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
A "piston massage" is an innovation I could get behind. That said, I like the Hope bleeding nipples the best of the bunch, purging air bubbles under pressure always works for me. Two syringes == sorcery.
Back in 2010 or so I had the 2nd gen Magic Link Coilair, and I loved that bike (cracked it, warrantied, cracked again, etc) and to make room for the tricky bits in the suspension it had 460mm chainstays in a size L, back when Speicalized was selling downhill bikes with 420mm chainstays.
Long story short, this is when Strava first came out, and on my local DH 3 min section I was easily faster than on my DH bike, despite having less travel and worse components/tires. I attribute it to mostly those long chainstays, as well as the magic link being a very, very good suspension platform (reactive to hits, supportive in g outs and turns, etc)
Around this time flow trails were also gaining popularity, and man that Kona was so slow on them. I strugged to keep up with friends who I would smoke on the steep & natural stuff.
Wish frame companies would develop reliable adjustable dropouts/chainstay length instead of figuring out how to poke less holes in their frames to save a few bucks. 150-170mm bikes are used as park bikes and daily drivers, so adjustable chainstays have a clear benefit outside just reducing the cost of having a chainstay mould for each size. If the enduro genre shifts to 140-160mm, that adjustability becomes even more valuable imo.
I hate to be the bearer of bad new, but you are going to see less and less adjustable chainstays moving forward. The wide adoption of UDH means no more chainstay adjustments. The only adjustable UDH dropouts I've seen are from small steel hardtail builders.
Rocky did one... https://bikes.com/products/instinct-c70-axs-24
I think there are others, just not coming to mind right now.
If you did the dropouts the way Banshee does it, it shouldn't be too hard even with UDH... UDH by itself will make the adjustable chainstay option, if done at the axle, a bit more clunky and it could be a problem with Horst link bikes due to the pivot proximity, but it can be done.
The question is, is it worth it? Do people actually use it?
Don't quote me on this...but I think the Pinky Field Test mentioned that Transmission itself can only be used on the longer of the two chainstay lengths. I seem to recall it sounding like the UDH hanger works just fine in both positions but not the direct mount Transmission.
Raaw also has an adjustable dropout if you use their dropout. They offer a UDH dropout but it's not adjustable. I haven't looked closely at Transmission (because I kind of don't care and I kind of don't want to want it; I'm happy with mechanical) so I'm not sure what the limitation is but there seems to be something.
One more win for mechanical drivetrains, guess!
the problem is, chainstay length effects suspension curve, alot as it increases leverage, The rocky mountain was a good example, it rode like a lazy sheep in long but then was stiff because you had to run the bike stiffer - surely corner balance was better but no racer etc ever ran the actual long setting.
No. For the general public it's a selling point at purchase and never used after. Most barely know how their suspension works much less what changes will do to it or even notice the changes on the trail.
Kavenz also uses modular dropouts that retain compatability with UDH. As you alluded to, solutions are out there. Just a matter if those solutions play nice with the brands' industrial design.
I believe Transmission's effectiveness is partially dictated by having the exact right # of links in the chain. They have an app where you put in your make/model/year/frame size/chainring size and it spits out how many links you need. I'd wager to guess that Sram probably discouraged frame manufacturers from adjustable chainstays when they were selling them on UDH because it could potentially cause less-than-desirable shifting performance if the user didn't have the correct number of links because of chainstay length adjustment. Which would then make the user think that their Transmission sucks.
Just a hunch.
I expect it would simply be a setting in the app. Similar for when you change a chainring size on a transmission bike you're supposed to re-setup your derailleur with the app.
I agree, But if the app told them they needed a longer chain because they changed the chainstay length, how many people would actually drop the $$$ for a new chain? Or re-stup their drive-train with the app in the parking lot before hitting the trail? Most people would probably just "run it." Then bitch to all their friends how much Transmission sucks.
My new dh frame has adjustable chain stay length and an adjustable lower shock mount for adjusting frame progression. Once things warm up I’m looking forward to trying short and long in both progression settings. I’m assuming I’ll like short with progressive, but I will definitely try all 4.
FWIW this is the app. Plug in the info, hit calculate and it spits out chain length. Chainstay length is preset by model/side/etc but I'm sure if that data point was editable it would spit out a different chain length.
Well that falls under people following directions and applies to literally every part of a bike. That's a whole other topic.
Exactly like that. Either two different Decoy models in your example with chips in different positions or a new data field for chip position. It'd be simple enough to incorporate. No different than someone with Transmission changing a chainring.
Yes, Rocky has done this for some bike platforms. It's worth noting that for the ones that do have it in the short mode use a specific hanger to Rocky and then the long uses the UDH. Therefore to above points yes, Transmission only compatible in the longer of the two adjustments.
