Honestly I've never found a situation where I preferred the DHF over an Assegai. DHX looks cool too.
1550 grams though... that's a thick b
I realize that every situation and rider is different. You learn how a tire reacts and you ride accordingly. I’ve used a DHF for over 20 years as a front tire. Maybe longer.
Many other designs have come and gone, but the DHF has persevered. I’ve tried other offerings, specifically the Assegai… This might sound weird, but I thought it was possibly too good. It made steering the bike boring. I couldn’t get a front wheel slide to happen. I actually enjoy that, and use it as a cornering method. You can actually feel what the tire is doing on a DHF. Assegai was too vague.
I’m going to go pour one out for the inevitable death of the DHF. 😢
I don't see ECVT becoming the dominant transmission, I do see gearboxes dominating ebikes in the next decade though.meat powered bikes will stay dominated by the...
I don't see ECVT becoming the dominant transmission, I do see gearboxes dominating ebikes in the next decade though. meat powered bikes will stay dominated by the derailleur for as far as I can foresee.
For ECVT Vs gearboxes, like cars and morotbikes, for a sports application (as opposed to the commuter market) there will always be a majority percentage of users that just prefer the control of picking a gear themselves as they read the terrain over something else deciding for you.
CVTs can simulate fixed ratios so that might end up being a control choice, although I don't know how the "feel" of it would differ given the unique power inputs in a bicycle application
I don't see ECVT becoming the dominant transmission, I do see gearboxes dominating ebikes in the next decade though.meat powered bikes will stay dominated by the...
I don't see ECVT becoming the dominant transmission, I do see gearboxes dominating ebikes in the next decade though. meat powered bikes will stay dominated by the derailleur for as far as I can foresee.
For ECVT Vs gearboxes, like cars and morotbikes, for a sports application (as opposed to the commuter market) there will always be a majority percentage of users that just prefer the control of picking a gear themselves as they read the terrain over something else deciding for you.
I’m pretty sure that discrete gear ratios can be programmed in. I suppose it would probably be the only way experienced MTB riders would be able to safely ride them on trails without significantly relearning how to ride.
I love that you think gearboxes will become ubiquitous on ebikes and will entirely replace mechanical derailleurs and electronic battery-powered derailleurs and electronic hard-wired derailleurs and...
I love that you think gearboxes will become ubiquitous on ebikes and will entirely replace mechanical derailleurs and electronic battery-powered derailleurs and electronic hard-wired derailleurs and autoshift derailleurs and internally geared hubs, instead of becoming one more option among a confusing sea of options and pricepoints, like everything else in the bike industry.
If only it were that simple.
amflows carbon full suspension e-suv is 3000. i don’t think their gearbox variant will be a lot more expensive than that.
my customer today who test rode the new vado evo will buy the amflow. as will a lot more people at that pricepoint. tell us why you expect an informed customer would buy anything less than that in the future. i don’t see many reasons for mainstream users to NOT want those instead of a dirty chain driven system that needs constant maintenance.
if those ride at least as good as a devinci powered ebike they will sell every bike they can produce with a gearbox motor…
CVTs can simulate fixed ratios so that might end up being a control choice, although I don't know how the "feel" of it would differ given...
CVTs can simulate fixed ratios so that might end up being a control choice, although I don't know how the "feel" of it would differ given the unique power inputs in a bicycle application
In which case... What would even be the point of using the ECVT in the first place if all you are doing is trying to replicate normal gears?
In which case... What would even be the point of using the ECVT in the first place if all you are doing is trying to replicate...
In which case... What would even be the point of using the ECVT in the first place if all you are doing is trying to replicate normal gears?
I've often asked the same question when conventional CVTs are used in place of traditional automatic gearboxes in cars, and then programmed to pretend to be an automatic gearbox...
However one good reason I can think of is that eCVTs are far simpler than gearboxes so they can be smaller, lighter and more durable all at the same time.
I realize that every situation and rider is different. You learn how a tire reacts and you ride accordingly. I’ve used a DHF for over 20...
I realize that every situation and rider is different. You learn how a tire reacts and you ride accordingly. I’ve used a DHF for over 20 years as a front tire. Maybe longer.
