Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

collectorsweekly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 73 posts

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#51

Post by sedachv »

StillBored wrote: post #45
jacquesm wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prices on those bikes are ridiculous. If you buy something like that please buy it second-hand from someone that had more money than brains and thought they were going to lose weight by buying a bike rather than using it. Usually these go for a fraction of their new value in mint condition once the new-years vows have worn off.

I'm going to second the price on mountain bikes. I picked up my first "real" (not a department store bike) mountain bike, a giant NRS XTC, in 2000. That bike cost me $1800 which I thought was outrageous. But, it was basically a top of the line giant at the time, complete with nearly the best components money could buy. I rode it weekly for a decade on trails designed to destroy bikes. I replaced it with a lower mid-r…

> Most of the "progression" seems to be more style than substance.

If you discount fat bikes (I think they are a different category of bicycles), the biggest tech improvement has been dropper seatposts.

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#52

Post by was_hellbanned »

Theodores wrote: post #5

This is great history, however there is more to the craze of mountain biking than these tales of pioneering legend. History can be taught as 'kings, queens and their wars' or it can be told in terms of economic and social things. With the mountain biking craze not much has been written about why it did take off like it did - really very few people knew who Fisher, Breeze, Ritchey et al. were. People just wanted a mou…

My revisionist view of the mountain bike craze is to see it as a natural reaction to what politicians, planners and motorists were doing to our roads.

I disagree with this entirely.

Mountain biking (and BMX) grew entirely out of the motocross and desert motorcycle racing scene that exploded in the 1970's and early 1980's.

BMX riders were entirely mimicking motocross riders. These downhill mountain bikers were mimicking the berm-riding, rooster-tail-shooting cornering of dirtbikes. Around the time of the photos in this article, people started adapting the front suspension from motorcycles for their downhill bicycles.

There was even a sidecar phase in BMX racing, which is very obviously taken straight from sidecar motorcycle racing.

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#53

Post by was_hellbanned »

“The reason mountain biking is so popular,” says Charlie Kelly, “is that it’s one of the only ways in modern life that you can turn on your adrenaline pump, and leave it on for a long time. You can go big-wave surfing or skydiving, but downhill bike riding gives you all the adrenaline you can handle.

I find that quote funny and sad, given that any skidding on trails in that area are now highly ticketable offenses, and have been since at least the early 1990s.

Given the popularity of mountain biking these days, it's ironic that I now find it easier to get my thrills by doing downhill road cycling. I don't have to worry (much) about coming across a cyclist or pedestrian in the middle of the road, and cars are the only thing slowing me down.

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#54

Post by jacquesm »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #42
jacquesm wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prices on those bikes are ridiculous. If you buy something like that please buy it second-hand from someone that had more money than brains and thought they were going to lose weight by buying a bike rather than using it. Usually these go for a fraction of their new value in mint condition once the new-years vows have worn off.

Those aren't the sort of bikes that people buy in order to lose weight. They are more like mini MotoX bikes without the engines. They cost a lot because they are built to be extremely strong and have brakes which work well at high speeds in bad conditions which is important when you smash it into a tree at 40mph. The risk with buying a bike like that second hand is that it may have already been crashed/damage.

I have some insight in the 'new bike sale' process for brand bikes. The margins are very healthy. I buy 'regular' bikes brand new and I won't argue about the price, the margin on those is a lot lower.

The margin on high end (road/mountain) bikes is insane and their performance is not substantially different from last years issue (which can be already had at a subtantial discount new), second hand ones are much more realistically priced.

If you feel like overspending and/or justifying that then be my guest but there is no rational reason why last years model should be worth half of what this years model is worth.

That's why there are 'model years' in the first place, they are simply a device for getting you to upgrade, this suggests that there is a lively second hand market where you can find something of almost the same functional value for a small fraction of the new sticker price.

In that second hand market you will find bikes that have been used heavily in that first year and bikes that are 'good as new' and the prices won't be too far apart, usually around 40-50% of what a new one costs.

For instance, this bike is $6600 new but discounted to $2495

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2014-SPECIALIZED-ENDURO-EVO-EXPERT-C...

You'd need to inspect it and make sure that it is really 'only a scratch' rather than that it has impact damage but that's doable if you know what you're buying. And if you don't then you do not have a good reason to spend more than $1000 on a mountainbike anyway. (The difference between a $1000 second hand bike and a new one that's 5 times as expensive are still not large enough to justify the difference in price).

Craigslist is another good source for hardly used bikes at a fraction of their new price.

As for impacting stuff at 40Mph, your carbon bike will be bits and pieces at those speeds, an aluminum bike will be still in one piece but ready for the shredder.

If your main concern is impact damage to your bike then you have been very lucky so far. In my opinion the main risk in mountainbiking down-hill with trees next to the track is impact damage to the rider, not the bike.

