# When did "BLING" roll over into MTB?



## mofoki (Feb 1, 2005)

What's up with the mountainbiking crowd these days. The manufactures aren't catering to real moutainbikers anymore. Carbon fibre bikes? Carbon cranks? Carbon this and that and the other things? OK, maybe carbon has it's good qualities in road bikes but if you take a look at my aluminum mtb frames, the dents and other damage caused by rocks and crap I've hit, I wouldn't want to risk spending $5000 to $7000 on any of it. What the heck bike is worth $7000 anyway? My cranks are aluminum and have taken hits and kept on ticking, they're ugly but still work, but my Mavic Crossmax wheels are cracking, the axle replaced twiced and haven't lasted two years of XC use. Now I'm suppose to spend $1000 again for new wheels? My point is how pricing is getting out of control and what is considered bling verses practical. Take I-9's wheels, almost $600 per wheel? C'mon. Bling; not state of the art as they would want you to believe. Really now what real mtb guy or kid is willing to spend that much to tear up on the trails every day. Take suspension for example, it all does the same thing, soften the ride. The rest is trickery, "Trek with the EX floating shock". I could go on to to name names but I hope my point is made. For the masses who really love mountainbiking we are sort of being forced to stay broke to get so called quality parts and keep our bikes operating or go into massive debt to replace that worn out bike, not to mention brainwashed about this junk. I think the manufactures need to quit acting like our politicians who just want to line their pockets with our money and quit with the false slogans like "Bikers building whatever for bikers" and start with the sincere love of cycling again. I'm sick of spending loads of money for crap parts that supposidly are high tech highly engineered be all do all but end up being junk. And to the people who offer ratings and reviews, you should tell us the truth about the value and how well this stuff really works. Bling doesn't do us mountainbikers any good, it just keeps us broke. I spent $3000 on my last Canny about three years ago and if I can't find a good bike around that figure when this one needs replaced soon I, along with my family, will find a new hobby.


----------



## jmoote (Aug 31, 2007)

It sounds like you need some no-nonsense functional components, and there's no shortage of those on the market. Most of the new products actually do offer something for those who are technically discerning, but if you ride a ton and spend little time maintaining your bike then they may not be for you. Some things are just for the sake of bling, but nobody is forcing you to buy these...

It's nice to have variety in the market and have the option to buy components that look as nice as they function.


----------



## fastale (Jul 2, 2007)

...are paragraphs considered bling?


----------



## mofoki (Feb 1, 2005)

You're right. I need functional parts. As for maintaining my bike, I've learned to service my bike about every other ride. My Lefty fork needs attention every week because of the bearing migration issues. My rear hub starts to come apart every now and then. Creaks and cracking sounds constantly need attention. Tires, well lets say I spend more than $200 a year on tires. This stuff does take a beating. Although I'm spooked sometimes when flying down a technical downhill, I do have a certain amount of trust that I'm not going to die in a crash. But as much maintenance that is required if I didn't do it myself, if I took it to the shop, I'd never be able to ride because I wouldn't have a bike to ride. I do alot of reading and searching websites and talking to people and the low priced stuff is usually the stuff that nobody wanted.


----------



## mofoki (Feb 1, 2005)

fastale said:


> ...are paragraphs considered bling?


I didn't realize paragraphs were required when ranting.


----------



## GuruAtma (May 17, 2004)

As long as the bling factories aren't using child slave labor, who cares what others buy. I love my blingy wheels.


----------



## w00t! (Apr 28, 2008)

mofoki said:


> What's up with the mountainbiking crowd these days. The manufactures aren't catering to real moutainbikers anymore. Carbon fibre bikes? Carbon cranks? Carbon this and that and the other things? OK, maybe carbon has it's good qualities in road bikes but if you take a look at my aluminum mtb frames, the dents and other damage caused by rocks and crap I've hit, I wouldn't want to risk spending $5000 to $7000 on any of it. What the heck bike is worth $7000 anyway? My cranks are aluminum and have taken hits and kept on ticking, they're ugly but still work, but my Mavic Crossmax wheels are cracking, the axle replaced twiced and haven't lasted two years of XC use. Now I'm suppose to spend $1000 again for new wheels? My point is how pricing is getting out of control and what is considered bling verses practical. Take I-9's wheels, almost $600 per wheel? C'mon. Bling; not state of the art as they would want you to believe. Really now what real mtb guy or kid is willing to spend that much to tear up on the trails every day. Take suspension for example, it all does the same thing, soften the ride. The rest is trickery, "Trek with the EX floating shock". I could go on to to name names but I hope my point is made. For the masses who really love mountainbiking we are sort of being forced to stay broke to get so called quality parts and keep our bikes operating or go into massive debt to replace that worn out bike, not to mention brainwashed about this junk. I think the manufactures need to quit acting like our politicians who just want to line their pockets with our money and quit with the false slogans like "Bikers building whatever for bikers" and start with the sincere love of cycling again. I'm sick of spending loads of money for crap parts that supposidly are high tech highly engineered be all do all but end up being junk. And to the people who offer ratings and reviews, you should tell us the truth about the value and how well this stuff really works. Bling doesn't do us mountainbikers any good, it just keeps us broke. I spent $3000 on my last Canny about three years ago and if I can't find a good bike around that figure when this one needs replaced soon I, along with my family, will find a new hobby.


your lesson for the day is "trickle down technology"

http://www.circletrack.com/techarti...ickle_down_technology_cams_lifters/index.html

now try not to be so angry.


----------



## markf (Jan 17, 2007)

if you're really that hard on stuff, my not invest in some of the newer more durability focused parts aimed at the all mountain/light freeride categories. from the sounds of it, you ride more of an all mountain style on budget XC parts and ***** that they don't hold up as well as you think they should.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Compared to what you spend on a car, and how much more critical to your safety and health a bike is, you're getting off cheap.

But, currently, everyone making composite frames & components is making them for purposes of weight, not durability. Those parts are clearly not for you.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

I'm pretty sure Shimano can be blamed for popularizing Bling, after the introduction of their gold LX group a few years back...


----------



## xjbebop (Jul 14, 2005)

... I thought the Turner cult was to blame for this obsession for excess... ??


----------



## trailadvent (Jun 29, 2004)

mofoki I tend to agree, first off though I'll say people in the most work hard for there money and have the right just as you me to have a say here to spend there dollars as they wish and I don't hate on that because they can or do thats life and good them, they deserve it, but also alot are slaves to marketing hype and need to buy the latest, maybe its my years in road and Im used to it!

But I agree, some of the core of MTB is lost, but as others have said with smart choices there is very good equipment out ther today, and allot of it dosen't have to be carbon, excessively light or bling to function well!
Im like you while I like carbon in aspects Im not convinced in its appication for average jo, and thats from many years using carbon products in sailing and mtb [mainly bars]

There is imo though a price value for longtivety, if you buy smart some stuff will last longer if maintained properly as it was desinged to.

MTB is hard on equipment yet most don't maintain there gear well or clean there bikes, low end or high end then balme components! Thats another story and not allare ignorant to this, just the usual jo who uses the LBS for everything!

Unfortunatley some people have to have the latest, blingiest stuff every 6months or so regardless of function or form, that produces bad products speed to market for the latest ideas usually at our cost in $$ and in bad experiences we are our worst enemies, this only teaches manafacutures and big bike companies that we can be easy pickings imo!

I think this is why some have identified well with single speeds again and hardtails allot of this is eliminated, and its how we used to be before non cyclists started seeeing easy money in MTB thats the circle of business!

Just use you dollars wisely, support companies that have great CS, meet your values build great bikes or parts they are out there and sometimes it may cost more up front but often it saves money in the long run and your ride experience is enhanced cause you just enjoy riding rather than the shine on the new s h i t e hanging off your bike.

Ive got a set of cranks on my bike 4yos old now and its a contest with myself now how bad they look the more they wear, I love it, my wheels are the same, Just keep rolling, Ive got a Thomson Elite seatpost Ive had since 99 they haven't changed! some stuff lasts and last well, that post still looks good above the seat clamp, my Sram gearing is 2yos going on 3yos old ok its XO/XGen/X9 but its taking the knocks and many miles! some suspension is also going the distance like my Pike 454 Uturn, 2yos is a long time for me, but thru axle, servicing and its all sweet, my Magura Disc brakes also have stood the test of time!

