ed 

samburger

Oh & Ed, are you & Doug in the middle of some sort of competition to see who can change there avatar/sig the most times in a single week or something?

samburger

Oh come on, that doesn't explain anything. That's like saying a Camaro isn't a sports car just because a Ferrari is sportier. Compare it to an XC race bike & tell me her bike isn't slack.

If I'm missing something here I want answers con flarnit! And if not, I want recognition that I'm not crazy!

ed 

dminor 

Head angle, Sam (angle 'c'):



That's what determines whether a frame's geometry is slack or steep. Downhill bikes run slack at 64-65° HA; dirt jumpers are usually comparatively steep at 68-69°.

A notable exception was the Transition Vagrant - - which was sold as a FR Hardtail/park bike/DJ do-it-all - - which had a somewhat slack 67° HA.

samburger

I could have looked through every picture of every kind of bike and I never would have noticed the head angle without someone pointing it out to me. Thanks Doug.

And Ed, thanks for the attempt, but I can be pretty dense.

cryptid01

Best examples I could find of opposite ends of the HA spectrum.

edit:

p.s. a camaro is not a sports car

Zephyr11

As much as I'd like to pretend I'm a shark on a bike...

samburger

And to get this straight, the term "slack" only refers to HA? Because I always thought geometry was affected be several factors. How would one describe a bike that has a low seat tube, higher bars, and a short stem?

dminor 

Slack refers only to head angle (or 'rake' in motorcycle terms) - - which is in turn altered by many, many variables.

Well, I take that back. Slack can sometimes be a refernce to seat tube angle but it will always be qualified as such and is not a factor in how a bike handles. It IS a factor in how a bike will ride in how it affects the cockpit.

dminor 

More like . . .

ed 

One "Ed" may describe it as heavenly.

samburger

Got it!

So "slack" in bicycles doesn't refer to the position you're in when on the bike, only the head angle.

samburger

According to car classes on all the biggest & most reputable car websites, & according to almost any professional car reviewer/tester; mechanic; engineer; etc, it is. Anyone who tries to say a Camaro or a Mustang isn't a sports car is just being a snob because they don't like the car. I don't care for the Camaro or any current American muscle cars ('muscle car' being a sub-catagory of 'sports cars', just like 'rally car' or 'tuner car'), but it's still a sports car.

But for humors sake, please tell me, what is a sports car, by the almighty 01 definition?

ed 

Muscle car...don't cross Gastro. He'll e-whack you.

rat fink

It's not a muscle car either. It's a pony car. I've owned 5 Camaros

samburger

As much as I wish I had the energy, this just really isn't worth arguing. My definition of a sports car is evolutionary, because the capabilities of today's muscle/pony are too close to that of a true-blue sports car to be worthy of differentiation.

Now, let me go get my flame-suit

cryptid01

No need to tap into the "almighty 01" definition when wiki will do.

"A sports car is a small, usually two seat, two door automobile designed for high speed driving and maneuverability. Sports cars have been either spartan or luxurious, but good handling, minimum weight, and high performance are requisite."

Characteristics in red are where Camaro fails at sportscardom. Continuing:

"A car may be a sporting automobile without being a sports car. Performance modifications of regular, production cars, such as sport compacts, sports sedans, muscle cars, hot hatches and the like, generally are not considered sports cars, yet share traits common to sports cars. They are sometimes called "sports cars" for marketing purposes for increased advertising and promotional purposes. Performance cars of all configurations are grouped as Sports and Grand tourer cars or, occasionally, as performance cars."

Ed, I concede this round but I'm not going down without a fight:

samburger

Funny, I'm usually very argumentative, but I guess 'usually' & 'always' are kinda different

Anyway, I've had this argument several times with several people & by the book, I already knew you were right on. And I guess in a proper argument or debate, that's all that really matters.

But just like everything in life, cars change. I still hold my ground that the current official definition of 'sports car' is outdated, but who earns that title isn't for me to choose. So congrats, you're the millionth person to prove me wrong today

ed 

As a former '71 Roadrunner 440 4spd, 3:91 posi owner...I agree with your statement.



Not an argument or even a big deal. I'm glad this topic came up in the weirdest of places though. Casting feelings aside, it's been kind of interesting.



I'll be the bigger man and call it a draw...even though I'm still licking my Cool Hand wounds.

cryptid01

For enthusiasts, the difference is always in the details. Figuring out that those details even exist is part of becoming an enthusast.

dminor 

Negative rep for errant GM reference uttered in description of a Mopar





*cough* Sure-Grip *cough*

samburger

This kind of nonsense is what keeps me coming back here

Is there a way I can agree with you without disagreeing with my previous statement?

ed 

You're still goin' down.

otismedina

So I figured out that the 1995 Gary Fisher Paragon is about one size too big for me. I went down to my local LBS and they suggested I part it out on eBay to get rid of it.

Long story short: I've now whetted my appetite for a mountain bike, but as a college student, I don't have a lot of money to throw around. I've been riding road for seven or eight years, but have never ridden mountain. My LBS suggested a Redline Monocog 29er as an entry-level single-speed 29er. I would probably upgrade to Avid BB7 discs and throw some SPDs on there. Any opinions?