# The problems with MTBs?



## Jon George (12 Sep 2018)

I've recently refurbished my #2 CX bike (chainset upgrade/shifters/35mm tyres) and been enjoying a bit of off-roading along nearby Bridleways and Byways in Suffolk. (Steep learning curve, but immense fun!) Now, It's a great bike to ride on the gravel and dirt trails, but I can easily envisage that come the rain, I'd probably be better with a MTB with disc brakes. Which, therein lies the problem: as Donald Rumsfeld once alluded to, it's the unknown unknowns that are concerning me.
I've read the helpful sticky at the top of this tread, but what else should I be thinking about? Will I need a whole new toolkit? What are they like to ride on-road to get anywhere useful off-road? Will I need to think about a roof-rack?
My LBS has a Saracen Mantra MST Team Hardtail for £600 which seems a decent entry-level bike (like the one in the link), but any advice on other things to consider about this prospective N+1 would be most welcome. 
https://www.tredz.co.uk/.Saracen-Mantra-MST-Team-Mountain-Bike-2018-Hardtail-MTB_121205.htm


----------



## Crackle (12 Sep 2018)

Tyres today are a lot better than yesteryear when an off road tyre just felt draggy on the road. So you can do road miles, without too much extra effort. The only thing with that Saracen is the Suntour XCM's. They're not great. The adjustment on them will do virtually nothing, the response is pretty poor and they weigh a lot. I'd do my very best not to buy a bike with Suntour forks or if you do, consider them your first upgrade if mtn biking sticks.

The Calibre range in Go Outdoors was always well specced for the price and still is. Rockshox forks, Deore componentry, well worth a look at

https://www.gooutdoors.co.uk/calibre-line-20-mountain-bike-p414110


----------



## I like Skol (12 Sep 2018)

Maybe you are over thinking this? IMO you are fine as you are for bridleways and by-ways. MTBs are for rougher stuff with rocks, jumps and steps IMO and most things that people might initially think of as MTB terrain can easily be ridden on a CX type bike with a little attention and careful choice of gear and line. In fact it can be immensely satisfying riding past a clutch of floundering full suss MTBs on your (what looks to them) 'road bike'


----------



## Spiderweb (12 Sep 2018)

As @I like Skol said, try and avoid Suntour forks, they are cheap but not cheerful!
Have a look at Pauls Cycles they always have some good deals, this Cube has Rockshox air forks, far superior to the Suntour you mentioned. A great buy at £599.
https://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m1b0s155p8406/CUBE-ATTENTION-SL-29-2017


----------



## MichaelW2 (12 Sep 2018)

MTBs will easify your ride, reducing the amount of skill you require and make it less of a challenge. That may be acceptable in steeper parts of the Alps, but we are talking Suffolk bridlepaths. I have ridden offroad with 28mm slicks in winter and it sometimes gets a bit tricky and is not as quick as an MTB. It is just too much bother finding an Alp to test myself so I make do with an unsuitable bike.
Back in the olden days, road racers used to ride on roads that were not surfaced. No one called it off roading.


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2018)

Try your cx bike in the conditions you fear. If you die in a horrible manner, then your fears are borne out and you should get a disc brakes bike forthwith.

If you live, which you will, then carry on as you are and stop fretting.


----------



## Cycleops (12 Sep 2018)

If you looking for a MTB then Decathlon are hard to beat for VfM.
https://www.decathlon.co.uk/rockrider-560-mountain-bike-275-black-red-id_8364715.html
My faves are 90's rigids, Gumtree is awash with them and they're cheap as chips. Ideal if you want to dip a toe.


----------



## pawl (12 Sep 2018)

Oh dear gone are the days that my one bike I rode what was called rough stuff canal paths.Derbyshire dales club runs and TT,s. Changed the wheels for tubs for theTT.Otherwiseit was 27 by 11/4.

Never tackled the sort of terrain that a MTB could tackle.Did ride the pass from Wasdale to the BlackSail Hut YH.
Did involve some pushing.Rode the The HighPeak andTissinton Trails a week ago on my full carbon Planet X shod with my trusty Michelin Endurance 23c tyres

A cyclo cross bike sounds a good alternative might have a look for one of the older bikes with canti brakes.


----------



## Jon George (12 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Try your cx bike in the conditions you fear. If you die in a horrible manner, then your fears are borne out and you should get a disc brakes bike forthwith.
> If you live, which you will, then carry on as you are and stop fretting.