So broken down my bikes have worked out pretty cheap and It won't be for sometime before they get replaced or maybe they won't! More likely add one or 2 here another SS not bling or expensive! and a DH also not bling but well built specc to last if thats possible in DH

But good topic, there's many companies out there know who rip off others designs, have bigger budgets so can stand up in patent courts, dictate to there dealers, force them to carry excess stock and wipe out competion or other brand options in store, taking down the smaller LBS bike shops that function on service and the customer, thats where my main beef is and I don't support those companies at all! No matter, theres just too many options out there to be sucked in by big corporates! A little bit of research and ya can rac up a number of good alternaitves and options!:thumbsup:


----------



## psychobilly808 (Aug 26, 2007)

while frankly I don't think it matters what other people choose to spend their money on I can kinda understand. I ride both road and mtn and there is for sure WAY more of this "look at my new fancy, flashy, carbon-ti-etc ______" on the road biking side. the though or more and more of that creeping over into the mtn side while yeah it kinda is a pain really it;s all about who you ride with anyway, any besides, when you and your bike are both coated top to bottom in mud nobody will be able to tell what your bike is made of. Oh and concerning the whole carbon durability issue consider this: we build racing sailboat that cross oceans and weather major storms out of carbon, the F-18 fighter is mostly carbon, the new boeing 787 is made mostly of carbon, indy cars are mostly carbon, in the grand scheme of things the loads put on a carbon bike frame are pretty small, it's totally not about the strength of the carbon itself, it's all about the carbon structure being built properly. that mainly concerns things like frames and rims though, smaller parts like bottle cages, carbon brake levers, or carbon parts of deraileurs, on a mountain bike, yes totally just bling factor, MAYBE there's a LITTLE bit of an arguement for the ultralight road bikes with that kinda stuff but IMHO on a mtn bike the tiny bit of weight you save with those little carbon bits will be right back in the bike in minutes in the form of cakes on mud.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

Luckily, we're finally at the point where most products brought to market actually work in the real world. Remember Kooka cranks, along with everything else that was purple anodized and didn't work? Back about ten years ago or more, most things didn't work and only a few manufacturers made stuff that did.

Fast forward to now: most things do work and work well at that, so how do you differentiate? Since everything works, there are generally subtle performance differences. Not better, not worse, just different. Cyclists have always been into the appearance of their bikes and parts, so one way to differentiate similar performing components is their looks, and also putting money into it and making them stand out next to the crowd. At one time, Shimano was the best performing, least bling you can get. While they're still not as flashy, they do have a distinctive appearance. Hope used to be one of the blingier brands and still is. They want to sell their craftsmanship by allowing the products to look as well made as they are.

Is there really much separating King, DT Swiss, and I9 hubs? Sure, some people will talk about engagement and other stuff, but when you boil it down, they are all top end hubs that at the end of the day plain work and engage when you mash the pedals. The difference is in appearance and bells and whistles.

The bling factor came from so many choices available, and luckily, as a consumer, the competition made it easier for you to decide where to go. You can luckily elect to not get that $1k Xmax wheelset (when you could have gotten a better handmade wheelset for $500 less), or anything with Shimano hubs, for instance. Even Hope hubs plain work and aren't a two week paycheck.

You also have to balance the economy of buying disposable parts compared to investment parts. For instance, I have a brand headset that's been on three bikes now and been serviced once. Better than having multiple old headsets before it that didn't last 6 months. 

The brakes I now use are amazing because every other ride I'm not replacing broken levers are reservoir covers like I used to with my old ones.

My hubs cab be easily rebuilt, instead of completely replaced. If I need new spokes, they are available at any bike shop.


----------



## Sideknob (Jul 14, 2005)

Speedub.Nate said:


> I'm pretty sure Shimano can be blamed for popularizing Bling, after the introduction of their gold LX group a few years back...


Y'know, I don't think I ever saw one single piece of that gangsta's ensemble on a bike.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

I'm pretty sure Flavor Flav wore the crankset around his neck on a gold (bike) chain on an episode of _Flavor of Love_.

As for the rest? Of the ones that actually sold, I assume they're either covered in dirt and unrecognizible just like every other colored component everybody spends so much time agonizing over, or else they're tucked away on bikes that never get ridden.


----------



## Gary H (Dec 16, 2006)

Here in the U.S. we have a thing called "The Free Market System". That means you have the freedom to make your own choices when it comes to what you purchase. If I like Bling, I can buy Bling! If I wanna paint my frame with a roller, thats my choice!

Live and let live I say. Do what you want, Ill do what I want! I wont tell you what to do, you dont tell me what to do.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

I thought Klein were always a bit of a poser crowd...?

But in terms of bling...come on man, I mean I get it...I understand your point but what is NOT bling in todays materialistic world...?

Cars...
Motorbikes...
Houses...
iPhones...(+ accessories)
key rings...
fashion...

Dude the list grows and grows. But I get your point and I have to say that I am definitely not into the whole bling-thing. But I do love my Hope brakes without their ano factor thanks.


----------



## zarr (Feb 14, 2008)

Speedub.Nate said:


> I'm pretty sure Flavor Flav wore the crankset around his neck on a gold (bike) chain on an episode of _Flavor of Love_.
> 
> As for the rest? Of the ones that actually sold, I assume they're either covered in dirt and unrecognizible just like every other colored component everybody spends so much time agonizing over, or else they're tucked away on bikes that never get ridden.


Bling has been around for years.Use your computer search and try to see Kooka Rasta & Kooka Bonnie cranks from the mid 90s. Also Cook Bros. cranks- and other stuff from back then. Bling ain't new.


----------



## mtroy (Jun 10, 2005)

fastale said:


> ...are paragraphs considered bling?


----------



## seosamh (Mar 17, 2007)

Just buy what you need, you don't need to be taken in by advertising, there is room for it all. The heart and soul of mtbing has and always been and will be what you do with your bike, if your looking to companies to tell you what to do or what you need, really your missing the point of mtbing. Personally myself, i spent a modest amount of money to get me a semi decent bike that can handle the type of riding i like to do, only time i buy parts is when i need them, other than that i couldn't care less what top end bling the companies are trying to punt. i'm too busy enjoying the bike i've got.


----------



## mtroy (Jun 10, 2005)

zarr said:


> Bling has been around for years.Use your computer search and try to see Kooka Rasta & Kooka Bonnie cranks from the mid 90s. Also Cook Bros. cranks- and other stuff from back then. Bling ain't new.


My thoughts exactly. As well, a lot of that bling, light weight, CNC'd and anodized stuff was in the dumpster long before the XT stuff ever was....actually the XT stuff is still working.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

I would not call XT THAT bling though...pretty simple looking with some streamlined visuals. But Blingy...?????


----------



## Scooty (Jul 17, 2008)

Whether it's road or mtb I like my bike to look good. I don't consider carbon to be "bling" there's really nothing bling about it. It's just carbon, it's light, it's strong, but it's bad when it comes to impacts (mtb, duh)...but there do need to be options for those who just want cheaper durability, which I believe there is. I was asking about wheelsets not long ago and I was directed to a nice ugly pair that should be able to take a beating...for only $150. I think the big problem here is finding GOOD looking stuff, that's worth a crap, that isn't mega expensive.

To each their own though, some like bling...some like ugly...some like murdered out (me ). Although, I do like the slight blingness of my new 2009 Cannondale CAA9...it is teh sick. White with carbon fork and some little metallic red parts for a little "bling".

I think you're right about carbon having much more of a place in road biking though. Having dealt with carbon for a while (skimboarding and windsurfing) I have seen it do some stupid stuff. If I had a carbon fork I wouldn't feel comfortable riding it after a wreck b/c I have seen carbon go from being super strong to taking one impact and snapping as soon as a decent amount of pressure is put on it.


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*Since the 1800's...*

I didn't read your paragraph-free rant or any of the novels that followed it. Bling has been around as long as bikes have. Anyone who's passionate about biking and their bikes will generally try to bling it in some way.

Is this really bugging you?


