I know this has probably been covered elsewhere, but I’m very curious about these bars as I’m terrified of carbon bars but desperately want all the...
I know this has probably been covered elsewhere, but I’m very curious about these bars as I’m terrified of carbon bars but desperately want all the “compliance” possible out of my cockpit. Do the One Up 35 bars have a noticeable uptick in comfort over any random 31.8 bar, or is it just marketing fodder?
Good question. I have the carbon OneUp on my bigger bike, and I feel like it has a touch more damping than the 31.8 Deity bar...
Good question. I have the carbon OneUp on my bigger bike, and I feel like it has a touch more damping than the 31.8 Deity bar on my "trail" bike. I still have a touch of trepidation about that carbon bar, so I'm a little curious about this one.
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues...
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues and am fairly sensitive to bar differences so ymmv).
My bike came with Alloy RaceFace 35s and the difference going to the OneUp carbon was insane, so much less feedback through the hands.
Both are more powerful than MT5s and you can still use whatever pads you want.
If you want best bang for your buck brakes got...
Both are more powerful than MT5s and you can still use whatever pads you want.
If you want best bang for your buck brakes got to go Hayes.
That's prob one of the best recommendos I've seen a co make. If it goes against their financial interests and they say it anyway, that's not to be taken lightly. Kudos!
I know this has probably been covered elsewhere, but I’m very curious about these bars as I’m terrified of carbon bars but desperately want all the...
I know this has probably been covered elsewhere, but I’m very curious about these bars as I’m terrified of carbon bars but desperately want all the “compliance” possible out of my cockpit. Do the One Up 35 bars have a noticeable uptick in comfort over any random 31.8 bar, or is it just marketing fodder?
Good question. I have the carbon OneUp on my bigger bike, and I feel like it has a touch more damping than the 31.8 Deity bar...
Good question. I have the carbon OneUp on my bigger bike, and I feel like it has a touch more damping than the 31.8 Deity bar on my "trail" bike. I still have a touch of trepidation about that carbon bar, so I'm a little curious about this one.
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues...
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues and am fairly sensitive to bar differences so ymmv).
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that made us really rethink bar design and why our new alloy has a very similar profile to take the jar and buzz out of hits.
atleast the rear center looks reasonably long'ish.
I would not be surprised if head angles are around 60 deg in a few years, remembering that 63...
atleast the rear center looks reasonably long'ish.
I would not be surprised if head angles are around 60 deg in a few years, remembering that 63 deg seemed absurd a few years back, now there are 130mm trail bikes with this much rake.
I was looking at the Canfield brothers' CBF suspension patent when I noticed Chris has two pending patents under his Suspension Formulas kinematics company, and they seem pretty interesting. One is essentially a frame with different main pivot locations to provide a "selectable axle path" (seen here), while the other is a new 4- or 6-bar suspension system with the BB located on the lower link (here). At the bottom of Suspension Formulas' website they list their available designs, with the addition of two new ones: "Chris' Formula Zero/CFZero" which mentions the moving-BB design patent in its description, and "Chris' Formula Three/CF3" which is described as a "quiver killer" (which I assume is the adjustable axle path design). No idea when these may make it to market, but I can't wait. (The CF1 design is the existing one on the Canfield Jedi for those wondering)
I was looking at the Canfield brothers' CBF suspension patent when I noticed Chris has two pending patents under his Suspension Formulas kinematics company, and they...
I was looking at the Canfield brothers' CBF suspension patent when I noticed Chris has two pending patents under his Suspension Formulas kinematics company, and they seem pretty interesting. One is essentially a frame with different main pivot locations to provide a "selectable axle path" (seen here), while the other is a new 4- or 6-bar suspension system with the BB located on the lower link (here). At the bottom of Suspension Formulas' website they list their available designs, with the addition of two new ones: "Chris' Formula Zero/CFZero" which mentions the moving-BB design patent in its description, and "Chris' Formula Three/CF3" which is described as a "quiver killer" (which I assume is the adjustable axle path design). No idea when these may make it to market, but I can't wait. (The CF1 design is the existing one on the Canfield Jedi for those wondering)
I heard Chris was racing a CF3 bike at enduro of nations or some race like that. Never saw any pictures though.
Good question. I have the carbon OneUp on my bigger bike, and I feel like it has a touch more damping than the 31.8 Deity bar...
Good question. I have the carbon OneUp on my bigger bike, and I feel like it has a touch more damping than the 31.8 Deity bar on my "trail" bike. I still have a touch of trepidation about that carbon bar, so I'm a little curious about this one.
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues...
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues and am fairly sensitive to bar differences so ymmv).
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that...
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that made us really rethink bar design and why our new alloy has a very similar profile to take the jar and buzz out of hits.
