Thoughtful Thursday - Just what is it we're after?

[Bearbonesnorm]

The Alpine bike thread got me thinking like these things do and I thought ... bike tech marches on at a fair old pace and things change considerably over time but what's it actually doing for us?

Are 'we' really riding things we didn't or wouldn't have previously? Has the pace of your descending increased noticeably or has time taken its toll and you've slowed down as you've got older? Personally, the only time I've found myself riding things 'less ordinary' was when I owned a DH bike but looking back, it was more about justifying the purchase than anything else.

If we're absolutely honest about it, 95% of the mountainbike population still ride as badly as they did 5 or 10 years ago

[ton]

started on a steel hardtail, still on a steel hardtail. I don't suit fashionable bikes. so never bought one. just plain old boring hardtails.

[benp1]

I'd say steel hardtails are still pretty current!

[looking forward to WTF Wednesday]

[ScotRoutes]

I'm certainly riding stuff on my Occam that I wouldn't previously and it's made me faster on some stuff I'd ridden before. Geometry, suspension travel, tyres all make a huge difference. There are some routes round here I wouldn't attempt without it and the guys I ride them with all have bikes in the same sort of category. Of course, Danny Macaskill can ride them all on a hardtail but even he prefers full suspension for them.

My riding skills have improved a bit over the years, though I'm still guilty of not practicing them they way I should.

There's not much crossover between that style of riding and my bikepacking trips, though I've certainly been over stuff where a full sus would have made me quicker and less likely to have a big fall. Indeed, I need to go back to Kintail with the Occam (and some company).

[whitestone]

We are pretty limited in space - there's nine bikes plus a frame in the house already! Consequently a bike has to "earn its keep" as it were. Sticking to MTBs, most bikes will be capable of most things that we ask of them so long as your main bike is more or less aligned with the majority of your riding then it's fine.

If most of my riding was at trail centres and bike parks then a modern full suss would be my bike of choice for example. I've ridden Alpine trails on the Solaris (when it had suspension forks) and while it coped, it certainly wasn't the most capable. Then again the same could be said of the rider

[AlasdairMc]

I ride more now on a rigid bike than I did on a full susser ten years ago, because I've got better. I shudder to think how many injuries I'd have now if I continued to ride a full susser.

[ctznsmith]

I'm crap on a bike. When I ride a lot I get marginally less crap.

Would a full suss make me less crap? It might aid my confidence and be more comfortable/stop me getting tired but I know from experience that £2/3k would be better spent working less so I can ride my rigid bike more to improve my skills.

[Ray Young]

I had a full suspension for a wee while and didn't like it. I felt like I was being robbed of something. "Have to think about that but of trail, no, just ride straight over it". Thoroughly enjoying the rigid 29er experience thanks.

[RIP]

'WTF Wednesday' -

[Alpinum]

Rigid has helped improve my riding a tiny little bit. But it holds me back too much in those places I love visiting (with or without a bike).

Are 'we' really riding things we didn't or wouldn't have previously? Has the pace of your descending increased noticeably or has time taken its toll and you've slowed down as you've got older? Personally, the only time I've found myself riding things 'less ordinary' was when I owned a DH bike but looking back, it was more about justifying the purchase than anything else.

Yes. Places I would have pushed. More traction, supportive angles, more reach, better distribution. It's all helping me. I feel a big difference.
Also places in the deep snow (fatbike) and would never have thought to be 'good' for riding (which might not have been what you meant).
After ca. 21 years, most of them all about gravity fed riding, even the last 12 years bikepacking tainted riding is still gravity motivated, I go faster the more demanding the terrain is. The learning curve may changed in it's slope, but I go faster and doing that I also take less risks because I know better what I'm capable of.

I must be very 'less ordinary' then...

The terrain I want to ride in dictates what bike I choose.

It still happens that riders trash bikes not quite meant for a certain type of riding. Once they're on an appropriate bike, it'll last much longer and also will not hold the rider back.

[Piemonster]

Indeed, I need to go back to Kintail with the Occam (and some company).

*Waves*

I'll still get off and push any scary bits admittedly.

