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
Norco adidas Race Division pre-season bike setup video
Looks extremely similar to a proto (but final) I had eyes on of GRX 12 speed a few months before it dropped.
https://raawmtb.com/pages/madonna-r
Thicker and they will move away from 203…
Mentioned that a couple of pages ago, where the whole 203 vs 200 discussion was going on. Some didn’t believe it back then some still won’t.
Will probably trickle down to XTR, XT,… and solve the ridiculous lever throw. Some might even say they brought the new brakes out, knowing that there’s going to be thicker rotors but still have a shit load of the 1.8 ones. But people who talk nonsense like that definitely have never worked in the cycling industry & wear foil hats.
And before you‘ll go and buy your local dealers stock on 203 Shimano rotors, I am pretty sure they will continue producing them.
There is fun to be had at the industry right now, messing with improper caliper adapters to a given disc diameter that may or may not be sold by shimano at a very atractive price 🤣
I thought I heard they are gonna be 2.2mm thicc
Probably unrelated, as on the pictures it's a 200/203mm, but some teams on 100% Shimano programs had to run the cheap ebike 223mm rotor Shimano offered to get a bit more power out of their aging lineup. Other teams just run Galfer rotors ...
Bombproof, I'll believe that one when I see it.
The new rotors are called Shimano Rt6B750 and seem to be 2.2mm thick. The brake prototype is called BRG8000
2.2 instead of 2.3 eh? Leave it to Shimano to react to industry trends… but not quite.
Dave Weagle’s latest:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DXshLlDEpxu/?igsh=cXc5b3RqNngxcTh5
The prototype rotors also look stamped and not machined, which is the biggest problem I have with Shimano rotors.
At least it means that 2.3 mm rotors from anyone else will be a clear upgrade.
Edit: And it looks like the pads would line up perfectly with the braking track if only the rotor was say 3 mm larger...
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DXmjV9LjRcj/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Not sure how this work or what it even do, but I like to imagine that it ramps up LSC under braking to avoid fork dive. Damper would have to be in the left leg.
We have 1.95, 2, 2.05, 2.10, 2.15 and I believe BRAKING even made 2.20 at some point. Well, at least we have enough options..
This explains why it's called Orion and not DW6 or DW5. With either of the latter two the two lower links are counter rotating while with Orion they are corotating.
Oh, as for Ochain being limited to 32T chainrings, hopefully this 32" wheel situation will bring more Ochain and power meter options for chainrings smaller than 32T. I guess you CAN run a 32T if your terrain is not particularly steep or your name is Nino Schurter on a 29er, but it's hard to imagine it will be a popular option for 32".
Check HxR components
Gonna be a dick and point out that if you run smaller than a 32t, you don’t need a power meter, you need a gym.
Edit: it’s not my opinion, just an uncomfortable matter of fact for why they don’t make power meters for 30t rings. I’m sure there are exceptions, like people riding fully loaded 87lb touring bikes who pump out 450 watts so they can go at a walking pace. Or Primoz who apparently lives in a magical land where rock climbing and mountain biking intersect.
Why would a thicker rotor reduce lever travel? That is not how brake calipers work.
I dont think there will be many bikes where ochain is used running 32 inch wheels in the back, they limit movement too much on downhills
Have you tried it?
Thicker rotors only reduce lever travel (which comes from less of a gap between pads and rotor) till the pads are worn a bit and the caliper seals let the pistons slip out a bit to make up for some of the wear. Then, the lever throw is only depending on the seal roll back of the caliper piston seals.
The same effect can be achieved by pumping the brakes and by that advancing the pistons slightly before you insert a thinner rotor.
Been through this many times, as always, you are welcome to come to our neck of the woods and show that you don't need anything less than a 32T ring 🙂
I wouldn't be surprised if a 32" rear wheeled bike would need an ochain (or an idler enabled "high pivot" design) at much lower travel numbers than what we are used to.
Antisquat is a function of pivot height vs. rear axle and chain growth. The more AS you get from the pivot height, the less you need from the chain itself.
As we moved from 26" wheels towards 29" wheels, the effective pivot height was dropping as the main pivot still needs to be in the vicinity of the BB for everything to work more or less normally. The caveat with that, as BBs are dropping below the axles, is that you need more chain induced antisquat. And that brings pedal kickback with it - you can't have chain induced without antisquat without the chainstay length stretching through the travel which brings pedal kickback with it.
32" wheels will make all of this worse again compared to 29", similar to what we saw with 29" compared to 26" wheels.
TL;DR: don't be surprised to see an ochain on a 130 mm 32" bike.
Saying thicker rotors don’t work because when they’re not thicker any more they’re the same as thinner rotors is a very confusing thesis.
29er rear wheel and 30t chainring with 10t on cassette with a max comfortable cadence of 95 rpm will give a top speed of 25 mph. When are you ever pedaling when going faster than 25mph on a trail bike, and will require a larger chainring? I appreciate the lower possible gearing of a 30t for slow tech climbs or ridiculously steep fire roads on the edge of traction. There is no reason to go larger except for being a DH racer, XC racer, or having too big of an ego.
It's not about the rotor's thickness but pad's thickness.
I have HS2 (2mm) in front and xt (1,8mm) in the rear, both have identical throw with xt brakes. I wonder if I can fit 2,3mm though - then maybe at the very beginning of the pads throw would be reduced.
Being realistic about your terrain and fitness and biasing your gear usage to the middle of your cassette is going to be better for your drivetrain long term.
If you wanna be a hero and only climb in first and second gear you’re gonna roast your cassette real fast.
Personally I run a 34T on my Sight. I stand up and pedal a lot however. Like I am a weird one and would prefer fork lockout. The problem I had with 32 is that on a mullet bike, the wheel definitely spins easier. I was switching gears a lot to keep an "aggressive" pace. When I stand and pedal I was in the range of gear 10-12 on trails. Now on roads im in that range but trails I usually sit in the 5-9 range with the 34T and standing.
Maybe Im just a masochist.
I went from 1.8 to 2.0 on my older TRP brakes.. Made a difference as far as the lever not hitting my other fingers while braking. Slight rub with fresh pads, but almost instant contact.. Almost too much..
I climb in my lowest gears. I thought that was the point. Math and physics and all that.
🤔
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker