a partner.. I didnt say solo sports, and its not like you're relying on partners for gear. And you can join any gym or free community center and get into tennis, racquetball, basketball, baseball, handball or any type of leagues you want. Go to a paintball store and sign up for ANY events you like, you just show up, pay the facilities free $5-$15, and go in with groups of strangers that dont remain strangers for long. I can go to almost any bar around here with good darts or a pool hall and there will *always* be people.

Its also irrational to compare a non-competitive bike to competitive shooting equipment. Apples and oranges. Where as apples to apples, shooting sports, with rifle, shotgun, and handgun, at the same entry level, are cheaper. Check your entry level gun & bullet prices at w-mart, and then go a step up and see its still cheaper. Then think of what kind of non-on-sale bike you can get for $450, and just how many things it'd be useful for and what limitations you'd have to "live with". Yea..


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

The Red said:


> Are your mountain bike trails not developed and upkept ? are preserves, parks & park facilities not immense, expensive developments? and dont argue they are not for mtb alone, cuz neither is a gym or YMCA.
> 
> So what if the sports require a partner.. I didnt say solo sports, and its not like you're relying on partners for gear. And you can join any gym or free community center and get into tennis, racquetball, basketball, baseball, handball or any type of leagues you want. Go to a paintball store and sign up for ANY events you like, you just show up, pay the facilities free $5-$15, and go in with groups of strangers that dont remain strangers for long. I can go to almost any bar around here with good darts or a pool hall and there will *always* be people.
> 
> Its also irrational to compare a non-competitive bike to competitive shooting equipment. Apples and oranges. Where as apples to apples, shooting sports, with rifle, shotgun, and handgun, at the same entry level, are cheaper. Check your entry level gun & bullet prices at w-mart, and then go a step up and see its still cheaper. Then think of what kind of non-on-sale bike you can get for $450, and just how many things it'd be useful for and what limitations you'd have to "live with". Yea..


You're making it too difficult.

Besides, expense is less of a limiting factor than is trail access.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

FoShizzle said:


> jealous you didnt think of it eh?
> 
> though on topic, i LOVE my new hardtail...its b!tchin and chicks dig it


What hardtail did you buy?


----------



## Hopping_Rocks (Aug 23, 2008)

I'd say that over 95% of the riders on the local trails ride hardtails.


----------



## antonio (Jan 18, 2005)

When I ride my 24lb HT (with high-volume tires, 26" risers, and a 120mm fork) I swear it is the best bike I have ever ridden, period. Yet, when I ride my 30lb FS (with even higher-volume tires, 27" risers, and a Pike) I swear that the FS is the best bike ever! I'm dumb like that.

Set your bike(s) up to suit your riding style(s), and enjoy. 

And leave this weak debate alone.


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

this one


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

nuclear_powered said:


> You know in _Lost_ how Desmond had to type in a code and press enter every 108 minutes or the world will end? Sometimes I wonder whether the thing that actually triggers the countdown each time is the moment someone starts a Hardtail vs Full-Suspension thread on a mountain bike forum.


this is wrong, its actually when someone starts a "v-brakes vs discs" or in some rare cases a "mechanical discs vs hydro"-thread


----------



## north20 (Nov 25, 2007)

I have an older (10+ years) custom hardtail that I just love. No matter what parts it's currently equipped with it just feels _right_ when I climb aboard.

However ...

Due to a health issue that causes severe tendinitis in my feet, that hardtail doesn't get ridden on any but the smoothest of trails these days. For the technical trails I prefer I've moved to a suspended ride to isolate my feet from the high frequency vibrations and hard knocks as much as possible.

The lesson? Ride what you've got and/or need and enjoy it. No need to get dramatic about it.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*Wow*

Obviously this IS still a hot topic. I feel very strongly that the industry is missing the point at the expense of the riders. I'll go into a shop just to look at the bikes and the salesman will tell me that I don't want a hardtail. The fact is I have spent thousands of miles on both and know I want a hardtail. My feeling is that mountain biking is were surfing was in the late 70's. The industry basically declared longboards dead outdated technology. This turned out not to be the case and the sport split in two with infrastructure for both. Some mountain biking companies are already slimming back on their hardtail lines (Giant, Diamond back, Haro and others). This is still an issue because the hardtail is now the underdog and big business is not giving hardtail riders the choices they deserve. I'm very happy to see I'm not alone. P.S. I love the Jedi analogy.


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> This is still an issue because the hardtail is now the underdog and big business is not giving hardtail riders the choices they deserve.


Or fully rigids for that matter, try finding a singe steel frame that will have a HT angle less than 72 with a 400a-c fork today (without excessive bb drop). I had to buy a really really slack one just get a decent HT angle when going fully rigid and it will still not be as good because of the bb drop. And it took me several months to find it (however now I know several others that would be similar).


----------



## strangeland2 (Apr 8, 2006)

The Red said:


> Are your mountain bike trails not developed and upkept ? are preserves, parks & park facilities not immense, expensive developments? and dont argue they are not for mtb alone, cuz neither is a gym or YMCA.
> 
> So what if the sports require a partner.. I didnt say solo sports, and its not like you're relying on partners for gear. And you can join any gym or free community center and get into tennis, racquetball, basketball, baseball, handball or any type of leagues you want. Go to a paintball store and sign up for ANY events you like, you just show up, pay the facilities free $5-$15, and go in with groups of strangers that dont remain strangers for long. I can go to almost any bar around here with good darts or a pool hall and there will *always* be people.
> 
> Its also irrational to compare a non-competitive bike to competitive shooting equipment. Apples and oranges. Where as apples to apples, shooting sports, with rifle, shotgun, and handgun, at the same entry level, are cheaper. Check your entry level gun & bullet prices at w-mart, and then go a step up and see its still cheaper. Then think of what kind of non-on-sale bike you can get for $450, and just how many things it'd be useful for and what limitations you'd have to "live with". Yea..


Everyone generally agrees Wal Mart bikes arent built for actually mountain biking. Yes it could be done but its not ideal. So if you re going to buy your entry level guns and ammo at Wally World you could also go two isles over and get a bike at the same entry level price. My father doesnt shoot competitively but I know for a fact all of his guns and bows are well in the range of a good hardtail/ entry level FS bike. Then try and maintain the arrows for a year and you re getting into the high end hardtail/midlevel FS range.

Can you even get a YMCA membership for $400? Basketball and tennis could be cheap alternatives cause most parks have courts that are free and there is almost always people around to get a game started. Football and baseball leagues are far from cheap. Maybe not in the same league as biking but they re hardly affordable options.

Id be interested to hear the locations of the people who prefer hardtails and think there are no need for full suspension. I own both a hardtail and full suspension (both bought second hand this point is needed in a few moments.) I can ride everything on the hardtail but its no where near as much fun as on the FS. If I was going to do the more freeride oriented stuff on the hardtail Id probably have to get a different frame to take the abuse but its definitely do able. The hardtail will always be the back up bike and if one has to go it would be the hardtail first unless if was for money reasons in which case the FS would get me more money in hand.

For general New England style riding I do my FS will always be the preferred bike. The hardtail can be a fun alternative to mix things up though.

Final point. Any of the competitive sports (shooting, archery, paintball) probably arent going to be done with entry level equipment for very long. Yes some people can do great with basic equipment but the average Joe Schmoe will have to advance his ability with equipment upgrades. So the guy showing up to paintball with the cheapest gear he could afford will eventually get tired of being lit up with paintballs every round and will soon start looking for better equipment while the guy with the decent entry level bike whos just showing up for casual fun ride will be much better set up for the money that was initially spent. Of course for the people who dont have the means to get the bike they need or want there is always the used market. The last three bikes I ve bought have all been used or dealer demo and they ve been so nice I couldnt even imagine spending the money on any of them brand new.


----------



## s0ckeyeus (Jun 20, 2008)

I wonder if topics like these would go anywhere if we weren't all bored out of our minds...


----------



## Strike the primer (Jan 27, 2006)

FoShizzle said:


> this one


Those bars are nifty!


----------



## The Red (Mar 15, 2009)

s0ckeyeus said:


> I wonder if topics like these would go anywhere if we weren't all bored out of our minds...


my first HT vs FS thread.. bare with me.


----------



## strangeland2 (Apr 8, 2006)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> Obviously this IS still a hot topic. I feel very strongly that the industry is missing the point at the expense of the riders. I'll go into a shop just to look at the bikes and the *salesman will tell me that I don't want a hardtail*. The fact is I have spent thousands of miles on both and know I want a hardtail. My feeling is that mountain biking is were surfing was in the late 70's. The industry basically declared longboards dead outdated technology. This turned out not to be the case and the sport split in two with infrastructure for both. Some mountain biking companies are already slimming back on their hardtail lines (Giant, Diamond back, Haro and others). This is still an issue because the hardtail is now the underdog and big business is not giving hardtail riders the choices they deserve. I'm very happy to see I'm not alone. P.S. I love the Jedi analogy.


Id say thats just the bike shop trying to make a higher dollar sale. That would be like going to a car dealer and telling them you want a base Pinto and them showing you a loaded Cadillac. They re just trying to sell the product that will get them the most money. The shops I ve been in are quite the opposite. People trying to get FS to cheap and the shops telling them to not even bother with the FS in that price range a hardtail would suit them better.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*The Change*

The change I want is not from other passionate riders, If you love to ride your FS then ride it. I want industry people to re-exam the hardtail and start pushing more $1,500 to $2000 trail hardtails. I want salesman to stop telling me I need a rear shock. I want magazines and other major publications to stop claiming hardtails are inferior. Most of all I want to ride my hardtail. P.S. I'm too short for a 29'r.


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

Vulgar Display of Power said:


> Those bars are nifty!


thanks...i have found they offend some people, which is why i bought them


----------



## Qatarbhoy (Jun 13, 2008)

"I've always compared mountain biking to gym memberships and while the initial cost in that light is still high, if one keeps a bike for a while, the costs are not terrible spread over the years."

And when you factor in reduced health care costs, riding a bicycle usually works out cheaper than not riding one.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

> Everyone generally agrees Wal Mart bikes arent built for actually mountain biking.


Actually there is a warning sticker on all walmart bikes saying they are not intended for off road use...


----------



## tg (Feb 1, 2006)

SHUT UP AND RIDE!! Who cares what bike you ride.....does it matter ? I have 5 and love them all. Most of all I just love to ride. :thumbsup: Every ride is a gift and you should give thanks every time you throw a leg over any bike. RIDE AND SMILE


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

tg said:


> SHUT UP AND RIDE!! Who cares what bike you ride.....does it matter ? I have 5 and love them all. Most of all I just love to ride. :thumbsup: Every ride is a gift and you should give thanks every time you throw a leg over any bike. RIDE AND SMILE


Some ppl just don't get it...


----------



## Jisch (Jan 12, 2004)

Boredom indeed... 

I ride a 6x6 FS bike and love riding that thing. I consider myself a pretty strong rider, both up and down and I am at the front of most group rides. Trails here are rocky, rooty and generally pretty much as technical as you can get and still ride. 

Every now and then I ride with a guy who was a nationally ranked junior racer. He rides a fully rigid bike. He says that suspension dampens the experience of riding - whatever, that's his opinion. I've tried following him down the nastiest trail around and I couldn't keep up to him. His ability to flow over stuff is incredible, smoothest rider I've ever seen. So while I'm plowing through and over stuff letting my suspension do its thing, he's floating over everything. It really is pretty amazing.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you don't need suspension to ride technical trails. 
John


----------



## VTSession (Aug 18, 2005)

Jisch said:


> I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you don't need suspension to ride technical trails.
> John


Yep.


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

FoShizzle said:


> this one
> 
> .


Dam that is one sexy HT....


----------



## Bueno (May 26, 2009)

Jisch said:


> Boredom indeed...
> ... I've tried following him down the nastiest trail around and I couldn't keep up to him. His ability to flow over stuff is incredible, smoothest rider I've ever seen. So while I'm plowing through and over stuff letting my suspension do its thing, he's floating over everything. It really is pretty amazing.
> 
> I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you don't need suspension to ride technical trails.
> John


Because your ride and speed depends up to 90-95% on YOU...and only 5-10% depends on your bike... this guys more trained and more strong riders ...therefore they could blow away you on any bike.. this way I can say WE DON'T NEED Shoks at all.. We could buy RIGID for 500$ and be happy... Why pay more ? 1500$ for bike with good Fork , which cost more that a rigid bike ? ... But if we watch MTB World Cup we see that ALL guys has hardtail WITH good Fork or FS bike... is this adv. ? ...they wonna ride on rigid, but they forced to ride on bikes with good forks because of their sponsors ??? It's a full of **** !

My friends, which ride on hardtails, early sad that Oh.. FS it's a low speed bikes because of swing... but after I bought FS bike and beat my frends on trail race, on uphills.. whatever.. and one guy win the our local XC Race on FS bike ...most of their bought FS bikes 

When I do uphill a have only problem it's a Fork swinging when I stand on my legs.. but don't forget about Lockout, I have remote lockout, and when I lock my fork I have no problem..