 Notwithstanding that my OP may have led you to think I'm being over-cautious, I do actually believe in confronting demons - I'll let you know if I die in the attempt with my rejuvenated CX.

Thanks everyone for the replies, so far.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (12 Sep 2018)

Cycleops said:


> My faves are 90's rigids, Gumtree is awash with them and they're cheap as chips. Ideal if you want to dip a toe.



Late 80's and 90's 26" rigids are the only type of MTB's I will buy. I refuse to have anything to do with what most people's idea of an MTB is today; i.e. something with suspension, weird looking frame geometry, and overly large wheels. For just pottering about on gravel and dirt tracks I see absolutely no need for anything more complicated or costly than a 26" rigid with rim brakes. You aren't going to be going fast enough to need to worry about braking power anyway. It's all a load of marketing BS to suggest that you can't venture off road without big wheels, discs, and suspension. Even an old gents 3-speed hub gear roadster will cope with gravel if fitted with robust tyres.


----------



## dave r (12 Sep 2018)

pawl said:


> Oh dear gone are the days that my one bike I rode what was called rough stuff canal paths.Derbyshire dales club runs and TT,s. Changed the wheels for tubs for theTT.Otherwiseit was 27 by 11/4.
> 
> Never tackled the sort of terrain that a MTB could tackle.Did ride the pass from Wasdale to the BlackSail Hut YH.
> Did involve some pushing.Rode the The HighPeak andTissinton Trails a week ago on my full carbon Planet X shod with my trusty Michelin Endurance 23c tyres
> ...



Yes, I remember rough stuff on my road bike, touring club day rides in the early 1980's that nearly always included several miles of rough stuff, fond memories of great days out.


----------



## Crankarm (13 Sep 2018)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Late 80's and 90's 26" rigids are the only type of MTB's I will buy. I refuse to have anything to do with what most people's idea of an MTB is today; i.e. something with suspension, weird looking frame geometry, and overly large wheels. For just pottering about on gravel and dirt tracks I see absolutely no need for anything more complicated or costly than a 26" rigid with rim brakes. You aren't going to be going fast enough to need to worry about braking power anyway. It's all a load of marketing BS to suggest that you can't venture off road without big wheels, discs, and suspension. Even an old gents 3-speed hub gear roadster will cope with gravel if fitted with robust tyres.



Oh dear. Disc brakes have proven time and time again they are far superior to rim brakes, not least for preserving the life of your bike's wheel rims as it is far easier to replace brake discs and pads than rim brake components and rims once they have worn out and split. New wheel time. ££££££. Plus stopping in the wet when your wheels are covered in mud and crud is far better with disc brakes. Period. As for full sus bikes you might have a point, although a good front suspension fork could be desirable. But it all depends on the type of terrain you ride in or will be riding if planning a specific ride.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (13 Sep 2018)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Late 80's and 90's 26" rigids are the only type of MTB's I will buy. I refuse to have anything to do with what most people's idea of an MTB is today; i.e. something with suspension, weird looking frame geometry, and overly large wheels. For just pottering about on gravel and dirt tracks I see absolutely no need for anything more complicated or costly than a 26" rigid with rim brakes. You aren't going to be going fast enough to need to worry about braking power anyway. It's all a load of marketing BS to suggest that you can't venture off road without big wheels, discs, and suspension. Even an old gents 3-speed hub gear roadster will cope with gravel if fitted with robust tyres.



Like what he said.

Unless you're going over rocks or really techy stuff a modern mtb is overkill.
My Jamis hardtail can take way more crap than I can throw it at.
MBR magazine just peddles the world as a BMX track to be jumped over illusion. The stuff they advocate is the stuff I pass as they walk up all the hills.


----------



## Kajjal (13 Sep 2018)

Voodoo bizango is probably the best bike in that price range, check the on line reviews.

Modern mtb bikes are very different to the bikes I started on in the early 1990’s. They are much better designed and allow you to more easily tackle off road trails. You likely don’t need full suspension but disc brakes make a huge difference. My advice is buy the bike that makes you enjoy your riding.


----------



## pawl (13 Sep 2018)

dave r said:


> Yes, I remember rough stuff on my road bike, touring club day rides in the early 1980's that nearly always included several miles of rough stuff, fond memories of great days out.




You remember the CTC appointed lunch and tea establishments.As you say great days out.

