Anybody know about the validity of the claims of dual chain high pivots about better chain efficiency over one chain? Articles and such on the RMU...
Anybody know about the validity of the claims of dual chain high pivots about better chain efficiency over one chain? Articles and such on the RMU and Phoenix and Demo 11 claim that it's more efficient or they say it's more efficient but they don't really say why or prove it. It seems fishy like theres still all the articulation on the first chain around the idler and then more articulation on the shaft between the first chain and second chain and then around the chainring?
One reason would be that the cog on the RMU or Pivot is much larger than the average idler. I think the Pivot is a 24...
One reason would be that the cog on the RMU or Pivot is much larger than the average idler. I think the Pivot is a 24 tooth? The average idler cog is more like a 16 tooth. That makes a suprisingly large difference on pedaling efficiency.
And yes, as jones007 mentioned, it will also feel much better as the suspension cycles because the rear derailleur cage doesn't have to accommodate as much chain growth.
Yeah keen to try one. More efficient? Maybe. More like a normal drivetrain? Definitely.
I’ve been in a high pivot for several years and have been annoyed with shifting precision and noisy clutches. This seems like a nice way to remove these issues, and more chain wrap all around is another nice bonus
Anybody know about the validity of the claims of dual chain high pivots about better chain efficiency over one chain? Articles and such on the RMU...
Anybody know about the validity of the claims of dual chain high pivots about better chain efficiency over one chain? Articles and such on the RMU and Phoenix and Demo 11 claim that it's more efficient or they say it's more efficient but they don't really say why or prove it. It seems fishy like theres still all the articulation on the first chain around the idler and then more articulation on the shaft between the first chain and second chain and then around the chainring?
It's legit in principle. It's not articulation perse, it's the angle of rotation of the link that determines the losses. The bigger the chainring, the smaller the rotation.
Dual chains uses larger rings compared to the idler of a high pivot bike.
Actual values of losses of one system vs another would have to be calculated and/or measured.
Then carry on.These have been rapidly gaining popularity in the XC world, with top places at the last Olympics. I think they now have a heavier...
Then carry on.
These have been rapidly gaining popularity in the XC world, with top places at the last Olympics. I think they now have a heavier duty version advertised for enduro. Has anyone seen them in EDR or DH events yet?
I used to do this but stopped as that extra mm is critical for mounting tires on Flow EX3 and Reserve rims. The new Schwalbe Radials...
I used to do this but stopped as that extra mm is critical for mounting tires on Flow EX3 and Reserve rims. The new Schwalbe Radials are not easy to mount either and basically require a Cush Core Bead Bro. (The previous gen radials weren’t bad though) I just check my spokes periodically and if ones broken, try to bend it around another or unscrew it from the nipple if I have my pliers. If all else fails I carry a Tubolito tube which is so small and light it could fit in your pocket. I don’t see them talked about much in the core MTB circles but Tubolitos are fantastic and have saved me from flats on tubed rental bikes more than once.
Out of curiosity, has it been with the Trail or gravity radials? I have found that I have pretty good luck getting the trail pro casing...
Out of curiosity, has it been with the Trail or gravity radials? I have found that I have pretty good luck getting the trail pro casing radials mounted on most rims, but I also run Kapton tape on my rims, so it's quite thin.
Also, agreed. Tubolito is great. Small and light.
The new gravity radials. The bead is really stiff and just wants to peel off the rim as you’re initially working it around. Getting it fully down into the center channel with no Gorilla tape/spoke hole protection helps, but the Bead Bro is the tool for the job. No problems with previous gen gravity radials (with the mesh/snake skin sidewalls) and the new trail radials.
It's legit in principle. It's not articulation perse, it's the angle of rotation of the link that determines the losses. The bigger the chainring, the smaller...
It's legit in principle. It's not articulation perse, it's the angle of rotation of the link that determines the losses. The bigger the chainring, the smaller the rotation.
Dual chains uses larger rings compared to the idler of a high pivot bike.
Actual values of losses of one system vs another would have to be calculated and/or measured.
But to allow for the dual chain there’s an extra chainring and the primary chainring is smaller which will increase the angle of rotation. I’d be curious which way the math works out.
Time to stock up on DHF's, the end is near... 🥲Will for sure be interested to check out this casing once it moves to DD and...
Time to stock up on DHF's, the end is near... 🥲
Will for sure be interested to check out this casing once it moves to DD and EXO +. I have ridden the DHF nearly exclusively since it came out.
