First Mountain Bike in 20 years?
08-08-17, 10:09 AM
#26
With a mighty wind
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,594
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1088 Post(s)
Liked 862 Times
in
490 Posts
Is the problem solvers hanger semi permanent? It looks like it is held in by the wheel, so the whole assembly comes loose if I remove the wheel? Is that how it works or does it go on and stay on just like any other derailleur hanger? It doesn't seem like too big of a problem either way since I'll be using a solid rear axle with nuts and probably slime or stans to keep the convenience level high.
The other question is about the cable stops. If I wire brushed the paint off and used JB weld or some other very strong epoxy, would that work? What epoxy did Trek use in the 90's to glue the 6000, 7000, and 8000, mountain bikes together? They were aluminum and never broke.
08-08-17, 11:45 AM
#27
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2762 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,433 Posts
Two questions.
Is the problem solvers hanger semi permanent? It looks like it is held in by the wheel, so the whole assembly comes loose if I remove the wheel? Is that how it works or does it go on and stay on just like any other derailleur hanger? It doesn't seem like too big of a problem either way since I'll be using a solid rear axle with nuts and probably slime or stans to keep the convenience level high.
The other question is about the cable stops. If I wire brushed the paint off and used JB weld or some other very strong epoxy, would that work? What epoxy did Trek use in the 90's to glue the 6000, 7000, and 8000, mountain bikes together? They were aluminum and never broke.
Is the problem solvers hanger semi permanent? It looks like it is held in by the wheel, so the whole assembly comes loose if I remove the wheel? Is that how it works or does it go on and stay on just like any other derailleur hanger? It doesn't seem like too big of a problem either way since I'll be using a solid rear axle with nuts and probably slime or stans to keep the convenience level high.
The other question is about the cable stops. If I wire brushed the paint off and used JB weld or some other very strong epoxy, would that work? What epoxy did Trek use in the 90's to glue the 6000, 7000, and 8000, mountain bikes together? They were aluminum and never broke.
But if it were me, I would just run full length housing. Plenty of mountain bikes do that now, anyway.
08-08-17, 12:52 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,036
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Two questions.
Is the problem solvers hanger semi permanent? It looks like it is held in by the wheel, so the whole assembly comes loose if I remove the wheel? Is that how it works or does it go on and stay on just like any other derailleur hanger? It doesn't seem like too big of a problem either way since I'll be using a solid rear axle with nuts and probably slime or stans to keep the convenience level high.
The other question is about the cable stops. If I wire brushed the paint off and used JB weld or some other very strong epoxy, would that work? What epoxy did Trek use in the 90's to glue the 6000, 7000, and 8000, mountain bikes together? They were aluminum and never broke.
Is the problem solvers hanger semi permanent? It looks like it is held in by the wheel, so the whole assembly comes loose if I remove the wheel? Is that how it works or does it go on and stay on just like any other derailleur hanger? It doesn't seem like too big of a problem either way since I'll be using a solid rear axle with nuts and probably slime or stans to keep the convenience level high.
The other question is about the cable stops. If I wire brushed the paint off and used JB weld or some other very strong epoxy, would that work? What epoxy did Trek use in the 90's to glue the 6000, 7000, and 8000, mountain bikes together? They were aluminum and never broke.
I have no idea if JB weld would work for cable stops.
08-09-17, 04:04 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 173
Bikes: Road Bike, Mountain Bike, Commuter Bike, Gravel bike
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
FWIW I made that 20 year bike technology gap myself and hung up my beloved Bontrager a few years ago...
I went for full suspension. I still like hardtails and sometimes find the squishiness bothersome, but this old lower back just can't take the trail-pounding like it used to. It makes up for a lot of mistakes as well.
29er's took some getting used to after a lifetime on 26's. They're slower to spin up and corner a bit slower, BUT it's not like it's horrible and what's best for you depends on your trails.
The trails are very rocky here in Central Texas, and those bit wagon wheels sure smooth them out. I still surprise myself when they gobble up rocks and drops that would have sent me over the bars on on 26" wheels.
If your trails aren't rocky the 27.5's corner better, are a little lighter and faster. I had them on a rental bike in Crested Butte and loved them too.
Tubeless? I've never had a flat on mine. 'nuff said.
