Standards of riding and fitness at trail centres

rhyko7

Northwind wrote:

rhyko7 wrote:

Don't get me started on dodgy bike set ups, why the hell would you want a stem longer than 80mm unless you are trying to set climbing or road records, then stacking spacers underneath to undo the damage done by the long stem, why why why

Perhaps they like it? Perhaps they have a bike designed for it? Short stems are only mandatory if you're from the church of MBR. And stem spacers are nothing to do with stem length, nothing to do with "undoing the damage", and just for getting the bars to the position that the rider prefers.

Northwind wrote:

rhyko7 wrote:

Don't get me started on dodgy bike set ups, why the hell would you want a stem longer than 80mm unless you are trying to set climbing or road records, then stacking spacers underneath to undo the damage done by the long stem, why why why

Most bikes are sold with overly long stems & spacers stacked under it, my theory was that people put spacers under the stem try & bring the balance away from a bik set upe that is trying to throw them over the bars.
Unless your racing xc there is no need to have a long stem. I can see the benefits for ckimbing but it's such a sacrifice on the descents,to me its worse than trying to attack a gnarly descent with the seat at full height.
When riding DH it is sometimes easier to have a high front end for the really steep parts, but I can't see why you would want to stack spacers in for xc other than to compensate for an overly long stem?

P.s holyzeus,i also have a trancex, I ride with a 65mm stem, I only ever rode with the original long stem on one ride.dunno how u ride it like that?

Northwind

Long stems don't throw you over the bar though. And like I say- on bikes that are designed for it, it works, better than short stems sometimes. Not that any of my bikes have one

neon_neon

rhyko7 wrote:

Northwind wrote:

rhyko7 wrote:

Don't get me started on dodgy bike set ups, why the hell would you want a stem longer than 80mm unless you are trying to set climbing or road records, then stacking spacers underneath to undo the damage done by the long stem, why why why

Perhaps they like it? Perhaps they have a bike designed for it? Short stems are only mandatory if you're from the church of MBR. And stem spacers are nothing to do with stem length, nothing to do with "undoing the damage", and just for getting the bars to the position that the rider prefers.

Northwind wrote:

rhyko7 wrote:

Don't get me started on dodgy bike set ups, why the hell would you want a stem longer than 80mm unless you are trying to set climbing or road records, then stacking spacers underneath to undo the damage done by the long stem, why why why

Most bikes are sold with overly long stems & spacers stacked under it, my theory was that people put spacers under the stem try & bring the balance away from a bik set upe that is trying to throw them over the bars.
Unless your racing xc there is no need to have a long stem. I can see the benefits for ckimbing but it's such a sacrifice on the descents,to me its worse than trying to attack a gnarly descent with the seat at full height.
When riding DH it is sometimes easier to have a high front end for the really steep parts, but I can't see why you would want to stack spacers in for xc other than to compensate for an overly long stem?

P.s holyzeus,i also have a trancex, I ride with a 65mm stem, I only ever rode with the original long stem on one ride.dunno how u ride it like that?

What a silly generalization - Different people like different things. My stem is 100mm and I wouldn't go any shorter - I like the way the bike handles & climbs, and I think it compensates for my long arms!
Don't believe everything the mags tell you.

HebdenBiker

rhyko7 wrote:

Don't get me started on dodgy bike set ups, why the hell would you want a stem longer than 80mm unless you are trying to set climbing or road records, then stacking spacers underneath to undo the damage done by the long stem, why why why

110mm stem here. And bar ends. And long seat post. My bike climbs beautifully. I ride mostly on the bridleways and farm tracks of the Pennines, but my bike is equally at home on the Red at Gisburn, and I'm at the stage where I'm cleaning the course (including Hully Gully, but not The Slab) without feeling the need to lower my seat post at any stage.

I have to admit - my bike shows its limitations on more challenging descents, at more challenging trail centres, but is great for 90% of the riding I do. I guess, if I wanted to improve technically, I could get myself a heavier, bouncier bike with a short stem and a high front end, then I could puff and pant and sweat up climbs like the riders I described in my OP, but then I would get my reward on the descents, on the handful of times a year I go to Dalby or Grizedale.