I rode with Loughborough section of the ctc.Rides always had a destination.Places like AltonTowers Warwick Castle,Trentham Gardens befor they became theme parks.


----------



## Crackle (13 Sep 2018)

Well as this has turned into a reminiscing thread.....It was the Rough Stuff Fellowship which appealed to me back in the day. However things move on, for most of us anyway and my road bike doesn't have 27x11/4 wheels and tyres or the slacker angles, plus there are far better bikes for the purpose now. There is never a reason not to add the +1 to the n.


----------



## JhnBssll (13 Sep 2018)

I've got both ends of the MTB spectrum; a 90's Kona Caldera steel hardtail and a modern carbon full suspension jobby. The new one is superior in almost every way, but the Kona is still competent and a lot of fun. With the Kona you have to choose your line and it will punish mistakes whereas the modern machine soaks up most of my errors and instils confidence beyond my skill level.

I suspect a modern hardtail would be somewhere between the two, it's a future N+1 for sure


----------



## DRHysted (13 Sep 2018)

Kajjal said:


> Voodoo bizango is probably the best bike in that price range, check the on line reviews.
> 
> Modern mtb bikes are very different to the bikes I started on in the early 1990’s. They are much better designed and allow you to more easily tackle off road trails. You likely don’t need full suspension but disc brakes make a huge difference. My advice is buy the bike that makes you enjoy your riding.



I bought myself one of those last week. Great fun to ride off-road, much quicker than my CX bikes, and easier, just smash it at obstacles and pedal. On road you have to accept that you’re not going to set any records, the tyres do make a lovely buzzing sound (largest I’ve ever had).


----------



## T4tomo (14 Sep 2018)

I'd the OP likes his CXbikes but wants disc brakes why buy a Mtb? Get a CX with discs?


----------



## Jon George (14 Sep 2018)

T4tomo said:


> I'd the OP likes his CXbikes but wants disc brakes why buy a Mtb? Get a CX with discs?


I just spent £600 making my BlueCross the CX bike it should always have been (a bit of a whim, but, hey-ho) and thus discovered the joys of off-roading, plus I've I've discovered I've got a great bike for touring. My learning curve is still pretty steep and, in the end, I may not have call for a MTB - but I'm damned if I'm going to invest in a disc brake CX bike if a disc brake MTB is more to my needs,


----------



## mustang1 (14 Sep 2018)

Crankarm said:


> Oh dear. Disc brakes have proven time and time again they are far superior to rim brakes, not least for preserving the life of your bike's wheel rims as it is far easier to replace brake discs and pads than rim brake components and rims once they have worn out and split. New wheel time. ££££££. Plus stopping in the wet when your wheels are covered in mud and crud is far better with disc brakes. Period. As for full sus bikes you might have a point, although a good front suspension fork could be desirable. But it all depends on the type of terrain you ride in or will be riding if planning a specific ride.


Yeah hydro disk brakes are great. I also like suspension but I think it's better to learn on non-suspension bikes for a few years before getting a sus bike (if at all). I like sus, but I dont really need it (though there have been a few times when I was thankful of having it).


----------



## Phaeton (14 Sep 2018)

Spiderweb said:


> ]https://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m1b0s155p8406/CUBE-ATTENTION-SL-29-2017


I have this bike & can highly recommend it, I spend nearly all my time on road, canal side & bridleways, the 29" wheels make it easy to ride over rough terrain, but it is not particular good on tight technical stuff.


----------



## T4tomo (14 Sep 2018)

Jon George said:


> I just spent £600 making my BlueCross the CX bike *it should always have been* (a bit of a whim, but, hey-ho) and thus discovered the joys of off-roading, plus I've I've discovered I've got a great bike for touring. My learning curve is still pretty steep and, in the end, I may not have call for a MTB - but I'm damned if I'm going to invest in a disc brake CX bike if a disc brake MTB is more to my needs,


should've found space in the budget for some hydro disc brakes then  (I realise you haven't got a disc compatible frame before the replies come flooding in pointing that out)


----------



## Jon George (14 Sep 2018)

T4tomo said:


> should've found space in the budget for some hydro disc brakes then  (I realise you haven't got a disc compatible frame before the replies come flooding in pointing that out)


 Yep - just wish I'd discovered the joys of off-roading earlier!