In theory, a moving BB mounted on the lower link could pass without an idler while still having a rearward axle path because of a high pivot, right? The only questionable point in all this would be how will the rider feel with this moving BB - guess in order for it to not feel weird, the BB must move only several mm (may be equal to the axle path). Am i correct in these assumptions?
In theory, a moving BB mounted on the lower link could pass without an idler while still having a rearward axle path because of a high...
In theory, a moving BB mounted on the lower link could pass without an idler while still having a rearward axle path because of a high pivot, right? The only questionable point in all this would be how will the rider feel with this moving BB - guess in order for it to not feel weird, the BB must move only several mm (may be equal to the axle path). Am i correct in these assumptions?
Previous issues with URT designs were that pedal pressure from your feet is counter to the suspension movement of the BB and resists suspension action in small bump compliance.
atleast the rear center looks reasonably long'ish.
I would not be surprised if head angles are around 60 deg in a few years, remembering that 63...
atleast the rear center looks reasonably long'ish.
I would not be surprised if head angles are around 60 deg in a few years, remembering that 63 deg seemed absurd a few years back, now there are 130mm trail bikes with this much rake.
it's 140mm, but in 2019 the Stumpy Evo. 63.5 deg Head angle.
That's just off the top of my head
But yeah, maybe I was overzealous...
it's 140mm, but in 2019 the Stumpy Evo. 63.5 deg Head angle.
That's just off the top of my head
But yeah, maybe I was overzealous in my comment, god forbid lol.
Was more curious than anything,
my V1 Sentinel was 140 with a 64HA, it was a blast to ride.
‘but I think the Stumpy EVO, and Sentinel were sorta in a class of their own, you could easily classify them as Enduro bikes, especially as they run 160 forks, and Transition even have the green light for 170’s
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues...
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues and am fairly sensitive to bar differences so ymmv).
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that...
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that made us really rethink bar design and why our new alloy has a very similar profile to take the jar and buzz out of hits.
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues...
I've run the carbon OneUps and Chromag OSX bars back-to-back to test and the OneUps were noticeably more comfortable/compliant than the Chromags. (I've got wrist issues and am fairly sensitive to bar differences so ymmv).
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that...
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that made us really rethink bar design and why our new alloy has a very similar profile to take the jar and buzz out of hits.
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul Aston and the NSMB guys preach about it but can’t really see how it would be that game changing. Is it just personal preference or do you believe there’s some performance gains made using more sweep than standard.
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that...
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that made us really rethink bar design and why our new alloy has a very similar profile to take the jar and buzz out of hits.
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul...
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul Aston and the NSMB guys preach about it but can’t really see how it would be that game changing. Is it just personal preference or do you believe there’s some performance gains made using more sweep than standard.
angle of the joint of my hands is relaxed, or not. for me the difference in being able to ride through or needing to take a break for the hands
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul...
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul Aston and the NSMB guys preach about it but can’t really see how it would be that game changing. Is it just personal preference or do you believe there’s some performance gains made using more sweep than standard.
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul...
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul Aston and the NSMB guys preach about it but can’t really see how it would be that game changing. Is it just personal preference or do you believe there’s some performance gains made using more sweep than standard.
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul...
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul Aston and the NSMB guys preach about it but can’t really see how it would be that game changing. Is it just personal preference or do you believe there’s some performance gains made using more sweep than standard.
I switch to the PNW Range Bar with a 10° backsweep and it made a big difference over the 8° stock bars.
I'm curious to hear from other folks on this. Currently on renthal bars. I think they have 7° backsweep? I think I like the forward aggressive position they put me in. Been very curious about the pnw bars especially for the price!
I'm curious to hear from other folks on this. Currently on renthal bars. I think they have 7° backsweep? I think I like the forward aggressive...
I'm curious to hear from other folks on this. Currently on renthal bars. I think they have 7° backsweep? I think I like the forward aggressive position they put me in. Been very curious about the pnw bars especially for the price!
I ran both the high and mid rise version of the SQ Lab 12 degree bars. I was a die hard 9x5 degree guy before that. I have pretty horrible wrists and they definitely made a noticeable difference in wrist pain and hand fatigue while descending. On the flip side, they were actually more uncomfortable than “normal” bars while climbing for sustained periods of time (15+ minutes) as I felt like it bent my wrists awkwardly in a seated position as my elbows aren’t as spread open when not in attack position. I negated this by moving my hands inward and wrapping my thumbs around my brake lever clamps. I would definitely have continued to run them, but they don’t produce a high enough rise.
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that...
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that made us really rethink bar design and why our new alloy has a very similar profile to take the jar and buzz out of hits.
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul...
