# Show your bike! if you have one course



## MaKo´s Tethan

ok, this is my dirt/dh bike, is not a big thing, but I don`t want to expend more money in bikes (I wanna build a house).
I use it for urban thing, trialbike, dirt jump and a little down hill, not too much, the fork sucks, need a real one.



















post your bikes!!


----------



## WarriorOfMetal

Somewhat customised 3-speed Columbia Sports III. Got it off Craigslist, the sellers told me that their brother had built it up from parts or something. The frame and Sturmey-Archer AW 3-speed internal gear hub are from 1971, not sure about the rest of it. I customised it a bit myself, when I scored a second, very similar, bike for free that was only usable for spare parts (frame damage made it unrideable). Currently, the only things on it from when I bought it are the frame, rear rack, handlebars, bottom bracket/crank, shifter, and chain. The brakes, wheels, fenders, reflectors, and a number of other smaller parts were pulled from the parts bike, and the shifter cable is only a month or so old.


















....and just to give an idea of the "before", here's one pic of it as I got it:


----------



## MaKo´s Tethan

classic, I love the seat hahaha.


----------



## Metaldave

Here's mine, not that it sees much light of day lately.. The laziness is crazy!


----------



## djpharoah

Any Road Bikers?

Any Mountain Bikers?


----------



## MaKo´s Tethan

ups...sory, I forget to search, what an idiot.


----------



## Mattmc74

Here is a pic of my GT and my Jeep.


----------



## Pauly




----------



## jymellis

1996 mongoose solution pro. all aluminum except the front forks. sealed bearings, 3 piece crank, triple wall rims, etc. 24 inchbmx race bike. its basically like a stretched race bike lol. im 6 foot 3 and cant fit a normal bmx bike. weighs barely over 11 pounds


----------



## TomParenteau

jymellis said:


> 1996 mongoose solution pro. all aluminum except the front forks. sealed bearings, 3 piece crank, triple wall rims, etc. 24 inchbmx race bike. its basically like a stretched race bike lol. im 6 foot 3 and cant fit a normal bmx bike. weighs barely over 11 pounds


 Gotta call BS on the 11 pounds. I bet it's no less than 25.


----------



## Stealthdjentstic

10 speed
Aluminum frame
special dualshock system
Barely 2.1 pounds.


The thing on the back there is for the really long bike marathons i do, I use it to carry extra enery.


----------



## Mattmc74

^ Nice bike man!


----------



## MaKo´s Tethan

Hidraulic disc brakes?awesome hahaha


----------



## jymellis

TomPerverteau said:


> Gotta call BS on the 11 pounds. I bet it's no less than 25.