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

*Really really?*

I'm going to be playing soccer and basketball for the rest of my life. There are tons of organizations that have structures already built so you can play them all with minimal hassle. I do think they cost less than mountain biking, especially considering I drive somewhere almost every weekend to go knock a ride out, plus basic care of the bike, which is certainly more than the 240 I spend to play in my competitive leagues. I probably spend that much on tires in a given year....

I also spend a fair amount of time shooting, dribbling and other types of training by myself. Not that it is hard to find pick up games...


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

umarth said:


> I'm going to be playing soccer and basketball for the rest of my life.


You mean football


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

FoShizzle said:


> this one


Ooooooooooooh!


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

*haha*

That'd confuse the hell out of everyone.



longcat said:


> You mean football


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

strangeland2 said:


> *Id say thats just the bike shop trying to make a higher dollar sale.* That would be like going to a car dealer and telling them you want a base Pinto and them showing you a loaded Cadillac. They re just trying to sell the product that will get them the most money. The shops I ve been in are quite the opposite. People trying to get FS to cheap and the shops telling them to not even bother with the FS in that price range a hardtail would suit them better.


Either that or they just want to be bastards that think they're in my head to tell me what I want. Oh, but up in fcuking Kootenay BC, (my hometown ) I had to deal with a guy who actually refused to sell me a hardtail because he wanted me to buy a FS! I told him no thanks, I want this one, and he fcuking kicked me out of the store. 
Damn, that guy was a bi+ch.

Anyways, hardtails rule:



> I want magazines and other major publications to stop claiming hardtails are inferior.


Really. There are some fully people who think that they are god and they have the right to tell people to stop riding what they want (namely, hardtails) Hardtails are nor old, nor outdated, nor dumb, nor inferior.



> I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you don't need suspension to ride technical trails


:yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: 
So true. I was a 100% hardtail guy until this year, when I demoed my soon-to-be-owned Tracer. I loved the feel and wanted to get into AM and didn't fully trust hardtails for that kind of riding (mostly out of fear) but that was a biiiig mistake.


----------



## simian23 (Aug 13, 2004)

The Red said:


> I was thinking along the lines of Raquetball, Tennis, Table Tennis, Archery, Darts, Basketbal, Handball, even Paintball.. and the obvious Soccer, Football, Baseball, Running. Whether you think of them as sports or not is irrelevant, if they are accredited games played as sports with recognized leaders, no matter how localized. Even Golf, Triathlons, and "shooting" sports require less investment to enjoy them.


You are on crack, or you've never done any of the sports listed above. I've competed in soccer, football, running, tennis, table tennis, golf, alpine skiing, and triathlons. Even at a non-competitive level, most of these sports involve major expenses if done regularly.

Soccer, basketball, and running are indeed cheap, however, which is probably why they are so popular the world over. So that's three sports out of a gazillion. And two require you to organize a team and the third is boring as hell.


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

floorball is cheap too http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floorball you need a stick and shoes, and 2 goals.


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

Ive done racquetball and soccer (cough "real football" cough). They are both cheaper. If you can use the facilities for free. We dont have to pay for riding on trails... I get free racquetball rooms in my college gym, which is automatically covered under my tuition, so to me thats much much cheaper. I do need a new racquet though...old one broke...damn and I liked that thing!


----------



## BrianU (Feb 4, 2004)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> I feel that hardtails are getting a bad rap from bike shops, magazines and big bike companies due to the fact that there is a slimmer profit margin on them. I have rode full suspensions extensively and just prefer a hardtail overall. I watched the olympics and all the fastest guys were still on hardtails. I know I'll get flak for saying it but unless your a freerider or a downhiller I think the hardtail is a simpler more elegant design. Is anyone on board with me? I still see many of the best guys and gals out on the trail on hardtails. What I fear is the bigger companies abandoning them to keep costs high then I will have no choice but to go back to full suspension. LONG LIVE THE HARDTAIL.


There is a difference between HT and FS bikes? They should issue pink panties as mandatory riding gear for both. If everyone rode only what they needed, you would all be riding rigid 29er SSs.

Seriously though, I love these retro debates. Makes me feel 20 years younger reading this banter. It is not every day that I get to read a post about a HT vs FS debate, which somehow gets shooting and tennis involved.

Brian


----------



## dstepper (Feb 28, 2004)

Why would it make any difference to anybody what type of bike I ride or how much I paid for it. To me this falls into get a life...please...and leave mine alone. I am happy just to see people out of their cars and riding.

Dean


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

Just keep making hardtails and variety and Im happy.


----------



## scrublover (Dec 30, 2003)

Man, hardtails suck and we all know it. Why the hell would anyone want to ride one of those craptacular things off-road is beyond me.


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

dstepper said:


> Why would it make any difference to anybody what type of bike I ride or how much I paid for it. To me this falls into get a life...please...and leave mine alone. I am happy just to see people out of their cars and riding.
> 
> Dean


uh...if you lived in SoCal you would understand the importance of having a blingy bike - seriously, it matters


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

scrublover said:


> Man, hardtails suck and we all know it. Why the hell would anyone want to ride one of those craptacular things off-road is beyond me.


Because hardtails kick ass and you know it.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

BrianU said:


> It is not every day that I get to read a post about a HT vs FS debate, which somehow gets shooting and tennis involved.


Now all we need is to add road biking, lycra, pot smoking, and perverted dogs into the mix.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*Ok*

Sounds like some of you are bitter you paid to much for a rear shock you didn't really need. Well at least you made the salesman happy.


----------



## scrublover (Dec 30, 2003)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> Because hardtails kick ass and you know it.


I have_ no idea_ what you're talking about. :thumbsup:


----------



## dstepper (Feb 28, 2004)

All that I know is that when I step off the lift I am glad I left my hardtail at home. I also know that on my local 4k 12 mile climb that I left the 7 inch bike at home.

Dean


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

dstepper said:


> All that I know is that when I step off the lift I am glad I left my hardtail at home. I also know that on my local 4k 12 mile climb that I left the 7 inch bike at home.
> 
> Dean


In other words, you make smart equipment choices? Pfffft! Bahhhh! Shhuhhhh!


----------



## knives out (Nov 23, 2007)




----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

Allow me to say a few simple words to my view of the hardtail and dualie and so on. 
Embrace the future...Remember the past...
Thats how I look at it.


----------



## The_Lecht_Rocks (Jan 2, 2007)

HT's rock 
FS rocks 

FS rocks harde on the rock than a HT but on the groomers, HT's are King...

My HT Stoke to the party :


















spoiled as they're Ti


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

The_Lecht_Rocks said:


> HT's rock
> FS rocks
> 
> FS rocks harde on the rock than a HT but on the grromers, HT's are King...
> ...


the On One looks heavy!


----------



## byknuts (Aug 9, 2008)

Kona0197 said:


> Some ppl just don't get it...


that is correct, you certainly don't.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

works of art, things of beauty!


----------



## The_Lecht_Rocks (Jan 2, 2007)

@FO - 26.5lbs heavy - BOOYAAH


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

The_Lecht_Rocks said:


> @FO - 26.5lbs heavy - BOOYAAH


haha...was just teasing - just pisses me off now how MUCH LIGHTER yours is!!! I honestly dont get it: maybe my scale is broken???


----------



## The_Lecht_Rocks (Jan 2, 2007)

perhaps the SOCAL smog is weighing yours down as opposed to my crystal clear scottish highland atmosphere ?


----------



## pumaking (Apr 10, 2009)

delete


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

From reading this whole thread just seems like a few people wanting to give themselves a pat on the back for riding the "older technology" or trying to stir up the pot for no damn reason.

Loved my hardtail, but damn I love my FS, amazing bike. Although, I still do have a hankering to build a nice Ti HT for the days I want to feel something different, but right now my wallet won't allow it.

I was going to build a Ti HT until I came across my 5-spot deal, and I am SOOOOO glad I got it. I think everyone should have both in their stable. I used to be an "HT-Fo-Life-y0!" fanboy.

I do not think HT's are being neglected at all. Look at the arantix delta frame, 12k for a HT! That's proof right there that there's still room for innovation and a market willing to gob over money for an HT.

Lastly- if I see a good rider on the trails I usually mention they're a good rider, I never notice if they're on an HT or FS. Now if it's a fully rigid SS, then I'll be a little extra-wooed by it.


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

RiceKilla said:


> From reading this whole thread just seems like a few people wanting to give themselves a pat on the back for riding the "older technology" or trying to stir up the pot for no damn reason.


you Sir are a pot stirrer


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*how hardcore of a trail rider are you*

most = mountain unicycle
second = rigid ss
third = hardtail
last = full suspension " I get so sore riding over bumps waaa "


----------



## Bueno (May 26, 2009)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> most = mountain unicycle
> second = rigid ss
> third = hardtail
> last = full suspension " I get so sore riding over bumps waaa "


Yes.. you are right... Everybody who ride on FS is an idiot ! , victims of market ... If FS is out of you budget.... that doesn't mean that FS sucks ... If you wanna ride Ford Focus just ride it .. I want ride Hummer H2 ... yes Ford Focus is faster on the road... and I an Idiot..


----------



## pumaking (Apr 10, 2009)

Delete


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

Damn right, gotta get this messy pot of jamabalya goin'.


----------



## The_Lecht_Rocks (Jan 2, 2007)

i am of the opinion that being in the [very] fortunate opinion of owning whatever bikes i like, i enjoy having the Ti hardtails AND the FS'ers.

neither's better, just different.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

> I want ride Hummer H2


Too bad GM isn't making them anymore.


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

The_Lecht_Rocks said:


> HT's rock
> FS rocks
> 
> FS rocks harde on the rock than a HT but on the groomers, HT's are King...


But a few rocks don't necessarily stop a HT from rocking either 

(the good rocks are in the background)


(in this case it was not the rocks or the slicks that stopped me: 
it was the tall SS gearing and the fact that I always make some mistake riding this spot uphill)


Maybe I'll get my FS bike in ridable shape some time... it is a different experience.


----------



## strangeland2 (Apr 8, 2006)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> most = mountain unicycle
> second = rigid ss
> third = hardtail w/ suspended fork... I get so sore riding over bumps but I cant afford a FS Waaa
> last = full suspension Cause its out of my price range. waaa


:thumbsup:


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

Kona0197 said:


> Too bad GM isn't making them anymore.


Not sure whats bad about that. Gas guzzling tanks. Too bad they still make that revolting tahoe.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

What? I drive a lowered street H2 what's wrong with that!


----------



## s0ckeyeus (Jun 20, 2008)

There's really no excuse to drive a Hummer...reportedly that was the vehicle Nero drove while Rome was burning...


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Dirt Bringer said:


> Not sure whats bad about that. Gas guzzling tanks. Too bad they still make that revolting tahoe.


That was the point of the post. I agree. Hummers are a gas guzzling tank. Now the military version on the other hand...


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> What? I drive a lowered street H2 what's wrong with that!


lol. Do you really?


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

Kona0197 said:


> That was the point of the post. I agree. Hummers are a gas guzzling tank. Now the military version on the other hand...


Understood. I figured you wouldnt like that thing anyway. The military version though, I agree. Worthless on road but man, offroad its rad (in the desert and such). For good forest or trail offroading Ill take a jeep or one of the old toyota land cruiser fj40's. I went offroading with a cousin in one of those once. Wow.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

My Uncle has an old Jeep Wrangler. He stuffed a 302 V8 down the throat of that rig. When I was a kid he used to take us out in that thing. Was almost as fun as the dune buggy.


----------



## Bueno (May 26, 2009)

Dirt Bringer said:


> ... Worthless on road but man, offroad its rad ...


I agree, FS bike Worthless on road but man, offroad its rad !


----------



## cth978 (Feb 9, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> My Uncle has an old Jeep Wrangler. He stuffed a 302 V8 down the throat of that rig. When I was a kid he used to take us out in that thing. Was almost as fun as the dune buggy.


Thats funny because the 302 was introduced in 1968 and if your 34 that means you were born in 1974. So either your uncle was loaded because he could pull an almost brand new motor out of a car or he was very very skilled because i seriously doubt they had any kind of motor mounts of any kind to convert a ford motor into a jeep. Considering in that day and age ford chevy and chrysler were all fighting for the most power.....And for the record you just cant Stuff a motor down the throat of any car or truck and call it done. :madman:


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

OK. I was born in '75. My uncle works at a titanium plant some I'm sure he could modify anything he wants. Chevy made a 302 from 1967-1969 as well. I'm not quite sure it is a 302. it might be a 350. All I know is it's a slick look jeep with a V8 crammed in the front. Next time I see him I will ask what cubic inch and make that motor is. I'll get some pictures as well. Assuming he has not sold it the economy being bad and all.

By the way I did a google search and there are all sort of adapters to let you mount a V8 in a Jeep.



> And for the record you just cant Stuff a motor down the throat of any car


Yeah I know. My other Uncle raised me. He is a auto mechanic. Spent many a day in his shop.


