A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Mountain Biking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Danny-boy flails some more! (was: Advice on a good hardtail.)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 1st 04, 06:19 PM
Jonesy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Danny-boy flails some more! (was: Advice on a good hardtail.)

"Dan Volker" wrote in message ...
"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...

Which ones were those?

Canondales, Specialized, Diamond Back


What models?


Mostly X-country ( 3 inch travel models)


So, comparing all these different bikes, ones with completely
different design purposes, really doesn't give you much of a broad
base for discussing free-ride bikes. Got it.

But I like the lame-ass barbs you try and stick onto the ends - they
really make you look smart. LOL.

Santa Cruz Blur, Intense Spyder.


I didn't know these were long-travel free-ride style bikes. Hmmm.


Most bikes I have ridden are 3 inch travel or less


So, you really don't have a broad base of comparison. I see.

that you have sufficient bike action input on rides to become aware
of this flex


There's motion in the rear of the bike. A bending moment that can be
felt on the trail, that disrupts the bikes handling.

and how could you distinguish such a frame behvior from all
the other possibilities which could cause a bike to ride or corner in
specific ways---bad tires being one example


If two bikes have the same tires, then the tires should act the same,
given approximately identical loads and pressures. That one's out, as
I already explained.

poorly set up shocks for a
specific frame, as another


Since the TALAS R was designed for the Liquid, specifically, and since
the manual states exactly how to set it up for rider weight and
desired travel characteristics, this one is just an exercise in
straw-clutching. You have yet to explain how this effects the plane
of motion from side-to-side.

I'm sure several other possibilities could be
considered as well.


Indeed. Mostly, it seems that what we have here is one person, with a
broad background in twisty, challenging singletrack, demoing a bunch
of different free-ride bikes, vs. some flatlander know-it-all who
tested one or two different bikes, and now thinks he's some sort of
expert.

I can live with that comparison.

And after you have shown repeatedly that you have almost
no awareness of whether you are riding a rockshox or a Manitou


Bzzzt. I knew exactly what I was riding. Just because it wasn't the
very same model as what you rode makes very little difference. Just
because *you* claim some world of difference doesn't mean anything.
Hell, your claims are frequently and hilariously debunked here.

It also seems you have forgotten that the Liquid has huge
leverage in its rocker arm


Ooops, looks like you have a reading comprehension problem. LOL.
Talk about not being able to keep things straight...

Mating a shock to this that can be perfectly adjusted to your weight
and riding style--and "is" perfectly adjusted, might be a better first step
in looking for problems.


The plane of motion that we are discussing has nothing to do with how
the shock is performing. It could be completely locked out, and there
would still be the same forces acting on the carbon stays and rocker
arms. (More or less - the point at which the tires are on the dirt in
the corner is where it moves laterally.)

What have you said so far that would indicate that
you had your rear shocks stet perfectly for you on the Liquid you rode?


They don't need to be set up "perfectly." They need to be set up
"close enough." If a bike doesn't operate well in "close enough",
then it's **** and you need to find a better bike. Funny, the
Specialized, Giant and Marin bikes worked just fine. Don't you find
it odd that one bike was so poorly set up that it acted like ****, but
the others were set up well enough to act great? Was that just purely
by chance? As in every other claim you make, you destroy your
crediblity by even suggesting it.

And,
how do you know that the Manitou 3 way SPV might just do a much better job
of adjusting perfectly to your weight and riding style than the Rockshock?


The adjustable-travel shock is a Fox TALAS R. What were you saying
about not being able to keep stuff straight, again? LOL. (The fork
was Rock Sux.)

If it needs to be perfect to ride acceptably, that's a serious
indictment of the bike. Period.

[snip hilarious flailing]

Danny, I set up the shock, according to what Trek said in the manual
(it could have been the Fox manual - either way, it was for that
shock, and that bike.)

You're trying to say now that somehow, the SPV shock transforms this
****ty-ass flexy POS into a hardtail? Jeez - you accuse *me* of drug
use? LMAO.

Trek Liquid. That's the bike, right? Whether it's a 25 or a 30,
you're just being dumb (redundancy, I know, I know...)


The big leverage in the rocker arm, exagerates the importance of the
correctly mated shock system


BWAHAHAHAHAHA! If the rocker arm transmits force from anywhere, it
should ONLY be in a vertical plane. The only difference, throughout
the entire range of travel, is that the lateral forces become largest
at the point where the rear hub is furthest toward the rear. In a
well-designed bike, there should be very, very little lateral movement
at any point in the travel, even if the shock was just a plain,
vanilla coil shock. It might be boingy, spongy, and ill-suited toward
your riding style, but the pivots, rockers shock and stays should not
flex laterally.

