DeltaOscar

Why do I want to go more than 85? Because when you climb like a sumo wrestler, you want every advantage elsewhere! As for crashing - isn't it cool at 80 plus to look down at your front wheel and think "imagine the mess if this explodes now". Gives me a little buzz every time. I do think leg speed is an issue as well though. I tend to push bigger gears slower than any of my mates. I tried the whole Armstrong high cadence when it was all the rage. Couldn't make it work.

I've got a 9 Speed Campag Veloce cassette and Crank on my Bianchi. Cassette is 13-23, big blade is 52T. Problem is I keep spinning out downhill. Can't get past 85 down suikerbossie. Will a 54 make much difference? Is there a compatible 54?

Panaracer Smoke and Dart. But also elastomer forks, disc wheels, tri bars and thumb shifters on top of the handlebar.

Because we're a bunch of sheep, who historically have just shut up and paid?

They're a good shoe.

That would be 2.4's on the back though. Contis historically run small for their published size. Just to make it more confusing, manufacturers marked sizes are often not accurate.

Road bike shoes are generally built for stiffness and lightness, with no concession to walking at all. MTB Shoes are generally more robust, have lugs/treads on the soles and are more flexible. Also look at the fastening system. If you're not looking for ultimate snugness and lightness don't get anything with a ratchet. Dirt clogs them up, and they can be a pain to undo. Maybe look at a mid level Sidi MTB shoe. They have removable lugs and treads which you can remove if you decide to stick to road riding.

Hopefully you were wearing a full face helmet with that! Continental MTB tyres are direction for front or back. When flipped around for back use' date=' the arcs on the tread have a flatter edge for more 'bight', when flipped for fronts, they have an arc'd design which guides the tyre nicely. Great tyres, maybe even the best I've ridden to date. Used the Gravity and now onto a set of Mountain Kings, truly a wicked tyre [/quote'] I'm running Race King 2.2 at the moment, thinking of putting a Mountain King 2.4 up front for more bite. Yep, you wont go wrong with that choice. Be sure to buy the 'PROTECTION' version of the Mountain King. The budget version has very thin sidewalls and is churned out in China. The Protection version has Kevlar reinforced sidewalls, Black Chilli rubber compound (better grip,longevity) and Kevlar bead, plus it's handmade in German by low class german slaves in sweatshops. My kinda tyre I can get MK 2.4 UST Supersonic with black chili, handmade in Germany for R400. It's not the protection version, but at that price it's a good way to test it out. The fact that German's are slaving away to make me a tyre is just a bonus.

That sign says: No people without hands and feet allowed. And No unaccompanied bicycles allowed. So we're cool.

Yeah, that's a 4am one

Hopefully you were wearing a full face helmet with that! Continental MTB tyres are direction for front or back. When flipped around for back use' date=' the arcs on the tread have a flatter edge for more 'bight', when flipped for fronts, they have an arc'd design which guides the tyre nicely. Great tyres, maybe even the best I've ridden to date. Used the Gravity and now onto a set of Mountain Kings, truly a wicked tyre [/quote'] I'm running Race King 2.2 at the moment, thinking of putting a Mountain King 2.4 up front for more bite.

How about Koeberg Rd, into Paarden Eiland then through the shipyard? The railway crossings are exciting.

I'd like your opinions on fitting different tyres front and back (mtb). I can see the logic in fiting something with a more agressive tread at the front for cornering bite. But I can't understand the logic of fitting a 'faster' tyre at the back to accelerate better. If both wheels are on the ground then they can't go round at different speeds (for the same circumference), surely you are limited by the 'slower' tyre at the front?

Which CL?

I said "treat everyone's opinion as bullsh*t" not treat research as bullsh*t. This is a forum of random people, all with opinions. I'm just offering my opinion that the man needs to do some real research of his own in order to make the best decision he can for himself. And he should treat that as bullsh*t too. Just beware the 'experts' on this forum, because:

Big H 'Cos he's never wrong

I can only speak from personal experience (what the hell else are we supposed to speak from). I rode a full carbon DS MTB - a Trek Fuel 100 Team Issue (who's own saga is unfolding over on the For Sale forum), for 4 years. It was awesome, beautifully made with a lovely 'soft' (not flexy) feel. It never missed a beat and handled very predictably. There is a reason that carbon, or composite materials are used for various high end applications. From sailing boats to racing cars to kayaks etc, etc. And have long since replaced aluminium as material of choice. The biggest hurdle to bicycle manufacturers seems to have been: 1. This issue of sizing - you can't just cut tubes to length, a separate mould needs to be made for each size. 2. Mostly as a function of the above - cost. 3. It is generally a more skill intesive method than welding. There seems to be no real weight saving over aluminium in bicycle construction until one gets the the high end of the scale. Bear in mind that when it comes to composite construction, there are many more factors involved than 'it's made of carbon'. There are various other composite materials which are used in conjunction with the carbon weave (nomex and kevlar are just two), and also the bonding agent and method of construction have a huge impact on the quality of the finished article. So, just the fact that it is 'carbon' doesn't necessarily make it better or worse. But it looks way cool. Do as much research as you can, make an informed choice, treat everyone's opinion as bullsh*t. Good luck.

DeltaOscar, congratulations. You have been JB'd!!! Don't take it too hard. Thanks Yang, but JB's response means F@*k all to me. This is supposed to be a discussion, not merely a handing down of unchallenged established gospel.

The Yeti. But not because it's better. Only because it's more exclusive. And a one mean looking machine Dead right

No it's not metaphysics (one word). We're intepreting his question differently - he asked about 'softer' you're thinking Flex, I'm thinking overall ride feel. My full carbon mtb definately felt 'softer' or 'deader' than my aluminium ones. And he was asking about "Titanium Ride Feel". If you can't answer an honest question without being condescending, don't bother.

If they were giving them away free? Then which one.