----------



## cth978 (Feb 9, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> OK. I was born in '75. My uncle works at a titanium plant some I'm sure he could modify anything he wants. Chevy made a 302 from 1967-1969 as well. I'm not quite sure it is a 302. it might be a 350. All I know is it's a slick look jeep with a V8 crammed in the front. Next time I see him I will ask what cubic inch and make that motor is. I'll get some pictures as well. Assuming he has not sold it the economy being bad and all.
> 
> By the way I did a google search and there are all sort of adapters to let you mount a V8 in a Jeep.
> 
> Yeah I know. My other Uncle raised me. He is a auto mechanic. Spent many a day in his shop.


You are very right there are plenty of ways to do a swap NOW. If your saying he used to take you fir rides in it when you were a kid there no way they made kits for it back then. I dont care what you or anyone else says I bet my left nut you couldnt find one anywhere.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

I ask him when he put in the V8. Might take awhile as we haven't talked in years. He did take us for rides in it as kids but perhaps he had the stock straight 6 in it then.


----------



## Bueno (May 26, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> Too bad GM isn't making them anymore.


Since when ? I still see 2009 H2 model on the market ...


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Since a month ago when they announced they are cutting 4 brands and Hummer was one of them.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Riding a hardtail (or rigid for that matter) won't make up for being slow.


----------



## longhaultrucker (Jan 24, 2007)

*On board?!? With hardtails???*

Yep,I'm there! My last 5 bikes...








2008 Redline d440








2005 Rocky Mountain Blizzard (sold)








2002 Redline Monocog (currently up for grabs








2000 Trek 6000 (still scattered)








2007 Redline Monocog Flite 26er (sold before I ever built it)


----------



## keith_mahoney (May 18, 2008)

Coasting said:


> Im a firm believer in the hardtail.Theres been some great steel hardtails coming out of England in the last couple of years.Bikes that are well thought out, very functional and very involving


Don't forget Canada!


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: No, I don't really drive a hummer H2, actually a new focus. No, I really don't hate FS, My whole point was I wish there were more $2,000.00 trail hardtail 26r's on the market. Am I oldschool, maybe, I just really like to keep it simple. new mountain bikes are complicated enough. I whish MB Action would give hardtails more respect or start a spin-off hardtail magazine. Daisy Dukes Jeep cj-7 was a V-8.


----------



## sherijumper (Feb 19, 2007)

I have a hardtail and duallie in my quiver and love how different each bike makes the same trail feel like . I think it is pretty cool to ride a technical rooty trail , fight it and clean it on a hardtail , then come back on the duallie and feel like you are floating over everything ........................Love it !

I don`t think hardtails will ever die , sadly they will be pushed aside , which is pretty much what already happened .


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Real MTB'ers need and want dual suspension.


----------



## j944 (Feb 24, 2006)

Riding in TX now I think FS bikes are over kill and find myself pulling out the stumphumper other than one of two FS. Both rides bring something to the rider in their own way. Others have been swayed by media and their friends. 


This is like the Ford vs Chevy arguement.


----------



## johnnypecans (Jan 5, 2009)

If I rode a full suspension bike here in Houston the trails would be about as fun as riding on a sidewalk. I can't understand the dudes I see wearing full armor, full face helmets, and riding giant freeride bikes. I'm sure I have more fun on my rigid.


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

mbmb65 said:


> Real MTB'ers need and want dual suspension.


Real mtb'ers (the guys who founded this sport) did it on rigids. Define real mtb'ers.


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

Dirt Bringer said:


> Real mtb'ers (the guys who founded this sport) did it on rigids. Define real mtb'ers.


Real mtb'ers ride 8 inch foes even if theyre only going to the store one block away, this is how the sport started.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

longcat said:


> Real mtb'ers ride 8 inch foes even if theyre only going to the store one block away, this is how the sport started.


Looks like you need a history lesson...


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

longhaultrucker said:


> 2007 Redline Monocog Flite 26er (sold before I ever built it)


what ars ze forks on dis 1? are it salsa?


----------



## YoungerNow (Nov 10, 2006)

Kona0197 said:


> Looks like you need a history lesson...


Real mtb'ers miss obvious sarcasm.


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

Kona0197 said:


> Looks like you need a history lesson...


no man the rest is pretty much urban legends.


----------



## bigpedaler (Jan 29, 2007)

longcat said:


> Squishy boing boing bikes are comfort bikes, real men ride rigids!


Actually, REAL men don't need to prove themselves...by riding rigids, not eating quiche, or any other so-called 'manly' activity.

As far as the 'comfort' thing...well, some of us MEN have abused ourselves too hard for too long, and could use a little help to enhance our enjoyment of an activity we love. I'm not a candidate for surgical repair of my 3 herniated lumbar discs, so in order to put in the 3-5 hour days on the bike that I enjoy, a little 'boing' is useful.


----------



## longcat (Apr 24, 2008)

The answers I've given in this thread are these:

1: No one give a **** what youre riding, really, ride whatever the **** you want. It doesnt matter, and no one really cares.

2: Arguing on the intarwebs is like winning the special olympics, without being retarded!

thats it ladies and gentlemen, it doesnt matter. welcome to reality. no one gives a F, really.


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

Maybe its just you that dosent give an F? Just for perspective?  I honestly dont care what people ride. I find this whole thing curious. The RIGID IS BETTER or DUAL SUS IS BETTER is all a load of bull in my book. Everything has its place. Whats better is what works best for you.


----------



## cstone (Apr 5, 2009)

If you like to sit in the seat and have the wheels on the ground or do real downhill, FS is for you. But if you like to jump, we have knees and elbows for shock absorption. I ride BMX a lot now, learnt that a HT is all one really needs. I like a bike that enjoys leaving the ground! :thumbsup:


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

BMX? You're on the wrong site...


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Dirt Bringer said:


> Real mtb'ers (the guys who founded this sport) did it on rigids. Define real mtb'ers.


Nah. Just stoners on bikes.


----------



## cstone (Apr 5, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> BMX? You're on the wrong site...


There are now rules you can only ride one type of bike? that would be boring!


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

mbmb65 said:


> Nah. Just stoners on bikes.


ok, so. A.your pullin our chain (and quite well) trying to be funny.
Second possibility B.you know nothing about mountain biking
Im gonna lean to the safe side and say its A.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

cstone said:


> There are now rules you can only ride one type of bike? that would be boring!


No rules against riding another style but this is MTBR - And I take it you know what that stands for. BMXs and Roadies have their own sites.


----------



## Wild Wassa (Jun 4, 2009)

I haulled my old 20kg rigid Scorpion clunker up hills for many a long year, some of the wildest hills going were I live ... and I thought that I was a real mountain biker because the wheels have nobbly tyres and I used to ride on any old wombat or sheep track that I could find. There are not many roads in the mountains where I live.

Then 3 weeks ago, I bought a Giant hardtail weighing a bit over half the weight of the beloved and faithful Scorpion. I had no idea that I was buying a Giant helicopter.

I can see that over the next few years, I'm going to enjoy improving my new bike ... and my landing techniques.

I've been riding the coming WC XC loop at Mount Stromlo (regularly) over the last few weeks, it is a rather difficult track in parts. If another person on an FS bike struggling on that track says to me, "You're on a hardItail?" ... I'll say to them, "Yes, how are you going Mate, would you like to have some Gatorade, I've plenty to spare."

Warren.


----------



## oldskoolm4 (Jan 13, 2008)

I ride squish and HT, but more hardtail than anything. Just depends on where I'm riding really. Hardtail is good on alot of trails, but some are alot of fun on a squish bike. Hell, sometimes I take both and swap out between laps.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*hammering*

Hammering uphill, out of the seat sucks on a FS unless you dual lock out, even then you have to get off the bike to lock out the rear, what a pain in the @$$.:madman: :madmax:


----------



## Glynis27 (Sep 28, 2007)

Kona0197 said:


> No rules against riding another style but this is MTBR - And I take it you know what that stands for. BMXs and Roadies have their own sites.


Dude just mentions the word BMX and you tell him to leave? lol

I ride a hardtail. I like the way it rides and feels. I don't want the rear end to squat. Someday I will add a FS rig to the stable. Won't get rid of the hardtail though.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

I didn't say leave exactly.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Dirt Bringer said:


> ok, so. A.your pullin our chain (and quite well) trying to be funny.
> Second possibility B.you know nothing about mountain biking
> Im gonna lean to the safe side and say its A.


Is there a C? I know of what I speak.


----------



## nOOky (May 13, 2008)

I just got back from a ride on my 29er hardtail. I left the front shock locked for part of the ride, just to see how it felt. I have ridden the trail I was on for many years. I ride it with a full suspension bike usually, 3" front and rear. This was the first time in years I rode it on a hardtail, my other bike is broken. I really missed the staying seated in the smaller stuff, no rear boing to suck it up for me. Larger stuff like logs and drops I'm off the seat using my legs for travel, so having no rear boing isn't so bad. 
Overall I like riding a hardtail, but being older and having parts of my body starting to go gradually, I like a full suspension bike more. For my use a good light cross country race style bike is just about perfect. I won't stop riding the hardtail though, it's fun and efficient and adequate for most anything an average rider could need a bike for. A fully suspended bike is just a bit plusher, like a Lexus suv versus a Saturn Vue for example.


----------



## yangpei (Apr 18, 2004)

The Red said:


> I was thinking along the lines of Raquetball, Tennis, Table Tennis, Archery, Darts, Basketbal, Handball, even Paintball.. and the obvious Soccer, Football, Baseball, Running. Whether you think of them as sports or not is irrelevant, if they are accredited games played as sports with recognized leaders, no matter how localized. Even Golf, Triathlons, and "shooting" sports require less investment to enjoy them.


Have you done any triathlons lately? A decent tri bike will set you back at least $1500 (if not more). A good wetsuit is another $200-$300. And, running shoes are around $100. And, most triathlon entry fees are pretty expensive.


----------



## yangpei (Apr 18, 2004)

I have a beautiful Seven Sola titanium hardtail with a 100mm fork. The bike rides great. But, I hardly ride it. Mainly because I feel more comfortable on my 5" and 6" travel bikes. I don't really like the stretched out "xc" feel anymore. But, I do like hardtails. So, I recently built up a Cotic BFe steel hardtail with a 160mm fork and a 68 degree head angle. The riding position should be more all-mountain and still be reasonably light (29 lbs) for all day riding.


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

mbmb65 said:



> Is there a C? I know of what I speak.


C. is you enlightening us.


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

That's if you want to be competitive.

Other than that, you can do it in lycra shorts with your mountain bike and a decent 70 dollar pair of Asics.

The entry is quite pricey. 70 bucks around here!


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

yangpei said:


> Have you done any triathlons lately? A decent tri bike will set you back at least $1500 (if not more). A good wetsuit is another $200-$300. And, running shoes are around $100. And, most triathlon entry fees are pretty expensive.


What tri bikes have you seen that are $1500? :skep:


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*hammering*

Hammering uphill out of the seat is not fun on a FS. Even if you have lockout you have to fiddle with it before every hill. What a pain!:madman:


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> Hammering uphill out of the seat is not fun on a FS. Even if you have lockout you have to fiddle with it before every hill. What a pain!:madman:


What, like on a road?


----------



## Bloodember (Apr 29, 2009)

Bueno said:


> Since when ? I still see 2009 H2 model on the market ...


Hummer's not dead, they were sold to a Chinese company.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

Just got done riding Aliso Woods, I counted 37 FS bikes that I passed, uphill, downhill, technical, and fire road, most of the 6" travel kooks were on the fire road though. Sad but true.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

> Hummer's not dead, they were sold to a Chinese company.


Where did you see that? I find it hard to believe we would let the Chinese build our war toys...


----------



## KendrickSnyder (Jun 7, 2009)

Mountain biking isn't cheap at all. But its worth it. It's not like buying porn.


----------



## GrampBredo (Dec 18, 2007)

Kona0197 said:


> Where did you see that? I find it hard to believe we would let the Chinese build our war toys...


It's true. And humvees are different than the civilian version.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

On real all mountain trails you just gotta have squish on both ends, otherwise your not all mountain or any mountain or even MTB'ing for that matter. Period. Leave the hardtail for the road or path.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

GrampBredo said:


> It's true. And humvees are different than the civilian version.


Yeah I know. But both made by the same company.


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

mbmb65 said:


> On real all mountain trails you just gotta have squish on both ends, otherwise your not all mountain or any mountain or even MTB'ing for that matter. Period. Leave the hardtail for the road or path.


tell that to the veteran riders who rode the north shore here in BC on rigids...im sure if you said that to their faces one of 'em would have given you a backhander for being such a retart.


----------



## andy85 (Apr 27, 2009)

HT and FS shouldnt be compared...
Both are great and work differently
Its up to the rider what he/she feels which is right for them


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

wickerman1 said:


> tell that to the veteran riders who rode the north shore here in BC on rigids...im sure if you said that to their faces one of 'em would have given you a backhander for being such a retart.