On the Liquid 25 and 50, where the travel stays 5
inches


If you had been reading along with the rest of the class, you would
have remembered that I fixed the travel at 5 inches, due to lack of
sufficient ride height in the 3 and 4 inch settings.

Flexy, fiddly travel
adjust that wasn't worth anything - not confidence inspiring.

Which does not exist on a 25. Check the website.


Which makes exactly what difference in how flexy the bike is? You
still haven't manged to explain that...


You have no idea that flex in the frame is occuring.


None of your hypotheses (except the tires) can be the cause, so we are
left with tires and frame. Since the tires are out (same tires on
Fuel 90, no apparent flex), that leaves the frame.

Hmmm, and lets see - Liquids have this funky seatstay design - the
stays are carbon. And are meant to flex. Gosh, these stays might not
only flex in one axis, but also another (they are tubular, after all.)
Naw, that can't be it - it's got to be some telescoping air-filled
concentric metal cylinders that are causing all this flex. Yeah,
sure.

You can't look down and
see the chain stays bending


Those aluminum stays better not be bending...

this is just
your guess about what is wrong with your riding experience. And it sounds
like a pretty lazy guess.


LOL. More irony from someone who obviously knows not one damn thing
about anything he says.

Hmmm, maybe you don't know everything about how every LBS specs,
loans, test-rides, or prices their bikes, huh?



Trek dealers are not supposed to be so incompetent that they can not
assemble bikes properly.


Unless, of course, the bikes come with a certain component spec from
the factory. One ordered specifically, or maybe there was a mid-year
spec change, or...

Fact is, Danny, you have no idea WHY the bikes got specced this way,
and pretending it's incompetance means that you're just casting about
for some lifeline to save you ass.

Too bad you're not man enough to admit that you don't really know what
the answer is.

If you call Trek, they will tell you what you saw
is wrong. You need to find more competent bike shops.


Funny thing about that - they have told me that some bikes get
different forks because they have similar price points. I'm sure you
could call them and hear the same thing.

But you won't.

No ****. It was a 30. I know you think you're making a point, so I'm
gonna leave it at "yeah, the 25 and 30 are completely different bikes
- so different they feel like they were made by different
manufacturers."

LMAO.


The 25 and 50 are part of a lineup where each is supposed to have full time
plush ( 5 inch potential travel), with SPV to prevent use of the full 5
inches when its not needed.


Like when you're pedalling? Ooops, except I wasn't pedalling, I was
going down the hill. The shocks are supposed to act completely
differently in that mode? Explain that, Dan. You keep speaking in
general, marketing, terms. Be specific and technical, so that
everyone will know that you know EXACTLY what you are talking about.

The 10 and 30 are a whole different
philosophy----changeable travel.


And this makes the same bike so drastically different on the downhill
(using the same travel setting as the SPV-equipped frame) that they
act like totally different bikes? Be detailed in your technical
description.

You can say the 25 is similar to the 50.
You can say the 10 is similar to the 30. That's it.


And they all use the very same frame. Ooops, different paint. Ah-HA
- it's the *paint* that makes all the difference! Black paint is
flexier! No wonder red bikes are faster!

As it is, you are
deserving the title of the "worst Reviewer" of bikes or parts I have ever
heard of.


Since you are wrong so often, this is actually quite a compliment.
Thank you.

Exactly what has this to do with the internals filtering low-frequency
inputs? What's that, you say? Nothing? Yup, you're right. When
you're not pedalling, the bikes have *essentially* the same behavior,
assuming the shock is set up correctly.



We can't begin to assume the shock was set up correctly.


If it was set up according to the manual, then it was set up about as
correctly as it can be without extensive "dialling-in." But it
shouldn't need to be perfect to ride well. It should have a decent
range of "good enough." Just like the Giant, Marin and Specialized.
All set up to factory-recommended specs. No lateral flex in these
bikes. (Not entirely true, but one really has to be looking for it to
tell.)

As I said before, if it needs to be set up perfectly to ride
acceptably, then the bike is crap.

Everything you have
said


[snip]

Considering the source of this, Dan, you really do make yourself look
like a total tool. Works for me.

So, one of these shocks, the one that keeps the bike from bobbing when
pedalling, somehow does a better job of doing something other than
that than the shock that wasn't designed to keep the bike from bobbing
when pedalling?


A bike with a short rocker arm will have less leverage


Both bikes have the same rocker arm length. And both bikes had the
same travel (5 inches.)

