greatscott

Peer pressure and marketing, and most marketing is false marketing but we swallow it hook line and sinker..

sputniky

Not only do you not pay much attention, you obviously haven't ridden many types of suspension if you're making this wildly inaccurate claim.

Your comments below prove that your idea of "mountain biking" is really out of touch with what millions of mountain bikers, on 2x and 1x systems, do every day.

The kindest way to put it is that you think you you know a thing or two about mountain bike gearing. The reality is that you are quite confused, as you show below.

The truth:

There is no large hole in the middle of a 2x shift pattern.
Modern 1x systems have good low, and high gearing, for mountain biking.
Both 2x and 1x systems are great for real world mountain biking that isn't at a skills park or a ski area (you would know this if you understood what "real mountain biking" is).

Claiming that 2x or 1x is only good for local skills parks or a ski area really proves how out of touch you are with what "real mountain bikers" do on a daily basis.

bruce19

I have mixed feeling about this. I think this is generally true but....I have a 14 year old Masi with Dura Ace (AL frame) and a 4 day old Cannondale CAAD 12 w/105. The DA is amazingly good. The new 105 is better. Not by a lot but better. I also recently went from Ksyrium Elite clinchers on a Guru steel roadie to a Ksyrium Elite UST. I love the clinchers but the tubeless are better. Much better. OTOH, I am now on my 7th Ducati (one at a time) and it's a 2001 Monster S4. I wouldn't trade it for a 2019. Maybe it's just a matter of doing due diligence to see what is actual and what is "marketing." Just my thoughts.

pdlamb

Perhaps you can tell us what your qualifications are? Where do you ride? What is "real mountain biking?" How many types of mountain bike suspension have your ridden? How much do you weigh? What sort of grades do you climb? What's the gearing chart of your 1x or 2x that has no holes?

Until you provide something more than ad hominem attacks, I'm inclined to disregard your posts.

Kapusta

Could people please knock off the “real mountain biking” nonsense?

There are plenty of “real mountain bikers” using 1x, 2x, and 3x. There are rational reasons to prefer more or fewer rings up front. I happen to find 2x (24/32 x 11-34) to work out better than 3x for MTB, but it does not work out for others.

cyccommute 

I fully agree. I don't question whether or not someone is a "real mountain biker" by the equipment they use. I happen to find that having the widest possible range for riding off-road works best for me. 1x and 2x are too limited in range and/or selection for my tastes. That doesn't say that my style of mountain biking is better or worse or that I'm not knowledgeable about the systems. I just have a different opinion.

cyccommute 

I've got him on ignore. I'm sort of wondering what kind of sock puppet he is. On his third post (ever), he took me to task based on one of the Crazy Guy posts in my sig because I suggest caution on a very remote downhill. What newbie goes out and finds that kind of specific information?

sputniky

I'm just a guy that has been riding for 30+ years who knows that 1x and 2x systems are for more than "the local skills park or ski area" and that they are great "out in the real world where an “actual mountain biker” rides, despite what this Stuart guy claims. I'm the same guy that knows, through personal experience, that suspension technology didn't stop when Stuart's ancient Specialized was built.

I've ridden all over the US, and also in Canada, Mexico, Norway, and Sweden.

Something that is vastly different than what Stuart imagines it to be.

Faux bar, Horst link, URT, DW, VPP VTK, Four by 4. I might have forgotten a few over the years.

Non sequitur.

Sometimes steep ones. Sometimes gradual ones. Sometimes they're chunky and ledgy, sometimes the'y're baby bottom smooth.

My 2x10 (rip) was 38/24 - 11/36 and my 1x12 is 32 (or 30 for some rides) - 10/50. I'm sure you can find gearing charts if you're truly interested.

You confusing the truth with ad hominem attacks.

Kapusta

What exactly is "inch worming"? I suspect you may each be talking about something a little different.

If you simply mean bobbing or otherwise giving unwanted movement when pedaling, there have been many designs that do this other than URTs. Many earlier Horst links (and other "faux-bar" designs) bobbed a lot, and even some VPP and DW-Link designs did not pedal great in the small ring. And there are a lot of designs out there now that pedal really, really well.

Also, Cyccommute did specify he was referring to bikes he has actually ridden, not every bike out there ever made.

It is interesting that suspension bobbing and 1x/2x/3x discussions are happening simultaneously, because they are related. One advantage of running fewer rings up front is that with less variation in chainline it requires fewer compromises in the suspension behavior when pedaling.

It is essentially impossible to get a suspension to behave optimally with rings ranging from 22t to 44t. The epic solved this problem with an inertia valve in the shock. This, along with the many "platform shocks" we saw in the mid 2000s, has the downside that it will never be as active and a shock without a platform. That may or may not be an issue for the rider in question.. 2x requires less compromise, but 1x really improved the situation. THIS is actually what pushed me to go 1x on my Turner 5-Spot: With 2x I found it behaved better in the 32t ring than the 24t ring (even better in a 36t when I tried it). Too much anti-squat in the 24t, and it works against me on rocky-rooty climbs. I only have one singletrack ride with the 1x setup now (32t ring), but already I noticed it is better when powering over rocks and root in my lowest couple gears. More active.

sputniky

"Inch worming" is when the wheel base elongates during the down stroke and you get a bit of a rebound in the neutral part of the pedaling circle that can feel like it springs you up. It's a "feature" of URTs.

While there are many bikes out there, there aren't that many suspension systems, hence my response.

"I don’t pay much attention to what the different linkages are but I’ve ridden a number of suspension systems"

sputniky

This is false.

I pointed out how ridiculous it was for you to suggest to someone that "learning how to mountain bike will go a very long ways to giving most people confidence to ride faster and better on pavement. You deal with all the things that give most road riders the heebie jeebies all the time." when you self-admittedly had to walk down a wide trail that is ho-hum, mundane, and no big deal. Heck, you even posted pictures of it.

cyccommute 

I describe it as "inch worming" because the bike feels like riding an inch worm. Yes, the suspension systems that I have ridden all "bobbed" to a horrible extent. Every pedal stroke caused the bike to squat and release...hence the "inch worming". It robbed me of power and made me work harder to move the bike. Rides that I had done previously on a hardtail were more taxing and left me much more tired than without suspension.

The problem with the FSR may have been gearing related but revalving the shock (at no small expense) and running the shock at much higher pressures than it should have been run at...in excess of 250 PSI...alleviated the problem somewhat but it was still an issue. The fact that the measures I took alleviated the problem still says to me that it was the shock rather than gearing.

The bike that solved that problem was the inertial valved Epic. It doesn't bob when I pedal and the suspension becomes active when I need it. It really is a joy to ride. In fact, it solved the problem enough that I'm not really interested in shelling out money for newer designs. Isn't that the point of this thread as well? If you find something that works, is it really worth dumping that for something new that might be better?

The FSR was a 2005. I have ridden other, newer, suspension bikes since then and have not been impressed enough to throw out the Epic. I spent $2000 on the FSR for a bike that I didn't like and didn't work like I wanted. The Epic that replaced it was a 2003 and I spent another $2000 on it, even with taking most of the parts off the FSR to build the frame. Should I dump another $2000, $4000 or $5000 on a bike just to see if it is better than the Epic? Thanks, but I'll pass.

rkwfxd

Buy a bike that you really want and you will have and enjoy it for many many years.

I have a 20 year old bike with updates.
I have a 1 year old bike factory stock.
I have several bikes in-between.

Been riding the 1 year old bike exclusively for that past few months.

Rode the 20 year old bike yesterday.

I'll be upgrading the 1 year old bike to make it more like the 20 year old bike.

None of my bikes are for sale.

Constantly shopping for N+1.

TricycleTom

Mine is doing fine after four decades. It even has a few of the original components. The front hub is still French, but I found I could re-grind the cones to avoid a re-lacing job. I have gone through a few front rims, but not the year that hub went rough. A bicycle is like a hammer or an aircraft - the basic identity has no set lifespan. There are DC-3s still making a living, but some have turbines.
I'd far rather ride than shop.

Beobuck

I agree completely with eja-botteccia:

Seriously, however, I bought my Bottecchia new in 1989 (after watching Lemond ride one).

I keep my bikes forever...too many good memories to replace them.

Between my oldest and newest bikes, I enjoy them all equally.:" I bought my Bridgestone RB1 in 1985; it was a great bike then, it's a great bike now. I have newer bikes, but they're becoming old friends, with lots of great memories.

sputniky

Wouldn't it be great if manufacturers had their new bikes available for folks to try out before they buy? Maybe have a fleet of their new bikes that they drove around to different areas each week for riders to test ride? Or, if they weren't going to be in your area on your time table if your local bike shop offered bikes to test ride before buying? Better yet, what if your local bike shop offered any test ride fee towards a new bike purchase?

That would be amazing!

Once they get smart and start offering these programs, so people don't have to dump another $2000, $4000 or $5000 on a bike just to see if it is better, they should call them ..."demos."

I sure hope this novel idea catches on sometime.

Artmo 

I’ve kept my handmade steel one for 62 years; admittedly it has been modernized and repainted, but it’s still a great bike to ride.

Cl904

My newest bike is a 1984 model🤷*♂️

Nartker

my daily rider is a Raleigh, steel Reynold 531frame in 1972. After 40 years in the garage, I put new wheels Ann derailers on it and have been riding it ever since.

The only mistake was I put 700 wheels on it, which were roughly an inch bigger that the ones it was built for. The top bar is now a bit of a nut buster. I’m

stephr1

+1

I have a Specialized Hard Rock with front suspension that I bought new back in 1998/9 and for the 1st 10 years was not very committed to regular maintenance (such a bad boy!

I've replaced the obvious things...chainrings/crank, bottom bracket, cogs/cassette, brake pads, cables, tubes, tires. I also had to replace the front and rear V-brakes. I also intentionally replaced the twist grip shift and installed Shimano Thumb shifters (that was a nice change!

Still have the same rims (tho, I suspect the bearing races are prob'ly going to force me to replace my wheels). I have over 20,000 miles on the bike. Not a weekend warrior, just use it for exercise ~50 miles/wk.).

I've looked at newer bikes mainly becuz of the perceived sexiness of disc brakes, but I just can't bring myself to make the buy. And as long as I continue to maintain the Hard Rock, it serves me just fine, thank you

I expect it to last another 10+ years (it may outlive me.....

BadGrandma

That's my bike! The Junior 2 model. My 7-year-old grandson received the Junior 1 when he was 4. And yes, if I could get a bike with disc brakes good for hill climbing, time trialing, and gravel grinding, I would buy it. Or buy 4 more bikes. And another Junior 1.

drbarney1

I find more corpulent tires such as the kind on mountain bikes do not go flat as easily or as often as thin tires.

GlennR

Trek did that 2 years ago. They had a few different models in a few different sizes. Both my son and I test rode the new Domane SLR Disc. I rode a 56 and he road a 61. We went on a 30 minute ride and which included hills, rough road and a stretch of gravel. It was my first time on a bike with 30mm tubeless tires and disc brakes. I was very impressed but the Domane was too similar to my Emonda SLR. I would up buying a Cannondale SuperX the next year because I like what the Domane offered but wanted one a bit farther away from a road bike.

sputniky

Yeah, bike companies and bike shops have had demo programs for decades which is why Stuart's "have to dump another $2000, $4000 or $5000 on a bike just to see if it is better" excuse is so strange.

I guess I need to select a more obvious sarcasm font next time.

GlennR

I use [/sarcasm]