Rigardt@Scott

My mom and dad. Mom is crazy fit (done cycles from Richards Bay down to Cape Town, top 10 in her age group at races like Argus, lots of stage races, etc etc). My dad is 140kg+, very unfit, so got an ebike to keep up with my mom. End result: it does not work - he smokes her on every hill - it's a matter of him pedaling ahead then stopping and waiting, and then the same thing over again. On the flipsside, because of the battery limitations and his lack of overall fitness he cannot go on any long rides with her anyway. They tried to make it work for a whike - but for them it just does not. I dunno if it is just their dynamic or what - but it didn't work like they had hoped it would. Another limiting factor is that the ebike does not give any skills to riders, so when it comes to any sort of single track situtation my mom still rides far ahead of my dad on the ebike. Long story short, they still do not ride together. An ebike gives pedaking speed to unfit riders, but no skills - so there is always going to be a divide between experienced and non experienced riders. Where it does work IMO is when both have ebikes, and the stronger one uses less assistance from the motor, the weaker one uses more assistance from the motor.

My GX Eagle chain needs to be replaced now @ +/- 1500km - majority of those km at places like Helderberg where it's climbing in the 2 easiest gears for an hour, then descending in the hardest 2 gears for 15mins. So in other words, the chain is stretched quite a bit on the climbs in the 50t, and because of that I replace it sooner rather than later. I've ordered an XX1 Eagle chain from CWC because of this thread - let's see how it goes.

Coffee on the keyboard moment hahahaha

If I remember correctly someone here on le Hub has one on order. Looks like a bruiser of a bike!

It's not often that I agree with something you say haha but ja - ascending riders on descending tracks are a bad idea. I've nearly ploughed into a few runners coming up Firehut in Jonkers (they were wearing earphones). Also had a close call with a rider coming uo never ending story one random weekday morning.

Okay, true, but this will not always be the case. Eg: rock gardens.

Yeah, what just annoys me is the thinking that all trails should be accessible to everyone. By doing that you are essentially punishing those that can handle the harder trails by dumbing those trails down. Sure, if only 10% can handle it then the amount of trail dedicated to those riders should be reflective - ie: only 10% of trails with that difficulty. I always laugh when I think of a trail in Pta that had this wooden feature - it was removed after 2 months because too many people fell. Yet there was a very accessible chicken line around it. Take away from those that can because some cannot. If you can't do a feature - don't. If you wanna try it even though you know it's above your limit make peace that there will be some risk involved. This thinking of safe progression for me is akin to wanting to get fit without wantinf to eat right and put in hard training rides.

I'm not trying to be difficult here, but sre you saying that the 5% should be ignored? I agree you cannot build 90% of trails for the 5%, but you can build sections of the trail for the 5%. And a trail being techy and challenging but still safe is an oxymoron, you cannot have both. We will never develop the level of our cycling if there are not difficult trails (and they will be inherently high risk). I think the one area we can agree on is the progression part. One cannot build a green route and then a double black - there does need to be some trails that get progressively harder to get people from "green" to "black" skill. Not everyone has the skill for black routes, not everyone wants to ride black trails, amd many that want to just need some development still. But this does mean that black trails are only going to be ridden by a small portion of riders, and that people need to know their limits before moving on to the "next trail up". But by saying we should not build for the 5% (I do not include myself in this, although I hope to get there) it means that it will always just be the 5% that can ride it. If you look at the average skill level in say Canada of Europe I'm guessing it's much higher than here - not because they are better, but because they are exposed to harder routes. The one thing you cannot escape in mtb is thinking there will be progression withour risk, the two are directly proportional.

Not at all what I am saying. I'm saying don't butcher lekker features in the name of accessability - there are loads of people that can do them and don't want them dummed down. Agree there should be more progression, smaller gap jumps, side by side increasing in size like Myles suggested, maybe even some with planks. Just don't take butcher the few features there actually are - it has happened at so many trail centers and it sucks! There does come a point though where a certain level of risk is involved, and if you are not happy with that level of risk, don't do it. Then stick to what you are okay with doing - that's not me saying hang up your bike. Just realise there are riders out there that enjoy gaps jumps, and techy root/rock lines. Eg: Status quo in Jonkers is above my pay grade at the moment, but I am not gonna ask them to dumb it down for me - I am gonna take some risks, have a few tumbles, and learn to ride it. I'm sure many don't want to take that risk, I understand that completely - but then stick to trails and features where you are happy with the risk/reward ratio. If they do not exist - petition for them to be built, don't petition for the exisiting features to be altered.

