A patent doesn't stop you from building something, but it does prevent you from exploiting it commercially.The use of the existing pivot bolt/idler location as a...
A patent doesn't stop you from building something, but it does prevent you from exploiting it commercially.
The use of the existing pivot bolt/idler location as a mounting point and the overlap between the chainring and the new drive ring suggests it was done this way because an idler pulley that large wouldn't fit without dramatically reducing the size of the chainring.
Also either he doesn't understand "pedal efficiency" or I don't. It's effectively eliminated anti-squat, so pedal efficiency's now in the dirt.
1. I am quite aware how patent enforcement functions. 2. I thought the attempt at humor was functional as well, but apparently not😁.
Have you ever held a belt, and flexed it? Even a car engine belt? Belts absolutely have more friction than a chain, it's not even close...
Have you ever held a belt, and flexed it? Even a car engine belt? Belts absolutely have more friction than a chain, it's not even close really.
I can't speak for every locale, but I could ride my waxed chains with no maintenance at all in my dry dusty location for 100+ miles with zero change in friction or performance.
Believe it or not, I have one on my bike, and a chain on a few other bikes.Bending with and without load is not the same...
Believe it or not, I have one on my bike, and a chain on a few other bikes.
Bending with and without load is not the same thing,and the energy used by bending a belt is fairly constant,while chains friction increases with power.
There's a dedicated thread to all this now, just saying like someone else mentioned, there's a lot of confirmation bias and a huge echo chamber talking about drag, but I literally just have 2 bikes next to me, one with a belt, and one with a chain I didn't lube after riding yesterday. There's no difference worth mentioning in their drivetrain losses.
I don't understand why people put so much emphasis on the new thing's one drawback that's barely a measurable difference. You could argue spares and belts can be hard to find, but get out of here with BS about efficiency already, there's so many ways you waste energy with a derailleur you don't realize because you're so used to it, it's really an invalid point.
If belts had more efficiency at over 150 watts, we'd almost certainly see them at the TdF. I certainly don't maintain over 150 watts when pedaling my bike.
There is a member over at MTB.com, NurseBen, and like all of us he has some pretty specific beliefs about what will and won't work on his bikes.
First, he wanted a gearbox with a belt, as he is a long-term fit mountain biker and wasn't concerned about a few watts. Mud kept packing up on his belt and the bike was throwing belts. I also think it kept squeaking. So, then he sold that bike and bought another gearbox bike, a Kavenz, but this time with a chain to get away from the belt issues. First, he punched a hole right through the gear box case, so there was $800 or something gone. Then he had to build a bash plate so that it wouldn't happen again, which of course adds even more weight. Next, he as a nearly daily bike rider, went out with his occasional rider friend and realized he killed himself to keep up. So, the next time he joins the friend but he rides his chained single speed bike, and has no issues keeping up. Now he has his second gearbox bike in like a year for sale and be bought a Canfield with a normal drivetrain to replace it and he acknowledged that it just sucked to pedal the gearbox bikes (finally). This was a guy that went from singing the praises of his gearbox belted bikes to eschewing them entirely, at no small financial loss, I'm sure.
If belts had more efficiency at over 150 watts, we'd almost certainly see them at the TdF. I certainly don't maintain over 150 watts when pedaling...
If belts had more efficiency at over 150 watts, we'd almost certainly see them at the TdF. I certainly don't maintain over 150 watts when pedaling my bike.
There is a member over at MTB.com, NurseBen, and like all of us he has some pretty specific beliefs about what will and won't work on his bikes.
First, he wanted a gearbox with a belt, as he is a long-term fit mountain biker and wasn't concerned about a few watts. Mud kept packing up on his belt and the bike was throwing belts. I also think it kept squeaking. So, then he sold that bike and bought another gearbox bike, a Kavenz, but this time with a chain to get away from the belt issues. First, he punched a hole right through the gear box case, so there was $800 or something gone. Then he had to build a bash plate so that it wouldn't happen again, which of course adds even more weight. Next, he as a nearly daily bike rider, went out with his occasional rider friend and realized he killed himself to keep up. So, the next time he joins the friend but he rides his chained single speed bike, and has no issues keeping up. Now he has his second gearbox bike in like a year for sale and be bought a Canfield with a normal drivetrain to replace it and he acknowledged that it just sucked to pedal the gearbox bikes (finally). This was a guy that went from singing the praises of his gearbox belted bikes to eschewing them entirely, at no small financial loss, I'm sure.
https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/belt-drive-and-gearbox-thread There, if you wanna keep blasting new tech while ignoring the obvious shortfalls of old tech Just a few simple points - Hard to use a belt without a gearbox, and gearbox is probably not the best for the lycra lovers. - Been riding my belt in treacherous mud all fall/winter, and had zero issues, literally zero maintenance..just saying, because some fella somewhere had a bad experience doesn't mean sh!t. - So what a fella broke something. I have a box full of broken derailleurs that had definitely cost me $1000 in the past 3 seasons. Just yesterday on my last ride I smoked another derailleur.
