Advice on a good hardtail.

"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...


Now you have me laughing...As if you have to be a materials engineer to
know
if a bike frame works well or not.

It helps to know *something*, so you can separate the hype from the
reality.

In your case, knowing something may be too much to hope for :-)



Since the Trek Liquid 25
rode better than any of the other bikes I demoed or rode on real trails

Which ones were those?

Canondales, Specialized, Diamond Back, Santa Cruz Blur, Intense Spyder.



If you rode a Liquid 25 or 50, and thought the stays were flexy, I'd
suggest
what you might have had as a problem was not the stays, but tires
that
had
sidewalls which were too soft for you, or insufficient air pressure

100% bull****. Why? I rode a Fuel 90 the day before, and they had
the same craptastic Bontrager tires. Even the same damn size. And
according to my tire gauge, they were filled to the same pressure, and
were ridden on the same trail. The Fuel was slightly flexy, but you
really had to be paying attention to notice. The Liquid was all over
the damn place. And it wasn't only the rear. The damn Rock Sux Pilot
they had on there blew chunks every which way.

It must suck when your mind goes---try to remember I was talking about an
entirely different bike than you are.


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

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


Don't you just love it when you catch someone spewing bull**** ? :-)
Like
just now, you are going on about the Liquid and how bad the Rock Sux
Pilot
was----The thing is Jonesy, that the Liquid 25 does not come with Rock
Shocks.

Sure it does. Look at the website - a psylo.

OK, are you on drugs, is it a reading comprehension problem..what is it ?
If you go to the website for trek, and then to the 25 ( the URL is
http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2004/...n/liquid25.jsp ) you will see
the following:

FRAMESET:
FRAME: ZR 9000
FORK: Manitou Black Elite w/SPV
REAR SHOCK: Manitou Swinger 3-Way w/SPV

There is no other way a 25 gets spec'd. Its not up to the LBS.



Mine had a Pilot, maybe
specced by the LBS - who knows? Yes, I think I know exactly what I
rode. Maybe it was not specced out EXACTLY like the ones at your LBS,
but here's the details:

Adjustable-height shock.
Hayes Hydraulics.
Bontrager wheelset and tires.
Pilot fork.

Not a 25. Please learn to read before getting attitude---though in this
case, your making me look pretty good in this discussion, so maybe you
should keep it up :-)


Even the new 10 has a Manitou fork. So maybe, just MAYBE, not all
bike shops have the very same spec. Unless, of course, you're a total
idiot.


Wow. Score another point here, by making a huge error and calling the other
guy an idiot. Way to go Jonesey.


You must have been riding the adjustable travel version--maybe a
Liquid 10--this is a completely differrent bike, one without SPV.

Yo, ****-for-brains - it's the very same frame. Only the paint is
different. So, I was riding one with a black-painted frame - what
does *that* tell you, genious?

I think you have to be smarter than you look.....but the way you keep going
on, I'm afraid the other members of the NG may begin to wonder....


The Liquid
25 has Manitou shocks with SPV front and rear. The Liquid 25 handles
NOTHING
like the Liquid 10---I would NEVER buy a Liquid 10.

It's the same damn frame. And side/side flex has NOTHING to do with
the type of shock. The mounting points are exactly alike, and these
shocks all move in only one axis.

The ass end would flex LATERALLY on corners, regardless of the shock's
position in it's stroke. That's not the shock, bubba. It's the bike.

Consider that when doing some high speed cornering, the rear shock should be
engaging in both positive and negative travel, to keep the rear wheel glued
to the ground as much as possible. The Manitou 3 way SPV does this well on
the Liquid frame. Apparently, the Rockshock does not--if it is possible to
garner some sense from all the erroneus conclusions you are drawing,
combined with you not being aware of what bike you were actually riding. I
hope for your sake, you are better about keeping track of what girlfriend or
wife you go home with :-)






It wasn't the tires, nor the pressure in them. Nice try, though.


