Disk brakes are good for muddy mountain biking and other icky things where your side-pull brakes squeal, whine and generally don't work as well as they should.
That can be true, depending on the amount of mud. I've got a LOT of mud where I am and I've seen jammed calipers, spilled hydraulic fluid and bent rotors too many times. It's actually quite difficult to really mess up v-brakes in my experience, nothing pulling a hunk of mud or a couple of sticks out of doesn't usually solve.
Rear suspension is another one of those weird items... it adds weight, and the geometry is such that the tension on your chain ever so slightly compresses your suspension... but if you're doing downhill mountain bike racing through a stony creek bed, that won't hurt you and you _might_ find it advantageous. Climbing hills, you may even find the suspension smooths out the dirt so you don't bounce on it and slip during a climb
I have used them, and in some situations they can, feel more comfortable I guess, but over all I've always really really noticed the loss of power over a good hardtail. And you really HAVE to pay the big bucks for a full suspension, or you're riding a 30+ pound bike.
With bicycles, somewhere around the $500CDN full retail pricetag, you don't get much more bang for your buck. All the garbage components are generally stripped off the bike at that point and you've got the "low-end" good stuff... provided you don't have any gimick components... like rear-suspension, disk brakes, etc.
Yeah, I bought it for the frame really, it rocks. Nice and light and very solid. I've upgraded to much better rims, drivetrain and derailers, so it's worth a fair bit more now, but no where near what I'd be paying for a good full suspension these days.
True, hydraulic disc brakes perform better, but are also more complicated, intruducing even more points of failure. I've seen quite a few failures of hydraulic systems, not pretty.
It comes down to weighing all of the issues and choosing, or learning through experience, what one likes.
Personally, I like things that I can fix on the trail with very few tools, are light, and simple. Thus my choice is probably always going to be v-brakes.
I was really making 2 points, one from the point of view of an amateur and one from the point of view of a pro.
For the pro, training includes weight conditioning, so a pro will NOT be fluctuating within 15 pounds on race day, they rather will have a target weight which they will be damned close to on race day. If they need that 1 pound, it'll come off the rider. Now, you're right here as well that the pro rider will also already have the super light forks so best of both.
For myself however, it really doesn't make enough difference to warrant spending a grand to loose a pound.
I also, at least for mountain biking, like a bit of weight on my machine...within reason. My bike's gotta feel solid. However, I don't concider 30lbs to be within reason. That'd be another reason why I ride a hardtail and v-brakes. 22 lbs and solid, wouldn't change a thing unless I was pro, which I am not and will not be.
There are 2 performance benefits to carbon fiber bike parts, the benefit you cite is not one of them.
Carbon fiber is lighter and (can be) stronger, but it is NOT stiffer.
The biggest trade-off with carbon-fiber bike parts is strength vs stiffness.
Most people HATE carbon-fiber frames because they have a tendancy to flex, and thus there is some loss of power. This is more of a problem in mountain biking when you really need to keep as much energy up as possible when carving tight trails and the like.
Funny, sure, but I'm going to guess that raygundan is a biker of some sort and didn't post this as a joke as this is the truth. This should be modded insightful for making a piece of common-sense more common!
Lets put it into real world terms: I am a cross-country mountain biker, and this season alone my weight has fluctuated anywhere from 170-185 pounds. (185 at the beginning of the season for sure, 170 after my last 24hr relay race, but regularly bouncing between 170 and 180)
And lets say I want to buy a new set of front-suspension forks.
My options are a 5 pound set for $150 and a 4 pound set for $1000 and I've got a big race coming up.
What's my best choice? The extra $850, or eating a couple less steaks between now and the race?
And please remember, this only even remotely matters if you are at a level where a single pound, which is likely going to be somewhere around one half of a percent of the total weight, is actually going to make a difference.
Hint: That's not you or me. That'd be Lance and a handful of others out there.
I totally agree. I've got a 3 year old $400(CDN) Peugeot mountain bike I bought just for casual riding at the time. This year I've gotten quite a bit more serious and have taken part in a number of cross-country relay races. Up until about a month ago, I was constantly looking at the 'other guys' $4000+ machines and trying to plan how and when I would upgrade.
I finally realized how stupid that would be. a) most of the guys I ride with have expensive bikes. b) i never get smoked by them. c) their stuff breaks as much as mine does, but their parts are _way_ more expensive. d) haven't had _my_ bike stolen. e) I do it for FUN. f) I will NEVER be taking it to the top level and thus will NEVER be able to actually reap the minute benefits one can get from really expensive bikes.
