Tomm

Well, that depends if you think healthcare is more fundamental than a right to council services / housing / education etc. I would argue that healthcare is a fundamental right for people in developed countries, far more so than the right to have your bins emptied every week or so etc. Or put more cynically, without good health you can't work / pay taxes. People live in poverty in this country, some people can't afford to eat every day. You probably don't see it, because the circles you move in (apologies if I'm wrong, but since you're on TF it's fairly likely you're white and middle class with a bit of disposable income) are sheltered from the worst of it. My point is that people missing out on EMA are unlikely to starve... Anyway, the NHS. Where else in the world can you find a healthcare system that is based entirely on need? We have a fantastic healthcare system over here, definitely something to be proud of. Whilst the tories don't want to necessarily privatise the whole lot (yet), they're playing with fire. Done right, their system could improve efficiency, give patients more choice and drive down cost to the taxpayer. Done badly, it'll cost more and result in a fragmented service run by lowest bidder sharks whose bottom line is more important than patient welfare. The biggest concerns seem to be around this idea that if institutions can offer to provide a service for a given price, it's much easier to compete on price on certain services. E.g. a gallbladder operation would be easy and simple to calculate the cost for, whereas elderly inpatient admissions or people requiring ITU can result in long hospital stays and large costs that are difficult to identify on a balance sheet. The trouble is, elective surgery is how most hospitals make their cash. Thus third party outfits will be able to undercut the NHS on the simple items (E.g. the gallbladder operation/hip replacement etc) and leave the District General Hospital to cover the costs of the complicated patients. Since aforementioned hospital won't be making any money on its elective operations any more (the independent-sector treatment centre has gazumped them), where is the money going to come from? In this worst-case scenario, NHS hospital budgets dry up and the standard or care is driven down as a result. Right, enough thinking. Time for name-calling:

I bought so many helmets online before I realised the best plan was going into a shop and paying 10-20% more for something that actually fits. Now I've learnt my lesson, I'm going to share my wisdom: No one should buy helmets online.

Yes, easily. In fact you can poke a sharp stick through it (slowly) if you try. But that's not the point of it.

O'Neal armour has basically the same thing it. They call it sas-tec but it works the same way. It's good stuff but it basically deforms with your body (so it's comfy) but in an accident it becomes hard like normal armour. I don't think it gives you more protection than hard plastic necessarily, but it's a better fit.

Just get 2 pictures. One from the right side of the bike so we can see what cranks it has, and one from the other side so we can see the size/ shape of the BB. EDIT: The only other thing you would need to know would possibly be the width of the frame at the BB. It'll be either 68mm or 73mm

SRSLY? I'm with you on the principle of royalty - Very few people would believe that people ought to get priviledges based on their family circumstances. However I think your logic is flawed. I don't know how much it costs to run a Royal family these days, but I imagine it's something in the millions of pounds (£50 M/yr ? EDIT: YES). Compare that with the spending of £8.6 billion pounds of tourism spending for London last year. If only 10% of those visitors have come to see something royal-related (Tower bridge, bucks palace, Crown Jewels, Tower of London etc etc) then the Royals are quids in.

I'm sure it depends a lot on whether you're a twat or not. If you are 16, quite scruffy generally, and don't really have a good manner with customers, then piercings are going to be the last straw. On the other hand, if you are well-dressed, knowledgeable and approachable then it would take a real jobsworth twat at Halfords to fire you over a piercing. It's all job-dependent of course, I know a doctor that has got away with loads of piercings (but I also know it's made life / job progression a bit harder for them).