Let's move it to the dedicated thread, I'm just sick of people parroting downfalls of some technology without having even tried it, and completely ignoring the downfalls of other tech..
I see your gearbox/belt/chain talk and raise you an enclosed primary chain with secondary "standard" drivetrain! This is cool:https://www.zoceli.cz/en/vysoko
I see your gearbox/belt/chain talk and raise you an enclosed primary chain with secondary "standard" drivetrain! This is cool:
How on earth does the secondary chain fit inside the seat tube with enough room to drive the upper pulley with any degree of efficiency? I don't get it.
The more I read about all this high pivot, gearbox, dual chain, 19 link stuff, the more I'm happy to be running a simple Horst or a single pivot.
one last derailment (hehe) of this thread for the gearbox debate:
even if a gearbox is 100% efficient, the total efficiency of the system will never exceed that of a system with an idler pulley, since you have something additional inbetween the cranks and the rear hub.
That being said, I'm starting to suspect that idlers' main performance benefits are less the more rearward axle path and more the reduction in chain drag on the suspension (like what ochain is trying to solve)
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to me these things look terrible for general use. And I don't just mean because you can't pedal, I mean I wouldn't want to ride skate parks, dirt jumps, or pump tracks with these. Or A-Line. I don't want to keep my crankarms dead level when I'm riding. Dropping an outside foot lowers my leverage point on the bike by 175mm. Why would I want to lose that? Also, when I'm pumping, I can move my center of gravity even higher and even lower using the cranks, and do really complicated stuff into and out of corners where there's a pump bump in the transition. All of that gets obliterated when you just stand on a crank spindle. I think cranks make bikes more capable and more fun to ride, even when you're not pedaling.
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
I see your gearbox/belt/chain talk and raise you an enclosed primary chain with secondary "standard" drivetrain! This is cool:https://www.zoceli.cz/en/vysoko
I see your gearbox/belt/chain talk and raise you an enclosed primary chain with secondary "standard" drivetrain! This is cool:
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to...
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to me these things look terrible for general use. And I don't just mean because you can't pedal, I mean I wouldn't want to ride skate parks, dirt jumps, or pump tracks with these. Or A-Line. I don't want to keep my crankarms dead level when I'm riding. Dropping an outside foot lowers my leverage point on the bike by 175mm. Why would I want to lose that? Also, when I'm pumping, I can move my center of gravity even higher and even lower using the cranks, and do really complicated stuff into and out of corners where there's a pump bump in the transition. All of that gets obliterated when you just stand on a crank spindle. I think cranks make bikes more capable and more fun to ride, even when you're not pedaling.
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to...
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to me these things look terrible for general use. And I don't just mean because you can't pedal, I mean I wouldn't want to ride skate parks, dirt jumps, or pump tracks with these. Or A-Line. I don't want to keep my crankarms dead level when I'm riding. Dropping an outside foot lowers my leverage point on the bike by 175mm. Why would I want to lose that? Also, when I'm pumping, I can move my center of gravity even higher and even lower using the cranks, and do really complicated stuff into and out of corners where there's a pump bump in the transition. All of that gets obliterated when you just stand on a crank spindle. I think cranks make bikes more capable and more fun to ride, even when you're not pedaling.
The lostco guys made a video on basically the same concept. I remember it being described as "always feeling you have the wrong foot forward"
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to...
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to me these things look terrible for general use. And I don't just mean because you can't pedal, I mean I wouldn't want to ride skate parks, dirt jumps, or pump tracks with these. Or A-Line. I don't want to keep my crankarms dead level when I'm riding. Dropping an outside foot lowers my leverage point on the bike by 175mm. Why would I want to lose that? Also, when I'm pumping, I can move my center of gravity even higher and even lower using the cranks, and do really complicated stuff into and out of corners where there's a pump bump in the transition. All of that gets obliterated when you just stand on a crank spindle. I think cranks make bikes more capable and more fun to ride, even when you're not pedaling.
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to...