----------



## Kajjal (14 Sep 2018)

DRHysted said:


> I bought myself one of those last week. Great fun to ride off-road, much quicker than my CX bikes, and easier, just smash it at obstacles and pedal. On road you have to accept that you’re not going to set any records, the tyres do make a lovely buzzing sound (largest I’ve ever had).



They are really good off road but If you are used to a road bike, on road a real mountain bike feels like you are cycling through treacle in comparison


----------



## Levo-Lon (14 Sep 2018)

Kajjal said:


> Voodoo bizango is probably the best bike in that price range, check the on line reviews.
> 
> Modern mtb bikes are very different to the bikes I started on in the early 1990’s. They are much better designed and allow you to more easily tackle off road trails. You likely don’t need full suspension but disc brakes make a huge difference. My advice is buy the bike that makes you enjoy your riding.




Indeed


----------



## Levo-Lon (14 Sep 2018)

Great for all things off road and good for the older back.







Good for all things off road and some tarmac







Sorry but a ridgid bike for MTB is 90's thinking


----------



## fossyant (14 Sep 2018)

I have a 90's rigid MTB that's used regularly off road, but XC. Anything rougher, my main bike is the full squash. Far more capable bike - the rider is an oaf !

The squashy is far better for my knackered back, less stress shock.


----------



## Elybazza61 (14 Sep 2018)

Ya need summat like this;







Ridley X-Trail Adventure*with Lauf Grit forks;takes 700c and 650b rims and with the 650's can fit 21" Schwalbe G-One bites.

The G-Ones aren't bad on tarmac but you could have a spare set of 700c wheels with road tyres.

Don't come cheap though.


*Similar bikes from of manufacturers are available but not as cool(apart from maybe a Shand or Mason Bokh,,,)


----------



## fossyant (14 Sep 2018)

Elybazza61 said:


> Ya need summat like this;
> 
> 
> View attachment 430031
> ...



Not enough travel !


----------



## Elybazza61 (14 Sep 2018)

fossyant said:


> Not enough travel !



Actually it was posted for the op.

Enough though for most East Anglian bridleways and for someone who's not an oaf


----------



## fossyant (14 Sep 2018)

Elybazza61 said:


> Actually it was posted for the op.
> 
> Enough though for most East Anglian bridleways and for someone who's not an oaf



Hee hee - love the Forks myself - just kiddin.

160mm Enduro next after the 130mm Trail bike I have - I can fall off even betterer !


----------



## JhnBssll (14 Sep 2018)

Mine feels like it's got tons of travel but is 135 front and 150 rear which weirdly isn't a great deal these days  Here are my two beasts, as you can see they're slightly different animals


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (15 Sep 2018)

meta lon said:


> Sorry but a ridgid bike for MTB is 90's thinking



Maybe so, but rigids are far more versatile for general use. You might have to ride them more thoughtfully and slower off road, rather than just aim the bike and let the suspension take the punishment, but they ride far better for the road miles you need to do to get to the place where you want to go off road. (unless modern MTB'ers just stick their full-sus on the roof of their car of course).
It's just the same with modern road bikes; many now are wholly impractical for everyday use that might involve riding in wet weather and needing to carry things with you as there is no tyre/mudguard clearance or rack provision - whereas even fairly sporty 1990's and earlier drop bar bikes can usually be fitted with guards and racks. Modern bikes seem to be designed with one narrow specific cycling discipline in mind rather than being versatile all-round machines that will perform multiple duties.


----------



## Salar (15 Sep 2018)

Call me old fashioned, old (I am) or retro, don't really care.

When I bought my "youngest" mtb a few years ago, a 2008 Kona, after a few rides in the hills the first modification was to get rid of the front suspension forks. I sold them on fleabay and fitted rigid steel forks. The weight saving was significant and the ride is better on the gentler slopes.

I'd rather think my way down a slope and take it slower.

Next week I'll be off somewhere in the forests and I'll be riding a fully rigid steel frame mtb from the 90's.

Guess I'm just old skool.  (Well old, and that's my excuse)


----------



## Kajjal (15 Sep 2018)

I ride a md 1990’s xc hardtail in the mountains abroad happily enough with v brakes, 3 x 8 gearing and elastomer front fork. My recent fs bike with disc brakes and 2 x 11 gearing is much faster and smoother. Unlike the 1990’s fs bikes it climbs hills fine.


