[Closed] Do you buy a bike to hide your weaknesses or to show off your strengths?

No

Yes

Weaknesses?

I tend to buy bikes that I like and worry about the other stuff afterwards.

I'm a pretty average rider and accept that I'll never use them to their full potential but if I like the way the ride (and look!) I'll buy one.

I bought my Rune for a variery of reasons - I liked it, it had around the amount of travel I was looking for, it was one of the few frames in my budget and it could be used with 26inch wheels because I didn't want to have to buy wheels, tyres and forks too.

dunno

I suppose my weakness is I don't earn enough to buy the latest fancy kit....

I buy a bike I think I'll enjoy riding and is a nice colour 😀

My weakness is I can resist everything except a bargain.

Having said that mostly my bikes seem to all start moving towards the longer travel end of their intended range so I guess that's me compensating. Except the rigid singlespeed. Although I've put a dropper post on it (which has made it really rather good through wooded singletrack - it's sometimes faster than my 140mm FS bike).

Crap thread alert!!!

No - its got to be red. Only red ones allowed....except the white one though. Yeah - weakness for mostly red bikes.

a big bouncy skill compensator

big sled so that you can really thrash them going down

buy bikes to enhance the stuff that you are already quite got at

am never going to be any good at going uphill or riding around fields gravity is the only thing on my side

Nope - unless you count my skill as building bikes then I definitely ride a bike that shows that off 😆

Neither.

Good question, would be interested in people's answers tho not many taking it seriously so far. Personally I reckon I'm about evens in descending v climbing, but I enjoy downs more so get a bike more geared towards them so normally as burly as I can get while not being a complete pig to pedal up/along the required distances.. A nice light efficient would be nice for longer rides with less technical descending, meaning to build up a sprightly climber for a while but normally end up with something not quite as gnar and a pound or two lighter than usual instead of a proper fast bike.

I suppose my weakness is I don't earn enough to buy the latest fancy kit....

I build my bikes to suit where I ride. I love cycling too much to load it with my insecurities. Life's hard enough!

I buy bikes which then show up new weaknesses.

If you don't want to think in terms of strengths and weaknesses, you can approach the same question in terms of fun and enjoyment.

Do you tend to look at bikes that will make the bits of the ride that you don't enjoy more bearable or do you go for bikes that makes the bits you find fun already even more fun?

I buy a bike that will be enjoyable to ride, or suit the purpose of the riding.

Aye maybe a better question, "accentuate the fun stuff or minimise the crap/boring stuff?"

Are there many great climbers who are nervous descenders tho? Will be some but would have thought the majority would be the opposite* or all rounders.

*totally understandable considering descending is pretty much universally appreciated whereas uphill is an acquired taste.

I tend to go with a fast bike for the terrain, and one which makes the local terrain the most fun too. If there is anything really gnar on a ride, then it will be a tiny bit that I'm happy to mince down in return for a fast ride over most of the ride.

I think the same as Al and Tang.

strengths?

What mindmap3 said sums it up!

have you seen my 24'' surly tourer, fitted with full guards, rear rack, 48c bulletproof tyres, panniers, bell, rearview mirror, flat pedals, 22/32/42 fitted with a 11.36 cassette.

deffo a skill compensator......... 😀

I choose a bike to be most fun for what I want to use it for. Accordingly I'd never buy something that prioritised climbing above all else as climbing is never much fun. It's a balance, biased towards the parts of the ride that I enjoy most. That happens to be the bits I'm best at but it's fun not performance that makes the decision.

Suppose it works like this... My strengths are in the things I do most, which are the things I like most. My weaknesses are in the things I do least, because I'm not that into them. And my bikes are all built to do the things I do most not the things I don't really dig. So yeah it'd be daft for them to do anything else really.