Find another theory - your flailing is amusing.

You're no mechanical genious, that's for damn sure.


I think I'd have to be an "Educational Genius" to explain things to you
properly for your awareness disability ;-)


I get it now - you just read what you want to, and ignore the
inconvenient. Sort of an MJV Jr.

Yeah, really. All your excuses just make you look like a whining kid.



Very good. Just gloss over another of your reviewing mistakes....You missed
on which rider you were reviewing


Ah, yes - lack of comprehension on your part means that you jam
another six inches of leg into your mouth.

Keep up, Danny:

You make claims about "fast" and "technical". Then you show a vid.
Neither fast nor technical.

It's all about you, not your wannabe buddy.

Got it now?

Overall, just one more example of you not knowing what you are talking
about.


USENET irony at it's finest.


So, if you know so damn much, why aren't the Specialized or Marin
bikes as good or better choices than your Liquid Rear End?

I don't think they are.


It's too bad that you can't answer this question. Not "won't", but
"can't". Because you never actually rode those bikes, to see how much
better they were than your flexy Liquid.

"I bought it, so it must be good."
--
Jonesy
Ads
  #4  
Old June 3rd 04, 04:24 AM
Reco Diver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Danny-boy flails some more! (was: Advice on a good hardtail.)

(Jonesy) wrote in message . com...
(Reco Diver) wrote in message . com...
(Jonesy) wrote in message . com...

Since the TALAS R was designed for the Liquid, specifically, [...]


snip

Who gave you the "Since the TALAS R was designed for the Liquid" quote?


Ooops. My mistake - the Liquid was *supposedly* designed to utilize
the TALAS R. I read this in an extended ad, errrr, mountain bike rag
review article.

IIRC, this was before the SPV was introduced on the other Liquid
designs.

Of course, I can't find the review article.

I guess I'll have to eat that factoid.


I thought you had it switched around, Fox usually credits co-design
stuff. Well then again... I had to return home to Central California
to do some family hospice. Anyway,I was at the Wooden Nickle (decent
place for eats near Airport and Freedom in Watsonhood). picking up
lunch. I run into a guy I know from Special'ed and we started talking
about "fox inertial valving." New technology ... a brand new thing. So
being the typical nit picking @ss that I am I let go with:

"Come on SHOWA worked on that for motorcycles starting in the late
70's, 'SHOWA anti-dive technology'"

Followed up by:

"Didn't Fox work on some co-op project with SHOWA in the motocross
days of the 80's? ... There's nothing new about the technology other
than it was made smaller ..."

About that time the table behind us cleared. Yep Fox is only two stop
lights away down Airport. Seems like lots of folks go to lunch at the
Nickle, even the guys from Fox.

R

Smile when you say "Dumb @ss"
  #5  
Old June 3rd 04, 05:53 PM
Dan Volker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Danny-boy flails some more! (was: Advice on a good hardtail.)


"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...
"Dan Volker" wrote in message

...
"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...

Which ones were those?

Canondales, Specialized, Diamond Back

What models?


Mostly X-country ( 3 inch travel models)


So, comparing all these different bikes, ones with completely
different design purposes, really doesn't give you much of a broad
base for discussing free-ride bikes. Got it.


I never said I did. The discussion I was having with a person about
hardtails and FS, was about typical mountain biking--not Freeriding
specifically as you now suggest.



But I like the lame-ass barbs you try and stick onto the ends - they
really make you look smart. LOL.

Santa Cruz Blur, Intense Spyder.

I didn't know these were long-travel free-ride style bikes. Hmmm.


Most bikes I have ridden are 3 inch travel or less


So, you really don't have a broad base of comparison. I see.


You got me Jonesey. I'm "not" a professional mountain bike reviewer, I have
"not" ridden every single mountain bike there is, and I've only been
participating on AMB for a few months now. While I did start mountain
biking back in the 80's ( in Western NY) , this certainly can not compare to
a guy like you who has become a posting legend on AMB..




that you have sufficient bike action input on rides to become aware
of this flex


There's motion in the rear of the bike. A bending moment that can be
felt on the trail, that disrupts the bikes handling.


You still have not explained how you could possibly know it is bending which
is taking place, as opposed to tires skipping from poor rear shock set
up--exagerated by the long rocker arm.



poorly set up shocks for a
specific frame, as another


Since the TALAS R was designed for the Liquid, specifically, and since
the manual states exactly how to set it up for rider weight and
desired travel characteristics, this one is just an exercise in
straw-clutching. You have yet to explain how this effects the plane
of motion from side-to-side.