----------



## AC/BC (Jun 22, 2006)




----------



## rabidweasel999 (Oct 22, 2006)

Hey, I don't see what's wrong with bling. I just spray painted my perfectly good Holzfeller platforms metallic silver, basically chrome.

Cheap bling FTW.


----------



## EnglishT (Apr 9, 2008)

I dont know how you use the word over there - but "bling" is over the top decoration usually.

I wouldnt say that putting a few coloured parts to make your bike individual (and look nicer, without being show-offish) would be bling, anymore than I'd say its a bad thing.

Heck, we spend enough money on our bikes, and enough time riding them - why not have them look how we want them to? 
And I've seen alot of showoff bikes, built to look cool with coloured parts (Ive been doing a little quietly myself - minor parts like ODI collars, headset spacers etcetc) but I wouldn't say that Ive seen something disgustingly blingy, even if a few are a little overdone for my liking.

That said, the "all black" look is rather classy, just a little common


----------



## Dangeruss (Jan 24, 2006)

Obviously the OP is too new to the sport, or young to recall the purple anodized years.


----------



## knives out (Nov 23, 2007)

I'm glad you're so arrogant as to assume what, 

a: who and what real mountain bikers are &,
b: what said real mountain bikers need and want.

Get a life.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Ken in KC said:


> I didn't read your paragraph-free rant or any of the novels that followed it...


Haw haw! I was thinking the same thing! Did someone leave the door open to the ADD students' room?


----------



## thesenator (Jul 26, 2007)

*REAL BLING, 1984 style!!!!*

I'm going to the smelting shop STAT!


----------



## rabidweasel999 (Oct 22, 2006)

My friend has an old '80s Haro that he spraypainted gold.

Entirely gold.

The rims, tires, chain, everything.


----------



## racer1337 (Oct 7, 2007)

I just got some spinners for my bike.


----------



## rabidweasel999 (Oct 22, 2006)

Where?


----------



## drg179 (Feb 4, 2007)

*Fitty*

When Fitty Cent started riding Moab in between tours.


----------



## Deme Moore (Jun 15, 2007)

Dude, you could buy the cheapest component set from today for pennies on closeout and it would still work better than what we had a decade ago. Hell there are perfectly useable trailbikes for $600! Factor inflation and if anything bikes are cheaper these days than they ever were.

And yes, back then they still pimped up their bikes back then like cheap tarts. Purple ano, funky suspension designs (that look curiously WalMart these days), pump and lock holders, disc wheel covers, bar ends, you name it. All the stuff that looks stupid today.


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

zarr said:


> Bling has been around for years.Use your computer search and try to see Kooka Rasta & Kooka Bonnie cranks from the mid 90s. Also Cook Bros. cranks- and other stuff from back then. Bling ain't new.


I'm pretty sure Nate was actually there when those parts were around, as was I, Zarr.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

zarr said:


> Bling has been around for years.Use your computer search and try to see Kooka Rasta & Kooka Bonnie cranks from the mid 90s. Also Cook Bros. cranks- and other stuff from back then. Bling ain't new.


Oops. I must have not noticed your reply because it has no blingtastic picture.



Purple anodized _anything_ doesn't count because it pre-dates the term Bling. It's just tacky.


----------



## Spartacus Rex (Dec 18, 2006)

*Cant beleive I am replying to the stupid diatribe but...*

I hate stupid rants like the OP's which are so myopic that you have to come to the conclusion that the poster is really that stupid/naive or jealous. Nobody is FORCING you to buy any of that stuff. Perhaps you need a lesson in free market economics? If nobody bought that stuff then companies wouldnt make it. There is a market first, and products second. If I came out with a $10,000 unobtainium wheelset how many units do you think I would sell (regardless of how I marketed it)? How long do you think I would be in business. The reason that there are those items is because there is a market for them regardless of what you think.

The fact that people are willing to pay $1200 for an I9 wheelset means that I9 makes enough profit to stay in business. Why do you feel like you HAVE to get an I9/Crossmax/King wheelset? Do anybody actually think that a $1200 wheelset performs twice as good as a $600 one?

As with ALL products the very last few percent of performance costs much more. This is because of the limited market that is available to sell to and the high costs of materials and specialized constuction of those products. You should be HAPPY that there are schleps out there like myself that buy those products because everyone else benefits.

The technology used to make the high end components becomes available in the lower end components of the future. How long have you been biking for? My 2007 XT crankset blows away the strength and weight of my old XTR setup from 10 years ago and costs far less (WAY less when adjusted for inflation). My SRAM x.9 components totally blow away my old XT system and have lasted far longer without need for adjustment. My Fox 36 fork is light years ahead of my old 2000 Marz Bomber (lets not even compare to the Rock Shox Judy I still have). Heck the Judy was $250 when it came out and used crappy elastomers to get 80mm of travel. You can get a Pike for that kind of money with plush travel, total adjustment and better durability. These advances in technology are a bad thing accourding to you? WTF?


----------



## lucifer (Sep 27, 2004)

Stop reading magazines.
Buy a used ti hardtail with xt or sram and a decent fork and ride off into the sunset.
Durable, lightweight, and reasonably priced are seldom found together.

Or in other words light, cheap, strong, pick two....


----------



## zarr (Feb 14, 2008)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> I'm pretty sure Nate was actually there when those parts were around, as was I, Zarr.


Bout time you started talking to me again, J.C. I was there too. :thumbsup:


----------



## douglas (Nov 12, 2004)

mofoki said:


> What's up with the mountainbiking crowd these days. The manufactures aren't catering to real moutainbikers anymore. Carbon fibre bikes? Carbon cranks? Carbon this and that and the other things? OK, maybe carbon has it's good qualities in road bikes but if you take a look at my aluminum mtb frames, the dents and other damage caused by rocks and crap I've hit, I wouldn't want to risk spending $5000 to $7000 on any of it. What the heck bike is worth $7000 anyway? My cranks are aluminum and have taken hits and kept on ticking, they're ugly but still work, but my Mavic Crossmax wheels are cracking, the axle replaced twiced and haven't lasted two years of XC use. Now I'm suppose to spend $1000 again for new wheels? My point is how pricing is getting out of control and what is considered bling verses practical. Take I-9's wheels, almost $600 per wheel? C'mon. Bling; not state of the art as they would want you to believe. Really now what real mtb guy or kid is willing to spend that much to tear up on the trails every day. Take suspension for example, it all does the same thing, soften the ride. The rest is trickery, "Trek with the EX floating shock". I could go on to to name names but I hope my point is made. For the masses who really love mountainbiking we are sort of being forced to stay broke to get so called quality parts and keep our bikes operating or go into massive debt to replace that worn out bike, not to mention brainwashed about this junk. I think the manufactures need to quit acting like our politicians who just want to line their pockets with our money and quit with the false slogans like "Bikers building whatever for bikers" and start with the sincere love of cycling again. I'm sick of spending loads of money for crap parts that supposidly are high tech highly engineered be all do all but end up being junk. And to the people who offer ratings and reviews, you should tell us the truth about the value and how well this stuff really works. Bling doesn't do us mountainbikers any good, it just keeps us broke. I spent $3000 on my last Canny about three years ago and if I can't find a good bike around that figure when this one needs replaced soon I, along with my family, will find a new hobby.


problem solved:


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

xjbebop said:


> ... I thought the Turner cult was to blame for this obsession for excess... ??


No, that's us Mountain Cycle riders, and our high tech single pivots...

There are more riders, out there at Bootleg, showing up with $5000 bikes like carbon Mojo's that walk over little steps...
Those people buy a bike like that, for the same reason they have a Landrover or H3 Hummer.


----------



## Rufudufus (Apr 27, 2004)

thesenator said:


> I'm going to the smelting shop STAT!


I'm afraid to ask why you happen to have that blingtastic picture lying around.


----------



## mofoki (Feb 1, 2005)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> Luckily, we're finally at the point where most products brought to market actually work in the real world. Remember Kooka cranks, along with everything else that was purple anodized and didn't work? Back about ten years ago or more, most things didn't work and only a few manufacturers made stuff that did.
> 
> Fast forward to now: most things do work and work well at that, so how do you differentiate? Since everything works, there are generally subtle performance differences. Not better, not worse, just different. Cyclists have always been into the appearance of their bikes and parts, so one way to differentiate similar performing components is their looks, and also putting money into it and making them stand out next to the crowd. At one time, Shimano was the best performing, least bling you can get. While they're still not as flashy, they do have a distinctive appearance. Hope used to be one of the blingier brands and still is. They want to sell their craftsmanship by allowing the products to look as well made as they are.
> 
> ...