 
ok

Everyone talks about bicycle weight. It consumes our discussions. Magazine reviews make it clear that if the very lightest parts are not chosen, if it is not as light as possible, the bicycle being examined is suspect. Light weight has become the _sine qua non_ of a good bicycle. A light bicycle is a good bicycle, without any further discussion of its other merits or qualities.
Can we step back for a moment?
Let's get some numbers. Let us see if, as I believe, the handy availability of a single number has led people to make poor decisions in their choice of bicycle.
First of all, weight is important. If it weren't, we would all be enjoying pleasant 75-mile rides on 42-pound Schwinn Varsity bikes. The road bikes offered today are a far cry from those mild-steel tanks. We're not talking about riding heavy bikes. I want to limit the discussion to modern, well-made, well equipped bikes.
My personal favorite bike is a 55-centimeter all Columbus Foco Steel Torelli bike with a steel fork, generously chromed, built up with a Campagnolo Record 10-speed group. It weighs about 19 pounds. Beyond aluminum spoke nipples and double-butted spokes, there is nothing heroic about the equipment to make it lighter. The Squadra HDP saddle is heavy by the usual standards.
UCI regulations limit a racing bike to about 15 pounds. What we are discussing, from a normal all-steel bike to a super-light, barely legal bike is about 4 pounds. This is what we're going crazy about, 4 pounds. Maybe a bit more with a less expensive groups. In any case, given the usual rider-bike package of at least 180 pounds or more, the difference is obviously very small indeed.
But how does this weight difference affect performance? Does removing these few pounds make the bike fly? Is a lighter bike the fountain of youth? The September 2003 _Bicycling Magazine_ has a chart that makes it easy to quantify the performance gains from light weight. James C. Martin, Ph.D., assistant professor in the department of exercise and sport science at the University of Utah provided some interesting calculations that make the cost of weight very clear.
He posited a 5 kilometer, 7% grade. That's a good, stiff climb. The legendary Stelvio climb averages 7.5%. He further assumed a rider who can kick out 250 watts. A 160 pound rider will take 19 minutes and 21 seconds to get up the hill. Every 5 pounds added make the trip up the hill take 30 seconds longer.
That means each added pound adds 6 seconds to the time it takes to get up this hill. That is only 6 seconds on a stiff, 20 minute climb.
So, given our roughly 4-pound range from a full steel bike to a super-light carbon or aluminum bike, the time difference up this hill would be 24 seconds from best to worst.
But, most weight conscious people aren't bringing their bikes down to 15 pounds because down at that weight, the handling gets very sketchy. 17 - 17.5 pounds is the normal range. The real discussion is about 1.5 to 2 pounds.
The performance advantage of a lighter bike is greatest when the hill is steepest. What happens as things flatten out? Then, as the speed of the bike increases, the resistance comes from the wind, tire rolling resistance, bearing drag, etc. Those 6 seconds/pound grow ever smaller.
The variations in body weight, however, being so much greater, make large difference. If that same 160 pound-250 watt rider were to be 220 pounds, he would come in 6 minutes, 10 seconds later.
So what do we do with this information?
There are two basic groups of riders to whom this is important.
The first is the serious athlete. A few seconds advantage is not something he can give up. No matter what the quality of the ride of the bike in question, he must seek every attainable performance gain in his equipment or his body.
Then there is the large body of dedicated cyclists who enjoy the sport at various levels, but do not compete in the higher racing categories. I think this is almost everyone reading this essay. For these riders, the choice of bike and equipment should involve a more complex, qualitative study. Weight is one consideration. But there are others. How does the bike feel? Is it stable? Does it fit? Does it have the snappy, clean, vibrant feel that should be the soul of a great bike?
These basically sensuous questions that are beyond simple quantification. It's not a matter of a 73 degree head tube or 18 pounds or 9 sprockets in the rear. It is the whole bike, taken as a whole that must be considered. One should not pick a bike as if he were one of the 7 blind men describing the elephant.
The fact that these 1.5 - 2 pounds are so unimportant in choosing a bike should be looked upon a truly liberating. Now we can to back to judging bikes on their real merits.
Before leaving this discussion, let's look at the most common "upgrade".
A full carbon fork is considered an upgrade that will add greatly to the competitive advantage of the bike. A full carbon fork replacing a steel fork can take off a little less than a pound. Remember, that's our 6 seconds. Clearly, we have all been oversold on the carbon fork as the easy performance upgrade. There is some improvement, but it is minuscule. And it is not without its costs in quality of road feel. For more about carbon, please see my essay on materials.
Or in other words, Scarpelli, you can't buy a bike light enough to keep up me with on a climb.
Bill McGann
Torelli Bicycles

taken from this site How Lightweight Do You NEED Your Bike To Be?

granted this is not about the bike i own. but it is to show you that the weight of my bike is not that dramaticaly light. and a freestyle bike, with a gyro and front and back pegs with a cro moly frame barely breaks the 25 pound mark just so you know.


----------



## DarkKnight369

I am GASing hard for a FS 29er, one of these bad boys...






Gary Fisher Rumblefish



or






Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Expert (or Comp)


I am what they refer to in the biking community as a Clyde, so my bike options are limited. I road some trails on my hybrid, and messed the bike up. I am really desiring something trail capable now.