I'm sure several other possibilities could be
considered as well.


Indeed. Mostly, it seems that what we have here is one person, with a
broad background in twisty, challenging singletrack, demoing a bunch
of different free-ride bikes, vs. some flatlander know-it-all who
tested one or two different bikes, and now thinks he's some sort of
expert.


With your broad, expansive background in twisty, challenging singletrack,
and your experience with such a wide variety of Freeride bikes, All Mountain
Bikes, X-country bikes, etc., its actually very kind of you to converse with
those of us not so fortunate. I guess I should thank you.

While I don't have the same high opinion of my bike knowledge that you do of
yours, I would like to point out that most of my first decade of riding was
in Western NY, and even after I moved to Florida, I travel to North Carolina
frequently. And I have ridden closer to a dozen different bikes, not the 2
or 3 you attribute to me---of course no comparison to you, but enough to
justify my having "some opinions".


I can live with that comparison.

And after you have shown repeatedly that you have almost
no awareness of whether you are riding a rockshox or a Manitou


Bzzzt. I knew exactly what I was riding. Just because it wasn't the
very same model as what you rode makes very little difference. Just
because *you* claim some world of difference doesn't mean anything.
Hell, your claims are frequently and hilariously debunked here.


So far most of the hilarity has been in your attempted debunking, where you
were clearly backstroking after you made some claims you now know are pretty
ridiculous---such as your saying that a Trek dealer can assemble a Liquid 25
with any spec it wants--and not just the spec Trek has for that bike, on
its site. I'm sure a lot of people reading this thread laughed pretty hard
after they read that.


It also seems you have forgotten that the Liquid has huge
leverage in its rocker arm



The plane of motion that we are discussing has nothing to do with how
the shock is performing. It could be completely locked out, and there
would still be the same forces acting on the carbon stays and rocker
arms. (More or less - the point at which the tires are on the dirt in
the corner is where it moves laterally.)


I disagree.. In a high speed turn, there are vertical forces from bumps on
the trail, and there are lateral forces. It seems your contention is that
only lateral forces are working on the bike, to make the bike track well
through the turn. My contention is that unless you are cornering with slick
tires on glassy smooth blacktop, the irregular surface of the trail will be
acting to throw the tire ( and bike) up and down, and that as each of these
vertical hits occurs, as the tire bounces up, the tire can skid laterally.
This is true on downhills, on flats, and on climbs. If the shock, rocker arm
and basic rear suspension concept of the bike is working for the rider, the
vertical forces should be minimized to the point that lateral forces do not
suddenly succeed to break the tire free and slide it sideways. If the rear
end is "not" working properly for the rider, the tire can bounce up and down
in reaction to the irregularities on the trail, and with sufficient up
forces, it can loose traction and then skid laterally in a turn. Its not
about lock-out or the SPV alternative , its about how well the shock does at
smoothing out the bumps to keep traction. Having the right pressure for the
Manitou 3 Way rear shock ( for the rider), both in main spriing and in
preload, is necessary for this. Since you have not ridden the Liquid with
this shock, you don't really know how different it would be in mating to the
rocker arm and rear end of the Liquid, than the shock in the bike you did
ride. And since you did not even know what you were riding, I don't think
your comments here do justice to the high level of expectations, most AMB
readers must have of you .
:-)





What have you said so far that would indicate that
you had your rear shocks stet perfectly for you on the Liquid you rode?


They don't need to be set up "perfectly." They need to be set up
"close enough." If a bike doesn't operate well in "close enough",
then it's **** and you need to find a better bike. Funny, the
Specialized, Giant and Marin bikes worked just fine.


What would lead us to believe the bikes you rode were even set up "for you"
?
Maybe the last person the Liquid was "set up for" was at a drastically
different weight and riding style than you.???
Maybe the Specialized, Giant and Marin bikes were last ridden by someone to
too far from your legendary abilities or body weight ?

Don't you find
it odd that one bike was so poorly set up that it acted like ****, but
the others were set up well enough to act great? Was that just purely
by chance? As in every other claim you make, you destroy your
crediblity by even suggesting it.

And,
how do you know that the Manitou 3 way SPV might just do a much better

job
of adjusting perfectly to your weight and riding style than the

Rockshock?

The adjustable-travel shock is a Fox TALAS R. What were you saying
about not being able to keep stuff straight, again? LOL. (The fork
was Rock Sux.)

If it needs to be perfect to ride acceptably, that's a serious
indictment of the bike. Period.