It's got no brakes which I don't like - you need some way to slow down on a MTB IMO. But that doesn't matter since it's got no chain so it won't go. Looks pretty though

Yeah I thought there would be arguments about what constitutes "ridable". Thing is - most people with a trials background could easily ride anything the average STW reader can. but just because you can doesn't mean you should, 'Technical' isn't the same as 'fun' in a lot of cases. I've no idea about the ranger's track. I've walked pyg/miner's and ridden llanberis, and llanberis would be by far the most fun one to ride up (it's doable). The others would be ok to push up but a bit crap to ride down unless you wanted to be a masochist. Sometimes a challenge is good though )

Yeah but "flat out" is about 12mph, because there's always a sharp corner or a TTF* to kill your flow and you can never go particularly fast. That would be dangerous... Coed-y-brenin was the worst offender for that. As soon as you got any speed there was always something to annoy you/slow you down and since they're aimed at retards who can't really ride bikes, none of the obstacles offer any difficulty for anyone on this forum. Feels like you're riding uphill for miles and then you get back to the car park. Yeah, I've done it a couple of times. Basically the Llanberis pass is the one you want. It's all rideable down and probably most of it up, too - although it's a bloody big hill so serious man points if you can ride it all without dabs For most people it's a 50:50 combination of pushing and riding up. The Miner's track and Pyg track are also good ones to push up, but I wouldn't bother coming down them - it wouldn't be any fun. In summer you'll probably get told off for riding, there are hundreds of people around and I'm sure someone will have a moan. Having said that, bear in mind that if you ride down it will take 20-30 minutes (plus punctures) whereas it's a minimum of 2 hours for walkers. I.e. you can reach the summit with only an hour or so of daylight left and then ride down when there's no one else around (the walkers will have headed home ages earlier). It's a pretty epic ride, but it's not amazingly fun/difficult/technical etc so I probably wouldn't bother, particularly in summer. There is some amazing landscape in North Wales, there will be some amazing XC I'm sure. But I don't know where *TTF - Technical trail feature. Yes, they really do call them that.

I thought it was complete uninspired dross. But that's just an opinion, I know lots of people rate it.

Well, since it's a very old frame and shock, it may well be a 550 that's old. At least the frame is single pivot which makes it slightly easier to judge. The TF tuned calculator recommends a 513 or 573 spring depending on what the shock is. Since it's old I have no idea which one it'll be but I'd err on the higher value since there probably won't be much compression damping built into the shock (which I guess accounts for the different values TF gives). I'd go for a new 550, I think. Give it a quick try on the bike and if it's completely wrong then send it back.

If you're getting that much sag, it'll probably either be a 400lbs spring, or a 550lbs spring that's ruined (old) and not as springy as it should be, hard to say. You'd never really feel the difference between 550lbs and 600lbs, unless as mentioned the 550lbs one was f**ked. The problem with springs is that they're really variable - depending on age / manufacturer one 550 spring can be completely different to another one. The only real way to get an answer is to try some different springs which isn't easy if you're buying online. Also what type of Marin is it? I'm not quite sure about the science behind it - but that website seems to suggest that single pivot / DW-link bikes should run softer springs than for 4-bar frames. Which is weird, because you can tailor a DW-link to have whatever combination of rising/falling rate you want, so I don't think they can generalise like that. So I don't know whether you should be using the values for Single Pivot/DW or VPP/4-bar. If it's one of those quad link bikes then it probably counts as VPP? The best way is to find out what other people are using on the same type of bike. I used that TF spring calculator for my Iron Horse and it came out with a 550 or something. I'm currently using a 400 which is spot on so I don't have too much faith in the calculator. P.S. Spring preload is bad. Tighten the collar until the spring stops rattling on the shock, then leave it. If it's too hard / soft, buy a different spring. P.P.S Are you definitely sure on the shock geometry. 200x50 is by far the commonest size for an XC bike rear shock.

T'is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought of as a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt. (Takes one to know one)

Even in my dreams, the pretty ones reject me

A posh girl in a posh house with a posh cat, probably had piano lessons since she was 4. Hardly very Rock 'n' Roll, is it?