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#56

Post by Htsthbjig »

plq wrote: post #14
vondur wrote: post #6

As an avid mountain biker, this article reminds me about the pure fun of riding in the outdoors. You don't need to spend 5K+ to do so. The technology in mountain biking has really taken off in the last 15 years. I can ride trails that only people on downhill bikes would have done 10 years ago, and the bike weighs less than 30lbs, making pedaling up hills not a problem. Enduro mountain bike racing has really taken off…

Are you sure about the rear suspension? Yes, it can save your wheel in some situations (which you should really be avoiding as an amateur), but %99 of the time it's unnecessery weight that also happens to eat some of the power that'd normally go to the wheel. (I'm not a competitive biker, mountain or otherwise, I'm just curious)

"but %99 of the time it's unnecessery weight that also happens to eat some of the power that'd normally go to the wheel."

If by 99 percent of the time you refer to climbing(because going up is so slow and takes more time compared with going down), lots of rear suspension's rigidity systems can be adjusted with your finger in a five seconds operation.

My bike has this mechanism, I just select the "rigid mode" for climbing and change it for going downhill.

Eating the power that will go to the wheel is exactly what I want when I go downhill the Swiss Alps, or Teide or Sierra Nevada.

Sometimes I would love to have "regenerative braking". I have a limit in the velocity I can handle. Over this everything goes so fast.

Also, having family you start re thinking the risk you take.

I am good, but not that good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xr5FGOKY3RM

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#57

Post by Htsthbjig »

rcraft wrote: post #13
vondur wrote: post #6

As an avid mountain biker, this article reminds me about the pure fun of riding in the outdoors. You don't need to spend 5K+ to do so. The technology in mountain biking has really taken off in the last 15 years. I can ride trails that only people on downhill bikes would have done 10 years ago, and the bike weighs less than 30lbs, making pedaling up hills not a problem. Enduro mountain bike racing has really taken off…

Any advice on bikes if I don't want to spend $5k?

I bought my first serious bike to a friend for less than 300 dollars.

It was a "first class" bike, but 10 years old, so it had not disk brakes, but good old generation brakes.

Simple hardtails and flat pedals are much better to learn MTB and much cheaper. In fact, if you can control your bike in the air with flat pedals a new world will open to you.

You will be able to do bunnies, Bunnie hops and other tricks that are more important than spending money on a bike.

If you know how to jump 1 meter height with your bike, you will run circles with a 300 dollars bike around anyone who does not in a 5K bike.

If you are a pro, then sure, go for it, but odds are that if you are asking you are not.

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#58

Post by flexd »

sedachv wrote: post #51
StillBored wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to second the price on mountain bikes. I picked up my first "real" (not a department store bike) mountain bike, a giant NRS XTC, in 2000. That bike cost me $1800 which I thought was outrageous. But, it was basically a top of the line giant at the time, complete with nearly the best components money could buy. I rode it weekly for a decade on trails designed to destroy bikes. I replaced it with a lower mid-r…

> Most of the "progression" seems to be more style than substance. If you discount fat bikes (I think they are a different category of bicycles), the biggest tech improvement has been dropper seatposts.

Do not forget about suspension technology.

A mid-range fork today is so much better than a mid-range pogo-stick fork from the 90s.

Better forks & shocks as well as a slacker headtube-angle on most bikes today make todays bike a lot better to handle and ride, and inspire a lot more confidence than a bike from the 90s.

I do agree prices are high, but you do not have to have a $10k carbon bike to have fun or win races.

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#59

Post by flexd »

dskhatri wrote: post #43
jiggy2011 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those aren't the sort of bikes that people buy in order to lose weight. They are more like mini MotoX bikes without the engines. They cost a lot because they are built to be extremely strong and have brakes which work well at high speeds in bad conditions which is important when you smash it into a tree at 40mph. The risk with buying a bike like that second hand is that it may have already been crashed/damage.

I would be more concerned about me smashing into a tree at 40mph than the bike. 40mph is an exaggeration, isn't it?

At the world cup finals in Hafjell, Norway last weekend, the top guys were hitting 82 kmh (51 mph~) on a open section speed trap. They aren't quite as fast in tighter sections, but still plenty fast.

Here is the helmet cam footage of Josh Bryceland that probably would have ended up winning if he had not overshot the last jump and broken his foot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBDpu4-pQhM The speedtrap is at about 2:30.

Re: Hippie Daredevils Who Invented Mountain Biking

#60

Post by nl »

jacquesm wrote: post #54
jiggy2011 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those aren't the sort of bikes that people buy in order to lose weight. They are more like mini MotoX bikes without the engines. They cost a lot because they are built to be extremely strong and have brakes which work well at high speeds in bad conditions which is important when you smash it into a tree at 40mph. The risk with buying a bike like that second hand is that it may have already been crashed/damage.

I have some insight in the 'new bike sale' process for brand bikes. The margins are very healthy. I buy 'regular' bikes brand new and I won't argue about the price, the margin on those is a lot lower. The margin on high end (road/mountain) bikes is insane and their performance is not substantially different from last years issue (which can be already had at a subtantial discount new), second hand ones are much more r…

Just be aware that second hand bike generally have no warranty on the frame. That may or may not be a concern. If you know what you are after getting a bike second hand and getting the parts off it can be a great way to get exactly what you want.

I'd also point out that you can get really good deals on bike when the model year changes over.

(I only do road bikes, but I'm sure it's pretty similar for MTBs).

Post reply on HN