What do you think makes a bike better?

Shaggy_Dog

Just out of interest, I want to know what people think makes a difference when rating a bike. In order of importance, ignoring price, brand loyalty and aesthetics, organise these factors of bike performance. I don't need to know details of what head angle, suspension travel or type of gearing you like, just how it factors into your decision making. Of course when you buy a bike price, brand loyalty and aesthetics play a major part. This is just to find out what you think makes a great RIDE as opposed to a great PRODUCT.

In no particular order:

Gearing quality (assuming everything is maintained and adjusted to work correctly), overall comfort, suspension travel, suspension performance, pedalling efficiency, shock setup, geometry, chassis stiffness, wheel stiffness, stem/bar stiffness, frame material, overall weight, wheelset weight, tyre choice, tyre pressure, cockpit setup (bar height, lever angle, stem length etc.). On-the-fly adjustments (such as drop down seatpost, bar mounted lockouts, travel/geometry), Braking power.

Here are mine:

Geometry
Suspension setup
Cockpit setup
Tyre pressure
Tyre choice
Wheelset weight
Overall weight
Suspension perfomance
Pedalling efficiency
Chassis stiffness
Braking power
Stem and bar stiffness
Wheelset stiffness
Comfort
Suspension travel
Frame material
Gearing quality
On-the-fly stuff

Anonymous

Too much to quantify. It's like asking someone why they love their partner, there's just so many different reasons that just listing a few of the more tangible ones does not suffice.
You could take all the qualities someone would give, and they would still not make the same partner or bike.

The Northern Monkey

The rider.

angry_bird

The Northern Monkey wrote:

The rider.

+ potato

Splottboy

Sunshine,

tailwind,

no mechanicals.

MuddyFunster

Great riding buddies.

Anonymous

adjustable seatpost is such a good thing that it would be high up on my list.as it happens, i had intended to swap the stumpy for a bionicon and was close to geting it sorted when i realized i couldnt fit a joplin to it so didnt bother.

the main thing i like on a bike though is an air fork and sram gears

Governor_Knoc

all of the above.

The Northern Monkey

sheepsteeth wrote:

adjustable seatpost is such a good thing that it would be high up on my list.as it happens, i had intended to swap the stumpy for a bionicon and was close to geting it sorted when i realized i couldnt fit a joplin to it so didnt bother.

the main thing i like on a bike though is an air fork and sram gears

hmm still no convinced by sram as yet... but i think its more to do with the shifters. the just arent as good/ergonomic as shimano

(and yeah i do run sram lol)

Raymondavalon

I like lesser known quality brands, for example this is the reason I'd never buy an Orange 5, they're as common as muck, a little like the Ford Fiesta of mountain bikes, they do the job, you see them everywhere and they never change much.

I like functionality combined with aesthetics. Riding position is key as I need to be at ease if spending hours in the saddle. Wide bars and short stem for me too
Brakes are also important as I weigh over 200 LBS so stopping power is key. +1 on the Joplin as it plays such an important part in my riding
SRAM vs. Shimano? That's a contentious issue, I have bikes with both. As long as the derailleur works when I hit the shifter/s I am happy.

capoz77

i think for me its how "at one" the bike feels to me and to the trail.

If it can take me to that magic flow place where nothing else in the world matters but me and trail I know i'm onto a winner.

Dubzy

At my age - it's just being able to push the pedals.

But seriously - I agree with the total freedom cycling gives you - go when, wherever you want at the pace you want on the type of bike you want on the terrain you want.

Priceless

Splottboy

When, oh when, oh when, are they gonna make a drop type Thudbuster seatpost?!

THEN I'LL GET ONE...

omaha

yeehaamcgee wrote:

Too much to quantify. It's like asking someone why they love their partner,

It has to...........
put a smile on your face and at the same time be forgiving enough not to kill you when you make a mistake.

Splottboy

Love your partner, or just get "used" to them?

After 27yrs later, is it LOVE or familiarity that takes over?

When it's more than half your life together, I think its the similarity/familiarity thing that takes over.

ANYONE???...

Help me out here, please?

GHill

All of the frame considerations come first (and as a package). The rest of it can be replaced and, within reason, have a smaller effect.

E.g. a great frame with heavy wheels will still ride well. A crap frame with awesome light wheels will always be crap.

Johnny Napalm

It's usually me getting off it!

projectsome

saddle, grips, and tyres for me

newclearbomb

The Northern Monkey wrote:

The rider.

+1 for me too.

I think there is too much emphasis put on bikes, if you cant ride then it doesent matter what you ride, if you can ride then then it doesent matter what you ride !

