Jump to content

Indy

Member
  • Content Count

    6,739
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9
  • Country

    United States

Indy last won the day on April 26 2019

Indy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,178 Excellent

About Indy

  • Rank
    Highly educated redneck
  • Birthday November 19

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Further South that I used to be
  • Interests
    Graham & Finley

Profile Fields

  • Bike(s)
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

3,018 profile views
  1. Yeah, this is compensated by your longer travel bike setups running a little more rake to compensate for the faster handling as your rake decreases under compression. And that is the problem with this fork design, you would need a frame designed around it for it to work effectively. So while the fork is expensive, to get the benefit out of it, you also need a frame designed around it, which will also be expensive due to the limited production of it. And even with shorter travel, you still have an increase in wheelbase that is going adversely affect the bike. I like the design, but it causes as many problems as it is trying to solve while significantly increasing the cost. So that doesn't work in my book.
  2. With it stuck out that far, think about what is happening when you turn the handlebars though. It ends up being more radical on the handling than just a raked out tube angle because of how much it will move bike when you turn. Plus you are extending your wheelbase which is going to affect handling and on a FS bike, your rear shock performance since the entire rear shock design and based off a certain wheelbase and approximate weight distribution (which is also affected since pushing the front tire out and lengthening the wheelbase will increase the load on the rear suspension). That's my quick off the top of my head evaluation anyways.
  3. With the way that fork is raked out, that thing has to make handling horrible.
  4. Not really, she looks nothing like those posted above.
  5. From a MTB standpoint, if they could make them cost effective, they are the ultimate in possibility as the tire/suspension possibilities.
  6. These have probably been the closest to getting it right, but still not there. They breaking down of the rubber spokes over time seems to be the issue and the open, exposed design just makes that worse as dirt and rocks get in the spokes. A lot of people really wanted these to be good. They are better than a solid rubber tire, but at the cost, solid rubber wins if puncture resistance is your primary concern.
  7. Ride quality (yes it matters on farm equipment) is less than satisfactory. They get torn up and are extremely expensive to replace. They do have issues with mud getting packed into them, that causes wear issues and ride issues. I think there is more than that too, but the ones I knew that got tractors with them, ended up paying for new rims and regular tires, which was also cheaper than replacing these.
  8. I know some farmers who have been less than thrilled with these on farm equipment.
  9. Indy

    Do you fear death?

    Nope, I hear she's pretty cool
  10. Indy

    This is beautiful..

    Either way, I'd say the video seemed about 6 minutes to long to me.
  11. Indy

    This is beautiful..

    While moving and doing stuff or just sitting there?
  12. Indy

    This is beautiful..

    Yeah, and she was also supposedly under water for about 5 minutes. Yeah, not CGI at all, sure.
  13. No clue what the hell is going on, but can't stop watching or laughing.
×
×
  • Create New...