You say most components built today work better than in earlier times. Well here's my experience with my Scalpel just in the two years I've owned it.

Headset lower bearing failed within a month. 
Mavic rear axle busted within two months.
Crank Bros pedals broke three times within the first 6 months and I had to threaten Crank Bros to get them to actually remedy the junk.
Lefty fork has had a bearing migration maintenance action preformed at least a hundred times. 
I've tried every brand of tire out there because they only seem to do what the manufacturer claims for the first month then they are worn to the point where they all act the same.
FSA crank spider lock ring cracked and they wouldn't warranty it so I went to Truvativ.
Cables, brake pads, grips, drive train, changed probably twice a year.
Sram 990 and 991 chain and cassette gave piss poor performance (skipping) since the day it was new so I went back to XT on those.

This stuff aint cheep. Yes I do ride hard. I did a good bit of racing last year and did well but the courses are suppose to be XC. They had some rock gardens which I don't think should be in XC but none the less I didn't have any problems with them. I need good stuff and I need it light weight at least within reason. This bike is already 26.5 lbs. That's heavy for XC bikes today. 
I was thinking of replacing it with a Ventana El bastardo but I've worked out the figures to get it to 25 or 26 pounds and it's over $5000. And I just don't see why a good machine has to cost that much. I can buy a Buell motorcycle new for $9000. You see what I mean?:skep:


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

*When did "BLING" roll over into MTB? *
When little red headed white boys started listening and talking like rappers. And then they discovered they can tote a 45 lb downhill bike up to the highest point around, bomb down shuttle back up and do it again.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> *When did "BLING" roll over into MTB? *
> When little red headed white boys started listening and talking like rappers. And then they discovered they can tote a 45 lb downhill bike up to the highest point around, bomb down shuttle back up and do it again.


Nice one...I mean mad props yo.


----------



## Captain Chaos (Jan 29, 2006)

mofoki said:


> You say most components built today work better than in earlier times. Well here's my experience with my Scalpel just in the two years I've owned it.


If you're hard on components, which you are, why did you buy a lightweight XC bike? Also, there is nothing wrong with SRAM products in comparison with Shimano, I've barely adjusted my X9 running gear in two years of ownership.

Nobody is forcing you to go out and spend thousands on a carbon fibre bike, plenty of companies still produce burly aluminium single pivot designs ala Orange, or simplistic steel hardtail frames ala Chromag.

I'm sorry you've had bad experiences with certain companies, that has forced you to "threaten" them for warranty repair, but you're still in the minority as most riders are happy with the progression in technology which has led away from the light-weight, low-strength craze of the '90s to the light-weigh, high-strength trend of the moment.


----------



## Exodus11 (Aug 21, 2007)

drg179 said:


> When Fitty Cent started riding Moab in between tours.


can anybody say they really mind this kind of bling? :thumbsup:


----------



## chad1433 (Apr 5, 2004)

Speedub.Nate said:


> Oops. I must have not noticed your reply because it has no blingtastic picture.
> 
> 
> 
> Purple anodized _anything_ doesn't count because it pre-dates the term Bling. It's just tacky.


I think the proper term back then was "pimp"...

Got the mushroom shirt, mushroom belt, mushroom jacket


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

mofoki said:


> You say most components built today work better than in earlier times. Well here's my experience with my Scalpel just in the two years I've owned it.
> 
> Headset lower bearing failed within a month.


That can happen, but it was likely warranteed, no?



> Mavic rear axle busted within two months.


Don't buy Mavic wheelsystems, especially if you're hard on stuff. Meanwhile, there are people on several of these forums doing quite well with them. Not that I advocate using XMax at all because I do think they're junk.


> Crank Bros pedals broke three times within the first 6 months and I had to threaten Crank Bros to get them to actually remedy the junk.


Usually all posts about Crank Bros. includes the phrase "...but they have great customer service" in there, meaning they warrantee a lot of stuff. Personally, I know enough to not buy anything Crank.


> Lefty fork has had a bearing migration maintenance action preformed at least a hundred times.


Owning a Lefty, I can say this is certainly a problem you should have pushed C'dale on.



> I've tried every brand of tire out there because they only seem to do what the manufacturer claims for the first month then they are worn to the point where they all act the same.


More evidence that you're riding hard, perhaps in the realm of severe usage, you should be changing your equipment.


> FSA crank spider lock ring cracked and they wouldn't warranty it so I went to Truvativ.
> Cables, brake pads, grips, drive train, changed probably twice a year.


Grips twice a year? I think you're just riding a lot. You happen to be putting more wear and tear in a shorter amount of time than many people. If you do 100k on a car in a year, and have mileage related breakdowns, do you complain to the manufacturer that they don't base their durability on time, as opposed to mileage?
I can't argue that even I would like longer wear from my drivetrain components, particularly chains and cassettes. I went to steel chainrings (I run only one) and the last one lasted me four years.



> Sram 990 and 991 chain and cassette gave piss poor performance (skipping) since the day it was new so I went back to XT on those.


See my post on SRAM chains. the new 990 cassette is the first cassette on which I haven't bent a cog.


> This stuff aint cheep. Yes I do ride hard. I did a good bit of racing last year and did well but the courses are suppose to be XC. They had some rock gardens which I don't think should be in XC but none the less I didn't have any problems with them. I need good stuff and I need it light weight at least within reason. This bike is already 26.5 lbs. That's heavy for XC bikes today.
> I was thinking of replacing it with a Ventana El bastardo but I've worked out the figures to get it to 25 or 26 pounds and it's over $5000. And I just don't see why a good machine has to cost that much. I can buy a Buell motorcycle new for $9000. You see what I mean?:skep:


What this boils down to is you're looking for unrealistic wear from your components. You want light, but you don't want to pay, then you're not willing to accept the mileage tradeoff inherent in lighter components.


----------



## nachomc (Apr 26, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> You want light, but you don't want to pay, then you're not willing to accept the mileage tradeoff inherent in lighter components.


Cheap, strong, light. Pick two.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

mofoki said:


> What's up with the mountainbiking crowd these days. The manufactures aren't catering to real moutainbikers anymore.
> 
> rant....
> 
> .


The bling started before 1996. There was a Blue Book called the BikePro Buyers guide that documented all the madness.

https://www.bikepro.com/products/brakes/brakelever/grafton.shtml










That was then, this is now. Nothing's changed. The good news is biking is a double sided sport. There's the bling and technology. Then there's the riding or fitness. You can focus on one, or you can focus are both. Both are fun and you can really be passionate about them.

So if you don't like the bling, don't buy into it. There's riders out there with very basic equipment and they can smoke everyone. And they have a big smile on their face.

At least now we have the internet right?

fc


----------



## Roswell52 (Mar 25, 2008)

drg179 said:


> When Fitty Cent started riding Moab in between tours.


These MTB Ho's go realz gud wit mi Blinged out Trek.....

Mokoki, my friend.....What a totally strange thread...


----------



## Sideknob (Jul 14, 2005)

Bring back purple ano I say!


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

I'm afraid to ask why you happen to know and use that word "Blingtastic"...lol. Man I was around in the 70s when it all came out aswell...just in a more flowery sense, you know man. We should have a blingtastic emoticon chaps...

We change from words like, "how cool man" to "How cool dude" to "How cool bro" to "dis yo blingtastic beyuch"...he he he. Fashion is like a package in many ways so are we who invent this ditribe to appease our own vanity on some level of heirarchy. TIC...



Rufudufus said:


> I'm afraid to ask why you happen to have that blingtastic picture lying around.


----------



## sonofshin (Mar 29, 2007)

Yeah, what Douglas said! Sounds like you just need a singlespeed.


