Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sports' started by Zodiac, Jul 10, 2006.
If you want a smooth, vibration free ride, think carbon fiber.
Functional and they look good, too.
Tangent, but interesting IMHO:
One of the early Trek carbon bike designers designed my current chair. The front end (the footrest area and tubes there) are ti; the bottom of the chair is carbon fiber:
here's a little bit better shot of the frame detail around the axle so you can see the carbon frame:
So anyway, this thing is built in the late 90's when there was some crossover between carbon-ti bike technology and wheelchairs.
They (the manufacturers) only made type this box-frame chair out of carbon for a few years, then quit doing it. I wondered why, not even thinking about early experiments with carbon bikes. So, in my infinite wisdom, I'm thinking, hey, this chair is cheap, it (sort of) fits, and by golly as a bicyclist I know ALL ABOUT carbon-ti stuff and it'll ride GREAT.
Sure enough it rides great like you'd expect carbon-ti do ride BUT--the problems that the early carbon bikes had also plagued the wheelchairs--there were fatigue issues and issues with the joints. An active chair user is gonna bang this thing up and down curbs all day like a kid on a BMX bike.
Sure enough, two weeks ago, mine begins that creaking noise and starts to flex. :eek1
Gorgeous chair, though. But I know why they abandoned the technology for a while. I wish they'd revisit it using some of the time-trial bike tech I've seen for "everyday" (your daily workhorse) chairs--I believe some of the custom houses are doing it for high-end chairs.
The new chairs have gotten away from the box-frame and are now 'mono frame" or "canti-frame' chairs like the Quickie Ti.
Re: positioning. Its roughly the same position, just rotated forward a bit. On second thought... based on where those damn bars are on the Rivendells, maybe a bit more aggressive than that...
I had a first-generation cannondale.
OMG that thing was a brutal boneshaker.
A few years back, as I was shopping for what would become the Marin, I tried a new Cannondale and was pleased to find they rode MUCH better.
Hey, anyone here ride a 49-50 cm bike?
I had an 87 Crit frame. Blueberry with white lettering. Blue 105 6-sp components.
GREAT bike for anything under about an hour's ride. Over that and things started to go south in a hurry.
I keep seeing those bikes coming up for sale on CL in about pristine shape. Wonder why?!
For us metric dummies, what size would that be (i.e. 18", 22" etc..?)
And a question = The tires on your chair, are they air, or solid?
I'd like all you cycle nerds to help me out with advice on bike style, and brand. I hear they're all made in China now anyway, even Cannondale....
For a bicycle company that still makes bikes in the USA, check out Burley www.burley.com
Made in Eugene Oregon.
Um... crap...uhhh...I ride a 17" hardtail mtnbike...the Marin is a 17"...so probably that neighborhood. It would probably work out for a short-torso'd guy who's 5"4 and and under, not more than a 31" inseam. Or better still, a short female or young teen.
I've got a nice steel old-school Trek that I'm gonna turn loose cheap to an ADV'er who can use it or wants to give their kid or spouse a good start for cheap. I'm gonna pull it out of storage and have a look at it.
Not worth selling--rattle-can paint job, dent in the down tube, but EXCELLENT mojo and a nice steel ride. 105 components.
the tires on the chair are pneumo...26X1 bike tires.
When it comes to MTN bikes I think the smaller the better. My Klein's a 17" (or around that I think, and again I'm 5'8"). Bopping through the woods on a tall bike is asking for it (at least in the NE).
Those pneuma tires must be a hell of alot smoother than that bakerlite like stuff they used to use...
Shit! I ride a 17" bike! WTF are you doing riding one?!
I miss roots, rocks, mud, and leaves. Out here they don't got NONE of that!
Okay, clarification: 16" woods bike, 17" hardtail for aroundtown use so I'm a little more stretched out.
I actually started out on a 14.5" Fuji Mt. Fuji limited and had a late growth spurt in my late 20's. :eek1 Outgrew that sucker. Moved up to a 16 and that's worked for most brands.
Famous SWMBO quote when she picked out her FS bike and made an observation about the suspension: "Mmmmm...five inches in the front AND back!"
The last mtn bike I got was my diamondback XSL, a 16". I test rode it and fell in love with it (4-bar rear end). Weird thing was I don't think I made a millimeter change anywhere on the stem, seat height, etc. Spooky--it was like it came from the factory set up perfectly. Weird.
Yeah, the solid tires really suck dead wombats. I've got those on an older chair and egad, that thing is heavy.
PS - I dug around and found a pic of the old Trek.
Not bad. It'll make someone happy.
I have a 1984 Schwinn High Sierra that was one of the first mass produced mountain bikes.....
Worth more today than when I bought it.
Pic of slightly modded one.
I live at the best pace in the world to ride it...At the Beach, The Bike Path is flat runs like 10 miles along the sand from Sunset to Newport, no cars or stop lights and and lotsa scenery...
That's cool, I recall I had a ROSS (which actually used to make great MTN bikes, also one of the few companies that even did), thing was all chrome, and very trick parts. They had mountain names...(?)
Also had a Nishiki back in 83/84 MTN bike. People used to stop me and ask what the hell kind of bike that is...
Roommate in college had a Nishiki Alien. 'Interesting' bike.
My first MTB was a Peterson (Rivendell) designed Bridgestone in 88.
The same model came with drop bars in 87.
I made many component changes and had front shocks on it for a couple years.
I rode the hell out of it for 12 years untill I got my DBR XR8.
Found a cool site with a bunch of old bstone info.