It's not machined, sure as hell not.
I mean why would 5dev do a supperlegera version (Internet points for this naming @Sir HC ) on a...
It's not machined, sure as hell not.
I mean why would 5dev do a supperlegera version (Internet points for this naming @Sir HC ) on a cnc if it was cncd from the get to?
I kinda wanna say its not printed as there doesn't seem to be any porosity in the material from the pictures. But the same would apply to casting it in sand or some soft proto tools (clamping pressure could be an issue). Plus the fact the tubes are welded to it and I'm not sure how well cast aluminum welds or how well weldable aluminum casts. I'm lost here to be honest...
@hitar_potar a rivet for securing the bond is not something I would expect a company the likes of Specialized to use. I expect they would test and verify the bond for serial production and not need it. This could be something to add extra security on protos.
I’ll bet you my lunch money it’s 2 halves that are machined and welded. BB shell sandwiched in the middle and seat collar welded on top, then the whole thing’s just been sanded back. Not sure what the 5dev thing is all about but that kink above the bb looks suspicious. Could they just be machining out to inspect internal surfaces after lab testing?
If the rule exists but is never enforced what’s the big deal for you. As long as they are not cherry-picking certain teams it applies to...
If the rule exists but is never enforced what’s the big deal for you. As long as they are not cherry-picking certain teams it applies to then I think most people are not worried about it.
the rule does not apply to MTB - scroll up the rule book to rule 1.3.004 and see. It has been like this for over a decade
Sadly, this could be another case of Intense making the coolest looking prototype for their team riders in aluminum and then making the production bike for us plebes in plastic. Listening to all of you production nerds talk about the time, complexity, and cost of making the massive aluminum cradle for the new Intense DH bike, I'm pretty convinced they're planning to make the production bike in carbon. All their other bikes are plastic, their last production downhill bike was plastic, and it seems like it'd be sooooooo much easier to build the cradle for this new six-link bike with layers of fancy plastic in a mold instead of casting it in two halves, welding them together, then machining 400 hundred different holes that have to be precisely in position relative to each other.
Sadly, this could be another case of Intense making the coolest looking prototype for their team riders in aluminum and then making the production bike for...
Sadly, this could be another case of Intense making the coolest looking prototype for their team riders in aluminum and then making the production bike for us plebes in plastic. Listening to all of you production nerds talk about the time, complexity, and cost of making the massive aluminum cradle for the new Intense DH bike, I'm pretty convinced they're planning to make the production bike in carbon. All their other bikes are plastic, their last production downhill bike was plastic, and it seems like it'd be sooooooo much easier to build the cradle for this new six-link bike with layers of fancy plastic in a mold instead of casting it in two halves, welding them together, then machining 400 hundred different holes that have to be precisely in position relative to each other.
Those split clamps look sweet. It is supposedly a huge difference for motos. But there’s also like 220lbs as opposed to like 30 lbs of force flexing the tubes. Who knows but it’s kind of cool to see.
@TEAMROBOT regarding the post about plastic intense. Don’t forget the part about how it’ll take 5 years or more to release it to the public. It took them so long to make a nomad copy that they had to re-fuck the links to make the geometry current by the time it was released lol.
Those split clamps look sweet. It is supposedly a huge difference for motos. But there’s also like 220lbs as opposed to like 30 lbs of force...
Those split clamps look sweet. It is supposedly a huge difference for motos. But there’s also like 220lbs as opposed to like 30 lbs of force flexing the tubes. Who knows but it’s kind of cool to see.
@TEAMROBOT regarding the post about plastic intense. Don’t forget the part about how it’ll take 5 years or more to release it to the public. It took them so long to make a nomad copy that they had to re-fuck the links to make the geometry current by the time it was released lol.
Good video showing stiction on moto forks with different types of clamps. over torque is the worst enemy for fork lowers!
Those split clamps look sweet. It is supposedly a huge difference for motos. But there’s also like 220lbs as opposed to like 30 lbs of force...
Those split clamps look sweet. It is supposedly a huge difference for motos. But there’s also like 220lbs as opposed to like 30 lbs of force flexing the tubes. Who knows but it’s kind of cool to see.
@TEAMROBOT regarding the post about plastic intense. Don’t forget the part about how it’ll take 5 years or more to release it to the public. It took them so long to make a nomad copy that they had to re-fuck the links to make the geometry current by the time it was released lol.
