Question of the Month

William:
The answer to your question is threefold. First even if it doesn’t appear to be doing damage to the corners or switchbacks on your trail, damage takes place each and every time we lock up a wheel. How so? Well have you ever grabbed a handful of brake on a paved surface, heard a squealing or dragging sound then noticed a long black trail of rubber left behind? That’s because when a wheel becomes locked up, something’s got to give until the momentum of the object in motion comes to rest. With the road, it’s the rubber of your tires that give first hence the resulting skid mark. In dirt (especially soft consistency), it’s likely that the ground will give before the rubber of your tires. Rather than shed a trail of spent rubber, a skidding mountain bike will instead drag pieces of the ground with it. Repeat the process enough and ruts form.

On public trails and especially those built by volunteers, this practice is just poor manners. Sure the accidental lockup is to be expected (like say if a deer were to dart out in front of you) but repeated skidding to clear corners is damaging to the terrain and will require frequent repair whether you acknowledge this damage or not. Mountain bikers are at constant odds with environmental groups who love to cite terrain damage in their argument against us- there is no reason to accommodate their agendas by proving them correct.

Secondly there is the issue of control. Realize that the moment a wheel stops spinning, the tire’s treads, which are designed to function in accordance with rotation, are now becoming nothing but rudders. It’s because of this that simple functions like steering become nearly impossible while locked up. It may look like a rider who rails a corner with the rear wheel locked up is in control, but in actuality he’s along for the ride the moment that tire ceases to rotate.

Finally, and perhaps the least of concern to others, is that frequent skidding is a good way to prematurely wear out tires. If none of the other reasons presented convince you to rethink your turning methods, hopefully the hit to your wallet in having to replace your rubber twice as often will.

KC:
Good question, jump bikes, urban, park or stunt-specific mountain bike models do look an awful lot like their BMX cousins. The truth is their role is pretty interchangeable as well but we find a few advantages to going the mountain bike route and these are: Larger wheels, a suspension fork, and usually some gearing. Of course, none of these traits are set in stone so to speak (as in it is possible to build up a fully rigid model, run smaller hoops, or convert to single speed if so desired) they do represent the primary differences in choosing a mountain bike over a BMX-specific model.

In the urban setting stunts typically consist of curb hops, manuals, and drops to concrete- exactly the type of conditions that favor a few inches of stiff suspension, powerful disc brakes, and larger wheels to clear cleanly. We say go for it. You won’t regret the decision.

Matt:

Been there done that! Actually a company does make exactly what you seek only rather than a complex mechanism like the one found on your car, the answer is a simple rubber strap that pulls the brake lever toward the grip. It’s aptly called the Bike Brake and comes in nine colors to match whatever sheen comes from your Intense’s frame. They can be reached at www.bikebrake.com

Bresson:

The trouble here is that many of our specific gripes had more to do with the spec of the borrowed bike we reviewed then the characteristics (or flaws) present in the frame itself. It’s a bit of a different story if we’re looking at a complete bike that will be spec’ed the same for everybody. In that instance, it’s easy for us to say something like “the fork is simply too soft for this chassis” or “the stock stem is far too long, replace it with a shorter unit with increased rise for sharper handling).

In this case, the specs that didn’t tickle our fancy weren’t the fault of Turner so much as they were the component choices of the friend of ours who let us borrow the bike. Being several inches taller than the average height of our test riders, we realized that were we to order the bike for ourselves, the spec sheet would read quite differently. As such we tailored our review to focus on the characteristics of the frame rather than the build. Which leads us to our next letter…

Wayne:

Indeed, the bike displays very impressive climbing prowess. As we responded to Bresson above, the trouble with reviewing a custom bike like this is that we’re forced to evaluate it with the spec sheet of the person who purchased it (which is why we prefer testing units directly from the factory, though this option isn’t always possible).
In this case, you are absolutely correct in suggesting a shorter stem to remedy the lengthiness of the top tube. Again though, this wasn’t our bike to make component swaps on at will.
Additionally, and in keeping with the theme of testing the frame rather than the build, the sensation of leading with your head is due to the reach to the bars. Unlike most contemporary All-Mountain designs, which tend to favor an upright riding position with the rider’s weight fairly centered in the chassis, the 5-Spot retains the trick of yesteryear’s hot cross country set-up in that it stretches its pilot pretty far over the top tube while distributing the bulk of the rider’s weight bias over the rear. It works great for sprinting but definitely compromises descending prowess.