Well, you messed up on identifying what was "most catastrophically
wrong" by
riding and reviewing a totally different bike

Have you forgotten that the frame is the same?

Have you forgotten that the shocks keep the tires tracking on the trail, so
that they don't loose traction ?


than the one we were
actually discussing---you have pretty much proven that the real culprit
in
the flexyness you found must have been a crappy adjustible travel system
and
Rockshox instead of SPV's.

Since you are so hilarously wrong that it's funny, I'll just snip the
rest of your bull****.

I'm glad you are seeing humour. If you can't be smart, at least you should
enjoy life :-)




At the same price point, you can get better bikes from
other makers, including Specialized and Marin. Four-bar, real
pivots,
solid and no Bontrager craptastic drivetrain shiite.


Considering Trek offers Demo days are real trails on a regular
basis,
and
most other brands do not

Uhhh, since when? I rode these Treks and a Klein, and a GF Sugar all
as part of a test ride program at my LBS. They only stipulated two
things: The bike came back undamaged in any way, and just as clean as
when it went out of the shop.

Sounds like a great shop. But there are not many of these around the US.

Which has ****-all to do with my comment. I don't give two ****s for
how many there are. I rode the bikes, on the trail. This weren't no
parking lot spin.



And again, even if a person does not want to buy a Trek, going to a
Trek DEMO at a good trail, will be much easier for most Americans than
finding a LBS that will let you ride their bikes on a good trail.

Now you know about LBSs across the country? You're an idiot.

I know what I hear from other riders on NG's and that I've met on the
trail--in many different areas. And I know the margins bike shops have.
Without manufacturer based demo programs, you just are not going to find
many bike shops that can effectively DEMO mountain bikes on real
trails---the bike ARE going to get scratched and beyond dirty. But thanks
for making me look good again in this discussion with you :-)



One of my criteria for whether or not I was going to buy at a
particular place was if they let me ride the bikes on the trail. I
got to ride quite a few bikes that way. Both the Marin TARA and the
Specialized FSR were rock-solid in the rear. Even the Giant AC with
it's long rocker was pretty stable. Heavy as hell, but stable. The
Liquid just didn't have it.

Again, you were riding the wrong bike, and unfortuately not aware of it.

Oh, it was the wrong bike alright, but since all of the Liquid line
has the same frame, minor things like whether or not the shock filters
low-frequency inputs doesn't matter a bit.

And comments like this beg the question---" Did you ever finish high
school?"



I rode a 30, you rode a 25. Saying that they are somehow vastly
different strains even the mediocre mind.

Sorry you are experiencing so much brain strain on this discussion. Maybe
you should jump into the next post someone makes on how to smoke pot. I'll
bet you know your **** in this area....



you might re-think this a bit--if they were so
bad, people would be riding them on trails and NOT liking the
performance.
Instead, people riding on real trails LIKE the way the bikes handle.

Maybe it's because they, like you, don't know any better?

You can't know how I ride, unless you see me ride

LOL. Irony, much? I watched you ride in the video, and heard your
description. Good enough for me, despite your mewling excuses
afterwards.

Really. I was the one with the camera mounted to his head....I did not
appear in the video. If you thought I was the guy with the Bill Bone team
jersey on, he is a sponsored rider who races and wins Expert Class all over
the US. Oh, you did'nt mean him.....You can tell how I was riding from what
you could see from the camera? Wow.






My main point was that being able to DEMO a bike on real trails is a
huge
big deal.

A clue for Einstein: I rode a pile of bikes on the same trail;
demo'ed them, if you will. I ain't no bench racer - I am actually
reporting it as I felt it. Funny thing - I ended up with a bike I had
never ridden because it's geometry was almost a perfect match for the
bike I'd been riding for over 10 years. So, riding is important, but
knowing what makes what feel like what makes all the difference. And
I paid attention.
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.

I didn't ask for a reiteration of your opinion, but for a WHY.

You can't handle the truth. Probably can't understand it, anyway. Maybe
when you come down off of whatever drugs you were on for the last few posts,
at that time it might be worth the effort.


