View Full Version : Ok we got our forum...


pornstar
01-07-2006, 11:44 PM
... does that mean we have to post stuff in it too?

seriously why was everyone posting so much and cmplaining about not having a forum and now that we were given a chance to have our own "frijolero" space we suddenly have nothing to post about? :p

bajamtnbkr
01-08-2006, 12:21 AM
Maybe because the holidays? :confused:
People are not back to work yet? So they can get a chance to post some pictures and riding stories.
Who knows but I do have planned a ride for tomorrow and told my friends to help me out on taking some pictures. I will post ASAP. :D

tigerdog
01-08-2006, 09:19 AM
Maybe because the holidays? :confused:
People are not back to work yet? So they can get a chance to post some pictures and riding stories.
Who knows but I do have planned a ride for tomorrow and told my friends to help me out on taking some pictures. I will post ASAP. :D

some of us won't have ride pics today because we're sick :mad:

Warp
01-08-2006, 12:40 PM
some of us won't have ride pics today because we're sick :mad:

Some other had been busy with the family.... you know.

OK... check this out....

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=155052

Sorry for not making the cross post before....

pornstar
01-10-2006, 10:08 AM
I am frankly scared of the third pic..... The tire is just a tiny bit of nothingness on getting stuck and you flying over your bike.

Warp
01-10-2006, 10:18 AM
I am frankly scared of the third pic..... The tire is just a tiny bit of nothingness on getting stuck and you flying over your bike.

Yer jokin', uh?? :confused:

Look at pic 6.... and that's a 2.4" tire, no skinny 2.1 shizzle.

Dude, what size a rock has to be to get stuck in there.... :rolleyes:


Oh wait!! You were joking, right?... tell me you were joking and I was short on my sense of humor (and medication) this morning.

pornstar
01-10-2006, 10:26 AM
Yer jokin', uh?? :confused:

Look at pic 6.... and that's a 2.4" tire, no skinny 2.1 shizzle.

Dude, what size a rock has to be to get stuck in there.... :rolleyes:


Oh wait!! You were joking, right?... tell me you were joking and I was short on my sense of humor (and medication) this morning.



jaja im not dissing on your brand new fork jaja
Its just that from tha pic it look slike theres just a very little space between the tire and the fork.
Jaja i never use a tire that wide cause i like going uphill as fast as i like going downhill.
Changing the subject It is glad to know of other brands that provide good quality products besides the same old

Warp
01-10-2006, 11:22 AM
jaja im not dissing on your brand new fork jaja
Its just that from tha pic it look slike theres just a very little space between the tire and the fork.

The pics looks like the bike is going to run over you... ;)


Jaja i never use a tire that wide cause i like going uphill as fast as i like going downhill.

Believe me that front tire width has little to do with uphill performance. Try it. Rear tire does.
In my case, it bumped up my rolling and downhilling performance with no penalty on may already sucky climbing performance.

Changing the subject It is glad to know of other brands that provide good quality products besides the same old

Yeah... you have to make some research to find stuff like this. The number of hits the thread has tells me that these are fork everybody would like to jump on but are afraid due to the little feedback.

I'll sound again like a Magura junkie and I am. But I jumped into these fork for a performance/price/customer support combo that is hard to beat.

Again, Magura CS is like sponsorship. A real benchmark of the industry.

pornstar
01-10-2006, 12:47 PM
Believe me that front tire width has little to do with uphill performance. Try it. Rear tire does.
In my case, it bumped up my rolling and downhilling performance with no penalty on may already sucky climbing performance.


I have 2.1 tire and that`s the bigget i`ll go, because i wanna race XC on my bike; i would never go back to 1.9ers.
Besdides theres not that much of a treath in Mazatlan, on the downhill dept.
On the trip i did i tried more technical courses and the bike handled just fine. No need for bigger tires at least not for me.



I'll sound again like a Magura junkie and I am. But I jumped into these fork for a performance/price/customer support combo that is hard to beat.

Again, Magura CS is like sponsorship. A real benchmark of the industry.


I would love to try the Magra disc brakes but that would mean expeding lots of dough. Maybe in my next lfe... err, i meant next bike :D
I sure hope that my baby Kona doesnt read this or it will brake its heart.

rzozaya1969
01-10-2006, 02:05 PM
I have 2.1 tire and that`s the bigget i`ll go, because i wanna race XC on my bike; i would never go back to 1.9ers.
Besdides theres not that much of a treath in Mazatlan, on the downhill dept.
On the trip i did i tried more technical courses and the bike handled just fine. No need for bigger tires at least not for me.