----------



## fossyant (15 Sep 2018)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> Maybe so, but rigids are far more versatile for general use. You might have to ride them more thoughtfully and slower off road, rather than just aim the bike and let the suspension take the punishment, but they ride far better for the road miles you need to do to get to the place where you want to go off road. (unless modern MTB'ers just stick their full-sus on the roof of their car of course).
> It's just the same with modern road bikes; many now are wholly impractical for everyday use that might involve riding in wet weather and needing to carry things with you as there is no tyre/mudguard clearance or rack provision - whereas even fairly sporty 1990's and earlier drop bar bikes can usually be fitted with guards and racks. Modern bikes seem to be designed with one narrow specific cycling discipline in mind rather than being versatile all-round machines that will perform multiple duties.



Neither of my 90's road bikes would take guards or any such stuff 

FS bikes are fine to ride on tarmac - alot depends on the tyres. You can lock out the suspension, but I never bother. My FS rolls just as well as the rigid MTB. It's that a HT or rigid is slightly less to maintain in sloppy weather.


----------



## Richard A Thackeray (20 Sep 2018)

You can get most places on a CX bike
*And*, they're lighter/easier to carry, when the need requires

Tough terrain on CX?, think some of the Three Peaks Cyclo-Cross descents (MTBs not allowed)


I raced MTBs in the 90s (1990 - 1996), & also raced Cyclo-Cross on my MTB, before buying a proper CX bike (no mudguard or bottle-cage mounts!)

T'was all pre suspension too, even though, the manufacturers own suspension fork legs were available to simply swap into the crown, by about 1992/1993
Which I think suggests what bike it was?


----------



## jowwy (20 Sep 2018)

fossyant said:


> Neither of my 90's road bikes would take guards or any such stuff
> 
> FS bikes are fine to ride on tarmac - alot depends on the tyres. You can lock out the suspension, but I never bother. My FS rolls just as well as the rigid MTB. It's that a HT or rigid is slightly less to maintain in sloppy weather.


Unless it's pre 1990 and comes from a skip.....he's not interested


----------



## I like Skol (21 Sep 2018)

Pace.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (21 Sep 2018)

jowwy said:


> Unless it's pre 1990 and comes from a skip.....he's not interested



Wrong on both counts. I have bikes of known age built as recently as 1995, and only two hack MTB's that were actual skip salvage. Most were actually purchased secondhand with legal tender, but don't let the facts stand in the way of your narrative that I only get them out of bins. I'm equally happy to raid a bin OR spend cash for the right machine.
My drop bar one is costing me twice as much as any of the others, although it's still only small beer compared with buying new. I choose according to what features I like, not what age they are. It just so happens that I like British-built bikes with lugged & brazed steel frames, preferably Reynolds - and no suspension in the case of MTB. That criteria therefore generally means nothing built after the late 1990's - as most mass produced frames were welded imports by the end of the century.


----------



## iandg (21 Sep 2018)

Just passed my rigid MTB onto one of my lads (to use for commuting around Inverness) as I was rarely using it. At 57 I've lost my confidence on technical MTB trails and my Surly Cross-Check handles everything I throw at it off-road (including mountain tracks). If I had the option of 'n+1' I think I'd go for a gravel/adventure specific frame with discs.


----------



## Levo-Lon (22 Sep 2018)

wicker man said:


> Just passed my rigid MTB onto one of my lads (to use for commuting around Inverness) as I was rarely using it. At 57 I've lost my confidence on technical MTB trails and my Surly Cross-Check handles everything I throw at it off-road (including mountain tracks). If I had the option of 'n+1' I think I'd go for a gravel/adventure specific frame with discs.
> 
> View attachment 430912




My whole body aches just looking at that pic.
When i was a lad i'd ride owt with 2 wheels anywhere but now i just couldn't enjoy that.

But it takes all sorts


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (23 Sep 2018)

wicker man said:


> Just passed my rigid MTB onto one of my lads (to use for commuting around Inverness) as I was rarely using it. At 57 I've lost my confidence on technical MTB trails and my Surly Cross-Check handles everything I throw at it off-road (including mountain tracks). If I had the option of 'n+1' I think I'd go for a gravel/adventure specific frame with discs.
> 
> View attachment 430912



Looks like absolute bliss to me.
As long as I can get on the Jamis and find places like that I'll be smiling.


