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

About Trek liquids



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #161  
Old August 22nd 04, 10:04 PM
Stephen Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

engamarus says:

Ummmmm! Notice that my mother language is Catalan, not English, and it's
not the same. My English is limited .


Your English is WAY better than my Catalan.

Actually, your English is way better than most native English-speakers'. ;-)

Steve
Ads
  #162  
Old August 22nd 04, 10:17 PM
Slacker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 22 Aug 2004 20:56:12 GMT, Stephen Baker =

wrote:

TBF says:

My first bike was a orange/brown ride with a banana seat made by Huff=

y.
Picked up nuff' chicks on that bike!


But did they stay with ya, or go running towards the first 10-speed =


rider they
saw?.... ;-)


Amb rule #1056 states: Any "chicks" under the age of 11 must be called =
=

little girls, not to be confused grrls, gurls or girlies.

-- =

Slacker
  #163  
Old August 23rd 04, 12:07 AM
TBF
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Stephen Baker" wrote in message
...
TBF says:

My first bike was a orange/brown ride with a banana seat made by Huffy.
Picked up nuff' chicks on that bike!


But did they stay with ya, or go running towards the first 10-speed rider

they
saw?.... ;-)


Well the last one I picked up with that bike married me after university.


  #164  
Old August 23rd 04, 12:08 AM
TBF
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Slacker" wrote in message
news[email protected]
On 22 Aug 2004 20:56:12 GMT, Stephen Baker
wrote:

TBF says:

My first bike was a orange/brown ride with a banana seat made by Huffy.
Picked up nuff' chicks on that bike!


But did they stay with ya, or go running towards the first 10-speed
rider they
saw?.... ;-)


Amb rule #1056 states: Any "chicks" under the age of 11 must be called
little girls, not to be confused grrls, gurls or girlies.

--
Slacker

By the time I got to "girlies" it was a Bianci 10 speed, paint and tires
matched in color.


  #165  
Old August 23rd 04, 01:23 AM
Stephen Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

TBF says:

Well the last one I picked up with that bike married me after university.


In that case I'm gonna bet the bike had little to do with it. ;-)

Steve
  #166  
Old August 24th 04, 04:41 AM
Gman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:01:02 +0200, bomba wrote:
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:27:09 -0400, Dan Volker wrote:

I did not say I was the one doing the toilet dipping to guys like JD...I was
just saying that guys like JD would have had that happening to them, if
they had attended USF, or any other big school.... It was the obvious
reaction which would occur when someone like JD forgot himself ( forgot that
he was a pencil neck) and talked obnoxiously to the wrong people. I would
have enjoyed watching this scenario, if JD had attended USF. They would not
have beaten him up or actually had a fight with him--that would not occur
with someone as physically pathetic as JD.


"physically pathetic"?! Holy **** Dan, how big are you?


Yeah, JD's one little pussy all right!


The point I am trying to make is that guys that "could" talk like JD
talks here on AMB---(i.e., guys that are physically capable of backing
up the implied physical challenges JD's posts contain)


What, like his ability to ride long and far on a mountain bike?

would not
actually talk like that in real life. Guys with this physical capability
learn early on, that tough talk causes real fights, and its not smart to
be picking these on a daily basis, even if you can win them.


Maybe I've missed something, but you appear to be the only one talking
about fighting.


True again. JD may not be the nicest guy on AMB and I don't
always agree with his remarks, but that's his deal. However
two things that are /CERTAINLY not/ in question are his
riding ability and his size.

If it were me (i.e., a little friendly advice), I wouldn't
go jumping up and down and yelling about things that I've
*obviously* got no clue about.

Gman
  #167  
Old August 28th 04, 04:21 PM
Gman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 17 Aug 2004 02:14:19 GMT, Stephen Baker wrote:
engamarus says:

I'm more worried about uphills behaviour, than downhills, as I think you
always have to suffer in uphills, and have fun in downhills. I'd prefer
less suffer than more fun . But obviously, I need more fun than a
downhill with a hardtail.


If you have to buy a full sus to have more "fun" than a hardtail or even
(gasp!) a rigid bike, then you must be confusing speed with skill.

Steve


Well I dunno about that. So you say skill=fun and not
speed=fun??? I disagree, they are both fun!

Even tho I often reach for a rigid bike, the FS is awfully
fun in much different ways. Speed *is* fun a lot of the
time.

There are lots of trails that I can just flow better with
the springs. I don't have to be "on", just point and shoot
baby! Something in the way? No problem...BAM and I'm over
it (/especially/ with the Zoke).

OTOH, skill is fun too, which is why lots of the AMB folks
have rigid SS bikes. For the challenge...

Gman "a little extra time on my hands this weekend" =)
  #168  
Old August 28th 04, 04:24 PM
Gman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 19 Aug 2004 00:19:56 GMT, Stephen Baker wrote:
engamarus says:

In Collserola there are plenty of tracks that you can pass with a rigid
bike or hardtail, but you don't enjoy them, because you were braking all
the time and with a severe risk of falling due to plenty free rocks. Not
about technics.


A-hah! We obviously have a different concept of "fun". That sounds great to
me.
Life is all about the differences. ;-)
(Vive la difference!)
Steve


I'll agree with both viewpoints. Took the rigid to Seattle
and there were *definitely* times I needed a fork. If I
rode there all the time, I'd very possibly put a fork on the
SS. (gasp!)

But it's fun to be purist too!

G
 




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
2004 - Trek 1400? Trek 1200? comments? yuri budilov Techniques 1 April 4th 04 10:53 PM
Klein vs. Trek (crossposted) Lester Long Techniques 9 September 29th 03 06:47 PM
FA: TREK Aluminum Investment Cast Lugs & Tubing The Ink Company Marketplace 0 September 8th 03 01:08 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.