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to me these things look terrible for general use. And I don't just mean because you can't pedal, I mean I wouldn't want to ride skate parks, dirt jumps, or pump tracks with these. Or A-Line. I don't want to keep my crankarms dead level when I'm riding. Dropping an outside foot lowers my leverage point on the bike by 175mm. Why would I want to lose that? Also, when I'm pumping, I can move my center of gravity even higher and even lower using the cranks, and do really complicated stuff into and out of corners where there's a pump bump in the transition. All of that gets obliterated when you just stand on a crank spindle. I think cranks make bikes more capable and more fun to ride, even when you're not pedaling.
The lostco guys made a video on basically the same concept. I remember it being described as "always feeling you have the wrong foot forward"
The lostco guys made a video on basically the same concept. I remember it being described as "always feeling you have the wrong foot forward"
I just made an account to make this comment, I'm the guy in that video. They definitely felt bizarre and completely wrong the first couple days with them, which is all we showed in the video. After riding them more I started to love them, and I'll get them on again once the bike park opens. They're not an advantage over normal chainless riding, they're just goofy and fun.
Lots of people reached out to buy a set from us, but ours was just a one off we made. If those people put their money where their mouth is that guy's gonna have some sales.
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to...
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to me these things look terrible for general use. And I don't just mean because you can't pedal, I mean I wouldn't want to ride skate parks, dirt jumps, or pump tracks with these. Or A-Line. I don't want to keep my crankarms dead level when I'm riding. Dropping an outside foot lowers my leverage point on the bike by 175mm. Why would I want to lose that? Also, when I'm pumping, I can move my center of gravity even higher and even lower using the cranks, and do really complicated stuff into and out of corners where there's a pump bump in the transition. All of that gets obliterated when you just stand on a crank spindle. I think cranks make bikes more capable and more fun to ride, even when you're not pedaling.
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
My initial reaction (well, next after "I want to give that a try") is that these will exert a torque on the BB shell that it doesn't normally experience,because the pedal load is now cantilevered and applied directly rather than transferred radially by a crankshaft, and I wonder what that means long term.
Edit: Threaded BBs are already slightly cantilevered, since the bearings are external to the frame, but only by that very small offset distance. So this might not necessarily be a new force, but I think it will be significantly greater.
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack...
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to...
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to me these things look terrible for general use. And I don't just mean because you can't pedal, I mean I wouldn't want to ride skate parks, dirt jumps, or pump tracks with these. Or A-Line. I don't want to keep my crankarms dead level when I'm riding. Dropping an outside foot lowers my leverage point on the bike by 175mm. Why would I want to lose that? Also, when I'm pumping, I can move my center of gravity even higher and even lower using the cranks, and do really complicated stuff into and out of corners where there's a pump bump in the transition. All of that gets obliterated when you just stand on a crank spindle. I think cranks make bikes more capable and more fun to ride, even when you're not pedaling.
What I took away from this Charlie is that you’re still riding 175mm cranks
Has anyone considered the possibility that the belt might in fact be the weakest part of the gearbox ecosystem? Sounds like most of the concerns over gearboxes on the wc circuit involve belts slipping.
Lewis and Intense???
i‘ve mavens myself and the hoses run parallel to the handlebars, those in the picture run a little bit inwards, like codes and level brakes.
Oh come on mate, they are 100% the pre-series maven levers. 😉
1. I am quite aware how patent enforcement functions. 2. I thought the attempt at humor was functional as well, but apparently not😁.
Brewis and Sntense?
My thought was Bimano and Srek.
If belts had more efficiency at over 150 watts, we'd almost certainly see them at the TdF. I certainly don't maintain over 150 watts when pedaling my bike.
There is a member over at MTB.com, NurseBen, and like all of us he has some pretty specific beliefs about what will and won't work on his bikes.
First, he wanted a gearbox with a belt, as he is a long-term fit mountain biker and wasn't concerned about a few watts. Mud kept packing up on his belt and the bike was throwing belts. I also think it kept squeaking. So, then he sold that bike and bought another gearbox bike, a Kavenz, but this time with a chain to get away from the belt issues. First, he punched a hole right through the gear box case, so there was $800 or something gone. Then he had to build a bash plate so that it wouldn't happen again, which of course adds even more weight. Next, he as a nearly daily bike rider, went out with his occasional rider friend and realized he killed himself to keep up. So, the next time he joins the friend but he rides his chained single speed bike, and has no issues keeping up. Now he has his second gearbox bike in like a year for sale and be bought a Canfield with a normal drivetrain to replace it and he acknowledged that it just sucked to pedal the gearbox bikes (finally). This was a guy that went from singing the praises of his gearbox belted bikes to eschewing them entirely, at no small financial loss, I'm sure.
