sorry I should have bolded the "and thus handle almost anything" as well that makes no sense.The car analagy is kinda almost, but not really.

here was an article in Autosport many years ago with the head guy at Wiliams Renaut touring car team he was saying the only, only reason they used 18in wheels was so they could run the brakes they run. Havingthe big wheels and low profile tyres gave them headaches in setting up the suspension.
Evo (or it was Performance car back then, same thing though) did a test, took a stock Audi A4 turbo and put bigger wheels on it and comparison tested it and it was junk, because of the extra rotating weight and the suspension wasn't designed for the stiffer sidwalls, it was measurable slower n test course.
Of couse these days most cars are designed around bigger wheels, but it's mostly for looks over function, unless your wheesl wont clearthe brake calipers you don'need huge wheels...a Mclaren F1 will pretty much hose any car you mentioned, yet only runs 17inch wheels. it's not the size of the wheels, its the package it comes in. ANd again the drive does a whole lot in that package.

But its the same with bikes, the wheel size and the drivetrain play a small part in the package.
You'l find that tere are peopel out there that could jump on your bike and ride it down a trail that you couldn't ride aan AM bike down, sure it'll be hard and they won't like, but they can do it,give them a $5000 bike and then they can do it easily.
Rider skill is one thing, having the best tool for the job is another.

Now heres a vid, from like 1998 I think, and yes quite a few FS bikes, but also quite a ot of HTs and were talking 80mm travel with rim brakes, so not even the luxury of discs for these guys... (especially at the ~20min mark)

 

also queue the vids of the guy riding a bike park on a wallmart bike or the guy riding whistler on a cross bike...

 

Is this the place?

 

"...unfortunately on my singlespeed" could mean he had lots of troubles, or could mean that it just made it a hard days work, it's not normally a the most fun to ride a new trail, an unknown trail on a bike that makes the hardest work, doesn't mean he couldn't ride it.

But also, here's a tip, since we don't know your riding etc, if you haven't got it already, and have a smartphone, download strava, and use that on your next few rides, it will tell you exactly where you sit in the pecking order of who can ride what.

 

Picked up my carbon Stumpy FSR Evo in 2013 and see no reason to replace it yet when it works perfectly fine. Forced obsolescence is not a reason for me to upgrade to a new bike. It definitely doesn't make my bike any less fun on the trails.

 

I love my 26ers because it lets me make fun of my friends that have 29ers for no reason without being a hypocrite

Are those 29ers? Pfft.

 

okay

 

This. 1000 times.

Yup

 

Just realized that I posted here but didn't answer the question.
09 giant trance
1 - plush ride
2 - great geometry--not to long, not too short, but just right for me
3 - bought barely used for incredibly cheap price.

 

yep that too... I don't have that any more thats for sure.

 

I remember when cars were actually fun to drive. The suspension was stiff and communicative enough that you could feel exactly how much grip you had and what your tyres were doing. When manufacturers describe today's cars as 'sporty', I swear I do not know what they are taking about.

Most drivers want comfort over handling and manufactures want to sell their cars to the highest number of people. So we have dull cars.

I think bikes might be the same. Many bike innovations, like larger wheels, dull the experience and make life easier. They let the typical bike buyer, the middle-aged magazine addict, ride trails that would be too difficult for him otherwise. He can feel like a hero, riding his sedan around on tame trails, while these dull bikes mean that the only way more competent riders can drag a thrill out of them is by going ever faster and bigger.

So technically, the bikes are better in that they can deal with harsher terrain more easily, but something of the spirit is slipping away. A Ferrari F40 will set you back one-and-a-half million today, and not because it's a comfortable car.

 

Good thoughts!

My specialized HT rockhopper A1 Comp is the F40 of MTN bikes! ha ha! It's fast, light, handles like a dream and is intoxicating to ride! just like the F40. Compared to the full suspension 29ers of today which are like a new automatic corvette, yep their fast, BUUUUTTTTTT, they are soul'less!

 

what year was your RX? I had an 85

 

It was an '82, started with a stock 12A, then got the ever so mildest of ported 12A's, loved that car, sold it to my flatmate. A bunch of my mates are rotor heads. If I had a job, I'd probably have an FD.
Replaced it with a Subaru Liberty RS (OZ special edition of the Legacy RS),my flatmate replaced it with an OZ spec R32 GTR.

 

Seen the word Ferrari and had to go find this article link. Couldn't stop laughing at the way this guy talks about some cars and experiences. Highly entertaining to me.

deadspin-quote-carrot-aligned-w-bgr-2<\/title><path d="M10,3.5l3-3,3,3Z" style="fill:%23fff;stroke:%23fff"/><path d="M0,3.5H10l3-3,3,3H26" style="fill:none;stroke:%231b3a4d"/><\/svg>')}.f_branding_on.blog-group-deadspin .editor-inner.post-content .pu

 

Seen the word Ferrari and had to go find this article link.