Disc brakes - lots better and less maintenance. Occasional fluid/pad changes, but it's just like on a car but easier. Plus no toe-ing in brake pads (yay!) On some bikes you can even swap 29 and 27.5 wheels.
Front suspension? 100-120 mm will do unless your taking HUGE drops or bomber downhills. Like someone said air sprung is better (IMHO). Maintenance is about the same but they don't lose pressure and have to be pumped back up like my old ones did. Change the oil and seals periodically to make them last.
Short stems are popular to push your weight back. Great for downhills, but can make it wheelie when climbing. Both have their good/bad points. For XC I don't think short stems are necessary. But short stems kinda call for wide bars, which give more control but catch more trees on tight trails. Depends on where you ride.
You don't need a triple, or even a double with new wide-range cassettes, and you'll save weight in the process.
That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Hope that helps man. Modern bikes are way better. Bite the bullet and you won't look back.
I went for full suspension. I still like hardtails and sometimes find the squishiness bothersome, but this old lower back just can't take the trail-pounding like it used to. It makes up for a lot of mistakes as well.
29er's took some getting used to after a lifetime on 26's. They're slower to spin up and corner a bit slower, BUT it's not like it's horrible and what's best for you depends on your trails.
The trails are very rocky here in Central Texas, and those bit wagon wheels sure smooth them out. I still surprise myself when they gobble up rocks and drops that would have sent me over the bars on on 26" wheels.
If your trails aren't rocky the 27.5's corner better, are a little lighter and faster. I had them on a rental bike in Crested Butte and loved them too.
Tubeless? I've never had a flat on mine. 'nuff said.
Disc brakes - lots better and less maintenance. Occasional fluid/pad changes, but it's just like on a car but easier. Plus no toe-ing in brake pads (yay!) On some bikes you can even swap 29 and 27.5 wheels.
Front suspension? 100-120 mm will do unless your taking HUGE drops or bomber downhills. Like someone said air sprung is better (IMHO). Maintenance is about the same but they don't lose pressure and have to be pumped back up like my old ones did. Change the oil and seals periodically to make them last.
Short stems are popular to push your weight back. Great for downhills, but can make it wheelie when climbing. Both have their good/bad points. For XC I don't think short stems are necessary. But short stems kinda call for wide bars, which give more control but catch more trees on tight trails. Depends on where you ride.
You don't need a triple, or even a double with new wide-range cassettes, and you'll save weight in the process.
That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Hope that helps man. Modern bikes are way better. Bite the bullet and you won't look back.
08-10-17, 07:14 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,624
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2975 Post(s)
Liked 1,182 Times
in
771 Posts
FWIW I made that 20 year bike technology gap myself and hung up my beloved Bontrager a few years ago...
I went for full suspension. I still like hardtails and sometimes find the squishiness bothersome, but this old lower back just can't take the trail-pounding like it used to. It makes up for a lot of mistakes as well.
29er's took some getting used to after a lifetime on 26's. They're slower to spin up and corner a bit slower, BUT it's not like it's horrible and what's best for you depends on your trails.
The trails are very rocky here in Central Texas, and those bit wagon wheels sure smooth them out. I still surprise myself when they gobble up rocks and drops that would have sent me over the bars on on 26" wheels.
If your trails aren't rocky the 27.5's corner better, are a little lighter and faster. I had them on a rental bike in Crested Butte and loved them too.
Tubeless? I've never had a flat on mine. 'nuff said.
Disc brakes - lots better and less maintenance. Occasional fluid/pad changes, but it's just like on a car but easier. Plus no toe-ing in brake pads (yay!) On some bikes you can even swap 29 and 27.5 wheels.
Front suspension? 100-120 mm will do unless your taking HUGE drops or bomber downhills. Like someone said air sprung is better (IMHO). Maintenance is about the same but they don't lose pressure and have to be pumped back up like my old ones did. Change the oil and seals periodically to make them last.
Short stems are popular to push your weight back. Great for downhills, but can make it wheelie when climbing. Both have their good/bad points. For XC I don't think short stems are necessary. But short stems kinda call for wide bars, which give more control but catch more trees on tight trails. Depends on where you ride.
You don't need a triple, or even a double with new wide-range cassettes, and you'll save weight in the process.
That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Hope that helps man. Modern bikes are way better. Bite the bullet and you won't look back.