Ya think?


----------



## verve825 (Mar 16, 2005)

mbmb65 said:


> On real all mountain trails you just gotta have squish on both ends, otherwise your not all mountain or any mountain or even MTB'ing for that matter. Period. Leave the hardtail for the road or path.


This is, hands down and absolutely, the single most asinine, stupid, and downright dumb post I've ever read on this board. I'll respond in kind: you're a dork who can't handle a bicycle properly. Learn how to ride, or take up backgammon.


----------



## Brown_Teeth (Jan 15, 2004)

Hard tails isn't if fit gals in lycra?


----------



## grumpyneal (May 14, 2007)

wickerman1 said:


> tell that to the veteran riders who rode the north shore here in BC on rigids...im sure if you said that to their faces one of 'em would have given you a backhander for being such a retart.


...I rode the shore on a Ritchey Ultra 21" frame with a Syncros rigid front end starting in 1993...the best day of my riding career was in 1996 when I bought a 19" Rocky Stratos frame and put a Judy XC fork on it and stopped that stupidity. Frame broke pretty quickly after too many flat to flats...moved on to steel frames [Norco Team Only with Reynolds 853] and broke those too...1999 moved to a Gspot and stayed until that got boring...

Yes, there were a lot of people riding the 'shore on rigids...NO...they didn't stay that way for long...NO...I doubt anyone cares how you ride it today. Hardtails make old guys get misty and smile...young guys look at you like you're a caveman...

I went back to a hardtail after years on a G-spot and now I have more fun on a Siffee....YES...I pass a lot of people on very new and expensive AM bikes....YES....I get passed by a lot of riders with massive skills...YES...I have to do a lot of yoga and pilates classes to keep my back strong....NO...I can't do flat to flat anymore...but all those trails have been 'paved' over anyways...

Kwitcher bichen and ride more...that's how you keep having fun...can't blame your tubeset for getting bored or for keeping stoked...


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

mbmb65 said:


> Ya think?


oh I know.... i definetely know. and they could kick your a$$ on your 2 wheeled couch while their on their HT on the shore.


----------



## johnnypecans (Jan 5, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> Yeah I know. But both made by the same company.


No, they're not. Not even kind of. The HMMWV is made by AM General. The "Hummer" brand is a marketing gimmick by GM, and their vehicles are tarted up common platform GM SUVs.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Yeah I looked it up and you are right. They sold HUMVEE to a Chinese company but they said the Military HUMVEE will still be made here and we still own that company.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> Just got done riding Aliso Woods, I counted 37 FS bikes that I passed, uphill, downhill, technical, and fire road, most of the 6" travel kooks were on the fire road though. Sad but true.


I'm glad I don't live where you do. Fire roads and masses of riders? Where do I not sign up?


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Kona0197 said:


> Yeah I know. But both made by the same company.


The H2 is made on the Yukon chassis. And while every company has done this to some extent, American manufacturers are the kings of taking the same old sh*t and putting it in a new package. Oh look, it's a "different" car. How many car companies did GM have? How many of those shared platforms? It was all the same sh*t. I think that the Japanese manufacturers proceeded VERY carefully when they started to do some of the same stuff, such as Lexus and the other "sub-brands", and they had to try extra hard to not just be offering the same crap in a different package, although they suffered from this a little as well.


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

mbmb65 said:


> On real all mountain trails you just gotta have squish on both ends, otherwise your not all mountain or any mountain or even MTB'ing for that matter. Period. Leave the hardtail for the road or path.


How long have you been riding again? Me smells noob.


----------



## RiceKilla (Apr 21, 2008)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> Hammering uphill out of the seat is not fun on a FS. Even if you have lockout you have to fiddle with it before every hill. What a pain!:madman:


What bike is this?

I do not have that problem on my bike.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

verve825 said:


> This is, hands down and absolutely, the single most asinine, stupid, and downright dumb post I've ever read on this board. I'll respond in kind: you're a dork who can't handle a bicycle properly. Learn how to ride, or take up backgammon.


   
But no, I agree with you completely, and will be ready to back you up on anything said like this on this thread again. 
I pounded the sh1t out of my first Specialized XCR hardtail on what you guys would now call Bootleg Canyon, and my frame never broke, never had a bad experience, and certainly was MTBing. Go get some brains, Mr. Mbmb.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

verve825 said:


> This is, hands down and absolutely, the single most asinine, stupid, and downright dumb post I've ever read on this board. I'll respond in kind: you're a dork who can't handle a bicycle properly. Learn how to ride, or take up backgammon.


Yay! I'm #1! You must be new to this board. Ridiculous drivel is posted on an hourly basis. Look around a little, familiarize yourself with the site and enjoy. And welcome to mountain biking. You're gonna love it.:thumbsup:


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

wickerman1 said:


> oh I know.... i definetely know. and they could kick your a$$ on your 2 wheeled couch while their on their HT on the shore.


Oh, I don't think so!:nono:


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

Who needs suspension anyway...


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

mbmb65 said:


> Oh, I don't think so!:nono:


well if they dont then i will LMAO


----------



## Fandred (Apr 13, 2009)

I work for a parts supplier to AM General which produces the militay versions of the H1.
They are made in Mishewaka, Indiana. I'm pretty sure I didn't spell that right. The H2's were also made there under contract for GM, but I doubt they will be now. The H3's were made in Shreveport, LA. The Hummer name was sold to GM, not the company. So they only sold the name and the H2 and H3 vehicle lines to the Chinese. What this has to do with bikes, I have no idea.


----------



## davidbeinct (Dec 6, 2007)

simian23 said:


> Soccer, basketball, and running are indeed cheap, however, which is probably why they are so popular the world over. So that's three sports out of a gazillion. And two require you to organize a team and the third is boring as hell.


I knew basketball required a team, but running does too? Who knew?

David B.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

wickerman1 said:


> well if they dont then i will LMAO


That is so awesome! Idle threats rock the hardest! Now what was it that you were whining about?


----------



## VTSession (Aug 18, 2005)

verve825 said:


> Nonetheless, I think that many, many non-professional mountain bikers are riding bikes that are way too heavy, offer way too much travel, and cost way more than necessary, for the type of riding real people encounter on a daily basis.


Completely agree. I ride around Boston and most places I ride are 95% pure cross country trails. I ride a hardtail and most of my riding buddies are one 4 inch travel FS bikes. I feel that 4 inch range for an FS is ideal. My riding buddies and I ride all the sketchy terrain and climb everything with no problems. When ever I see other rider's they are always on big, heavy 5-7 inch travel FS with body armor. "Where the f---- are you riidng?" The trails here are not suitable for bikes like that." I usually think to myself.

The problem I see is that technology from DH/FR bikes is trickling down a lot by now. Today you see so many features on everyday bikes, that were only in DH bikes a few years ago. Chainguides, oversized disc brake rotors, thru-axle forks, fatter tires, long travel forks. All these features you can now get a the avererage "tral bike." The trails are the same but the bikes get heaver and squishier. There is no way an average rider needs features like that to pedal around on some XC trails.


----------



## knumbskull (May 29, 2009)

VTSession said:


> Completely agree. I ride around Boston and most places I ride are 95% pure cross country trails. I ride a hardtail and most of my riding buddies are one 4 inch travel FS bikes. I feel that 4 inch range for an FS is ideal. My riding buddies and I ride all the sketchy terrain and climb everything with no problems. When ever I see other rider's they are always on big, heavy 5-7 inch travel FS with body armor. "Where the f---- are you riidng?" The trails here are not suitable for bikes like that." I usually think to myself.
> 
> The problem I see is that technology from DH/FR bikes is trickling down a lot by now. Today you see so many features on everyday bikes, that were only in DH bikes a few years ago. Chainguides, oversized disc brake rotors, thru-axle forks, fatter tires, long travel forks. All these features you can now get a the avererage "tral bike." The trails are the same but the bikes get heaver and squishier. There is no way an average rider needs features like that to pedal around on some XC trails.


Not everyone rides cross country trails around Boston


----------



## GrampBredo (Dec 18, 2007)

knumbskull said:


> Not everyone rides cross country trails around Boston


Exactly! I ride my big 6'' bike XC in Connecticut, because it doubles as my DH bike for Vermont. I'd rather have overkill for XC than be pathetically under equipped for DH, since I can't afford multiple MTB's I'm limited to one.


----------



## brobee (Jun 14, 2009)

I recently started riding again after a 10 year hiatus. I have stayed in good shape over the years, so my legs just needed a good "working in" and I needed to regain my control of the bike for more technical ascents and descents.

So yesterday, I decided to go for a solid 4-5 hour ride (it was awesome btw). I had two bikes to choose from: '09 Trance X1, '97 Stumpy M2. I chose the Stumpy. Not cause I thought it was inherently better. But because I wanted to have a good time riding, and because I know how to ride that bike damn well. I hit the trails and soon started frequently seeing many fellow riders out (trails were actually packed that day). I would say that 80% were on a fairly new FS rig. I ended up riding around with many folks over the coming hours.

A possibly pertinent observation came from this: I ride in Connecticut, so there are a lot of fairly steep but short technical ascents, full of rocks and roots. I can usually roll right up and over this stuff on my hardtail. Find a good line, hit the hill, shift some weight back to get traction, and power over the crap. A lot of guys/gals who were on the FS setups seemed to be stopped by this. They would pick the line, and proceed up the ascent, but would just stand and pedal, and proceed to spin out. Same for some of the occasional HT guys.

Now, I chose my hardtail that day because I feel I have good technique and am capable on that bike. Some of these people I rode with, clearly didnt have that.

So the point of this rambling is that, you just have to know *how* to ride your bike. Thats probably why you see people on new FS bikes who cant climb technical stuff (because Im sure they climb just fine), or people on HT bikes who cant descend (because I know you can bomb down some rough **** in a hardtail just fine).


----------



## yangpei (Apr 18, 2004)

brobee said:


> A possibly pertinent observation came from this: I ride in Connecticut, so there are a lot of fairly steep but short technical ascents, full of rocks and roots.


On a smooth fireroad climb, I would agree that a hardtail is probably as fast, or faster than a short travel FS bike. But, on a technical climb with roots and rocks, a good FS bike should be able to keep the rear wheel on the ground better and maintain traction.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*starlog*

Starlog June 22nd 2009, I'm riding a familiar trail in familiar territory. Their appear to be several very slow creatures struggling everywhere on the trail. For some odd reason they have overly complicated bouncing devices on the backs of their bikes. This appears to be a useless and totally looks oriented appendage, perhaps to attract a mate. I will collect more data and report back to starfleet at a later time. Meanwhile I'll continue to swerve past these sad creatures. Kirk Out. :winker:


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> Starlog June 22nd 2009, I'm riding a familiar trail in familiar territory. Their appear to be several very slow creatures struggling everywhere on the trail. For some odd reason they have overly complicated bouncing devices on the backs of their bikes. This appears to be a useless and totally looks oriented appendage, perhaps to attract a mate. I will collect more data and report back to starfleet at a later time. Meanwhile I'll continue to swerve past these sad creatures. Kirk Out. :winker:


----------



## davidbeinct (Dec 6, 2007)

yangpei said:


> On a smooth fireroad climb, I would agree that a hardtail is probably as fast, or faster than a short travel FS bike. But, on a technical climb with roots and rocks, a good FS bike should be able to keep the rear wheel on the ground better and maintain traction.


Did you read the rest of his post? He made a lot of good points that you totally glossed over by picking that one short section. I ride both and like both, so I don't really consider myself having a dog in this fight.

David B.


----------



## davidbeinct (Dec 6, 2007)

brobee said:


> I recently started riding again after a 10 year hiatus. I have stayed in good shape over the years, so my legs just needed a good "working in" and I needed to regain my control of the bike for more technical ascents and descents.
> 
> So yesterday, I decided to go for a solid 4-5 hour ride (it was awesome btw). I had two bikes to choose from: '09 Trance X1, '97 Stumpy M2. I chose the Stumpy. Not cause I thought it was inherently better. But because I wanted to have a good time riding, and because I know how to ride that bike damn well. I hit the trails and soon started frequently seeing many fellow riders out (trails were actually packed that day). I would say that 80% were on a fairly new FS rig. I ended up riding around with many folks over the coming hours.
> 
> ...


You make some good points here. I own an '06 Stumpy and an '08 Titus Motolite II. I have owned the Stumpy since 2007, which is when I started mountain biking. I have a nice smooth pedaling action, at least I think so, from my time road riding. On the Stumpy it took me some time to learn to do exactly what you're talking about, use a little more muscle and not always try to sit and spin, the HT responds really well to that.

Now that I'm using the ML II more, new toy that it is, I need to go back to really staying conscious of sitting and spinning. It really responds well to nice smooth power delivery. The Stumpy wants me to be a big V-Twin, the ML II wants me to be a nice smooth I-4.

