Much love! I'm just stoked to be part of a brand (Vital) that I grew up being such a fan of. We might be small, but I love what we stand for and everyone out there who connects with it.
Jason, I do have to argue a point that came up on the B Practice podcast.. The current race format definitely creates good stories.. Last years champion struggles to qualify, a guy wins one week, DNQ the next.. The names that didn't make the show... Dak overcomes early season issues to a 5th place qualifying run... And those are all before the finals start.. Maybe those stories are not being told in a proper way.. If at all? DH qualifying is about as predictable as the 250 class right now..
Jason, I do have to argue a point that came up on the B Practice podcast.. The current race format definitely creates good stories.. Last years...
Jason, I do have to argue a point that came up on the B Practice podcast.. The current race format definitely creates good stories.. Last years champion struggles to qualify, a guy wins one week, DNQ the next.. The names that didn't make the show... Dak overcomes early season issues to a 5th place qualifying run... And those are all before the finals start.. Maybe those stories are not being told in a proper way.. If at all? DH qualifying is about as predictable as the 250 class right now..
Fair points. Def a lot of stories to grab onto each weekend. Maybe too many? Or maybe some stories that don’t build the overall narrative well? Like is Luca winning and then not making finals at back to back races a good or a bad story, or a sign that the format has some holes in it? I can see arguments for either case.
I’m all for some drama and inconsistency to keep it interesting. I do feel like the current format has me all confused on how I feel about it because it can be a lot to digest before we even go racing.
On the gearbox e-bike topic : one of the larger (not largest) target demographics for e-bikes in general is Dirtbikers and motorcyclist that enjoy expanded access over there traditionally i.c.e. powered two wheelers: these fine folks despise external derailleur drivetrains on three principles : weakness, wear and wear costs, and related maintenance.
Jason, I do have to argue a point that came up on the B Practice podcast.. The current race format definitely creates good stories.. Last years...
Jason, I do have to argue a point that came up on the B Practice podcast.. The current race format definitely creates good stories.. Last years champion struggles to qualify, a guy wins one week, DNQ the next.. The names that didn't make the show... Dak overcomes early season issues to a 5th place qualifying run... And those are all before the finals start.. Maybe those stories are not being told in a proper way.. If at all? DH qualifying is about as predictable as the 250 class right now..
Fair points. Def a lot of stories to grab onto each weekend. Maybe too many? Or maybe some stories that don’t build the overall narrative well...
Fair points. Def a lot of stories to grab onto each weekend. Maybe too many? Or maybe some stories that don’t build the overall narrative well? Like is Luca winning and then not making finals at back to back races a good or a bad story, or a sign that the format has some holes in it? I can see arguments for either case.
I’m all for some drama and inconsistency to keep it interesting. I do feel like the current format has me all confused on how I feel about it because it can be a lot to digest before we even go racing.
You could be right on too many points, but the broadcast can condense them a bit.. The US series does a good job of giving a couple of key stories at the start of the broadcast..
Id rather see the craziness in qualifying than a bunch of people with guaranteed spot just racing for a start time.
I have a possible podcast topic I would like to bring up...
I'm curious about the metrics of suspension quality. When we talk about the quality of suspension on a mountain bike, what are the metrics that we are using to determine that? In the end, is speed the determining factor? How does comfort factor in to the equation? What about capability / what get's absorbed rather than transferred to the rider? IF these are opposing, how does a suspension company determine what to put at the top of the list?
How does the industry reconcile the fact that most mountain bikers probably don't need the suspension products that make you the fastest. Or that most mountain bikers probably don't set their suspension up correctly (I'm looking at you for this one, Lars), or maintain their equipment at the recommended service intervals?
Also, bonus points if you can get Chris Canfield on the podcast to talk about suspension, especially his belief that you should be bottoming out your suspension during every run. I feel like he's a little to honest for his own good, which I think would fit right in on the podcast.
Side note / follow up: Should we be less concerned with bottoming out our suspension with the rise of hydraulic bottom outs? It doesn't feel like we get the same harsh shot through the spine that we used to...
LASTLY
With the rise of adjustable platforms, flip chips and the like, do we think we will ever see things like the dual position air, or the u-turn air springs again? Did these technologies just not function? Where they just a nightmare to service? It seems like now more than ever being able to adjust your fork's travel would be pretty welcome.
U turn or DPA specifically was a bandaid to make bad bikes climb better. Bikes are now good as they are.