----------



## CactusJoe (Aug 10, 2005)

psychobilly808 said:


> Oh and concerning the whole carbon durability issue consider this: we build racing sailboat that cross oceans and weather major storms out of carbon, the F-18 fighter is mostly carbon, the new boeing 787 is made mostly of carbon, indy cars are mostly carbon


However, all those things you listed exist in a world surounded by armies of highly paid support technicians, and it wouldn't be uncommon to pay 5000 bucks to overhaul the most basic, simple component. Mountain bikes are in a different world.


----------



## mondaycurse (Nov 24, 2005)

You can still enjoy yourself on a bling-free bike, just like me. The most blingy part on my bike is my scuffed-up Ti brake levers, but I still outride the guy on the Yeti Arc with the $600 fox fork, $300 brakes, $800 wheelset, and $1,000,000 ego.


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> *When did "BLING" roll over into MTB? *
> When little red headed white boys started listening and talking like rappers. And then they discovered they can tote a 45 lb downhill bike up to the highest point around, bomb down shuttle back up and do it again.


Which has been since the very beginning. 
The repack riders had 40 + pound Schwinn's and technically speaking, they had to push them up most hills, then race down. 
They also made their own (custom) parts. 
So...the word Bling, may not have been around, but they were listening to Hendrix and AC DC, with Purple Haze anodized parts.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Ericmopar said:


> Which has been since the very beginning.
> The repack riders had 40 + pound Schwinn's and technically speaking, they had to push them up most hills, then race down.
> They also made their own (custom) parts.
> So...the word Bling, may not have been around, but they were listening to Hendrix and AC DC, with Purple Haze anodized parts.


What'd they complain about back then, excessively "groovy" bike parts?


----------



## ilostmypassword (Dec 9, 2006)

Great thread people. Mtbing is the new Golf as i keep hearing  If people want bling then good on them. We can make our own minds up can't we? 

>>>>Put simply- you don't have to ride a bike that will last a season- there are lots of options <<<<<

- Single speed for wet/ wintery weather - whatever- but with only one cog to wear out its a great choice .

- Trail bike for getting in the K's with mates- reliable and built with sensible parts that will last.

- Expensive XC race bike for events and races - parts that are light and will last a few seasons.

YOU CHOOSE


----------



## kabayan (Oct 25, 2004)

Spartacus Rex said:


> I hate stupid rants like the OP's which are so myopic that you have to come to the conclusion that the poster is really that stupid/naive or jealous. Nobody is FORCING you to buy any of that stuff.


I hate stupid replies like these which are so myopic that you have to come to the conclusion that the poster is really stupid/naive. 
Billion dollar corporations have more sales/marketing types for CEOs. There's a sales department, a marketing department, product placement, market research, viral marketing, celebrity endorsers, bulletin boards etc etc in addition to R&D. In some cases, those budgets are bigger than the R&D budgets. The good ones sell it to you even when you don't know they're selling it to you. The good ones create a market, instead of trying to meet a marketing need. And the last time I checked, they were selling to people.
Nobody is forcing you to buy it so don't. Please! Did anyone force you to reply to this "stupid" thread? Sold!


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Gosh that sounds familiar...!?
You did'nt copy-N-paste that reply from some-such place did you...?



kabayan said:


> I hate stupid replies like these which are so myopic that you have to come to the conclusion that the poster is really stupid/naive.
> Billion dollar corporations have more sales/marketing types for CEOs. There's a sales department, a marketing department, product placement, market research, viral marketing, celebrity endorsers, bulletin boards etc etc in addition to R&D. In some cases, those budgets are bigger than the R&D budgets. The good ones sell it to you even when you don't know they're selling it to you. The good ones create a market, instead of trying to meet a marketing need. And the last time I checked, they were selling to people.
> Nobody is forcing you to buy it so don't. Please! Did anyone force you to reply to this "stupid" thread? Sold!


----------



## pt3r (Mar 8, 2008)

Since when has the passion forum turned into the frustration forum? OP, go ride your bike. last time I checked that was what biking was all about; riding not ranting..


----------



## Konish (Dec 26, 2006)

mofoki said:


> I was thinking of replacing it with a Ventana El bastardo but I've worked out the figures to get it to 25 or 26 pounds and it's over $5000. And I just don't see why a good machine has to cost that much. I can buy a Buell motorcycle new for $9000. You see what I mean?:skep:


I never understand these apples to oranges intrinsic value comparisons of dissimilar things. I mean, they do have semi-custom production motorcycles that easily fetch $60K, but does that just make it a really bad car?. Seriously I'd think a Buell would be a *really* bad mountain bike. My kayak cost $3K used...again, its a terrible mountain bike.

I'm sure you have a least a little understanding of a little concept known as "economies of scale"(?) I'm guessing that Ventana sells fewer units than Buell worldwide and a fair bit of V's manufacturing process is still done by hand.


----------



## misctwo (Oct 24, 2004)

never liked grafton stuff. avid's tri-align brakes and paul's love levers owned all!


----------



## jsnider8 (Jan 5, 2008)

Exodus11 said:


> can anybody say they really mind this kind of bling? :thumbsup:


Will Lysol be strong enough to clean those saddles? :skep:


----------



## big_slacker (Feb 16, 2004)

We've all seen that. I was on the tail of a guy out at cottonwood (Riding my super hi-tech steel frame SS) who was on a brand new blinged out specilized. He pulled over to let us pass but we stopped to chat instead. Turns out he paid $4000 for it?! :O

I'm not hating though, people can spend their income how they choose. After all, if like you say there are boutique bikes being bought and babied those folks are financing R&D, sponsoring factory riders and giving us trickle down technology. This is a good thing, and it makes them feel proud to own 'tha best' for this season anyway.

I mean, its not like there aren't durable, reasonably priced parts out there. $600 wheels? I spend $600 for my whole bike. :thumbsup:

Right now you can build a 25 lb bike with decent components that will handle tearing up the trails several times a week for $1500. What is the problem with bling again?



Ericmopar said:


> No, that's us Mountain Cycle riders, and our high tech single pivots...
> 
> There are more riders, out there at Bootleg, showing up with $5000 bikes like carbon Mojo's that walk over little steps...
> Those people buy a bike like that, for the same reason they have a Landrover or H3 Hummer.


----------



## carbuncle (Dec 9, 2005)

I think it's cool that colors are making a comeback! Add some style and options in there, I have no problem with that. If there's a market for it, then it'll get made.


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

1997 Bling!
You have to click on the frames link, once you get there.
http://web.archive.org/web/19990125090946/http://mountaincycle.com/


----------



## Spartacus Rex (Dec 18, 2006)

*Get a grip*



kabayan said:


> I hate stupid replies like these which are so myopic that you have to come to the conclusion that the poster is really stupid/naive.
> Billion dollar corporations have more sales/marketing types for CEOs. There's a sales department, a marketing department, product placement, market research, viral marketing, celebrity endorsers, bulletin boards etc etc in addition to R&D. In some cases, those budgets are bigger than the R&D budgets.


Dude, go read the context of the original post. Do you honestly expect us to believe that the likes of I9, Chris King, Mavic, Ventana are "billion dollar corporations ...[that have] budgets bigger than the R&D budgets." ? The context of the original post was about "bling" of the handmade high end boutique market. According to your post, Walmart should have the "blingiest" bikes since they are a billion dollar company. Now go read my post again and think about the economics lesson after you lookup "myopic" in the dictionary.


----------



## 24hourracer (Jul 7, 2008)

Bling has been around as long as the mountain bike... Who here remembers the early 90's infestation of all things purple, followed by the summer of rasta anodized everything. How about those Kooka ultra light exploding aluminum components (a friend broke 2 sets of cranks in one summer). It all started with a bunch of displaced aircraft CNC shops trying to make a buck. Long live the bling...(I just hope purple comes back, I still have some goods...)


----------



## monogod (Feb 10, 2006)

Exodus11 said:


> can anybody say they really mind this kind of bling? :thumbsup:


the bikes are fly, if one is into that sort of thing. but i personally don't find skanks appealing, nor do i consider them bling.


----------



## fastale (Jul 2, 2007)

monogod said:


> the bikes are fly, if one is into that sort of thing. but i personally don't find skanks appealing, nor do i consider them bling.