[snip hilarious flailing]

Danny, I set up the shock, according to what Trek said in the manual
(it could have been the Fox manual - either way, it was for that
shock, and that bike.)


Maybe it was a Giant Manual you were reading--or maybe it was the manual for
your car---what's the differnence ?




The big leverage in the rocker arm, exagerates the importance of the
correctly mated shock system


BWAHAHAHAHAHA! If the rocker arm transmits force from anywhere, it
should ONLY be in a vertical plane. The only difference, throughout
the entire range of travel, is that the lateral forces become largest
at the point where the rear hub is furthest toward the rear. In a
well-designed bike, there should be very, very little lateral movement
at any point in the travel, even if the shock was just a plain,
vanilla coil shock. It might be boingy, spongy, and ill-suited toward
your riding style, but the pivots, rockers shock and stays should not
flex laterally.


You still have not shown a shred of evidence that any lateral flex or
movement occurs. Everything you attribute to latteral flex seems more likely
to be vertical hit induced lateral skidding--from poorly set up back end.


Hmmm, maybe you don't know everything about how every LBS specs,
loans, test-rides, or prices their bikes, huh?



Trek dealers are not supposed to be so incompetent that they can not
assemble bikes properly.


Unless, of course, the bikes come with a certain component spec from
the factory. One ordered specifically, or maybe there was a mid-year
spec change, or...


So you really are a backstroker....You have to know how hilarious it is for
you to pretend that a dealer can assemble any components they want on a bike
and still call it a Liquid 25. I guess I'll have to thank you again for
making me look good in this discussion :-)


Fact is, Danny, you have no idea WHY the bikes got specced this way,
and pretending it's incompetance means that you're just casting about
for some lifeline to save you ass.


That's not what our local Trek rep says about this :-)
Give me the name of the bike shop, and lets see what Trek will have to say
to them....


Too bad you're not man enough to admit that you don't really know what
the answer is.

If you call Trek, they will tell you what you saw
is wrong. You need to find more competent bike shops.


Funny thing about that - they have told me that some bikes get
different forks because they have similar price points. I'm sure you
could call them and hear the same thing.

But you won't.


A local Trek Rep is close enough. Alot more than you did--but then, you
prefer backstroking to eating crow :-)

No ****. It was a 30. I know you think you're making a point, so I'm
gonna leave it at "yeah, the 25 and 30 are completely different bikes
- so different they feel like they were made by different
manufacturers."

LMAO.


The 25 and 50 are part of a lineup where each is supposed to have full

time
plush ( 5 inch potential travel), with SPV to prevent use of the full 5
inches when its not needed.


Like when you're pedalling? Ooops, except I wasn't pedalling, I was
going down the hill. The shocks are supposed to act completely
differently in that mode? Explain that, Dan. You keep speaking in
general, marketing, terms. Be specific and technical, so that
everyone will know that you know EXACTLY what you are talking about.


All shocks are not equal in their ability to work with a given rocker arm
and rear end. Some shocks will be easier to set up properly than others.
The only way to be specific, would be to have you at a real demo, where the
bikes could be set up optimally.


The 10 and 30 are a whole different
philosophy----changeable travel.


And this makes the same bike so drastically different on the downhill
(using the same travel setting as the SPV-equipped frame) that they
act like totally different bikes? Be detailed in your technical
description.


Yeah right. I am supposed to provide detailed technical descriptions, while
you can't even be bothered to know what bike and components you are riding
on.


You can say the 25 is similar to the 50.
You can say the 10 is similar to the 30. That's it.


And they all use the very same frame. Ooops, different paint. Ah-HA
- it's the *paint* that makes all the difference! Black paint is
flexier! No wonder red bikes are faster!

As it is, you are
deserving the title of the "worst Reviewer" of bikes or parts I have

ever
heard of.


Since you are wrong so often, this is actually quite a compliment.
Thank you.

Exactly what has this to do with the internals filtering low-frequency
inputs? What's that, you say? Nothing? Yup, you're right. When
you're not pedalling, the bikes have *essentially* the same behavior,
assuming the shock is set up correctly.



We can't begin to assume the shock was set up correctly.


If it was set up according to the manual, then it was set up about as
correctly as it can be without extensive "dialling-in." But it
shouldn't need to be perfect to ride well. It should have a decent
range of "good enough." Just like the Giant, Marin and Specialized.
All set up to factory-recommended specs. No lateral flex in these
bikes. (Not entirely true, but one really has to be looking for it to
tell.)

As I said before, if it needs to be set up perfectly to ride
acceptably, then the bike is crap.