----------



## TomParenteau

jymellis said:


> ok
> 
> Everyone talks about bicycle weight. It consumes our discussions. Magazine reviews make it clear that if the very lightest parts are not chosen, if it is not as light as possible, the bicycle being examined is suspect. Light weight has become the _sine qua non_ of a good bicycle. A light bicycle is a good bicycle, without any further discussion of its other merits or qualities.
> Can we step back for a moment?
> Let's get some numbers. Let us see if, as I believe, the handy availability of a single number has led people to make poor decisions in their choice of bicycle.
> First of all, weight is important. If it weren't, we would all be enjoying pleasant 75-mile rides on 42-pound Schwinn Varsity bikes. The road bikes offered today are a far cry from those mild-steel tanks. We're not talking about riding heavy bikes. I want to limit the discussion to modern, well-made, well equipped bikes.
> My personal favorite bike is a 55-centimeter all Columbus Foco Steel Torelli bike with a steel fork, generously chromed, built up with a Campagnolo Record 10-speed group. It weighs about 19 pounds. Beyond aluminum spoke nipples and double-butted spokes, there is nothing heroic about the equipment to make it lighter. The Squadra HDP saddle is heavy by the usual standards.
> UCI regulations limit a racing bike to about 15 pounds. What we are discussing, from a normal all-steel bike to a super-light, barely legal bike is about 4 pounds. This is what we're going crazy about, 4 pounds. Maybe a bit more with a less expensive groups. In any case, given the usual rider-bike package of at least 180 pounds or more, the difference is obviously very small indeed.
> But how does this weight difference affect performance? Does removing these few pounds make the bike fly? Is a lighter bike the fountain of youth? The September 2003 _Bicycling Magazine_ has a chart that makes it easy to quantify the performance gains from light weight. James C. Martin, Ph.D., assistant professor in the department of exercise and sport science at the University of Utah provided some interesting calculations that make the cost of weight very clear.
> He posited a 5 kilometer, 7% grade. That's a good, stiff climb. The legendary Stelvio climb averages 7.5%. He further assumed a rider who can kick out 250 watts. A 160 pound rider will take 19 minutes and 21 seconds to get up the hill. Every 5 pounds added make the trip up the hill take 30 seconds longer.
> That means each added pound adds 6 seconds to the time it takes to get up this hill. That is only 6 seconds on a stiff, 20 minute climb.
> So, given our roughly 4-pound range from a full steel bike to a super-light carbon or aluminum bike, the time difference up this hill would be 24 seconds from best to worst.
> But, most weight conscious people aren't bringing their bikes down to 15 pounds because down at that weight, the handling gets very sketchy. 17 - 17.5 pounds is the normal range. The real discussion is about 1.5 to 2 pounds.
> The performance advantage of a lighter bike is greatest when the hill is steepest. What happens as things flatten out? Then, as the speed of the bike increases, the resistance comes from the wind, tire rolling resistance, bearing drag, etc. Those 6 seconds/pound grow ever smaller.
> The variations in body weight, however, being so much greater, make large difference. If that same 160 pound-250 watt rider were to be 220 pounds, he would come in 6 minutes, 10 seconds later.
> So what do we do with this information?
> There are two basic groups of riders to whom this is important.
> The first is the serious athlete. A few seconds advantage is not something he can give up. No matter what the quality of the ride of the bike in question, he must seek every attainable performance gain in his equipment or his body.
> Then there is the large body of dedicated cyclists who enjoy the sport at various levels, but do not compete in the higher racing categories. I think this is almost everyone reading this essay. For these riders, the choice of bike and equipment should involve a more complex, qualitative study. Weight is one consideration. But there are others. How does the bike feel? Is it stable? Does it fit? Does it have the snappy, clean, vibrant feel that should be the soul of a great bike?
> These basically sensuous questions that are beyond simple quantification. It's not a matter of a 73 degree head tube or 18 pounds or 9 sprockets in the rear. It is the whole bike, taken as a whole that must be considered. One should not pick a bike as if he were one of the 7 blind men describing the elephant.
> The fact that these 1.5 - 2 pounds are so unimportant in choosing a bike should be looked upon a truly liberating. Now we can to back to judging bikes on their real merits.
> Before leaving this discussion, let's look at the most common "upgrade".
> A full carbon fork is considered an upgrade that will add greatly to the competitive advantage of the bike. A full carbon fork replacing a steel fork can take off a little less than a pound. Remember, that's our 6 seconds. Clearly, we have all been oversold on the carbon fork as the easy performance upgrade. There is some improvement, but it is minuscule. And it is not without its costs in quality of road feel. For more about carbon, please see my essay on materials.
> Or in other words, Scarpelli, you can't buy a bike light enough to keep up me with on a climb.
> Bill McGann
> Torelli Bicycles
> 
> taken from this site How Lightweight Do You NEED Your Bike To Be?
> 
> granted this is not about the bike i own. but it is to show you that the weight of my bike is not that dramaticaly light. and a freestyle bike, with a gyro and front and back pegs with a cro moly frame barely breaks the 25 pound mark just so you know.