They're not skanks, they're dudes. Look closely.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Ericmopar said:


> Which has been since the very beginning.
> The repack riders had 40 + pound Schwinn's and technically speaking, they had to push them up most hills, then race down.
> They also made their own (custom) parts.
> So...the word Bling, may not have been around, but they were listening to Hendrix and AC DC, with Purple Haze anodized parts.


Actually you are wrong that one. There wasn't red headed white boys listening to rap and talking the rap lingo way back then. Sure the heavy schwinn's being pushed up hills smoking a doobie half way up and jamming to Hendrix at the bottom was happening. But I'm talking about when Bling came into play; the time frame was around the year 2000'. You know, when these red headed white boys whose mentors were the rappers figured out they could take a 45lb plus downhill rig, tote it up and bomb down shuttle it up and do it all over gain.


----------



## KONA_in_SB (May 20, 2004)

monogod said:


> the bikes are fly, if one is into that sort of thing. but i personally don't find skanks appealing, nor do i consider them bling.


Ah come on. What's wrong with skanks? I spent the better part of my teenage years having a lot of fun with skanks.


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

2008 Mountain Cycle Bling.

It's not mine...:arf:

View attachment 381247


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Ericmopar said:


> 2008 Mountain Cycle Bling.
> 
> It's not mine...:arf:
> _____________________
> ...


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Bro I HOPE & PREY THAT they NEVER  bring back purple ANYTHING...he he he:thumbsup: especially they!



24hourracer said:


> Bling has been around as long as the mountain bike... Who here remembers the early 90's infestation of all things purple, followed by the summer of rasta anodized everything. How about those Kooka ultra light exploding aluminum components (a friend broke 2 sets of cranks in one summer). It all started with a bunch of displaced aircraft CNC shops trying to make a buck. Long live the bling...(I just hope purple comes back, I still have some goods...)


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

The winter of 89-90 was probably the advent of bling. It was out with old traditional steel diamond frames, and in with the weirdest, funkiest looking things you could wedge two wheels into, and for the next four years, the industry blew up with thousands of companies making brightly colored, neon, splatter anodized, shiny crap that made bikes look like christmas trees. It was nuts. Purple came and went pretty fast. Blue and red stuck around forever, but what you see today is a tiiiiny fragment of how "blingy" mountain bikes once were. There were no all-black-with-a-few-matching-colorful-anodized-bits. Imagine cnc machined, rasta anodized rear derailleurs, purple and blue splatter anodized seatposts, with green and gold anodized hubs, tie-dyed titanium spokes, bladed carbon spokes that self-destructed after 50 miles, red anodized stems, turquoise bar ends, carbon bars, a soggy, mushy, non-responsive, 2" full suspension setup, a machined 1.25" travel fork with a couple of rubber bumpers in it, and frames that only lasted for a few races before tearing in half. We paid manymanymany thousands of dollars for this stuff, and it nearly killed us every time we rode it.

It was an amazingly productive period for everyone involved in developing gear though.

...but looking back on it is fairly nauseating.


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> Very nice bike, it's too bad they are still using that interrupted seat tube design. It makes it hard to slam the seat far enough down for a downhill run. In fact they haven't changed much about that frame since the early to mid nineties.


That frame isn't from the early to mid 90s. That's a new design, from about 03, although it's had some geometry tweaks, to keep up with fork development.

As far as the seat tube comment. If you set one up, with about 3" of seat post insertion at your full extension, you can drop it all the way.
It's the same with my San An. I can drop it to the clamps, if I want too.
I should add, I have a longish, 32" inseam.


----------



## tomsmoto (Oct 6, 2007)

ive learned how utterly unimportant what everyone else is doing is. if people want to strip down naked and ride backwards through a cornfield, they can have at it. ill continue doing my thing.


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

HotBlack said:


> The winter of 89-90 was probably the advent of bling. It was out with old traditional steel diamond frames, and in with the weirdest, funkiest looking things you could wedge two wheels into, and for the next four years, the industry blew up with thousands of companies making brightly colored, neon, splatter anodized, shiny crap that made bikes look like christmas trees. It was nuts. Purple came and went pretty fast. Blue and red stuck around forever, but what you see today is a tiiiiny fragment of how "blingy" mountain bikes once were. There were no all-black-with-a-few-matching-colorful-anodized-bits. Imagine cnc machined, rasta anodized rear derailleurs, purple and blue splatter anodized seatposts, with green and gold anodized hubs, tie-dyed titanium spokes, bladed carbon spokes that self-destructed after 50 miles, red anodized stems, turquoise bar ends, carbon bars, a soggy, mushy, non-responsive, 2" full suspension setup, a machined 1.25" travel fork with a couple of rubber bumpers in it, and frames that only lasted for a few races before tearing in half. We paid manymanymany thousands of dollars for this stuff, and it nearly killed us every time we rode it.
> 
> It was an amazingly productive period for everyone involved in developing gear though.
> 
> ...but looking back on it is fairly nauseating.


I don't have to imagine. I had a 1976, nickel plated, Mongoose. With gold hubs & rims, a chrome handlebar, red anodized stem, red spider, red seat post, white nylon sproket, and white sidewall, Cheng Chen tires...
Oh yea...I think it had a red, white and blue seat and red grips.


----------



## Plats (Jun 18, 2008)

Good thread, I heard a salesperson at a LBS say the other day "Mountain biking is the new golf". So maybe the market place has turned into a bling zone: shiney parts, on shiney bikes.... "hey have you tried the new carbon fiber driver?", "Cost a thousand bucks, but shaved 2 strokes off my game..., it was worth every penny". Anyway, guys are always gonna throw bunches of money into their recreation and hobbies - I personally don't see any harm in it. But it does seem that all the recent bling has created some pressure on the hardcore / dedicated types to spend more money to keep up with technology. I still ride my 2000 Frankenbiked Hardrock, ran up on some dudes on $5000 FS bikes, we chatted a bit, they weren't hatin on my bike, it was all good. I ride for me anyways, get out on the mountain and dodge some rocks and bumps and conquer little descents and what not, just take it easy and have fun. Maybe get a cheap hardtail and ditch the technomonster bike if its messin up your good time.


----------



## hotfeat1227 (May 15, 2007)

carbon bikes are aimed at a very particular crowd of people. its not like trek has let go of its all around aluminum fuel in favor of pricey carbon on all their bikes. sure its there. why? because people want it. if u dont want it. dont buy it. another example: xtr. many people say xt is just as good. if that is true, why would anyone in their right mind want xtr? well some people just have to have the best and what manufacturer would refrain from making a product that could be profitable??
as far as treks full floater goes. it has nothing to do with bling and everything to do with functionality.. so im not quite sure what ur talking about on that one..

i agree that you should invest in some heavier duty components. xc stuff is not meant to be ridden on "technical down hills".


----------



## big_slacker (Feb 16, 2004)

"i agree that you should invest in some heavier duty components. xc stuff is not meant to be ridden on "technical down hills".

Is that why I fell off my single speed today on the rocky downhill switchback section? I though it was because my front v-brake grabbed too hard. 

Guess I should have ridden the tracer, would have saved me a spill.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Ericmopar said:


> That frame isn't from the early to mid 90s. That's a new design, from about 03, although it's had some geometry tweaks, to keep up with fork development.
> 
> As far as the seat tube comment. If you set one up, with about 3" of seat post insertion at your full extension, you can drop it all the way.
> It's the same with my San An. I can drop it to the clamps, if I want too.
> I should add, I have a longish, 32" inseam.