Jonesey, I almost feel sorry for you. Almost.

Dan V

Dan V says:

snip personal stuff replying to personal stuff

You can't handle the truth.

Dan, just a note - the first guy who said that publicly (the movie, you know
the one I mean) was a self-righteous SOB who thought he was God. We wouln't
want to assume you were the same.

Steve

"Stephen Baker" wrote in message
...
Dan V says:

snip personal stuff replying to personal stuff

You can't handle the truth.

Dan, just a note - the first guy who said that publicly (the movie, you
know
the one I mean) was a self-righteous SOB who thought he was God. We
wouln't
want to assume you were the same.

Steve

Hey, it was just too much fun to say it here...it kind of fit, you know :-)

Dan V

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


Now you have me laughing...As if you have to be a materials
engineer to know if a bike frame works well or not.

It helps to know *something*, so you can separate the hype from the
reality.

In your case, knowing something may be too much to hope for :-)


{743 lines of stuff excised}

OMG can anyone imagine how long a "Volksey/Jonsey" flame war could go on?!?
This one's only 3 or 4 posts in so far, and it's already freakin' War &
Peace...

Bill "ya both got stamina, I'll give you that (sounds nicer than long-winded
gas bags ;-)" S.

angotja wrote:
I just bought a ....... I highly recommend .....

Hmmmm, shouldn't this have been posted at MTBR?

Tom (I buy lots of stuff, which means it's all good!)

"S o r n i" wrote in message ...
Dan Volker wrote:
"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...


Now you have me laughing...As if you have to be a materials
engineer to know if a bike frame works well or not.

It helps to know *something*, so you can separate the hype from the
reality.

In your case, knowing something may be too much to hope for :-)


{743 lines of stuff excised}

Yeah, what is up with these full-quoters? Almost as bad as posters-top.

OMG can anyone imagine how long a "Volksey/Jonsey" flame war could go on?!?
This one's only 3 or 4 posts in so far, and it's already freakin' War &
Peace...

Oh, not too much longer, methinks...

Bill "ya both got stamina, I'll give you that (sounds nicer than long-winded
gas bags ;-)" S.

But, in contrast, you get your posting done really quick. Hair trigger?
--
Jonesy "what double-entendre?"

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

It helps to know *something*, so you can separate the hype from the
reality.

In your case, knowing something may be too much to hope for :-)

Look up the word "irony."

Since the Trek Liquid 25
rode better than any of the other bikes I demoed or rode on real trails

Which ones were those?

Canondales, Specialized, Diamond Back

What models?


Santa Cruz Blur, Intense Spyder.

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

100% bull****. Why? I rode a Fuel 90 the day before, and they had
the same craptastic Bontrager tires. Even the same damn size. And
according to my tire gauge, they were filled to the same pressure, and
were ridden on the same trail. The Fuel was slightly flexy, but you
really had to be paying attention to notice. The Liquid was all over
the damn place. And it wasn't only the rear. The damn Rock Sux Pilot
they had on there blew chunks every which way.

It must suck when your mind goes---try to remember I was talking about an
entirely different bike than you are.

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...)

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...

Don't you just love it when you catch someone spewing bull**** ? :-)
Like
just now, you are going on about the Liquid and how bad the Rock Sux
Pilot
was----The thing is Jonesy, that the Liquid 25 does not come with Rock
Shocks.

Sure it does. Look at the website - a psylo.


[snip specs]

My mistake - I clicked on the 30.

There is no other way a 25 gets spec'd. Its not up to the LBS.

Ooops, you had me, then you went and got all stupid.

There are two Trek dealers within 10 miles of here. They each have a
boatload of Fuels and Liquids in the stores. So, I went and looked at
the Liquids.

Near LBS, Liquid 25 - Manitou Black
Far LBS, Liquid 25 - Rock Shox Pilot

Near LBS, Fuel 90 - Rock Shox Psylo
Far LBS, Fuel 90 - Manitou Black.