These days a good bike can cover all the houses though so it's not like you have to overspecialise- my everyday trailbike is built for bombing down stuff but all it took was a tyre change to solo the Glentress Seven on it.

weaknesses and strenghts only exists together..
no need to compensate..
I enjoy both..
If I build up a new bike ..
its always a promise for new adventures..

Or buy it because you like the colour? <<<< works for me!

I built up a bike to suit what is 95% of my local riding terrain - so I opted for a lightweight 100mm hardtail. I've used a 6" FS on the same trails for years and I can honestly say that it's a joy to be rid of the heavy, sloppy-arsed beast.

Gravity runs are where I excel but I'm weak on the climbs so, to a degree, I went for the current choice because I wanted help going upwards. But the main deciding factor was the honing of my riding on a rigid hybrid on and off road for the last seven odd years. I liked the riding postion and the the weight so wanted something with similar contact points and a similar weight but with fatter tyres and front suspension. So that's where I ended up.

I know someone who has numerous bikes, most of which are very lightweight. It never made sense until he explained his need to be first to the top. He was never that good going down because he used to bottle it too often. The bikes afforded him the excuse for being slow on descents or, on a few occasions, a total refusal to even drop into a bomb hole. Not mocking, just seems a bit weird to not admit you don't want to do something instead of finding excuses. I rode a few of those bikes and hammered them - none broke.

Say, for example, that you are a pretty strong climber but a nervous descender. Do you buy a nice light XC bike so that you can climb even faster and accept that you will always be slow on the way down

^^ This, but then I've never been a fan of going downhill. I Love climbing.. 😀

Can a bike really show that i am "good" at arguing and crap at spelling?

I have a do everything 120mm FS which is more than in need for 95% of my riding , and a lighting 100mm hard tail for backup/racing.

As my strength is best described as "Le Rouleur" I changed both to 2x10 with a 40/28 and 34/12 to allow me to ride along the flats at speed. As I've got fitter though I've found by accident the 28/34 combo tends to get me up hills quicker once I've got my rhythm.

teasel - Member

I know someone who has numerous bikes, most of which are very lightweight. It never made sense until he explained his need to be first to the top. He was never that good going down because he used to bottle it too often. The bikes afforded him the excuse for being slow on descents or, on a few occasions, a total refusal to even drop into a bomb hole. Not mocking, just seems a bit weird to not admit you don't want to do something instead of finding excuses. I rode a few of those bikes and hammered them - none broke.

Hasn't worked when I've ridden with him. 😉

Heh

To be fair to him, I don't think you knew him when he was at his peak, although he's never been as fit you are now since I've known him.

I buy a bike to ride. This year will see my first new MTB (self-build) in 13 years. The last one was fun.

An interesting question.

I reckon that most people I ride with build bikes for the part of the ride they enjoy the most, ie downhill.

Mine definitely shows off my strengths….

[img] [/img]

+1 D0NK, surely you buy a bike that you think excels in the sort of riding you enjoy, which may play to your strengths but isnt "showing off"?

I built up a bike to suit what is 95% of my local riding terrain

I did the opposite. I built a bike that will excel in the sort of big riding experiences that memories are made of, but that is still useable on my local terrain. I dont want a bike that will excel in the Chilterns*, but in France Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, India, Colorado, Morocco...

*you probably have more interesting and worthwhile local trails!

I'm an average climber and even on a tiny little featherweight carbon bike I'd still be an average climber, my bike was bought as it is an average climber but amaze balls downhill, just like me 🙂

I don't think I buy/assemble any bike specifically to accommodate my strengths or weaknesses, I choose bikes that I believe will provide me the most enjoyment (at the price I can afford)...

I've given this a few seconds thought and can genuinely say that I buy a bike to ride it.

Do you buy a bike to hide your weaknesses or to show off your strengths?

I bought a bike to show off [b]other peoples[/b] weaknesses 😉 (Dialled Alpine)

To be fair to him, I don't think you knew him when he was at his peak, although he's never been as fit you are now since I've known him.