Many other designs have come and gone, but the DHF has persevered. I’ve tried other offerings, specifically the Assegai… This might sound weird, but I thought it was possibly too good. It made steering the bike boring. I couldn’t get a front wheel slide to happen. I actually enjoy that, and use it as a cornering method. You can actually feel what the tire is doing on a DHF. Assegai was too vague.
I’m going to go pour one out for the inevitable death of the DHF. 😢
I actually know exactly what you mean. Ever since I switched to Kryptotals, I know in 99% of conditions I have full confidence in my tire to the point I've kind of forgotten about them as a factor. But the DHF/DHR2 combo of the past would side of you pushed them, juuuust a little, but you knew where they'd hook up just as they dug into the corner. It was the same in almost every condition so you could plan for it.
Now I'm wet conditions if I slide, it comes as a huge surprise and I'm not ready for it. I don't hate the new tires at all but I do miss the rowdy days.
I love that you think gearboxes will become ubiquitous on ebikes and will entirely replace mechanical derailleurs and electronic battery-powered derailleurs and electronic hard-wired derailleurs and...
I love that you think gearboxes will become ubiquitous on ebikes and will entirely replace mechanical derailleurs and electronic battery-powered derailleurs and electronic hard-wired derailleurs and autoshift derailleurs and internally geared hubs, instead of becoming one more option among a confusing sea of options and pricepoints, like everything else in the bike industry.
Thank you for the kind words! Glad to hear you enjoyed the podcast and the history bit in particular.Yes, I do think the DJI and Gobao...
Thank you for the kind words! Glad to hear you enjoyed the podcast and the history bit in particular.
Yes, I do think the DJI and Gobao motor gearbox units are going to shake things up, but the gallows humor joke I was making is that no technology change is ever truly complete in the bike world, where there are still new bikes being sold with straight 1 1/8" steerer tubes, friction shifters, 26" wheels, and freewheels. Which is why I predict there will always be derailleurs even on ebikes, either because the ecvt is too expensive for certain price ranges, or for SL ebikes, or for people who just like the old way of doing things, or who knows what reason I can't think of yet.
So yes, SRAM should be terrified that the ecvt is going to eat up a huge portion of their derailleur sales, and yet I don't think the Transmission drivetrain will be truly irrelevant on ebikes anytime soon.
While I totally agree - there will probably be 3x7 26ers sold in department stores for the rest of my life, I don't think any of the components on those systems is remotely interesting to any of on Vital.
My curiosity was more about the higher end gear stuff. If higher end ebikes predominantly move to eCVTs, will SRAM reintroduce drivetrains closer to the X01/XX1 Eagle lines of yesteryear, optimized for pedal bikes rather than ebikes? Or are we stuck with the current lineup of giant, heavy gear for the foreseeable future?
I think this is the gamble for small companies like Madrone. I'm guessing that the advent of T-Type was the perfect opportunity for them to hop into the market, albeit, only for the people willing to cough up XX1-level dough.
I've often asked the same question when conventional CVTs are used in place of traditional automatic gearboxes in cars, and then programmed to pretend to be...
I've often asked the same question when conventional CVTs are used in place of traditional automatic gearboxes in cars, and then programmed to pretend to be an automatic gearbox...
However one good reason I can think of is that eCVTs are far simpler than gearboxes so they can be smaller, lighter and more durable all at the same time.
The CVTs in my Subaru and Toyota are paired with a conventional automatic transmission - they just smooth out the transition between gears when you aren't being aggressive. Easy enough to see the gear change by watching the tach. I assumed most/all car CVTs are like this, but maybe I'm wrong.
If the internet isn't wrong, some modern hybrids use planetary gear eCVTs which do not require a conventional gear system, using the ICE on one side, and electric on the other. I haven't done research to find cars that actually do this though, so maybe not yet.
In the absence of a conventional transmission, the "feel" of a gear change would need to be programmed. I'm not sure what I would opt for. I do like to modify my cadence at different times, so I could imagine that rather than manually changing gears, I would opt for some approach to let me spin fast sometimes, and mash at other points. Kind of a moot point though when even mashing I couldn't match 50% of the 2HP motor power for more than a few seconds.