[voodoo_simon]

I've gone full circle, started off in rigid bikes before the invention of man made theme park riding (I think - certainly before the Marin trail), progressed to a hardtail, then went lighter, then to a short travel full suspension through to a full on 'all mountain' style full suspension and then back to a rigid singlespeed that got 'upgraded' to gears two years ago

Also had a mix of road bikes and a fat bike in the mix too, as well if commute bikes

The full suspension was great, gave me the confidence to carry speed and attack the trail (did I just type that...), whilst the singlespeed gave me the power and I guess, that 'zen' feeling of being at one with the bike (seriously, what am I typing?!).

I'm most happy on my rigid bike now though, I'll ride anywhere with it and I do t have to worry where I'm going with it. Most of it is roughy stuff and bridleway exploring but it does get shown the odd hill every now and again

Strangely enough, I've only had two types of bikes that I've bought for one sole purpose, the roads bikes for ermmm, well, road riding and my fat bike was bought for racing in the snow. All my other bikes have been bought out of want rather than need and I guess to some small extent, my riding style has changed depending on what I was riding. Saying that, I have been known to go out on the singlespeed whilst my friends are riding 'enduro' style bikes but it does my for an anti social ride :-/

[jameso]

what's it actually doing for us?

About as much as the Romans?

Tech moves on and our riding needs change. I think we see tech in a way that depends on where our riding is at the time. I used to see anything that let me ride 'better' (smoother and faster) over rough ground as a good thing so tech was good. Now I want stuff to be reliable and simple so I relish the challenge of rigid bikes. Some waffle about purity and feeling the terrain maybe, or not. Tech hasn't diminished in value, I just don't value it as highly now. I would do if I moved to eg French Alps though. All varies a lot imo.

And my riding is no more or less fun than it was in the late 80s either. All the while I've been able to find a bike that makes me happy when I ride. In all of this i've realised the bike is just something that gets me to places I want to be, all I want the bike to do is feel great and encourage me to ride more/have fun/be comfy along the way. so ... do I ride anything different now etc, or think the tech adds ability - a little, it can do, but skills count for way more.

[RIP]

Eloquently put Mr Olsen :). The "smoother and faster = better" quote reminds me, still just about OT I feel, of my immediate reaction to '29 inch wheels'. In turn, that reaction was exactly the same as Bertholt's in Baron Munchausen when Vulcan / Ollie Reed explains, as only Ollie could, the advantage of his new ICBM invention (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RD6DVYM8ktc) - "where's the fun in THAT?" . Smooth n fast... may as well be on road. I've just noticed that the subsequent line in that scene is "ohhh we cater for all sorts here.. you'd be surprised" which rather neatly sums up this thread and this place .

[PeterC]

What is it we're after? Can't speak for anyone else, but I had a blast a few weeks back cycling found some of the same stuff that I rode 20 years ago, strangely enough on the same bike (rigid Univega Alpina 504 in case anyone was curious). I was never really into speed as such on the MTB really just enjoyed the pleasure of using the bike to get into some of the more remote areas of Scotland a bit more effectively than walking. I guess I probably used the Alpina more as what would now be considered a 'gravel bike' for forest roads, land rover tracks and so on. Although, a new bike is on order, consider myself a bit short for a 29er so 27.5+ is the candidate, so can embrace modernity, just a late adopter. Hope it will help smooth out some of the rough stuff and give a bit more comfort to the old bones. I think at my age I really wouldn't want a bad off, old bones take a long time to heal and time is precious.
Now my son on the other hand, a downhill, enduro, two hardtails and a wardrobe full of body armour obviously rides at the other end of the spectrum, but as I said to him, aye, one day you will be my age and you'll have a purple bike, with purple anodised bits, how he laughed

Edit. Of course if I was his age and lived round the corner from Aonach Mhor I'd probably have the same bikes, back then though it was climbing and fell running for me.

[psling]

The Alpine bike thread got me thinking like these things do and I thought ... bike tech marches on at a fair old pace and things change considerably over time but what's it actually doing for us?

Importantly, the "things change considerably over time" bit includes people as well as bike tech. It also includes prices and the "at a fair old pace" bit is particularly relevant to that over the last few years.

From a personal point of view, the 'people' bit sees me riding more slowly and with no competitive urges these days. I've always ridden hardtails whether rigid or front suspension and in past years I've had some nice cross-country full sus bikes. Different styles of riding; sit and pedal full sus, in and out of saddle hardtail. These days I'm all hardtail. Mind you, I sometimes think maybe it's time for another full sus as I'm getting beaten up over rocky tracks but I always seem to get there in the end and savour the moment.