Good video showing stiction on moto forks with different types of clamps. over torque is the worst enemy for fork lowers!
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=535436420352104
Good video showing stiction on moto forks with different types of clamps. over torque is the worst enemy for fork lowers!
Tho it is hardly applicable to Mtb forks. MX forks use a USD design in which one of the bushing is attached to the stanchion and move up and down in the upper tubes. Because that if you over tighten your clamps you end-up forcing that moving bushing in an area that has been made smaller due to the clamping, hence the added frictions especially further in the travel. In contrast there is nothing moving in the clamping area of a normal fork.
One of the advantages of split clamps is that they help reducing the kink that is happening around the clamp when the upper tubes bend due to impact. It creates a wider radius of bending instead of having the bend concentrated at the clamp/tube junction. Once again it is relevant for USD forks with sliding bushing but I am not sure what would be the benefit for a normal fork or a USD fork with fixed bushing, at least in term of sensitivity. The only benefit that I can see is to add some compliance to a double crown fork, in that sense finding it being tested on a 40 makes sense.
Those split clamps look sweet. It is supposedly a huge difference for motos. But there’s also like 220lbs as opposed to like 30 lbs of force...
Those split clamps look sweet. It is supposedly a huge difference for motos. But there’s also like 220lbs as opposed to like 30 lbs of force flexing the tubes. Who knows but it’s kind of cool to see.
@TEAMROBOT regarding the post about plastic intense. Don’t forget the part about how it’ll take 5 years or more to release it to the public. It took them so long to make a nomad copy that they had to re-fuck the links to make the geometry current by the time it was released lol.
Good video showing stiction on moto forks with different types of clamps. over torque is the worst enemy for fork lowers!
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=535436420352104
Good video showing stiction on moto forks with different types of clamps. over torque is the worst enemy for fork lowers!
Tho it is hardly applicable to Mtb forks. MX forks use a USD design in which one of the bushing is attached to the stanchion and...
Tho it is hardly applicable to Mtb forks. MX forks use a USD design in which one of the bushing is attached to the stanchion and move up and down in the upper tubes. Because that if you over tighten your clamps you end-up forcing that moving bushing in an area that has been made smaller due to the clamping, hence the added frictions especially further in the travel. In contrast there is nothing moving in the clamping area of a normal fork.
One of the advantages of split clamps is that they help reducing the kink that is happening around the clamp when the upper tubes bend due to impact. It creates a wider radius of bending instead of having the bend concentrated at the clamp/tube junction. Once again it is relevant for USD forks with sliding bushing but I am not sure what would be the benefit for a normal fork or a USD fork with fixed bushing, at least in term of sensitivity. The only benefit that I can see is to add some compliance to a double crown fork, in that sense finding it being tested on a 40 makes sense.
this is the video about split clamps that joecarlino linked to above (just embedding it here). fascinating!
this is the video about split clamps that joecarlino linked to above (just embedding it here). fascinating!
Really interesting. This video plus @Erwan_Ghesquiere ’s explanation clarify the purpose, and does make me wonder what the end goal of using split clamps on a “right side up” fork would be.
I think it was the 32 mm Boxxer that had the air spring designed with a short top cap and the main piston moving past the lower clamp initially. That caused some binding and the air spring was redesigned in such a way where at the end of the stroke the piston did not move past the lower clamp, preventing this binding.
Not sure how the split clamp would prevent kinking the tube when bending it, but I can see how it would prevent ovalisation compared to a single bolt clamp (in the area of max deformation of one of the clamp sides, the other side is completely solid, preventing excess deformation).
It's not machined, sure as hell not.
I mean why would 5dev do a supperlegera version (Internet points for this naming @Sir HC ) on a...
It's not machined, sure as hell not.
I mean why would 5dev do a supperlegera version (Internet points for this naming @Sir HC ) on a cnc if it was cncd from the get to?
I kinda wanna say its not printed as there doesn't seem to be any porosity in the material from the pictures. But the same would apply to casting it in sand or some soft proto tools (clamping pressure could be an issue). Plus the fact the tubes are welded to it and I'm not sure how well cast aluminum welds or how well weldable aluminum casts. I'm lost here to be honest...
@hitar_potar a rivet for securing the bond is not something I would expect a company the likes of Specialized to use. I expect they would test and verify the bond for serial production and not need it. This could be something to add extra security on protos.