They seem to have pulled that DHX review. Probably scheduled it wrong, though the social media post with the now dead link are still up.
And it was already indexed by the Google AI search, so if you're interested in the gist, you can just type "bikerumor maxxis dhx" in the ai search mode.
And it was already indexed by the Google AI search, so if you're interested in the gist, you can just type "bikerumor maxxis dhx" in the...
And it was already indexed by the Google AI search, so if you're interested in the gist, you can just type "bikerumor maxxis dhx" in the ai search mode.
And it was already indexed by the Google AI search, so if you're interested in the gist, you can just type "bikerumor maxxis dhx" in the...
And it was already indexed by the Google AI search, so if you're interested in the gist, you can just type "bikerumor maxxis dhx" in the ai search mode.
just saw this in mojo suspension story. Looks like some kind of dual spring setup for fine tuning/recreating individual dual rate spring curve. I think Dave Garland did something like this for the boxxer quite some years ago.
just saw this in mojo suspension story. Looks like some kind of dual spring setup for fine tuning/recreating individual dual rate spring curve. I think Dave...
just saw this in mojo suspension story. Looks like some kind of dual spring setup for fine tuning/recreating individual dual rate spring curve. I think Dave Garland did something like this for the boxxer quite some years ago.
Very cool. That could presumably be pretty great running coils on frames that lack adequate progression or are kinda borderline in that regard.
My thoughts as well, but what's weird is that it's on a TR11, which is a VERY progressive frame. I think it's around 40%. Putting a progressive coil on that is kind of highly progressive leverage curve is like putting a hat on a hat.
Here's a link to the Avalanche page on that bike, with Avalanche's leverage curve graph and Transition's as well. The curve does appear to be regressive then progressive, so maybe the goal is making the first part of the curve more linear or progressive, and thus less regressive off the top? http://www.avalanchedownhillracing.com/Bike%20set%20ups/2022%20TR11%20V3%20Alloy.htm
just saw this in mojo suspension story. Looks like some kind of dual spring setup for fine tuning/recreating individual dual rate spring curve. I think Dave...
just saw this in mojo suspension story. Looks like some kind of dual spring setup for fine tuning/recreating individual dual rate spring curve. I think Dave Garland did something like this for the boxxer quite some years ago.
One thing that's desirable about the Foes method pictured here is that when the progression comes from the spring instead of from the leverage rate, it doesn't spike or slow the shaft speed at various positions in the shock travel, which can adversely change the damping feel at various points in the travel.
One downside is that it's a whole mess of springs you need to have on hand to sort through until you find your desired ride height and suspension feel. In the case of this Foes they're also expensive titanium springs. My suspicion is that 99% of riders won't bother and will be on the wrong spring rate from day one, because it's harder, more expensive, and more time consuming than adjusting an air shock with shock pump or volume reducers. Which 50% of riders won't bother with, either.
I don't see ECVT becoming the dominant transmission, I do see gearboxes dominating ebikes in the next decade though.meat powered bikes will stay dominated by the...
I don't see ECVT becoming the dominant transmission, I do see gearboxes dominating ebikes in the next decade though. meat powered bikes will stay dominated by the derailleur for as far as I can foresee.
For ECVT Vs gearboxes, like cars and morotbikes, for a sports application (as opposed to the commuter market) there will always be a majority percentage of users that just prefer the control of picking a gear themselves as they read the terrain over something else deciding for you.
While it’s likely that ECVT will come with autoshift to hold a specific cadence (like most current e-bikes do), ECVT e-bikes will almost certainly have a “choose your own gear” setting also. It easy to imagine being able to choose the gearing steps and range, which would be pretty cool imo.
One thing that's desirable about the Foes method pictured here is that when the progression comes from the spring instead of from the leverage rate, it...
One thing that's desirable about the Foes method pictured here is that when the progression comes from the spring instead of from the leverage rate, it doesn't spike or slow the shaft speed at various positions in the shock travel, which can adversely change the damping feel at various points in the travel.