 
Just so YOU know, that thing doesn't weigh less than 25 pounds. Put it on the scale sometime instead of making up a guess like 11! Dirt jumping & freestyle bikes are usually around 27. 11 is total BS. The lightest 5 Expert class BMX race bike weighs more than 11. And another thing "just so you know," you might not be the only one here who has experience with bicycle racing.


----------



## jymellis

TomPerverteau said:


> Just so YOU know, that thing doesn't weigh less than 25 pounds. Put it on the scale sometime instead of making up a guess like 11! Dirt jumping & freestyle bikes are usually around 27. 11 is total BS. The lightest 5 Expert class BMX race bike weighs more than 11. And another thing "just so you know," you might not be the only one here who has experience with bicycle racing.


 
sure thing buddy, it aint your schwinn stingray lol.


----------



## TomParenteau

jymellis said:


> sure thing buddy, it aint your schwinn stingray lol.


 
No, it's not. It's YOUR Mongoose! It's also not 11 pounds.


----------



## jymellis

dun


----------



## DarkKnight369

I don't care how much the bike weighs, as long as it can fit my size comfortably and support my weight. There are a few bikes that are made big enough for me, but I still worry about the wheel strength. Lightweight stuff is worthless to me if it buckles under pressure.


----------



## Sebastian

Supermarket bike : 50$
Rust in Peace : Priceless


----------



## Fred

Obviously not my exact one, but this is what I get around on:






Or at least it was till some fucker tried to steal it, couldn't cut my lock so cut the frame in half instead. Still haven't got over the brainless malice in that... Had to get a replacement frame on the cheap, so I've got a Frankenbike with all of the hardware from the Felt but with this frame:






Isn't perfect - the frame I got wasn't made for disk brakes and I didn't want to split the cables up, so they're attached with wire ties at the moment. Still, it works!


----------



## Donny Oliver

MaKo´s Tethan said:


> ok, this is my dirt/dh bike, is not a big thing, but I don`t want to expend more money in bikes (I wanna build a house).
> I use it for urban thing, trialbike, dirt jump and a little down hill, not too much, the fork sucks, need a real one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> post your bikes!!





MaKo´s Tethan said:


> ok, this is my dirt/dh bike, is not a big thing, but I don`t want to expend more money in bikes (I wanna build a house).
> I use it for urban thing, trialbike, dirt jump and a little down hill, not too much, the fork sucks, need a real one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> post your bikes!!


----------



## Donny Oliver

20190108_103753



__ Donny Oliver
__ Jan 9, 2019



2006 Haro SX Pro Group 1




My 2006 Haro SX group one pro BMX bike all aluminum very light 16 lb


----------



## Donny Oliver

2006 Haro SX Pro Group 1 all aluminum very light 14 lb aluminum Fork aluminum frame very fast and stiff


----------



## Donny Oliver

20190108_103753



__ Donny Oliver
__ Jan 9, 2019



2006 Haro SX Pro Group 1


----------



## Drew

jymellis said:


> He posited a 5 kilometer, 7% grade. That's a good, stiff climb. The legendary Stelvio climb averages 7.5%. He further assumed a rider who can kick out 250 watts. A 160 pound rider will take 19 minutes and 21 seconds to get up the hill. Every 5 pounds added make the trip up the hill take 30 seconds longer.
> That means each added pound adds 6 seconds to the time it takes to get up this hill. That is only 6 seconds on a stiff, 20 minute climb.
> So, given our roughly 4-pound range from a full steel bike to a super-light carbon or aluminum bike, the time difference up this hill would be 24 seconds from best to worst.