That's a different reason - for certain bits of metalwork if there's a long wire and a current can build up E.g. ECG wires, pacemakers etc. I presume that's more common, but potentially less severe than a massive foreign body being ripped out through the flesh. The classical case is cerebral aneurysm clips, they can be metal and because they're placed very accurately, any small shift in their position (by the magnet) can lead to catastrophic haemorrhage. We have to ask the question, but as far as I know, those dangerous types of clips haven't been in popular usage for years.

The people that really changed trials (in vague chronological order) Hans Rey The Marti(y)ns Ryan Leech (He's surely unemployed now?) Chris Akrigg Trialskings TRA Coustellier Brothers + Vincent Hermance Craig Lee Scott Damon Watson Danny Mac Obviously a lot of those are foreigners but there are plenty of people on that list who you could talk to. Actually someone should compile a history of trials and the internet, as played out by youtube videos. Would be pretty interesting.

MRIs are done with essentially a big magnet that's exceedingly strong. If you have bits of (magnetic) metal inside you that aren't well secured (eg to bone) there's a risk they could become dislodged and cause damage as they're pulled through the tissue. In reality, a lot of medical metalwork isn't magnetic and it's usually anchored well enough not to pull through. But they always ask so the radiographer/radiologist can make the decision.

Nothing. Even if it's made of steel (not ti), it's such a small fragment and presumably well-fixed that it's not likely to be a problem for scans. Well, it does actually. The organic nature of the human body means that adverse events are not predictable. Every time you have a procedure done, you have to give your consent and there are ALWAYS risks, ranging from minor or unlikely to severe depending on the procedure. It's not like replacing a wheel on your car or something where the outcome is predictable. Like I said before, I don't know the ins and outs of what happened here, but has the dentist actually done anything negligent? From what you've said here, I don't think so. Could have happened to anyone. Matt - your second post sounds like the tooth is giving you more trouble than you mentioned first time round. You have to weigh up whether it is giving you enough trouble to warrant doing something about it, and I think you're probably within your rights to expect that would be sorted out for you if you asked.

I have no knowledge of how your dentist works, but I can tell you how any medical practitioner should gain informed consent from a patient. This can be with verbal consent, or a formal, uh, form that you would sign. They should explain the procedure, the benefits and the risks. I'm not a dentist, but if the tool breaking is a common (or rare but serious) complication then they perhaps should have mentioned it at the time of consent. People can argue about what constitutes a "common" complication and I don't think there is anything set in stone, some people will quote a risk of > 1%. However, in this case the complication could be neither common nor particularly serious so they wouldn't have to warn you. In the event of this complication, it looks like leaving the instrument there is the usual practice and if this is the case, you certainly couldn't call it negligence. Every procedure has a risk associated with it, which you accept because the other option (declining treatment) is less desirable. You can't blame the practitioner just because you were unlucky. As a side note, even if there was a suggestion of negligence, you'd have to prove that you've suffered as a result. It doesn't sound like you have actually particularly suffered? Even if you do get pain, it would be very difficult to prove it was secondary to the metal fragment that's there. Obviously the tooth was very diseased in the first place to have required the root canal. It's also now dead, so you could probably expect a different sensation. I don't know the exact circumstances of the events in your case, so it's impossible to say whether something was done incorrectly/badly. But just because you suffered a complication isn't (of itself) a just cause for a lawsuit.

Yeah there's not a huge difference. Sometimes the supertackys seem to more drag on roads (although I might have imagined that). They just wear out in half the time.

How was it treated? 3 weeks is a bit optimistic in most cases...

It's a bit like pissing money away. For DH, perhaps they're worth it. Not for XC though. IMO of course

I've run high rollers for ever, and occasionally fancy a change. Haven't found anything I like more. The 2.1 high rollers are a lot thinner and faster so if you're small and there's no rocks where you ride, you might do ok. I didn't like them at all. The advantages are ok, but they're a different carcass compared to high rollers - they're much thinner sidewalls but higher air volume. Didnt have any grip issues. Depending on where you ride, you might find you can get away with some of the semi-ish slick maxxis tyres. I can't remember the names of them...