I've found that a wide 2.2 or 2.3 and a 2.0 or 2.1 in the rear works for me.

tigerdog
01-10-2006, 03:52 PM
The thing is, with tyre sizes, the number on the side often has little to do with actual size. A Specialized 2.0 is like a Kenda 2.1. Some 2.35s are really only like a real 2.1. I think Conti might be a little optimistic in their measurements if I remember rightly.

I remember not so long ago (in my mind anyway), xc riders wouldn't dream of anything over a 1.9 (am I showing my age). The recent large volume tyres have made a huge difference in my opinion. I might try something a little bigger on the front soon.

Currently running Blue Groove 2.1 Stick-E on the front, and Nevegal 2.1 DTC on the back. Might try a 2.35 up front soon.

What's my point? I don't know, but I think we have more tyre options now than ever before. Although every shop I go in here seems to have the same pair of Tioga XCs. It'd be interesting to hear what others here in Mexico are running.

Warp
01-10-2006, 04:05 PM
The thing is, with tyre sizes, the number on the side often has little to do with actual size. A Specialized 2.0 is like a Kenda 2.1. Some 2.35s are really only like a real 2.1. I think Conti might be a little optimistic in their measurements if I remember rightly.

I remember not so long ago (in my mind anyway), xc riders wouldn't dream of anything over a 1.9 (am I showing my age). The recent large volume tyres have made a huge difference in my opinion. I might try something a little bigger on the front soon.

Currently running Blue Groove 2.1 Stick-E on the front, and Nevegal 2.1 DTC on the back. Might try a 2.35 up front soon.

What's my point? I don't know, but I think we have more tyre options now than ever before. Although every shop I go in here seems to have the same pair of Tioga XCs. It'd be interesting to hear what others here in Mexico are running.

Well, I was referring to have a wider tire up front than on the rear (not IN the rear, Roberto :D )

Anyway... I'd could go away with a front tire as wide as your Kendas 2.1", Tiger.

As for my tire choice....

Front: WTB Motoraptor 2.4" (More like a 2.3)
Rear: Tioga Factory DH 2.1 (Sorry Tiger! I'm a cheapo)

Some popular tires around here are Michelins (errr...), Conti's (ughn!!), Tiogas, WTB's (there's a place at San Pablo that uses to have some old stock WTB's at awesome prices) and Schwalbes. I'm not counting on the countless cheap no-name tires, mostly all made by the cheapo factory of Kenda (Chen-Shing) and IRC (in India).

I've seen some Maxxis lately at stores (transivion and Ciclo Uzi at Polanco)... and prices are not that off from the US (around 40-55 bucks) but I'd rather buy a new hub for that money. Yeah, I'm a cheapo.

tigerdog
01-10-2006, 04:32 PM
I've seen some Maxxis lately at stores (transivion and Ciclo Uzi at Polanco)... and prices are not that off from the US (around 40-55 bucks) but I'd rather buy a new hub for that money. Yeah, I'm a cheapo.

Yeah, I'm not crazy about spending that much on a soft piece of rubber that's not going to last a year. I never pay more than $35 for a tyre. That's probably why I've never run Contis.

Warp
01-10-2006, 04:35 PM
I never pay more than $35 for a tyre. That's probably why I've never run Contis.

35 bucks is reasonable for a quality tire. I wouldn't pay more than that.

pornstar
01-10-2006, 10:00 PM
35 bucks is reasonable for a quality tire. I wouldn't pay more than that.


I was running some Maxxis Larsen, but i didnt quite dig them 2.0
Now i`m running some Geax Tubeless tires i think they are called Mezcal... (Cheers!)
They are quite good with a minimal thread that digs in like it had claws.
And i havent gotten a singleflat since i started using them.
No skidding and i think they are a little bit widder than the 2.1 they claim to be.

This is a tipical example of how a thread becomes hitchjacked by the Mexican maf... oops i mean by the frijolero`s crew

BTW it had never passed through my mind haven any tire, no matter its size in the rear, i do have an open mind and respect other peopples preferences though. :p