2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker

Related:
jonkranked
Posts
1185
Joined
5/5/2016
Location
Norristown, PA US
1 day ago
Primoz wrote:
The smaller the chainrings are, the higher the forces in the chain for a given power load. Because the two primary chainrings are fairly small (around...

The smaller the chainrings are, the higher the forces in the chain for a given power load. Because the two primary chainrings are fairly small (around 20t), the loads in the chain are high. Thus, apparently, the need for two of them. So it's not a patent circumvention thing... 

not only a patent circumvention thing. 

8
j0lsrud
Posts
95
Joined
7/20/2021
Location
NO
1 day ago Edited Date/Time 1 day ago
Primoz wrote:
The smaller the chainrings are, the higher the forces in the chain for a given power load. Because the two primary chainrings are fairly small (around...

The smaller the chainrings are, the higher the forces in the chain for a given power load. Because the two primary chainrings are fairly small (around 20t), the loads in the chain are high. Thus, apparently, the need for two of them. So it's not a patent circumvention thing... 

Tried to count on the picture, seems like 18 and 13t sprockets. 

Is it because the leverage ratio/torque with two small sprockets? 

I found this old article, that say 10s chains from 2007 break at around 10,5kN, which is a lot. But then again, does this force actually happen in sprint of sat 1800w? https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/83157/what-is-the-maximum-force-that-an-average-bicycle-chain-sprocket-can-withstand

And now the internet told me this:

https://calcengines.com/shaft-power-torque-speed-calculator/?P=1800&Pu=W&T=&Tu=Nm&n=120&eta=95&r=50&ru=mm&sf=1.5&solve=auto

By The Internets calculations (and my inputs) the force at a 13t (Ø50mm) sprocket is around 2400N when producing 1800w at 140rpm. This means the chain can take over 4 times the power. And i really don't understand the need for two chains.

 

6
TEAMROBOT
Posts
1368
Joined
9/2/2009
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
1 day ago
TEAMROBOT wrote:
Good questions! I had a great conversation with Kiran MacKinnon of Santa Cruz Bikes at Sea Otter (and it should be published as a podcast at...

Good questions! I had a great conversation with Kiran MacKinnon of Santa Cruz Bikes at Sea Otter (and it should be published as a podcast at some point), and he said that because e-bike frames have to be so much stiffer than pedal bikes, taking the motor and battery out basically produces a bike that rides like a block of wood (i.e. overly stiff and harsh over bumps).

That doesn't mean that an e-bike with the motor removed is unridable (i.e. Martin Maes racing DH on the e-Wild frame as a development project for the new Rallon DH bike), but it's a big performance compromise, especially at a time where "engineered compliance" is such a big buzzword in the industry. That was actually what we were talking about, with the new slimmer downtube on the Nomad, when we ended up talking about big e-bike downtubes.

Because of the necessary increases in frame stiffness for good e-bike handling, I don't think a dedicated hybrid pedal/e-bike frame would pencil out, unless you did a lot of crazy things to tune or adjust stiffness when you added or removed a motor, like the removable seatstay braces on many current DH bikes.

For the foreseeable future, I think the main benefit of a dedicated motor-replacement/BB assembly will be its ability to get old broken down e-bikes back out on the trails.

For what it’s worth, the rear triangle on Alden’s Crestline e-bike frame that has been converted to a dh is being made stiffer for him. Provided...

For what it’s worth, the rear triangle on Alden’s Crestline e-bike frame that has been converted to a dh is being made stiffer for him. Provided he’s a tall guy riding hard.

That's awesome. Thanks for sharing that additional color to my commentary. That bike is SO sick and I totally forgot about it when I was thinking of examples of eebs with the motor removed.

In my comments, I should have added: YMMV.

But we're not all Alden Pate.

1
johann377
Posts
26
Joined
11/16/2024
Location
Mosfellsbaer IS
1 day ago Edited Date/Time 1 day ago
ebruner wrote:
Question(s) for the group at large that pops into my head when I see these pedal bike development mules that are ebikes, and based off of...

