Hello Vital MTB Visitor,
We’re conducting a survey and would appreciate your input. Your answers will help Vital and the MTB industry better understand what riders like you want. Survey results will be used to recognize top brands. Make your voice heard!
Five lucky people will be selected at random to win a Vital MTB t-shirt.
Thanks in advance,
The Vital MTB Crew
The chainstay can’t actually grow, in terms of length, without the wheelbase growing as well, right. I get the fork compressing, and moving back, so effectively shortening the wheelbase, but I thought the idea behind the added stability of HP bikes was a lengthening of the wheelbase (relative to its static, or sagged position)
Is it possible, that the RC isn’t lengthening, it’s just moving further up from the bb while cycling through the suspension (so I guess lengthening if it were to be on the same plane, but they’re not, so the axle path is moving up and forward)
Apologies to everyone for possibly hijacking the thread. I think it’s still slightly relevant, as we are discussing a prototype Spesh frame
1) The "chainstay length" is the straight line distance from the BB to the rear axle, which increases throughout travel on most modern designs, because chain growth is positive wherever anti-squat is positive (or vice-versa). VPP is one exception in its implementation where in some cases, the anti-squat goes negative quite close to the end of travel and the chain contracts slightly.
2) The rear centre is effectively the horizontal component of the "chainstay length". If you draw a line on the ground between the BB and the rear axle, it will lengthen initially and then shorten once the axle has (approximately, but for most Horst/FSR designs as near as makes no difference) passed above the height of the pivot and the horizontal component of its motion changes direction.
Hopefully I haven't made any boneheaded mistakes in these explanations...
And let's listen to what krabo is saying.
If you think the above product jargon is, er, unique, then you should google what the bike looks like.
I suspect that design doesn't play well with the trend towards steeper seat tube angles; the Wolf Ridge 8 has a 73.5° (effective) seat tube angle. https://www.marinbikes.com/bikes/2020-wolf-ridge-8#geometry
But I think in cycling form and function are often on equal ground. It needs to work well and it needs to look like current trends. Even the Tantrum bikes reviewed well if I remember correctly (maybe I'm wrong) but I've only seen one locally on a buy sell. It just didn't look right to people even if the concept is good so they won't jump on it. If it looked like a session or SC, they would have sold like bacon pancakes in a beer garden.
Per Cam Zibo’s instagram