I hate to quote a 10 year old post in a necro-bumped thread, but...  

While it's VERY important to take all of this with a grain of salt, I have two observations here.

1) The reason Stelvio is such an iconic climb (and I'm hoping to fly out to Italy to ride it myself this year) is not because it averages 7.5%, but because it ascends for 6,000 feet of vertical over 17 miles of gorgeous switchbacks built up out of the side of the Alps. The average grade itself is nothing particularly special. As the grade increases beyond that (and I've done climbs where the grade has averaged double that) the impact of every additional pound starts to have a greater and greater impact on climbing speed, so on a really hairy climb, you're talking quite a bit more than 6 seconds over 20 minutes per pound- at least double, probably more (since the steeper the grade the more of your power output is moving in the vertical and not horizontal plane). 

2) the other thing to keep in mind here, is that by the time you're spending the kind of money where you're getting down to even 17lbs (and my road bike, a 2015 Specialized Tarmac Expert on a set of Enve 4.5s, is right around 17-17.1) you're talking some pretty serious money. For perspective, I'm eying my next road bike and while I think I should be able to get it to the UCI limit (currently 14.99lbs), I'll be hard pressed to do that for less than five figures. There are two sorts of people who spend that kind of money on bikes; those with more money than talent, and those who are pretty damned serious about riding performance. At that level, being able to shave 12-24 seconds off your theoretical best possible effort on a 20-minute 7.5% climb actually becomes pretty significant. And as technology has continued to evolve, the "tradeoffs" of lower weight have largely gone away - the SL6 iteration of my (SL5) frame, for example, is stiffer relative to the power stroke, more compliant relative to road chatter, and more aerodynamic than the first gen version of Specialized's aero frame, while being a half pound lighter. 

Anyway, yes, cutting weight off the rider is a lot cheaper than off the bike, but that's not the same as saying bike weight is irrelevant... And if the takeaway of this article for you is it's EASY to get a road bike down to 15lbs so its largely a matter of choice, well, trust me, it's really not. It's bloody expensive.


----------



## Drew

Picture of my bike, BTW.


----------



## thedonal

Nice to see a bike thread here. I'm on a cheap-ish commuter bike here- Carrera Subway One (for the Brits among us). So far, in 19 months, it's had a new groupset, 4 chains, new pedals (due to being knocked off) and just put a new bottom bracket on. At least I'm learning my mechanicking skills!! That's at least 50 miles a week- more when the weather's good.

So I'm keeping it good for the London to Brighton in June- 54 miles will a great big 'ill at the end. Did it in 4 hours 15 last year and want to knock 30 mins off that this time around.

Can't wait for the good weather and lighter evenings to get the mileage in.

I'd love a decent road bike at some point- I'm eyeing up a Cannondale Synapse AL- but can't throw the money at it yet.,.

Edit- as per cutting the weight- I'm all for losing a bit myself. I've stopped drinking for a while and hopefully soon the pounds will start falling off me!


----------



## TedEH

Holy necro-bump, Batman. But also, I really want the snow to go away so I can bust the old bike out. It's nothing worth showing off, but it's enough to get me to work and back.


----------



## chuggalug




----------



## Drew

Engines are cheating!  

Just got back from a long weekend in Tucson, highlights of which were riding Mt. Lemmon to the observatory, Gates Pass, and Mt. Graham, the latter of which is reputed to be harder than Lemmon and one of the 20 hardest climbs in the States, but personally I found Lemmon worse - the steepest grades there were the final couple miles to the observatory, and 10-12% over 8,000 feet above sea level is sheer hell, while by the time you're over 8,000 feet and fighting thinning air, Graham has leveled off a fair amount.


----------



## Kyle-Vick

I cheat like chuggalug.


----------



## jaxadam

This thread is finally going places.