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

Mine had a Pilot, maybe
specced by the LBS - who knows? Yes, I think I know exactly what I
rode. Maybe it was not specced out EXACTLY like the ones at your LBS,
but here's the details:

Adjustable-height shock.
Hayes Hydraulics.
Bontrager wheelset and tires.
Pilot fork.

Not a 25.

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.

You must have been riding the adjustable travel version--maybe a
Liquid 10--this is a completely differrent bike, one without SPV.

Yo, ****-for-brains - it's the very same frame. Only the paint is
different. So, I was riding one with a black-painted frame - what
does *that* tell you, genious?

[snip no-response]

If you look at the pictures of the frames, the 30 got the black paint.

The Liquid
25 has Manitou shocks with SPV front and rear. The Liquid 25 handles
NOTHING
like the Liquid 10---I would NEVER buy a Liquid 10.

It's the same damn frame. And side/side flex has NOTHING to do with
the type of shock. The mounting points are exactly alike, and these
shocks all move in only one axis.

The ass end would flex LATERALLY on corners, regardless of the shock's
position in it's stroke. That's not the shock, bubba. It's the bike.

Consider that when doing some high speed cornering, the rear shock should be
engaging in both positive and negative travel, to keep the rear wheel glued
to the ground as much as possible.

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.

Apparently, the Rockshock does not--if it is possible to
garner some sense from all the erroneus conclusions you are drawing

Before you swell any more, let me clue you in: Fox TALAS R.

It wasn't the tires, nor the pressure in them. Nice try, though.


Well, you messed up on identifying what was "most catastrophically
wrong" by
riding and reviewing a totally different bike

Have you forgotten that the frame is the same?

Have you forgotten that the shocks keep the tires tracking on the trail, so
that they don't loose traction ?

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?

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

Clue (again): When not pedalling, the shocks will act almost
identically, since they were both designed to do exactly that. ONE of
these shocks will filter low-freq. inputs, and the other won't. Trail
bumps are not low-freq.

Clue (yet again): If the wheel is not in contact with the trail as
much, then the rear end wouldn't apear to flex as much. Has to have
contact with the ground in order to flex the system.

And again, even if a person does not want to buy a Trek, going to a
Trek DEMO at a good trail, will be much easier for most Americans than
finding a LBS that will let you ride their bikes on a good trail.

Now you know about LBSs across the country? You're an idiot.

I know what I hear from other riders on NG's

Except what you think you know, you actually don't. Funny, that's a
recurring theme with you. You know all about SS bikes. Ooops, you
don't. You know all about "technical." Ooops, you don't. You know
all about how minor spec differences make a world of difference on
bikes with the same frame. LOL, nope. Now, you know all about the
pricing, speccing, loaning and sexual habits of every LBS in the
world. Uhh, yeah.

Four LBSs within a 15 mile radius. All four will let you take a bike
for the day. Mostly, the policy is, "you break it, you own it." So
you blanket statement just doesn't wash.

Oh, it was the wrong bike alright, but since all of the Liquid line
has the same frame, minor things like whether or not the shock filters
low-frequency inputs doesn't matter a bit.

And comments like this beg the question---" Did you ever finish high
school?"

And your comments beg the question: Do you know how suspension
components actually work, or is all you're good for is to make
hilariously ironic quips?

I rode a 30, you rode a 25. Saying that they are somehow vastly
different strains even the mediocre mind.

Sorry you are experiencing so much brain strain on this discussion.

You obviously have reading comprehension problems. Maybe you should
figure out where you went so horribly wrong and get back to me.

LOL. Irony, much? I watched you ride in the video, and heard your
description. Good enough for me, despite your mewling excuses
afterwards.

Really.

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

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.

I didn't ask for a reiteration of your opinion, but for a WHY.

You can't handle the truth

A clever quip. But one that lets you wiggle out of explaining the
differences. I know, when you run out of room, tap dance! Go ahead -
so far you've had an amusing version of the truth, and I seem to be
handling that just fine. Go ahead and try me, if you think you have
what it take.

