Very thin pedals are awesome, they provide a very different feel, you stand much more connected to the bike, is like "regular" pedals try to roll forward in comparison. I tested some 11mm thick HT pedals many years ago, they felt awesome but durability wasn't there.
That design of pedal may push the user to prefer even shorter cranks, they somehow make them feel longer in my experience, while pedaling at low dead center but when you ride with the cranks level too
That's because they do effectively make your cranks longer.
A good bike fitter will determine the correct cranks length taking into account the thickness of the pedals.
Which could be an "issue" (for some) with the pendulum pedals. At the bottom half of the pedal stroke the cranks will be longer and at the top half they'll be shorter so you'll be pedalling in an elliptical shape rather than circular. I already know my knees don't like that.
Drop pedals don't make cranks longer, they make the BB effectively lower. There is no pedal that makes the crank longer or shorter looking at the whole revolution. Seat height does have to be adjusted based on Pedal thickness though. With drop pedals the drop is there both at bottom dead centre and top dead centre. It's all offset. Just as the pedal thickness with standard pedals comes into play all around the crank revolution.
What drop pedals do though make the crank just a bit longer when it's mid power stroke and you drop your heel. Just slightly though, just like standard pedals make it shorter in the same position.
regarding the durability of the outlier pendulum or void pedal, Andrew Major has a set of each and has a good track record when he was at NSMB and Bike Mag (only writes at his own blog for now https://meatengines.com/ ) for long term review and teardown so if long term issue should arise we will most likely hear about it. And yes those pedals have 2 6902 bearing per pedals and a chunky looking steel axle that needs to be properly torqued to 30nm for correct preload on those bearings. So not a pedal for the frequent parking lot pedal switcher.
As for the canadian hockey funding statement, lalalalala can't hear you through all our gold medals.
Despite liking the design of the Pendulum pedal I'm wondering if their claim that the plattform sits 12mm below the axle can be true?
The outer diameter of the threads is 9/16 inch which is roughly 14.3mm - for me the distance between the axle and the plattform would be less than half of that so rather 6 or 7mm. Or did I get something wrong?
Not a major flaw but they should have their numbers right for 300$ If it wasn't that expensive I would really like to try them - they look really interesting.
Despite liking the design of the Pendulum pedal I'm wondering if their claim that the plattform sits 12mm below the axle can be true?The outer diameter...
Despite liking the design of the Pendulum pedal I'm wondering if their claim that the plattform sits 12mm below the axle can be true?
The outer diameter of the threads is 9/16 inch which is roughly 14.3mm - for me the distance between the axle and the plattform would be less than half of that so rather 6 or 7mm. Or did I get something wrong?
Not a major flaw but they should have their numbers right for 300$ If it wasn't that expensive I would really like to try them - they look really interesting.
Don’t take this as defence of Lewis.But since when were 5dev the pioneers of cnc’d cranks and lattice structures.Pretty sure guys like Goldtec played with stuff...
Don’t take this as defence of Lewis.
But since when were 5dev the pioneers of cnc’d cranks and lattice structures.
Pretty sure guys like Goldtec played with stuff like that in the late 90’s that was just as snappy.
Of all the companies to copy Lewis have really chosen badly this time. At least Trickstuff are expensive and work bloody well. Apart from being on Neko’s bikes 5dev’s reputation is not glowing.
I've always thought Frameworks tagline should be, "Frames that make sense, with cranks that make none."
Despite liking the design of the Pendulum pedal I'm wondering if their claim that the plattform sits 12mm below the axle can be true?The outer diameter...
Despite liking the design of the Pendulum pedal I'm wondering if their claim that the plattform sits 12mm below the axle can be true?
The outer diameter of the threads is 9/16 inch which is roughly 14.3mm - for me the distance between the axle and the plattform would be less than half of that so rather 6 or 7mm. Or did I get something wrong?
Not a major flaw but they should have their numbers right for 300$ If it wasn't that expensive I would really like to try them - they look really interesting.
Btw the Loam Ranger made a video about them.