Is this someone with whom you had a disagreement, who had a penchant for coffee and one sided forks...?!

Like virtually everyone it's a bit of both for me, I ride a lightweight XC race bike, because I enjoy riding fast and racing XC. I'd quite like a trail bike as well to give a bit more help on the descents (which is where I struggle most), but even then it'd be something I could still hammer on the climbs.

I think Northwind probably summed it up most eloquently.

When i was looking to replace my miniDH bike for something that could be pedaled more easily but still cut it going down, i narrowed my choice to either a Stumpjumper or Enduro. Both very capable for all day riding but one was easier and less tiring to climb on, so that's the one i got. Nothing to do with showing off as only show off when no one is about to see it 😆

Never bought a bike. I've built my bike with parts that were on offer, looked like that they'll last, are rated well or are hand-me-downs. Consequently my 1x8 bike weighs 35lbs, has a mixture of DJ/DH/xc/road parts. Not too much of an issue as I prefer descending although rear-suspension, a dropper and some knobblies would be nice at times.

I'm currently building an 02 Patriot on the cheap too. It's a bit of a museum with the mishmash of parts.

Fair enough, "showing off" was the wrong phrase. I should have said something like "accentuate" I guess.

[b]Northwind:[/b] My strengths are in the things I do most, which are the things I like most. My weaknesses are in the things I do least, because I'm not that into them. And my bikes are all built to do the things I do most not the things I don't really dig. So yeah it'd be daft for them to do anything else really.

Well it would be if you put it like that 🙂 but if we accept that all bikes are a compromise, that they all have areas where they are good and areas where they are not so good and that, as riders, we also have strengths and weaknesses; wouldn't it be just as logical to pick a bike that was better at the things you find more of a challenge.

Interesting to read about the rider who picked a bike that gave him an excuse not to ride stuff that he didn't want to ride anyway though. I fear I may be guilty of a bit of that too. By my logic above, I should probably ride some big bouncy thing to give me more confidence on the descents, but I'd feel a bit of an idiot pushing that down the tricky bits 🙂

wouldn't it be just as logical to pick a bike that was better at the things you find more of a challenge.

That depends if you [i]want [/i]to do more of the things you find a challenge. I find doing 10 foot drops a challenge. Riding a 19lb 29er hardtail won't help this. Riding a full on DH bike will, but I'm not interested in improving my ability to ride 10 foot drops, particularly as it would come (in that instance) at the expense of virtually everything else I do.

And (at least in my case) I'd feel under pressure to do the 10 foot drop, which (if I'm honest) I don't want to do anyway.

Well put.

Is this someone with whom you had a disagreement, who had a penchant for coffee and one sided forks...?!

Yes I think you're on the right lines.

I buy whatever fits, has a decent write up and fits in my budget for a S/H replacement frame as I don't buy new anymore. Happily all my bikes have been loads better than me.

My strengths are in the things I do most... My weaknesses are in the things I do least

Njee bigger bikes can do [i]some[/i] skill transference, I have had some (not particularly light or racey) short travel steep angle narrow barred bikes in the past. Look at a technical section and think "no chance" but try it on a burlier bike and assuming you land it, do it a few more times, get the technique nailed and suddenly you can ride it on your smaller racier bike. You're still not going to be launching off cliffs but you can progress.
Of course that could just be a my lack of bottle and my baby steps, tremulous nudging my riding envelope technique.

Weird question. Buy:

1. What you lust over
2. What fits the majority of your riding habits
3. What will fit your anticipated future riding habits
4. What you lust over.

I bought my bikes to suit the terrain I ride and conditions I ride in.

I selected my current bike not to hide or enhance, but to best do the job of the biggest riding/racing I am into. So that left me with a bigger travel bike for the UK than the "OMG he is soooo overbiked" crew would like, but then I'm not fussed about technical climbing etc etc, I'd rather winch up a fireroad and save it for the descents. This left me able to choose a bike that suits European proper Enduro rather than a 120/140 "trail" bike or whatever for over here.