Jonesey, I almost feel sorry for you. Almost.

No you don't. You're afraid that if you give any details, you'll be
exposed for the fraud that you are. LOL.
--
Jonesy

"S o r n i" wrote in message ...

OMG can anyone imagine how long a "Volksey/Jonsey" flame war could go on?!?

Missed this somehow.

Bill, Bill, Bill. You should know by now, from all your yukking it up
with fellow Kalifornian Micky V, that it's not "flaming" but "telling
the truth."
--
Jonesy "Duh!"

"Jonesy" wrote in message
om...

Which ones were those?

Canondales, Specialized, Diamond Back

What models?

Mostly X-country ( 3 inch travel models)---but lets not stray too far
here....As it is, you can't keep just one model straight, lot less bringing
in 8 or 9 other models in to the discussion ;-)





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 (the less referring to my
old Canondale hardtail, with the 50mm monoshock--A bike with a very stiff
back end, by any definition).


100% bull****. Why? I rode a Fuel 90 the day before, and they
had
the same craptastic Bontrager tires. Even the same damn size.
And
according to my tire gauge, they were filled to the same pressure,
and
were ridden on the same trail. The Fuel was slightly flexy, but
you
really had to be paying attention to notice. The Liquid was all
over
the damn place. And it wasn't only the rear. The damn Rock Sux
Pilot
they had on there blew chunks every which way.


Jonesey, I think the problem here is that you "think" the problem is a
flexy rear end, but what are you telling us that would convince a practical
person, that you have sufficient bike action input on rides to become aware
of this flex---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, poorly set up shocks for a
specific frame, as another---I'm sure several other possibilities could be
considered as well. And after you have shown repeatedly that you have almost
no awareness of whether you are riding a rockshox or a Manitou, a 10, a 30,
or a 25, etc., I don't see how you can expect anyone to have faith in your
"awareness" to the degree that we should expect you could ferret out the
flexy chain stays and isolate them yourself as the cause of the poor
performance. It also seems you have forgotten that the Liquid has huge
leverage in its rocker arm, much more so than the other Treks and most other
bikes. 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. What have you said so far that would indicate that
you had your rear shocks stet perfectly for you on the Liquid you rode? 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?
Certainly, however set up the shock for you has the biggest impact on what
your riding experience with either is going to be. Since you are dealing
with bike shops that are so incompetent they can't assemble their bikes with
the proper parts, I am not expecting much out of the tuning you were riding
with--or your own sense of tuning--it appears you don't know good mechanics
from bad.




It must suck when your mind goes---try to remember I was talking about
an
entirely different bike than you are.

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, as well as correct tuning for riding style and
body weight. I don't think the 10 or the 30 are using shock systems that
mate well with the frame---they may be an effort to deliver what some
people are looking for ( either plush ride or compressed travel), but I
think this effort fails. On the Liquid 25 and 50, where the travel stays 5
inches, and the bikes use Manitous front and back, they can be set up to
ride very weel---You have not told us anything to indicate you ever had any
such opportunity, and riding the 10 or 30 will not count. If you believed
some shop monkey that told you they would be equivalent, then you have
another problem we will need to deal with at another time.



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. You can't look down and
see the chain stays bending....You don't have warning lights on your
dashboard blinking at you with a message about flexy stays.....this is just
your guess about what is wrong with your riding experience. And it sounds
like a pretty lazy guess.


Don't you just love it when you catch someone spewing bull**** ? :-)
Like
just now, you are going on about the Liquid and how bad the Rock Sux
Pilot
was----The thing is Jonesy, that the Liquid 25 does not come with
Rock
Shocks.

Sure it does. Look at the website - a psylo.


[snip specs]

My mistake - I clicked on the 30.

There is no other way a 25 gets spec'd. Its not up to the LBS.

Ooops, you had me, then you went and got all stupid.

There are two Trek dealers within 10 miles of here. They each have a
boatload of Fuels and Liquids in the stores. So, I went and looked at
the Liquids.

Near LBS, Liquid 25 - Manitou Black
Far LBS, Liquid 25 - Rock Shox Pilot

Near LBS, Fuel 90 - Rock Shox Psylo
Far LBS, Fuel 90 - Manitou Black.

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



Mine had a Pilot, maybe
specced by the LBS - who knows? Yes, I think I know exactly what I
rode. Maybe it was not specced out EXACTLY like the ones at your LBS,
but here's the details:

Adjustable-height shock.
Hayes Hydraulics.
Bontrager wheelset and tires.
Pilot fork.

Not a 25.

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. The 10 and 30 are a whole different
philosophy----changeable travel. You can say the 25 is similar to the 50.
You can say the 10 is similar to the 30. That's it. As it is, you are
deserving the title of the "worst Reviewer" of bikes or parts I have ever
heard of.




You must have been riding the adjustable travel version--maybe a
Liquid 10--this is a completely differrent bike, one without SPV.

Yo, ****-for-brains - it's the very same frame. Only the paint is
different. So, I was riding one with a black-painted frame - what
does *that* tell you, genious?

[snip no-response]

If you look at the pictures of the frames, the 30 got the black paint.

The Liquid
25 has Manitou shocks with SPV front and rear. The Liquid 25 handles
NOTHING
like the Liquid 10---I would NEVER buy a Liquid 10.

It's the same damn frame. And side/side flex has NOTHING to do with
the type of shock. The mounting points are exactly alike, and these
shocks all move in only one axis.

The ass end would flex LATERALLY on corners, regardless of the shock's
position in it's stroke. That's not the shock, bubba. It's the bike.

Consider that when doing some high speed cornering, the rear shock
should be
engaging in both positive and negative travel, to keep the rear wheel
glued
to the ground as much as possible.

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. Everything you have
said so far indicates that you had no ability to set up the shock on the
Liquid, and this seems unlikely to change if you were able to ride a 25.
You;d need help from someone. So far, you have not had the "right kind" of
help.




Apparently, the Rockshock does not--if it is possible to
garner some sense from all the erroneus conclusions you are drawing

Before you swell any more, let me clue you in: Fox TALAS R.

It wasn't the tires, nor the pressure in them. Nice try, though.


Well, you messed up on identifying what was "most catastrophically
wrong" by
riding and reviewing a totally different bike

Have you forgotten that the frame is the same?

Have you forgotten that the shocks keep the tires tracking on the trail,
so
that they don't loose traction ?

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, and therefore, a
poorly adjusted rear shock will not destroy the ride quality for this --in
the same way a bike with a long rocker arm will have a poorly adjusted shock
"exagerating" the problems of the poorly adjusted shock. And some shocks are
easier to dial i than others.



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 ;-)



And your comments beg the question: Do you know how suspension
components actually work, or is all you're good for is to make
hilariously ironic quips?

I rode a 30, you rode a 25. Saying that they are somehow vastly
different strains even the mediocre mind.

Sorry you are experiencing so much brain strain on this discussion.

You obviously have reading comprehension problems. Maybe you should
figure out where you went so horribly wrong and get back to me.

LOL. Irony, much? I watched you ride in the video, and heard your
description. Good enough for me, despite your mewling excuses
afterwards.

Really.

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, and with your bias, you made claims the
one you thought was me, was a poor rider--when in fact, he is a top national
racer, and a great technical rider as well.

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



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.

I didn't ask for a reiteration of your opinion, but for a WHY.

You can't handle the truth

A clever quip. But one that lets you wiggle out of explaining the
differences. I know, when you run out of room, tap dance! Go ahead -
so far you've had an amusing version of the truth, and I seem to be
handling that just fine. Go ahead and try me, if you think you have
what it take.

Jonesey, I almost feel sorry for you. Almost.

No you don't. You're afraid that if you give any details, you'll be
exposed for the fraud that you are. LOL.
--

Considering you keep exposing your own failings, I think you have this
backwards.

Dan V