One downside is that it's a whole mess of springs you need to have on hand to sort through until you find your desired ride height and suspension feel. In the case of this Foes they're also expensive titanium springs. My suspicion is that 99% of riders won't bother and will be on the wrong spring rate from day one, because it's harder, more expensive, and more time consuming than adjusting an air shock with shock pump or volume reducers. Which 50% of riders won't bother with, either.
And then next thing you know there’ll be position sensitive damping and I’ll be sitting here wondering why so much complexity has been added all to solve something easily doable with a linkage.
Springs in series result in a crazy low initial spring rate unless you’ve got at least one very stiff spring in there. Half of what they help with in off road applications doesn’t apply to bikes at all. In theory it does let you pick an initial sprint rate, final spring rate, and transition point, but without winding your own springs the customization available is surprisingly limited.
And it was already indexed by the Google AI search, so if you're interested in the gist, you can just type "bikerumor maxxis dhx" in the...
And it was already indexed by the Google AI search, so if you're interested in the gist, you can just type "bikerumor maxxis dhx" in the ai search mode.
One thing that's desirable about the Foes method pictured here is that when the progression comes from the spring instead of from the leverage rate, it...
One thing that's desirable about the Foes method pictured here is that when the progression comes from the spring instead of from the leverage rate, it doesn't spike or slow the shaft speed at various positions in the shock travel, which can adversely change the damping feel at various points in the travel.
One downside is that it's a whole mess of springs you need to have on hand to sort through until you find your desired ride height and suspension feel. In the case of this Foes they're also expensive titanium springs. My suspicion is that 99% of riders won't bother and will be on the wrong spring rate from day one, because it's harder, more expensive, and more time consuming than adjusting an air shock with shock pump or volume reducers. Which 50% of riders won't bother with, either.
And then next thing you know there’ll be position sensitive damping and I’ll be sitting here wondering why so much complexity has been added all to...
And then next thing you know there’ll be position sensitive damping and I’ll be sitting here wondering why so much complexity has been added all to solve something easily doable with a linkage.
Springs in series result in a crazy low initial spring rate unless you’ve got at least one very stiff spring in there. Half of what they help with in off road applications doesn’t apply to bikes at all. In theory it does let you pick an initial sprint rate, final spring rate, and transition point, but without winding your own springs the customization available is surprisingly limited.
BigLinkage in here trying to sell their leverage rate conspiracies.
From that angle it’s funny how much it looks like a DHF without the gap between the center tread and corner knobs.I wonder if they intended...
From that angle it’s funny how much it looks like a DHF without the gap between the center tread and corner knobs.
I wonder if they intended for this to be the DHF replacement but decided to call it DHX for some reason.
I managed to sneak a comment in the BR post before they deleted it, where I asked if in the second to last picture they didn't confuse the DHX for the DHF.
The picture had three rolled tires next to each other, and they claimed the center one was the DHX and the right one was a DHF, but the more I looked at it, the more the center one was the same DHF pattern you're talking about, and the right one was just a modified High Roller/DHR.
EDIT: I guess they noticed the embargo breaking post thanks to my comment...😷
I've often asked the same question when conventional CVTs are used in place of traditional automatic gearboxes in cars, and then programmed to pretend to be...
I've often asked the same question when conventional CVTs are used in place of traditional automatic gearboxes in cars, and then programmed to pretend to be an automatic gearbox...
However one good reason I can think of is that eCVTs are far simpler than gearboxes so they can be smaller, lighter and more durable all at the same time.
The CVTs in my Subaru and Toyota are paired with a conventional automatic transmission - they just smooth out the transition between gears when you aren't...
The CVTs in my Subaru and Toyota are paired with a conventional automatic transmission - they just smooth out the transition between gears when you aren't being aggressive. Easy enough to see the gear change by watching the tach. I assumed most/all car CVTs are like this, but maybe I'm wrong.
If the internet isn't wrong, some modern hybrids use planetary gear eCVTs which do not require a conventional gear system, using the ICE on one side, and electric on the other. I haven't done research to find cars that actually do this though, so maybe not yet.
In the absence of a conventional transmission, the "feel" of a gear change would need to be programmed. I'm not sure what I would opt for. I do like to modify my cadence at different times, so I could imagine that rather than manually changing gears, I would opt for some approach to let me spin fast sometimes, and mash at other points. Kind of a moot point though when even mashing I couldn't match 50% of the 2HP motor power for more than a few seconds.