Question(s) for the group at large that pops into my head when I see these pedal bike development mules that are ebikes, and based off of the various ebike to dh bike conversions that are a part of racing these days.  

  1. Is there a future where pedal bikes either take on the form of ebikes, but with bb assemblies that bolt into the motor mounts?  
  2. Is or would that potentially be a problem for the various groups of consumers?  The average consumer vs the die hard vs tip of the spear of performance chasers?  
  3. Do we think that would create problems for overall bike development and design?  Would this make pedal bikes better or worse overall, and what about ebikes... would this impact ebike frame development in a good or a bad way?

    I can see a certain logic to this as many brands are spending a lot of time developing their suspension packaging, kinematics and frame design around primarily ebikes... and there is efficiency and economics of scale doing it this way.  Beyond that, there could be performance benefits of having flexibility in the bb placement and being able to adjust or add weight etc.  

TEAMROBOT wrote:
Good questions! I had a great conversation with Kiran MacKinnon of Santa Cruz Bikes at Sea Otter (and it should be published as a podcast at...

Good questions! I had a great conversation with Kiran MacKinnon of Santa Cruz Bikes at Sea Otter (and it should be published as a podcast at some point), and he said that because e-bike frames have to be so much stiffer than pedal bikes, taking the motor and battery out basically produces a bike that rides like a block of wood (i.e. overly stiff and harsh over bumps).

That doesn't mean that an e-bike with the motor removed is unridable (i.e. Martin Maes racing DH on the e-Wild frame as a development project for the new Rallon DH bike), but it's a big performance compromise, especially at a time where "engineered compliance" is such a big buzzword in the industry. That was actually what we were talking about, with the new slimmer downtube on the Nomad, when we ended up talking about big e-bike downtubes.

Because of the necessary increases in frame stiffness for good e-bike handling, I don't think a dedicated hybrid pedal/e-bike frame would pencil out, unless you did a lot of crazy things to tune or adjust stiffness when you added or removed a motor, like the removable seatstay braces on many current DH bikes.

For the foreseeable future, I think the main benefit of a dedicated motor-replacement/BB assembly will be its ability to get old broken down e-bikes back out on the trails.

This feels a bit like PR speak to defend half of the products they offer, which of course they should do. But couldn’t the increased stiffness suit other riders better, for example heavier or more aggressive riders? 

I use my Crafty analog and as an e-bike, absolutely love it both ways.  

2
1 day ago
bigbonjour wrote:
Saw this in the background of an Instagram story, must be the new tall boy going away from VPP

Saw this in the background of an Instagram IMG 9094 0.png?VersionId=8GXNvckEx5Crh4SadHstory, must be the new tall boy going away from VPP

Sir HC wrote:

Making way for a TQ system to slot into there ?

I was going to say, it looks like an ebike, not a meatbike

3
3
hardbash
Posts
63
Joined
7/14/2021
Location
DE
1 day ago Edited Date/Time 1 day ago
Primoz wrote:
The smaller the chainrings are, the higher the forces in the chain for a given power load. Because the two primary chainrings are fairly small (around...

The smaller the chainrings are, the higher the forces in the chain for a given power load. Because the two primary chainrings are fairly small (around 20t), the loads in the chain are high. Thus, apparently, the need for two of them. So it's not a patent circumvention thing... 

j0lsrud wrote:
Tried to count on the picture, seems like 18 and 13t sprockets. Is it because the leverage ratio/torque with two small sprockets? I found this old article, that...

Tried to count on the picture, seems like 18 and 13t sprockets. 

Is it because the leverage ratio/torque with two small sprockets? 