I had a dual position air on a 15 Giant Reign and basically never used it. That was after years of using a coil Uturn Pike on the previous bike. And the Giant still wasn't a good bike by today's standards.
Links to new podcast! We had fun chatting about this one. I'm curious what other people's definition is of being a 'core' mountain biker?
Links to new podcast! We had fun chatting about this one. I'm curious what other people's definition is of being a 'core' mountain biker?
these engagement bait titles are gettin good!
the first rule of core club, is you do NOT. TALK. ABOUT core club. jokes aside, ya know being from surf culture the most core thing is inherently the idea of surfing alone, at lesser known beach breaks, especially if the waves aren't even that good. and you're just groveling and out there for yourself, no social element, even when its not convenient.
and there is a large amount of crossover to this concept to MTBing. ya know going to a well known trail center, and riding the trails that are like top ranked on trailforks, with a group of people to socialize with... is totally great but there's nothing inherently core about it. that's just... like a generic enjoyable hobby. there's technically not TOO much separating that from a book club
heh
similar to skating, just going to purpose built skatepark is not inherently seen as core. where as street skating, curb skating, and pool skating (or diy spots) is seen as more core, even more so if you do it alone.
So the narrative is... Are you riding even when it's super inconvenient? Are you riding trails you cut yourself? Or rough cut rake and ride trails? Or lesser known trails that run like crap? And is there ANY evidence that you did so? Did you need the validation of strava or a gopro recording?
To ride completely for yourself, where ONLY you know it happened, and on trails (or jump lines) that most people are avoiding for whatever reason... Is the apotheosis of core. Also if you are a soul skater... Jason, are you an Airborne fan or a Brink fan? lol
It's hard not to center this on your own experience, but I'd say, minimum, if you've made it 3-5 years riding some kind of MTB (CC, Downhill, Enduro, Park, Dirt Jump), and it's your main hobby, you're a core mountain biker.
I've been doing "this" for almost 40 years (with a 6 year (mostly) break from the late 90's through early aughts). First bike had no suspension and cantilevers. Last month, I bought a Heckler e-bike. There have been A LOT of bikes over the years. Up through college, I worked in a shop to pay for bikes. Since then, I have used LBS's for repairs, and occasional bike purchases (though I often by lightly-used bikes, and parts online, honestly).
I ride 2-4 x per week. Gravity-oriented trail-riding, dirt jump, and shuttle downhill. I raced cross-country as a teenager through mid-20s, and downhill / enduro in my early 40s. I think Strava is lame. I follow World Cup racing and some freeride. I've volunteered about a dozen times on trail days.
Anyway, I imagine that qualifies me as "core"...but honestly, I'd never use that term. Sounds like a demographic / marketing thing.
You’re only core if you help to build or maintain trails, otherwise you’re just a person using the trails. Obviously it’s hardcore if you do it all yourself.
Half of why I go to the gym is to make building and maintaining forest trails easier and faster.
I say one way you know you are core if you build frame up (at least some of the time) vs buy a complete bike. Idk why but it seems to me that most of my core friends do that.
The real answer is if you ride as much as you possibly can whether it is alone, with friends, pedaling, bike park, good weather or bad. If you want to ride no matter what you are core. Most important is alone. If you don't ride solo you don't really like riding.
As you get older, the line between kook and core starts to blur. You go along thinking something you're doing is a core mtb move, only to find out later that it's kooky. Of course, vice/versa is true.
As you get older, the line between kook and core starts to blur. You go along thinking something you're doing is a core mtb move, only...
As you get older, the line between kook and core starts to blur. You go along thinking something you're doing is a core mtb move, only to find out later that it's kooky. Of course, vice/versa is true.
a lot of younger kids try hard to look like they're not trying hard.
then you get older and you actually reallydon't care what anyone else thinks.
As you get older, the line between kook and core starts to blur. You go along thinking something you're doing is a core mtb move, only...
As you get older, the line between kook and core starts to blur. You go along thinking something you're doing is a core mtb move, only to find out later that it's kooky. Of course, vice/versa is true.
Finished the pod on my drive home. To define what is core, I propose the following: If you have a vision of what mountain biking is in your head and that shapes the sport for you in a way that you are executing on that vision, then you are a core mountain biker. That leaves room for a large variety of visions within the sport that may not be your thing, but are most definitely rad. For example, I would argue that Nino Schurter, Ben Hildebrand, Jesse Melamed, Phil Atwil, Braden Billinghurst, Payson McElveen and Wyn Masters are all core mountain bikers. Likewise, I would have a hard time saying that some of the kook hammer head 70 year old dudes who ride 7 days a week that can still rip your legs off on their barely maintained niner aren't core.