I didn't say that frame was from the early to mid nineteen nineties.* I said; Quote; In fact they haven't changed much about that frame since the early to mid nineties*. I knew it was a fairly new frame it's just that they haven't changed much about it. You said yourself; all they have changed is a slight tweak here and there to change the geometry for today's forks. But the rear is identical to the frames from the early to mid nineteen nineties with the interrupted seat post design. I seriously doubt you can slam your post all the way to the seat post clamp and still have enough length for the correct position for climbing. I can see cutting the post down far enough so that you can slam it down but that leaves you short for getting full extension in the raised position


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> I didn't say that frame was from the early to mid nineteen nineties.* I said; Quote; In fact they haven't changed much about that frame since the early to mid nineties*. I knew it was a fairly new frame it's just that they haven't changed much about it. You said yourself; all they have changed is a slight tweak here and there to change the geometry for today's forks. But the rear is identical to the frames from the early to mid nineteen nineties with the interrupted seat post design. I seriously doubt you can slam your post all the way to the seat post clamp and still have enough length for the correct position for climbing. I can see cutting the post down far enough so that you can slam it down but that leaves you short for getting full extension in the raised position


You're thinking of the San Andreas. It's been around since 92.
The Fury has been around since 03 or 04. I forget which.
I have a 06 San Andreas, and can assure you, I can lower the seat enough to downhill, although I don't do that with my bike.
It doesn't matter anyways. Even if I couldn't lower the saddle enough on a interrupted seat tube bike for downhilling, the solution is simple. 
You just get a downhill saddle and spare seat post, for those occasions.
The Fury is a heavy duty 5" trail bike. It's not meant for any downhill use except Super-D. It does however make a great park bike.


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

San Andreas, 92-06 with shock mount and seat mast tweeks.
View attachment 381545


Fury, 03-08, with head angle changes.
View attachment 381546


----------



## Irrenarzt (Apr 19, 2006)

Bling started in 1991 with the popularity of purple anodized Ringle parts.

Any ***** knows that purple is the official color of the ghey community. Avoid like the plague...


----------



## zarr (Feb 14, 2008)

Irrenarzt said:


> Bling started in 1991 with the popularity of purple anodized Ringle parts.
> 
> Any ***** knows that purple is the official color of the ghey community. Avoid like the plague...


I thought it was pink. ... Purple is Princes' color. Also the rock group Deep Purple & Jimi Hendrix (Purple Haze?) And the rock group The New Riders of the Purple Sage.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Boy oh boy...where do some of you get your education from....????


----------



## NorKal (Jan 13, 2005)

Ericmopar said:


> There are more riders, out there at Bootleg, showing up with $5000 bikes like carbon Mojo's that walk over little steps...
> Those people buy a bike like that, for the same reason they have a Landrover or H3 Hummer.


Thank you, I'll keep driving my Jeep (over rocks) and rockin' my Azonic off drops and not worry about bling. :thumbsup:


----------



## zarr (Feb 14, 2008)

Sim2u said:


> Boy oh boy...where do some of you get your education from....????


awound da woild!  (Comedy ala The Bowery Boys)


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

he he he he...so des ne.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Ericmopar said:


> San Andreas, 92-06 with shock mount and seat mast tweeks.
> View attachment 381545
> 
> 
> ...


Once again I never said it was meant for downhill. But every bike does *"some"* downhill and with an interrupted seat post design [old school] it makes it impossible to slam the post all the way down and still have enough extension for the right climbing position. And by the way it is a nice bike and definitely bling worthy.


----------



## eat_dirt (May 26, 2008)

my bikes are ghetto, not bling.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

From my understanding the interrrupted seat tube design was in some cases, based on the shock position as such. If it were not interrupted, the thinking at the time was there existed a posibility that the seat tube would slip under mild to extreme use (which when put into a catogory is extremely wide and hard to predict) and clash, inadvertantly destroy or damage the shock - which mind has happend with some models.

My friends older Giant VT had this very same issue, although his bike used the dreaded seat tube shim and as a result slipped when bottoming out his travel and totalled his piggy back shock. Dont ask me how because I was not there, I only saw the result of what he did and I just shook my head and thought "how the bloody hell did get it down there like that...?".



DIRTJUNKIE said:


> Once again I never said it was meant for downhill. But every bike does *"some"* downhill and with an interrupted seat post design [old school] it makes it impossible to slam the post all the way down and still have enough extension for the right climbing position. And by the way it is a nice bike and definitely bling worthy.


----------



## Sim2u (Nov 22, 2006)

Its not how much it is...its what you do with it that counts, he he he. Ghetto bike rock...:thumbsup: **(Context being Ghetto Bikes...he he he)**



eat_dirt said:


> my bikes are ghetto, not bling.


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> Once again I never said it was meant for downhill. But every bike does *"some"* downhill and with an interrupted seat post design [old school] it makes it impossible to slam the post all the way down and still have enough extension for the right climbing position. And by the way it is a nice bike and definitely bling worthy.


On some bikes, like my old Stumpy, that was true, but not on my San An.
The reason I posted the pics, was so you could see the difference in the frames. You had said they hadn't changed the design much since the early to mid nineties. They had in fact, designed a totally new bike. 
There is a family resemblance in the swingarms, but that is a case of "why mess with something, that works so well".


----------



## Hardline (Jan 16, 2004)

I feel that bikes are just like any other thing in life. Take cars for example. The main use is transportation. Whether it be people or goods. Does anyone really need a half million dollar car that goes 215 MPH for transportation. NO But some people have the expendable income that they would like to spend on them. Same with a bike. Would a quality built Hardrock work for the average mountain biker? Probably but some people have the expendable income that they use to purchase exotic and one off rigs. Some people try to buy cars and bikes that they can not actually afford and that is just foolish. JJ


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Ericmopar said:


> On some bikes, like my old Stumpy, that was true, but not on my San An.
> The reason I posted the pics, was so you could see the difference in the frames. You had said they hadn't changed the design much since the early to mid nineties. They had in fact, designed a totally new bike.
> There is a family resemblance in the swingarms, but that is a case of "why mess with something, that works so well".


Both of those frames are basically the same design, the rear suspension is the same. The front triangles are slightly different and part of that is because one is a downhill bike and the other is an All Mountain bike. I just think that company is lacking in advancing their suspension technology. That suspension design has been around since the early nineteen nineties. Very few serious bike builders of today go with an interrupted seat tube designed suspension. Some XC only bikes have this design, but if you are marketing towards an All Mountain bike this design sucks. An all Mountain design of today needs to be able to slam the seat down for a downhill run and still have enough seat post for the correct climbing position.


----------



## doogie (Sep 24, 2006)

GuruAtma said:


> As long as the bling factories aren't using child slave labor, who cares what others buy. I love my blingy wheels.


Brilliant, good man.


----------



## mcrumble69 (Jul 31, 2005)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> Both of those frames are basically the same design, the rear suspension is the same. The front triangles are slightly different and part of that is because one is a downhill bike and the other is an All Mountain bike. I just think that company is lacking in advancing their suspension technology. That suspension design has been around since the early nineteen nineties. Very few serious bike builders of today go with an interrupted seat tube designed suspension. Some XC only bikes have this design, but if you are marketing towards an All Mountain bike this design sucks. An all Mountain design of today needs to be able to slam the seat down for a downhill run and still have enough seat post for the correct climbing position.


Bling for bikes has been around for as long as I can remember. Just think of those streamers kids used at the end of their bars.

Now for my addition to the derail.. 
The Mountain Cycle swingarm design hasn't changed much but that's because it didn't need too. It just plain works and it's super reliable. 
The part I like most is being able to use 3 different shock mounts for different head angles and bb heights.
As for the interupted seat tube all you need is a telescoping seat post.
I raise it for climbing and drop it for steep downhills.
It works great for any trail I have ridden.and has never come close to hitting.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

mcrumble69 said:


> Bling for bikes has been around for as long as I can remember. Just think of those streamers kids used at the end of their bars.
> 
> Now for my addition to the derail..
> The Mountain Cycle swingarm design hasn't changed much but that's because it didn't need too. It just plain works and it's super reliable.
> ...


----------



## mcrumble69 (Jul 31, 2005)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> Yep the old telescoping seat post trick. I know Titec makes one but I'm confused on what you have for a set up. I know neither Thomson or Salsa doesn't make one so how did you use a Thomson post and have it telescoping?


