I wouldn't be surprised if it was Sotto as well, just under a different arrangement regarding ownership and all. As far as I've heard they don't do that much inhouse, industrial design and the like is outsourced...
As for the C, honestly it seems kinda... 'interesting'. Split downtube with the shock in it (awesome for torsional stiffness and all...) and a very long, flat link, which is also very stiff when loaded from both sides as opposed to a triangle.
There's a reason so many bikes look like a Session after all
I wouldn't be surprised if it was Sotto as well, just under a different arrangement regarding ownership and all. As far as I've heard they don't...
I wouldn't be surprised if it was Sotto as well, just under a different arrangement regarding ownership and all. As far as I've heard they don't do that much inhouse, industrial design and the like is outsourced...
As for the C, honestly it seems kinda... 'interesting'. Split downtube with the shock in it (awesome for torsional stiffness and all...) and a very long, flat link, which is also very stiff when loaded from both sides as opposed to a triangle.
There's a reason so many bikes look like a Session after all
on the jekyll, definitely a direct influence from the DH bike they had been testing.
Gotta say I would be pretty keen on trying a bike using a high pivot 4-bar design like that new cannondale. Doesn't it look like the new range could have a similar configuration?
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and it makes sense for them not to be too efficient...
Gotta say I would be pretty keen on trying a bike using a high pivot 4-bar design like that new cannondale. Doesn't it look like the...
Gotta say I would be pretty keen on trying a bike using a high pivot 4-bar design like that new cannondale. Doesn't it look like the new range could have a similar configuration?
yes that seems to have an inverted Horst, if anything I think the Range is going to have more travel than this one (based on Norco's lineup and the fact that they used it in downhill races this summer). But the Jekyll is dual crown compatible too so maybe not.
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and...
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and it makes sense for them not to be too efficient...
Because noise and efficiency is not as big of an issue I wonder if we don't see more E-bikes using these designs.
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and...
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and it makes sense for them not to be too efficient...
Im curious, are those idler wheels THAT inefficient? Are we talking like the extra bit of drag from a gearbox vs standard system or like belt drive vs chain? Exactly how much less efficient is an idler system?
Haibike used it in earlier Bosch variants with the small drive sprocket. But I'd hazard a guess an idler will negatively impact drivetrain (chain) lifetime. Ebikes have a problem with this as is, so it would be just worse plus the idler, with a relatively small bearing and mounting, would be stressed quite a lot more on an ebike than under human power. Maybe with a low power motor it might work. But honestly for high pivots I might do things a bit differently...
As for how much, I don't know. But thinking about it logically, the losses could be up to twice as high, depending on the angle of the chain. The main loss comes from link rotation within the roller with the chain wrapping around a sprocket. If its unloaded (derailleur cage pulleys, bottom of front and rear sprockets), it adds something, but not that much. The majority of losses comes from the rotation in the powered section, so at the top of both front and rear sprockets. Adding an idler adds two more rotations (wrapping onto the idler and off of it) with the rotation angles being quite severe with most idlers being under 20T in size. Another possible negative? The whole chain is taught when wrapped when the tensions subsides going along the number of engaged teeth with, guessing here, roughly 5 teeth (in the front) carrying the majority of the load and the rest of the teeth essentially unloaded (the number of teeth depends on the sprocket diameter as the geometry of the wrapping plays a role).
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and...
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and it makes sense for them not to be too efficient...
Im curious, are those idler wheels THAT inefficient? Are we talking like the extra bit of drag from a gearbox vs standard system or like belt...
Im curious, are those idler wheels THAT inefficient? Are we talking like the extra bit of drag from a gearbox vs standard system or like belt drive vs chain? Exactly how much less efficient is an idler system?
It’s the gears meshing, not the final drive method (chain/ belt)
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and...
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and it makes sense for them not to be too efficient...
It's not that bad. I ride a Forbidden Druid, and any drag/noise from the idler pulley is minimal as long as the chain is lubed. When the chain is dry, I can hear it. What is noticeable is the drag from the chainguide on that particular bike. It's there for enhanced wrap around the chainring, and most of the time I don't notice it, but when the chain is dry I can feel it and hear it. This is all anecdotal, as I haven't tested it with a power meter or anything.
People remember that axle path is dictated by the IC path on a horst design, not by the chainstay pivot. There are bikes out there with an high chainstay pivot and idler, but the axle path is not much rearward (like the GT fury). However, it's nice that many brands are exploring (not really exploring) new ways of making bikes.
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and...
It is tempting for me too, any high pivot bike, but dammit, that small idler gear is putting me off, everybody says they are noisy and it makes sense for them not to be too efficient...
Because noise and efficiency is not as big of an issue I wonder if we don't see more E-bikes using these designs.
All of the Rocky Mountain Ebikes kinda use an idler. They don't use it to increase rearward travel, but rather to dump one extra reduction gear inside the motor gearbox.
All of the Rocky Mountain Ebikes kinda use an idler. They don't use it to increase rearward travel, but rather to dump one extra reduction gear...
All of the Rocky Mountain Ebikes kinda use an idler. They don't use it to increase rearward travel, but rather to dump one extra reduction gear inside the motor gearbox.
That's like an old school two roller chain guide plus two idlers!
