If you like to ride off the back, definitely go longer chain stay. If you have the opportunity, just get all of the pieces now so that you can try everything without having to order new stuff in the future.
with regards to the reach I don’t know if you should go with a shorter reach. I would say just keep the same front geometry that you’re used to and lengthen the rear. The increase in wheelbase is not a big deal since we get so much better handling out of the change.
If you like to ride off the back, definitely go longer chain stay. If you have the opportunity, just get all of the pieces now so that you can try everything without having to order new stuff in the future.
with regards to the reach I don’t know if you should go with a shorter reach. I would say just keep the same front geometry that you’re used to and lengthen the rear. The increase in wheelbase is not a big deal since we get so much better handling out of the change.
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from...
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
You cant afford it anyways and this would kill you-
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from...
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from...
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from...
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
Did you account for sag? There is about 13mm of wheel growth.
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from...
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
I'm not surprised, whoever is running their geo over there is asleep at the wheel.
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from...
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
Am I the only one who saw the new Chromag and was immediately out because of those stubby little chainstays? Maybe I have been smoking too much of the Cahal-pack but 435 on a medium is laughable to me.
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from...
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
Am I the only one who saw the new Chromag and was immediately out because of those stubby little chainstays? Maybe I have been smoking too...
Am I the only one who saw the new Chromag and was immediately out because of those stubby little chainstays? Maybe I have been smoking too much of the Cahal-pack but 435 on a medium is laughable to me.
Yeah, that part is definitely a bit of a bummer. I would be curious how many design engineers and testers are above 6' in the industry.
Am I the only one who saw the new Chromag and was immediately out because of those stubby little chainstays? Maybe I have been smoking too...
Am I the only one who saw the new Chromag and was immediately out because of those stubby little chainstays? Maybe I have been smoking too much of the Cahal-pack but 435 on a medium is laughable to me.
Rallon owner with a ratio of 1.75. It’s fantastic. Really natural and easy to figure out. Less arm pump and elbow tendonitis pain. Superb traction. Only downside is it might be slightly more likely to spin the rear wheel on heinous steep tech climbs when standing up. Maybe I just need to spend more time balancing my weight.
re chainstays, it looks like the transition sentinel quietly went from a 448 to 442 in size large with their new colorways. WIth a 170mm fork, that puts it really close to the last generation nomad geo.
Ok, at least one of you guys must have ridden the Reya by know, right? I’m still desperately curious about it, but I have no avenue to try one unless I buy it outright or take a flight.
Some interesting thoughts from the guys at Spot about chainstay length in a podcast about their new bike on the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast with Simon Stewart.
Geometry talk starts around 29 minutes in but the whole podcast is a great listen!
Side note: I really dig both Simon's episodes and David Golay's episodes of the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast. I know the pacing of the speech in the David-hosted episodes is challenging for some folks but if you can hang with those episodes there's a ton of cool info and cool people to learn from/about!
Some interesting thoughts from the guys at Spot about chainstay length in a podcast about their new bike on the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast with...
Some interesting thoughts from the guys at Spot about chainstay length in a podcast about their new bike on the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast with Simon Stewart.
Geometry talk starts around 29 minutes in but the whole podcast is a great listen!
Side note: I really dig both Simon's episodes and David Golay's episodes of the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast. I know the pacing of the speech in the David-hosted episodes is challenging for some folks but if you can hang with those episodes there's a ton of cool info and cool people to learn from/about!
Sounds like they couldn't be bothered and gave a BS answer to justify it after admitting that testing proven it made a difference.
Some interesting thoughts from the guys at Spot about chainstay length in a podcast about their new bike on the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast with...
Some interesting thoughts from the guys at Spot about chainstay length in a podcast about their new bike on the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast with Simon Stewart.
Geometry talk starts around 29 minutes in but the whole podcast is a great listen!
Side note: I really dig both Simon's episodes and David Golay's episodes of the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast. I know the pacing of the speech in the David-hosted episodes is challenging for some folks but if you can hang with those episodes there's a ton of cool info and cool people to learn from/about!
Sounds like they couldn't be bothered and gave a BS answer to justify it after admitting that testing proven it made a difference.
Not gonna lie: I had the same impression.
If it makes a difference but it costs no different because a new mold is made for every size front triangle, then I'd be making it happen. Even if that means the suspension performance changes a tiny bit. Even if for no other reason than some number of folks REALLY think it matters and the people who don't think it matters won't mind if it changes a little.
Part of performing well is believing you can perform well. If your brain expects a bike to suck, it's going to have to be OUTSTANDING to even make it out of "suck" towards "kinda ok." Handing people a "we've given consideration to your concerns" detail is probably going to predispose many more people to believe your bike will be good and believe they can perform well on it than saying "we're protecting you from your stupid selves" ever will.
I thought the other points in their considerations around frame geometry and weight were really interesting, too!
The only point I'd love to argue is that the lower and central weight placement makes the bike more maneuverable.. But, really that interview shows why you need to look at everything as a whole package, not just one or 2 numbers.
I brought up stack because Spots “solution” to evenly weighting the wheels gives a compromised body position, the larger frame sizes have the rider hunched over with too much weight on the hands. Stack AND chainstay length need to increase.
Are you more or less likely to spin out your back wheel on a steep standing climb with the Uber long stays?
Size M frame rider here. I’ve had numerous bikes from 438-450 mm chain stays.
Short chainstays (Firebird) makes it easy to loop out backwards but when standing and pedalling you get good traction. 443 chainstays on a high pivot (Range) was an absolute machine climbing. Traction for days in all situations.
450 chainstays (Rallon) tends to spin out, loose traction in extreme situations more easily. Obv there are numerous factors but it seems night and day to me. The best position so far seems to be seated with an upright body position but then you have to be careful when it gets steep.
@w4s answering your question here…
If you like to ride off the back, definitely go longer chain stay. If you have the opportunity, just get all of the pieces now so that you can try everything without having to order new stuff in the future.
with regards to the reach I don’t know if you should go with a shorter reach. I would say just keep the same front geometry that you’re used to and lengthen the rear. The increase in wheelbase is not a big deal since we get so much better handling out of the change.
Appreciate the reply, thank you! 👍
1.9 F/R ratio on the new demo in S3 and grows in S4 and S5 even further into the 1.9s. A bit of a bummer from my opinion. Was quite excited for seeing what that bike was about but dang, thats a bummer
You cant afford it anyways and this would kill you-
Actually, I can. I am not concerned with cost whatsoever and neither about maintenance. I care about fit and performance
Brother you dont change your tires enough to care about performance.
Money? Now tires? Man, come scope my pile of changed tires and how often I go through them.
Going personal and taking shots online at me when we hardly even cross paths and I have always been respectful towards you...Good on you Ryan.
I agree with you on the sizing.
So you getting the forbidden or frameworks.
This is a joke, this is the internet. - No one is supposed to afford it.
Tell me where the tire pile is I could use some.
Did you account for sag? There is about 13mm of wheel growth.
I'm not surprised, whoever is running their geo over there is asleep at the wheel.
Makes the commencal v5 look even more attractive.
This, the weight balance at sag moves forward quite a bit.
Am I the only one who saw the new Chromag and was immediately out because of those stubby little chainstays? Maybe I have been smoking too much of the Cahal-pack but 435 on a medium is laughable to me.
It does but not enough IMO. As always though, personal preference of a tall guy
Yeah, that part is definitely a bit of a bummer. I would be curious how many design engineers and testers are above 6' in the industry.
I ride a medium and think they're comically short. Do they get a deal only making two size stays?
It seems that the Chromag is more of a park, freeride trick bike.. The numbers make sense for that..
Rallon owner with a ratio of 1.75. It’s fantastic. Really natural and easy to figure out. Less arm pump and elbow tendonitis pain. Superb traction. Only downside is it might be slightly more likely to spin the rear wheel on heinous steep tech climbs when standing up. Maybe I just need to spend more time balancing my weight.
re chainstays, it looks like the transition sentinel quietly went from a 448 to 442 in size large with their new colorways. WIth a 170mm fork, that puts it really close to the last generation nomad geo.
I still think they don't just because of how unbalanced the 465(!) reach will feel
I ride a large 2018 Smuggler with 430mm CS and 475mm reach and it's positively unrideable 🤦♂️ lol
Ok, at least one of you guys must have ridden the Reya by know, right? I’m still desperately curious about it, but I have no avenue to try one unless I buy it outright or take a flight.
Some interesting thoughts from the guys at Spot about chainstay length in a podcast about their new bike on the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast with Simon Stewart.
https://blisterreview.com/podcasts/spots-ryan-palmer-on-their-new-lightweight-trail-bike-ep-326
Geometry talk starts around 29 minutes in but the whole podcast is a great listen!
Side note: I really dig both Simon's episodes and David Golay's episodes of the Bikes & Big Ideas podcast. I know the pacing of the speech in the David-hosted episodes is challenging for some folks but if you can hang with those episodes there's a ton of cool info and cool people to learn from/about!
Sounds like they couldn't be bothered and gave a BS answer to justify it after admitting that testing proven it made a difference.
Not gonna lie: I had the same impression.
If it makes a difference but it costs no different because a new mold is made for every size front triangle, then I'd be making it happen. Even if that means the suspension performance changes a tiny bit. Even if for no other reason than some number of folks REALLY think it matters and the people who don't think it matters won't mind if it changes a little.
Part of performing well is believing you can perform well. If your brain expects a bike to suck, it's going to have to be OUTSTANDING to even make it out of "suck" towards "kinda ok." Handing people a "we've given consideration to your concerns" detail is probably going to predispose many more people to believe your bike will be good and believe they can perform well on it than saying "we're protecting you from your stupid selves" ever will.
I thought the other points in their considerations around frame geometry and weight were really interesting, too!
The only point I'd love to argue is that the lower and central weight placement makes the bike more maneuverable.. But, really that interview shows why you need to look at everything as a whole package, not just one or 2 numbers.
Seems like taller folks COG wouldn’t get pulled forward of the BB if stack increased proportionally with reach per frame size.
Are you more or less likely to spin out your back wheel on a steep standing climb with the Uber long stays?
I brought up stack because Spots “solution” to evenly weighting the wheels gives a compromised body position, the larger frame sizes have the rider hunched over with too much weight on the hands. Stack AND chainstay length need to increase.
Size M frame rider here. I’ve had numerous bikes from 438-450 mm chain stays.
Short chainstays (Firebird) makes it easy to loop out backwards but when standing and pedalling you get good traction. 443 chainstays on a high pivot (Range) was an absolute machine climbing. Traction for days in all situations.
450 chainstays (Rallon) tends to spin out, loose traction in extreme situations more easily. Obv there are numerous factors but it seems night and day to me. The best position so far seems to be seated with an upright body position but then you have to be careful when it gets steep.
Post a reply to: Modern Geo Talk: Chainstays, Stack, Reach, and Bitching About It