And unlike cars, where it's easy to argue that a bmw or mercedes is worth the money over a ford as they are more fun to drive, comfortable...blah blah whatever, I have NO problems with my bike and the expensive bikes I've ridden certainly don't feel special, and DEFFINATELY don't feel like they're worth more than 10x the price.
Now maybe if I broke the bank on a new bike I wouldn't be the only one with money to buy the beer after a good ride;)
Actually, if you wan't to get into a good useless waste of money tech discussion with a hardcore mountain-biker, pull out the v-brake vs disc-brake topic. Oh, I used to fall fully on the 'can't wait to have the cash to buy a nice set of disc-brakes' crowd...but a good slap with common sense brought me around.
Me: Gonna buy me a set of those real soon! (Disc Brakes) Bike Shop Owner: Really? Why? Me: Um, they're better... Bike Shop Owner: Really? Why? Me: Um, because they work better right? Bike Shop Owner: Let me ask you this then, what problems are, or have you, had with your v-brake system? Me: Um... Bike Shop Owner: And of those problems, which will be solved by a higher price tag, more weight, more parts and generally more complexity? Me: Since you put it like that, I guess I'm unsold thank you!
And as an interesting aside, the shop owner's success in _not_ selling me something has resulted in some darned solid customer loyalty.
Interestingly enough as well is the fact that there is a limit in the rules as to the minimum allowable weight of a bicycle. There are lighter bikes that have been proven to be faster that cannot be ridden in this race.
Haven't been able to decide how I feel about this yet...actually I wish it was one way or the other:
a) riders can use _any_ man powered 2 wheeled vehicle of whatever design they want...
OR
b) ALL riders ride the exact same bike.
Either technology is a factor, or it isn't. I think it's the middle ground stance that annoys me.
I haven't used gif in a couple of years now, there's just no contest when compared with png. Now if MS would just update IE to natively support png alpha channels the web would be a much more wonderful place!
MDI in and of itself does not suck. Using it as the solution for EVERYTHING rather than where it was most appropriate and useful is what sucked.
It doesn't work well for office type apps, as depending on the context of any individual document, the required toolbars, docked panels etc. can be very very different, making it hard to use. A good example of bad use of MDI.
A great example of proper MDI use however would be Photoshop. Wouldn't want PS any other way thanks.
Re:Political commentary at the Key Bridge in DC
on
Reverse Graffiti
·
· Score: 1
I wouldn't concider that a troll really, it's too ironic...It would only really be concidered a troll statement for religious nuts who actually truly believe that statement, and thus the irony would just whoosh right over their heads.
It is truly amazing that the organization that gave us the America's Army video games...wait for it...now has a video game studio!
Holy shit! Who would have thunk that releasing a Game like America's Army would lead to building a game studio?
Do you catch the hint of sarcasm yet? WTF, like really. Of course they have a freaking game studio...somebody had to build the freaking game in the first place.
Your argument would be right on if it hadn't already been blown to shit by precedent.
This is exactly what has happened with CD's lately if you hadn't noticed, they're all DRM'd etc now. (At least everything from the big 5) Not because consumers want this mind you, rather because these have been FORCED into the stores and onto consumers.
What's the result been? CD sales plummeting even more.
Ahh, but why did it take them so long to notice? Hmm, because they _weren't_ losing money...rather they were making money hand over fist.
And then they plateaud (sp?) and went looking for how to generate a new influx of cash. That's when they started to care. That's also when they started imposing copy protection in a serious manner. That's also when they actually started _loosing_ money.
That was the same thing I saw first that turned me off of this article completely.
I wouldn't extend this to bashing Gnome directly, but the attitude of the writer of this article is not helping any. What a freaking TOOL.
Well, apparently I've learned something today. Everything I do with computers, which I have obviously been taking for granted all of these years, is wrong wrong wrong! I've f'd up the metaphores! I'm using my tabbed browser in a useful, functional manner when I should _really_ be using it JUST LIKE A BOOK! Because of course that is the intended purpose of tabs in a browser! Dummy me, glad I know now! Don't know what I would ever have done if this wonderfully intelligent person hadn't intervened and set me straight!
And besides, who doesn't buy 2 copies of the paper and tape them all up on the wall together so you can get the 'Big Picture'? Come on now, he's gonna bash this too?
XP is actually quite useable on 128mb ram as well, it just gets unhappy when you try running lotsa apps on top. Plenty fine for surfing, email, IM and editing the odd text document.
Slashdot Mirror
That can be true, depending on the amount of mud. I've got a LOT of mud where I am and I've seen jammed calipers, spilled hydraulic fluid and bent rotors too many times. It's actually quite difficult to really mess up v-brakes in my experience, nothing pulling a hunk of mud or a couple of sticks out of doesn't usually solve.
