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
Just entertain the thought that maybe, just maybe, the bike is really holding the 35-50 y/o dads back, but in a different way than you might think. Most bikes are designed and developed for and with 25 +/- y/o, fit, incredibly skilled pro riders. That is not me and most others on here are not on that level as well. So that is why trying to emulate a setup that pro riders use and the bike industry sells as the cool new stuff to have might in reality be holding back the average rider. I am not saying this is always the case, there are good examples of improvements and products that the average Joe can benefit from. As you wrote, trying out what works best for you is the way to go. However, that also means that sometimes you can already see from the prodcut announcement that this product most likely will not be beneficial for the average rider, or, in the worst case, even be detrimental for their riding experience. So why not voice this opinion in the comments on forums that are meant to exchange opinions about mountain bike-related topics?
New, but you can't see the novelty from the outside 🤫
https://www.instagram.com/p/C4Vja7MMLph/
Trying out special, really really soft skis showed me what carving looks like with my shitty technique and finally sent me on the path to greatly improve my skills (incidentally also triggered the raising of my cockpit on the bike...). Trying out a WC slalom ski would not give the same results, that's for sure. So there is something in the right equipment for the right cause.
Speaking with some of their guys, they still think the SI is the best for that mid range up and down bike. But have have agreed that its weight is a negative for XC and its characteristics are not as crucial for a non pedal DH bike. I didn't get a straight answer on the Ebike but did hear it's hard to integrate with a motor, as they share the same space.
While SI isn't DW, they are damn close with that very small translation/ low link. They are trying to accomplish the same thing.
Wasn't the original DW link design or patent positioned in such a way where the lower link did not change direction of rotation? I seem to remember that the IC is supposed to be on the lower link at full compression, though that is still possible with a change of rotating direction. But I think recent designs have gotten more aggressive in the amount the lower link rotates backwards?
But this is very similar to what Switch Infintiy and Sixfinity do - extend the chain length for antisquat early in the travel, make it shorter deep in the travel to prevent pedal kickback.
Can we finally do away with orange lowers on these new fox forks? One of the worst things to happen to mountain biking.
The best explanation of SI I've heard (or visualised) is that it's a "DW"/VPP/Dual link design, where the bottom link is infinitely long (since it can't rotate at all). Which since it can't rotate, forces that oscillation in movement through the travel of the sliding part.
Road cycling has started to figure this out; most people won't be comfortable on a the bike a world tour rider rides so they've started offering bikes for normal (i.e. not world tour) riders.
There’s not much you can do to an XC bike and the DH bike isn’t on the market…
But I think you might be right.
All of these bikes were built on the back of the DW/Switch link.
But I see what you're saying. I could have phrased it better mb.
That's exactly how sliders are evaluated kinematically, draw a perpendicular (infinitely long) line through the pivot on the slider carrier and see where it intersect with the line on the other link. That's how you get the IC.
It's literally like having an infinitely long link.
but bro i need every opportunity to announce to everyone at the trailhead how much i spent on my bike
Behold, dentist bike!
The main problem with electronic suspension in a human-powered vehicle is deterministic vs intelligent suspension; it may seem counter intuitive at first, but intelligent suspension, that makes "decisions" on its own, is actually worse for biking. If there was an electronic fork that adjusted the compression/rebound based on depth of travel, or shaft speed, that would be excellent. Position-sensitive damping is probably easier with electronics than a bunch of bypass ports, sleeves, and tubes. But this is "deterministic", given a set of conditions, it will always give the same output. This allows the rider to adjust the suspension, just like turning a knob, and then know how its going to react. "Intelligent" suspension, like what Fox and RS have, I think makes riding worse. The electronics is trying to decide when you're pedaling or not- no bueno. You don't know what the suspension is going to do in a given situation. Riding a bike is not something done with your brain, its done in your brain stem with reflexes. If you don't know in your brain stem what will happen when you do this or that, you're going to ride slower. A good analogy is if you had two people riding a bike at once, each person with one hand on one side of the handlebars. No bueno.
They messed up the Factory Orange color on the frame.
Forks with orange lowers and black lowers are the same cost, so what's your point?
Orange lowers is ugly, thats the point
Just buy the black then.
Don’t sweat though the Kashima lowers will be available very soon
Then…don’t buy it. Wild that some people think this way and are allowed to use the internet lol
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree HTA and ride like an XC bike on the downhill. I OTB'ed for the first month more than the previous 3 years until I adjusted my technique.
Fast forward a few years, and by 2019 it was hard to buy a bike that had crap geo, and now all bikes have the same geo haha. All suspension is pretty good, all brakes are pretty good, and all high end builds are neon-pastel frame colors so everyone can see from a helicopter how much you spent on your bike.
I feel like the next innovations aren't going to be in performance, per-se, but rather in manufacturing techniques (still mourning that GG bit the dust)
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were promised...
Lets also get rid of orange helmets, terrible trend. /s
Band do it too much. Enough with the “flex pivot” bs.
I thought you guys all liked orange stuff because of Trump.
Or just buy a different colour/brand
Engineered flex encompasses a lot more than flex pivots my dude.
Ya, with how powerful engineered carbon layup can be, with directional flex it allows, I'm shocked it isn't used more. Go ride a steel bike like Starling, and while not a perfect bike, on loose, natural, and/or off camber turns, the traction is amazing (only issue for me is that they are too flexy for burlier riders, or for longer travel bikes with long AtC forks, as seen on Neko's frames; he loved the comfort and grip of his steel triangle, but too flexy for WC racing). Carbon can give you the best of both worlds.
But back to the topic of next-gen manufacturing- Its frustrating seeing bikes (like the GG) reuse parts across models and frame sizes. I get it, for cost reasons its necessary, but innovation in manufacturing could allow for more custom bikes in the future, like Robot/Atherton. The old Privateer 141 shared the same tubesets as the longer travel original, so its going to be too heavy and too stiff for a shorter travel sibling. The same with sharing tubes & molds across sizes. Yes, there are bean pole tall guys on XLs, but its pretty reliable that larger sizes are going to have heavier riders. Taller riders also benefit from longer chainstays, and while moving the main pivot back on larger sizes is a cool trick to allow the reuse of a rear mold across sizes, you still end up with a rear triangle either overbuilt for lighter riders or underbuilt for heavier ones. Imagine if manufacturing technology progressed to the point where it was cost effective to do custom molds for each part for each size for each model, with the carbon fibers being tuned to provide lateral compliance like a steel frame, but in the appropriate amount for each size.