Everything you have
said


[snip]

Considering the source of this, Dan, you really do make yourself look
like a total tool. Works for me.

So, one of these shocks, the one that keeps the bike from bobbing when
pedalling, somehow does a better job of doing something other than
that than the shock that wasn't designed to keep the bike from bobbing
when pedalling?


A bike with a short rocker arm will have less leverage


Both bikes have the same rocker arm length. And both bikes had the
same travel (5 inches.)


You were comparing the Liquid to the Fuel--they do NOT have the same rocker
arm length. you did not ride the 25, so you can't really compare.

Dan V



  #6  
Old June 4th 04, 06:04 PM
Jonesy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Danny-boy flails some more! (was: Advice on a good hardtail.)

"Dan Volker" wrote in message ...
"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...
"Dan Volker" wrote in message

...


Mostly X-country ( 3 inch travel models)


So, comparing all these different bikes, ones with completely
different design purposes, really doesn't give you much of a broad
base for discussing free-ride bikes. Got it.


I never said I did.


And yet you are claiming to have knowledge on bike handling esoterica,
based on no real experience. Wow.

And since you bought a free-ride style bike, that somehow translates
into full knowledge on all bikes? Wow, again.

Most bikes I have ridden are 3 inch travel or less


So, you really don't have a broad base of comparison. I see.


I'm "not" a professional mountain bike reviewer


Neither am I, nor do I claim to be. I only report my *experience,*
nothing more. You seem to be taking issue, like you actually know
something about the subject. But you haven't ridden the bikes, didn't
make the side-by-side comparisons I did, and yet somehow you know it's
all bunk.

Uhh, yeah. Now tell me a story about those killer hills and
"technical" trails in the mountains of FL.


that you have sufficient bike action input on rides to become aware
of this flex


There's motion in the rear of the bike. A bending moment that can be
felt on the trail, that disrupts the bikes handling.


You still have not explained how you could possibly know it is bending which
is taking place


Simple. It's lateral motion not felt with bikes of the same purpose,
nor on bikes with similar wheelsets. All bikes were set up according
to factory specs/recommendations for a person of my weight/riding
style.

as opposed to tires skipping from poor rear shock set
up--exagerated by the long rocker arm.


If the bike was designed to take that shock, and the shock was set-up
according to factory recommendations, then how is this possible?
Let's go with something more plausible - the carbon seatstays are not
limited to one axis in their flexibility.

Mostly, it seems that what we have here is one person, with a
broad background in twisty, challenging singletrack, demoing a bunch
of different free-ride bikes, vs. some flatlander know-it-all who
tested one or two different bikes, and now thinks he's some sort of
expert.


[snip]

Unlike you, Danny, I'm just relating what I felt and how I came about
my conclusions. Your weak theory of "poor set-up" has been discarded
due to it's implausibility.

While I don't have the same high opinion of my bike knowledge that you do of
yours


BWAHAHA! "Technical", etc. You are flogging yourself mercilessly
trying to establish credibility in this thread alone! Who are you
trying to kid, here?

[snip]

You didn't ride but one free-ride style bike (according to your list)
and yet you seem to be able to tell a guy who *did* ride a number of
them everything about why you'd only recommend the one you just
happened to get. Uh-huh. Just like how no bike shops let their bikes
out for demo rides. Uh-huh.

Keep digging.

I can live with that comparison.

And after you have shown repeatedly that you have almost
no awareness of whether you are riding a rockshox or a Manitou


Bzzzt. I knew exactly what I was riding. Just because it wasn't the
very same model as what you rode makes very little difference. Just
because *you* claim some world of difference doesn't mean anything.
Hell, your claims are frequently and hilariously debunked here.


So far most of the hilarity has been in your attempted debunking, where you
were clearly backstroking after you made some claims you now know are pretty
ridiculous---such as your saying that a Trek dealer can assemble a Liquid 25
with any spec it wants


An obviously lie. Look up that quote. Good luck.

The plane of motion that we are discussing has nothing to do with how
the shock is performing. It could be completely locked out, and there
would still be the same forces acting on the carbon stays and rocker
arms. (More or less - the point at which the tires are on the dirt in
the corner is where it moves laterally.)


I disagree.. In a high speed turn, there are vertical forces from bumps on
the trail, and there are lateral forces.


Have you *seen* the trail I was riding? No? Then you have no idea
what bumps were in the trail. Frankly, your casting about for some
sort of hook to hang your hat on is pathetic, but let's just say that
the shock worked OK, that the sag was set properly, and that the
rebound was set such that it wasn't too slow.

