I've got a new bike...

[defsdoor]

I'd complain if I were you, it's got no fucking pedals.

It needs pedals ?

[Surfr]

This is my 2004? Marin Quake 5.0 Dual Slalom bike. Not that I've ever done any Dual slalom, but it's a perfect bike for my style of riding.



Excuse the gay looking slick and turbotrainer

[Governmentyard]

I bought my last (and current) bike in...um...1987 or 88, I believe. Cost me $400. I use it, but not as much as I should.

So, my question is, "Have bikes changed much in the last (almost) 20 years?" I'm expecting the answer to be yes. How so? Better...stronger...faster?

Everything is better. Frames lighter and seats more comfy and grips more ergonomic and brakes more reliable and tyres less burty - much less bursty - and there's suspension and everything now too.

[Xstreme]

Hey Mojo - you're a bit spoilt with nice trails around your neck of the woods aren't you

I used to do an awful lot of riding up in the North Yorkshire Moors when I was living in the UK - great place

[mattley]

So, my question is, "Have bikes changed much in the last (almost) 20 years?" I'm expecting the answer to be yes. How so? Better...stronger...faster?

Well I'd hate to dissapoint.

Yes, bikes have changed in the last 20 years. They're now better, faster and stronger.







Race bikes haven't changed significantly, from the engineering point of view, but materials tech has come on a pace at the high end with the use of Carbon Fibre and various lightweiht alloys. This has a lot to do with the regulatory bodies £2500 will buy a bike that needs balast to weigh enough for the rules, so the focus has moved onto things like strength, aerodynamics, rapid gear shift systems, elyptical gears stuff like that.

If you saw a state of the art race bike now, next to one 20 years old, it would be very familiar, you could however, be blown away if you wanted get nerdy about materials technology.

Off road things have come on a pace, I guess the key changes would be the addition of suspension, and disk brakes, both rubbish IMO. Though suspension is good if you're actually going down a mountain, the energy consumed when all you want is to go forward outways any advantage for me, and disk brakes, though goo, add nothing more than maintainence, my brakes are already better than thet tyres. Gear selection systems are different, some are even better that they were back then

But a bike is pretty much a bike, the criteria for a bike hasn't really changed since it's inception, all the changes over the last 200 years have been incremental and based more on advances in materials than anything else. The last 20 years aren't so different.

[Driller]

<T1000>

Say, that's a nice bike ....

</T1000>

[goldfish]

This is my 2004? Marin Quake 5.0 Dual Slalom bike. Not that I've ever done any Dual slalom, but it's a perfect bike for my style of riding.



Excuse the gay looking slick and turbotrainer

When do you think you'll get the stabilisers off?

Simon

[Xstreme]

everklear - yes a lot changed. One of the main changes was aluminium becoming the most common frame building material. Lighter and less resistant to rot than steel frames. Steel is however making some what of a comeback with most big manufacturers now offering a couple of steel bikes in their line up and lots of smaller frame builders have been refining their steel frames over the years.

Also of course suspension has become an accepted perhaps 'must have' part of the package even on gentle trail riding bikes.

Components have also become lighter and more reliable. Disk brakes are now been found on lower end bikes.

It's nice having the latest shiny kit but to be honest I enjoy riding my old steel framed singlespeed bike as much as any other bike I own

[Mine'sAPint]

It's nice having the latest shiny kit but to be honest I enjoy riding my old steel framed singlespeed bike as much as any other bike I own

Amen to that, this bike's just plain FUN

[Xstreme]

Off road things have come on a pace, I guess the key changes would be the addition of suspension, and disk brakes, both rubbish IMO.

I wouldn't like be without either of them on the true mountain bike. I agree for gentle trail riding the cheaper suspension forks found on the majority of those bikes is pretty much useless dead weight. I also aren't too convinced by a lot of the lower end cable operated disks. However my disk brakes have probably payed for themselves several times over due to the decrease in wheel rebuilds (no rim wear with disk brakes) and also saved me a couple of long walks when the wheel had become far too buckled to ever fit through conventional brake calipers.

I think it all depends on what you want out of a mountain bike. I know an awful lot of them don't ever get (and shouldn't be allowed) anywhere near a mountain.

[Xstreme]

Amen to that, this bike's just plain FUN

we've got the same taste in Singlespeeds

Beautiful Any idea what year yours is? Mines a 92 model. It was re-sprayed a few years back and was treated to some new stickers (unfortunately put on in slightly the wrong position).

They're just great bikes though eh? There's something I love about the geometry on the Kona hardtails. To be honest mines mostly retired from true mountain biking duty and spends the majority of time in the city. However now and again (mostly when I go back to the UK) I grab the Kona and hit the trails. It's one of those things i'll never ever sell.

[everklear]

Thanks men.

Too bad about the lack of rocket boosters as standard, but I guess that sort of defeats the purpose, eh?

[Mine'sAPint]

Beautiful Any idea what year yours is? Mines a 92 model. It was re-sprayed a few years back and was treated to some new stickers (unfortunately put on in slightly the wrong position).

Thanks! Mine's the 2004 Explosif, nice steel frame with the cool sliding dropouts that allow you to tension the chain - just perfect for a singlespeed! It just handles so nicely, particularly with the rigid fork.

[mattley]

Off road things have come on a pace, I guess the key changes would be the addition of suspension, and disk brakes, both rubbish IMO.

I wouldn't like be without either of them on the true mountain bike.

As I went on to say, and as you alluded to.... If you actually want to chuck it down a mountain....

See later....

decrease in wheel rebuilds (no rim wear with disk brakes) and also saved me a couple of long walks when the wheel had become far too buckled to ever fit through conventional brake calipers.

I've never had a rim wear problem, I use soft pads and replace them regularly, it's cheaper, and I don't do endurance like you.



... later....

There was a court case over here a couple of years ago, that never went to appeal, so isn't yet in law. It centred around the selling of a bike as a 'mountain bike'. Two fat idiots went to halfords and bought a pair of mountain bikes for about £140 ish IIRC each. They then took them to wales and tried to go down a mountainon them. Unsurprisingly both broke and they were both quite badly hurt. The UK consumer group picked up on the case and pushed for clarification, but it doesn't seem to have happened.

[matt303]

Stop it with the single speeds will you, I can't afford another bike.

I'm really torn between my full suspension with discs bike and my v-brake equipped steel hardtail (it's an On One - Inbred), the steel framed bike feels so nimble but I would swap the v-brakes for discs any day.