That's why I think it's about if you have a vision for the sport from your perspective and if that drives you. I think people that are into any aspect of the sport and do it with vision and intention make up the core of the sport. There is room for everyone from shredder groms, uci xc/dh racers, weekend warriors to social riders to be core.
That being said, there are things that are definitely not core. Not trying to gate keep here... but just because you meet the definition above, does not mean you can't miss the memo and fail to read the room. Examples: Bluetooth Speakers while riding, knee pads over pants and bell removable chin bar helmets (i'm kidding... maybe).
Oh one last thing... maybe I like this definition of core because I came up with it and as a male, I am overly confident my idea is the true best. But on a serious note, this definition applies to aspects of the sport beyond appearance or . For example, I think having a vision, or strong opinion about frame geometry that runs deeper then head tube angle, is a core perspective on geo.
Finished the pod on my drive home. To define what is core, I propose the following: If you have a vision of what mountain biking is...
Finished the pod on my drive home. To define what is core, I propose the following: If you have a vision of what mountain biking is in your head and that shapes the sport for you in a way that you are executing on that vision, then you are a core mountain biker. That leaves room for a large variety of visions within the sport that may not be your thing, but are most definitely rad. For example, I would argue that Nino Schurter, Ben Hildebrand, Jesse Melamed, Phil Atwil, Braden Billinghurst, Payson McElveen and Wyn Masters are all core mountain bikers. Likewise, I would have a hard time saying that some of the kook hammer head 70 year old dudes who ride 7 days a week that can still rip your legs off on their barely maintained niner aren't core.
That's why I think it's about if you have a vision for the sport from your perspective and if that drives you. I think people that are into any aspect of the sport and do it with vision and intention make up the core of the sport. There is room for everyone from shredder groms, uci xc/dh racers, weekend warriors to social riders to be core.
That being said, there are things that are definitely not core. Not trying to gate keep here... but just because you meet the definition above, does not mean you can't miss the memo and fail to read the room. Examples: Bluetooth Speakers while riding, knee pads over pants and bell removable chin bar helmets (i'm kidding... maybe).
Oh one last thing... maybe I like this definition of core because I came up with it and as a male, I am overly confident my idea is the true best. But on a serious note, this definition applies to aspects of the sport beyond appearance or . For example, I think having a vision, or strong opinion about frame geometry that runs deeper then head tube angle, is a core perspective on geo.
I think you could extend this to any biker who is still looking for personal improvement. Any one who is dedicating actual effort into getting better, whatever that may look like, is core. I don't think you have core without progression. If you've lifted weights, done an interval, learned to wrench, gone to a yoga class, drank a nasty ass protean smoothie or any of that for the raw sake of "getting better" at biking, you are core.
Core doesn't as where you are, it asks where you're going.
In order to retain maximum coreness of the Vital community, I will be handing out jorts to everyone. Please state your size when you get to the table. We will be adding 10 to the number you give and handing you a complimentary shoe lace to use as a belt. Thank you.
If someone thinks of themselves as being a mountainbiker first and foremost, regardless of how many sports or hobbies they engage in or if they log more hours in another activity, does that make them core?
Much love! I'm just stoked to be part of a brand (Vital) that I grew up being such a fan of. We might be small, but I love what we stand for and everyone out there who connects with it.
Jason, I do have to argue a point that came up on the B Practice podcast.. The current race format definitely creates good stories.. Last years champion struggles to qualify, a guy wins one week, DNQ the next.. The names that didn't make the show... Dak overcomes early season issues to a 5th place qualifying run... And those are all before the finals start.. Maybe those stories are not being told in a proper way.. If at all? DH qualifying is about as predictable as the 250 class right now..
Being honest?
Love j shredd, Lars & bars and the lord spom, all together.
It’s a good pod ,
Fair points. Def a lot of stories to grab onto each weekend. Maybe too many? Or maybe some stories that don’t build the overall narrative well? Like is Luca winning and then not making finals at back to back races a good or a bad story, or a sign that the format has some holes in it? I can see arguments for either case.
I’m all for some drama and inconsistency to keep it interesting. I do feel like the current format has me all confused on how I feel about it because it can be a lot to digest before we even go racing.
On the gearbox e-bike topic : one of the larger (not largest) target demographics for e-bikes in general is Dirtbikers and motorcyclist that enjoy expanded access over there traditionally i.c.e. powered two wheelers: these fine folks despise external derailleur drivetrains on three principles : weakness, wear and wear costs, and related maintenance.
It’s just one point on the venn diagram
You could be right on too many points, but the broadcast can condense them a bit.. The US series does a good job of giving a couple of key stories at the start of the broadcast..
Id rather see the craziness in qualifying than a bunch of people with guaranteed spot just racing for a start time.
I have a possible podcast topic I would like to bring up...
I'm curious about the metrics of suspension quality. When we talk about the quality of suspension on a mountain bike, what are the metrics that we are using to determine that? In the end, is speed the determining factor? How does comfort factor in to the equation? What about capability / what get's absorbed rather than transferred to the rider? IF these are opposing, how does a suspension company determine what to put at the top of the list?
How does the industry reconcile the fact that most mountain bikers probably don't need the suspension products that make you the fastest. Or that most mountain bikers probably don't set their suspension up correctly (I'm looking at you for this one, Lars), or maintain their equipment at the recommended service intervals?
Also, bonus points if you can get Chris Canfield on the podcast to talk about suspension, especially his belief that you should be bottoming out your suspension during every run. I feel like he's a little to honest for his own good, which I think would fit right in on the podcast.
Side note / follow up: Should we be less concerned with bottoming out our suspension with the rise of hydraulic bottom outs? It doesn't feel like we get the same harsh shot through the spine that we used to...
LASTLY
With the rise of adjustable platforms, flip chips and the like, do we think we will ever see things like the dual position air, or the u-turn air springs again? Did these technologies just not function? Where they just a nightmare to service? It seems like now more than ever being able to adjust your fork's travel would be pretty welcome.
U turn or DPA specifically was a bandaid to make bad bikes climb better. Bikes are now good as they are.
I had a dual position air on a 15 Giant Reign and basically never used it. That was after years of using a coil Uturn Pike on the previous bike. And the Giant still wasn't a good bike by today's standards.
Maybe not the right podcast, but Dak's backyard visit from Carson Brown is live!
Not on homepage yet, but new episode is out.
FYI: Type is Fedko’s clothing line. It’s more streetwear than performance/riding clothing.
Links to new podcast! We had fun chatting about this one. I'm curious what other people's definition is of being a 'core' mountain biker?
these engagement bait titles are gettin good!
the first rule of core club, is you do NOT. TALK. ABOUT core club. jokes aside, ya know being from surf culture the most core thing is inherently the idea of surfing alone, at lesser known beach breaks, especially if the waves aren't even that good. and you're just groveling and out there for yourself, no social element, even when its not convenient.
and there is a large amount of crossover to this concept to MTBing. ya know going to a well known trail center, and riding the trails that are like top ranked on trailforks, with a group of people to socialize with... is totally great but there's nothing inherently core about it. that's just... like a generic enjoyable hobby. there's technically not TOO much separating that from a book club
heh
similar to skating, just going to purpose built skatepark is not inherently seen as core. where as street skating, curb skating, and pool skating (or diy spots) is seen as more core, even more so if you do it alone.
So the narrative is... Are you riding even when it's super inconvenient? Are you riding trails you cut yourself? Or rough cut rake and ride trails? Or lesser known trails that run like crap? And is there ANY evidence that you did so? Did you need the validation of strava or a gopro recording?
To ride completely for yourself, where ONLY you know it happened, and on trails (or jump lines) that most people are avoiding for whatever reason... Is the apotheosis of core. Also if you are a soul skater... Jason, are you an Airborne fan or a Brink fan? lol
It's not specifically MTBing, but if you want to witness the utter peak and purified essence of C O R E, look no further...
Shirtless Keith, from Palos Verdes: https://palosverdesmagazine.com/meet-shirtless-keith/
Too bad this was not discussed with Aggy a few years ago, he would have made a few more bucks.
It's hard not to center this on your own experience, but I'd say, minimum, if you've made it 3-5 years riding some kind of MTB (CC, Downhill, Enduro, Park, Dirt Jump), and it's your main hobby, you're a core mountain biker.
I've been doing "this" for almost 40 years (with a 6 year (mostly) break from the late 90's through early aughts). First bike had no suspension and cantilevers. Last month, I bought a Heckler e-bike. There have been A LOT of bikes over the years. Up through college, I worked in a shop to pay for bikes. Since then, I have used LBS's for repairs, and occasional bike purchases (though I often by lightly-used bikes, and parts online, honestly).
I ride 2-4 x per week. Gravity-oriented trail-riding, dirt jump, and shuttle downhill. I raced cross-country as a teenager through mid-20s, and downhill / enduro in my early 40s. I think Strava is lame. I follow World Cup racing and some freeride. I've volunteered about a dozen times on trail days.
Anyway, I imagine that qualifies me as "core"...but honestly, I'd never use that term. Sounds like a demographic / marketing thing.
Flats = CORE
Change my mind.
You’re only core if you help to build or maintain trails, otherwise you’re just a person using the trails. Obviously it’s hardcore if you do it all yourself.
Half of why I go to the gym is to make building and maintaining forest trails easier and faster.
I say one way you know you are core if you build frame up (at least some of the time) vs buy a complete bike. Idk why but it seems to me that most of my core friends do that.
The real answer is if you ride as much as you possibly can whether it is alone, with friends, pedaling, bike park, good weather or bad. If you want to ride no matter what you are core. Most important is alone. If you don't ride solo you don't really like riding.
Remember when everyone thought Palmer wasn't training? But, those in the know would tell you that guy never showed up at a racer unprepared..
core is if you do it for intrinsic reasons.
Beware the guy at the group ride who claims to be coming off the couch.
As you get older, the line between kook and core starts to blur. You go along thinking something you're doing is a core mtb move, only to find out later that it's kooky. Of course, vice/versa is true.
I've been dropped by that guy a lot. Rude.
a lot of younger kids try hard to look like they're not trying hard.
then you get older and you actually really don't care what anyone else thinks.
i'm lost on this one. would have to explain further.
are we implying kids in jorts and cotton tees takes more effort than dudes in tech gear with full kits of pads and bag accessories etc orrr
are we implying that calling the tryhard kids tryhards is a part of not caring what other people think
Finished the pod on my drive home. To define what is core, I propose the following: If you have a vision of what mountain biking is in your head and that shapes the sport for you in a way that you are executing on that vision, then you are a core mountain biker. That leaves room for a large variety of visions within the sport that may not be your thing, but are most definitely rad. For example, I would argue that Nino Schurter, Ben Hildebrand, Jesse Melamed, Phil Atwil, Braden Billinghurst, Payson McElveen and Wyn Masters are all core mountain bikers. Likewise, I would have a hard time saying that some of the kook hammer head 70 year old dudes who ride 7 days a week that can still rip your legs off on their barely maintained niner aren't core.
That's why I think it's about if you have a vision for the sport from your perspective and if that drives you. I think people that are into any aspect of the sport and do it with vision and intention make up the core of the sport. There is room for everyone from shredder groms, uci xc/dh racers, weekend warriors to social riders to be core.
That being said, there are things that are definitely not core. Not trying to gate keep here... but just because you meet the definition above, does not mean you can't miss the memo and fail to read the room. Examples: Bluetooth Speakers while riding, knee pads over pants and bell removable chin bar helmets (i'm kidding... maybe).
Oh one last thing... maybe I like this definition of core because I came up with it and as a male, I am overly confident my idea is the true best. But on a serious note, this definition applies to aspects of the sport beyond appearance or . For example, I think having a vision, or strong opinion about frame geometry that runs deeper then head tube angle, is a core perspective on geo.
I think you could extend this to any biker who is still looking for personal improvement. Any one who is dedicating actual effort into getting better, whatever that may look like, is core. I don't think you have core without progression. If you've lifted weights, done an interval, learned to wrench, gone to a yoga class, drank a nasty ass protean smoothie or any of that for the raw sake of "getting better" at biking, you are core.
Core doesn't as where you are, it asks where you're going.
This conversation is getting VERY not core.
In order to retain maximum coreness of the Vital community, I will be handing out jorts to everyone. Please state your size when you get to the table. We will be adding 10 to the number you give and handing you a complimentary shoe lace to use as a belt. Thank you.
If someone thinks of themselves as being a mountainbiker first and foremost, regardless of how many sports or hobbies they engage in or if they log more hours in another activity, does that make them core?
I remember Semenuk being quite specific about MTB not being very core in comparison to skate or BMX: https://youtu.be/rncB849eguA?is=joDDAfjFMJo2sWPR
Which makes me wonder, in terms of core, Semenuk:
The rider: very core
The edits: pretty core
People who say he is their favourite rider: usually not core
Post a reply to: Vital’s Bikes: Unaffiliated Podcast - Community Conversation