I found this old article, that say 10s chains from 2007 break at around 10,5kN, which is a lot. But then again, does this force actually happen in sprint of sat 1800w? https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/83157/what-is-the-maximum-force-that-an-average-bicycle-chain-sprocket-can-withstand

And now the internet told me this:

https://calcengines.com/shaft-power-torque-speed-calculator/?P=1800&Pu=W&T=&Tu=Nm&n=120&eta=95&r=50&ru=mm&sf=1.5&solve=auto

By The Internets calculations (and my inputs) the force at a 13t (Ø50mm) sprocket is around 2400N when producing 1800w at 140rpm. This means the chain can take over 4 times the power. And i really don't understand the need for two chains.

 

Calculate with half of that rpm (no downhiller sprints at such a high rpm) the safety factor is not that big anymore, but I would guess one chain would be enough still

1
1
jalopyj
Posts
104
Joined
10/23/2023
Location
Concord, CA US
1 day ago
bigbonjour wrote:
Saw this in the background of an Instagram story, must be the new tall boy going away from VPP

Saw this in the background of an Instagram IMG 9094 0.png?VersionId=8GXNvckEx5Crh4SadHstory, must be the new tall boy going away from VPP

Sir HC wrote:

Making way for a TQ system to slot into there ?

I was going to say, it looks like an ebike, not a meatbike

Yeah - plus shock looks to have a piggy back and it sorta looks like he is pushing "walk mode" with his left thumb to hike his bike up the hill.

2
1
TEAMROBOT
Posts
1368
Joined
9/2/2009
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
1 day ago Edited Date/Time 1 day ago
johann377 wrote:
This feels a bit like PR speak to defend half of the products they offer, which of course they should do. But couldn’t the increased stiffness...

This feels a bit like PR speak to defend half of the products they offer, which of course they should do. But couldn’t the increased stiffness suit other riders better, for example heavier or more aggressive riders? 

I use my Crafty analog and as an e-bike, absolutely love it both ways.  

On the one hand, yes, and also no.

Yes, totally, optimal stiffness for any bicycle chassis component is highly contingent on rider weight, riding style, and terrain. So I imagine a bike that's "too stiff" on average will suit some riders at the margins and a bike that's "too flexy" on average will suit others. This is actually a huge gripe I have with the bike industry in general, because products are almost always advertised as a one-size-fits-all solution, and they aren't/don't/can't.

On the other hand, I don't tend to think Kiran is bullshitting me, because I've known him for a while, and I say this in love, but he would get a lot farther in the business world by being less honest and less maniacally detail-oriented. There are situations when everyone else on a product team can be satisfied with their result and Kiran wants to do "another run" or "another day" or "another test." I respect the hell out of Kiran because he really believes what he's saying, and he's gone to bat for his ideas over and over and over again. He also thinks about what he's going to say before opening his mouth, a habit I could learn from.

So when he says the old Nomad downtube was too stiff and the new downtube isn't, I tend to believe him and I think he really means it. And when he talks about test riding ebikes with the motors taken out and saying they rode like a block of wood, I tend to believe that, too.

To combine those two thoughts: I trust that Kiran means what he says, but I also recognize that his impressions and preferences won't translate to all riders everywhere. He's one data point. But he's a pretty big and heavy data point (literally), and he rides really hard, so if he's telling me something is too stiff, that's noteworthy.

Reflecting on your questions inspired a hypothetical question and a poll:

Would you rather have every chassis component on your bike (fork, frame, bars, wheels, cranks, etc) be too slighty too flexy or slightly too stiff, and why?

Ryan Burney Vital MTB Bottom Bracket Be Wagging 0

https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/would-you-rather-have-too-much-engineered-compliance-or-too-little

14
matmattmatthew
Posts
359
Joined
6/14/2014
Location
Fresh Prince of Bel Air, MD US
1 day ago

Maybe this will clear a few things up 


 

10
1 day ago
ebruner wrote:
Question(s) for the group at large that pops into my head when I see these pedal bike development mules that are ebikes, and based off of...

Question(s) for the group at large that pops into my head when I see these pedal bike development mules that are ebikes, and based off of the various ebike to dh bike conversions that are a part of racing these days.  