The other thing I picked up from your post is that we're all from different places. I'm from CT too, so I think I know exactly the kind of terrain you're talking about. But others may be thinking of very different sorts of riding. E.g. I don't know that I could find you a long fire road climb in my part of CT.

So, I agree, knowing your bike is as important as what you choose to ride.

David B.


----------



## yangpei (Apr 18, 2004)

davidbeinct said:


> Did you read the rest of his post? He made a lot of good points that you totally glossed over by picking that one short section. I ride both and like both, so I don't really consider myself having a dog in this fight.
> 
> David B.


Yes, I read the whole post. I don't think I glossed anything. I just quoted the portion of the post that I was responding to. I was just pointing out that for technical ascents, a full suspension bike has the advantage. I have several FS bikes and a few hard tails as well. In fact, I should be picking up my Cotic BFe from the shop today once I get back from Vancouver


----------



## lubes17319 (Dec 19, 2005)

Jayem said:


> ....Or, let me put it this way: Any douche on a 23lb hardtail can ride up a mountain. Where's the challenge in that?....


You ain't ridden w/this douche....I'll even end up pushing an 18# bike up a hill.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

The other thing I picked up from your post is that we're all from different places. I'm from CT too, so I think I know exactly the kind of terrain you're talking about. But others may be thinking of very different sorts of riding. E.g. I don't know that I could find you a long fire road climb in my part of CT.

David B.[/QUOTE]

This is an excellent point, I think I live in a place (South O.C. CA) where image is everything. Around here having an expensive looking bike makes you look cool. People buy the most expensive looking bike they can to hang it up in the garage or use it as a beach cruiser around here and the bike shops know that so thats what they like to sell. When I go to buy a bike The salesmen who don't know me assume I am one of those guys and insist I need full suspension for the terrain around here. I've ridden most the trails in the area on both types of bikes and FS is not the best choice for this terrain. All the serious riders in the area Know it but thats only about 10% of the people out on the trails on weekends. So what we end up with is trails full of kooks on 6" FS bikes stopping and talking about how cool their bikes are.


----------



## davidbeinct (Dec 6, 2007)

yangpei said:


> Yes, I read the whole post. I don't think I glossed anything. I just quoted the portion of the post that I was responding to. I was just pointing out that for technical ascents, a full suspension bike has the advantage. I have several FS bikes and a few hard tails as well. In fact, I should be picking up my Cotic BFe from the shop today once I get back from Vancouver


And yet in the post you quote, the poster says that FOR HIM, a HT is the way to go for technical climbs, you don't address that. So, terrain, individual rider, all must be taken into account. There is no way to make the blanket statement that any single style is the best climber. Well, you can make it, you just can't really back it up, except when it comes to your riding. That's all I was trying to say.

David B.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*observing the trail*

 I figured it out, beginner xc riders use hardtails, intermediate xc riders use F.S. , Expert xc riders use hardtails.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Jayem said:


> You're kidding right?
> 
> 450 won't buy you skis, boots and poles, not to mention the required clothing, gas used, and lift tickets.
> 
> ...


1. Golf is a sport, and motorcycling and snowmobiling are far further from a sport than golf.
Tennis
a basketball (and even join a club instad of playing at a park/YMCA... I don't NEED a team to shoot a few hoops, or to throw a baseball with a friend.
running
and of course...
CALVINBALL!!!!


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

I was going to get a hardtail, but rode a FS and *just liked the feeling way more*. Is my 5" complete overkill for Houston? Probably, but I can use it wherever I may go, be that Austin, Maine, or Colorado. All that matters is what you like.
and GREEN is the best color, anyone who likes another color better is a moron.


----------



## aries14 (Nov 23, 2005)

I have both, but the more I ride the more I like my HT. Dont get me wrong I love the FS, but I seem to reach for the HT more these days.


----------



## johnnypecans (Jan 5, 2009)

laxman2001 said:


> and of course...
> CALVINBALL!!!!


Calvinball is a blank check, and I refer to the rules:

1.2. Any player may declare a new rule at any point in the game (Figure 1.2). The player may do this audibly or silently depending on what zone (Refer to Rule 1.5) the player is in.

thusly, if we were playing right now, I could declare that all goals must be scored riding in reverse on a fixed gear carbon full squish downhill bike while singing "For He's A Jolly Good Fellow" and gargling caviar. All goals scored in this manner are worth double trousers.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

> 1. Golf is a sport, and motorcycling and snowmobiling are far further from a sport than golf.
> Tennis
> a basketball (and even join a club instad of playing at a park/YMCA... I don't NEED a team to shoot a few hoops, or to throw a baseball with a friend.
> running
> ...


Golf is a sport?


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> Golf is a sport?


It requires both skill and athleticism (yeah there are fat people, but there are fat linemen and fat baseball players), it's been in the olympics, it's nationally televised on a regualr basis. It's covered extensively by ESPN, SI, and all of the major networks. Millions of people play it. If you walk like me then it's pretty healthy. 
It has a clearly defined and objective scoring system, (unlike say, figure skating, cheer, or boxing). It is clearly a physical activity.
It depends on what you define sport as.
I thought this was a pretty good article
http://www.seattlepi.com/othersports/347676_sportornot17.html


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

Golf isn't really a sport.


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

I refuse to do ANY sports.

That is one reason I like riding mountain bikes on trails.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> Golf isn't really a sport.


then neither is boxing, or mountain biking.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

laxman2001 said:


> then neither is boxing, or mountain biking.


Get out of here.


----------



## Brunner (Apr 25, 2009)

people only golf as an excuse to drink beer without their wives around.


----------



## gregarfish (Aug 16, 2008)

The Red said:


> T
> There will always be HT and FS.. why? Because Chevy will never drop the *Cavalier* or Corvette.. if all Chevy made was Corvettes, then the price of one would plummet..


The Cavalier was dropped in 2005.....


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

gregarfish said:


> The Cavalier was dropped in 2005.....


...and replaced with the Cobalt. Don't be a nitpicker. 
The same could be said for the Corolla and an LS 460, or a Caliber and a Viper...


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*birdie*

 golfing is for self-righteous douche-bags.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Wow, those are some pretty gross generalizations. I mean, the millions of people that play are most definitely drunken, married, self-righteous d-bags...
You racist, sexist, and anti-semitic too?
Why don't you actually try and accept that some people like different things than you do.

Have you even tried golf?

Actually, you probably did, and sucked just like everyone else that starts ou. But you were probably too scared to keep trying and actually improve. Thus, you hate it because you're not good at it.


----------



## mondaycurse (Nov 24, 2005)

I own a hardtail, but would eventually like to own both. 
Forget arguing, I like riding.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

laxman2001 said:


> Wow, those are some pretty gross generalizations. I mean, the millions of people that play are most definitely drunken, married, self-righteous d-bags...
> You racist, sexist, and anti-semitic too?
> Why don't you actually try and accept that some people like different things than you do.
> 
> ...


I tried golf and was pretty good at it. I hated the crap out of it because it was the most boring thing I've ever done in my life.

"Oh, look! I got my ball in your hole!"
"No, sir, I believe I got my hole in your ball!"


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> I tried golf and was pretty good at it. I hated the crap out of it because it was the most boring thing I've ever done in my life.
> 
> "Oh, look! I got my ball in your hole!"
> "No, sir, I believe I got my hole in your ball!"


I find it relaxing. Just because you don't enjoy it doesn't mean others are wrong for doing so. I guess like single speed...


----------



## BeakJones (Oct 29, 2008)

This guy rides AM/DH so probably has a different mindset about golf. Not all of us need to be flying down mountains to have a good time. Golf is ridiculously fun; it's strategy... and some of us like using our brains on a sport. (not saying you don't on a bike by any means, but it's a different kind of strategy... like real-time vs. chess.)


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

he should try speed golf. And, as fun as biking is I still love cracking the occasional 280yd drive. (which ain't too bad for 5' 7" and weak). 
And I'd love to see someone walk up to Tiger and tell him golf isn't a sport. See what happens.


----------



## Scott O (Aug 5, 2004)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> I feel that hardtails are getting a bad rap from bike shops, magazines and big bike companies due to the fact that there is a slimmer profit margin on them. .


Getting back to the OP's original premise of why full susp are promoted more than hardtails, what is the average profit margin of a hardtail vs a FS?


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

yangpei said:


> for technical ascents, a full suspension bike has the advantage.


100% agree....that is the ONLY thing I notice as a disadvantage on my rides with my new hardtail. having said that, i simply have to ride it like a singlespeed up through techy stuff to have a chance but yeah, this is where a good FS REALLY shows an advantage.

on the other hand, my most recent hardtail is what i had always hoped for and i LOVE it...a hardtail that can virtually do the techy stuff as comfortably (or near) as a good FS bike (not talking DH stuff....XC to AM stuff on given ride). I even find myself picking my new hardtail over my new Sultan though much of that boils down to my loving simplicity

even so, i have NO interest, other than on a singlespeed, to ever have a XC-ish hardtail again, 26er, 29er, or otherwise - its gotta be a slack AM hardtail now that i have tasted that sweet nectar :thumbsup:


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*you have something brown on your nose*

 I've known many avid golfers, generally they're trying to climb the corporate latter by golfing with their boss, thus they are douche-bags. Golf originally stood for Gentleman Only Ladies Forbidden.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> I've known many avid golfers, generally they're trying to climb the corporate latter by golfing with their boss, thus they are douche-bags. Golf originally stood for Gentleman Only Ladies Forbidden.


And I'm 19 and played for my high school team, as did my friend who got a full scholarship to Vanderbilt (where I met him)... And he's one of the nicest guys I know.


----------



## Scott O (Aug 5, 2004)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> I tried golf and was pretty good at it. I hated the crap out of it because it was the most boring thing I've ever done in my life.


Liar.


----------



## The_Lecht_Rocks (Jan 2, 2007)

golf - on mtbr........
oh dear :nono: 

it's a game for when we can't cycle anymore. possibly...


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

The_Lecht_Rocks said:


> golf - on mtbr........
> oh dear :nono:
> 
> it's a game for when we can't cycle anymore. possibly...


i have yet to meet any MTBers at our country club...its very odd, no?


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

well I do both. I will admit they are near the opposite ends of the sports spectrum... But they're fun in different ways


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

Scott O said:


> Liar.


Why do you say that?


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> Why do you say that?


because he likes golfing... if you find it boring make it interesting. When I usedto golf we used to wrap beers in tin foil and put them in the bottom of the bag lol would keep them nice and cold and get hammered golfing LOL


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> Why do you say that?


also because it is quite rare for anyone to be "good" at golf when they first try it. (Possibly with the exception of baseball players, who usually already have the well-timed, rhythmic swing necessary to hit a good shot). Therefore I believe he's calling out the man on being instantly "good."


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Golf is a real sport?


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> Golf is a real sport?


Banging your sister is a sport? Then I guess I'm the world champ.


----------



## bucksaw87 (Jun 18, 2007)

Kona0197 said:


> Golf is a real sport?


didn't we already cover this?

golf is the single-speed of the sport world.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

laxman2001 said:


> also because it is quite rare for anyone to be "good" at golf when they first try it. (Possibly with the exception of baseball players, who usually already have the well-timed, rhythmic swing necessary to hit a good shot). Therefore I believe he's calling out the man on being instantly "good."


I never said I only tried it once. I kept giving it a chance just to see what all these corporate idiots and PGA competitors found so interesting about it.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

double post


----------



## zadey1234 (May 7, 2007)

I won't ride a fully, to easy and I have legs to flow over everything. As for climbing, 90% of hills I need to get up, I walk.


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

mountain_bomber156 - Define "pretty good". Pretty good could mean anything from shooting par to eventually getting it in the hole.

If "Curling" can be considered enough of a sport to be in the Olympics, golf is definitely a sport. I'd like to see some of you drive 300+ yards. Or hit the ball, period. And I ain't no yuppie golfer that toutes his brand new Callaway's and a sweater around my neck. My Ping Eye 2's have served me for over 10 years and still does great (bought for $200 on ebay), some cheap putter, and jeans with Adidas Samba's as my golf gear.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

p nut said:


> mountain_bomber156 - Define "pretty good". Pretty good could mean anything from shooting par to eventually getting it in the hole.
> 
> If "Curling" can be considered enough of a sport to be in the Olympics, golf is definitely a sport. I'd like to see some of you drive 300+ yards. Or hit the ball, period.


To be devil's advocate, I don't necessarily consider Olympic inclusion to define a sport. I mean, one "requirement" for something to be a sport that a lot of people agree with is the necessity of clearly defined objectives toward winning. I.E. which team scores the most points in X amount of time, who goes X distance the fastest (or who goes the farthest in X amount of time), or who takes the fewest strokes to put a ball in a hole. Obviously there are some exceptions, such as boxing, which most people consider to be a sport despite the presence of judges. However, something like ice dancing? Not so much...