----------



## iandg (23 Sep 2018)

meta lon said:


> My whole body aches just looking at that pic.
> When i was a lad i'd ride owt with 2 wheels anywhere but now i just couldn't enjoy that.
> 
> But it takes all sorts



With disc brake adventure bikes you get the option to use 650 wheels and fatter tyres. I run 38/40c generally but have had upto 47c tyres fitted (bit of a squeeze). There are some sections on trails where I decide to get off and walk that riders on MTBs would just 'bounce over', but the ride's great


----------



## iandg (23 Sep 2018)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> Looks like absolute bliss to me.
> As long as I can get on the Jamis and find places like that I'll be smiling.



Saying goodbye to these tracks soon and heading to Dumfrieshire - plenty of choice there tho' 

https://www.strava.com/activities/690474616

https://flic.kr/s/aHskG2dMs9


----------



## Levo-Lon (23 Sep 2018)

wicker man said:


> With disc brake adventure bikes you get the option to use 650 wheels and fatter tyres. I run 38/40c generally but have had upto 47c tyres fitted (bit of a squeeze). The ride's great



i think your a far more dedicated cyclist than me , my neck and lower back just wouldn't allow that.
i get back and arm pain on my HT with 2.4s with 22psi in them.
oddly i dont suffer back pain on the road bike just neck.


----------



## podsquad (24 Sep 2018)

Funnily enough I have been considering getting a gravel bike and binning the MTB, so an opposite to you.

As many have stated in here if you are flying over rocks and drops a MTB has the advantage, but then your rides might be slightly slower.

I have been considering a gravel bike for time efficient riding and throw in some road and off road rides and mix it up, instead of going out on the discipline specific bike which I can currently do.

If you are keen on getting a MTB to do what you currently ride and maybe in some more gnarly rides I would advise on a short travel rig, less stuff to go wrong, less stuff to clean and cheaper maintenance.

Most of the bikes we all see riding round our local routes are so overkill it’s unreal, and they pay the price on the climbs.


----------



## Levo-Lon (24 Sep 2018)

podsquad said:


> Funnily enough I have been considering getting a gravel bike and binning the MTB, so an opposite to you.
> 
> As many have stated in here if you are flying over rocks and drops a MTB has the advantage, but with that’s your rides might be slightly slower.
> 
> ...




200mm travel fs at Sherwood pines you mean or even 160


----------



## I like Skol (24 Sep 2018)

meta lon said:


> 200mm travel fs at Sherwood pines you mean or even 160


Was at Sherwood recently. I reckon it would be perfect for my GT Grade, but is also pretty sweet on the Zaskar hardtail with a 70mm fork


----------



## Salar (25 Sep 2018)

podsquad said:


> Most of the bikes we all see riding round our local routes are so overkill it’s unreal, and they pay the price on the climbs.



Agree, some of the downhill machines I see at Brechfa. make you wonder.


----------



## Jody (25 Sep 2018)

meta lon said:


> 200mm travel fs at Sherwood pines you mean or even 160



My lads first off-road ride was at pines a few weeks ago. Did the full red loop on this beastie. Super proud of him as he has only been on a bike without stabilizers a handful of times. I did chuckle to myself when I saw a 200mm downhill rig on the "black" run, rider complete with full face and neck brace.


----------



## iandg (25 Sep 2018)

meta lon said:


> i think your a far more dedicated cyclist than me , my neck and lower back just wouldn't allow that.
> i get back and arm pain on my HT with 2.4s with 22psi in them.
> oddly i dont suffer back pain on the road bike just neck.



I get lower back pain occasionally (longer and harder rides) but I've spent a long time playing with position and I'm all sorted and comfortable now.


----------



## Levo-Lon (25 Sep 2018)

wicker man said:


> I get lower back pain occasionally (longer and harder rides) but I've spent a long time playing with position and I'm all sorted and comfortable now.




30 odd years of laying paving has taken it's toll on my neck and back.
It's ok but wear and tear and maybe a bit of disc compression from constant heavy work is the problem.
I should be 6 foot but I'm only 5foot 8 now


----------



## iandg (25 Sep 2018)

meta lon said:


> 30 odd years of laying paving has taken it's toll on my neck and back.
> It's ok but wear and tear and maybe a bit of disc compression from constant heavy work is the problem.
> I should be 6 foot but I'm only 5foot 8 now



Ah, I see. That's what my best friend's dad did - he has the same problems. 

I worked in a hospital lab, heaviest thing I had to lift was a blood bag


----------