----------



## Seabeast2000

Kyle-Vick said:


> View attachment 67713
> 
> 
> I cheat like chuggalug.



Two stroke smoker? What part of MI you in?


----------



## jaxadam

That’s a RM-Z 450. With an FMF 4.1 Titanium full pipe. Solid ride there.


----------



## Kyle-Vick

I am in Northern Michigan. This one is a four stroke, but I do have an RM250 smoker I am building. 




I started a thread looking for moto folks last year or so that didn't get much love:
http://sevenstring.org/threads/anyone-ride-motocross-dirtbikes.329200/

Sorry bicycle people.


----------



## BlackMastodon

Don't remember if I took any pictures of it but my brother had an old frame sitting in my parents' garage that had oversized forks and no back wheel. I bought new forks, disc brakes, rims, and a cassette and put it together at the end of last summer but only got to ride it once. 

I'm ready to break it out of hiding now that the weather is picking up, I'll look for pictures or snap some when it's outside.


----------



## Seabeast2000

I finally got a lithium battery and tender. Now I have space in the battery compartment for skittles or something.


----------



## Drew

To get this back on topic, I'm looking HARD at one of these:


----------



## ExplorerMike

Here’s my 2016 Terrible One Barcode. I’ve been riding bmx since 1995.


----------



## will_shred

I got huge into mountainbiking over the summer, currently I ride a trek Marlin 6, but I quickly caught the bug I'm looking at upgrading to a Giant Trance 3. Full air suspension, dropper post, 27.5 inch wheels, ect. This thing is one mean machine.


----------



## Lemonbaby

upload

Got a fatbike 1.5 years ago. Big fun in all conditions, even snow!


----------



## Drew

So, this happened last night: 





2020 Venge Pro in gloss teal over carbon (overcast conditions so it looks black, but it has these awesome blue-green highlights in the light). The thing smokes - it isn't even up on the Specialized site yet, but it's basically the SRAM eTap bike, but with Ultegra Di2. I've only had time for a quick shakeout spin so far, but it feels VERY slippery in the wind, and way more comfortable than a racing aero frame has any right to be. It's LIIIIIGHT, too - I haven't weighed it myself, but it can't be more than 17lbs, and will be a bit less once I swap out the stock crankset for their S-Works carbon power meter set with a pair of Absolute Black rings, maybe a hair heavier than a Dura-Ace Madone build. Surprisingly compliant over rough pavement, but stiff enough to take off like it's got an afterburner when you dig in. It's gonna be a blast.


----------



## UV7BK4LIFE

Nice! That's a sick bike!


----------



## Drew

Yeah, the thing's insane - nearly a year later I'm still ludicriously happy with it. I did swap the stock crankset for a Specialized S-Works Power crankset for dual sided power metering, and with the lighter carbon-railed version of this saddle (which to my surprise I really liked) I brought the weight down from about 17.2 to a flat 17lbs, which is insane for an aero frame. I've picked up a couple tough Strava KOMS and set a whole BUNCH of PRs on her, though to be fair I've also been training my ass off.


----------



## bostjan

Heh - I've been through two bikes since this thread started. I still love my Old early 1990's Schwin Sidewinder, but it's rusted and rickety as hell now.

There's a pretty big bike-snob (I mean this lovingly) community here, and I just ride for fun, mostly on the easier trails, so I don't own anything fancy. I also tend to be hard on my bikes, so it'd be crazy for me to spend more than a couple grand on a bike that I'm like going to crash two or three times.


----------



## UV7BK4LIFE

I am trying to post a pic of my Colnago V1-R Disc............


----------



## odibrom

I've got one of these (sorry for the _institutional _photo), it's like an Ibanez RG7421 (MIJ) for the BTT bikes (imo). Aluminum frame, Shimano 3x9 speeds, 27.5" wheels, locking suspension at the front wheel, disk breaks...

I'm not a super active guy in this, mainly doing city routes with my older kid (he's 12), nevertheless, it is a nice bike, light enough (compared to my previous one), easy to drive and easy to climb steep roads.

I've done some off road with it on very small trails nearby my living place and it performed perfectly.


----------



## soliloquy

i'm looking to pickup a bike as well. I'm just having a hard time understanding why cruiser bikes look awesome, yet fail to modernize via use of lighter metals, maybe shocks, maybe gears or something.

my daily use would be suitable for a hybrid bike, yet I cant stand the way they look. too generic looking, in my opinion, thus looking at cruisers. Yet they are heavy, bulky, sluggish, and a challenge to ride in the area I live.


----------



## Seabeast2000

soliloquy said:


> i'm looking to pickup a bike as well. I'm just having a hard time understanding why cruiser bikes look awesome, yet fail to modernize via use of lighter metals, maybe shocks, maybe gears or something.
> 
> my daily use would be suitable for a hybrid bike, yet I cant stand the way they look. too generic looking, in my opinion, thus looking at cruisers. Yet they are heavy, bulky, sluggish, and a challenge to ride in the area I live.




Are you talking about the PeeWee Herman style beach cruiser or something like a fat bike? I would like to get a fatbike some day just to roll over shit that would wash out on a standard MTB.


----------



## soliloquy

Seabeast2000 said:


> Are you talking about the PeeWee Herman style beach cruiser or something like a fat bike? I would like to get a fatbike some day just to roll over shit that would wash out on a standard MTB.



I'm not familiar with PeeWee Herman's bike, but something similar to this:





I get it. The purpose of those bikes is meant to be traditional. Yet why not use modern technology to improve something that was made in the 50s?


----------



## Seabeast2000

There are a few Aluminum bikes on this site:

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/cruiser_bikes.htm

Decked out cruiser.


----------



## odibrom

So, last week I got a flat tire on my bike's front wheel and I can't repair it. I simply can't remove the tire. It's a new type of some sort and with this lock down I'm yet to take it to repairs... damn... On my previous bike I also got a flat tire in my rear wheel and have been able to repair it cleanly, new air chamber and new tire, all done without any stress.


----------



## Drew

soliloquy said:


> I'm not familiar with PeeWee Herman's bike, but something similar to this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I get it. The purpose of those bikes is meant to be traditional. Yet why not use modern technology to improve something that was made in the 50s?


Upright riding position that is both extremely un-aerodynamic and will be unstable at speed, single speed/probably fixed gear, frame curves that will make it pretty flexible and inefficient almost no matter what you do, no rim or disc brakes, chain guard's sole purpose is to make it easier to ride with regular pants, heavy, wide seat that will cause chafing on longer rides, and heavy wheels that will increase rotational inertia needlessly. Pretty much everything about that screams "I'm not concerned with performance." Why bother adding performance features? Nothing about this bike is intended to go fast. A lot of the things you find appealing about it - the riding position, the shape of the frame, the seat, whatever - are all things that those same modern features you want to see added have all replaced because they make no sense from a performance standpoint.

Your best bet if you want something in the same spirit as that is some of the more performance-oriented "city bikes" that are on the market, intended for commuting. Something like this:

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/sirrus-x-5-0/p/171174?color=271476-171174&searchText=92420-3101

Carbon frame, suspended bars, 1x mountain biking drivetrain but geared more like a gravel bike, with a 42 in front and an 11-42 in the rear, hydraulic discs, and not exactly a great wheelset but one that's a standard road size and allows you to use standard road tires, so if you really want to go all on on performance here, yea, you can technically throw a set of Enves on it.

Or, just go all in and grab a gravel bike - I've been using a by-now-fairly-tricked-out Diverge Comp as a commuter when not doing gravel races and events on it, just keeping a spare wheelset with slicks and an Enve AR3.4 with knobby 42s for gnarlier stuff, and the thing is both a super comfortable ride and fast as fuck when you do want to push things.

Or, hell, even a cross country MTB is probably spiritually a descendent of that, once it became thoroughly modernized - the sport was born with lunatics taking modified versions of those things down "Repack Ridge" in Marin County, so named because you had to repack the hub after every descent because it would burn through all the grease while braking.


----------



## jaxadam

New K & N X-Stream air box setup.