  1. Is there a future where pedal bikes either take on the form of ebikes, but with bb assemblies that bolt into the motor mounts?  
  2. Is or would that potentially be a problem for the various groups of consumers?  The average consumer vs the die hard vs tip of the spear of performance chasers?  
  3. Do we think that would create problems for overall bike development and design?  Would this make pedal bikes better or worse overall, and what about ebikes... would this impact ebike frame development in a good or a bad way?

    I can see a certain logic to this as many brands are spending a lot of time developing their suspension packaging, kinematics and frame design around primarily ebikes... and there is efficiency and economics of scale doing it this way.  Beyond that, there could be performance benefits of having flexibility in the bb placement and being able to adjust or add weight etc.  

TEAMROBOT wrote:
Good questions! I had a great conversation with Kiran MacKinnon of Santa Cruz Bikes at Sea Otter (and it should be published as a podcast at...

Good questions! I had a great conversation with Kiran MacKinnon of Santa Cruz Bikes at Sea Otter (and it should be published as a podcast at some point), and he said that because e-bike frames have to be so much stiffer than pedal bikes, taking the motor and battery out basically produces a bike that rides like a block of wood (i.e. overly stiff and harsh over bumps).

That doesn't mean that an e-bike with the motor removed is unridable (i.e. Martin Maes racing DH on the e-Wild frame as a development project for the new Rallon DH bike), but it's a big performance compromise, especially at a time where "engineered compliance" is such a big buzzword in the industry. That was actually what we were talking about, with the new slimmer downtube on the Nomad, when we ended up talking about big e-bike downtubes.

Because of the necessary increases in frame stiffness for good e-bike handling, I don't think a dedicated hybrid pedal/e-bike frame would pencil out, unless you did a lot of crazy things to tune or adjust stiffness when you added or removed a motor, like the removable seatstay braces on many current DH bikes.

For the foreseeable future, I think the main benefit of a dedicated motor-replacement/BB assembly will be its ability to get old broken down e-bikes back out on the trails.

johann377 wrote:
This feels a bit like PR speak to defend half of the products they offer, which of course they should do. But couldn’t the increased stiffness...

This feels a bit like PR speak to defend half of the products they offer, which of course they should do. But couldn’t the increased stiffness suit other riders better, for example heavier or more aggressive riders? 

I use my Crafty analog and as an e-bike, absolutely love it both ways.  

I'm also going to push back. One of the biggest problems with ebikes is they are way too stiff in the front triangle. I'd say external batteries that allow for traditional tubing have the potential to ride much better, but let's be honest the most important priority for how an ebike handles is how good it looks.

7
Pappas717
Posts
42
Joined
1/13/2022
Location
Port Washington, NY US
1 day ago

Just got the message from UCI that ALL electronics are banned in DH. I THINK they just mean Suspension, But if it's Derailleurs too...Wow. Bruni's response was.."Well, FK!".

3
9
1 day ago Edited Date/Time 1 day ago
Pappas717 wrote:
Just got the message from UCI that ALL electronics are banned in DH. I THINK they just mean Suspension, But if it's Derailleurs too...Wow. Bruni's response...

Just got the message from UCI that ALL electronics are banned in DH. I THINK they just mean Suspension, But if it's Derailleurs too...Wow. Bruni's response was.."Well, FK!".

Consider the source?

18
Pappas717
Posts
42
Joined
1/13/2022
Location
Port Washington, NY US
1 day ago

No I did not..It got forwarded to me..Is it BS??

1
4
jonkranked
Posts
1185
Joined
5/5/2016
Location
Norristown, PA US
1 day ago

I'll bet a crab link it's fake

7
1
Uncle Cliffy
Posts
375
Joined
3/11/2010
Location
Medford, OR US
1 day ago

Got to take a look at Alyana Van Horn‘s race bike for this season…


IMG 3010 179859013446  864E91F5-3E58-46B4-BDB0-4D90AEA1E833 179859014903  ED9C3004-942A-462C-9B8E-2D28DCB4622E 179859016288  1178B735-74A1-4594-A3FC-883C5F1D61B5 179859029699  64E46BB1-22A5-4BC3-A3E0-D919AE7FC9EF 22

10
1 day ago
Pappas717 wrote:
Just got the message from UCI that ALL electronics are banned in DH. I THINK they just mean Suspension, But if it's Derailleurs too...Wow. Bruni's response...

Just got the message from UCI that ALL electronics are banned in DH. I THINK they just mean Suspension, But if it's Derailleurs too...Wow. Bruni's response was.."Well, FK!".

Consider the source?

That page is on a cease and desist speed run lmao

14
1
Pappas717
Posts
42
Joined
1/13/2022
Location
Port Washington, NY US
1 day ago Edited Date/Time 1 day ago

Thanks for the info guys, I had no idea. I hope they have a painfully death..I hate BS sites. 

2
22
Buckets Up
Posts
222
Joined
10/18/2010
Location
Hancock, MI US
1 day ago
Pappas717 wrote:

Thanks for the info guys, I had no idea. I hope they have a painfully death..I hate BS sites. 

It’s a satire page. Once you’re aware it’s great entertainment.

36
his dudeness
Posts
23
Joined
12/30/2010
Location
San Jose, CA US
1 day ago
29 wrote:
I think this is as close to a „for racing purposes only“ bike we’ll get from specialized. Who is the realistic target group for this? A...

I think this is as close to a „for racing purposes only“ bike we’ll get from specialized. Who is the realistic target group for this? A few age groupers, the occasional dentist and maybe some kids sponsored by their rich parents. The ones who want it will buy it anyways, other than that I see it as an engineering exercise and podium representation at the World Cup for spesh. 

Low production numbers, complex molds and layup, high structural requirements and engineering costs, it was never gonna be price competitive and i don’t think specialized will care about the hardtail dad bods in the pb comment section moaning. 

You can theoretically buy the Pinarello F HR 3D that was used for the hour record for like 28k € because of UCI rules, which for me falls in a similar category. 

Plenty of cheaper well working alternatives if you just want a park bike. 

In typical fashion, the target market is whoever wants one bad enough. The Demo is a legacy product just like a V10, Supreme, Glory etc. There...

In typical fashion, the target market is whoever wants one bad enough. The Demo is a legacy product just like a V10, Supreme, Glory etc. There will always be brand loyal fans eagerly awaiting the new-new. The fact it has exclusive cutting-edge technology will only add to the demand. Specialized knows the people will pay, and their pricing has always reflected this for new releases.

For racing, a couple of my closest friends are on a race team that has been in line to get frames for months. I’m excited to see them when they arrive!

Yup. The price isn’t “too steep” if Specialized is marketing and easily selling these to people with appropriately deep pockets. It’s entirely likely they don’t have much of a goal to make it affordable for more people if they’re not producing the quantity and can still sell out of them. 

Pricing people out of the market creates exclusivity, which is the cool factor among the Ferrari and Rolex crowd. 

5
his dudeness
Posts
23
Joined
12/30/2010
Location
San Jose, CA US
1 day ago
bigbonjour wrote:
Saw this in the background of an Instagram story, must be the new tall boy going away from VPP

Saw this in the background of an Instagram IMG 9094 0.png?VersionId=8GXNvckEx5Crh4SadHstory, must be the new tall boy going away from VPP

Sir HC wrote:

Making way for a TQ system to slot into there ?

Tarhic wrote:
TQ is developing a new motor, a bit smaller/lighter than the current one but with 100 Nm if I am correct. I should be out next summer...

TQ is developing a new motor, a bit smaller/lighter than the current one but with 100 Nm if I am correct. 
I should be out next summer not before. So it could be the reason. 

