RonSonic wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
>
>
> Sorta like finding a luxury car with sports car performance and minivan cargo
> capacity.
Yup! What's the big deal with that?? Why can't you have a woman
that's pretty and smart? <DUCKS>
> Point is, all other things are never equal. The bike I scoot up to the library
> on is a bit different from the one I blast through the forests with and those
> are nothing like the road beast. All do have some commonality in how I fit, but
> horses for courses as they say.
I guess I'm looking for a bike that really epitomizes the "hybrid"
concept, that's all. I too will move on to more specific roles for
each bike as I build up a "collection" in time...just want this
"workhorse" to be a good general all-around machine.
> If you wanna fuss about it then learn about it. Don't fuss AND cling to your
> ignorance. That's stupid.
I would think I'm learning right now! How am I clinging to anything?
Because I ask, because I doubt?
> Well either get off your ass and find out -
Uh, how do I get off my ass and "find out"...I thought that's the whole
point of this thread!
>OR - explain just what sort of
> riding you're doing that you fear LX is not good enough to handle so you can get
> some meaningful advice.
My suspicion is only based on the fact that the bike's "only" $1,200
and yet only weighs in at 19 lbs. I'm figuring corners may have been
cut somewhere!
> And brother unless you use words like "gnarly, sick,
> xtreme" to describe the enormous "drops, hucks and jumps" you're taking, LX is
> more than strong enough.
No, I don't do "tricks" -- guess I'll be fine, then. Thanks!
> That part I understand. Now the part you need to understand is that you are
> responsible for either learning enough to make all these decisions yourself,
> which also means paying money for your mistakes, or put yourself in the hands of
> someone who knows and giving him the information necessary.
Yes, Master!
> Nope. One of the reason we have so many manufacturers is to provide bikes that
> fit so many different people. They ain't all the same. I've got two 21" mountain
> bikes, that are so different you wouldn't think they were the same size at all.
> It's funny, I line those up with my 60cm road bike and the bars, saddles and
> cranks all sorta line up, sorta, but nothing else is the same.
I really don't get it...what the hell does 21 inches mean anymore??
LOL..."size" doesn't matter!
> Trust me, these parts are better than you.
??
> Nah, just need to learn to do your own maintenance.
So things are supposed to wear out??
I guess I really have got it backwards...I'm think bikes are inherently
"uncomfortable" but should "last"...seems like the only thing that
lasts is the frame itself -- everything else can be expected to see
replacement, including rims!
> And there's a lot of messengers out there with ONE caliper brake and a fixed
> gear, which doesn't stop any better than a coaster brake.
And there are messengers who use track bikes with no brakes -- ?!?!
I'm just saying, in response to your question, that at 5'11" and 230
lbs. I ride often and I ride hard!
> Don't let the
> advertising guys get you to think that buying more stuff is the answer.
I'm naturally skeptical; can't you tell? =)
> My question is what's wrong with the Trek that it should be replaced.
Um, LOL -- it's stolen! =(
> The more upright you sit the more of your weight is on whatever part of your
> anatomy hits the saddle. If you have a stupid plush saddle it'll be your crotch
> that takes the weight. If you have a proper hard saddle set high enough it'll be
> the sits bones on either side of your ass and below the cheeks that bear the
> load.
>
> I can build callouses on my ass.
Sounds logical enough. See, bikes are inherently uncomfortable, as I
say! Even you can build padding on your ass, and your bikes fit you.
> By raising the saddle you shift weight forward to your hands and legs.
Problem with this is that then the wrists and even elbows wind up hurt,
not to mention straining the neck...this is also why cycling to me has
been an "inherently uncomfortable" sport.
> Using a
> narrow relatively hard saddle means you can keep your weight off the tender bits
> and onto the bony bits on either side. Sit on a hard wood bench, lean forward.
> Feel the two spots your weight is on - that's what should be supporting you on
> the bike. Riding on your taint is just cruelty.
That hurts too, riding on the bones! I do that, too, but over long
rides weight's just shifted all over the place -- I can even ride by
sitting on just one cheek!
> You should be getting out of the saddle and shifting your position regularly.
> Don't get settled in to one position.
Yes, I do. Glad to see I'm doing something right, then! Always
figured on bicycling being a "natural" thing.
> Myself I like the Specialized BG saddles, they are fitted to the rider and have
> a groove and cutout right where you don't want your weight to rest.
Cool, thanks for the tip! I'm over to Specialized's site right now to
check 'em out....
> Here's da Faqs jack: ftp://draco.acs.uci.edu/pub/rec.bicycles/faq They presume
> knowledge, but there's good general info.
>
> Ron
They always presume a working know-how to begin with, don't they? How
annoying.
But thanks all the same; this looks good -- much obliged!!