[ltud]

"Goo" wrote

Did someone seriously moderate his post? I agree with Itud’s right to disagree.

If you’re going to moderate the profanity in a post, moderate it, don’t change the content. Also, I agree that if profanity isn’t allowed, a filter should be installed. IMO, while I don’t necessarily agree with what Itud said in the first place, I think changing his words was totally uncalled for.

I know I hate it when people put words in [i:3jwye3y5]my [/i:3jwye3y5]mouth…

Thanks Greg. It’s a small change, but the fact that it was unannounced – and the edit note doesn’t even point out that it wasn’t me who made the change – concerns me.

[ltud]

Edited for content!? How many posts on this site are edited for content? If someone disagrees with the wrong person, does their post get edited for content? Is no one allowed to rock the boat?

This is ridiculous. Removing profanity is fine, changing content and formatting without informing the author of the post is disgusting.

If want to censor profanity, put a filter in that won’t allow it to be posted. If you can’t do that, at least remove only the objectionable content. I’m wondering now how many of my other posts have been modified to say something different without my knowledge.

What the moderated sentence should read is "Unless maybe you run [expletive deleted] chinese lights." That has an entirely different meaning than "Unless maybe you run "cheap" lights."

I’d really like to know who edited my post and why they felt it was a good idea to change the meaning of what I said without PMing me or at least putting a quick reply into the thread.

I thought this was a good, well run site, not sure about that any more.

[ltud]

"maddslacker" wrote

[quote="ltud":2j8bfr3h]A lot of people disagree with my opinion that one really good light on the bars is enough. I even disagreed with the theory of it. But in real world usage, having ridden with my SlickRock on my helmet and on my bars, I can say that it’s location does not affect my riding speed and that I prefer having it on my bars.

Have you actually done a race yet?

Get back to us once you have. 😃

(Hint: racing is totally different than recreational riding) 😉[/quote:2j8bfr3h]
Yup, I pop in my race eyes when I’m racing. They are somewhat less functional than my standard eyes, but they weigh ten grams less each. Totally worth it

Get over yourself. Many factors of racing are different than recreational riding, but how well your light performs is not one of them. Unless maybe you run "cheap" lights.

*edited for offensive content by GoldenGoose.

[ltud]

"bikenut1" wrote

how long has it been since you have been on a bike? it could just be from not being on a bike for awhile. 2 1\2 hrs. is a long time if you have’nt been riding for some time. give it some time to see if the soreness goes away. just be faithfull about riding the bike and it probably go away. we are not 20 anymore 😆

This is also a good point. I thought of it, but it sounded like sore arms and wrists was not your only problem.

[ltud]

I’m 27 and I’d never broke any bones or had any serious wounds until last summer. A lot of bruises and scrapes as a kid, but nothing that ever required more than basic first aid.

In the last four years I took up downhill skiing, motorbiking, and mountain biking. After this, I started telling people that my retirement savings plan was a tree fund – I would never have to pay for retirement, because I was almost certain to hit a tree before reaching retirement, It was just a question of when, lol.

The trees have yet to do any amount of damage to me, but a year ago tomorrow I hit a car that pulled out in front of me without warning. I was travelling at the same pace as the cars around me, and there was nothing I could do. If I’d been in my SUV, the woman driving that car might be dead and I might be fine. As it was, I was on my R1, and despite its excellent brakes, I went right over her car. Ruptured my spleen, collapsed a lung and broke six bones. She walked away, and later fought the $172.50 ticket for not yielding to through traffic.

It took two months until I could get back on my mountain bike and I’m still not quite 100%, but I’m close enough that I can’t use my injuries as an excuse anymore.

I’m still counting on the tree fund to take care of retirement, but I plan on having as much fun as possible between now and then 😀

[ltud]

A lot of people disagree with my opinion that one really good light on the bars is enough. I even disagreed with the theory of it. But in real world usage, having ridden with my SlickRock on my helmet and on my bars, I can say that it’s location does not affect my riding speed and that I prefer having it on my bars.

[ltud]

It could be your stem length. A shorter stem should bring your body more upright, shifting weight off your arms. Is your seat pushed way forward or back? To start off with, it should be centered so that there is an equal amount of seat rail showing ahead of and behind the seat post clamp.

The shop you bought the bike from should be happy to help you with this. A good shop will also swap your stem out for a shorter one of similar value, for no charge.

[ltud]

"maddslacker" wrote

Let me phrase it this way, I did my first ever race last fall, 24 Hours of Moab, and there is no way I will ever race with only one light. For recreational riding I use just the one on my helmet, but for racing flat out, I absolutely need both. And I have incredible night vision, so that’s not the issue, it’s just nice to have the trail lit up with the static light, and have a second light for where I’m looking.

Maybe I’ll notice a difference if I get faster. Right now, I simply cannot outride my light, even on downhill segments.

When you get you MS 1400, you should try a trail with your MS 900 turned off and let us know how it goes. I bet 1100 lumens on your bars will be enough, 99.9% of the time.

[ltud]

"maddslacker" wrote

Even with hi powered lights. The one one the bars throws a floodlight on to the trail in general, and the one on your helmet illuminates where you are looking.

Think switchbacks…

Yeah, a series of fast switchbacks might cause a problem. The trails I ride at night don’t have any switchbacks on downhills, unless you ride the wrong way 😀. They do have tight corners and a few hairpins though; and my SlickRock punches through them, mounted on the bars.

[ltud]

"maddslacker" wrote

One light on the bars and one light on the helmet is the way to go.

With lower power lights, I agree.

With a well-designed 900 lumen light on the bars though, you’d have to be very fast to outride your light. Downhill racing is the only case I can think of where you’d need more than that. I only want a helmet light for convenience: looking off the trail, mechanical issues, getting stuff out of my pack, etc.

I will be running my 250 at low power (110 lumens?) unless my 900 dies.

[ltud]

"brianW" wrote

I have a mininewt 250. been on a few rides. Noticed my average speed went down 2 mph on a trail I know well.

I recently bought a Minewt 250 Wireless and I find that it is adequate for night riding. Mounting it on my helmet, I can see fairly well, but it does slow me down a bit. I wouldn’t use it alone for night racing. It would probably be ok for twilight racing though.

I also have a Slickrock 900, which is phenomenal. With that on my bars, I can ride at the same speed I do in the day. I just can’t look around easily, as I find it too cumbersome to mount on my helmet. It’s a bit heavy, and I don’t like the cord (to the battery) at the back of my head. I also hit my head on branches a lot and it’s an HID (more fragile than LED) light unit, so I really don’t want it getting hit up there.

Looking forward to riding with both lights this season! 😃

[ltud]

That’s similar to what I was talking about.

[ltud]

Assuming the fork can be fixed, I think you’d be looking at $100-200 to get the fork serviced, and a new headset installed – including the cost of the headset.

Unless the rest of the bike is mint, I’d say it’s not worth it.

[ltud]

"fat_billy" wrote

These youngsters fly by and I find ’em later with a tacoed wheel and figure my pace is best. Remember age and treachory can overcome youth and skill sometimes. 😄

Are you sabotaging their bikes!? 😮

😆

[ltud]

I wear a wide variety of different shorts, depending on my mood and what kinda ride I’m going on. I find the biggest advantage of spandex on a mountain bike is that the shorts never snag on my seat as I shift around the bike on technical terrain.

Most of my shorts have a chamois in them. When I wear the ones that don’t, I either wear them over spandex or limit them to short rides. Riding without a chamois for any distance sucks.

[ltud]

"dozzerboy" wrote

Well a bashguard is designed to slide over objects. If you were to put teeth on them and then try to slide over something, it will grab and throw you off the bike. Also, when you hit a rock it will grind the teeth off or shear them off.

The ones with half-teeth that I was referring to are shaped so that they will slide forward, but grab and pull forward when rotating. Kinda like a ratchet gear, sorry I can’t describe it better and I’m too lazy to embed a pic lol.

A rubber bashgaurd would certainly have the potential to fetch up on obstacles though.

[ltud]

"fleetwood" wrote

[quote="ltud":my5ymepa]You can buy bashguards that are designed with half-teeth to chew their way over roots.

Man, you must have some gnarly roots where you ride if your bash guard is hitting them.[/quote:my5ymepa]

You don’t know the half of it lol.

I actually don’t hit my (36T) bashguard a whole heck of a lot, maybe once a ride, and usually on rocks. I used to hit my (44T) big ring a lot though.

"fleetwood" wrote

[quote="ltud":my5ymepa]There’s also a new product which is a hard rubber bashguard that acts as a third tire almost, allowing your bashguard to have some traction on wet roots and rocks.

I think Goo highlighted one of these in a recent write up.[/quote:my5ymepa]

That must have been where I saw it, that Otter thing he went to 😀

[ltud]

So yes 😛

[ltud]

"8valvegrowl" wrote

There is no increase in rolling resistance. The biggest difference in lowering pressures is increased grip and the fact that the tire conforms to things on the trail with more suppleness which makes for a smoother, faster rides overall.

My bike dropped a pound of unsprung, rotating mass by going tubeless. The bike accelerates faster, handles more nimbly, and is easier to get over obstacles.

No way am I ever going back to tubes.

Those are heavy tubes you were running!

I’m interested in going tubeless once I have a nice set of tubeless ready wheels, but it’s not worth it for me at this point. I have cheap wheels, so upgrading those is a bigger performance priority for me than tubeless. I run low pressures already, if I ran any lower I would be hitting my rim constantly, so there’s no traction advantage. I’m a big guy guy on a hardtail, but I never get flats – really, I bring CO2 and tubes but I end up giving them to other riders who have flats. I can change a dozen tubes in the time that it would take me to set my wheels up for tubeless, so there’s no time savings. I use cheap tubes and don’t flat them, so there’s no dollar savings. And I’m not interested in frigging around with goo!

[ltud]

You can buy bashguards that are designed with half-teeth to chew their way over roots. There’s also a new product which is a hard rubber bashguard that acts as a third tire almost, allowing your bashguard to have some traction on wet roots and rocks.

I’d suggest buying one of these rather than mutiliating your existing bashguard, removing any material is likely to compromise it’s strength.

[Author]

Posts