There's a comment by Pierron in the first pic in response to Thomas Estaque saying (per google translate) something like "he's gonna put 7 seconds into us we will go away crying, it will be beautiful". Whatever the result, it will be rad to see Hill ride DH again.
Well, Maribor is at the end of April and the next EWS round is two weeks later so no clashes there. Understandable if he doesn't want to risk an injury but I'm sure he'd love a chance to win another WC DH race, which is still more prestigious if we're being honest.
he's doing the first 2 events of each discipline (EWS & DH), then making a decision. this doesn't make a huge ton of sense, seeing as the 3rd EWS race is before the second WC DH race.
Gonna be an interesting year, its tough to bet against Gwin but Bruni has shown when he can keep it upright he has the speed to beat a healthy Gwin straight up. Would love to see one of the young guns like Norton or Harisson, or Finn on the top step.
I may be wrong about this, but my understanding is that the main people to blame for the shit geometry we endured for decades were the early XC racers, who wanted the geometry/positioning of their road bike on their mountain bikes. The klunkers started right with wide bars and slack angles...but the early dirt roadies fucked it all up and it took decades to recover from this. People even believed that a bike needed to be twitchy and uncomfortable to be fast in those days.
Mtb and road biking are not the only sports driven by non-sense and under-engineering however. We got it good compared to skiing. How long did it take to get the shape and torsional stiffness right for alpine skis? (...and there is still room for improvement on torsional stiffness). There's also the infuriating clusterfuck of "beliefs" and "philosophies" related to waxing and structuring the base of nordic skis. I'm sure sailing, windsurfing, etc. have plenty of examples of things that didn't really work and took decades to figure out as well.
A good example of what can happen when someone competent started to think rationally about improving things is the first EVIL chainguide. All the chainguides on the market were garbage and a start-up with the right people and ideas took over very rapidly.
Yes to the Klunker thing though we called them trail-bikes.
Stuff I built tended to be slacker than what my first proper "mountain bike" was.
One of my builds in 1975 was a 20" "Stingray" (CCM Canada Version) frame with 24" forks.(20" wheel at first, later I played with 24" but no knobbies in that size only 20's)
I loved it, except for the added leverage from the longer fork; steerer tube bends were common until I had one reinforced, then I just ended up bending the blades at the crown. .
I remember an aftermarket fork from Ashtabula that had both reinforced steerer and fork blades that I lusted after but was never able to get.
Downside was no front brake with the 20" wheel - coaster and a rear rim brake for the win.
Rim brake for control - coaster for awesome skidz.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.