A very famous MTB rider told me that there are two types of people that ride !

Bike riders and people who ride bikes, it doesent make a great deal of sense to me nor anybody reading this probably but i often think about it whilst i,m riding !!!!!!

I was at Sherwood Pines last Sunday with my 5 year old watching a guy on a full susser with full body armour goggles an everything psyching himself up for the ladder drop type thing at the top before the two little wall rides !
Whilst young teenagers were launching off it on BMX's and nailing the wall rides !

Tartanyak

Har! Sherwood Pines is just round the corner from me now and I can just imagine someone at the top all armoured up... 'Gauging his line' or something...


Anyhoo, I think familiarity makes for a good bike. Knowing how it'll react to whatever is good, no matter if the reaction is back. You get used to something and how it works. Eventually, you stop thinking about it and it's like the bike's a part of you (and not in a painful way... Or something that the police would then pass onto the newspapers). So, more confidence. Or more time to be scared... Either way, I like it

wobbem

Splottboy wrote:

When, oh when, oh when, are they gonna make a drop type Thudbuster seatpost?!

THEN I'LL GET ONE...

I'd 2nd that

supersonic

Geometry is very important, but the rider should always be getting something that suits anyway. I don't think there is such thing as 'good' geometry ie when a bike is described as having such, as what is good for riders vary. There is M.O.R. geometry which is what suits a lot of people though.

For me fork performance, weight and stiff chassis are important. I put drivetrain right down the list, I would be happy running 8 speed stuff. I'm not convincved that shifting has got that much better in the last decade. Hunt out an old XTR 952 rear mech and some XT shifters and for a few quid you have a decent set up.

Dislike most full sus for long rides as a don't like pedal feedback and don't like bobbing. And no design on the market is neutral at either, despite what claims are made.

bike-a-swan

Go faster stripes and flames on the paintwork.

To be honest, it just needs to feel 'right'. Tyres seem to make a big difference, but I have a lot of difficulty pinning down anything else. What may seem to work on one bike is awful on another.

Anonymous

Oh well, if you guys are going to mention tangible things anyway then....

I like a bike that sets my weight pretty far back, and a short rear end. This makes it easy to pop the front up at a moment's notice, and if I hit an unexpected dropoff, the bike will more than likely stay level, whereas with a forward weighted bike it will tend to nosedive.

ExTrEmE BiKeR

the main things i look for is suspension and brakes. if both those parts are good, it sets the tone for the rest of the bike.

bearfraser

An Electric motor(hidden in the frame)and running on 3 aaa batts giving 100 horse output

Shaggy_Dog

Obviously the rider makes the most difference, I'm talking purely about the bike. I'm happy riding nearly anything, more interested in where than on what bike, but I really appreciate a good one. If you owned your own bike brand how would you go about building the ultimate bike? (assuming you're not trying to make money - great bikes aren't always great selling bikes)

This all boils down to my utter hatred of Trek's current hardtail range (apart from the 8000 upwards, they're alright) and having to sell them. They tend to have a bar mounted lockout and great gears, but shit forks and shit geometry, we do Genesis and Gary Fisher who both make great hardtails. I think too many manufacturers and punters worry too much about gears and gadgets. When I'm out riding I never think "ooh, that was a sweet gearshift" or "so glad I've got a bar mounted lockout".

I think it's just a bloke thing to insist on gadgets. There is definitely truth to the "some people are riders, some people ride bikes" cllche. but I think it goes a little deeper, some people ride bikes, some people buy bikes. Most of people I know with a fleet of posh machinery can't ride particularly well. The ones who are awesome riders tend to have one or two very dialled machines that aren't that high end.

Shaggy_Dog

supersonic wrote:

Geometry is very important, but the rider should always be getting something that suits anyway. I don't think there is such thing as 'good' geometry ie when a bike is described as having such, as what is good for riders vary. There is M.O.R. geometry which is what suits a lot of people though.

For me fork performance, weight and stiff chassis are important. I put drivetrain right down the list, I would be happy running 8 speed stuff. I'm not convincved that shifting has got that much better in the last decade. Hunt out an old XTR 952 rear mech and some XT shifters and for a few quid you have a decent set up.

Dislike most full sus for long rides as a don't like pedal feedback and don't like bobbing. And no design on the market is neutral at either, despite what claims are made.

Good answer, I agree completely, apart from the full susser thing, I like both but if I had to have one MTB it would probably be a full suss. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I like a laterally flexy chassis, but not so much it ghost shifts, I don't like too much torsional flex though. I think if I were building a bike brand I'd struggle the most in trying to get the bike to flex in a way that works well.

giantculler

The rider at all