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
Does indeed seem to be a 20mm axle.
Surprised it's on a sentinel, since that's meant to be a 160mm travel bike, but I guess just run it at 170 and see
20 mils? like 0.508mm?
Sounds like a NASA Mars Climate Orbiter Disaster
Hate to post from the other site but the lineup of these 3 is doing something to me. 🥵
Love it 🤌 no notes.
Well it could be coil.......but apart from that looks sick!
The chant doesn't work as well otherwise
Mind describing what you mean here in a lil more detail?
Since it's a USD fork, you can get more travel in the same/similar axle-to-crown and not blow-up the geo numbers. I would think Fox would keep it the same as the normal 38 +10 travel (or whatever it would work out to be).
If Fox makes USD forks fairly common, bet someone with a 3d printer could make decent money printing out guards.
Ahh true, because the stanchion to crown interface can be shorter on a USD to normal fork, similar to how axle to crown is shorter given the travel for dual crown forks
Sea otter: Any new shoes from five ten? I’m trying to manifest an impact pro with boa.
Theres long Rear centre but with the chainstay arm being short(such as the druid E)
Theres long rear centre with long chainstays
and then theres shorter rear centre with long or short physical chainstay arms.
Short chainstays with short rear centres are the problem, we need to make the chainstay longer while controlling rear centre.
You can have a bit of the benefit of a longer rear centre and a bit of short benefit by making the physical chainstay arm long. Ie getting it infront of the BB with the bb pushed back into the arm.
Bikes like the enduro are such a good standard because they have long physical chainstays, the enduro rides like its rear centre is much longer because of it.
I've spent so much time messing with long and short bikes both in reach and stays/rear centre etc
Once i figured out why the enduro felt the way it did I understood why the One-sixty felt the same way.
We need to seperate rear centre and chainstay lengths. as they are different on full suspension bikes and make alot of change to how a bike rides
EDIT: in suspension geo terms, For offroad, 'long links' or 'long arms' seem to perform better.
i'm finishing up details like thumbnail etc, but here's "crazy and cool" video from sea otter today for you tech nerds first. it's a rad time in MTB with so many crazy contraptions out there!
Bit of a video walk around of the Fox USD on EMBN’s youtube vid at ~11mins
https://youtu.be/_dJDv6mNeWs?si=XTd8I_ZmF08DP1Hw
Or maintaining current travel to AC figures allows room for increase in overlap. Rumored to be 170 max travel
I'm still more interested in the Cane Creek USD enduro fork that's supposedly in the works. Fox has pushed me away from them with how annoying they are to work on and QC issues. At least with Cane Creek, I know I'm getting into more complicated maintenance, but it's better performance offsets that.
The fox USD looked very good in person
Are you talking about suspension performance? Many of us focus on long rear center being a geo trait that helps balance out weight between front and rear wheels.
You seem to talking about longer chainstays as a component of the kinematic equation. Am I close?
Would be a weird move to limit it to 170 unless the current 38 runs alongside it? No way Fox would cut themselves out of the 180 SC market.
Both, they both effect each other.
People are asking for long chainstays but they should be asking for long rear centres.(for what they think they want)
a long chainstay arm/link can help balance the bike without having a long rear centre.
I argue its all about CG and how CG moves under compression or decent angle of the bike, a long rear centre is just an easy way to achieve it and sell it but when you point the Bike downhill a long rear centre is often a pain in the ass, which can be literally.
Some bikes, like the Reign/trance can achieve both benefits of each by using a long DW style link thats assisted by being mounted quite far forward - all of that design is smooth, in all graphs, in return you get some DW link stuff without the pedal kick.
I've ridden a few long rear centre bikes and own a titan 3.2, it gives up so much suspension Performance for the sake of central balance at sag Id like to try it with without the lower link. it's balanced untill its not, it starts to pitch you forward especially when you experience fast consecutive hits - you cant tune that out with the shock.
I need to experience some more bikes with growing stays, The gen 6 slash has short stays that grow really predictably(its actually a really good bike) But i want to try something with a almost vertical long rear link that moves outwards alot to see if you can get mid stroke balance when you start really pushing into the bike.
More testing required, Been messing with this alot this year and currently have a 6 enduro ish garage haha - Been trying really hard to get Some local Stuff made
Well I'll be damned, dreams can come true
Just rumors at this point, but the bulk of demand is definitely for 170 or less. That said I can't imagine this fork is being rolled out as a replacement for the current 38 rather than as a new category unto itself. At least I would hope not.
Would seem risky to take what is widely considered to be the best 160+ fork currently available and replace it outright with something so drastically different and potentially less widely appealing.
I can't figure out why anyone making an inverted fork in 2025, especially a single crown inverted fork, wouldn't use the Manitou hex axle to add torsional stiffness. The patent is expired and it adds almost no weight. I imagine a 15mm hex axle is significantly stiffer in torsion than a round 20mm axle, and doesn't require a new front hub. Especially if you're already doing pinch bolts, you can do it the way the Dorado has been doing it since 2002? It's so simple!
We'd finally settled on Boost 15mm as a trail bike front hub, and now it's blowing up again. Sigh.
Yes, it looks like Praxis is using the same/a very similar shifting system as the Vyro shifting chainring, but they've packaged it in a gearbox.
The Praxis gearbox looks awesome if it works. As others have mentioned, the old Honda derailleur-in-a-box system was the king of efficiency and mechanical simpliciaty, but limited by the size of a cassette that you could fit in the box. This system from Praxis looks like a way to fit more gear range into a more compact space by routing them in series. Super cool. Chains are a billion times more efficient than my last time riding a bike with meshing gears, which was a highly underwhelming ride on Hammerschmidt a decade-ish ago.
USD fork mud guard is a PITA to 3D print... Probably easier to make a mold and make it out of carbon or fibreglass...
Does it have something to do with the axle path arc? A longer swingarm will have a less curved axle path...
It's probably much much harder to make on the dropouts side (square holes vs. round holes and all) and possibly adds very little vs. a cranked down pinch bolt. If you clamp it we'll enough a round axle will also not rotate, case in point, handlebars, stems, seat posts, etc.
Not exactly a billion, more like 5 ish times at most (1 to 2 percent losses with a chain, 5 to 10 percent with meshed cogs).
One thing to note, using two chains in series inside a gearbox will still lower the efficiency compared to a straight chain in a single speed layout by 3 times as you add two loss generating components besides the original one. Are losses on a standard cassette drivetrain higher than a single speed layout due to the chain bending? Yes. Higher than having two additional chain drives? Possibly not, though not sure. Also depends on the lubrication strategy of course.
torsional flex on my flash, stiff enough
most what you see is really coming from the stem/bar
yeah thats what i was assuming he was talking about. its just that we have two different phenomenons created by longer chainstays (or rather, are linked with longer chainstays, since long CS measurements can be acheived through different means, as pointed out by noidea.)
i like your point, noidea. I had really put those two ideas together, long cs and long swingarm, but that does sound like magic sauce. most of us are settling for whatever the fuck we can get from the people designing these bikes, so each step in what we feel is the right direction gets a resounding cheer.
cool video.. now go ride down a mellow gradient street, reach 30-40 km/h and pull front brake while watching the alignment of the front wheel and your stem ; ) (and take a video) zero fore-aft but some torsional flex due to the way the braking affects the system.. I never checked on conventional fork, but had an issue with a broken fender on my edge and paid attention to this as it was crooked and then saw the flex.. anyways.. fantastic forks, I have 2 USDs..