Sorta jumping in here... but anyway. By putting planks in the middle of a gap jump people can now roll over it instead of jumping it - it ruins the take-off. It's simple, if you can't do a jump then don't. It's mountain biking, it's a dangerous sport, progression will cost you some skin - make peace with that. When we compare our trails with international standards it's a joke (not a condemnation of Tygerberg specifically, but SA trails in general). Bikes can turn without berms, and slow speed chunk is fun - but you have to be willing to take a tumble or two if you want to learn. I don't understand why we don't have the tech stuff to match Europe and Canada - I thought us South Africans are supossed to be a bit tougher.

Based purely on aesthetics, this is probably the single best looking bike for sale at the moment.

Yeah, it is extremely well thought out and made - but it just seems to me that boutiqye alu frame producers are charging absurd amounts for their frames considering cost of production vs that of carbon. Very nice bike none the less.

This looks like fun:

Waaaay too much for an alu frame.

Those batteries need time to recharge. Works great with 2 hours of loadshedding per day, not so lekker when we go into stage 4/5/6. My brother in law spent thousands on UPS solutions for his servers (he does online back/web hosting/other tech services) - his servers cannot go down otherwise a thousand of his client's websites also go down. The UPS solution didn't work during stage 4 as the batteries did not have time to recharge between the "offs". He slept at the office last week to start up diesel genies every morning at 3AM. Going full solar now - moerse expensive, but the only real long term sustainable solution.

Sell something here and there... not too hard to get your hands on dirty money as a teen if you really want it. Obviously his parents could be involved, but teenagers are dodgy characters at the best of times haha they do things under their parent's noses all the time.

Yeah, I used to be into the bodybuilding scene in high school and varsity - haven't indulged in the illegal stuff myself, but it was readily available if you just ask around. And I am not just speaking about the gym rat stuff, the athletics guys, swimmers, cyclists, etc also got their fix quite easily. So sad to see - but the fact that he is a junior using does not indict his parents....

Good move, you can get up anything with a 30t chainring. You don't need a chain guide, if your chain length is right the chain will stay on with a narrow wide ring.

Personally I (or any of the much faster guys I ride with) have not had any issues with it where we ride - Jonkers, Helderberg. We also all rode Exo at Klipberg and Ezel without issues - granted I didn't bomb down stage 4 Ezel at speed, but the other guys managed 4 and 5 on 2.3 Exo Aggressors without issues. That said, if I rode TM trails, or something like Klipberg/Ezel regularly I would put at least DD on the rear.

Was looking for one for the rear of my big bike last week - none to be found anywhere. Settled for the Exo version - not ideal, but with a Foamo will be fine.

In Bottelary hills? That's pretty much roads between the winelands with occassional single track thrown in, next to no rocks. I rode there with 2.1 Ikons in Exo casing front and rear for a long time with no lack of grip or punctures and I weigh 100kg. Not that I am reccommending that. My vote would be Ikon (2.3) or Ardent Race (2.35) on the rear, paired with an Ardent (2.4), Forekaster (2.35), or Aggessor (2.5) on the front. Exo all around - nothing at bottelary is going to kill an Exo casing.

No worries, just don't wanna reccommend a double down casing with an aggressive tread and soft compound to someone that rides for distsnce and spends time on tar! My reccommendation in the Maxxis range would be the Ardent 2.4 in Exo casing, or Aggressor 2.3 also in Exo casing - the latter being softer compound and offering more grip, the former being slightly faster roling and harder wearing but offering less grip in corners. Another favourite of mine is the Onza Ibex in 2.25 width. It looks very aggresive, and does offer good grip, but rolls faster than you may think it would. Alternatively, if you want slightly more aggressive grip then a Maxxis High Roller or DHR2 is excellent. I'd stick to the Exo casing from the sounds of your type of riding, not everyone is a fan of it, but in my experience it holds up well - especially on the front (on the rear I see the point in a DD casing). I paired up a Ardent Race on the rear for a long time with an Ardent for more distance type stuff, which I switched out for a DHR2 for more aggressive stuff. The DHR2 is heavy and rolls slower (and wear fast on tar), but your grip levels increase ten fold over something like an Ardent. Just depends where your priorities lie...

What bike do you have? Do you ride more for distance, or get as much descending in as possible? Do you prefer grip or want little roling resistance? Do you pick lines carefully, or bomb through everything in your path? Are you heavy or light?

Supply and demand. Buy your airconditioners in winter and generators when there is no load shedding...

I'd go for the Rekon Race 2.35 - the extra width adds alot of volume to the tyre and translates to better comfort and absorption of things like corrugations. I run a 2.35" Ardent Race on the rear which is awesome!