Couldn't stop laughing at the way this guy talks about some cars and experiences. Highly entertaining to me.

deadspin-quote-carrot-aligned-w-bgr-2<\/title><path d="M10,3.5l3-3,3,3Z" style="fill:%23fff;stroke:%23fff"/><path d="M0,3.5H10l3-3,3,3H26" style="fill:none;stroke:%231b3a4d"/><\/svg>')}.f_branding_on.blog-group-deadspin .editor-inner.post-content .pu

 

LOL thats great... but i'd still like one.

 

Nostalgia improves the quality of everything.

 

I bet those new 1.3 million dollar Ferraris are no fun to drive at all.

 

Just how much more fun is a Ferrari than a Honda Civic on city streets and highways with a speed limit of 65? Actually, I bet it would be even more fun in a car that makes city streets and 65 mph speed limits feel like a race track.

 

Ha ha...the R34 review Clarkson did was awesome. My friend has a R33. It's crazy. As for the person saying that new Ferraris are no fun to drive. We are not saying that...just as we are not saying 29rs are not fun to ride....as someone who has driven both newer and older Ferrari's......The old ones are much more involving and needing driver skill to keep on the track. Where as the new stuff the electric nannies keep you there. You can be massively ham fisted with them and still come out looking like a rose....Where as with the old ones, try to drive the same way you will be in the weeds.

 

As for the person saying that new Ferraris are no fun to drive. We are not saying that...just as we are not saying 29rs are not fun to ride....as someone who has driven both newer and older Ferrari's......The old ones are much more involving and needing driver skill to keep on the track. Where as the new stuff the electric nannies keep you there. You can be massively ham fisted with them and still come out looking like a rose....Where as with the old ones, try to drive the same way you will be in the weeds.

So in other words the new ones are better.

 

No...actually if you can ACTUALLY DRIVE, the F40 will hand ass to anything besides the Enzo. but you have to know how to drive. SOOOOOOOO just like in mountain bikes, the ole light weight 26'rs will keep up and beat 29rs etc if the person knows how to ride....simple. Enzo only wins because of sheer HP.

 

I think a boost controller would help the F40's lag, and if you found a driver that really knows how to feather the throttle out of the apex, then yes the F40 may keep up with the Enzo. Most of the people here would crash both cars, and several celebrities have crashed Enzo's, but the F40 sounds even more wicked to drive, kind of like the older 70's and 80's 911 Turbos. BTW I'm experimenting on how to make my 26" bike faster downhill than a 27.5", the problem is that I may end up spending more money on the 26" just to do that, so where does one draw the line in performance vs. money spent?

 

BTW I'm experimenting on how to make my 26" bike faster downhill than a 27.5", the problem is that I may end up spending more money on the 26" just to do that, so where does one draw the line in performance vs. money spent?

Are you familiar with downhill racing?

 

Are you familiar with downhill racing?

I'm not familiar with downhill racing. I got all of the psychotic stuff out of my system when I was younger.

 

F40 vs. LaFerrari?

 

After considering all of this I think I'm going to try 13" wheels on my mtb because that's what the vintage Civic's had and I've heard from prominent sources that they're more fun to drive on city streets than a Ferrari F40.

 

'Twitchy' but rad...

 

Last time I checked, it was about having fun.

Unless your idea of "fun" is endless debates about wheel sizes.

 

Last time I checked, it was about having fun.

Said who? For a lot of guys it's about being faster than your mates. Or faster than some guy you don't even know who also has a sad app on his phone.

 

What in the holy crap happened to my beautiful thread!?

 

[emoji23]

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

you left it for too long...

 

Most of the cars I've had (okay , some) were fun in some way or 'nother but mainly my take on them was if some part fell off the car, it probably wasn't needed anyways.

I also know those who remove anything from the car that quits working -rather than fix it. With these concepts, it's not uncommon to see an old Jeep CJ or YJ that weighs in at 2200 lbs or an 89 VW Fox Wagon that's 1935 lbs.

I was either too lazy or too cheap to replace a bad battery in the VW so I parked on slight inclines and roll-started it for a long time.

 

My riding buddy lent me his 29er carbon Yeti while my 26er wheel was being repaired and after a little over 100 miles on it I was surprised by some things.

Pros
-Rollover - Obvious.
-Speed - Surprised by how easily I could maintain speed
-Stability - Bike had an excellent suspension though compared to my single pivot

Cons
-A handful in tight corners - I was surprised by how bad this was
-Slow to accelerate - This is especially frustrating during climbing or rhythm sections
-Feels "dead" due to slow reaction to input.

Overall I liked it but my 26er just feels more fun. Overall times are similar, I am faster or slower in certain sections of trail depending on the bike. When I finally got my 26er back, that first ride reminded me of why I love it.

 

But i think we might have gotten slightly off topic here...

 

"This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend.
Some people started reading it not knowing what it was and now they are stuck reading it forever just because, this is the thread that never ends, yes it goes.........."

I love this thread, have been reading it daily for weeks... Every time I check in it's completely different!

Don't let it stop now!

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk