Looking for "Chain-slap" solution...

Dan Volker wrote:

Even when I get down to my target bodyfat level of around 8 or 9%, and a
weight of about 180 pounds,

You sound like a roadie. Who the **** cares about body fat percentages? A
mtn biker is either slow and fat, fast and fat, fast and thin, slow and
thin, just right, or not just right.

I am going to be too heavy to enjoy riding a
rigid SS in technical terrain .

WTF does weight have to do with riding rigid SSes in technical terrain?

I rode a rigid Diamond Back bike the first
year hyperglide came out,

Whoopie for you. I rode a rigid Bridgestone before the hyperglide came
out. I had just as much fun then as I do now. I pity you for your lack of
understanding of the word fun.

Greg

Dan Volker says:

Again, all I was interested in was discussing mountain biking, but instead,
what I get to hear about is the "Evangelical Church of the Single
Speeders"...Speaking of ignorance, you can't possibly believe that everyone
who rides a mountain bike should cherish your "holy grail" the way you do ?

And then follows it with:

Even when I get down to my target bodyfat level of around 8 or 9%, and a
weight of about 180 pounds,

I thought we were trying to talk mountain biking - not target bodyfats and
stuff....

Sheesh! Some folks. ;-)

Steve

Dan Volker stood on a soapbox and shouted to anyone who would care to
listen :
Again, all I was interested in was discussing mountain biking, but
instead, what I get to hear about is the "Evangelical Church of the
Single Speeders"...Speaking of ignorance, you can't possibly believe
that everyone who rides a mountain bike should cherish your "holy
grail" the way you do ? For that matter, if you are aware of this,
then why do you feel you have to push this SS existence on anyone who
does not care about SS's.

so... talk about mountain biking! Write a RR. What gives you joy? Your best
day on a bike?

Even when I get down to my target bodyfat level of around 8 or 9%,
and a weight of about 180 pounds,


see there ya go, you don't talk mountain biking, you talk all this
scientific biology stuff. That's no worse that others going off about SS or
bike bits or Shaun's latest trip into the pub. It's all good to one degree
or another.

I am going to be too heavy to enjoy
riding a rigid SS in technical terrain .

doubt it, I know one SS-er that's #225 I believe, IIRC...



Penny

GT says:

I rode a rigid Diamond Back bike the first
year hyperglide came out,

Whoopie for you. I rode a rigid Bridgestone before the hyperglide came
out. I had just as much fun then as I do now.

I still ride a rigid gearie - SpecialEd. Bestest bike I've owned, and that
includes the 1960's handbuilt Carlton I had during the 70's.

Steve

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 16:30:31 -0500, "Dan Volker"
wrote:


"P e t e F a g e r l i n" wrote in message
.. .

Equating facts with religious zeal just illustrates the severity of
your ignorance.

Again, all I was interested in was discussing mountain biking, but instead,
what I get to hear about is the "Evangelical Church of the Single
Speeders"...Speaking of ignorance, you can't possibly believe that everyone
who rides a mountain bike should cherish your "holy grail" the way you do ?

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Very bad form there Danny boy.

What is this "holy grail" that you think I possess (metaphorically of
course)?

Again. equating facts with religious zeal just illustrates the
severity of your ignorance.

For that matter, if you are aware of this, then why do you feel you have to
push this SS existence on anyone who does not care about SS's.

Where have I ever done that Danny boy?

Please stick to the aforementioned facts that you are obviously having
a great deal of trouble comprehending.

Even when I get down to my target bodyfat level of around 8 or 9%, and a
weight of about 180 pounds, I am going to be too heavy to enjoy riding a
rigid SS in technical terrain .

How can you possibly know if you've never ridden one?

Ignorance upon ignorance.

p.s. "technical terrain" varies wildly depending upon one's riding
experience.

snip trip down memory lane

G.T. wrote:
Dan Volker wrote:

Even when I get down to my target bodyfat level of around 8 or 9%,
and a weight of about 180 pounds,

You sound like a roadie. Who the **** cares about body fat
percentages? A mtn biker is either slow and fat, fast and fat, fast
and thin, slow and thin, just right, or not just right.

Or in my case, just not right!

Bill "leaving for a ROAD ride (poured last two days, but still ain't quite
right I know)" S.

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:10:41 -0500, Dan Volker wrote:

After looking at all the posts on this, I'm thinking arguing about whether
SS bikes or geared bikes are better is a huge waste of time.

Bingo.

I don't know that I'll ever try single speed bikes, but whether I do or not
will not really matter. Getting out on good trails as often as possible does
matter, and for me, this means getting beyond Ocala, to North and South
Carolina, and Georgia, and doing this as often as I can.

Its all about riding. That's why we're here. The last week isn't an
indication of normal activity on this NG (if there is just a thing!).

Once or twice a year I'll get out West, and sooner or later I'll see one of
these "fabled" SS guys blazing down the trail.

Not necessarily. I've never seen one in my local area in the last 7 years.

I wanted to have mountain biking discussions, and to me, single speed
discussions are just too much of a sub-specialty---kind of like looking for
scuba diving discussions, and having everyone talking about rebreathers
instead---its a subset with a value, but its not the primary topic I would
be looking for.

That's how a lot of us feel about racing. Or adult BMX ("freeriding"). I
really couldn't care less about SSing - several of the long-ass climbs
around here are tough enough in granny gear that most riders avoid them -
but SSing is at least closer to what we traditionally call "mountain
biking" (which mostly has to do with the pure enjoyment of riding in the
outdoors).

If somebody baits you with a "try singlespeed" reply to any issue you have
with the drivetrain, you IGNORE it. That's what you have to do. If it
really bothers you, you can filter out the two people who might do this.

--
-BB-
To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 16:30:31 -0500, Dan Volker wrote:

Again, all I was interested in was discussing mountain biking, but instead,
what I get to hear about is the "Evangelical Church of the Single
Speeders"...Speaking of ignorance, you can't possibly believe that everyone
who rides a mountain bike should cherish your "holy grail" the way you do ?
For that matter, if you are aware of this, then why do you feel you have to
push this SS existence on anyone who does not care about SS's.

You must have lost track - just because a bunch of us were noting that
we'd observed that people can be damn fast on an SS doesn't mean we're
"pushing" them on anyone, or even that we ride them ourselves. I don't
recall hearing that Pete F has one.

Some people really like working and finessing the
trail---I appreciate that, and enjoy it, but I put more emphasis on going
fast. And the bike that lets me do this with the greatest ease, is the bike
I am going to preach about :-)

Preaching is always a such good way to follow-up bitching about someone
else's preaching (if you're trying to like a twit). Me, I'll just preach
about RIDING (well, maybe about Belgian beer. But mostly about riding).

--
-BB-
To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

"G.T." wrote in message
m...
Dan Volker wrote:

Even when I get down to my target bodyfat level of around 8 or 9%, and a
weight of about 180 pounds,

You sound like a roadie. Who the **** cares about body fat percentages?
A
mtn biker is either slow and fat, fast and fat, fast and thin, slow and
thin, just right, or not just right.

If you are 20 pounds overweight, and you lose the fat, but keep the muscle,
you WILL be much faster--faster on easy ****, and faster on technical. If
you don't know this yet, your may be in denial ;-)



I am going to be too heavy to enjoy riding a
rigid SS in technical terrain .

WTF does weight have to do with riding rigid SSes in technical terrain?


A 200 pound muscular rider ( or a 200 pound fat rider) is going to have to
waste far more energy and oxygen controlling their upper body as the bike
movements in the technical terrain require alot of countering to the
inertial forces, as well as pushing the bike forward or back, etc. This
works the same way as in hill climbing--a little guy who weighs 130 pounds
will have no problem standing on a long hill climb, but the muscular or fat
rider at 200 pounds , will need to sit to be as efficient as possible up a
long hill climb. The little guy also will have vastly more headroom to jump
around on his bike and contract a lot of his little muscles ( his little
muscles don't use up anywhere near as much O2 as the 200 lb muscular rider's
muscles do) --this is about him having much more oxygen processing ability
per pound of body weight. The small riders tend to have much better oxygen
processing abilities than big riders ( this is aVO2 max discussion which is
probably way over your head :-)


I rode a rigid Diamond Back bike the first
year hyperglide came out,

Whoopie for you. I rode a rigid Bridgestone before the hyperglide came
out. I had just as much fun then as I do now. I pity you for your lack
of
understanding of the word fun.


And when you were a 6 year old, you probably had as much fun playing with
your lump of coal, as I did as a 6 year old playing with a Tonka Toy....I
guess its great that you still can enjoy simple pleasures.

You could also probably enjoy riding a $200 beach cruiser in the mountains,
and I know I would opt "not" to ride if this was my only choice. If I was
that limited, I'd be out hiking or running instead.

As long as your happy riding your lump of coal, I'm happy for you :-)

Regards,
Dan V

"Dan Volker" wrote in message
. ..

"P e t e F a g e r l i n" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:10:41 -0500, "Dan Volker"
wrote:

And then again, even if I get to be impressed with SS bikes, I don't
know
that I would discuss it again here for more than a single post, since
this
whole discussion has had far too much religious zeal on the part of
many
from the SS crowd, with the attendant expectation that the
"non-believers"
should bow down and kiss their ring.....:-)

Equating facts with religious zeal just illustrates the severity of
your ignorance.

Again, all I was interested in was discussing mountain biking, but
instead,
what I get to hear about is the "Evangelical Church of the Single
Speeders"...Speaking of ignorance, you can't possibly believe that
everyone
who rides a mountain bike should cherish your "holy grail" the way you do
?
For that matter, if you are aware of this, then why do you feel you have
to
push this SS existence on anyone who does not care about SS's.

Even when I get down to my target bodyfat level of around 8 or 9%, and a
weight of about 180 pounds, I am going to be too heavy to enjoy riding a
rigid SS in technical terrain . I rode a rigid Diamond Back bike the
first
year hyperglide came out, and a rigid Raleigh two years before that--this
was long before suspension...back in this time period, I was at 175 pounds
and extremely lean, and I was fast on a mountain bike or road bike---but
the
rigid bike was no where near as "enjoyable" to me then, as a dual
suspension
bike is to me now. Some people really like working and finessing the
trail---I appreciate that, and enjoy it, but I put more emphasis on going
fast. And the bike that lets me do this with the greatest ease, is the
bike
I am going to preach about :-)

Dan V

GP = 210# at 5' 10" and god knows how much body fat. Not too much for SS
though.

Singlespeeds are fun and fast. I ride with geary guys all the time and have
no trouble keeping up. Only trouble is getting around others in the sticky
or steep stuff. You can't go slow on a SS. If you go slow, you walk.
Remember, when you are spinning in your granny, I will either ride by you
very fast or run by you with my bike on my shoulder. I can run faster than
you can spin in your granny.

I rode with a different bunch of guys on New Year's Day and finally one guy
said to me. "Hey what's with that bike. It's only got one small
chainring," I told him it only has one gear and he almost fainted. I rode
my rigid SISS with these guys all day and no problems keeping up. They all
rode Full Boingers with gears. These guys are a lot like you, they are very
fast "racer guys". They are the "top riders" in the area. One guy owns a
bike shop in Newport RI. We rode the toughest trails with varying terrain.
They could probably ride in Florida. I don't race anything. I might race
to work with a coffee and still arrive late but I don't know if that counts.

Try it you'll like it. Don't talk about things you don't understand. You
said it yourself you have never seen anyone riding a singlespeed. There may
not be any in your area. Maybe the guys you ride with aren't really that
good. Maybe your trails aren't the ones where the best riders ride. Maybe
the SS'ers stay away from you because they don't like your attitude. You
see them all the time around here. I'm not in the rockies or moab. I'm in
New England. Rhode Island actually. Not too many mountains here either but
I have fun. The terrain is rocky and rooty. Fun is the key. Not racing,
not arguing.

BTW: I'll give you credit, you kept coming back for more but your foot kept
going in deeper. JD was right, you are now eating yourself. A+ for
sticktoitiveness.

One more thing, I don't have any "Chain-slap" on my singlespeed. You might
want to try that as a solution to your problem.

Relax
GP