----------



## zadey1234 (May 7, 2007)

p nut said:


> mountain_bomber156 - Define "pretty good". Pretty good could mean anything from shooting par to eventually getting it in the hole.
> 
> If "Curling" can be considered enough of a sport to be in the Olympics, golf is definitely a sport. I'd like to see some of you drive 300+ yards. Or hit the ball, period. And I ain't no yuppie golfer that toutes his brand new Callaway's and a sweater around my neck. My Ping Eye 2's have served me for over 10 years and still does great (bought for $200 on ebay), some cheap putter, and jeans with Adidas Samba's as my golf gear.


I don't think I would play golf myself(Pricey to pay for course time, I don't have a few hundred bucks for every few weekends at 15.), but it is a sport. I bought a cheap driver and a case of golf balls to hit around at my grandpa's farm. Took me like an hour to hit one like 50 feet. So yeah, but I do know its a sport, apparently an expensive but relaxing one.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Mini golf is fun...


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

zadey1234 said:


> I don't think I would play golf myself(Pricey to pay for course time, I don't have a few hundred bucks for every few weekends at 15.), but it is a sport. I bought a cheap driver and a case of golf balls to hit around at my grandpa's farm. Took me like an hour to hit one like 50 feet. So yeah, but I do know its a sport, apparently an expensive but relaxing one.


MTBing can be just as expensive, if not more. You can get a decent set of clubs for $500 or less, and play on a local course for under $10 on weekdays or $20 on weekends. Just like MTB, there are levels...

Also, Minigolf IS fun.


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

laxman2001 said:


> To be devil's advocate, I don't necessarily consider Olympic inclusion to define a sport. I mean, one "requirement" for something to be a sport that a lot of people agree with is the necessity of clearly defined objectives toward winning. I.E. which team scores the most points in X amount of time, who goes X distance the fastest (or who goes the farthest in X amount of time), or who takes the fewest strokes to put a ball in a hole. Obviously there are some exceptions, such as boxing, which most people consider to be a sport despite the presence of judges. However, something like ice dancing? Not so much...


To be the err....angel's advocate? (does that make me a fairy?), ice skating IS a sport, as well. I understand that the Olympics does not define sports, but it is a "competition of athletic games", which makes it a sport since a "sport" is defined as, "Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively."

Just as you were defending golf, how about trying a triple axle and then calling ice skating "not so much" a sport?



EDIT: Figure skating does have a set amount of time and you DO have to score as many points as possible. A sport, by your definition.


----------



## zadey1234 (May 7, 2007)

laxman2001 said:


> MTBing can be just as expensive, if not more. You can get a decent set of clubs for $500 or less, and play on a local course for under $10 on weekdays or $20 on weekends. Just like MTB, there are levels...
> 
> Also, Minigolf IS fun.


I've learned something while on my last bike(May rebuild it as an SS), You don't need a name brand bike(Spec, cannon, kona, etc.) to have a good time with a buddy on some trails. I was damn proud of that bike no matter how much people laughed at it. My Cannondale F8 rides just a little better because of a frame that better fits me. Wheels on it are in deep need of replacement though.

Edit:I don't want to spend 500 bucks on clubs and another reason for not wanting to play golf, I really don't have the patience, MTBing doesn't require that much patient. If it does, then I must be doing it wrong then. lol


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Figure skating is a real sport too?


----------



## Mountain Cycle Shawn (Jan 19, 2004)

fop1 said:


> then please explain to me why everyone rides these if they are no better then a hardtail?


Because they are cool, dude! And we have been all made to believe they are better.


----------



## bucksaw87 (Jun 18, 2007)

Kona0197 said:


> Figure skating is a real sport too?


rules/guidelines? check
participants? check
having fun? check
competition? check
physical activity? check

i'd say it is


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

p nut said:


> To be the err....angel's advocate? (does that make me a fairy?), ice skating IS a sport, as well. I understand that the Olympics does not define sports, but it is a "competition of athletic games", which makes it a sport since a "sport" is defined as, "Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively."
> 
> Just as you were defending golf, how about trying a triple axle and then calling ice skating "not so much" a sport?
> 
> ...


I completely understand how ice dancing could be judged a sport, and don't have a problem with people who define it as such. My ONLY issue with it is that the scoring seems to be very subjective. Now, it is quite possible that my eyes are simply not trained to see the minute differences between one person's triple axle and another's. But costume, form and how "pretty" it is have at least some value. I dislike the idea of this because, by the same definition, we could classify something such as Irish Dancing a sport (and while it is certainly competitive and intense enough to be one, the #3 Irish Dancer in the world lived on the floor above me, I just don't see it as such).
In something such as basketball, it doesn't matter how "pretty" your shot is, if if goes in the hoop, it counts. Same with football, baseball, golf, hockey, NASCAR, and most other major sports.


----------



## BrianU (Feb 4, 2004)

bucksaw87 said:


> didn't we already cover this?
> 
> golf is the single-speed of the sport world.


You know, I could understand golf coming up in a post tilted "Hardtails". After all, spending an afternoon outside wacking little balls with a stick and an afternoon riding a HT are similar, but dragging singlespeeds into it is just cold.

Brian


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

bucksaw87 said:


> rules/guidelines? check
> participants? check
> having fun? check
> competition? check
> ...


fair enough.


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

laxman2001 said:


> I completely understand how ice dancing could be judged a sport, and don't have a problem with people who define it as such. My ONLY issue with it is that the scoring seems to be very *subjective.*


Well, so is the officiating in basketball, football, baseball, etc. etc. There is always the human error factor in all sports. It will always be just a part of the game.



laxman2001 said:


> In something such as basketball, it doesn't matter how "pretty" your shot is, if if goes in the hoop, it counts. Same with football, baseball, golf, hockey, NASCAR, and most other major sports


Yeah, but if it were just a bunch of men putting up ugly shots, I guarantee it will die quickly as a sport. Certain athletic beauty is definitely a part of sports in general. Yes, the final line is getting the ball in the hoop, across the goal line, etc., but HOW that's done is a big part of it, as well.


----------



## Trek7000rider (Sep 7, 2008)

my conclusion? learn to ride trails on a hardtail. most people will be fine with the ht. some people may want to step it up to more difficult terrain (althought most wont) and at that point, they may wish to consider a FS. they are different. different strokes for different folks. its that easy. I like both, but i have a HT right now and i'm fine with it.


----------



## Bruzer (Apr 23, 2008)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> I feel that hardtails are getting a bad rap from bike shops, magazines and big bike companies due to the fact that there is a slimmer profit margin on them. I have rode full suspensions extensively and just prefer a hardtail overall. I watched the olympics and all the fastest guys were still on hardtails. I know I'll get flak for saying it but unless your a freerider or a downhiller I think the hardtail is a simpler more elegant design. Is anyone on board with me? I still see many of the best guys and gals out on the trail on hardtails. What I fear is the bigger companies abandoning them to keep costs high then I will have no choice but to go back to full suspension. LONG LIVE THE HARDTAIL.


Tyler,

I want to put your post another way so we are clear.

You prefer a moderate amount of comfort technology on your bicycle by having a bicycle with suspension *only on the front*. But you shun the comfort technology of a fully suspended bicycle?

Your preference seems like an arbitrary line to draw. Either you endorse suspension or you don't. If you prefer a "a simpler more elegant design" why not a rigid bicycle or go back to basics and ride the original Penny Farthing. There are still fully rigid bikes that can handle off road riding, who most likely think that any type of suspension is a luxury.

In your original post you seem offended that shops/magazines are giving hard tails a "bad rap." So you tried to rally the form members around your hard tail propaganda, which as I pointed out earlier is an arbitrary mix of comfort technology and original bicycle design.

Would you have encouraged the automobile industry to shun full suspension? Things would sure be different if cars only had front suspension. Motorcycles are another good example. Sure you can pay a custom builder to make a hard tail, but riding is much more comfortable on a motorcycle with front and rear suspension.

For full disclosure I own rigid and hard tail bicycles. I rented a full suspension bicycle when in Boulder Colorado recently and it was technology that was just OK.

- Bruzer


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*?*

Bruzer,

Seriously now, the technology of a sport comes from racing; Cars, motorcycles, boats etc.. Most of us are riding cross country; uphill, downhill, singletrack, fire-road,. Most of the big companies are telling us racing has nothing to do with the average rider, which if true means bicycle riding is totally different than the other sports I mentioned earlier, which of course, it is not. The only cross country racers who ride full suspension bikes are sponsored by the companies who are pushing full suspension bikes on buyers. Even with the money of the big companies behind the full suspension cross country bike, hardtails win the race more, especially internationally where hardtails are more popular. Oh, and in M.B Action this month Richard Cunningham announces the death of the 26" hardtail while acknowledging the best cross country racer still rides one. If big buissiness wins this fight we will all suffer the loss of the best design, technologically speaking of course.:sad:


----------



## Scott O (Aug 5, 2004)

Anyone who says golf is easy is full of it. And if you ever have tried to play, then you will have a huge appreciation of what the pros are able to do in manipulating their swings, hitting out of the sand, etc. Golf is definatley a thinking man's game (kinda like riding a singlespeed?). It can be cheaper than biking (my 4 bikes cost me many g's, while my used Pings off of ebay cost me $350). Though I'd take a good day of mtb'ing over golf, the one big advantage it has over biking is that its a lot easier to knock back a few beers during a round. And who doesn't enjoy getting a hot dog at the snack shack after 9 holes? How bout the cute beer girl driving around the course selling you snackie cakes and beers? Did I mention the joy of lighting up a good stogie when you're having a good round? And I'm always a big fan of unbuckling someone else's bag on a cart so that when they drive away it bounces off of the back like a sack o potatoes.

Mountain_bomber - what's so corporate about any of that? 

And why the hell am I arguing about golf on a bike site? Damn you Al Gore and your internet!!!!


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> Bruzer,
> 
> Seriously now, the technology of a sport comes from racing; Cars, motorcycles, boats etc.. Most of us are riding cross country; uphill, downhill, singletrack, fire-road,. Most of the big companies are telling us racing has nothing to do with the average rider, which if true means bicycle riding is totally different than the other sports I mentioned earlier, which of course, it is not. The only cross country racers who ride full suspension bikes are sponsored by the companies who are pushing full suspension bikes on buyers. Even with the money of the big companies behind the full suspension cross country bike, hardtails win the race more, especially internationally where hardtails are more popular. Oh, and in M.B Action this month Richard Cunningham announces the death of the 26" hardtail while acknowledging the best cross country racer still rides one. If big buissiness wins this fight we will all suffer the loss of the best design, technologically speaking of course.:sad:


you actually listen to RC? The hardtail isn't going anywhere anytime soon.


----------



## Scott O (Aug 5, 2004)

Did I mention how hot golf babes are? :ihih:


----------



## nOOky (May 13, 2008)

I have a 29er hardtail and a 26" fs bike. I took them both out sunday, one bike did one lap of my local favorite trail, then I took the other. I used to ride a rigid bike many years ago on the same trails, then I progressed to a front suspension hardtail, then to a full suspension, then I bought another hardtail. I believe in my experiences (been riding a mountain bike since I can remember) that the full suspension offers a more enjoyable experience. I can ride anything with my hardtail, even with the front fork locked out. I just find that the technology of a full suspension allows me enjoy it more. Coming up on logs or jumps, I just know there won't be quite as a big a hit on my forearms and wrists, and that the rear going over things will take some of the shock that my bent legs have to absorb. The rear seems to track a bit better over rooted and rocky climbs, maybe that little bit of give helps.
Maybe it's old age, but I enjoy the technology of a full suspension cross country type bike. If I can afford a 29er fs next year I will probably try one of those. It's all about preference, in a race I can see using whatever is lighter and gives you an edge. But for everyday riding, I'll keep using my fs bike.


----------



## Duey (May 13, 2009)

I ride your Mom's Hardtail..


----------



## Scott O (Aug 5, 2004)

Duey said:


> I ride your Mom's Hardtail..


Haaa haaa! Haaaaaa! Wicked funny!

Comedy just ain't your thing son. Go back to working on your poetry.


----------



## Bruzer (Apr 23, 2008)

Tyler Kiefer said:


> Bruzer,
> 
> Seriously now, the technology of a sport comes from racing; Cars, motorcycles, boats etc.. Most of us are riding cross country; uphill, downhill, singletrack, fire-road,. Most of the big companies are telling us racing has nothing to do with the average rider, which if true means bicycle riding is totally different than the other sports I mentioned earlier, which of course, it is not. The only cross country racers who ride full suspension bikes are sponsored by the companies who are pushing full suspension bikes on buyers. Even with the money of the big companies behind the full suspension cross country bike, hardtails win the race more, especially internationally where hardtails are more popular. Oh, and in M.B Action this month Richard Cunningham announces the death of the 26" hardtail while acknowledging the best cross country racer still rides one. If big buissiness wins this fight we will all suffer the loss of the best design, technologically speaking of course.:sad:


Tyler,

Maybe front suspension bikes were "pushed" on you and you didn't even know it.

