Mountain Bikes · Public discussion

angles

Matthew Paterso · 2003-12-22T00:00:44+00:00

Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork! http://www.pinkbike.com/modules/photo/?op=view&image=141064 eh, WTF? -- Matt Fear of a flat planet

Started by Matthew Paterso · 22 December 2003 · Last activity 25 December 2003 · 16 posts · 1,418 views

← Back to Mountain Bikes

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postanglesMatthew Paterso · 22 Dec 2003 02 / This pagePosts 1–16Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #16Squid-In-Traini · 25 Dec 2003

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section: Mountain Bikes
Published: 22 December 2003
Last activity: 25 December 2003
Original author: Matthew Paterso
Posts: 16
Discussion status: Public discussion
Total views: 1,418
Views / 30 days: 0
Topics: Frame geometry

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Original post
Matthew Paterso
Archived post

22 December 2003, 00:00 UTC #1

Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
eh, WTF?
--
Matt
Fear of a flat planet

Report
Dave W
Archived post

22 December 2003, 00:00 UTC #2

Matthew Paterson <[email hidden]> had this to say
"]news:[email hidden]
Quoted message said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
eh, WTF?
Wow, dig that angle. And Yes, Mr. Wheeler, it's an SS. And why not, you don't need multiple gears to
do shuttles.

Report
Michael Dart
Archived post

22 December 2003, 00:00 UTC #3

"Matthew Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
eh, WTF?
Oh, that's messed up! WTF is right.
Mike

Report
Jon Bond
Archived post

22 December 2003, 02:00 UTC #4

"Matthew Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
eh, WTF?
--
Matt
Fear of a flat planet
Yikes. Is that a 24" front wheel w/ a 26" rear? Maybe its meant to have a 26" front and 24" rear? Or
even just a 26/26?
Not sure if that'd account for everything, that bike is just fugly.
Jon Bond

Report
Tcmedara
Archived post

22 December 2003, 02:00 UTC #5

Jon Bond said:
"Matthew Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
eh, WTF?
--
Matt
Fear of a flat planet
Yikes. Is that a 24" front wheel w/ a 26" rear? Maybe its meant to have a 26" front and 24" rear?
Or even just a 26/26?
Not sure if that'd account for everything, that bike is just fugly.
Jon Bond
I think you've figured it out, Jon. Even though its set up with disks, it looks like the brake
bosses on the fork are actually even with the top of the tire tread. Somethin' just ain't right
there, for sure. Of course, wouldn't a 26' tire actually slacken the head tube even more? And
that top tube is already pretty sloped, I can't imagine it with a bigger front tire. That thing
is just scary!
Tom

Report
Miles Todd
Archived post

22 December 2003, 06:00 UTC #6

tcmedara said:
Jon Bond said:
"Matthew Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
eh, WTF?
--
Matt
Fear of a flat planet
Yikes. Is that a 24" front wheel w/ a 26" rear? Maybe its meant to have a 26" front and 24" rear?
Or even just a 26/26?
Not sure if that'd account for everything, that bike is just fugly.
Jon Bond
I think you've figured it out, Jon. Even though its set up with disks, it looks like the brake
bosses on the fork are actually even with the top of the tire tread. Somethin' just ain't right
there, for sure. Of course, wouldn't a 26' tire actually slacken the head tube even more? And
that top tube is already pretty sloped, I can't imagine it with a bigger front tire. That thing
is just scary!
Tom
There are other goofy things going on. I found this photo of the frame
Quoted message said:
schlickjumper.deforum1 158.htm
and it doesn't look so odd at all. Some perspective trickery (maybe a box camerawith the lens
tilted?) is screwing up the image.
Miles

Report
Miles Todd
Archived post

22 December 2003, 06:00 UTC #7

miles todd said:
tcmedara said:
Jon Bond said:
"Matthew Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
>
> pinkbike.comphoto
>
> eh, WTF?
>
> --
> Matt
>
> Fear of a flat planet
Yikes. Is that a 24" front wheel w/ a 26" rear? Maybe its meant to have a 26" front and 24"
rear? Or even just a 26/26?
Not sure if that'd account for everything, that bike is just fugly.
Jon Bond
I think you've figured it out, Jon. Even though its set up with disks, it looks like the brake
bosses on the fork are actually even with the top of the tire tread. Somethin' just ain't right
there, for sure. Of course, wouldn't a 26' tire actually slacken the head tube even more? And
that top tube is already pretty sloped, I can't imagine it with a bigger front tire. That thing
is just scary!
Tom
There are other goofy things going on. I found this photo of the frame
Quoted message said:
schlickjumper.deforum1 158.htm
and it doesn't look so odd at all. Some perspective trickery (maybe a box camerawith the lens
tilted?) is screwing up the image.
Miles
Here's the manufacturer's site:
Quoted message said:
alutech-bikes.comdduinfo.html
Miles