Seen over on you-know-where. I'd like to try one; I think the idea has merit. The mechanism seems pretty small, so not sure about long-term durability, but it's got me curious.
[url=https://www.aenomalyconstructs.com/]https://www.aenomalyconstructs.com/[/url]
Seen over on you-know-where. I'd like to try one; I think the idea has merit. The mechanism seems pretty small, so not sure about long-term...
Seen over on you-know-where. I'd like to try one; I think the idea has merit. The mechanism seems pretty small, so not sure about long-term durability, but it's got me curious.
Seems like a cool idea, but what are the real benefits to doing that?
Seems like a cool idea, but what are the real benefits to doing that?
You must not dirt jump or DH. When one sits on a saddle that's lower than proper ride height, the angle at which the pelvis meets the saddle is rotated back significantly. So sitting on a lowered seat that is flat or nose down really is uncomfortable. I forget what company made it, but one post rotates the saddle back automatically when lowered.
You must not dirt jump or DH. When one sits on a saddle that's lower than proper ride height, the angle at which the pelvis meets...
You must not dirt jump or DH. When one sits on a saddle that's lower than proper ride height, the angle at which the pelvis meets the saddle is rotated back significantly. So sitting on a lowered seat that is flat or nose down really is uncomfortable. I forget what company made it, but one post rotates the saddle back automatically when lowered.
It was specialized. They ran into post travel limitations with their integrated design.
You must not dirt jump or DH. When one sits on a saddle that's lower than proper ride height, the angle at which the pelvis meets...
You must not dirt jump or DH. When one sits on a saddle that's lower than proper ride height, the angle at which the pelvis meets the saddle is rotated back significantly. So sitting on a lowered seat that is flat or nose down really is uncomfortable. I forget what company made it, but one post rotates the saddle back automatically when lowered.
Sorry, I don't think I really made my point clear. I meant to ask, why does having a different angle on the dh make a difference, surely it would just make it harder to rest?
Sorry, I don't think I really made my point clear. I meant to ask, why does having a different angle on the dh make a difference...
Sorry, I don't think I really made my point clear. I meant to ask, why does having a different angle on the dh make a difference, surely it would just make it harder to rest?
Personally I'm more curious about the ability to drop the saddle nose for steep climbs and re-level it for longer sections of flat terrain. That might not be applicable for everyone, based on where and how they ride, but the idea being able to produce more power more comfortably on both the steeps and the flats appeals to me. I haven't recently felt the desire to adjust my saddle angle for descending (185mm dropper helps), but on very steep trails I could see how that might make sense.
Edit: writing this got me thinking about a two-position version just for XC nerds. Hmm...
You must not dirt jump or DH. When one sits on a saddle that's lower than proper ride height, the angle at which the pelvis meets...
You must not dirt jump or DH. When one sits on a saddle that's lower than proper ride height, the angle at which the pelvis meets the saddle is rotated back significantly. So sitting on a lowered seat that is flat or nose down really is uncomfortable. I forget what company made it, but one post rotates the saddle back automatically when lowered.
Sorry, I don't think I really made my point clear. I meant to ask, why does having a different angle on the dh make a difference...
Sorry, I don't think I really made my point clear. I meant to ask, why does having a different angle on the dh make a difference, surely it would just make it harder to rest?
In the DH world pivoting your saddle nose up is usually used to allow the use of adequate saddle height while not having that wide chuck of plastic impeed your movement past it. To acheve the same you could slam your saddle another 3/4cm down but then the saddle would become useless at pushing with your inner tight. I'd rather have 150mm dropper with tilt than 170+mm dropper which are becoming a trend for that reason (not only but tilt is a better way to get backward movement clearance).
Nice update to the Arktos !
As for the C, honestly it seems kinda... 'interesting'. Split downtube with the shock in it (awesome for torsional stiffness and all...) and a very long, flat link, which is also very stiff when loaded from both sides as opposed to a triangle.
There's a reason so many bikes look like a Session after all
As for how much, I don't know. But thinking about it logically, the losses could be up to twice as high, depending on the angle of the chain. The main loss comes from link rotation within the roller with the chain wrapping around a sprocket. If its unloaded (derailleur cage pulleys, bottom of front and rear sprockets), it adds something, but not that much. The majority of losses comes from the rotation in the powered section, so at the top of both front and rear sprockets. Adding an idler adds two more rotations (wrapping onto the idler and off of it) with the rotation angles being quite severe with most idlers being under 20T in size. Another possible negative? The whole chain is taught when wrapped when the tensions subsides going along the number of engaged teeth with, guessing here, roughly 5 teeth (in the front) carrying the majority of the load and the rest of the teeth essentially unloaded (the number of teeth depends on the sprocket diameter as the geometry of the wrapping plays a role).
Seen over on you-know-where. I'd like to try one; I think the idea has merit. The mechanism seems pretty small, so not sure about long-term durability, but it's got me curious.
https://www.instagram.com/trinity_mtb/
"aluminum, mixed wheel, high pivot , gearbox driven prototype. Rear travel 155-170mm, front travel 160-190mm. Adjustable head angle, chainstay length, and anti-squat figure"
Edit: writing this got me thinking about a two-position version just for XC nerds. Hmm...