Some technology comes from and for comfort. Technically you don't need a front suspension fork to ride the trails, but you chose to carry the extra weight up the hills. Rigid forks are lighter (and harsher) than all front suspension forks. I would argue that front suspension bikes are more comfortable than rigid bikes, and full suspension are more comfortable than front suspension bikes.

My point is you chose to draw the line at front suspension. Others draw the line at front and rear suspension. Why you chose one over another seems arbitrary.

You will always be able to buy a hard tail (or 1/2 suspended bike) from somewhere, the will never really go away. In the end the superior technology will win out, and the race is over for motorcycles. Thank goodness my motorcycle has full suspension, I would hate to have ridden over 30,000 miles on a hard tail motorcycle (old technology).

- Bruzer


----------



## lubes17319 (Dec 19, 2005)

So, from what I've read...........darts is a sport, right?


----------



## Duey (May 13, 2009)

Scott O said:


> Haaa haaa! Haaaaaa! Wicked funny!
> 
> Comedy just ain't your thing son. Go back to working on your poetry.


My first post is about as helpful and intelligent as every other post in this thread.. HT > DS, DS > HT, Apples > Oranges.. George W. might say, "at least you're all eating your vegetables.." Who gives a flying **** what anyone thinks.. just ride?


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

Bruzer said:


> In the end the superior technology will win out, and the race is over for motorcycles. Thank goodness my motorcycle has full suspension, I would hate to have ridden over 30,000 miles on a hard tail motorcycle (old technology).


I hate getting sucked back in again, this this argument is old and flawed. Motorcycles outweigh the rider by a significant amount, and they have engines which produce a lot more power than a person. So while they both have two wheels, you cannot then say that what is optimal for one is optimal for the other.


----------



## WYTE FANG (Jul 6, 2009)

I think that full suspension bikes should only be used for rugged xc, freeriding, and downhill. For everything else a hardtail is the best, IMO. If your just riding paved roads you don't need a full suspension. I see ppl riding around on the streets on downhill bikes. It's a waste of money and equiptment.


----------



## Bruzer (Apr 23, 2008)

bad mechanic said:


> I hate getting sucked back in again, this this argument is old and flawed. Motorcycles outweigh the rider by a significant amount, and they have engines which produce a lot more power than a person. So while they both have two wheels, you cannot then say that what is optimal for one is optimal for the other.


Sorry to bring you back in.

What you are saying is the additional weight overcomes the advantage of rear suspension ... for you. You don't seem to mention or care about the extra weight of the front suspension, but I see your point.

If the technology improves to a point where rear suspension weight is minimal or acceptable (as is the front suspension) I assert many other people will take advantage of the increased comfort result. Rear suspension has come a long way and has had many weight reductions already. I suspect that the future innovations will reduce the weight even further.

If weight wasn't a factor more people would be using the advanced technology (suspension) much like motorcycles.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

WYTE FANG said:


> I think that full suspension bikes should only be used for rugged xc, freeriding, and downhill. For everything else a hardtail is the best, IMO. If your just riding paved roads you don't need a full suspension. I see ppl riding around on the streets on downhill bikes. It's a waste of money and equiptment.


But what if I LIKE my 5" bike on a rooted, bumpy XC trail? I don't need it, but it's more comfortable. And if I want a DH bike to ride down the street, then if I have the means I should be allowed to. As long as a person isn't a dick about it I don't care what they ride. That's the beauty of our free-market system. It doesn't matter what you NEED, its what you WANT. That's why we have huge plasma TV's and and luxury cars and double soy chi lattes. It's why we beat those pinko commies.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*Good designs just look right.*

bruzer,

No one won a race on a hardtail motorcycle in the last 70 years. Bobbing is also a huge factor in climbs, also not a factor on a motorcycle. My first bike was rigid, my second and third bikes were full suspension, after years of riding I now choose a hardtail because it just works the best for me.


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

nOOky said:


> I just find that the technology of a full suspension allows me enjoy it more.


There we are again:
people like different things. One likes the mother, another prefers the daughter. Still another one might want both.

I have some bumpy and twisty trails around me. Now I've been riding them on my singlespeed HT, but feel that I should really get my 7" bike in riding shape soon. Last summer a minor injury forced me to ride FS only and in a couple of weeks I was missing the HT.

Actually, I think some of those trails would be intreresting (read: enjoyable) on a rigid bike. Not faster. Not easier. Interesting.


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

Bruzer said:


> What you are saying is the additional weight overcomes the advantage of rear suspension ... for you. You don't seem to mention or care about the extra weight of the front suspension, but I see your point.


It's not just a weight thing, you also need to figure in comfort, control, and feel. Stop focusing in a small part of the picture to the exclusion of everything else. I like the added comfort and control front suspension offers me, while I like the control, feel, and weight a hardtail offers me.

Also, equating front and rear suspension is simply not correct. You're saying if you're going to accept front suspension, then it doesn't make sense to reject rear suspension. The fact is, front suspension and rear suspension affect a bike very differently.



Bruzer said:


> If the technology improves to a point where rear suspension weight is minimal or acceptable (as is the front suspension) I assert many other people will take advantage of the increased comfort result. Rear suspension has come a long way and has had many weight reductions already. I suspect that the future innovations will reduce the weight even further.
> 
> If weight wasn't a factor more people would be using the advanced technology (suspension) much like motorcycles.


Rear suspension is already at a point where it's weight in minimal and acceptable, but again you have to understand that weight is just a part of the equation.

Now you're bringing up motorcycles again. In case you haven't noticed, a motorcycle has an _engine_ which makes a lot more _power_ than a person, and makes it more smoothly. You don't have to worry about a motorcycles suspension bobbing or sucking power from the engine. Stop trying to equate two things which are not equal!


----------



## The Red (Mar 15, 2009)

suspension this, suspension that..

Do you realize that the "the 26" HT is dead" comment in a mag is meant just as much for the brainspace of the anti-HT zealot as much as the pro-HT zealot, and the attention-addicted celeb and/or mag will say anything for your brainspace? This is where the wise person lowers their head and understands why the Enquirer can stay in print while legit papers with international networks of reporters are going under.

To those who try to inject passion onto a technical suspension choice that should be made with reason, intelligence, necessity, capability, and availability in mind... what you _should_ suspend .. is your judgment.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

The Red said:


> suspension this, suspension that..
> 
> Do you realize that the "the 26" HT is dead" comment in a mag is meant just as much for the brainspace of the anti-HT zealot as much as the pro-HT zealot, and the attention-addicted celeb and/or mag will say anything for your brainspace? This is where the wise person lowers their head and understands why the Enquirer can stay in print while legit papers with international networks of reporters are going under.
> 
> To those who try to inject passion onto a technical suspension choice that should be made with reason, intelligence, necessity, and availability in mind... what you _should_ suspend .. is your judgment.


Which is why people just don't seem to SHUT UP about the stupid conception that hardtails are dead. What kind of brainless moron came up with that load of crap anyway?

Plus, I'd love to shoot all the bastards that run the Enquirer.


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> What kind of brainless moron came up with that load of crap anyway?


As The Red already said, people that care more about sales than anything else. If it sells, it sells.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

p nut said:


> As The Red already said, people that care more about sales than anything else. If it sells, it sells.


And they're all bastards too.

If the product lives up to it's hype, I like it. Companies that would rather make an amazing product and not sell any beat the _crap _out of the guys that don't care about their quality and just want to sell as many as they can dish out. Same goes for the people that belittle the things that actually matter/things that are better just to sell their dumb-ass things. Case in point- the brainless morons that think hardtails are dead.


----------



## Scott O (Aug 5, 2004)

Who are you guys talking to? I guess I'm missing who the people are that are saying hardtails are dead? 

Was it a Southpark episode where everyone was blaming everything on 'corporations'? Damn those corporations!!!


----------



## ZeroNine3 (May 18, 2009)

laxman2001 said:


> But what if I LIKE my 5" bike on a rooted, bumpy XC trail? I don't need it, but it's more comfortable. And if I want a DH bike to ride down the street, then if I have the means I should be allowed to. As long as a person isn't a dick about it I don't care what they ride. That's the beauty of our free-market system. It doesn't matter what you NEED, its what you WANT. That's why we have huge plasma TV's and and luxury cars and double soy chi lattes. It's why we beat those pinko commies.


Hahaha.... f...ing commies. Ride what you wish/ can afford, rigid, hard tail, full suspension....


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> If the product lives up to it's hype, I like it. Companies that would rather make an amazing product and not sell any beat the crap out of the guys that don't care about their quality and just want to sell as many as they can dish out. Same goes for the people that belittle the things that actually matter/things that are better just to sell their dumb-ass things. Case in point- the brainless morons that think hardtails are dead.


That's the business world. Most couldn't care less if it's the best thing suited for the consumers' needs, but if it's flying off the shelves, they'll make it. Granted, *usually*, the best suited item will prevail, obviously, but not always. I would like to see companies that really care to succeed, but that doesn't always happen. Look at WalMart, bikesdirect, lots of online retailers, etc. that snuffs out the shop down the street started by a guy that's biked 95% of his life and offers excellent service, but cannot match the prices.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

p nut said:


> That's the business world. Most couldn't care less if it's the best thing suited for the consumers' needs, but if it's flying off the shelves, they'll make it. Granted, *usually*, the best suited item will prevail, obviously, but not always. I would like to see companies that really care to succeed, but that doesn't always happen. Look at WalMart, bikesdirect, lots of online retailers, etc. that snuffs out the shop down the street started by a guy that's biked 95% of his life and offers excellent service, but cannot match the prices.


I dunno, i think compared to most other areas the LBS has done an incredible job of surviving. Think about it, whats the biggest store you've bought a bike from (not counting a wally-world or target cheapie). REI? But even then, in most parts of the country the LBS is still doing pretty well. Compared to golf, where superstores such as Dicks and large store such as golfsmith or golf galaxy are driving the small stores out of business, or the obvious examples of Wal-Mart and others. The place the LBS's need to be afraid of is, of course, online.


----------



## Scott O (Aug 5, 2004)

Just busted a spoke on my 10 year old Rolf Vector Pro wheels on my commute home. I wonder if Walmart can replace it for me?


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

laxman2001 said:


> I dunno, i think compared to most other areas the LBS has done an incredible job of surviving. Think about it, whats the biggest store you've bought a bike from (not counting a wally-world or target cheapie). REI? But even then, in most parts of the country the LBS is still doing pretty well. Compared to golf, where superstores such as Dicks and large store such as golfsmith or golf galaxy are driving the small stores out of business, or the obvious examples of Wal-Mart and others. The place the LBS's need to be afraid of is, of course, online.


The LBS's are SURVIVING, not doing well. I know of more people with Wal-Mart, Target bikes than ones from the LBS. )And no, I don't think they got a good deal on a heavy POS, but when they're looking at a $100 price tag vs. $400, it's obvious where their money will go.) IIRC, those $3-400 bikes are 80% of the LBS's sales. I know that hurts a lot of their sales to lose it to WalMart or other stores. They make enough sales and service enough of the POS bikes to survive. They're not in it to make mega bucks.

Why do you think WalMart, Target, etc. have not ventured into selling higher end (or at least DECENT) bikes? Because there is hardly any money in it. If there were, they'd start selling Serotta's and Yeti's as soon as they could get their greedy paws on them.

And as I've already mentioned, online is very much a threat to the LBS. The main thing the LBS has going for them is that you can try out and test ride a bike before buying it, as well as servicing of the bikes. If any of those online vendors figures out a way to ship demo bikes back and forth at no extra charge to the customer, while still offering their online prices......yikes. I'm venturing to guess the LBS will be nothing more than a service shop in the future.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

I hate big business... :madmax:


----------



## Go! Ninja Go! (Apr 25, 2009)

laxman2001 said:


> 1. Golf is a sport, and motorcycling and snowmobiling are far further from a sport than golf.
> Tennis
> a basketball (and even join a club instad of playing at a park/YMCA... I don't NEED a team to shoot a few hoops, or to throw a baseball with a friend.
> running
> ...


I really hope you're not serious saying motorcycle racing isn't a sport. Try keeping your heartrate around 160bpm for about 45 minutes in over 100 degree heat. Not to mention throwing a roughly 450lb machine side to side inches away from the pavement and your competition. There's a reason most serious racers cycle more than you probably do. There's a WSBK race on the 25th I believe televised on Speed. Do yourself a favor and watch it.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Go! Ninja Go! said:


> I really hope you're not serious saying motorcycle racing isn't a sport. Try keeping your heartrate around 160bpm for about 45 minutes in over 100 degree heat. Not to mention throwing a roughly 450lb machine side to side inches away from the pavement and your competition. There's a reason most serious racers cycle more than you probably do. There's a WSBK race on the 25th I believe televised on Speed. Do yourself a favor and watch it.


Oh, I think it is a sport. Without question racing is. My point was that playing a round is much closer than say, riding a snowmobile around on a mountain. 
But yes, definitely a sport. And you would also need to know that I actually WATCH the 24 of Le Mans on the internet live, along with keeping up with Formula 1. And Valentino Rossi rules.