Sorry i didn’t reply to this sooner - Christmas eve and stuff and else… 😀
What about forgeting rivets and bonds, and instead using bolts with threads (and probably some sort of lubrication or light glue to fill the microspace between a lug and a tube? And probably using a different-than-round shape for the end of the tube that goes inside the lug (therefore the lug is also shaped like this)? Best example i could think of is Manitou Dorado’s thruaxle. And the way it is mounted on the fork with bolts. Wouldn’t such a solution be doable for a frame? With enough time in R&D, if this is doable, such a solution could make it cheap and easy enough to change the size of your frame at home without buying an entire new frame! Or am i talking bs?
I think it was the 32 mm Boxxer that had the air spring designed with a short top cap and the main piston moving past the...
I think it was the 32 mm Boxxer that had the air spring designed with a short top cap and the main piston moving past the lower clamp initially. That caused some binding and the air spring was redesigned in such a way where at the end of the stroke the piston did not move past the lower clamp, preventing this binding.
Not sure how the split clamp would prevent kinking the tube when bending it, but I can see how it would prevent ovalisation compared to a single bolt clamp (in the area of max deformation of one of the clamp sides, the other side is completely solid, preventing excess deformation).
I think the idea is that instead of having one rigid block holding the tube you have two smaller and independant clamps. That way the clamps can bend with the tube to some extant hence increasing the kind radius compared to the situation where you have a rigid clamp which doesn't move and that will cause all the bending and forces to concentrate at the clamp/tube junction. I think that's the explanation given by Luxon which is one of the split clamp company in MX.
If they are cut apart deep enough, then yes, there is some logic to that (as one clamp compared to the other will rotate a bit. If only half the diameter is cut, then this effect will be lessened a lot. I don't know how it's actually done, so I have no idea on the actual state.
@hitar_potar it would work. But the situation where you replace a part of the frame is practically non-existent. And doing that will add weight and complexity, not to speak about the issues (creaking, dirt buildup, making it work in the long run) that it just doesn't make sense to do it that way. The axle is designed to be taken out, the tubes not so much. Plus you'd need all of the tubes (and likely all of the lugs too, leaving just the seat tube) to change a frame size (tubes in different sizes are either angled differently or are positioned at different heights if the angle is the same.
What you could also do is use a liquid metal glue gun to join the parts together
It'll be assembled in a jig, but full cure can take days or even weeks depending on what adhesive they use. Also might have to be cured in an oven, and jig might not fit or be suited for high temps.
I’ll bet you my lunch money it’s 2 halves that are machined and welded. BB shell sandwiched in the middle and seat collar welded on top, then the whole thing’s just been sanded back. Not sure what the 5dev thing is all about but that kink above the bb looks suspicious. Could they just be machining out to inspect internal surfaces after lab testing?
Sorry if this has already been posted.
https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/is-shimano-about-to-reinvent-the-rear-…
Both Shimano and SRAM have dozens of patents for stuff like this that will never see the light of day. I don't know why this would be any different.
the rule does not apply to MTB - scroll up the rule book to rule 1.3.004 and see. It has been like this for over a decade
Sadly, this could be another case of Intense making the coolest looking prototype for their team riders in aluminum and then making the production bike for us plebes in plastic. Listening to all of you production nerds talk about the time, complexity, and cost of making the massive aluminum cradle for the new Intense DH bike, I'm pretty convinced they're planning to make the production bike in carbon. All their other bikes are plastic, their last production downhill bike was plastic, and it seems like it'd be sooooooo much easier to build the cradle for this new six-link bike with layers of fancy plastic in a mold instead of casting it in two halves, welding them together, then machining 400 hundred different holes that have to be precisely in position relative to each other.
New Di2 already out?
PS: that's a weird looking cassette isn't it?
https://www.vitalmtb.com/news/press-release/Shimano-Introduces-Three-E-…;
Old news m8
not many wc dh frames left made in carbon though
Sh*t
Starts from 1799£ for frameset up to 4500£ for complete bikes
The guy who posted the photo said the clamps were made by Hope. Not sure if old or new. But never seen a split lower clamp for Fox on MTB.
Those split clamps look sweet. It is supposedly a huge difference for motos. But there’s also like 220lbs as opposed to like 30 lbs of force flexing the tubes. Who knows but it’s kind of cool to see.