I have used them, and in some situations they can, feel more comfortable I guess, but over all I've always really really noticed the loss of power over a good hardtail. And you really HAVE to pay the big bucks for a full suspension, or you're riding a 30+ pound bike.
Yeah, I bought it for the frame really, it rocks. Nice and light and very solid. I've upgraded to much better rims, drivetrain and derailers, so it's worth a fair bit more now, but no where near what I'd be paying for a good full suspension these days.
True, hydraulic disc brakes perform better, but are also more complicated, intruducing even more points of failure. I've seen quite a few failures of hydraulic systems, not pretty.
It comes down to weighing all of the issues and choosing, or learning through experience, what one likes.
Personally, I like things that I can fix on the trail with very few tools, are light, and simple.
Thus my choice is probably always going to be v-brakes.
Don't get me wrong, you're right too.
I was really making 2 points, one from the point of view of an amateur and one from the point of view of a pro.
For the pro, training includes weight conditioning, so a pro will NOT be fluctuating within 15 pounds on race day, they rather will have a target weight which they will be damned close to on race day. If they need that 1 pound, it'll come off the rider. Now, you're right here as well that the pro rider will also already have the super light forks so best of both.
For myself however, it really doesn't make enough difference to warrant spending a grand to loose a pound.
I also, at least for mountain biking, like a bit of weight on my machine...within reason. My bike's gotta feel solid. However, I don't concider 30lbs to be within reason. That'd be another reason why I ride a hardtail and v-brakes. 22 lbs and solid, wouldn't change a thing unless I was pro, which I am not and will not be.
I do cross-country relay racing, mostly 8 and 24 hour races.
Guys do this shit solo.
I can hold my own, but am not and never will be elite. I'm not in that solo class.
They are the elite and a very large number of them ride rigid frame bikes, at least on the tail.
There is no full suspension bike that can transform as much energy into forward-momentum as this is exactly what suspension does, absorbs energy.
Thus, at the top of the field the fancy gadgets disappear...replaced with tried and true designs engineered to perfection.
There are 2 performance benefits to carbon fiber bike parts, the benefit you cite is not one of them.
Carbon fiber is lighter and (can be) stronger, but it is NOT stiffer.
The biggest trade-off with carbon-fiber bike parts is strength vs stiffness.
Most people HATE carbon-fiber frames because they have a tendancy to flex, and thus there is some loss of power. This is more of a problem in mountain biking when you really need to keep as much energy up as possible when carving tight trails and the like.
I personally love the ones who think their suspension is supposed to bounce up and down as far as possible, great fun to watch!
Funny, sure, but I'm going to guess that raygundan is a biker of some sort and didn't post this as a joke as this is the truth. This should be modded insightful for making a piece of common-sense more common!
Lets put it into real world terms:
I am a cross-country mountain biker, and this season alone my weight has fluctuated anywhere from 170-185 pounds. (185 at the beginning of the season for sure, 170 after my last 24hr relay race, but regularly bouncing between 170 and 180)
And lets say I want to buy a new set of front-suspension forks.
My options are a 5 pound set for $150 and a 4 pound set for $1000 and I've got a big race coming up.
What's my best choice?
The extra $850, or eating a couple less steaks between now and the race?
And please remember, this only even remotely matters if you are at a level where a single pound, which is likely going to be somewhere around one half of a percent of the total weight, is actually going to make a difference.
Hint: That's not you or me. That'd be Lance and a handful of others out there.
I totally agree.
;)
I've got a 3 year old $400(CDN) Peugeot mountain bike I bought just for casual riding at the time. This year I've gotten quite a bit more serious and have taken part in a number of cross-country relay races. Up until about a month ago, I was constantly looking at the 'other guys' $4000+ machines and trying to plan how and when I would upgrade.
I finally realized how stupid that would be.
a) most of the guys I ride with have expensive bikes.
b) i never get smoked by them.
c) their stuff breaks as much as mine does, but their parts are _way_ more expensive.
d) haven't had _my_ bike stolen.
e) I do it for FUN.
f) I will NEVER be taking it to the top level and thus will NEVER be able to actually reap the minute benefits one can get from really expensive bikes.
And unlike cars, where it's easy to argue that a bmw or mercedes is worth the money over a ford as they are more fun to drive, comfortable...blah blah whatever, I have NO problems with my bike and the expensive bikes I've ridden certainly don't feel special, and DEFFINATELY don't feel like they're worth more than 10x the price.
Now maybe if I broke the bank on a new bike I wouldn't be the only one with money to buy the beer after a good ride
Actually, if you wan't to get into a good useless waste of money tech discussion with a hardcore mountain-biker, pull out the v-brake vs disc-brake topic. Oh, I used to fall fully on the 'can't wait to have the cash to buy a nice set of disc-brakes' crowd...but a good slap with common sense brought me around.