Bike tech wise, bikes today are marvels compared to twenty, even ten years ago. Obvious steps like disc brakes and, for the more downhill orientated, dropper posts but also developments in frame materials like carbon fibre and changes in geometry. With the much higher popularity of cycling the marketing men have got on board pushing perhaps unnecessary developments convincing those who want that they need.

What's it actually doing for us? Keeping us fit, healthy and attractive to the opposite sex? Well, keeping us skint mostly but hey, you can't take it with you so why not enjoy it to the point just beyond that which you can't quite afford...

[ctznsmith]

Re: technological change it's axle standards that really bug me.

Do people actually notice the difference and is it beneficial?

As a sort of related example I once switched the cranks on a road bike I had from 105 to Rotor. I noticed the difference in the stiffness of the cranks but then I also noticed that my mtb spd pedals and shoes I used on said bike seemed really flexy!

[voodoo_simon]

The Alpine bike thread got me thinking like these things do and I thought ... bike tech marches on at a fair old pace and things change considerably over time but what's it actually doing for us?

Importantly, the "things change considerably over time"

A bit like music! How many bands sound the same as they did 20 years ago*

*apart from Status Quo

[psling]

Re: technological change it's axle standards that really bug me.

Do people actually notice the difference and is it beneficial?

Funnily enough I typed a paragraph on that kind of thing - axle standards, bottom brackets, internal cable routing, etc. - and then deleted it because I found it hard to put into the right words to mean what I was trying to put over! But I agree, a lot of things seem to be just for the sake of creating something new or different and, unless you are a pro elite racer, seem to do nothing except add cost. There may be some engineering benefit to some of it but I'm sure a lot of it is change just for change's sake.

[ton]

anyone think, like me that bike prices have not gone up all that much since you 1st bought one.
mid eighties, my muddy fox explorer cost me about £500 i seem to remember. roughly a months wage back then. my present bike has just cost me roughly a months wage.

[ZeroDarkBivi]

Fun.

If riding a fully rigid single speed over the Colorado mountains until your wrist gives up delivers that fun, then so be it.

I enjoyed riding a rigid 26er with 1.8 tyres almost 30 years ago, but I haven't forgotten what a bone-rattling experience it was, and I wouldn't dream of using that same bike now because there are alternatives that make it less fatiguing, opening up opportunities for longer days and more difficult routes.

For me I want to ride a bike that is optimised for the terrain. I don't relish the challenge of riding a cross bike over the Cuillin Ridge, in the same way I have no interest in soloing the Matterhorn, mid-winter, at night, naked, because nobody has had the 'vision/audacity/stupidity' to take on such a challenge... I enjoy the thrill of speed, and whilst not very fast now, I do like to go long, and as I get older I appreciate the comfort that modern tech (especially suspension) offers on long routes, without too much compromise in efficiency.

Innovation: of course there is a lot of marketing BS in bikes as every other consumer market, but there have been advances in many areas that deliver improvements. There is no compulsion to adopt any of these if retrograde is your style, but would you really be as content riding bumpy MTB routes with panniers over 'bikepacking' style bags? The availability of excellent lightweight bivi kit is another area that has evolved for the better, but perhaps some people prefer carrying massive heavy rucksacks.

Just how big a golf-bag of bikes one can justify will depend on the extent of riding and budget available. If I only ever cycled in the UK, my Spearfish would be a pretty good match for most things, but I would prefer riding a more 'focussed' bike for high mountains or gravel trails. Whilst I am cynical of much of the 'new ideas', I also appreciate that new bikes are generally better than old ones, and make my riding more fun, which is the point.

[Chicken Legs]

I would like a bottom bracket that doesn't creak !!

[PaulB2]

I would like a bottom bracket that doesn't creak !!

Press- fit is already on the wane again

[Chicken Legs]

I would like a bottom bracket that doesn't creak !!

Press- fit is already on the wane again

I am not sure who thought a PF30 was progress !!

[PaulB2]

I would like a bottom bracket that doesn't creak !!

Press- fit is already on the wane again

I am not sure who thought a PF30 was progress !!

accountants...