Here's a picture of mine.

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t...Sep2007039.jpg

Is that a laptop mounted on your bars**********? :eek:

Who cares? Green bikes are HOT.

It's not that steep its 71deg. Or maybe that is steep? I don't know. I do know it handles like a dream in twisty stuff, and climbs like a mountain goat.

Anybody know what type of Conti tire those are? They look like they'd handle pretty good.

Yeah, 71 degree HA would take some getting used to for me. My 820 is about that steep and I never feel as confident on it as I do on a slacker frame, like 69deg.

You are correct!

You truly, don't know.

Not that it prevents you from trying to comment "authoritatively" about head angles, or handlebar widths, etc., etc.

" Gee Mr Spicoli, I don't know"..........Mr Hand,Fast times at Ridgemont High.

You only use one "etc.". Your general lack of knowledge of the English language does not prevent you from sounding like a jerk.

Good point. I'll have to do that before I take it on any real singletrack. So far I've only ridden it on the doubletrack around here, nothing too aggressive.

2007 Trek Fuel EX 9.5

current configuration:
FRAME: 15.5" OCLV 110 carbon black; ZR 9000 swingarm W/120MM travel
FRONT SUSPENSION: 2007 RockShox SID Team With Poplock 80mm
REAR SUSPENSION: RockShox MC3.R With Poplock Remote
WHEELSET: 2007 Mavic Crossmax SL-R
TIRES: Maxxis Larsen TT (Tubeless) 26x2.0
CRANKSET: Shimano XTR 175MM 44/32/22
BOTTOM BRACKET: Shimano XTR
REAR DERAILLEUR: Shimano XTR
FRONT DERAILLEUR: Shimano XTR
SHIFTERS: Shimano XTR Dual Control
BRAKESET: Shimano XTR Hydraulic Disk w/ XTR Disc 6" Rotors
SEATPOST: Bontrager XXX Lite Carbon
STEM: FSA FR200
HANDLEBAR: Bontrager XXX Lite Carbon 31.8mm, Nashbar ergo bar ends (not pictured)
HEADSET: Chris King
SADDLE: WTB Rocket V
CASSETTE: Shimano XTR 11-34T, 9 Speed
CHAIN: Shimano XTR
PEDALS: Nashbar SPD/sport platform (had eggbeaters but they keep breaking)
ACCESSORIES: CatEye tail light, CatEye MC100 micro wireless comp, small saddle bag for tools.

I picked the Trek up for $2,800, lightly used this past November.

http://www.glasswolf.net/misc/trek.jpg

That was a good one!!!!!!!

Handlebar width is common sense. Apparently, you need to get some, being that you had to put two etc. in there.

ooooohhhhhh, that was even better!

Common sense. Careful about schooling others about language.

Dang, that's a small frame.

yeah. 5'7" 30" inseam.
I use a 52cm road frame, too. small I guess, but it works for me.

updated pic
just took this one

http://www.glasswolf.net/misc/trek2.jpg

Very nice! I remember when those came out, and '94 sounds about right at the earliest. I would have guessed a year or two later, but things like that always seem to be a little older than I remember. I'm pretty sure it's nearly identical to Trek's OCLV frame at the time, though I could be wrong. They also both came out with V-framed bikes around that time with unified rear triangles and appeared to share a few frame parts there, as well. Although the Fisher was aluminum and the Trek carbon. I have a couple of magazines with ads for your bike, but I don't recall seeing any articles about them. The ads don't really tell much either.

Your claims about handlebar width were, and are, ridiculous. Just as your comments about a 71 degree head angle not being steep were, and are, ridiculous.

Since(!) we're discussing the ridiculous things that you have been posting, you equating using an extra "etc." for literary effect with a lack of common sense is also ridiculous.

Before you go making crazy assumptions about anyone's "general lack of knowledge of the English language" you might want to consider your own posts lil' buddy.

As I said Runtnick, I stated that I did not know if it was steep or not. As you said, "Just as your comments about a 71 degree head angle not being steep were, and are, ridiculous." I said it was and it wasn't and also said that I don't really know if it is or not. So that claim can't be ridiculous as I really never even claimed anything at all.

My handlebar claim is based on past racing experience. Go to a tight, wooded, twisty trail and ride it as fast as you can on a wide bar. Then, do the same trail on a narrower bar. Your time will be faster, as you will have more clearance between the trees, allowing you to take a more direct attack angle through the turn. It was faster for me, and is faster for a lot of XC racers. Why do you think most PRO XC racers race them?

SS with a rigid and one brake? You sir are ballsy. Props.

Lamplight;

Thanks for that. I got this bike used from a Clydesdale friend (beats me why he had a 15" frame in his possesion. his replacement was a Trek 9.8 Elite) a couple of years ago. Been looking on the history of this frame ever since. I have yet to see another, both back in Malaysia and currently in UK either.

Here are a couple more pics after an early morning ride (and a new seatpost :D)

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/9780/dsc00283ep7.jpg

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/2268/dsc00281di3.jpg

Cheers

Just keep on digging.
http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o...eepdigging.jpg


Since when was correcting your improper grammar, you're not important enough to use "literary effect" that doesn't adhere to the rules, a crazy assumption? You made a brash assumption about xcracer13, and I'm making a point. You obviously don't have a complete grasp on the proper English language, "lil'" is not a word. The word is "little". Assumption is different that observation.

The only thing that I'm digging is your "virtual" last resting place.


It's a crazy assumption because you did not understand that it was used for literary effect.


No assumption, let alone a brash one. I took him at his word (words). Assumption is different that observation!


Keep on playing the grammar Nazi 'lil buddy. It's all you got (oh no!), even though it's hypocritical, considering your posting history.