LOL..It started it's life as a Titec and then I got creative with some parts I had laying around. 
The outer post that gets clamped in the seat tube is from a 30.9 Titec scoper.
I then used a 27.2 Thomson post for the inner sliding post.
The stock Titec clamp didn't work very well so I swapped it for a 32.0 Salsa clamp I had.
The post hasn't moved since..:thumbsup:


----------



## nm_gunslinger (Jul 28, 2008)

It's only bling if you don't ride it the way it was meant to be ridden.....:nono:


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

mcrumble69 said:


> LOL..It started it's life as a Titec and then I got creative with some parts I had laying around.
> The outer post that gets clamped in the seat tube is from a 30.9 Titec scoper.
> I then used a 27.2 Thomson post for the inner sliding post.
> The stock Titec clamp didn't work very well so I swapped it for a 32.0 Salsa clamp I had.
> The post hasn't moved since..:thumbsup:


*Great minds think alike:*
Awesome job:thumbsup: I too thought about doing that but never knew for sure if it could be done. Wanting to retain my Thomson and Salsa QR. So I never wanted to shell out the coin to buy the Titec and butchering it up not knowing for sure. BTW are you related to MacGyver?


----------



## yoda2 (Nov 3, 2006)

I remember getting my purple annodized bar ends in the early '90's. Man those things were ballin. 

Seriously though, I just built my lastest XC bike and spent about $1300 total. It's nothing blingy and most of the parts were on sale and last years stuff. It still has nice components on it, all XT except for LX cranks, but nothing blingy. I wish I could've bought a comparable bike at the LBS, but similar bikes there were $2,000+


----------



## mcrumble69 (Jul 31, 2005)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> *Great minds think alike:*
> Awesome job:thumbsup: I too thought about doing that but never knew for sure if it could be done. Wanting to retain my Thomson and Salsa QR. So I never wanted to shell out the coin to buy the Titec and butchering it up not knowing for sure. BTW are you related to MacGyver?


LOL.. You should see the boat I built out of Duct tape and Bondo. Now that's Bling..


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

mcrumble69 said:


> LOL.. You should see the boat I built out of Duct tape and Bondo. Now that's Bling..


Photo's please! 
:thumbsup:


----------



## Henrythewound (Jul 1, 2007)

Anyone seen the new spokes that look "braided"? I saw someone post a pic on another site, looked crazy and reminiscent of bling


----------



## Vivisect_VI (Aug 4, 2008)

zarr said:


> Bling has been around for years.Use your computer search and try to see Kooka Rasta & Kooka Bonnie cranks from the mid 90s. Also Cook Bros. cranks- and other stuff from back then. Bling ain't new.


I think the bike "bling" really started getting out of hand in the mid 1980's with the BMX / Freestyle bikes and its just spreading like cancer:yikes:


----------



## fux (Oct 21, 2006)

Yup.

Bling has been here ever since I started riding mtbs. (mid 80`s)

Who didnt crave for cooks brothers, purlple anodising or carbon nuke proof hubs?

What were suspension forks? An unnesesery and heavy bling Item.

I loved my tricked out Kona Hei-Hei in the early 90`s, purple bits and srp lightening bolts.

The worst bike I ever owned was this baby.

Sdg seat, lowill leaders that creaked and had more slop that a 50 year old ho` ... cooks brothers cranks, Hope titanium hubs, spd`s, hydrolic maguras...










I think the thread starter should ask himself where mountainbiking would be today (or tommorow) without leading edge componment companies pushing the bounderies?

I embrace bling, although now that I`m older, I buy mostly middle of the road stuff that has been tried tested by the blinghunters and has become affordable to the masses.

(Well, thats what I tell the wife  )


----------



## biketavioumaximus (Jun 28, 2007)

In the early 1980's   Thats right kids  my redline bmx had plastic Z rims which were feather weight and buckled way too easy, so I swapped them out for gold ano alloy rims to match my gold ano shimano dx crank set.............those were the days.

BLING IS KING!!!!:thumbsup: :thumbsup:


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Henrythewound said:


> Anyone seen the new spokes that look "braided"? I saw someone post a pic on another site, looked crazy and reminiscent of bling


Yep even Harley Davidson riders are using those spokes for some aftermarket bling effects.


----------



## Tbone (Jan 28, 2004)

thesenator said:


> I'm going to the smelting shop STAT!


OMG, that was my dreambike. NOt the gold one though


----------



## big_slacker (Feb 16, 2004)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> Yep even Harley Davidson riders are using those spokes for some aftermarket bling effects.


Harley riders will do anything to make their anachronistic noisemakers 'look better'.


----------



## fire horse (Mar 9, 2004)

*Your alllllllmost a...*

a...a...SINGLE SPEEDER! It's ok brother, your just about to reach the critical.."I'm fed up, and I'm not going to take it any more!!!" tipping point.

A lot of us converted because we were tired of breaking crap that costs too much, was made too whimpy, and just plain ol complicated the riding experience. Back in the day (for some of us) all we rode were rigid BMX single speed bikes and we did everything on them from trails, trials, jumps, commuting, etc.

Go ahead, I dare you. Strip away those gears...hell...go rigid even!


----------



## big_slacker (Feb 16, 2004)

You can still have bling on an SS. Ti skewers, expensive hubs, carbon bars.... Even a ti frame, bling bling beotch! :madman:



fire horse said:


> a...a...SINGLE SPEEDER! It's ok brother, your just about to reach the critical.."I'm fed up, and I'm not going to take it any more!!!" tipping point.
> 
> A lot of us converted because we were tired of breaking crap that costs too much, was made too whimpy, and just plain ol complicated the riding experience. Back in the day (for some of us) all we rode were rigid BMX single speed bikes and we did everything on them from trails, trials, jumps, commuting, etc.
> 
> Go ahead, I dare you. Strip away those gears...hell...go rigid even!


----------



## PaMtnBkr (Feb 28, 2005)

*Irony*



mofoki said:


> What's up with the mountainbiking crowd these days. The manufactures aren't catering to real moutainbikers anymore. Carbon fibre bikes? Carbon cranks? Carbon this and that and the other things? OK, maybe carbon has it's good qualities in road bikes but if you take a look at my aluminum mtb frames, the dents and other damage caused by rocks and crap I've hit, I wouldn't want to risk spending $5000 to $7000 on any of it. What the heck bike is worth $7000 anyway? My cranks are aluminum and have taken hits and kept on ticking, they're ugly but still work, but my Mavic Crossmax wheels are cracking, the axle replaced twiced and haven't lasted two years of XC use. Now I'm suppose to spend $1000 again for new wheels? My point is how pricing is getting out of control and what is considered bling verses practical. Take I-9's wheels, almost $600 per wheel? C'mon. Bling; not state of the art as they would want you to believe. Really now what real mtb guy or kid is willing to spend that much to tear up on the trails every day. Take suspension for example, it all does the same thing, soften the ride. The rest is trickery, "Trek with the EX floating shock". I could go on to to name names but I hope my point is made. For the masses who really love mountainbiking we are sort of being forced to stay broke to get so called quality parts and keep our bikes operating or go into massive debt to replace that worn out bike, not to mention brainwashed about this junk. I think the manufactures need to quit acting like our politicians who just want to line their pockets with our money and quit with the false slogans like "Bikers building whatever for bikers" and start with the sincere love of cycling again. I'm sick of spending loads of money for crap parts that supposidly are high tech highly engineered be all do all but end up being junk. And to the people who offer ratings and reviews, you should tell us the truth about the value and how well this stuff really works. Bling doesn't do us mountainbikers any good, it just keeps us broke. I spent $3000 on my last Canny about three years ago and if I can't find a good bike around that figure when this one needs replaced soon I, along with my family, will find a new hobby.


Hey Mofiki,
Too funny that you go on a rant about bling when you want to or were going to buy a Ventana. Does a Ventana work THAT much better than a "XYZ name your brand" bike? No, I'm not busting on Ventana, I owned one and they are awesome bikes, but one mans bling is another mans ideal tool for the job. It's all in what you want to spend. I look at my bikes as a tool that brings me happiness but still a tool to achieve the job I desire it to fulfill.


----------



## tduro (Jan 2, 2007)

It's the economy, stupid! (not directed at anyone in particular). But it's all about separating the consumer from his money. There's an art in making things way more expensive than what's reasonable, and then convincing someone that they need it. It's called marketing. It's very expensive. And that's what you're paying for. It works. It's well-proven. And manufacturers that don't embrace it don't last long. 

In my estimation, 90% of everything you'll ever get out of a bike can be had for about $500. Personally, I'm willing to double that and spend $1000 to get to about 95%. That last 5% goes for thousands more! No thanks. I have other hobbies to support!


----------