Report
Jon Bond
Archived post

22 December 2003, 11:00 UTC #8

Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
>>
>> pinkbike.comphoto
>>
>> eh, WTF?
>>
>> --
>> Matt
>>
>> Fear of a flat planet
>
>
> Yikes. Is that a 24" front wheel w/ a 26" rear? Maybe its meant to have a 26" front and 24"
> rear? Or even just a 26/26?
>
> Not sure if that'd account for everything, that bike is just fugly.
>
> Jon Bond
I think you've figured it out, Jon. Even though its set up with disks, it looks like the brake
bosses on the fork are actually even with the top

of
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
the tire tread. Somethin' just ain't right there, for sure. Of

course,
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
wouldn't a 26' tire actually slacken the head tube even more? And that top tube is already
pretty sloped, I can't imagine it with a bigger front tire. That thing is just scary!
Tom
There are other goofy things going on. I found this photo of the frame
Quoted message said:
schlickjumper.deforum1 158.htm
and it doesn't look so odd at all. Some perspective trickery (maybe a box camerawith the lens
tilted?) is screwing up the image.
Miles
Here's the manufacturer's site:
Quoted message said:
alutech-bikes.comdduinfo.html
Miles
Maybe somebody ran it into a wall really fast? That'd explain the odd reflections up near the head
tube too....
The picture after the original (number wise) looks right, but its taken at a 45 so its hard to tell.
Either way that head angle is SUPER steep! Either that or maybe the person built it for huge drops
at no speed, but it still looks stupid.
Jon Bond

Report
Dave Adnum
Archived post

22 December 2003, 20:00 UTC #9

"Jon Bond" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
>>>
>>> pinkbike.comphoto
>>>
>>> eh, WTF?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> Fear of a flat planet
>>
>>
>> Yikes. Is that a 24" front wheel w/ a 26" rear? Maybe its meant to have a 26" front and 24"
>> rear? Or even just a 26/26?
>>
>> Not sure if that'd account for everything, that bike is just fugly.
>>
>> Jon Bond
>
>
>
> I think you've figured it out, Jon. Even though its set up with disks, it looks like the
> brake bosses on the fork are actually even with the

top
Quoted message said:
of
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> the tire tread. Somethin' just ain't right there, for sure. Of

course,
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> wouldn't a 26' tire actually slacken the head tube even more? And that top tube is already
> pretty sloped, I can't imagine it with a bigger front tire. That thing is just scary!
>
> Tom
>
>
There are other goofy things going on. I found this photo of the

frame
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:

> schlickjumper.deforum1 158.htm
and it doesn't look so odd at all. Some perspective trickery (maybe a box camerawith the lens
tilted?) is screwing up the image.
Miles
Here's the manufacturer's site:
Quoted message said:
alutech-bikes.comdduinfo.html
Miles
Maybe somebody ran it into a wall really fast? That'd explain the odd reflections up near the head
tube too....
The picture after the original (number wise) looks right, but its taken at

a
Quoted message said:
45 so its hard to tell. Either way that head angle is SUPER steep!

Either
Quoted message said:
that or maybe the person built it for huge drops at no speed, but it still looks stupid.
Jon Bond
even doing huge drops at no speed .. at that head angle the front tyre would end up smashing into
the downtube unless he somehow got that super monster fork limited to 8 inches of travel while
retaining its 12" travel extension... to me it jus looks like the headtube was (most likely) torn
off from running that size fork on the bike and then rewelded (poorly) at the wrong angle so the
bike could be shown complete... i dunno tho,, either way.. if you got full squish out of that fork
the wheel would end up hittin the downtube.
dave

Report
Squid-In-Traini
Archived post

23 December 2003, 04:00 UTC #10

"Matthew Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
Photoshop.
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

Report
Bomba
Archived post

23 December 2003, 15:00 UTC #11

Squid-in-Training said:
Quoted message said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
Photoshop.
That was my first thought, but it's difficult to tell with the lighting. Could just be a crumpled
down / head tube, but it's certainly not 'unmodified'.

Report
Slacker
Archived post

23 December 2003, 22:00 UTC #12

Matthew Paterson said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
eh, WTF?
And yet another one pinkbike.comphoto
--
Slacker

Report
Matthew Paterso
Archived post

24 December 2003, 00:06 UTC #13

Matthew Paterson said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
More fork madness :
pinkbike.comphoto
--
Matt
Fear of a flat planet

Report
Matthew Paterso
Archived post

24 December 2003, 00:06 UTC #14

Slacker said:
And yet another one pinkbike.comphoto
My god. Why do you need that much travel? You dont! Not even MX bikes have that much, and they do
150 foot gaps!
Why, why....WHY!
--
Matt
Fear of a flat planet

Report
Sorni
Archived post

24 December 2003, 00:06 UTC #15

Matthew Paterson said:
More fork madness :
pinkbike.comphoto
As the virgin said to the late John Holmes: AIN'T NO F-in' WAY!
Bill "useable travel?" S.

Report
Squid-In-Traini
Archived post

25 December 2003, 04:00 UTC #16

"bomba" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Squid-in-Training said:
Quoted message said:
Saw this, and I just had to share it. Looks like its been built (wrong) for that fork!
pinkbike.comphoto
Photoshop.
That was my first thought, but it's difficult to tell with the lighting. Could just be a crumpled
down / head tube, but it's certainly not 'unmodified'.
Drawing a vertical line at the headtube, you see fishy stuff, especially near the light.
I say if not PS, then crumpled, but then again that has got to be one strong fork 😉
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

Report

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.

Jump through the discussion

What we know about this thread

Continue through CyclingForums

Active in this thread