It all depends on how you measure, this is how the "12mm below" could be achieved...
Despite liking the design of the Pendulum pedal I'm wondering if their claim that the plattform sits 12mm below the axle can be true?The outer diameter...
Despite liking the design of the Pendulum pedal I'm wondering if their claim that the plattform sits 12mm below the axle can be true?
The outer diameter of the threads is 9/16 inch which is roughly 14.3mm - for me the distance between the axle and the plattform would be less than half of that so rather 6 or 7mm. Or did I get something wrong?
Not a major flaw but they should have their numbers right for 300$ If it wasn't that expensive I would really like to try them - they look really interesting.
Btw the Loam Ranger made a video about them.
I would see it like this:
The pendulum flat pedal plattform is approximately 12mm lower than your normal/most flat pedals with an axle going through the whole pedal body. and since the axle is most of the time somewhere around 6-8mm in diameter, on top of which there is still some aluminium body above it, its lower.
Not 12mm under the center of the pedal axle but 12mm under normal flat pedal plattform.
I would see it like this:The pendulum flat pedal plattform is approximately 12mm lower than your normal/most flat pedals with an axle going through the whole...
I would see it like this:
The pendulum flat pedal plattform is approximately 12mm lower than your normal/most flat pedals with an axle going through the whole pedal body. and since the axle is most of the time somewhere around 6-8mm in diameter, on top of which there is still some aluminium body above it, its lower.
Not 12mm under the center of the pedal axle but 12mm under normal flat pedal plattform.
This. My preferred flat pedal is 17mm thick at the center, so these drop pedals would sit 14.5mm lower than my pedals. Which is a ton! That's over half an inch, and it's almost a whole pedal lower than my pedal.
But I agree, "12mm below the axle" isn't an accurate or clear sentence. Hope that's not what they go with for final copy on their website.
This. My preferred flat pedal is 17mm thick at the center, so these drop pedals would sit 14.5mm lower than my pedals. Which is a ton...
This. My preferred flat pedal is 17mm thick at the center, so these drop pedals would sit 14.5mm lower than my pedals. Which is a ton! That's over half an inch, and it's almost a whole pedal lower than my pedal.
But I agree, "12mm below the axle" isn't an accurate or clear sentence. Hope that's not what they go with for final copy on their website.
"Center of the axle" is indeed what it says on their site. I think "top" of axle may be more accurate with the given numbers?
Regardless, it lowers your pedal quite a bit. Between that and the big ol' openness under foot, I'd love to try them.
As a taller guy who runs too many headset spacers with a 50mm rise bar and high COG, I'm really interested in these. I'm not sure they'll hold up, I'm an axle bender and thin pedal axles have never survived long. The standard bearings should be an easy swap when they inevitably toast themselves. But I'm dubious that they'll hold up given the amount of leverage on those bearings. I'll try them if I can buy a spare left axle from day 1.
Say it's a 15mm drop from my existing Scarabs. That's 15mm less rise on the bars/spacers, 15mm lower saddle, it more than makes up for the 10mm shorter cranks I'm running, and without bottom pins rock clearance should be fine.
I'm not sure they'll work out, but the upsides make this an experiment worth trying.
As a taller guy who runs too many headset spacers with a 50mm rise bar and high COG, I'm really interested in these. I'm not sure...
As a taller guy who runs too many headset spacers with a 50mm rise bar and high COG, I'm really interested in these. I'm not sure they'll hold up, I'm an axle bender and thin pedal axles have never survived long. The standard bearings should be an easy swap when they inevitably toast themselves. But I'm dubious that they'll hold up given the amount of leverage on those bearings. I'll try them if I can buy a spare left axle from day 1.
Say it's a 15mm drop from my existing Scarabs. That's 15mm less rise on the bars/spacers, 15mm lower saddle, it more than makes up for the 10mm shorter cranks I'm running, and without bottom pins rock clearance should be fine.
I'm not sure they'll work out, but the upsides make this an experiment worth trying.
I ride 95% of my time in the area where they were developed and tested. The riding at Moose Mtn and Prairie View(Husky), two opposing hill sides, is no joke. Its steep, with concrete hard clay with loose on top and has some big moves all over the place, and the guys riding them the last two years testing them take advantage off all of all of it. From my understanding, the pedals have held up very well and everyone who's ridden them have been hooked.
This pedal is one of those ideas that seemingly makes obvious sense – it's incredibly baffling that it hasn't been done. I wonder if there'd be advantages to a clipless implementation. 🤔
It's been done before. Shimano had clip ins that were similar 40 years ago in the 80s with a special thread which made them a non-start because it required a special Dura Ace crank.
There was another option, a commuter variant, linked in the Tioga Fly Paper thread on Mtbr.
Clipless wise, I'd say yes because of stability which should make it less tiring?
Put in an order for a pair. The 2 most immediate benefits that come to mind are a lower center of gravity on any given bike and the ability to glance off pedal strikes. No too excited about the "pendulum cradling effect" these will have, I think if you're in the chunk going fast you will get blown off regardless of using these or regular pedals - happy to be proven wrong though!
There is a benefit. Maybe not as much if you run thin pedals (think OneUp aluminium), but there is a benefit. Even pedalling up. I do roll my pedal going up in the technical, steep stuff sometimes, less so with drop pedals.
It's been done before. Shimano had clip ins that were similar 40 years ago in the 80s with a special thread which made them a non-start...
It's been done before. Shimano had clip ins that were similar 40 years ago in the 80s with a special thread which made them a non-start because it required a special Dura Ace crank.
There was another option, a commuter variant, linked in the Tioga Fly Paper thread on Mtbr.
Clipless wise, I'd say yes because of stability which should make it less tiring?
I ordered a set of pendulums and some 5mm shorter cranks and the shortest available for my bike at 155s (e-bike, so e13 cranks for Black Friday are only $74). I've dreamt of these pedals for years.
The price of the pedals was $214 shipped to the USA after conversion.
IME, how big a crank feels/ effectively is while pedaling is determined strictly from the distance from the BB to the top of the pedal while during the powerstroke. That's all that matters in my experience, not the overall circle/ oval. For instance, 165mm cranks feel like clown cranks when I'm on clipless pedals, yet 165s feel like 170s (or larger) when on flats, just because the foot is 5-10mm closer to the pedal spindle even on flats.
Standard pedals spin in an oval, the Pendulums with the foot surface in line with the pedal axle, should be perfect circles. I suspect that they make cranks feel longer. A lot longer. In fact you could add that at the bottom the cranks are longer when you are considering the length of the lever.
It's been done before. Shimano had clip ins that were similar 40 years ago in the 80s with a special thread which made them a non-start...
It's been done before. Shimano had clip ins that were similar 40 years ago in the 80s with a special thread which made them a non-start because it required a special Dura Ace crank.
There was another option, a commuter variant, linked in the Tioga Fly Paper thread on Mtbr.
Clipless wise, I'd say yes because of stability which should make it less tiring?
I ordered a set of pendulums and some 5mm shorter cranks and the shortest available for my bike at 155s (e-bike, so e13 cranks for Black...
I ordered a set of pendulums and some 5mm shorter cranks and the shortest available for my bike at 155s (e-bike, so e13 cranks for Black Friday are only $74). I've dreamt of these pedals for years.
The price of the pedals was $214 shipped to the USA after conversion.
IME, how big a crank feels/ effectively is while pedaling is determined strictly from the distance from the BB to the top of the pedal while during the powerstroke. That's all that matters in my experience, not the overall circle/ oval. For instance, 165mm cranks feel like clown cranks when I'm on clipless pedals, yet 165s feel like 170s (or larger) when on flats, just because the foot is 5-10mm closer to the pedal spindle even on flats.
Standard pedals spin in an oval, the Pendulums with the foot surface in line with the pedal axle, should be perfect circles. I suspect that they make cranks feel longer. A lot longer. In fact you could add that at the bottom the cranks are longer when you are considering the length of the lever.