It seems your contention is that
only lateral forces are working on the bike


You seem to not be able to read. Try again...

My contention is that unless you are cornering with slick
tires on glassy smooth blacktop, the irregular surface of the trail will be
acting to throw the tire ( and bike) up and down


Again, you didn't see the trail, so (as usual for you) you have no
clue. Let's just say that the trail at the points where I felt rear
flex was pretty smooth, and that my weight shift from braking caused
more suspension action than the trail could have.

In the same corners, with the other free-ride style bikes, there was
very little lateral movement. Odd, huh?

and that as each of these
vertical hits occurs, as the tire bounces up, the tire can skid laterally.


If that would have happened, I'd have known it. But it didn't. Look,
dufus, I ride a softtail as my main bike. It's bump response is
similar to my beater hardtail. Better, but nothing like an FS rig.
On bumpy turns, I don't stutter-skid, evn though bump compliance is
close to zero. And yet these bikes don't flex laterally either.
Weird, huh?

[snip an attempt to lecture in FS 101]

Get over yourself Danny - you look like an idiot banging away at this
stupid theory that doesn't hold any water to begin with.

Its not
about lock-out or the SPV alternative , its about how well the shock does at
smoothing out the bumps to keep traction


Finally we agree. The SPV has nothing to do with non-pedalling
forces, so all that remains is shock set-up.

Having the right pressure for the
Manitou 3 Way rear shock ( for the rider), both in main spriing and in
preload, is necessary for this.


And when you set the sag, according to manufacturer's recommendation,
you are setting the shock to operate according to your weight.
Anybody with a shock pump can do this. I have a shock pump, and a
ruler. Maybe I could set up the shock, huh?

Since you have not ridden the Liquid with
this shock, you don't really know how different it would be in mating to the
rocker arm and rear end of the Liquid, than the shock in the bike you did
ride


It doesn't make any sense that a change in shock would make such a
vast difference in handling on the same frame. In pedalling, sure.
If it has to be perfect in order to ride properly, then the design
sucks eggs.

They don't need to be set up "perfectly." They need to be set up
"close enough." If a bike doesn't operate well in "close enough",
then it's **** and you need to find a better bike. Funny, the
Specialized, Giant and Marin bikes worked just fine.


What would lead us to believe the bikes you rode were even set up "for you"


Is it so tough for you to understand written English? Maybe that's
why most folks think you're a total fool.

Maybe the last person the Liquid was "set up for" was at a drastically
different weight and riding style than you.???


Who says it was at the settings from the last person?

Maybe the Specialized, Giant and Marin bikes were last ridden by someone ...


Who says they had settings remaining from the last person?

Don't you find
it odd that one bike was so poorly set up that it acted like ****, but
the others were set up well enough to act great? Was that just purely
by chance? As in every other claim you make, you destroy your
crediblity by even suggesting it.


I knew you wouldn't be able to hack this one.

Danny, I set up the shock, according to what Trek said in the manual
(it could have been the Fox manual - either way, it was for that
shock, and that bike.)


Maybe it was a Giant Manual you were reading--or maybe it was the manual for
your car---what's the differnence ?


How would I have the Giant manual when I was riding the Liquid? When
it comes right down to it, Danny, I blow all of your straw-clutching
arguments right out of the water.

but the pivots, rockers shock and stays should not
flex laterally.


You still have not shown a shred of evidence that any lateral flex or
movement occurs.


Sure I have. Just because you can't begin to recognize what
*observation* is all about doesn't mean the Liquid isn't a flexy POS.
Of course, you bought it, so it *must* be good.

Everything you attribute to latteral flex seems more likely
to be vertical hit induced lateral skidding--from poorly set up back end.


Since you haven't seen the trail, and haven't ridden the range of
bikes that I did for this specific test, it seems unlikely that you
can competently diagnose the issue. But that's you, in a single
sentence.


Trek dealers are not supposed to be so incompetent that they can not
assemble bikes properly.


Unless, of course, the bikes come with a certain component spec from
the factory. One ordered specifically, or maybe there was a mid-year
spec change, or...


So you really are a backstroker....You have to know how hilarious it is for
you to pretend that a dealer can assemble any components they want on a bike
and still call it a Liquid 25.


Where did I say "any components they want?" You're just making that
up.

Fact is, Danny, you have no idea WHY the bikes got specced this way,
and pretending it's incompetance means that you're just casting about
for some lifeline to save you ass.


That's not what our local Trek rep says about this :-)


What's his name and phone number?

Too bad you're not man enough to admit that you don't really know what
the answer is.


I knew you'd pass this one by too...