It will be a long time, if ever, before the DHF truly goes away. The DHF is available in 20, 24, 26, 27.5, and 29” diameters, a couple width options, and endless spec permutations between compound and casing. It would take years, literally, to move all those specs over to the DHX tread.
Anybody know about the validity of the claims of dual chain high pivots about better chain efficiency over one chain? Articles and such on the RMU...
Anybody know about the validity of the claims of dual chain high pivots about better chain efficiency over one chain? Articles and such on the RMU and Phoenix and Demo 11 claim that it's more efficient or they say it's more efficient but they don't really say why or prove it. It seems fishy like theres still all the articulation on the first chain around the idler and then more articulation on the shaft between the first chain and second chain and then around the chainring?
RMU and phoenix are supposed to be quite efficient feeling while pedalling. The demo 11 does not feel efficient at all. They are very different platforms.
Time to stock up on DHF's, the end is near... 🥲Will for sure be interested to check out this casing once it moves to DD and...
Time to stock up on DHF's, the end is near... 🥲
Will for sure be interested to check out this casing once it moves to DD and EXO +. I have ridden the DHF nearly exclusively since it came out.
Maxxis are the undisputed kings of SKU-creep and the DHF has been racking up SKUs for decades. We'll all be on 36" wheels by the time they finally shift the last one. They still have the HR2 and the old Dissector listed on the international site.
Maxxis are the undisputed kings of SKU-creep and the DHF has been racking up SKUs for decades. We'll all be on 36" wheels by the time...
Maxxis are the undisputed kings of SKU-creep and the DHF has been racking up SKUs for decades. We'll all be on 36" wheels by the time they finally shift the last one. They still have the HR2 and the old Dissector listed on the international site.
That is so true. I have Maxxis on most of my bikes, even my wife's bike, and every time I need to order new tires, I have to refresh myself with all of their nomenclature and different models.
Maxxis are the undisputed kings of SKU-creep and the DHF has been racking up SKUs for decades. We'll all be on 36" wheels by the time...
Maxxis are the undisputed kings of SKU-creep and the DHF has been racking up SKUs for decades. We'll all be on 36" wheels by the time they finally shift the last one. They still have the HR2 and the old Dissector listed on the international site.
That is so true. I have Maxxis on most of my bikes, even my wife's bike, and every time I need to order new tires, I...
That is so true. I have Maxxis on most of my bikes, even my wife's bike, and every time I need to order new tires, I have to refresh myself with all of their nomenclature and different models.
I just write down the part number for the exact tires I already own. I do this with every tire brand but Maxxis is notoriously confusing. Really glad that Schwalbe went to just “trail” and “gravity” casings at least. I’d praise Conti for doing “trail/endurance”, “enduro”, and “downhill” casings but when searching for “enduro” casing it’s really easy to accidentally buy an “endurance” casing.
I know it's the highest spec model, but it's still a little refreshing to see a longer travel (enduro light?) complete bike that is around 30lbs...
I know it's the highest spec model, but it's still a little refreshing to see a longer travel (enduro light?) complete bike that is around 30lbs. Nowadays, it seems like downcounty bikes are hovering around 30lbs and longer travel bikes are 35+. As someone who likes to do big days in the saddle, it's nice to see some new bikes attempt to keep the weight down.
The RS version of the Genie could be really good or an improvement. My problems with the Fox version were mostly lack of adjustments, real useable LSC, and any HSC adjustment. Running one band but adding some HSC to reduce how quickly the Fox blew through the travel could be cool.
The RS version of the Genie could be really good or an improvement. My problems with the Fox version were mostly lack of adjustments, real useable...
The RS version of the Genie could be really good or an improvement. My problems with the Fox version were mostly lack of adjustments, real useable LSC, and any HSC adjustment. Running one band but adding some HSC to reduce how quickly the Fox blew through the travel could be cool.
I'm hoping so. The SJ15 is on my short list of new bikes; I've been holding out to see what Yeti releases. The new LT looks phenomenal, but it's more bike than I need, and the $$$ is a little hard to swallow. I know there are rumors of new shorter-travel Yetis that will be released, but I can't imagine they will be much cheaper than the LT, if at all.