All riders have to make a compromise when they buy a bike. No bike is suitable for every type of riding. Personally, I have favoured pedalling efficiency and power transfer, which puts me at a disadvantage on technical descents. Maybe I should try an Orange 5. Maybe it would change my life. One day I'll rent one and give it a go, but I suspect that my current bike is the best set-up for the type of riding I do.

Oh and the thing about spacers compensating for long stems, it's not as simple as that.

DodgeT

Here we go again... gone from criticising how people ride, to saying that you cant have a certain stem length/spacers, back round to what type of bike you should have..
This thread is never going to end.

Sounds like you guys should be trail police, giving fines out to whoever doesnt have the appropriate bike for what they're doing, or sweat a bit, or have a long stem or too much travel... :roll:

Or maybe just ride what you like, how and when you like and stop worrying about other people and let them do the same.

HebdenBiker

DodgeT wrote:

Here we go again... gone from criticising how people ride, to saying that you cant have a certain stem length/spacers, back round to what type of bike you should have..
This thread is never going to end.

Sounds like you guys should be trail police, giving fines out to whoever doesnt have the appropriate bike for what they're doing, or sweat a bit, or have a long stem or too much travel... :roll:

Or maybe just ride what you like, how and when you like and stop worrying about other people and let them do the same.

Here we go again. People who can't read properly, but are determined to see fault and take offence, try to close down discussion. Sounds like you should be forum police, giving out fines for whoever doesn't hold the prevailing popular opinion.

This is a DISCUSSION BOARD. If you don't want to discuss the topic, why bother posting? Jog on.

DodgeT

HebdenBiker wrote:

I have to admit - my bike shows its limitations on more challenging descents, at more challenging trail centres, but is great for 90% of the riding I do. I guess, if I wanted to improve technically, I could get myself a heavier, bouncier bike with a short stem and a high front end, then I could puff and pant and sweat up climbs like the riders I described in my OP, but then I would get my reward on the descents, on the handful of times a year I go to Dalby or Grizedale.

I can read fine thanks, its the general sweeping statements above which cause amusement for me.

Anyway, off out now to walk the dog, i may even have a little jog while i'm at it

HebdenBiker

DodgeT wrote:

HebdenBiker wrote:

I have to admit - my bike shows its limitations on more challenging descents, at more challenging trail centres, but is great for 90% of the riding I do. I guess, if I wanted to improve technically, I could get myself a heavier, bouncier bike with a short stem and a high front end, then I could puff and pant and sweat up climbs like the riders I described in my OP, but then I would get my reward on the descents, on the handful of times a year I go to Dalby or Grizedale.

I can read fine thanks, its the general sweeping statements above which cause amusement for me.

Anyway, off out now to walk the dog, i may even have a little jog while i'm at it

Enjoy your jog

When you get back, have another read of the paragraph you quoted. I am admitting the possibility that a "bigger" bike would help me become a technically better rider, but this would mean a compromise in terms of speed and efficiency on the non-technical terrain I mostly ride.

What (I think) I was asking, in my OP, was this:

1. I am not a particularly fit person.*
2. Despite this, I find myself passing an awful lot of people at Gisburn who are on "big" bikes.
3. Therefore, are they over-biked for the terrain?
4. If so, who told them they needed a big (and therefore expensive) bike? Was it the magazines, and sites like this?

5. OF COURSE (and for the umpteenth time on this thread) people are entitled to buy and ride what they like, but, when choosing a bike, are people unduly influenced by glossy advertising, and magazine articles, which push the latest and most expensive technology, when, for certain types of riding (such as trail centre red trails), they would have just as much fun, and possibly perform better, with "less" bike?

6. I think many people know and accept this, but choose to ride big, bouncy bikes anyway. Many people have said so on this thread. That's fine, of course. And it begs the question, is the pleasure of riding an expensive bike, in itself, one of the pleasures of the sport/pastime that is MTBing?