It is a shame for Santa to go away from the VPP system ... :-( 

As soon as Roskopp became bff’s and neighbors with Sinyard and joined Spesh as some kind of inside/outside consultant, I kinda had a thought there’d be some note sharing. Don’t remember if Roskopp has a hand in SC anymore but I’d imagine he still has tons of influence. 

 

1
1 day ago
Sir HC wrote:

Making way for a TQ system to slot into there ?

Tarhic wrote:
TQ is developing a new motor, a bit smaller/lighter than the current one but with 100 Nm if I am correct. I should be out next summer...

TQ is developing a new motor, a bit smaller/lighter than the current one but with 100 Nm if I am correct. 
I should be out next summer not before. So it could be the reason. 

It is a shame for Santa to go away from the VPP system ... :-( 

As soon as Roskopp became bff’s and neighbors with Sinyard and joined Spesh as some kind of inside/outside consultant, I kinda had a thought there’d be...

As soon as Roskopp became bff’s and neighbors with Sinyard and joined Spesh as some kind of inside/outside consultant, I kinda had a thought there’d be some note sharing. Don’t remember if Roskopp has a hand in SC anymore but I’d imagine he still has tons of influence. 

 

Rob has been completely out for a few years now

6
dolface
Posts
1663
Joined
10/26/2015
Location
CA US
1 day ago
jonkranked wrote:

I'll bet a crab link it's fake

That's 100% a parody account (NPC== Non Player Character)

1
nicasucksdude
Posts
45
Joined
1/30/2024
Location
Salt Lake City, UT US
1 day ago
Sir HC wrote:

Making way for a TQ system to slot into there ?

I was going to say, it looks like an ebike, not a meatbike

jalopyj wrote:
Yeah - plus shock looks to have a piggy back and it sorta looks like he is pushing "walk mode" with his left thumb to hike...

Yeah - plus shock looks to have a piggy back and it sorta looks like he is pushing "walk mode" with his left thumb to hike his bike up the hill.

I dunno that’s the hand position I use to push my meat bike up a hill

3
MrDuck
Posts
71
Joined
2/2/2021
Location
CA
1 day ago
I will never understand the “it’s a whole separate sport” thing. I ride my ebike exactly like my analog bike just do more laps. Literally every...

I will never understand the “it’s a whole separate sport” thing. I ride my ebike exactly like my analog bike just do more laps. Literally every other person I know with an ebike does the same and is not going out and climbing up downhill trails in boost. I see plenty of e-bikes on the lift at the bike park being ridden like analog bikes. 

The innovation is happening in the motor and battery because the “bike part” of the tech has plateaued. Amflow proved this by making a decent riding bike out of thin air.

Then you didn't ride your actual mountain bike the same way a lot of us do. 

It's a vastly different sport. I have both if that matters.

4
12
nskerb
Posts
337
Joined
3/3/2020
Location
Kelso, WA US
1 day ago
TEAMROBOT wrote:
On the one hand, yes, and also no.Yes, totally, optimal stiffness for any bicycle chassis component is highly contingent on rider weight, riding style, and terrain...

On the one hand, yes, and also no.

Yes, totally, optimal stiffness for any bicycle chassis component is highly contingent on rider weight, riding style, and terrain. So I imagine a bike that's "too stiff" on average will suit some riders at the margins and a bike that's "too flexy" on average will suit others. This is actually a huge gripe I have with the bike industry in general, because products are almost always advertised as a one-size-fits-all solution, and they aren't/don't/can't.

On the other hand, I don't tend to think Kiran is bullshitting me, because I've known him for a while, and I say this in love, but he would get a lot farther in the business world by being less honest and less maniacally detail-oriented. There are situations when everyone else on a product team can be satisfied with their result and Kiran wants to do "another run" or "another day" or "another test." I respect the hell out of Kiran because he really believes what he's saying, and he's gone to bat for his ideas over and over and over again. He also thinks about what he's going to say before opening his mouth, a habit I could learn from.