I ordered a set of pendulums and some 5mm shorter cranks and the shortest available for my bike at 155s (e-bike, so e13 cranks for Black...
I ordered a set of pendulums and some 5mm shorter cranks and the shortest available for my bike at 155s (e-bike, so e13 cranks for Black Friday are only $74). I've dreamt of these pedals for years.
The price of the pedals was $214 shipped to the USA after conversion.
IME, how big a crank feels/ effectively is while pedaling is determined strictly from the distance from the BB to the top of the pedal while during the powerstroke. That's all that matters in my experience, not the overall circle/ oval. For instance, 165mm cranks feel like clown cranks when I'm on clipless pedals, yet 165s feel like 170s (or larger) when on flats, just because the foot is 5-10mm closer to the pedal spindle even on flats.
Standard pedals spin in an oval, the Pendulums with the foot surface in line with the pedal axle, should be perfect circles. I suspect that they make cranks feel longer. A lot longer. In fact you could add that at the bottom the cranks are longer when you are considering the length of the lever.
Don't think pedals spin in an oval. If your foot sits on top of the axle for a traditional flat pedal, it basically does that throughout the whole circular motion. The only catch here is that your circle center is not the center of the BB, it's offset by the same amount your feet is off the axle of the pedal. The black circle is what the crank/pedal spindle spins, at the center of that is the BB. Red is what you might be experiencing with a traditional flat pedal today, where you're offset positive at the same amount for the whole rotation. Blue is what might be possible with the pendulum pedals, where you're still offset the same amount, just negative.
If lower rider-bike-system COG mattered, riders could bend their knees a few degrees more and achieve lower COG than a new gadget offers. So much about mountain biking, beyond seated spinning on a regular surface, includes dynamically increasing and decreasing your ‘weight’ on the touch points.
I’m hoping someone offers some evidence that this static COG picture of bike performance matters at all, now that ebike companies are touting it. I can’t think of a single reason it would matter in tbe context of moutain biking.
Not that I have to tell the crowed on this form anything, but once again I get irked with people who try to pass off cheeper...
Not that I have to tell the crowed on this form anything, but once again I get irked with people who try to pass off cheeper "knock offs" as just as good as the real thing because "they are all made in the same factory." I mean, they probably are, but by paying for the actual product instead of the knock off you're also paying for the engineering (and marketing) that goes into the product, and at least the engineering portion of it is worth paying for. Granted, if you genuinely can't afford it and its your only option then... sure. Go for it, biking is expensive and I rather see folks on bikes than off of them. But if you're just being a cheapskate then you should really think about where your dollar goes and who it goes to.
I remember I had a couple friends who went out and bought cheeper carbon rims because of the "same factory" argument and they were just the stiffest piles of poor ride quality, and the little bit of time I spent on them trying them out made me appreciate compliance in a wheel set more so than I ever have done before. To this day they complain about harshness every time I ride with them.
NOW BACK TO RUMORS!
A little birdie told me Forbidden has a few new bikes coming out to fill out their line up. Taking their "one ride" geo philosophy to some other categories.
I, for one, welcome our new long chain stay overlords.
This pedal is one of those ideas that seemingly makes obvious sense – it's incredibly baffling that it hasn't been done. I wonder if there'd be advantages...
This pedal is one of those ideas that seemingly makes obvious sense – it's incredibly baffling that it hasn't been done. I wonder if there'd be advantages to a clipless implementation. 🤔
It's been done before. Shimano had clip ins that were similar 40 years ago in the 80s with a special thread which made them a non-start...
It's been done before. Shimano had clip ins that were similar 40 years ago in the 80s with a special thread which made them a non-start because it required a special Dura Ace crank.
There was another option, a commuter variant, linked in the Tioga Fly Paper thread on Mtbr.
Clipless wise, I'd say yes because of stability which should make it less tiring?
I mean, why did this ever go away? From where I sit, it's clearly a superior design.
Bearings.
One big caveat with drop pedals is about 40 mm added (20 mm either side) to the Q factor. For people that don't like inboard bearing bulges (ala OneUp) these are probably a no go.
Very thin pedals are awesome, they provide a very different feel, you stand much more connected to the bike, is like "regular" pedals try to roll forward in comparison. I tested some 11mm thick HT pedals many years ago, they felt awesome but durability wasn't there.
That design of pedal may push the user to prefer even shorter cranks, they somehow make them feel longer in my experience, while pedaling at low dead center but when you ride with the cranks level too
That's because they do effectively make your cranks longer.
A good bike fitter will determine the correct cranks length taking into account the thickness of the pedals.
Which could be an "issue" (for some) with the pendulum pedals. At the bottom half of the pedal stroke the cranks will be longer and at the top half they'll be shorter so you'll be pedalling in an elliptical shape rather than circular. I already know my knees don't like that.
Drop pedals don't make cranks longer, they make the BB effectively lower. There is no pedal that makes the crank longer or shorter looking at the whole revolution. Seat height does have to be adjusted based on Pedal thickness though. With drop pedals the drop is there both at bottom dead centre and top dead centre. It's all offset. Just as the pedal thickness with standard pedals comes into play all around the crank revolution.
What drop pedals do though make the crank just a bit longer when it's mid power stroke and you drop your heel. Just slightly though, just like standard pedals make it shorter in the same position.
Ah ha, that makes sense 👍🏼
Time for more coffee
regarding the durability of the outlier pendulum or void pedal, Andrew Major has a set of each and has a good track record when he was at NSMB and Bike Mag (only writes at his own blog for now https://meatengines.com/ ) for long term review and teardown so if long term issue should arise we will most likely hear about it. And yes those pedals have 2 6902 bearing per pedals and a chunky looking steel axle that needs to be properly torqued to 30nm for correct preload on those bearings. So not a pedal for the frequent parking lot pedal switcher.
As for the canadian hockey funding statement, lalalalala can't hear you through all our gold medals.
Despite liking the design of the Pendulum pedal I'm wondering if their claim that the plattform sits 12mm below the axle can be true?
The outer diameter of the threads is 9/16 inch which is roughly 14.3mm - for me the distance between the axle and the plattform would be less than half of that so rather 6 or 7mm. Or did I get something wrong?
Not a major flaw but they should have their numbers right for 300$
If it wasn't that expensive I would really like to try them - they look really interesting.
Btw the Loam Ranger made a video about them.
It's $300 CAD so not as outrageous as you think.
I've always thought Frameworks tagline should be, "Frames that make sense, with cranks that make none."
It all depends on how you measure, this is how the "12mm below" could be achieved...
I would see it like this:
The pendulum flat pedal plattform is approximately 12mm lower than your normal/most flat pedals with an axle going through the whole pedal body. and since the axle is most of the time somewhere around 6-8mm in diameter, on top of which there is still some aluminium body above it, its lower.
Not 12mm under the center of the pedal axle but 12mm under normal flat pedal plattform.
This. My preferred flat pedal is 17mm thick at the center, so these drop pedals would sit 14.5mm lower than my pedals. Which is a ton! That's over half an inch, and it's almost a whole pedal lower than my pedal.
But I agree, "12mm below the axle" isn't an accurate or clear sentence. Hope that's not what they go with for final copy on their website.
"Center of the axle" is indeed what it says on their site. I think "top" of axle may be more accurate with the given numbers?
Regardless, it lowers your pedal quite a bit. Between that and the big ol' openness under foot, I'd love to try them.
As a taller guy who runs too many headset spacers with a 50mm rise bar and high COG, I'm really interested in these. I'm not sure they'll hold up, I'm an axle bender and thin pedal axles have never survived long. The standard bearings should be an easy swap when they inevitably toast themselves. But I'm dubious that they'll hold up given the amount of leverage on those bearings. I'll try them if I can buy a spare left axle from day 1.
Say it's a 15mm drop from my existing Scarabs. That's 15mm less rise on the bars/spacers, 15mm lower saddle, it more than makes up for the 10mm shorter cranks I'm running, and without bottom pins rock clearance should be fine.
I'm not sure they'll work out, but the upsides make this an experiment worth trying.
"Try our new Pendulum pedal. The MOST BALLER way to raise your effective stack height."
I ride 95% of my time in the area where they were developed and tested. The riding at Moose Mtn and Prairie View(Husky), two opposing hill sides, is no joke. Its steep, with concrete hard clay with loose on top and has some big moves all over the place, and the guys riding them the last two years testing them take advantage off all of all of it. From my understanding, the pedals have held up very well and everyone who's ridden them have been hooked.
Also, come ride here
https://www.trailforks.com/region/moose-mountain/
This pedal is one of those ideas that seemingly makes obvious sense – it's incredibly baffling that it hasn't been done. I wonder if there'd be advantages to a clipless implementation. 🤔
It's been done before. Shimano had clip ins that were similar 40 years ago in the 80s with a special thread which made them a non-start because it required a special Dura Ace crank.
There was another option, a commuter variant, linked in the Tioga Fly Paper thread on Mtbr.
Clipless wise, I'd say yes because of stability which should make it less tiring?
Put in an order for a pair. The 2 most immediate benefits that come to mind are a lower center of gravity on any given bike and the ability to glance off pedal strikes. No too excited about the "pendulum cradling effect" these will have, I think if you're in the chunk going fast you will get blown off regardless of using these or regular pedals - happy to be proven wrong though!
There is a benefit. Maybe not as much if you run thin pedals (think OneUp aluminium), but there is a benefit. Even pedalling up. I do roll my pedal going up in the technical, steep stuff sometimes, less so with drop pedals.
From over 40 years ago.
I ordered a set of pendulums and some 5mm shorter cranks and the shortest available for my bike at 155s (e-bike, so e13 cranks for Black Friday are only $74). I've dreamt of these pedals for years.
The price of the pedals was $214 shipped to the USA after conversion.
IME, how big a crank feels/ effectively is while pedaling is determined strictly from the distance from the BB to the top of the pedal while during the powerstroke. That's all that matters in my experience, not the overall circle/ oval. For instance, 165mm cranks feel like clown cranks when I'm on clipless pedals, yet 165s feel like 170s (or larger) when on flats, just because the foot is 5-10mm closer to the pedal spindle even on flats.
Standard pedals spin in an oval, the Pendulums with the foot surface in line with the pedal axle, should be perfect circles. I suspect that they make cranks feel longer. A lot longer. In fact you could add that at the bottom the cranks are longer when you are considering the length of the lever.
I mean, why did this ever go away? From where I sit, it's clearly a superior design.
So I was only 95% wrong 😅
Don't think pedals spin in an oval. If your foot sits on top of the axle for a traditional flat pedal, it basically does that throughout the whole circular motion. The only catch here is that your circle center is not the center of the BB, it's offset by the same amount your feet is off the axle of the pedal.
The black circle is what the crank/pedal spindle spins, at the center of that is the BB. Red is what you might be experiencing with a traditional flat pedal today, where you're offset positive at the same amount for the whole rotation. Blue is what might be possible with the pendulum pedals, where you're still offset the same amount, just negative.
PS - when you order shorter cranks, you're just drawing a smaller circle. The offset is the same.
If lower rider-bike-system COG mattered, riders could bend their knees a few degrees more and achieve lower COG than a new gadget offers. So much about mountain biking, beyond seated spinning on a regular surface, includes dynamically increasing and decreasing your ‘weight’ on the touch points.
I’m hoping someone offers some evidence that this static COG picture of bike performance matters at all, now that ebike companies are touting it. I can’t think of a single reason it would matter in tbe context of moutain biking.
you mean Forbidden going E with the DJI motor?
Please no, I don't want to have to buy new pedals
those pedals look really interesting, I'm a big boy, I can bend a few sets of DMR Vaults a year. That's a lot of stress in 2 bearings and no axle.
If it's has proven reliability, I will get some.
Bearings.
One big caveat with drop pedals is about 40 mm added (20 mm either side) to the Q factor. For people that don't like inboard bearing bulges (ala OneUp) these are probably a no go.