Funny thing about that - they have told me that some bikes get
different forks because they have similar price points. I'm sure you
could call them and hear the same thing.

But you won't.


A local Trek Rep is close enough.


Give me his name and number. I'll call him and talk to him
personally.


Like when you're pedalling? Ooops, except I wasn't pedalling, I was
going down the hill. The shocks are supposed to act completely
differently in that mode? Explain that, Dan. You keep speaking in
general, marketing, terms. Be specific and technical, so that
everyone will know that you know EXACTLY what you are talking about.


All shocks are not equal in their ability to work with a given rocker arm
and rear end.


Since we are talking about Liquids, the rocker is the same. Since the
Liquid was originally conceived to use the TALAS shock, your
"poorly-mated" theory is just plain bull****.

The only way to be specific, would be to have you at a real demo, where the
bikes could be set up optimally.


And some marketing/sales guy can operate a shock pump and read an
instruction manual better than I can? Now, I get that it's possible
that *you* couldn't follow along, but I'm a little smarter than that.

As I said before, if the bike needs to be perfectly set up to even
work acceptably, then the design is ****.

The 10 and 30 are a whole different
philosophy----changeable travel.


And this makes the same bike so drastically different on the downhill
(using the same travel setting as the SPV-equipped frame) that they
act like totally different bikes? Be detailed in your technical
description.


Yeah right.


I knew you wouldn't have an answer. Talk about the backstroke, LOL...

Exactly what has this to do with the internals filtering low-frequency
inputs? What's that, you say? Nothing? Yup, you're right. When
you're not pedalling, the bikes have *essentially* the same behavior,
assuming the shock is set up correctly.


[snip]

You really need to learn to trim out the stuff you aren't responding
to. I guess you need to be schooled in the basics of USENET, too.

A bike with a short rocker arm will have less leverage


Both bikes have the same rocker arm length. And both bikes had the
same travel (5 inches.)


You were comparing the Liquid to the Fuel


No, stupid, I was comparing the Liquid 30 to the Liquid 25. Try and
read before you make yourself look like a total tool.

So, all you've got, after all this, is some vague "set-up" error, and
a "poorly-mated shock/frame" combo, on a bike that was designed
originally to take that particular shock. LOL, you crack me up.
Funny, I can build up my bikes and service their parts by myself with
no problems, and yet I have difficulty reading a manual and operating
a shock pump and a rebound adjuster. Yup, it looks like a real
convincing argument. LMAO.
--
Jonesy
  #7  
Old June 5th 04, 03:35 AM
Bob Rogers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Danny-boy flails some more! (was: Advice on a good hardtail.)


"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...

JD's BITCH has spoken. Gay marriage is alive and well.


  #8  
Old June 5th 04, 12:50 PM
Dan Volker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Danny-boy flails some more! (was: Advice on a good hardtail.)


"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...



And since you bought a free-ride style bike, that somehow translates
into full knowledge on all bikes? Wow, again.


I swear you must be on drugs. Where did I ever say I was riding free ride
bikes? Oh, and the Liquid 25 is not a free ride bike, its an "All Mountain"
bike. One of these days you'll get in a discussion and be able to remember
what you are talking about...I hope.







While I don't have the same high opinion of my bike knowledge that you

do of
yours


BWAHAHA! "Technical", etc. You are flogging yourself mercilessly
trying to establish credibility in this thread alone! Who are you
trying to kid, here?

[snip]



Newsflash....I was being sarcastic. Apparently you have such a high opinion
of yourself, you missed the sarcasm--pretty sad.

Jonesy, have someone help you with the reading part before you answer me
next time, and then maybe you will sound better.

Dan V


  #9  
Old June 6th 04, 02:51 AM
Stephen Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Danny-boy flails some more! (was: Advice on a good hardtail.)

Dan V says:

its an "All Mountain"
bike.


WTF is an "All Mountain" bike. Honestly, I'm just curious here. Is it
something different from the "traditional" mountain bike, that could basically
do a bit of everything? Or is this some marketing ploy to make sur you own
each of DH, FR, XC, AM, and UC (That's Urban Chic, BTW)

Enough with the acronyms and re-naming - it's a feckin' mountain bike!

Steve "tough day - last kid graduated from high school, 7 hours driving, etc."
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Advice on a good hardtail. frodge Mountain Biking 48 May 29th 04 01:49 PM
Steel hardtail question MTBScottie Mountain Biking 20 November 12th 03 07:53 PM
Hardtail Advice B. Sanders Mountain Biking 4 July 8th 03 12:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.