So when he says the old Nomad downtube was too stiff and the new downtube isn't, I tend to believe him and I think he really means it. And when he talks about test riding ebikes with the motors taken out and saying they rode like a block of wood, I tend to believe that, too.

To combine those two thoughts: I trust that Kiran means what he says, but I also recognize that his impressions and preferences won't translate to all riders everywhere. He's one data point. But he's a pretty big and heavy data point (literally), and he rides really hard, so if he's telling me something is too stiff, that's noteworthy.

Reflecting on your questions inspired a hypothetical question and a poll:

Would you rather have every chassis component on your bike (fork, frame, bars, wheels, cranks, etc) be too slighty too flexy or slightly too stiff, and why?

Ryan Burney Vital MTB Bottom Bracket Be Wagging 0

https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/would-you-rather-have-too-much-engineered-compliance-or-too-little

1st paragraph: agree

2nd: No opinion

3rd: Very interesting. Of all the parts of a bike, I would have bet money that the stiffness of a downtube would be the least important. Given he's a professional tester I want to believe it, but wouldn't the downtube basically be in tension all of the time? The top tube stiffness seems like it would be WAY more influential in the feel of a bike. IDK how downtube stiffness would be a huge factor if its always in tension. 

Too flexy or too stiff? Too stiff every single time. The first thought my brain goes to is flexy wheels and tires. Nothing kills the vibe like being in a pretty G'd out compression and your bike flexes you into wanting to steer off the trail into a pile of sharp sticks. I'll live with a chatter-y bike over living with a pool noodle bike. 

1
cmaac
Posts
44
Joined
8/25/2023
Location
Tahoe, CA US
1 day ago
Got to take a look at Alyana Van Horn‘s race bike for this season…

Got to take a look at Alyana Van Horn‘s race bike for this season…


IMG 3010 179859013446  864E91F5-3E58-46B4-BDB0-4D90AEA1E833 179859014903  ED9C3004-942A-462C-9B8E-2D28DCB4622E 179859016288  1178B735-74A1-4594-A3FC-883C5F1D61B5 179859029699  64E46BB1-22A5-4BC3-A3E0-D919AE7FC9EF 22

I always called the lower link on my Norco Range the 'scrotum' that would bang into things - but this - this needs a name. 

Looks like the carbon bit will extend outside of that 'special area' and be exposed when suspension is active. 

What a very special area. 

3
FullSendy
Posts
13
Joined
4/3/2026
Location
High St, IL US
1 day ago

The Demo link does extend outside the static frame, which in part is probably why they didn't want to construct that much more mass to cover it all. Also, if something immovable hits that area, you are already fuxxed, covered or not. 

I don't doubt they didn't cover it because of 'aesthetics' or online commenters. So congrats to all of us, I guess?

1
Znarf
Posts
22
Joined
4/30/2013
Location
DE
1 day ago Edited Date/Time 1 day ago

I‘d take more flex all the time compared to too stiff. But, I tend to prefer more natural, rooty, rocky trails compared to cleaner bikepark style trails, however, I am not crazy heavy and middle aged with almost 30 mtb seasons on my joints. Flex means comfort, to some extent. And comfort means no pain, too stiff means less riding long term. Injuries and wear are (unfortunately for many) a factor long term.

The last couple percent of speed don‘t mean much to me, I am riding just for fun. (I am an experienced rider, but also have other responsibilities and priorities compared to my more radical mtb phases) 

I totally understand that above some level, you want something less vague. And there‘s a big difference, if you have to do one all out run a day or continue riding, until you‘re exhausted to the bones.

@TEAMROBOT 

 

2
1
Brian_Peterson
Posts
1147
Joined
4/26/2011
Location
Canyon Country, CA US
1 day ago

The moto guys realized a long time ago that some chassis flex is a good thing.. Especially while cornering.. Suspension doesn't always work as well leaned over..

4

Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker

The Latest