----------



## ExplorerMike

Forgot I had pics of my older bmx bike on my phone. This is a 1998 Kink Empire, they later made an Empire Revision B frame, but this is one of the originals. It actually went back to Kink a while back because even they didn’t have one, so they could reverse engineer it to see what they did. Super rare in the bmx world and it’s a total tank! I’m thr original owner too, been riding it since high school!


----------



## Drew

May as well share an updated picture of my Venge with the new crankset and oval rings. Weighs in at about 16.8lbs, and while the new Tarmac SL7 is being positioned as rendering the Venge obsolete by being very nearly as aero while being lighter, that's only true in full S-Works trim - the SL7 Pro weights the same as the Venge Pro while the Venge is about 8 seconds faster over a 40km time trial, and my Venge as it stands now is lighter than a stock SL7 Pro or Venge Pro by roughly a quarter to a third of a pound. 

Besides, it's way sexier.


----------



## MUTANTOID

Sadly I haven't gotten to ride much this year due to Covid. I'm hoping for an epic fall tho!


----------



## jaxadam

New suspension time. Don't think I'll be dropping $6k on a A-kit as my riding is now relegated to keeping my kids upright and separated.

Bye bye this guy











I still might be able to ride this!


----------



## Seabeast2000

Effit I finally got a 29r, nothing special but a good starting platform to mod and upgrade over the years.


----------



## jaxadam

I have an itch that I think only this will scratch.









Why We Lust for the Aprilia RS 660: Review and Buyers Guide


Why we lust after the Aprilia RS 660: A quick review, plus a detailed look at specs, maintenance requirements, and alternatives.




motofomo.com


----------



## Seabeast2000

jaxadam said:


> I have an itch that I think only this will scratch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why We Lust for the Aprilia RS 660: Review and Buyers Guide
> 
> 
> Why we lust after the Aprilia RS 660: A quick review, plus a detailed look at specs, maintenance requirements, and alternatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> motofomo.com


dat fuckin front disk.


----------



## Bevo

Mine!


----------



## Bevo

jaxadam said:


> I have an itch that I think only this will scratch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why We Lust for the Aprilia RS 660: Review and Buyers Guide
> 
> 
> Why we lust after the Aprilia RS 660: A quick review, plus a detailed look at specs, maintenance requirements, and alternatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> motofomo.com


----------



## Bevo

I had the big brother!

The most uncomfortable bike ever lol!


----------



## jaxadam

Bevo said:


> I had the big brother!
> 
> The most uncomfortable bike ever lol!



Can’t be any worse than a Ducati!


----------



## Bevo

jaxadam said:


> Can’t be any worse than a Ducati!


The street versions are freaking hot from both, boiling your ass or wrists.
Track versions are tight, I am 5’8” and look huge on it. The worst part was the foot peg to seat distance, I felt like I was in a deep squat non stop.

Getting on my ZX10 was ahhhhhhh like a glove lol!
Every track I went to I beat my best Aprilia time in 5 laps..


----------



## littlebadboy

Badass Ifugao bikes!


----------



## Bevo

My man powered bikes..


----------



## Drew

You guys and your motorcycles.  

Bevo - Dolomites, in that third picture? If so, I'm jealous! Bucket list riding for sure. 

No changes in the fleet on my end, but my Diverge is a '18, closing on 9,000 miles, and has been ridden pretty hard in its life and it shows. I've been looking _hard_ at the newest S-Works CruX as a replacement gravel racing rig and retiring my Diverge as a full time commuter, and just might go for it when the 2023 models are released and they're back in stock. A sub-16 pound gravel bike would be nuts, haha.


----------



## mlp187

Man I miss Mako. That dude had some wild guitar building threads and an interesting life.

Also, glad to see this thread! Just picked this Fit Series 22 up today (check out that down-tube sticker):





I’m 6’3”-6’4”, and this fits perfectly. The top tube is 21.25”. Sorry for the freedumb units.

I’m currently too fat to skate but am plenty sexy to ride a bike. Hopefully in a few months I’ll be skating on the regular too.


----------

