Peachy!":1xut00m2 said:WimVDD":1xut00m2 said:Love the Fox but it's not a mountainbike, no?
Lol! none of them are Mountain Bikes anymore...... :xmas-big-grin:
True. But the Fox never was, no? Or maybe a 29'er "avant la lettre"...
Peachy!":1xut00m2 said:WimVDD":1xut00m2 said:Love the Fox but it's not a mountainbike, no?
Lol! none of them are Mountain Bikes anymore...... :xmas-big-grin:
Peachy!":1pxxgmzm said:Lol! none of them are Mountain Bikes anymore...... :xmas-big-grin:
Peachy!":hox8b1uw said:Lol! none of them are Mountain Bikes anymore...... :xmas-big-grin:
WimVDD":o4dz0ay5 said:Love the Fox but it's not a mountainbike, no?
uno-speedo":unvc7v8j said:Peachy!":unvc7v8j said:Lol! none of them are Mountain Bikes anymore...... :xmas-big-grin:
Yeah, what was Tomac thinking...
O, but I wasn't suggesting it should be thrown out of the competition. It can stay as far as I'm concerned and it will probably get my vote too. I'm really not a fan (and that's an understatement) of high rise stems icw drop bars.Retro Spud":2eesqcfp said:WimVDD":2eesqcfp said:Love the Fox but it's not a mountainbike, no?
Maybe / Maybe not
I‘m quite neutral on the point (and you do have a point) But in a sparse month do we need to be digging out the rule book
No mater what - It’s a lovely example
legrandefromage":13l04mof said:Well, whats the point in entering anything these days??
If there was a 'Freemans Catalogue bike only' month, someone would come along with a Dave Yates built prototype Townsend Yaksmaka
Oh and it would have to be a 'barn find' too with some bullshit backstory to bring a tear to a potatoes' eye. Plus it would have been dripping in M900 to please the Freemans marketing department in 1991.
<stomps off, glares at early Christmas decks, squashes baubles>