But for what it's worth, I can still stick it to an XC ride pretty well on a big bike, it's just harder work.

D0NK - Member

Assuming we're talking descending vs climbing (as OP seemed to be) what goes up must come down and vicky versy, so unless you push the downs or ups a lot then you're probably doing a fair amount of both.

I was looking at it more widely- like, none of my bikes is a great jumper but I don't care because I'm not into jumping, the alterative would be to get a bike that jumps better and flatters me, but that'd have tradeoffs elsewhere.

Climbing, well, almost any bike will climb- so as long as you stay away from the extremes, it's more or less just a case of taking extra time and jellybabies to get to the top. So sacrifices there are more minor whereas a sacrifice on the way down is more likely to take you into hard limits of capability, and sudden abrupt pain 😉

I bought my bike because I liked the idea of a Lefty and Paul's had some killer deals.

Climbing, well, almost any bike will climb- so as long as you stay away from the extremes, it's more or less just a case of taking extra time and jellybabies to get to the top.

Yes, but Strava is always watching 🙂

Actually, I'm not sure it is just a case of more time and more jellybabies, it's going to be more work too, which could leave you too tired to enjoy the descent.

But you are right, I was thinking more widely than just up vs down (although that's certainly part of it).

I dont want a bike that will excel in the Chilterns*, but in France Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, India, Colorado, Morocco...

*you probably have more interesting and worthwhile local trails!

🙂 Nope, Chilterns rider here.

I don't make many journeys to the locations you mention but if I did I'd probably take the FS anyway, so not a problem, but I had more than enough of dragging that thing around the local woodland stuff.

I have some classic memories of the my local trails and though I get your point, for me it isn't where I ride that makes biking the memory making activity that it is...

Njee - Yup, that's the chap. 🙂

Njee bigger bikes can do some skill transference, I have had some (not particularly light or racey) short travel steep angle narrow barred bikes in the past. Look at a technical section and think "no chance" but try it on a burlier bike and assuming you land it, do it a few more times, get the technique nailed and suddenly you can ride it on your smaller racier bike. You're still not going to be launching off cliffs but you can progress.

Totally agree - used to have a 5" trail bike (back when that was quite long travel) and it definitely helped me progress on the shorter travel bike.

Njee - Yup, that's the chap.

Remember him employing his 'technique' on a Surrey Hills ride!

Interestingly ( or not) I'm another Chilterns rider and I ride a 160mm slack ish HT, it's perfectly usable in the chilts, but its built [i]for[/i] the road trips to the lakes, Wales, the Alps etc etc much like the crashing monkey

I can climb just fine and I descend pretty well, it's not hiding any lack of skill (per se) but it is a HT and that limits me, if I ride a FS I know that I would get out if depth on the DH and if anything the HT stops that

I buy mine to have fun on downhill bits. I'll always sacrifice climbing ability if it means the dh is gonna be better. I'm a shit climber anyway. Road bikes are for efficiency, mtb for fun!

I haven't felt restricted on the hardtail around the local stuff but it is a bit tame compared to, say, the Surrey Hills. I'll probably bust the wheels before the frame but it won't bother me - I'll just stick on a tougher pair and take the weight hit.

I've always maintained that riding a longer travel bike only deadens the trail if you ride it like a HT/short travel FS. The 'bigger' bike gives the opportunity for faster speeds which in turns leads to different lines. On the same trails, the two bikes can make for totally different rides. All just in my opinion and experience, of course.

Remember him employing his 'technique' on a Surrey Hills ride!

🙂 Likewise. Ha...!

I bought and specced my bike to compensate for my lack of skill and bottle when descending. It may be a bit heavy and have slightly draggy tyres for fast climbing but the more I ride it the fitter I get and so I gradually climb faster and I'm pretty sure I'll never outgrow it's downhill capabilities.