Many posts on this thread have challenged my thoughts in constructive ways. No offence, Dodge, but your post above wasn't one of them, which is why I lost my patience. Sorry about that.

So let's try and boil my thoughts down to a single sentence:

Does the bike industry (including its press) make us think that we need more bike than we actually do, and does it ignore the fact that people could save their money and have just as much fun, and perform just as well, on "less" bike?

And to (once again) pre-empt the inevitable drivel...

Yes yes, I KNOW people can spend as much as they like on a bike if they want to.

BUT, to move the debate on a little, if everthing they read about mountain biking tells them that, unless they have a minimum level of equipment they won't get as much out of the sport, or that they won't be proper "members" of the MTB world, is their choice to buy a massive bike really a "free choice"?

Yes, I know that I'm being provocate by persisting with this discussion. But it's interesting to me, and I continue to be interested in the (constructive) replies.






* This can be demonstrated. I was 2/3 of the way down the field in the Calderdale MTB Marathon last weekend. So I really am no great shakes. But at Gisburn the big-bike riders around me do flatter my performance. If my lap of Gisburn was a race, I would do much better than I did at the CMTBM.

ilovedirt

A longer stem puts you over the front of the bike. Spacers under a stem put you further over the back of the bike. End of.

DodgeT

HebdenBiker wrote:

Many posts on this thread have challenged my thoughts in constructive ways. No offence, Dodge, but your post above wasn't one of them, which is why I lost my patience. Sorry about that.

So let's try and boil my thoughts down to a single sentence:

Does the bike industry (including its press) make us think that we need more bike than we actually do, and does it ignore the fact that people could save their money and have just as much fun, and perform just as well, on "less" bike?

No worries, we wouldnt fall out about it in a pub, so no reason to on here It's very hard for things to be taken in the right context in pure text, I think thats why so many threads turn into slanging matches - not that this is

So, to answer your question above;

I occasionally read the mags, but they in no way influence what I do. What I do influences what I do....
I started off last september borrowing a bike for a ride - a 10+yr old claud butler full suss, heavy as you like, not much worked on it, but I had a hell of a blast around macclesfield forest on it and got the bug..
Then bought myself a cheap hardtail off ebay, which didnt last long until I got an on one 456. I then started to wander farther afield, going to trail centres like llandegla, penmachno etc. Had a go on a full suss half way round llandegla, I was knackered at the time and getting on it was like being in an armchair, but I could still keep going longer and comfier than the hardtail.
So, buys myself a full suss, 120mm front/100mm rear, loved it, moved onto more techy places like coed y brenin, had a go at snowdon, go places like gisburn and lee quarry regularly.
I then realise I want (not necessarily need) more travel, so try a few bikes out and end up with what a have now, a 160mm front and rear all mountain machine and I absolutely bloody love it.
I can have so much fun at Lee (like I did this morning) and also do good old rides on it - 6hrs (28 miles) in the peaks last weekend - all natural stuff.
It goes uphill as fast as a hardtaill (well as fast as i'd go on a hardtail anyway) and just puts a grin on my face whether i'm going up, or across, or down etc.
I love it The extra travel doesn't hold you back, it lets you do more.

Northwind

ilovedirt wrote:

A longer stem puts you over the front of the bike. Spacers under a stem put you further over the back of the bike. End of.

Possibly start of. But not the end of anything.

rhyko7

Hi trail police here (i actually don't ride trail centres much)
I seem to have ignited a fire & ppl keep adding fuel lol

1st off ide like to state;
I do not read/buy any bike magazines

More of my crazy opinions to follow

What I have learnt here is not everyone rides for the descents,for some the climb is the priority, that didn't occur to me.
P.s for riding any descent a long stem is worse than a short stem no matter how the bike is designed. The riders body,arms & bars form a triangle,using spacers is very similar to shortening the stem in most cases

I would also like to state getting a bigger travel bike probably does not make you a better rider,riding bigger terrain will tho. You probably ride quicker on more sus but would not neccassarily be quicker when hopping back on the old steed.

I'm not on a mission to offend ppl,just offering an opinion love it or hate some may try a shorter stem & love it now