I recall seeing something in pit bits many moons ago.. Atherton DH bike very clearly had a UDH dropout that looked like a potential 2-3 position puck system for RC adjustment. Couldn't get a direct view of how it worked from interior/hub side, but it was spotted and discussed nonetheless. Pretty neat if there was a viable solution brands could adopt into frame design.
Thinking from a 30k foot view on the design side: modular dropouts might just be the best solution to adequately offer adjustment with keeping mounting secure and kinematics in line. However, thinking with the brain that I have, they just may be a Product Manager or Engineer's nightmare in terms of additional SKU's on a BOM and multitude of additions to development test plans.
I realize not all brands can do this given their different suspension designs, but Specialized does this in a brilliant way with having a flip chip at the Horst link pivot.
Enough with the chainstay and transmission discussion - We have something else to scold Sram for.
Some really clear pics from ESMTB of the electric dropper we discussed about a few pages back. I see why they did it, but it still looks terrible. But having the battery be a part of the collar, probably greatly decreases the stack height of the whole dropper, which is positive at least.
https://esmtb.com/asi-es-la-canyon-lux-world-cup-cfr-de-jenny-rissveds-…
In the PB comments, many are asking why not put the battery internal, but then you have to plug your whole bike into a USB-C charger instead of just popping the battery out and leaving your bike in the garage
Seems like the only reason for this to exist is to save on labour costs in installing the post in the factory. Another innovation I can live without.
Reading the last few pages, I am definitely convinced to keep my 1x11 drivetrain until I go for an electric motor + gearbox setup. Seems like not long now, and I am not in a hurry anyway.
Yeah, while I also understand why people would want that. The reason sram/fox hasnt done it is most likely because it then increases the total length of the post. And on pretty much everything except for an XC bike, people want as long of a post as possible, and to run it slammed. And adding 1-2 inches of battery to that dropper, makes so one has to run a 1-2 inch shorter dropper, the opposite of what they want. Some bikes are the exception though, that have a massive seat tube. But most bikes wont fit one of those droppers.
The batteries dimensions are now "built in" to the collar. So the top part of the dropper can be significantly smaller. I am guessing if you ran a 170mm AXS dropper before, you could probably run a 200mm one now. The stack height of the "old" one is quite big.
I believe at 170mm axs one is similar in total length to a OneUp 200mm one. Just because the top part with the battery increases the stack so much.
We can quite clearly see the difference here - Probably a good 20mm, or close to an inch of difference?
New one:
Old one
Pretty sure this has been proposed before but I don't see why there isn't built in wiring with power and a data line like Can bus that has ports near the cranks, dropper, derailleur and suspension which can all run to a single battery (which e bikes basically already have). Would give flexibility for using wired or wireless droppers without their own power source - you could just tap in to the power for a wireless post, or have the actuator signal transmitted on the CAN bus as well
1 x 11 was a great generation - especially the sram stuff. I feel like certain eras of drivetrain were better than others in performance, and the main thing that let 11 speed down was the range not being quite enough to get a good spread of gears without any massive jumps
I've got some bad news: it doesn't matter where the added stack height is located, it's still added stack height. A 180mm post with 20mm of added stack height for a battery and motor at the top of the seatpost is just as tall as a 180mm post with 20mm of added stack height at the collar. At least if the added stack height is integrated at the very bottom of the post some people will be able to slam the post all the way into a deep-insertion seat tube. But for most people, it's probably just added stack height.
Wasn’t the point of moving the battery/motor to allow for more rear wheel clearance with the back of the saddle and thus allow for longer drop options?
I’m sure we’ll see 200mm or greater drop with next gen Reverb AXS, same as Fox did with their post.
The collar is already pretty fat on the AXS V1, and by the looks of it, it hasnt increased in size very much adding a battery to it on the V2
So by doing this, they've dropped a significant ammount of stack from the seat mount part/top of the dropper. Sorry if that wasnt clear enough in the above post.
The old "collar" is quite fat on the old version:
So by putting the battery there instead of at the top, I'd say they lost a good ammount of stack - as pictured in my last post
I just measured bottom of the seat rail, to top of dropper stanchion on my bike - And its just about 25mm/1 inch~
And looking at the new post, if we estimate the saddle rails to be about 7mm (I dont have a ergon seat with carbon rails, just the regular metal rails - Which are 6-7mm) - You'll now have to excuse my horrendeus MS paint skills - But the "stack" of the new seat seems to be about 2 seat rails high, so lets call it 15mm. So maybe not as much as I thought from the beginning, since the collar might still be a bit thicker with the new battery.
But then again, as mentioned above by chriskief, the main objective was probably to get the battery away from where it currently is. But take that with maybe a decrease in stack by 10-15mm, its still pretty good.
Regardless, it looks very ugly, and will probably be like $1000. So I will not be replacing my V1 any time soon
Not just uglier but the tilt adjust on the V1 is one of the best features on my entire bike. It looks like that goes away in V2.