----------



## Go! Ninja Go! (Apr 25, 2009)

laxman2001 said:


> Oh, I think it is a sport. Without question racing is. My point was that playing a round is much closer than say, riding a snowmobile around on a mountain.
> But yes, definitely a sport. And you would also need to know that I actually WATCH the 24 of Le Mans on the internet live, along with keeping up with Formula 1. And Valentino Rossi rules.


Off topic maybe, but have you read his autobiography? I was hoping he'd do a bit better this past weekend at Laguna, but 2nd is enough to keep him in the points lead. If you like Vale check out Ben Spies as well. Another awesome racer with the same talent and drive as The Doctor.

Oh yeah....I'm a big Ferrari fan myself. Crap year though.


----------



## Mountain Cycle Shawn (Jan 19, 2004)

They are all sports and one is no more or less of a sport then the other, just different!


----------



## oldskoolm4 (Jan 13, 2008)

texacajun said:


> Seatboy & MB156, I think I'll respectfully disagree. Not everything goes downhill...except maybe internet arguements. :skep: When going UP ledgy, scree stuff my FS is the light saber and the hardtail is the edge of control trail destoyer. My 3" bike is light & nimble, the rear suspension keeps my rear wheel on the ground so I can slowly pick my lines and work my way up multi-ledges and loose climbs without spinning and throwing rocks everywhere. I CAN and DO ride my rigid SS on some of the same trails, but I have to hit them at higher speeds and lose traction (i.e. add to trail wear) much more often.
> 
> Also I'll agree with the marathon vs xc racer boi comments. Spend 4+ hours riding Down and UP the rocks & ledges of central texas in the triple digits and you'll see why most of us use FS bikes. It just makes for a much more enjoyable all day ride.


I'm in North Texas and I ride a hardtail singlespeed. I do have a F/S bike I bring out every now and then, though.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

> But yes, definitely a sport. And you would also need to know that I actually WATCH the 24 of Le Mans on the internet live, along with keeping up with Formula 1. And Valentino Rossi rules.


NASCAR is the best in racing.


----------



## rbrsddn (Dec 3, 2006)

Go! Ninja Go! said:


> Off topic maybe, but have you read his autobiography? I was hoping he'd do a bit better this past weekend at Laguna, but 2nd is enough to keep him in the points lead. If you like Vale check out Ben Spies as well. Another awesome racer with the same talent and drive as The Doctor.
> 
> Oh yeah....I'm a big Ferrari fan myself. Crap year though.


 Spies is a great young rider, but the same talent and drive as Rossi? Might be a little early in his career to compare them. When he wins 100 GP's then I'll agree.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> NASCAR is the best in racing.


there is no question in my mind that NASCAR is just as hard/intense/legitimate as any other form of racing. But personally I like the idea of A. cars going both left and right, and B. the actual use of modern technology and innovation.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

*Big Business*

If you've worked for big business for any length of time before you will begin to understand that the decisions about what should be marketed to the customer are made by focus groups. More often than not focus groups miss the point of what is best for shoppers. Focus groups decide what bike you are going to want. Because of focus groups, we in the U.S. don't get the hardtail bike choices from the big companies that Europe and Canada do. For example, I want to be able to pick up one of the bad ass euro-spec hardtail trail bikes from Specialized from a local shop but I can't. When big business makes and enforces bad decisions we all suffer, It's a sad fact of life in todays screwed up economy.:madman:


----------



## Charlie America (Jan 13, 2004)

*Been there; done that.*










I've had my share of bikes over the last 40+ years or riding, from no-name bikes I took apart very weekend to rebuild to a "free ride" machine with a "pro build". FS and HT and I have loved riding them all.

I did finally had a frame built for me about 10 years ago and loved riding it, racing it and traveling to exotic riding places with it. I damaged it in Vancouver and was forced to look for another frame to race that season and ended up on a FS. I really enjoyed it and the comfort level of plowing my way over everything... my lack of finesse was no longer an issue.

A few years of mixing it up with both bikes and I had to take a break from riding (kids, ya know) and when it came time to get back into it, the FS didn't work for me anymore.

Now, the FS languishing in the basement and my HT is the beast-of-burden once more... and again I'm in love.

CA


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

^^ Nice Seven. If you're packing a stand on your ride, I'd like to see what else you carry with you!


----------



## p nut (Apr 19, 2007)

laxman2001 said:


> there is no question in my mind that NASCAR is just as hard/intense/legitimate as any other form of racing. But personally I like the idea of A. cars going both left and right, and B. the actual use of modern technology and innovation.


NASCAR does have actual road courses in the circuit. Also, just because they use a Taurus/Camry/Monte Carlo body, it doesn't mean they're not using modern technology. There's plenty of it on there.

But with that said, I enjoy F1 and MotoGP far more than NASCAR. Even though my team, Honda, has pulled out (but I guess not completely)...


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

p nut said:


> NASCAR does have actual road courses in the circuit. Also, just because they use a Taurus/Camry/Monte Carlo body, it doesn't mean they're not using modern technology. There's plenty of it on there.
> 
> But with that said, I enjoy F1 and MotoGP far more than NASCAR. Even though my team, Honda, has pulled out (but I guess not completely)...


Doesn't NASCAR still use carburetors and the same base design since the 60's or so?
Don't get me wrong, they are still amazing engines, but when F1 cars are LIMITED to 18,000 rpm and put out over 700hp out of a naturally aspirated 2.4L V8... well it just doesn't compare.

And while Le Mans cars aren't quite as ridiculous, they have ACTUAL INNOVATION, like the Audi diesels, or aero innovations...


----------



## VTSession (Aug 18, 2005)

knumbskull said:


> Not everyone rides cross country trails around Boston


Thanks! You're so insightful.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

laxman2001 said:


> Doesn't NASCAR still use carburetors and the same base design since the 60's or so?
> Don't get me wrong, they are *still amazing engines*, but when F1 cars are LIMITED to 18,000 rpm and put out over 700hp out of a naturally aspirated 2.4L V8... well it just doesn't compare.
> 
> And while Le Mans cars aren't *quite as ridiculous*, they have *ACTUAL INNOVATION*, like the Audi diesels, or aero innovations...


Also like this guy:










which uses a Rolls-Royce jet engine out of a helicopter as it's propulsion method.
I'd be so scared to ride one, but would love to have one! 
Listen to the engine noise:






So cool!


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

> there is no question in my mind that NASCAR is just as hard/intense/legitimate as any other form of racing. But personally I like the idea of A. cars going both left and right, and B. the actual use of modern technology and innovation.


You are aware that NASCAR has road races and every so often use race tracks where they go left and right? As far as modern technology goes NASCAR has engineered some of the best safety devices.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> You are aware that NASCAR has road races and every so often use race tracks where they go left and right? As far as modern technology goes NASCAR has engineered some of the best safety devices.


Yet people still die quite a bit... :skep:


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

I haven't heard of a death since Dale died back in 2000 I think it was.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

Kona0197 said:


> I haven't heard of a death since Dale died back in 2000 I think it was.


Hmm.


----------



## bucksaw87 (Jun 18, 2007)

Kona0197 said:


> I haven't heard of a death since Dale died back in 2000 I think it was.


2001
there were a few deaths in the couple years leading up to 2001.


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

Kona0197 said:


> You are aware that NASCAR has road races and every so often use race tracks where they go left and right?


They have what? Two of them?



Kona0197 said:


> As far as modern technology goes NASCAR has engineered some of the best safety devices.


Because _that's_ what racing's about - the best safety devices.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Obviously you don't get it. :madman:


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

Go! Ninja Go! said:


> Off topic maybe, but have you read his autobiography? I was hoping he'd do a bit better this past weekend at Laguna, but 2nd is enough to keep him in the points lead. If you like Vale check out Ben Spies as well. Another awesome racer with the same talent and drive as The Doctor.


Hah! I'm actually reading his autobiography right now! I was hoping, praying he'd catch Pedrobot before the end. I cannot describe how much I hate Pedrosa and want him to never step foot on a podium again.

It's still too early to call Spies the next Rossi, but there sure are a lot of things about Spies which remind me of Rossi. I'm really hoping he wins the WSBK title his rookie year.


----------



## bucksaw87 (Jun 18, 2007)

bad mechanic said:


> They have what? Two of them?


watkins glen and infineon. there used to be more, back in the 80's. the grand nationals have or had a road race in canada, and in mexico city.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

NASCAR races in Mexico City once a year I think.


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

Kona0197 said:


> Obviously you don't get it. :madman:


Oh, I get it just fine, which is why I don't watch Nascar. There's much better racing to be had.


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Better than NASCAR? Doubt it.


----------



## sherijumper (Feb 19, 2007)

*Nascar fans*

Around and around they go


----------



## sherijumper (Feb 19, 2007)

Seriously , how does a thread on hardtail mountainbikes get derailled into an argument about some cheesy car racing ? Do you see that door to your left or right , maybe it`s behind you . Use it and go outside .


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Cheesy? Those are fighting words around some NASCAR fans...


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Kona, stop it. You're acting like a troll. 
again, NASCAR has 2 races with right turns, EVERY F1, MotoGP, and enduro race has them. F1 has some serious safety devices too. Considering Kubica crashed at like 200mph last year at the Canadian GP and was racing in 3 weeks...


----------



## Kona0197 (Oct 19, 2004)

Sorry. Thanks Laxman.


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> Also like this guy:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's Jay Leno. He said that bike can melt bumpers on tailgaters.


----------



## zadey1234 (May 7, 2007)

Soo..Umm..Yeah, where were we? Oh yeah, Hardtails. 

I actually have noticed my front suspension on my F8 hinders my riding, heavier, more crap to worry about breaking and its annoying, atleast the fork I have(its a cheapo anyways.), which is why I'm looking into a Monocog 29er. SS, Rigid, 29er, there's like nothing to break, and rigid is more fun riding here because its mainly xc here.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

Curmy said:


> That's Jay Leno. He said that bike can melt bumpers on tailgaters.


I know! :arf:

Anyway, yes, hardtails.


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

Hardtails: some like 'em, some prefer FS. 
Either way, they aren't going anywhere.
And, for the record, at least Scott, Trek, Specialized (and I'm sure others) have a healthy selection of HTs in the US.


----------



## Tyler Kiefer (May 21, 2009)

Yeah, they just save their best for the European market, check out their bikes that are available to Germany on their websites.


----------



## Dirt Bringer (May 10, 2006)

mountain_bomber156 said:


> Also like this guy:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This redifines the meaning of "crash and burn".


----------



## Rev Bubba (Jan 16, 2004)

*The 26" Hardtail is Dead!*

At least Richie Cunningham says so in the August issue of MBA. I remember when he used to say the hardtail itself was dead so I guess he is getting mellow in his old age.

Of course, I'm so freakin' old I don't know any better cause I have my 26" steel hardtail loaded in the car so I can catch a quick ride after work.

:thumbsup:


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

I've only been in this sport a month and a half and i can tell RC is an idiot. I'll stick with MTBR. (Which reminds me that I need to save up and get on of those jerseys)


----------



## Qatarbhoy (Jun 13, 2008)

"Better than NASCAR? Doubt it."

MotoGP offers better racing every other weekend. Rossi is the best racer alive today - imho! Very mellow dude as well.


----------



## nOOky (May 13, 2008)

Ahhh MotoGP. They turn left, right, and they ride in the rain! What could be better than that?
Valentino is the man, sort of like an Italian Lance Armstrong on an 800 cc bike


----------



## Mongol (Jan 14, 2004)

johnnypecans said:


> The color orange is the _best_ color. You people who like other colors are just fooling yourselves.


dude. whatever. We all know blue bikes are best. I've had two, so i know.


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

Mongol said:


> dude. whatever. We all know blue bikes are best. I've had two, so i know.


It is is not about what is best. It is well known that red parts make your bike faster, white one - lighter, blue one - stronger, and yellow ones - safer.


----------



## mountain_bomber156 (Feb 17, 2009)

Dirt Bringer said:


> This redifines the meaning of "crash and burn".


Still.


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

Curmy said:


> red parts make your bike faster, white one - lighter, blue one - stronger, and yellow ones - safer.


and black makes you look slimmer


----------



## The_Lecht_Rocks (Jan 2, 2007)

rossi ride's a Cove Hummer fwiw............................


----------



## laxman2001 (Jun 1, 2009)

*black*



perttime said:


> and black makes you look slimmer


I'm so the king of black (there's a way to put it without sounding offensive)
All black bike
black helmet
black gloves
black shoes, socks
black shorts
and a black cannondale jersey (fine it has white trim, so do the shoes) (not the one in the pic)

He rides only at night.

No one has ever gotten a good look at him and lived to tell the tale.

Some say he has the result of a botched CIA experiment to create the world's greatest assassin, while others claim he is the actual spirit of MTB manifested. All we know is, he's called THE BIKE NINJA!

(for those who don't get the last part, google Stig intro. It's from Top Gear, the greatest show on television)


----------