I went for full suspension. I still like hardtails and sometimes find the squishiness bothersome, but this old lower back just can't take the trail-pounding like it used to. It makes up for a lot of mistakes as well.
29er's took some getting used to after a lifetime on 26's. They're slower to spin up and corner a bit slower, BUT it's not like it's horrible and what's best for you depends on your trails.
The trails are very rocky here in Central Texas, and those bit wagon wheels sure smooth them out. I still surprise myself when they gobble up rocks and drops that would have sent me over the bars on on 26" wheels.
If your trails aren't rocky the 27.5's corner better, are a little lighter and faster. I had them on a rental bike in Crested Butte and loved them too.
Tubeless? I've never had a flat on mine. 'nuff said.
Disc brakes - lots better and less maintenance. Occasional fluid/pad changes, but it's just like on a car but easier. Plus no toe-ing in brake pads (yay!) On some bikes you can even swap 29 and 27.5 wheels.
Front suspension? 100-120 mm will do unless your taking HUGE drops or bomber downhills. Like someone said air sprung is better (IMHO). Maintenance is about the same but they don't lose pressure and have to be pumped back up like my old ones did. Change the oil and seals periodically to make them last.
Short stems are popular to push your weight back. Great for downhills, but can make it wheelie when climbing. Both have their good/bad points. For XC I don't think short stems are necessary. But short stems kinda call for wide bars, which give more control but catch more trees on tight trails. Depends on where you ride.
You don't need a triple, or even a double with new wide-range cassettes, and you'll save weight in the process.
That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Hope that helps man. Modern bikes are way better. Bite the bullet and you won't look back.
Now take that last step and go tubeless. It's not about getting flats or not, it's about decreasing rotational weight and the tires conform better to uneven ground because they aren't working against the tubes which also makes pedaling easier.
08-10-17, 07:59 AM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 173
Bikes: Road Bike, Mountain Bike, Commuter Bike, Gravel bike
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I still dutifully carry a tube just in case, and force of habit. Come to think of it I don't even know how to get the tubeless stem out because I've never had to do it!
I'll figure it out at the time or won't get home. Learned a lot of bike repairs that way :-)
08-10-17, 08:02 AM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,624
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2975 Post(s)
Liked 1,182 Times
in
771 Posts
I'm tubeless but carry a tube. So far the few punctures I have had this season...the sealant has done what it's suppose to do.
08-10-17, 08:10 AM
#34
Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I have a first gen MountainKlein, a Fat Chance Team Comp and an Ellsworth. The ellsworth is full suspension but the others both unsuspended.
The MountainKlein is very relaxed geometry undoubtedly designed for fast West Coast fire roads. Decent bike for the Mrs on the road now. Geometry is slow for our woods.
The Fat Chance is very lightweight and squirrelly as heck. Took a while to not get pitched over the bars.
The Ellsworth is almost too easy to ride in the rough because the suspension works but there is maintenance associated with suspension.
We're where almost all the riding is rolling singletrack trails.
When it comes to choosing what to ride it's almost always the Fat Chance now.
It demands paying attention when riding and the paint job attracts everyone. Two of a kind sunset fade.
A hardtail can be a blast because it can be so light.
I tend to like vintage bikes better but then I can't use the technology like the youngsters can.
Riding the piece of history, both things with and without motors, is just plain fun.
Just some food for thought.
The MountainKlein is very relaxed geometry undoubtedly designed for fast West Coast fire roads. Decent bike for the Mrs on the road now. Geometry is slow for our woods.
The Fat Chance is very lightweight and squirrelly as heck. Took a while to not get pitched over the bars.
The Ellsworth is almost too easy to ride in the rough because the suspension works but there is maintenance associated with suspension.
We're where almost all the riding is rolling singletrack trails.
When it comes to choosing what to ride it's almost always the Fat Chance now.
It demands paying attention when riding and the paint job attracts everyone. Two of a kind sunset fade.
A hardtail can be a blast because it can be so light.
I tend to like vintage bikes better but then I can't use the technology like the youngsters can.
Riding the piece of history, both things with and without motors, is just plain fun.
Just some food for thought.
Last edited by Beemie; 08-10-17 at 12:45 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Donnie2112
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
9
05-02-10 08:43 AM
