Search results for:

mdizzle just posted his bike in current projects with a rear radial to use on the velodrome.

i see that people do actually do it now, but that doesn't make it sensible.

neither of those bikes look very convincing to me, but still that is NUTS!!!!

I've seen a few pics of TT bikes with all radial wheels.

pics or it didn't happen.

yes. but the only real point to that is to save weight. it's really kind of silly.

guys no rear wheel is fully radially laced. it would destroy the hub under hard pedaling. I 100% guarantee you that there isn't a single bike wheel on earth like that. you need spoke to be tangential to the hub flanges if your going to be delievering any roatational force through the hub (either through the drive train or through disc brakes).

<3 gatorskins

insert your joke in mum here

yar

^^I don't know why i feel like chiming in so much here. anyway, i agree with this guy.

he's just saying a burly cruiser.

Think I would just use something along these lines myself

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/LargeImage.aspx?ModelID=33042

Stronger and better fun IMO

seriously man, if i had that bike, riding it under any of the cirmstances that i would use the brooklyn for would be completey ridiculous.

I'm not defending fixed gear trickery.

I'm defending the idea of a 20lb single speed 700c bike that can handle a 2 foot drop, the occasional grind here and there, hauling over rough roads and up and down curbs, and then clip along at 15+ miles an hour for more than a few miles. i would just love a bike like that.

I do it now on my IRO, but i know it's going to wear the bike down.

nice. i bet that bike is a blast to ride.

so i wrecked my bike over the summer. It was this.

The fork was destroyed and so i decided to go threadless. I caouldn't afford a new fork at the moment so i just plunked down some change for a spicer track fork. Sometime I'll get a new proper fork made for the bike.

Here's the current set up. I REALLY need a new stem about 60mm, same rise. that one is 100. way too fucking long. It was just laying down in my parts bin. also it needs to match the frame's tube set better.

need to get the cranks anodized to black, as well.

I'd like a different seat and post as well, but that can wait.

Because it was stolen.

ten four buddy.

shitty weak.

MTB's have pretty slack angles. meant to ride over shit. really woun't feel all that snappy.

because of the paint, or becuase it was stolen?

post your favorite cook book.

http://www.pvspade.com/Sartre/cookbook.html

thats a sweet paint job.

Looks quite nice.
Is there a 'trick specific' reason the drive train is on the left?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_fcHQnLqdtEE/SwMtaPi5u4I/AAAAAAAAAGE/Dxa0aN9p3UQ/s1600/cs.jpg

it's possible that trick riders put a greater amount of force backwards on the drivetrain than forwards when landing and such. In this light, you'd want to flip the wheel so that the hub takes that load, and not the lock ring. Really, i'd just get one of the new bolt on systems, such as the one from Level.

thats my guess, but it's just that.... a guess.

no it isn't.

sorry dude. it's fast for a bike that can also handle stair sets and the like. didn't mean to mislead anyone. It's not fast when compared to bikes designed for speed. sorry, thanks for calling me out. you're really lookng out for everyone here and thats great. we all appreciate it, and fully consider you a vital component of the community. please don't change .

I don't get it. If you want to do serious tricks you get a BMX no? Lighter, smaller, stronger, more clearance! Surely it's a no brainer?

i totally agree, I think the intended purpose of this frame is silly, but whatever....

I'll tell you that i reaaaally like the idea of a super solid single speed with 700c wheels. It's fast, can handle anything you throw at it, and fun. It can get you across town really quickly and with a bit of silliness inbetween point A and B.

Would I want to drop 850 dollars on a frame for that? No fucking way.

i bet every fucking hipster in dalston is going to be on one of those utterly foul cinellis.

I hope they all get nicked, badly re-speayed with hammerite by some smack-head and sold to some exchange student in brick lane to then be driven over by an hgv (not the exchange student tho).

It's irritating how cinelli have gone down this road.

who

fucking

cares

ok next paint job i get, rear triangle is going to be clear coated up to the lugs. thats hot.

i literally just said the if its less than 6 no one's listening

thats 4.5/10.

I haven't haven't heard it so i can't say whether i like it... but thats the problem with pitchfork. Seriously it's like 15 music nerds in a room all talking smack. It works sometimes. It's an annoying presence in our music culture. It literally dictates what people will listen to.

hahaha

I have to agree with this part of his review though!!!---

"I still get hate mail for saying Make Believe was so bad that it retroactively ruined the Blue Album and Pinkerton, and I still believe it..."

do you stinky english look at Pitchfork much? It's a music review website based in the US, and easily, very very easily, is the most influential source of "opinion" on new music we have. I don't think a single band here in the States becomes popular without getting some kind of praise on that site.

It's both good, and bad. Good because if you want to sit down and get a few new albums it's relative easy to see whats new out there, then read a pretty well written review, and then hear the album for free. It's bad, because if it's not on pitchfork, or if it got less than a 6.0, you aren't going to find it.

I have a friend, you may have heard of, named gregg gillis, who goes under the name Girltalk. Pitchfork built his career. He was playing our house parties, buming around town. The minute pitchfork reviews his first album, he completely blew up. Another friend of mine, has a band called White Williams, and the same thing is happening.

ANYWAY they have a list of the top 200 albums from this decade, as far as they are concerned. here's the first twenty:
http://pitchfork.com/features/staff-lists/7710-the-top-200-albums-of-the-2000s-20-1/

i don't know what I think the best album of the past decade is. It's hard to know until you actually get a few years beyond. I could easily roll out some 90's bands. Regardless, bands and albums that stand out for me are....

1. Spiritualized - Live at Royal Albert /// Ladies and Gentlemen We are Floating in Space (1997, i know)

2. Underworld - hmmm.... not sure. I'd have to go look. Love underworld though.

3. Luomo - Convivial

4. Arctic Monkeys - first album whatever the fuck it's called that it's not. love it.

5. Radiohead - Kid A, even though i hate to admit it's quite a unique thing.

6. Spoon - God i love spoon. Kill the Moonlight and Ga Ga Ga Ga..... i mean any spoon album really. LOVE spoon.

it's totally impossible to do. this list is paltry. Except for Ladies and Gentlemen, even i think it looks like shit i'm just liking at the moment.