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul Aston and the NSMB guys preach about it but can’t really see how it would be that game changing. Is it just personal preference or do you believe there’s some performance gains made using more sweep than standard.
I've mentioned this before (I think it was in the cockpit thread?) but I swapped out a 40 mm Turbine R stem and a 35 mm rise Turbine R handlebar (5/8 deg sweep) for an aliexpress 35 mm stem and a 55 mm rise, 8/12 deg sweep bar (and moved a 20 mm spacer from above to under the stem). While the riding has improved (due to the bars being higher), because of the much reduced effective reach I'm riding much more off the back of the bike, which I feel is a negative. And I fear I'm more of a praying mantis than before, I'm worried a higher backsweep angles your elbows inwards.
I haven't done back to back testing yet, I'm saving it for a new bike, but this backswept bar needs a test with a 50 mm stem and/or I need to go back to a less swept bar.
Maybe move this debate to the bar height topic and rename said topic to 'general cockpit discussion'?
I'm curious to hear from other folks on this. Currently on renthal bars. I think they have 7° backsweep? I think I like the forward aggressive...
I'm curious to hear from other folks on this. Currently on renthal bars. I think they have 7° backsweep? I think I like the forward aggressive position they put me in. Been very curious about the pnw bars especially for the price!
I ran both the high and mid rise version of the SQ Lab 12 degree bars. I was a die hard 9x5 degree guy before that...
I ran both the high and mid rise version of the SQ Lab 12 degree bars. I was a die hard 9x5 degree guy before that. I have pretty horrible wrists and they definitely made a noticeable difference in wrist pain and hand fatigue while descending. On the flip side, they were actually more uncomfortable than “normal” bars while climbing for sustained periods of time (15+ minutes) as I felt like it bent my wrists awkwardly in a seated position as my elbows aren’t as spread open when not in attack position. I negated this by moving my hands inward and wrapping my thumbs around my brake lever clamps. I would definitely have continued to run them, but they don’t produce a high enough rise.
Can we move this discussion along to another thread please.....
Yep, you can see the additional pivot placements above and below the main pivot with the idler in the first photo. I'm guessing this CF1 implementation (no idler) is meant to provide similar benefits to the original CBF design with the center of curvature at the top of the chainring, but with lower anti-rise.
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul...
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul Aston and the NSMB guys preach about it but can’t really see how it would be that game changing. Is it just personal preference or do you believe there’s some performance gains made using more sweep than standard.
I've mentioned this before (I think it was in the cockpit thread?) but I swapped out a 40 mm Turbine R stem and a 35 mm...
I've mentioned this before (I think it was in the cockpit thread?) but I swapped out a 40 mm Turbine R stem and a 35 mm rise Turbine R handlebar (5/8 deg sweep) for an aliexpress 35 mm stem and a 55 mm rise, 8/12 deg sweep bar (and moved a 20 mm spacer from above to under the stem). While the riding has improved (due to the bars being higher), because of the much reduced effective reach I'm riding much more off the back of the bike, which I feel is a negative. And I fear I'm more of a praying mantis than before, I'm worried a higher backsweep angles your elbows inwards.
I haven't done back to back testing yet, I'm saving it for a new bike, but this backswept bar needs a test with a 50 mm stem and/or I need to go back to a less swept bar.
Maybe move this debate to the bar height topic and rename said topic to 'general cockpit discussion'?
Done. Although the title has been censored, Vital don't seem to like the word 'cockpit'.
Now back to tech rumours, has anyone heard anything about GT strengthening their DH frames? Asking on behalf of Roger Viera.
WAO Arrival would like to have a chat
pit bits 2 (now working) from vds - https://www.vitalmtb.com/photos/features/pit-bits-2-val-di-sole-world-c…
Hilarious from Commencal to mark the launch of the Meta SX V5: https://discover.commencal.com/landing-meta-sx-v5-eu-en/.
My bike came with Alloy RaceFace 35s and the difference going to the OneUp carbon was insane, so much less feedback through the hands.
That's prob one of the best recommendos I've seen a co make. If it goes against their financial interests and they say it anyway, that's not to be taken lightly. Kudos!
The shape of that bar is super unique and allows for more vibration damping in it. Without sounding too product preachy, it was that bar that made us really rethink bar design and why our new alloy has a very similar profile to take the jar and buzz out of hits.
it's 140mm, but in 2019 the Stumpy Evo. 63.5 deg Head angle.
That's just off the top of my head
But yeah, maybe I was overzealous in my comment, god forbid lol.
Well, looks like Jesse's got the new Vivid Air. It can only be so long now... Right?
