Multimedia

Author Topic: Ugly Parts  (Read 37407 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline medusa.cascade

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 261
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #30 on: July 27, 2015, 04:00:24 AM »
Absolutely 2 for 1 in this image

Offline Dr. Lucien Sanchez

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #31 on: July 27, 2015, 06:08:51 AM »
Shouldn't that wheel be cross laced?

Offline KillSeth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2002
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #32 on: July 27, 2015, 10:27:41 AM »
I wonder if the failure of both the MTT and the BPE led to the current state of Animal (i.e. seemingly dormant).

Offline metalbmxer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1723
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #33 on: July 27, 2015, 12:16:42 PM »
I wonder if the failure of both the MTT and the BPE led to the current state of Animal (i.e. seemingly dormant).

Good point
The tire mold alone is like $20,000?
And they put a lot of R&D into those pedals which surely wasn't cheap

Offline JFax

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2366
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #34 on: July 27, 2015, 01:32:53 PM »
I remember reading an interview with the guy who designed that tyre. I remember thinking that it looked so cool.

Then when I finally saw it on some street kids bike I though that it was waaaaay too big for anyone to seriously ride.

Surely enough the kid was off it within a few weeks
Quote from: andreasTHN;1991264
He is so good that he probably doesnt have a serial number on his frame, just a cheat code...

Offline Zoidberg

  • Doctor
  • Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 6605
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #35 on: July 27, 2015, 03:01:20 PM »
tripod seats and coloured tyres are the worst offenders

Offline DontcallmeKenneth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #36 on: July 27, 2015, 03:18:31 PM »
The mtt would have been nice if it was a 2.25 not whatever size it was as well as the 2.1.
I hope animal is just redoing the line. And not out for good. Social media would suggest theyre finished, but the addition of new riders suggest otherwise.

Offline jtr

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
  • former eraserhead
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #37 on: July 27, 2015, 04:23:17 PM »
they should have sticked with the old tires they've made. the asm and the glh used to be such good tires and today would still be. sadly no chance of getting your hands on those.
maybe a bigger version like 2.25 of the asm for the street kids and they're good to go.
this mtt is the most rediculous shit i've seen in a long time

Offline dude...

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2264
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #38 on: July 27, 2015, 06:54:16 PM »
mtt is a prime offender, it could be improved dramatically if the tread was shallower i think
this year i am going to have sex and it will be awesome

Offline MilkyWilky

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 367
  • www.marcsist.com
    • View Profile
    • Marcsist
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #39 on: July 28, 2015, 02:29:35 AM »

Lincoln stems look rad, fuck you :P



That looks goooood with the sunken topcap, Spev!
I think it can be kind of limiting to take view of a single style or sensibility towards what is a good looking or bad looking part. From where I'm sitting, the super generic and typical parts are ugly. So then everybody ends up making near-clones to satisfy the hive mind, that's not a world I want to live in.

That being said I own an Elementary, a Lincoln, Director and a convertable post. And I like em'.


Offline meathead

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #40 on: July 28, 2015, 05:10:30 AM »
all this hate for the mtt, i love mine , had 3 now , 2 2.35 or what ever they was befor i went back to brakes now running the smaller 2.1 on the front , never failed me,unlike the green glh's hahahaha!

Offline ediotism

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #41 on: September 09, 2015, 12:04:56 AM »
Agreed. If you need softer landings than "2.25 at 50psi then you're doing something wrong.

landing flat is now a style

Offline ediotism

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #42 on: September 09, 2015, 12:07:56 AM »
Absolutely 2 for 1 in this image


what's with the base of that peg?? it almost looks like the owner has a 5" peg and think "hmmmmph this is not long enough, i need extenders"

Offline Bunky

  • Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges!
  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 5747
    • View Profile
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #43 on: September 09, 2015, 12:36:07 PM »
Shouldn't that wheel be cross laced?

Yehp.  I've seen a couple of these rims laced up wrong like this...

You can see from this picture how much angle it puts on the spoke near the nipple when it's laced wrong. 
Quote from: G
this website is essentially an irrelevant back-water of the internet

Offline slvtn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3224
    • View Profile
    • tumblr
Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #44 on: September 12, 2015, 04:39:27 AM »


I really really really hate the look of these new 2.4 or above tires. It just looks ridiculous. Why do you need bigger tires for softer landings when you know damn well that the majority of your spot is a foot tall ledge.

Yes. Even the mountainbike industry learned that anything bigger than 2,3" (maybe 2,5" for the worst downhill tracks) is quite useless. And while they now fancy tanwalls and fatbikes, BMX is now jumping on the 2,6" gazzaloddi train and makes it even worse with that fuckin colours.
I couldn\'t tell if she was wet or the pasta was just beyond al-dente.

Bikeguide.org - Bike maintenance for BMX'ers

Re: Ugly Parts
« Reply #44 on: September 12, 2015, 04:39:27 AM »

 

-->

Tell them " Sheepdog sent you", for a little something special

Click this image for a little something special
Hello