@TEAMROBOT regarding the post about plastic intense. Don’t forget the part about how it’ll take 5 years or more to release it to the public. It took them so long to make a nomad copy that they had to re-fuck the links to make the geometry current by the time it was released lol.
I had to do a little research on the split clamps (I’m down with the ‘VID, so it’s not like I don’t have the time…)
Seems like something that would help alleviate one of the downsides of standard dual crown forks.
Now I just want Formula to finally release the Selva XL.
Good video showing stiction on moto forks with different types of clamps. over torque is the worst enemy for fork lowers!
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=535436420352104
Tho it is hardly applicable to Mtb forks. MX forks use a USD design in which one of the bushing is attached to the stanchion and move up and down in the upper tubes. Because that if you over tighten your clamps you end-up forcing that moving bushing in an area that has been made smaller due to the clamping, hence the added frictions especially further in the travel. In contrast there is nothing moving in the clamping area of a normal fork.
One of the advantages of split clamps is that they help reducing the kink that is happening around the clamp when the upper tubes bend due to impact. It creates a wider radius of bending instead of having the bend concentrated at the clamp/tube junction. Once again it is relevant for USD forks with sliding bushing but I am not sure what would be the benefit for a normal fork or a USD fork with fixed bushing, at least in term of sensitivity. The only benefit that I can see is to add some compliance to a double crown fork, in that sense finding it being tested on a 40 makes sense.
this is the video about split clamps that joecarlino linked to above (just embedding it here). fascinating!
Thanks for that explanation.
Really interesting. This video plus @Erwan_Ghesquiere ’s explanation clarify the purpose, and does make me wonder what the end goal of using split clamps on a “right side up” fork would be.
I think it was the 32 mm Boxxer that had the air spring designed with a short top cap and the main piston moving past the lower clamp initially. That caused some binding and the air spring was redesigned in such a way where at the end of the stroke the piston did not move past the lower clamp, preventing this binding.
Not sure how the split clamp would prevent kinking the tube when bending it, but I can see how it would prevent ovalisation compared to a single bolt clamp (in the area of max deformation of one of the clamp sides, the other side is completely solid, preventing excess deformation).
Something new coming from GT?
Sensor HP?
Definitely a low pivot bike, just based on that photo.
Sorry i didn’t reply to this sooner - Christmas eve and stuff and else… 😀
What about forgeting rivets and bonds, and instead using bolts with threads (and probably some sort of lubrication or light glue to fill the microspace between a lug and a tube? And probably using a different-than-round shape for the end of the tube that goes inside the lug (therefore the lug is also shaped like this)? Best example i could think of is Manitou Dorado’s thruaxle. And the way it is mounted on the fork with bolts. Wouldn’t such a solution be doable for a frame? With enough time in R&D, if this is doable, such a solution could make it cheap and easy enough to change the size of your frame at home without buying an entire new frame! Or am i talking bs?
I think the idea is that instead of having one rigid block holding the tube you have two smaller and independant clamps. That way the clamps can bend with the tube to some extant hence increasing the kind radius compared to the situation where you have a rigid clamp which doesn't move and that will cause all the bending and forces to concentrate at the clamp/tube junction. I think that's the explanation given by Luxon which is one of the split clamp company in MX.
If they are cut apart deep enough, then yes, there is some logic to that (as one clamp compared to the other will rotate a bit. If only half the diameter is cut, then this effect will be lessened a lot. I don't know how it's actually done, so I have no idea on the actual state.
@hitar_potar it would work. But the situation where you replace a part of the frame is practically non-existent. And doing that will add weight and complexity, not to speak about the issues (creaking, dirt buildup, making it work in the long run) that it just doesn't make sense to do it that way. The axle is designed to be taken out, the tubes not so much. Plus you'd need all of the tubes (and likely all of the lugs too, leaving just the seat tube) to change a frame size (tubes in different sizes are either angled differently or are positioned at different heights if the angle is the same.
What you could also do is use a liquid metal glue gun to join the parts together
If it's a rivet then it's probably only there to hold the parts together while the glue cures.
Or a backup if anything goes wrong. The curing is likely done in a jig ensuring the correct orientation of everything.
It'll be assembled in a jig, but full cure can take days or even weeks depending on what adhesive they use. Also might have to be cured in an oven, and jig might not fit or be suited for high temps.
Or touch hardness could be achieved in minutes. Which makes sense as you don't want to have a bike jigged up for days or weeks. Even if it's a proto.