Subaru uses a straight CVT with no additional gearing with all 'gear changes' being simulated.
From that angle it’s funny how much it looks like a DHF without the gap between the center tread and corner knobs.I wonder if they intended...
From that angle it’s funny how much it looks like a DHF without the gap between the center tread and corner knobs.
I wonder if they intended for this to be the DHF replacement but decided to call it DHX for some reason.
I think so because towards the end of 2025 maxxis had a dhf2 page on their site for a couple days. It had a picture of the old dhf, but had a different description and rolling resistance/ traction chart.
I realize that every situation and rider is different. You learn how a tire reacts and you ride accordingly. I’ve used a DHF for over 20 years as a front tire. Maybe longer.
Many other designs have come and gone, but the DHF has persevered. I’ve tried other offerings, specifically the Assegai… This might sound weird, but I thought it was possibly too good. It made steering the bike boring. I couldn’t get a front wheel slide to happen. I actually enjoy that, and use it as a cornering method. You can actually feel what the tire is doing on a DHF.
Assegai was too vague.
I’m going to go pour one out for the inevitable death of the DHF. 😢
CVTs can simulate fixed ratios so that might end up being a control choice, although I don't know how the "feel" of it would differ given the unique power inputs in a bicycle application
I’m pretty sure that discrete gear ratios can be programmed in. I suppose it would probably be the only way experienced MTB riders would be able to safely ride them on trails without significantly relearning how to ride.
amflows carbon full suspension e-suv is 3000. i don’t think their gearbox variant will be a lot more expensive than that.
my customer today who test rode the new vado evo will buy the amflow. as will a lot more people at that pricepoint. tell us why you expect an informed customer would buy anything less than that in the future. i don’t see many reasons for mainstream users to NOT want those instead of a dirty chain driven system that needs constant maintenance.
if those ride at least as good as a devinci powered ebike they will sell every bike they can produce with a gearbox motor…
In which case... What would even be the point of using the ECVT in the first place if all you are doing is trying to replicate normal gears?
I've often asked the same question when conventional CVTs are used in place of traditional automatic gearboxes in cars, and then programmed to pretend to be an automatic gearbox...
However one good reason I can think of is that eCVTs are far simpler than gearboxes so they can be smaller, lighter and more durable all at the same time.
not having a delicate expensive low hanging derailleur in the back?
I actually know exactly what you mean. Ever since I switched to Kryptotals, I know in 99% of conditions I have full confidence in my tire to the point I've kind of forgotten about them as a factor. But the DHF/DHR2 combo of the past would side of you pushed them, juuuust a little, but you knew where they'd hook up just as they dug into the corner. It was the same in almost every condition so you could plan for it.
Now I'm wet conditions if I slide, it comes as a huge surprise and I'm not ready for it. I don't hate the new tires at all but I do miss the rowdy days.
While I totally agree - there will probably be 3x7 26ers sold in department stores for the rest of my life, I don't think any of the components on those systems is remotely interesting to any of on Vital.
My curiosity was more about the higher end gear stuff. If higher end ebikes predominantly move to eCVTs, will SRAM reintroduce drivetrains closer to the X01/XX1 Eagle lines of yesteryear, optimized for pedal bikes rather than ebikes? Or are we stuck with the current lineup of giant, heavy gear for the foreseeable future?
I think this is the gamble for small companies like Madrone. I'm guessing that the advent of T-Type was the perfect opportunity for them to hop into the market, albeit, only for the people willing to cough up XX1-level dough.
They seem to have pulled that DHX review. Probably scheduled it wrong, though the social media post with the now dead link are still up.
The CVTs in my Subaru and Toyota are paired with a conventional automatic transmission - they just smooth out the transition between gears when you aren't being aggressive. Easy enough to see the gear change by watching the tach. I assumed most/all car CVTs are like this, but maybe I'm wrong.
If the internet isn't wrong, some modern hybrids use planetary gear eCVTs which do not require a conventional gear system, using the ICE on one side, and electric on the other. I haven't done research to find cars that actually do this though, so maybe not yet.
In the absence of a conventional transmission, the "feel" of a gear change would need to be programmed. I'm not sure what I would opt for. I do like to modify my cadence at different times, so I could imagine that rather than manually changing gears, I would opt for some approach to let me spin fast sometimes, and mash at other points. Kind of a moot point though when even mashing I couldn't match 50% of the 2HP motor power for more than a few seconds.
And it was already indexed by the Google AI search, so if you're interested in the gist, you can just type "bikerumor maxxis dhx" in the ai search mode.
(Tough times to break an embargo)
It's still on twitter
https://x.com/bikerumor/status/2080777975331455266
I mean the content of the non-working link is indexed, and with good enough questions you can get the details of what's been published
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkP1rakHZtQ
GMBN mega mullet running on a prototype 32" Romy, not sure if that's been spotted before (bike check starts at 20min)
I meant over a normal gearbox.
just saw this in mojo suspension story. Looks like some kind of dual spring setup for fine tuning/recreating individual dual rate spring curve. I think Dave Garland did something like this for the boxxer quite some years ago.
Very cool. That could presumably be pretty great running coils on frames that lack adequate progression or are kinda borderline in that regard.
2006 Foes Curnutt
My thoughts as well, but what's weird is that it's on a TR11, which is a VERY progressive frame. I think it's around 40%. Putting a progressive coil on that is kind of highly progressive leverage curve is like putting a hat on a hat.
Here's a link to the Avalanche page on that bike, with Avalanche's leverage curve graph and Transition's as well. The curve does appear to be regressive then progressive, so maybe the goal is making the first part of the curve more linear or progressive, and thus less regressive off the top? http://www.avalanchedownhillracing.com/Bike%20set%20ups/2022%20TR11%20V3%20Alloy.htm
One thing that's desirable about the Foes method pictured here is that when the progression comes from the spring instead of from the leverage rate, it doesn't spike or slow the shaft speed at various positions in the shock travel, which can adversely change the damping feel at various points in the travel.
One downside is that it's a whole mess of springs you need to have on hand to sort through until you find your desired ride height and suspension feel. In the case of this Foes they're also expensive titanium springs. My suspicion is that 99% of riders won't bother and will be on the wrong spring rate from day one, because it's harder, more expensive, and more time consuming than adjusting an air shock with shock pump or volume reducers. Which 50% of riders won't bother with, either.
While it’s likely that ECVT will come with autoshift to hold a specific cadence (like most current e-bikes do), ECVT e-bikes will almost certainly have a “choose your own gear” setting also. It easy to imagine being able to choose the gearing steps and range, which would be pretty cool imo.
And then next thing you know there’ll be position sensitive damping and I’ll be sitting here wondering why so much complexity has been added all to solve something easily doable with a linkage.
Springs in series result in a crazy low initial spring rate unless you’ve got at least one very stiff spring in there. Half of what they help with in off road applications doesn’t apply to bikes at all. In theory it does let you pick an initial sprint rate, final spring rate, and transition point, but without winding your own springs the customization available is surprisingly limited.
The photos got indexed by the image search engines too
BigLinkage in here trying to sell their leverage rate conspiracies.
I managed to save one…
From that angle it’s funny how much it looks like a DHF without the gap between the center tread and corner knobs.
I wonder if they intended for this to be the DHF replacement but decided to call it DHX for some reason.
I managed to sneak a comment in the BR post before they deleted it, where I asked if in the second to last picture they didn't confuse the DHX for the DHF.
The picture had three rolled tires next to each other, and they claimed the center one was the DHX and the right one was a DHF, but the more I looked at it, the more the center one was the same DHF pattern you're talking about, and the right one was just a modified High Roller/DHR.
EDIT: I guess they noticed the embargo breaking post thanks to my comment...😷
Subaru uses a straight CVT with no additional gearing with all 'gear changes' being simulated.
The eCVT you're talking about is Toyota's Hybrid Synergy Drive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_Synergy_Drive
I think so because towards the end of 2025 maxxis had a dhf2 page on their site for a couple days. It had a picture of the old dhf, but had a different description and rolling resistance/ traction chart.
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker