41–50 of 78 posts
Although I'm an avid reader, this is my first ever comment. I built this site https://comparemtb.com/ to give people a way to visually compare the geometries of many different mountain bikes. I'd be interested in any feedback. Thanks.
> I'd be interested in any feedback.
I'll start with pointing out that there seems to be no instructions or hints on the landing page.
Odd how it does not give the weight of bicycles in the specs.
Odd how it does not give the weight of bicycles in the specs.
I recently bought a medium-spec build of a lightweight frame bike, and could shave 2+ lbs with upgrades, if I wanted to. Not paying for those upgrades out-of-box saved me ~4800 euro up front, and the bike is 17.9 lbs instead of 16.2 lbs. Meanwhile, I could stand to lose 15 lbs myself. :-)
Great explanations! It’s really silly that seat tube length is used as the single measure of frame size. Much more important is reach and standover height, since those can’t easily be changed. A longer or shorter stem will adjust reach at the expense of changing how responsive the steering is, whereas a short seat tube can be fixed with a longer seat post. Seat tube length is also measured differently by different ma…
My thoughts exactly. Being on the shorter side what matters is the stand over height - too high and it greatly limits on/off/standing manoeuvrability and agility. I was surprised to learn that the smallest adult bikes tend to have a stand over height of 68-70cm. For some bikes, it’s even higher. For the lower tail of the adult height distribution, this is too tall to use comfortably.
As a bicyclist, I'm amused this made it on to the HN front page. I'm not sure I agree with the description of stack. Cockpit height can be adjusted with riser stems and different handlebar shapes; it's not solely a function of axle-crown and headtube length. Without getting into it too much, some other descriptions are not great either. The general overview is ok but they make some overly strong claims. I'm not sure…
As a bicyclist, I'm amused this made it on to the HN front page. I'm not sure I agree with the description of stack. Cockpit height can be adjusted with riser stems and different handlebar shapes; it's not solely a function of axle-crown and headtube length. Without getting into it too much, some other descriptions are not great either. The general overview is ok but they make some overly strong claims. I'm not sure…
As a bicyclist, I'm amused this made it on to the HN front page. I'm not sure I agree with the description of stack. Cockpit height can be adjusted with riser stems and different handlebar shapes; it's not solely a function of axle-crown and headtube length. Without getting into it too much, some other descriptions are not great either. The general overview is ok but they make some overly strong claims. I'm not sure…
When you’re knowledgeable about something and read an article/blog/whatever about that topic, it’s shocking how much is either somewhat off-base or just plain wrong.
The articles that aren’t about your areas of expertise are no different.
As a bicyclist, I'm amused this made it on to the HN front page. I'm not sure I agree with the description of stack. Cockpit height can be adjusted with riser stems and different handlebar shapes; it's not solely a function of axle-crown and headtube length. Without getting into it too much, some other descriptions are not great either. The general overview is ok but they make some overly strong claims. I'm not sure…
Wheelbase is important if you're using a bike for transportation. A longer wheelbase makes for more stability and helps with carrying groceries, children, or other cargo. It does make the bike feel less nimble so may not be optimal for purely recreational riders.
Although I'm an avid reader, this is my first ever comment. I built this site https://comparemtb.com/ to give people a way to visually compare the geometries of many different mountain bikes. I'd be interested in any feedback. Thanks.