Me: Gonna buy me a set of those real soon! (Disc Brakes)
Bike Shop Owner: Really? Why?
Me: Um, they're better...
Bike Shop Owner: Really? Why?
Me: Um, because they work better right?
Bike Shop Owner: Let me ask you this then, what problems are, or have you, had with your v-brake system?
Me: Um...
Bike Shop Owner: And of those problems, which will be solved by a higher price tag, more weight, more parts and generally more complexity?
Me: Since you put it like that, I guess I'm unsold thank you!
And as an interesting aside, the shop owner's success in _not_ selling me something has resulted in some darned solid customer loyalty.
Interestingly enough as well is the fact that there is a limit in the rules as to the minimum allowable weight of a bicycle. There are lighter bikes that have been proven to be faster that cannot be ridden in this race.
Haven't been able to decide how I feel about this yet...actually I wish it was one way or the other:
a) riders can use _any_ man powered 2 wheeled vehicle of whatever design they want...
OR
b) ALL riders ride the exact same bike.
Either technology is a factor, or it isn't. I think it's the middle ground stance that annoys me.
Took the words right out of my mouth.
I haven't used gif in a couple of years now, there's just no contest when compared with png. Now if MS would just update IE to natively support png alpha channels the web would be a much more wonderful place!
MDI in and of itself does not suck.
Using it as the solution for EVERYTHING rather than where it was most appropriate and useful is what sucked.
It doesn't work well for office type apps, as depending on the context of any individual document, the required toolbars, docked panels etc. can be very very different, making it hard to use. A good example of bad use of MDI.
A great example of proper MDI use however would be Photoshop. Wouldn't want PS any other way thanks.
This isn't about transmission of email though, this is about email residing on a physical machine being read.
A new protocol to replace SMTP would do nothing to stop an ISP from reading it on their end.
Thus, I fail to see how this proves it to be a step in the wrong direction?
Hoth anyone?
I wouldn't assume anything about what the painter believes, that would be pointless as it wouldn't be based in fact.
Software is art by definition then?
I concur, Dumbass.
I wouldn't concider that a troll really, it's too ironic...It would only really be concidered a troll statement for religious nuts who actually truly believe that statement, and thus the irony would just whoosh right over their heads.
Wonderful statement really.
It is truly amazing that the organization that gave us the America's Army video games...wait for it...now has a video game studio!
Holy shit! Who would have thunk that releasing a Game like America's Army would lead to building a game studio?
Do you catch the hint of sarcasm yet?
WTF, like really. Of course they have a freaking game studio...somebody had to build the freaking game in the first place.
Your argument would be right on if it hadn't already been blown to shit by precedent.
This is exactly what has happened with CD's lately if you hadn't noticed, they're all DRM'd etc now. (At least everything from the big 5)
Not because consumers want this mind you, rather because these have been FORCED into the stores and onto consumers.
What's the result been? CD sales plummeting even more.
The writing is already on the wall.
Sure, but can you explain how purchasing the disposable disk is better than renting the video for the night?
I sure don't.
Ahh, but why did it take them so long to notice?
Hmm, because they _weren't_ losing money...rather they were making money hand over fist.
And then they plateaud (sp?) and went looking for how to generate a new influx of cash. That's when they started to care. That's also when they started imposing copy protection in a serious manner. That's also when they actually started _loosing_ money.
Coinky-dink? I think not.
That was the same thing I saw first that turned me off of this article completely.
I wouldn't extend this to bashing Gnome directly, but the attitude of the writer of this article is not helping any. What a freaking TOOL.
Well, apparently I've learned something today. Everything I do with computers, which I have obviously been taking for granted all of these years, is wrong wrong wrong! I've f'd up the metaphores! I'm using my tabbed browser in a useful, functional manner when I should _really_ be using it JUST LIKE A BOOK! Because of course that is the intended purpose of tabs in a browser! Dummy me, glad I know now! Don't know what I would ever have done if this wonderfully intelligent person hadn't intervened and set me straight!
And besides, who doesn't buy 2 copies of the paper and tape them all up on the wall together so you can get the 'Big Picture'? Come on now, he's gonna bash this too?
Why do you care how this guy went about doing this?
That's what is ridiculous.
Guy deserves some credit for this, at the very least he's not deserving of belittlement for his choice of tool to write it in.
Looks like it worked for this guy, what's your beef?
Um, it's believed that it was an inside job and that the code stolen could not have been stolen directly off of the internet.
XP is actually quite useable on 128mb ram as well, it just gets unhappy when you try running lotsa apps on top. Plenty fine for surfing, email, IM and editing the odd text document.