I was looking at the Canfield brothers' CBF suspension patent when I noticed Chris has two pending patents under his Suspension Formulas kinematics company, and they seem pretty interesting. One is essentially a frame with different main pivot locations to provide a "selectable axle path" (seen here), while the other is a new 4- or 6-bar suspension system with the BB located on the lower link (here). At the bottom of Suspension Formulas' website they list their available designs, with the addition of two new ones: "Chris' Formula Zero/CFZero" which mentions the moving-BB design patent in its description, and "Chris' Formula Three/CF3" which is described as a "quiver killer" (which I assume is the adjustable axle path design). No idea when these may make it to market, but I can't wait. (The CF1 design is the existing one on the Canfield Jedi for those wondering)
I heard Chris was racing a CF3 bike at enduro of nations or some race like that. Never saw any pictures though.
CF3?
›
There are more photos: https://www.rootsandrain.com/rider4964/chris-canfield/photos/filters/page1/
CF1:
no 12° backsweep, no buy
In theory, a moving BB mounted on the lower link could pass without an idler while still having a rearward axle path because of a high pivot, right? The only questionable point in all this would be how will the rider feel with this moving BB - guess in order for it to not feel weird, the BB must move only several mm (may be equal to the axle path). Am i correct in these assumptions?
Previous issues with URT designs were that pedal pressure from your feet is counter to the suspension movement of the BB and resists suspension action in small bump compliance.
Was more curious than anything,
my V1 Sentinel was 140 with a 64HA, it was a blast to ride.
‘but I think the Stumpy EVO, and Sentinel were sorta in a class of their own, you could easily classify them as Enduro bikes, especially as they run 160 forks, and Transition even have the green light for 170’s
Lol, I’m 100% ok with that. I prefer a 12 also. 🤷🏽
Just out of curiosity what do you think the main benefit of a 12° (or just more backsweep than normal) is? I’ve seen guys like Paul Aston and the NSMB guys preach about it but can’t really see how it would be that game changing. Is it just personal preference or do you believe there’s some performance gains made using more sweep than standard.
angle of the joint of my hands is relaxed, or not. for me the difference in being able to ride through or needing to take a break for the hands
This 100%
I switch to the PNW Range Bar with a 10° backsweep and it made a big difference over the 8° stock bars.
You guys add longer stems when using that much backsweep? Actual reach must be shortned a lot?
40mm stock replaced with 50mm PNW Range.
I'm curious to hear from other folks on this. Currently on renthal bars. I think they have 7° backsweep? I think I like the forward aggressive position they put me in. Been very curious about the pnw bars especially for the price!
Uh oh, we're verging on "Backsweep Rumors and Innovation."
Big Backsweep Boi. 12degrees is prime, I've done even 16 and liked it.
I ran both the high and mid rise version of the SQ Lab 12 degree bars. I was a die hard 9x5 degree guy before that. I have pretty horrible wrists and they definitely made a noticeable difference in wrist pain and hand fatigue while descending. On the flip side, they were actually more uncomfortable than “normal” bars while climbing for sustained periods of time (15+ minutes) as I felt like it bent my wrists awkwardly in a seated position as my elbows aren’t as spread open when not in attack position. I negated this by moving my hands inward and wrapping my thumbs around my brake lever clamps. I would definitely have continued to run them, but they don’t produce a high enough rise.
File the “backsweep” topic right next to the “should your handlebars be the same height as your seat when it’s fully extended” topic.
These are not tech rumors. These are subjective, personal preference, opinions based on anecdotal evidence.
Enough.
I've mentioned this before (I think it was in the cockpit thread?) but I swapped out a 40 mm Turbine R stem and a 35 mm rise Turbine R handlebar (5/8 deg sweep) for an aliexpress 35 mm stem and a 55 mm rise, 8/12 deg sweep bar (and moved a 20 mm spacer from above to under the stem). While the riding has improved (due to the bars being higher), because of the much reduced effective reach I'm riding much more off the back of the bike, which I feel is a negative. And I fear I'm more of a praying mantis than before, I'm worried a higher backsweep angles your elbows inwards.
I haven't done back to back testing yet, I'm saving it for a new bike, but this backswept bar needs a test with a 50 mm stem and/or I need to go back to a less swept bar.
Maybe move this debate to the bar height topic and rename said topic to 'general cockpit discussion'?
Can we move this discussion along to another thread please.....
Yep, you can see the additional pivot placements above and below the main pivot with the idler in the first photo. I'm guessing this CF1 implementation (no idler) is meant to provide similar benefits to the original CBF design with the center of curvature at the top of the chainring, but with lower anti-rise.
Done. Although the title has been censored, Vital don't seem to like the word 'cockpit'.
Now back to tech rumours, has anyone heard anything about GT strengthening their DH frames? Asking on behalf of Roger Viera.