Guys, make a belt vs chain thread or something, The rest of us dont care for gearbox's & belts etc
https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/belt-drive-and-gearbox-thread
There, if you wanna keep blasting new tech while ignoring the obvious shortfalls of old tech
Just a few simple points
- Hard to use a belt without a gearbox, and gearbox is probably not the best for the lycra lovers.
- Been riding my belt in treacherous mud all fall/winter, and had zero issues, literally zero maintenance..just saying, because some fella somewhere had a bad experience doesn't mean sh!t.
- So what a fella broke something. I have a box full of broken derailleurs that had definitely cost me $1000 in the past 3 seasons. Just yesterday on my last ride I smoked another derailleur.
Let's move it to the dedicated thread, I'm just sick of people parroting downfalls of some technology without having even tried it, and completely ignoring the downfalls of other tech..
I see your gearbox/belt/chain talk and raise you an enclosed primary chain with secondary "standard" drivetrain! This is cool:
https://www.zoceli.cz/en/vysoko
How on earth does the secondary chain fit inside the seat tube with enough room to drive the upper pulley with any degree of efficiency? I don't get it.
The more I read about all this high pivot, gearbox, dual chain, 19 link stuff, the more I'm happy to be running a simple Horst or a single pivot.
Huh. Wonder if Brembo licensed the lever reach adjust from Hayes, USP US11124263?
one last derailment (hehe) of this thread for the gearbox debate:
even if a gearbox is 100% efficient, the total efficiency of the system will never exceed that of a system with an idler pulley, since you have something additional inbetween the cranks and the rear hub.
That being said, I'm starting to suspect that idlers' main performance benefits are less the more rearward axle path and more the reduction in chain drag on the suspension (like what ochain is trying to solve)
Forget belts and chains, what about a wheel on the spindle that drives a counter-rotating wheel to spin the rear wheel?
Get with the times or get left behind, dinosaurs!
Not really a rumor but perhaps an innovation, but could see these being popular with the no drivetrain Whistler crowd and folks who have a pumptrack only kinda bike. Paging Remy Morton
MOTOCRANX
the ultimate in pedal kick back elimination!
seriously though, they have to be fun on a DH bike, don't they?
I could see these being a helpful training tool for isolating different skills in a coaching environment (like doing drills with only one ski), but to me these things look terrible for general use. And I don't just mean because you can't pedal, I mean I wouldn't want to ride skate parks, dirt jumps, or pump tracks with these. Or A-Line. I don't want to keep my crankarms dead level when I'm riding. Dropping an outside foot lowers my leverage point on the bike by 175mm. Why would I want to lose that? Also, when I'm pumping, I can move my center of gravity even higher and even lower using the cranks, and do really complicated stuff into and out of corners where there's a pump bump in the transition. All of that gets obliterated when you just stand on a crank spindle. I think cranks make bikes more capable and more fun to ride, even when you're not pedaling.
The e-bike story arc is now complete.
Strider bike for adults after they first take off the training wheels.
Looks like a Lahar's 3rd cousin twice removed. I dig it.
cue all the 'but what about motorcycles' comments
The lostco guys made a video on basically the same concept. I remember it being described as "always feeling you have the wrong foot forward"
O/T Is there a consensus on what the correct foot forward is?
looks like they're the creation of that Lee likes bikes guy. I've always thought that guy was kinda an idiot.
I just made an account to make this comment, I'm the guy in that video. They definitely felt bizarre and completely wrong the first couple days with them, which is all we showed in the video. After riding them more I started to love them, and I'll get them on again once the bike park opens. They're not an advantage over normal chainless riding, they're just goofy and fun.
Lots of people reached out to buy a set from us, but ours was just a one off we made. If those people put their money where their mouth is that guy's gonna have some sales.
Left, wait no Right.
I intentionally swap my forward foot to get used to it and hopefully lessen any side to side strength imbalances from riding.
My initial reaction (well, next after "I want to give that a try") is that these will exert a torque on the BB shell that it doesn't normally experience,because the pedal load is now cantilevered and applied directly rather than transferred radially by a crankshaft, and I wonder what that means long term.
Edit: Threaded BBs are already slightly cantilevered, since the bearings are external to the frame, but only by that very small offset distance. So this might not necessarily be a new force, but I think it will be significantly greater.
What I took away from this Charlie is that you’re still riding 175mm cranks
Has anyone considered the possibility that the belt might in fact be the weakest part of the gearbox ecosystem? Sounds like most of the concerns over gearboxes on the wc circuit involve belts slipping.