Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Sat Dec 03, 2016 1:23 am

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 229 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 23  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:09 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:05 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Virginia, USA
John wrote:
Thought this might be interesting. Some of the entries thus far may have to be discussed.

As others have pointed out we're after evolutionary dead ends.

I think we need a succinct definition of "evolutionary dead ends." If my Grove doesn't fit, I'll gladly remove it from the competition.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:30 pm 
Dirt Disciple

Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:01 pm
Posts: 98
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
I submit this http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=205435
as an entry


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:30 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:18 pm
Posts: 1285
Location: in the harbor
mfh126 wrote:
I think we need a succinct definition of "evolutionary dead ends." ..

I think anyone can define it for themselves

...for example (sorry for out of topic but maybe this is a special kind of "Dead End") A crazy type like me always does something crazy! 8)

The story: Years ago I had to ride long distance along the sandy coast. Of course it was not easy, so I thought to myself, I could take special hubs :lol::lol:

Image

Image

Although it was fantastic to ride with it, now I would say my concept was one of the biggest mistakes at this bike!

years later ...the evolution :D

Image

In my opinion, the Marin/Manitou FRS were excellent technical development but unfortunately this kind of rear sus has not developed further.

Cheers (..and not a lot of questions please :lol:)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:44 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:05 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Virginia, USA
@airpressure: :lol:

Nader wrote:
mfh126 wrote:
I think we need a succinct definition of "evolutionary dead ends." ..

I think anyone can define it for themselves


Yes, I thought it would be that easy, too, but the first 7 pages of this thread have proven otherwise!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:13 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:44 pm
Posts: 3584
Location: Wherever it is, I'm being just that little bit more Lance
Quote:
I think we need a succinct definition of "evolutionary dead ends."


Yes, you're quite right. I've set the chaps to it and we'll have one right after the chimpanzee typewriter pool has written the succinct definition of "what is Retro?" and "when is Retro not Retro but just second hand?" as well as other nuggets of philosophical gold that the likes of René Descartes would struggle to get to grips with before developing a head ache and going for a nap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 10:25 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:05 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Virginia, USA
Personally, I don't need a definition. I was merely suggesting it as a way to end the negative comments after every candidate bike is posted.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 12:28 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:45 pm
Posts: 587
Craptivator :?:
:roll: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 1:05 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:12 am
Posts: 2461
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
mfh126 wrote:
Seems some folks misread John's original criteria for this month's BoTM. I highlighted a couple of key words since everyone is focused on softbeam and URT as key criteria, when in reality they were only mentioned as examples, not an all inclusive list. I'd say all entries are valid so far, no?


I'm more than happy with all entries so far, yes some dead ends are bigger than others but I don't see why people make it such a big deal when all they have to do is vote for the bike they like and think best fits the definition.

There are still plenty of bikes that could be submitted.

Maybe a few more examples will help people:

Trek 9000 - mentioned previously but undamped rubber for suspension didn't go far.
Pro-Flex - Elastomers and Grivin forks
Trek Y bike - URT done all wrong
Klein Mantra - URT done better but looks all wrong and early ones prone to breaking due to design faults
Mountain machine - 24"/20" wheel combo
Off road tandems - I think it would be easy to argue these are a dead end especially if you've tried tight single track...

I'm forgotten the name of that metal tubing which was produced and then quickly removed from the market but anything made from that would do.

Just because they are rubbish in design doesn't mean they aren't fun to ride. But if the ride makes you laugh and say "What were they thinking when they designed this?" then there is a

Parts wise there are endless parts produced to fix a problem which never exisited or made things worse.

170mm off road stem - I have one but can't say I'll ever use it
HED aero wheels for off road - look cool but
White porcs and white tyres in general
etc
etc


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 2:04 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:12 am
Posts: 2461
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Back in the early days we used to nominate other peoples bikes we thought were worthy of BOTM and so I'd like to nominate Aaran's 91 Nishiki Alien ACX. Note: I'll check with Aaran that he is happy for it to be entered or would like to choose a different bike.

Now the main justification is the frame. I doubt many could agrue that the bolted rear end on a hard tail took off as a design - I'm sure some will try though ;)

Also worthy of mention is a fork with a removable crown which we no longer see - well not in single crown forks.

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 2:09 am 
BoTM Winner
BoTM Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 1328
Location: USA
[quote="andrewlOff road tandems - I think it would be easy to argue these are a dead end especially if you've tried tight single track...

[/quote]

I absolutely love my off road tandem. More laughs per mile than any other bike I have owned.

Good comments.....


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 229 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 23  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group