The SJ15 ticks most of the boxes, especially in the S5 size, but I've been a little leary of the Genie shock. I've heard great things from some reviews and others that suggest swapping it out. I'm almost ready to pull the trigger and order the SJ15 frame with the new RS Genie, but I'd love to hear a review of the new shock or a comparison to the Fox version.
It's legit in principle. It's not articulation perse, it's the angle of rotation of the link that determines the losses. The bigger the chainring, the smaller...
It's legit in principle. It's not articulation perse, it's the angle of rotation of the link that determines the losses. The bigger the chainring, the smaller the rotation.
Dual chains uses larger rings compared to the idler of a high pivot bike.
Actual values of losses of one system vs another would have to be calculated and/or measured.
But to allow for the dual chain there’s an extra chainring and the primary chainring is smaller which will increase the angle of rotation. I’d be...
But to allow for the dual chain there’s an extra chainring and the primary chainring is smaller which will increase the angle of rotation. I’d be curious which way the math works out.
The math maths out. The chainring interfacing with the cassette is the sameish in both cases, let's say a 32. And the chain rolls onto it. It's not taught when it rolls off so we ignore that part. The chain rolls off the cassette in both cases.
When it comes to the idler, it's a 16 to maybe 20 tooth and the chain rolls onto it and off it. With DWs dual chains the two chainrings are larger and the chain, taught, rolls off the one on the crank and rolls onto the secondary. The total angles of rotation under power are smaller and thus the losses are smaller.
The math maths out. The chainring interfacing with the cassette is the sameish in both cases, let's say a 32. And the chain rolls onto it...
The math maths out. The chainring interfacing with the cassette is the sameish in both cases, let's say a 32. And the chain rolls onto it. It's not taught when it rolls off so we ignore that part. The chain rolls off the cassette in both cases.
When it comes to the idler, it's a 16 to maybe 20 tooth and the chain rolls onto it and off it. With DWs dual chains the two chainrings are larger and the chain, taught, rolls off the one on the crank and rolls onto the secondary. The total angles of rotation under power are smaller and thus the losses are smaller.
The nighttain has a 20T for the larger of the jackshaft rings, not sure about the smaller, and a 27T chainring. A chain link rotates 11.25 degrees (22.5 total) going onto and off a 16T idler and 9 degrees going onto a 20T ring. Add in the fact that there are two rings on the jackshaft and that's at least 18 degrees total. A little more because one of the rings is smaller by the looks of it. Then the smaller chainring is a little less efficient than a 32T. Maybe if you compare it to a bike that uses an idler on the slack side of the chain the claim could work out, but with no idler on the slack side it looks like a wash at best.
Edit: I just laid it out and it appears the jackshaft configuration has the edge by about 1 degree, which I would not consider appreciable considering no one talks about drivetrain losses going to a smaller chainring up front.
I'm not sure, the bike with the diaper on it is clearly not using an idler.
Agreed, the front end looks a lot like the wilson pictured above but the rear end looks to have taken a lot of design from the chainsaw/troy/spartan vertical shock layout
I'm hoping so. The SJ15 is on my short list of new bikes; I've been holding out to see what Yeti releases. The new LT looks...
I'm hoping so. The SJ15 is on my short list of new bikes; I've been holding out to see what Yeti releases. The new LT looks phenomenal, but it's more bike than I need, and the $$$ is a little hard to swallow. I know there are rumors of new shorter-travel Yetis that will be released, but I can't imagine they will be much cheaper than the LT, if at all.
The SJ15 ticks most of the boxes, especially in the S5 size, but I've been a little leary of the Genie shock. I've heard great things from some reviews and others that suggest swapping it out. I'm almost ready to pull the trigger and order the SJ15 frame with the new RS Genie, but I'd love to hear a review of the new shock or a comparison to the Fox version.
The nighttain has a 20T for the larger of the jackshaft rings, not sure about the smaller, and a 27T chainring. A chain link rotates 11.25...
The nighttain has a 20T for the larger of the jackshaft rings, not sure about the smaller, and a 27T chainring. A chain link rotates 11.25 degrees (22.5 total) going onto and off a 16T idler and 9 degrees going onto a 20T ring. Add in the fact that there are two rings on the jackshaft and that's at least 18 degrees total. A little more because one of the rings is smaller by the looks of it. Then the smaller chainring is a little less efficient than a 32T. Maybe if you compare it to a bike that uses an idler on the slack side of the chain the claim could work out, but with no idler on the slack side it looks like a wash at best.
Edit: I just laid it out and it appears the jackshaft configuration has the edge by about 1 degree, which I would not consider appreciable considering no one talks about drivetrain losses going to a smaller chainring up front.
Thankyou for doing the math. I did feel that the two chains do offer a different suspension feel, somewhat similar to running ochain on a single idler setup, at least when I rode a phoenix but was skeptical on the pedaling efficiency gain claims and didn't notice a difference.
The RS version of the Genie could be really good or an improvement. My problems with the Fox version were mostly lack of adjustments, real useable...
The RS version of the Genie could be really good or an improvement. My problems with the Fox version were mostly lack of adjustments, real useable LSC, and any HSC adjustment. Running one band but adding some HSC to reduce how quickly the Fox blew through the travel could be cool.
I'm hoping so. The SJ15 is on my short list of new bikes; I've been holding out to see what Yeti releases. The new LT looks...
I'm hoping so. The SJ15 is on my short list of new bikes; I've been holding out to see what Yeti releases. The new LT looks phenomenal, but it's more bike than I need, and the $$$ is a little hard to swallow. I know there are rumors of new shorter-travel Yetis that will be released, but I can't imagine they will be much cheaper than the LT, if at all.
The SJ15 ticks most of the boxes, especially in the S5 size, but I've been a little leary of the Genie shock. I've heard great things from some reviews and others that suggest swapping it out. I'm almost ready to pull the trigger and order the SJ15 frame with the new RS Genie, but I'd love to hear a review of the new shock or a comparison to the Fox version.
Rs genie also has hbo from what I can tell on the photos
On DHF talk, I'd happily never ride that tire ever again - Had some of the scariest moments on that tire, I'd happily have a Forekaster on the front over it.
The nighttain has a 20T for the larger of the jackshaft rings, not sure about the smaller, and a 27T chainring. A chain link rotates 11.25...
The nighttain has a 20T for the larger of the jackshaft rings, not sure about the smaller, and a 27T chainring. A chain link rotates 11.25 degrees (22.5 total) going onto and off a 16T idler and 9 degrees going onto a 20T ring. Add in the fact that there are two rings on the jackshaft and that's at least 18 degrees total. A little more because one of the rings is smaller by the looks of it. Then the smaller chainring is a little less efficient than a 32T. Maybe if you compare it to a bike that uses an idler on the slack side of the chain the claim could work out, but with no idler on the slack side it looks like a wash at best.
Edit: I just laid it out and it appears the jackshaft configuration has the edge by about 1 degree, which I would not consider appreciable considering no one talks about drivetrain losses going to a smaller chainring up front.
I just checked the RMU I have on hand for testing and the smaller Jackshaft pulley is a 17. I imagine the difference in your calculations is pretty marginal
On DHF talk, I'd happily never ride that tire ever again - Had some of the scariest moments on that tire, I'd happily have a Forekaster...
On DHF talk, I'd happily never ride that tire ever again - Had some of the scariest moments on that tire, I'd happily have a Forekaster on the front over it.
I'm currently on a Forekaster/Rekon combo for my short travel trail bike.
I don't think I have the technique to brake well with the Rekon. For whatever reason, I'm skidding that tire A LOT more than the Aggressor I had there previously (in a DHF/Aggressor combo).
The Forekaster has been sick, though. I'm sure I've just jinxed it by saying it out loud but it's been really good on the hard pack and dusty and moondusty stuff around me. I've definitely pushed it too far and had some two-wheel slides but it still felt sorta controlled even when out of control.
I don't think anything in my riding has changed THAT much since I switched from DHF front to Forekaster front, but I've had WAY fewer shit-my-pants moments on the Forekaster than I did on the DHF. Both EXO and MaxxTerra.
Next tires will probably be Continental Magnotal front and either Dubni or Trino rear (in Trail/Grip Casing/Compound). There's been a lot of praise for the Dubnital but I don't think I'm the sort of rider that can hold their shit together on a tire like that. Rekon already feels a little too squirrely for my (lack of) technique and via the internet the Dubnital looks even lower-grip than the Rekon.
Anyone with experience that can compare Dubni, Trino, and Rekon?
I'm currently on a Forekaster/Rekon combo for my short travel trail bike.I don't think I have the technique to brake well with the Rekon. For whatever...
I'm currently on a Forekaster/Rekon combo for my short travel trail bike.
I don't think I have the technique to brake well with the Rekon. For whatever reason, I'm skidding that tire A LOT more than the Aggressor I had there previously (in a DHF/Aggressor combo).
The Forekaster has been sick, though. I'm sure I've just jinxed it by saying it out loud but it's been really good on the hard pack and dusty and moondusty stuff around me. I've definitely pushed it too far and had some two-wheel slides but it still felt sorta controlled even when out of control.
I don't think anything in my riding has changed THAT much since I switched from DHF front to Forekaster front, but I've had WAY fewer shit-my-pants moments on the Forekaster than I did on the DHF. Both EXO and MaxxTerra.
Next tires will probably be Continental Magnotal front and either Dubni or Trino rear (in Trail/Grip Casing/Compound). There's been a lot of praise for the Dubnital but I don't think I'm the sort of rider that can hold their shit together on a tire like that. Rekon already feels a little too squirrely for my (lack of) technique and via the internet the Dubnital looks even lower-grip than the Rekon.
Anyone with experience that can compare Dubni, Trino, and Rekon?
I can compare the rekon, magnotal, and trinotal, but not the dubnotal as it's a bit too light for me
Just as a heads up, while the trinotal looks reminiscent of the forekaster, it has much shorter knobs. In terms of overall grip/rolling resistance, its forekaster > magnotal > rekon > trinotal.
I really like the center tread on the magnotal, but the sideknobs don't quite reach forekaster levels of grip
Yeah keen to try one. More efficient? Maybe. More like a normal drivetrain? Definitely.
I’ve been in a high pivot for several years and have been annoyed with shifting precision and noisy clutches. This seems like a nice way to remove these issues, and more chain wrap all around is another nice bonus
It's legit in principle. It's not articulation perse, it's the angle of rotation of the link that determines the losses. The bigger the chainring, the smaller the rotation.
Dual chains uses larger rings compared to the idler of a high pivot bike.
Actual values of losses of one system vs another would have to be calculated and/or measured.
He doesn't have a berd equipped superboost wheel.
The new gravity radials. The bead is really stiff and just wants to peel off the rim as you’re initially working it around. Getting it fully down into the center channel with no Gorilla tape/spoke hole protection helps, but the Bead Bro is the tool for the job. No problems with previous gen gravity radials (with the mesh/snake skin sidewalls) and the new trail radials.
Maxxis' new Minion DHX is live, you can find all the details and debate its abilities here (also discussed, new DH casing) - https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/maxxis-new-minion-dhx-tire-and-dh-casing-thoughts-and-discussion
Time to stock up on DHF's, the end is near... 🥲
Will for sure be interested to check out this casing once it moves to DD and EXO +. I have ridden the DHF nearly exclusively since it came out.
But to allow for the dual chain there’s an extra chainring and the primary chainring is smaller which will increase the angle of rotation. I’d be curious which way the math works out.
It will be a long time, if ever, before the DHF truly goes away. The DHF is available in 20, 24, 26, 27.5, and 29” diameters, a couple width options, and endless spec permutations between compound and casing. It would take years, literally, to move all those specs over to the DHX tread.
I’d be surprised if the “New DH” casing showed up on anything but DH casing tires - didn’t Maxxis already update DD in the last couple years?
RMU and phoenix are supposed to be quite efficient feeling while pedalling. The demo 11 does not feel efficient at all. They are very different platforms.
Yeah that typo was a brain fart, I meant TREAD moving to other casings
Maxxis are the undisputed kings of SKU-creep and the DHF has been racking up SKUs for decades. We'll all be on 36" wheels by the time they finally shift the last one. They still have the HR2 and the old Dissector listed on the international site.
EXO+ was updated a couple years back but DD hasn’t changed since it was launched.
That is so true. I have Maxxis on most of my bikes, even my wife's bike, and every time I need to order new tires, I have to refresh myself with all of their nomenclature and different models.
I just write down the part number for the exact tires I already own. I do this with every tire brand but Maxxis is notoriously confusing. Really glad that Schwalbe went to just “trail” and “gravity” casings at least. I’d praise Conti for doing “trail/endurance”, “enduro”, and “downhill” casings but when searching for “enduro” casing it’s really easy to accidentally buy an “endurance” casing.
Buzzwords. They should just use “light/mid/heavy” for casing options across all brands.
The RS version of the Genie could be really good or an improvement. My problems with the Fox version were mostly lack of adjustments, real useable LSC, and any HSC adjustment. Running one band but adding some HSC to reduce how quickly the Fox blew through the travel could be cool.
Updated version of this proto Wilson is my guess of what we are seeing covered up
I'm hoping so. The SJ15 is on my short list of new bikes; I've been holding out to see what Yeti releases. The new LT looks phenomenal, but it's more bike than I need, and the $$$ is a little hard to swallow. I know there are rumors of new shorter-travel Yetis that will be released, but I can't imagine they will be much cheaper than the LT, if at all.
The SJ15 ticks most of the boxes, especially in the S5 size, but I've been a little leary of the Genie shock. I've heard great things from some reviews and others that suggest swapping it out. I'm almost ready to pull the trigger and order the SJ15 frame with the new RS Genie, but I'd love to hear a review of the new shock or a comparison to the Fox version.
I'm not sure, the bike with the diaper on it is clearly not using an idler.
The math maths out. The chainring interfacing with the cassette is the sameish in both cases, let's say a 32. And the chain rolls onto it. It's not taught when it rolls off so we ignore that part. The chain rolls off the cassette in both cases.
When it comes to the idler, it's a 16 to maybe 20 tooth and the chain rolls onto it and off it. With DWs dual chains the two chainrings are larger and the chain, taught, rolls off the one on the crank and rolls onto the secondary. The total angles of rotation under power are smaller and thus the losses are smaller.
The nighttain has a 20T for the larger of the jackshaft rings, not sure about the smaller, and a 27T chainring. A chain link rotates 11.25 degrees (22.5 total) going onto and off a 16T idler and 9 degrees going onto a 20T ring. Add in the fact that there are two rings on the jackshaft and that's at least 18 degrees total. A little more because one of the rings is smaller by the looks of it. Then the smaller chainring is a little less efficient than a 32T. Maybe if you compare it to a bike that uses an idler on the slack side of the chain the claim could work out, but with no idler on the slack side it looks like a wash at best.
Edit: I just laid it out and it appears the jackshaft configuration has the edge by about 1 degree, which I would not consider appreciable considering no one talks about drivetrain losses going to a smaller chainring up front.
Agreed, the front end looks a lot like the wilson pictured above but the rear end looks to have taken a lot of design from the chainsaw/troy/spartan vertical shock layout
The s5 has a terrible f/r ratio...
Thankyou for doing the math. I did feel that the two chains do offer a different suspension feel, somewhat similar to running ochain on a single idler setup, at least when I rode a phoenix but was skeptical on the pedaling efficiency gain claims and didn't notice a difference.
Rs genie also has hbo from what I can tell on the photos
On DHF talk, I'd happily never ride that tire ever again - Had some of the scariest moments on that tire, I'd happily have a Forekaster on the front over it.
I just checked the RMU I have on hand for testing and the smaller Jackshaft pulley is a 17. I imagine the difference in your calculations is pretty marginal
I'm currently on a Forekaster/Rekon combo for my short travel trail bike.
I don't think I have the technique to brake well with the Rekon. For whatever reason, I'm skidding that tire A LOT more than the Aggressor I had there previously (in a DHF/Aggressor combo).
The Forekaster has been sick, though. I'm sure I've just jinxed it by saying it out loud but it's been really good on the hard pack and dusty and moondusty stuff around me. I've definitely pushed it too far and had some two-wheel slides but it still felt sorta controlled even when out of control.
I don't think anything in my riding has changed THAT much since I switched from DHF front to Forekaster front, but I've had WAY fewer shit-my-pants moments on the Forekaster than I did on the DHF. Both EXO and MaxxTerra.
Next tires will probably be Continental Magnotal front and either Dubni or Trino rear (in Trail/Grip Casing/Compound). There's been a lot of praise for the Dubnital but I don't think I'm the sort of rider that can hold their shit together on a tire like that. Rekon already feels a little too squirrely for my (lack of) technique and via the internet the Dubnital looks even lower-grip than the Rekon.
Anyone with experience that can compare Dubni, Trino, and Rekon?
I can compare the rekon, magnotal, and trinotal, but not the dubnotal as it's a bit too light for me
Just as a heads up, while the trinotal looks reminiscent of the forekaster, it has much shorter knobs. In terms of overall grip/rolling resistance, its forekaster > magnotal > rekon > trinotal.
I really like the center tread on the magnotal, but the sideknobs don't quite reach forekaster levels of grip
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker