It seems wild to me that people would run a DH bike with zero bash protection! It's as if the preventative measures work so well, that...
It seems wild to me that people would run a DH bike with zero bash protection! It's as if the preventative measures work so well, that people forget why they were developed in the first place and get complacent.....
100%. I don't even want to run my XC bike without a bashguard.
I actually had the thought the other day while on a ride, has anyone tried to incorporate bash protection and weights? Seems to me like all these racers that are adding weight really low on the bike could come up with something that serves both needs. Weight on literally the lowest point of the bike but also drivetrain protection.
Brian Park over on PB says from Taipei:"Every major motor manufacturer has an eCVT coming for the 2028-2029 model year, which means new singlespeed...
Brian Park over on PB says from Taipei:
"Every major motor manufacturer has an eCVT coming for the 2028-2029 model year, which means new singlespeed hubs and potentially a new chain pitch standard (booo)."
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for...
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for e-bikes) might be in our future --- now has an answer. Not ideal for those that have a mixed fleet, and want to be able to swap parts between them, but perhaps this will minimize the design-bias toward >750W ebbs for those of us that still like to peddle.
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many trade-offs, primarily due to gobbling up battery life needed for mtb applications, that I can't see the advantages out weight simply losing the derailleur.
"An aside, it's surprising to me that so much eCVT development seems to be centred on performance mountain biking. I hope the brands have data that mountain bike consumers want this, because it seems to me that the technology will be best suited to urban cargo bikes and light electric vehicles."
Brian Park over on PB says from Taipei:"Every major motor manufacturer has an eCVT coming for the 2028-2029 model year, which means new singlespeed...
Brian Park over on PB says from Taipei:
"Every major motor manufacturer has an eCVT coming for the 2028-2029 model year, which means new singlespeed hubs and potentially a new chain pitch standard (booo)."
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for...
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for e-bikes) might be in our future --- now has an answer. Not ideal for those that have a mixed fleet, and want to be able to swap parts between them, but perhaps this will minimize the design-bias toward >750W ebbs for those of us that still like to peddle.
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many...
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many trade-offs, primarily due to gobbling up battery life needed for mtb applications, that I can't see the advantages out weight simply losing the derailleur.
"An aside, it's surprising to me that so much eCVT development seems to be centred on performance mountain biking. I hope the brands have data that mountain bike consumers want this, because it seems to me that the technology will be best suited to urban cargo bikes and light electric vehicles."
Exactly, we should stop pretending the bike industry does much more than "inching" and trying to sell you as much bikes, parts, stuff as possible every 3 years. Every big step will come with huge drawbacks, wich will be slowly and partially solved in following iterations. Like when they tought 450% range 1x 11s transmissions are all than you need (until they "realize" that any less than 500% is not workable for most people)... Fully integrated roadbikes in a time when most groupsets where still mechanical? All those years with shitty disc brakes/dropper posts/geometry/suspension dampers? You'll get what I'm trying to say
Ecvts/MGUs are going to be flawed in one way or another at first. They are of course ideal for utility bikes (but will be prohibitively expensive for most people in most places, initially at least) so there is a NEED for enthusiasts to buy into them. They are going to be draggy and heavier than tradiccional systems, but they will open develoment paths that will ultimately make ebikes better... But slowly... A couple steps every few gears...
I thought the gabao ecvt was lighter than the pinion mgu by over a lb? Pinion bikes did need an extra 200ish w of battery power, because of the drag, to equal current motor/der/ battery systems but the newer semi solid state batteries more than make up for that. Is low 50's for bike weight exceptable? The lowest pinion mgu i saw was 50, with careful part selection but real tires, but most were 55+/-
Brian Park over on PB says from Taipei:"Every major motor manufacturer has an eCVT coming for the 2028-2029 model year, which means new singlespeed...
Brian Park over on PB says from Taipei:
"Every major motor manufacturer has an eCVT coming for the 2028-2029 model year, which means new singlespeed hubs and potentially a new chain pitch standard (booo)."
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for...
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for e-bikes) might be in our future --- now has an answer. Not ideal for those that have a mixed fleet, and want to be able to swap parts between them, but perhaps this will minimize the design-bias toward >750W ebbs for those of us that still like to peddle.
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many...
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many trade-offs, primarily due to gobbling up battery life needed for mtb applications, that I can't see the advantages out weight simply losing the derailleur.
"An aside, it's surprising to me that so much eCVT development seems to be centred on performance mountain biking. I hope the brands have data that mountain bike consumers want this, because it seems to me that the technology will be best suited to urban cargo bikes and light electric vehicles."
Why do you think eCVTs will use the battery more quickly? In theory, they provide infinite gears with just the gearing loss of a single planetary gear drive. They will require two motors, so perhaps a small loss using two small motors instead of one large one, but I don't think that will be an added burden on the battery.
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for...
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for e-bikes) might be in our future --- now has an answer. Not ideal for those that have a mixed fleet, and want to be able to swap parts between them, but perhaps this will minimize the design-bias toward >750W ebbs for those of us that still like to peddle.
Seems like a horrible idea to chase marginal gains in rear wheel bracing angle (that have largely been rejected by the consumer base due in part to standard fatigue) when the whole industry is working on SKU consolidation
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for...
Seems like the question I posed a page or so ago about the possibility of a split in bike-part standards (one for peddle-bikes, and another for e-bikes) might be in our future --- now has an answer. Not ideal for those that have a mixed fleet, and want to be able to swap parts between them, but perhaps this will minimize the design-bias toward >750W ebbs for those of us that still like to peddle.
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many...
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many trade-offs, primarily due to gobbling up battery life needed for mtb applications, that I can't see the advantages out weight simply losing the derailleur.
"An aside, it's surprising to me that so much eCVT development seems to be centred on performance mountain biking. I hope the brands have data that mountain bike consumers want this, because it seems to me that the technology will be best suited to urban cargo bikes and light electric vehicles."
Why do you think eCVTs will use the battery more quickly? In theory, they provide infinite gears with just the gearing loss of a single planetary...
Why do you think eCVTs will use the battery more quickly? In theory, they provide infinite gears with just the gearing loss of a single planetary gear drive. They will require two motors, so perhaps a small loss using two small motors instead of one large one, but I don't think that will be an added burden on the battery.
"they will require two motors" , have more drag/resistance and will be heavier
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many...
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many trade-offs, primarily due to gobbling up battery life needed for mtb applications, that I can't see the advantages out weight simply losing the derailleur.
"An aside, it's surprising to me that so much eCVT development seems to be centred on performance mountain biking. I hope the brands have data that mountain bike consumers want this, because it seems to me that the technology will be best suited to urban cargo bikes and light electric vehicles."
spoken like a true fan of flow trails without anything that could ever endanger a rear derailleur
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many...
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many trade-offs, primarily due to gobbling up battery life needed for mtb applications, that I can't see the advantages out weight simply losing the derailleur.
"An aside, it's surprising to me that so much eCVT development seems to be centred on performance mountain biking. I hope the brands have data that mountain bike consumers want this, because it seems to me that the technology will be best suited to urban cargo bikes and light electric vehicles."
Why do you think eCVTs will use the battery more quickly? In theory, they provide infinite gears with just the gearing loss of a single planetary...
Why do you think eCVTs will use the battery more quickly? In theory, they provide infinite gears with just the gearing loss of a single planetary gear drive. They will require two motors, so perhaps a small loss using two small motors instead of one large one, but I don't think that will be an added burden on the battery.
"they will require two motors" , have more drag/resistance and will be heavier
Do they give details about where the extra drag comes from, or is it just some vague hand-waving without evidence? I would have thought eCVTs would be less draggy than a Pinion MGU, but I guess we'll have to see how the execution plays out. Unclear about mass, but it seems like a lot of folks here were keen on getting rid of rear axle mass in favor of BB mass, and this would do that. Unclear how they would manage direct peddling, say, if the battery was dead. That might be a problem.
I'm not in the market for any sort of ebike, but as an engineer, I'm always interested in seeing what companies come up with.
After a quick scan of the article, it sounds like the primary loss/drag worry is in peddling without assistance, where one motor acts as a generator in order to power the second motor, incurring both motor and generator losses.
I guess we'll see how this works out in the next few years. It seems like a good solution for giant heavy bikes, cargo and the like, and probably never usable for SL-type MTBs. I'm kind of hoping that more interest develops in the SL market, as my knees age out in the next decade or two.
I’ve seen it too many times in this thread recently. I’m sorry but grammar matters sometimes.
You pedal a bike. Therefore it’s pedaling a bike or pedaling efficiency.
Peddle means to travel from place to place selling small goods, or to persistently try to convince people to accept an idea, story, or piece of information. Peddling is the act of trying to sell those goods or ideas.
The only thing you’re peddling with an eCVT is the idea that it’s somehow better (or worse) than the other options.
Its never been more clear. I can't wait for ecvt. Been just milking my stockpile of old xt, deore and a microshift r der. Finally tired of the 2 downshift, i up shift to get to the next gear down method and dug out my fresh and new microshift mx. Worked amazing for 2 rides. Clutch doesnt affect shifting. Then last night the steel ring that butts against the der hanger and the b tension screw bends. I bent it back with channel locks after crawling home. I didnt notice the steel actually had ripped and not just bent so crawled home from the same spot today. I mustve caught a branch or something. Its not just rocks or branches that kill derailleurs. "Flow"/jump trails kill them just fine. Every landing is cumulative to that final explosion. Fkn derailleurs!! Just bought a shimano cues 10/11. See how that goes. Anyone know where to get some small parts for a minty microshift mx?
Early 80's it would be a few suntour derailleurs a year. Look at a stick and the thing would jump into your spokes. Then suntour made the xc sport with the triangle cage with 3 pulleys. Thing was still scared of sticks
I’ve seen it too many times in this thread recently. I’m sorry but grammar matters sometimes.You pedal a bike. Therefore it’s pedaling a bike or pedaling...
I’ve seen it too many times in this thread recently. I’m sorry but grammar matters sometimes.
You pedal a bike. Therefore it’s pedaling a bike or pedaling efficiency.
Peddle means to travel from place to place selling small goods, or to persistently try to convince people to accept an idea, story, or piece of information. Peddling is the act of trying to sell those goods or ideas.
The only thing you’re peddling with an eCVT is the idea that it’s somehow better (or worse) than the other options.
I always wanted to be an engineer, and now I are one.
Thanks for pointing out the mistake I've been making for the last few pages.
Not a rumor, but was reading in the Norco team DH thread about how they’re gonna release the top build kit when the new Shimano stuff launches (next March?)
Anywho, those new Saint brakes feel pretty nice. Was wandering around the pits in Whistler and felt them at the yeti tent. Felt like a pretty light lever action into oodles of power. I think they’ll easily rival mavens and would love to try them.
I saw this up close maybe nine months ago while on a work trip to NZ. It’s a pretty good bit of industrial design. They’ve embraced the full moto, and to my eye kind of pulled it off in a way that works. I don’t think they go on sale until the MGU early adopter exclusivity expires.
It’s crying out for a sweet USD fork to embrace that aesthetic.
FRÉJUS, FRANCE – October 8th – VAN RYSEL, the high-performance cycling brand born in Lille, today announces a major turning point in its history at Roc d'Azur. Renowned for its excellence on road, gravel and triathlon, VAN RYSEL takes a new step towards its goal of becoming the world's number one cycling brand by officially entering the mountain bike market, unveiling its race bike: the RCR-XC.
Behind-the-scenes work and intensive in-house development
This official launch is the culmination of a long process. For several months now, VAN RYSEL has been building an MTB structure, bringing in recognised top talent from the discipline, including an R&D team based in the French Alps. Away from the spotlight, the brand's engineers and product managers have mobilised all their expertise to develop entirely new products and shape their own interpretation of high performance in mountain biking. With a single goal in mind: to develop the ultimate machine to win the biggest XC races.
The RCR-XC: a data-driven technological breakthrough
The RCR-XC was designed according to the strict methodology VAN RYSEL developed on the road: detailed analysis of race scenarios, wind tunnel sessions, collaboration with the best industry partners (such as ZIPP, RockShox and VITTORIA) and co-design with professional riders.
Since the Paris 2024 Olympic Games race, engineers first meticulously analysed all the data from the World Cup circuit. From the vast amount of data collected, VAN RYSEL focused on the three most important variables in determining the foundations of the brand's first mountain bike: speed, power and time. "Wherever the athlete spends the most time in the race is where there is the most time to be gained through design," explains Luis Moro, VAN RYSEL MTB Product Manager.
This led VAN RYSEL to develop its first competition MTB, in the burgeoning 32" standard, that VAN RYSEL believes offers real world performance advantages.
And that's not all: we wanted to push the boundaries even further, with the same rigour that has driven our success on the road. Despite this new wheel diameter, the carbon frame - whose stiffness was fine-tuned through several days of field testing with DECATHLON FORD riders - is actually lighter than the 29-inch platform currently used by the team: -230g (on a size M frame).
Aerodynamics was also placed at the heart of development. Wind tunnel testing helped shape a bike that delivers a significant saving of 15.5 watts at 35 km/h compared with the 2026 mountain bike used by the team.
"We didn't set out to build just another mountain bike, but one of the fastest in the world: the RCR-XC is designed to win the biggest races. To fuel that ambition, we applied V|R's successful scientific method, based on data and wind tunnel testing, to off-road riding, with no compromise. This frame is the result of co-design: the dynamics of a 32-inch at a lower weight than a 29-inch, validated by the best riders in the world." - explains Luis Moro, VAN RYSEL MTB Product Manager.
VAN RYSEL partners with the DECATHLON FORD team
To prove the value of this machine at the highest level, VAN RYSEL is partnering with the DECATHLON FORD team (managed by Samuel Roces). From 2027, VAN RYSEL will be the team's official bike and apparel supplier, with the RCR-XC ridden by world-class names including Luca Martin (UCI world number 1), Samara Maxwell (2 World Cup wins) and Savilia Blunk.
"Developing the fastest machine in the world only makes sense if it's ridden by the best athletes on the planet. Today, it is an honour and an immense source of pride for me to announce: VAN RYSEL becomes the official bike and apparel supplier for the DECATHLON FORD team from the 2027 season!" said Nicolas Pierron, CEO of VAN RYSEL.
Availability of VAN RYSEL MTB products
VAN RYSEL's arrival in mountain biking will begin with a first range of apparel, available in Europe from 2027, with other markets, including the United States, to follow.
The RCR-XC will first be used by DECATHLON FORD's professional riders, so their feedback can be incorporated under the most demanding World Cup conditions. It will go on sale at a date to be announced later.
Our products will reflect the same commitment as in our other areas of our business: enabling every cyclist to access the best equipment on the market at the fairest possible price.
I tested the Intradrive at Eurobike a couple of years ago and the shifting feel was really nice. Positive engagement akin to Sram 11spd days in the best sense of that description. The test bike was built with that Alutech frame.
Watching quarterhp demo 11 review and Henry brought up a good point. Have to think Specialized has plans to use Highgear for the next enduro. Could it be a vertical shock with highgear? Anyone with insight?
Van Rysel 32" XC bike - https://www.vanrysel.com/en-GB/c/lp/van-rysel-mountain-bike-rcr-xcFRÉJUS, FRANCE – October 8th – VAN RYSEL, the high-performance cycling brand born in Lille, today announces a major...
FRÉJUS, FRANCE – October 8th – VAN RYSEL, the high-performance cycling brand born in Lille, today announces a major turning point in its history at Roc d'Azur. Renowned for its excellence on road, gravel and triathlon, VAN RYSEL takes a new step towards its goal of becoming the world's number one cycling brand by officially entering the mountain bike market, unveiling its race bike: the RCR-XC.
Behind-the-scenes work and intensive in-house development
This official launch is the culmination of a long process. For several months now, VAN RYSEL has been building an MTB structure, bringing in recognised top talent from the discipline, including an R&D team based in the French Alps. Away from the spotlight, the brand's engineers and product managers have mobilised all their expertise to develop entirely new products and shape their own interpretation of high performance in mountain biking. With a single goal in mind: to develop the ultimate machine to win the biggest XC races.
The RCR-XC: a data-driven technological breakthrough
The RCR-XC was designed according to the strict methodology VAN RYSEL developed on the road: detailed analysis of race scenarios, wind tunnel sessions, collaboration with the best industry partners (such as ZIPP, RockShox and VITTORIA) and co-design with professional riders.
Since the Paris 2024 Olympic Games race, engineers first meticulously analysed all the data from the World Cup circuit. From the vast amount of data collected, VAN RYSEL focused on the three most important variables in determining the foundations of the brand's first mountain bike: speed, power and time. "Wherever the athlete spends the most time in the race is where there is the most time to be gained through design," explains Luis Moro, VAN RYSEL MTB Product Manager.
This led VAN RYSEL to develop its first competition MTB, in the burgeoning 32" standard, that VAN RYSEL believes offers real world performance advantages.
And that's not all: we wanted to push the boundaries even further, with the same rigour that has driven our success on the road. Despite this new wheel diameter, the carbon frame - whose stiffness was fine-tuned through several days of field testing with DECATHLON FORD riders - is actually lighter than the 29-inch platform currently used by the team: -230g (on a size M frame).
Aerodynamics was also placed at the heart of development. Wind tunnel testing helped shape a bike that delivers a significant saving of 15.5 watts at 35 km/h compared with the 2026 mountain bike used by the team.
"We didn't set out to build just another mountain bike, but one of the fastest in the world: the RCR-XC is designed to win the biggest races. To fuel that ambition, we applied V|R's successful scientific method, based on data and wind tunnel testing, to off-road riding, with no compromise. This frame is the result of co-design: the dynamics of a 32-inch at a lower weight than a 29-inch, validated by the best riders in the world." - explains Luis Moro, VAN RYSEL MTB Product Manager.
VAN RYSEL partners with the DECATHLON FORD team
To prove the value of this machine at the highest level, VAN RYSEL is partnering with the DECATHLON FORD team (managed by Samuel Roces). From 2027, VAN RYSEL will be the team's official bike and apparel supplier, with the RCR-XC ridden by world-class names including Luca Martin (UCI world number 1), Samara Maxwell (2 World Cup wins) and Savilia Blunk.
"Developing the fastest machine in the world only makes sense if it's ridden by the best athletes on the planet. Today, it is an honour and an immense source of pride for me to announce: VAN RYSEL becomes the official bike and apparel supplier for the DECATHLON FORD team from the 2027 season!" said Nicolas Pierron, CEO of VAN RYSEL.
Availability of VAN RYSEL MTB products
VAN RYSEL's arrival in mountain biking will begin with a first range of apparel, available in Europe from 2027, with other markets, including the United States, to follow.
The RCR-XC will first be used by DECATHLON FORD's professional riders, so their feedback can be incorporated under the most demanding World Cup conditions. It will go on sale at a date to be announced later.
Our products will reflect the same commitment as in our other areas of our business: enabling every cyclist to access the best equipment on the market at the fairest possible price.
Watching quarterhp demo 11 review and Henry brought up a good point. Have to think Specialized has plans to use Highgear for the next enduro. Could...
Watching quarterhp demo 11 review and Henry brought up a good point. Have to think Specialized has plans to use Highgear for the next enduro. Could it be a vertical shock with highgear? Anyone with insight?
If they do, they’ll need to figure out the drag with the current system. It’s fine on a DH bike but I wouldn’t want to pedal it all day.
Shop guys pretty regularly see just about any frame on earth broken, and it really doesn't often turn any of us off a brand. The forces...
Shop guys pretty regularly see just about any frame on earth broken, and it really doesn't often turn any of us off a brand. The forces bikes see are both pretty dynamic and pretty crazy at times, especially considering how much we expect this premium stuff to weigh. Seeing a broken V-10 doesn't make me want to avoid them, it makes me curious how fuckin' hard the rider was going.
The general public does not always understand that stuff does just break. We get people in daily who tell us we couldn't pay them to ride carbon, then we grab a frame from the back with the BB cut out and say "go ahead and try to break this" and almost always have a believer in 20 seconds. We have a Blur front triangle with the BB cut out. I've put the TT on a stand, held the DT, and can literally suspend my 150lb ass. Probably been full force slammed against hard concrete corners a hundred times. That's still a frame that broke at the end of the day, so imagining the forces it saw to crack is pretty insane.
I think people should be a lot less wary. You're not a WC athlete, you aren't pushing a bike that hard, and the vast majority of broken items we see are due to rider error or mechanical neglect.
I don't disagree with anything you've said, but the number of snapped Phoenix frames floating around online should raise anyone's eyebrows.It's not a carbon vs. aluminum...
I don't disagree with anything you've said, but the number of snapped Phoenix frames floating around online should raise anyone's eyebrows.
It's not a carbon vs. aluminum issue. It just seems like Pivot may have gone too light on the frame.
I actually thought people overreacted to BK's snapped Hardline frame a while back. But the more I've seen fail under other circumstances, the more you have to wonder.
You do see a good amount of them, but have you been to many DH races recently? There are a so many people on the new...
You do see a good amount of them, but have you been to many DH races recently? There are a so many people on the new Phoenix, most races I've been too in the last few years there are more Pivots than v10s, at least in Colorado and Utah. The more bikes out there getting races, the more broken frames there are going to be.
In whistler, you see like five v10's for every one pivot phoenix.
Talking to the shops there, they hardly ever see a broken v10 frame. If they do crack, it's because someone smacked the frame into something. Usually a chainstay hitting a tree or something like that.
There are videos online of people breaking phoenix chainstays from normal landings, and breaking front triangles from heavy landings.
These are single instances being published so it's tough to know if it's representative of a design issue, bad QC, or previous abuse, but the videos of catastrophic failures I have seen are concerning, especially when there are other options available that don't have any instances of failure under normal use.
I actually had the thought the other day while on a ride, has anyone tried to incorporate bash protection and weights? Seems to me like all these racers that are adding weight really low on the bike could come up with something that serves both needs. Weight on literally the lowest point of the bike but also drivetrain protection.
In the longer write up he made the below statement, which as a huge fan of emtbs I agree. Ecvt's will bring with them SO many trade-offs, primarily due to gobbling up battery life needed for mtb applications, that I can't see the advantages out weight simply losing the derailleur.
"An aside, it's surprising to me that so much eCVT development seems to be centred on performance mountain biking. I hope the brands have data that mountain bike consumers want this, because it seems to me that the technology will be best suited to urban cargo bikes and light electric vehicles."
Exactly, we should stop pretending the bike industry does much more than "inching" and trying to sell you as much bikes, parts, stuff as possible every 3 years. Every big step will come with huge drawbacks, wich will be slowly and partially solved in following iterations. Like when they tought 450% range 1x 11s transmissions are all than you need (until they "realize" that any less than 500% is not workable for most people)... Fully integrated roadbikes in a time when most groupsets where still mechanical? All those years with shitty disc brakes/dropper posts/geometry/suspension dampers? You'll get what I'm trying to say
Ecvts/MGUs are going to be flawed in one way or another at first. They are of course ideal for utility bikes (but will be prohibitively expensive for most people in most places, initially at least) so there is a NEED for enthusiasts to buy into them. They are going to be draggy and heavier than tradiccional systems, but they will open develoment paths that will ultimately make ebikes better... But slowly... A couple steps every few gears...
I thought the gabao ecvt was lighter than the pinion mgu by over a lb? Pinion bikes did need an extra 200ish w of battery power, because of the drag, to equal current motor/der/ battery systems but the newer semi solid state batteries more than make up for that. Is low 50's for bike weight exceptable? The lowest pinion mgu i saw was 50, with careful part selection but real tires, but most were 55+/-
Why do you think eCVTs will use the battery more quickly? In theory, they provide infinite gears with just the gearing loss of a single planetary gear drive. They will require two motors, so perhaps a small loss using two small motors instead of one large one, but I don't think that will be an added burden on the battery.
Seems like a horrible idea to chase marginal gains in rear wheel bracing angle (that have largely been rejected by the consumer base due in part to standard fatigue) when the whole industry is working on SKU consolidation
"they will require two motors" , have more drag/resistance and will be heavier
spoken like a true fan of flow trails without anything that could ever endanger a rear derailleur
Do they give details about where the extra drag comes from, or is it just some vague hand-waving without evidence? I would have thought eCVTs would be less draggy than a Pinion MGU, but I guess we'll have to see how the execution plays out. Unclear about mass, but it seems like a lot of folks here were keen on getting rid of rear axle mass in favor of BB mass, and this would do that. Unclear how they would manage direct peddling, say, if the battery was dead. That might be a problem.
I'm not in the market for any sort of ebike, but as an engineer, I'm always interested in seeing what companies come up with.
After a quick scan of the article, it sounds like the primary loss/drag worry is in peddling without assistance, where one motor acts as a generator in order to power the second motor, incurring both motor and generator losses.
I guess we'll see how this works out in the next few years. It seems like a good solution for giant heavy bikes, cargo and the like, and probably never usable for SL-type MTBs. I'm kind of hoping that more interest develops in the SL market, as my knees age out in the next decade or two.
I’ve seen it too many times in this thread recently. I’m sorry but grammar matters sometimes.
You pedal a bike. Therefore it’s pedaling a bike or pedaling efficiency.
Peddle means to travel from place to place selling small goods, or to persistently try to convince people to accept an idea, story, or piece of information. Peddling is the act of trying to sell those goods or ideas.
The only thing you’re peddling with an eCVT is the idea that it’s somehow better (or worse) than the other options.
Hey look: we have a forum topic for e-bikes!
Its never been more clear. I can't wait for ecvt. Been just milking my stockpile of old xt, deore and a microshift r der. Finally tired of the 2 downshift, i up shift to get to the next gear down method and dug out my fresh and new microshift mx. Worked amazing for 2 rides. Clutch doesnt affect shifting. Then last night the steel ring that butts against the der hanger and the b tension screw bends. I bent it back with channel locks after crawling home. I didnt notice the steel actually had ripped and not just bent so crawled home from the same spot today. I mustve caught a branch or something. Its not just rocks or branches that kill derailleurs. "Flow"/jump trails kill them just fine. Every landing is cumulative to that final explosion. Fkn derailleurs!! Just bought a shimano cues 10/11. See how that goes. Anyone know where to get some small parts for a minty microshift mx?
Early 80's it would be a few suntour derailleurs a year. Look at a stick and the thing would jump into your spokes. Then suntour made the xc sport with the triangle cage with 3 pulleys. Thing was still scared of sticks
I always wanted to be an engineer, and now I are one.
Thanks for pointing out the mistake I've been making for the last few pages.
This times eleventy brizillion!!!
Not a rumor, but was reading in the Norco team DH thread about how they’re gonna release the top build kit when the new Shimano stuff launches (next March?)
Anywho, those new Saint brakes feel pretty nice. Was wandering around the pits in Whistler and felt them at the yeti tent. Felt like a pretty light lever action into oodles of power. I think they’ll easily rival mavens and would love to try them.
How do you know how much power they have if you just felt them in the pits?
I’m confused. Don’t we all possess the ability to fully review a bike and/or components from the classic showroom brake lever pull?!
I saw this up close maybe nine months ago while on a work trip to NZ. It’s a pretty good bit of industrial design. They’ve embraced the full moto, and to my eye kind of pulled it off in a way that works. I don’t think they go on sale until the MGU early adopter exclusivity expires.
It’s crying out for a sweet USD fork to embrace that aesthetic.
Van Rysel 32" XC bike - https://www.vanrysel.com/en-GB/c/lp/van-rysel-mountain-bike-rcr-xc
FRÉJUS, FRANCE – October 8th – VAN RYSEL, the high-performance cycling brand born in Lille, today announces a major turning point in its history at Roc d'Azur. Renowned for its excellence on road, gravel and triathlon, VAN RYSEL takes a new step towards its goal of becoming the world's number one cycling brand by officially entering the mountain bike market, unveiling its race bike: the RCR-XC.
Behind-the-scenes work and intensive in-house development
This official launch is the culmination of a long process. For several months now, VAN RYSEL has been building an MTB structure, bringing in recognised top talent from the discipline, including an R&D team based in the French Alps. Away from the spotlight, the brand's engineers and product managers have mobilised all their expertise to develop entirely new products and shape their own interpretation of high performance in mountain biking. With a single goal in mind: to develop the ultimate machine to win the biggest XC races.
The RCR-XC: a data-driven technological breakthrough
The RCR-XC was designed according to the strict methodology VAN RYSEL developed on the road: detailed analysis of race scenarios, wind tunnel sessions, collaboration with the best industry partners (such as ZIPP, RockShox and VITTORIA) and co-design with professional riders.
Since the Paris 2024 Olympic Games race, engineers first meticulously analysed all the data from the World Cup circuit. From the vast amount of data collected, VAN RYSEL focused on the three most important variables in determining the foundations of the brand's first mountain bike: speed, power and time.
"Wherever the athlete spends the most time in the race is where there is the most time to be gained through design," explains Luis Moro, VAN RYSEL MTB Product Manager.
This led VAN RYSEL to develop its first competition MTB, in the burgeoning 32" standard, that VAN RYSEL believes offers real world performance advantages.
And that's not all: we wanted to push the boundaries even further, with the same rigour that has driven our success on the road.
Despite this new wheel diameter, the carbon frame - whose stiffness was fine-tuned through several days of field testing with DECATHLON FORD riders - is actually lighter than the 29-inch platform currently used by the team: -230g (on a size M frame).
Aerodynamics was also placed at the heart of development. Wind tunnel testing helped shape a bike that delivers a significant saving of 15.5 watts at 35 km/h compared with the 2026 mountain bike used by the team.
"We didn't set out to build just another mountain bike, but one of the fastest in the world: the RCR-XC is designed to win the biggest races. To fuel that ambition, we applied V|R's successful scientific method, based on data and wind tunnel testing, to off-road riding, with no compromise. This frame is the result of co-design: the dynamics of a 32-inch at a lower weight than a 29-inch, validated by the best riders in the world." - explains Luis Moro, VAN RYSEL MTB Product Manager.
VAN RYSEL partners with the DECATHLON FORD team
To prove the value of this machine at the highest level, VAN RYSEL is partnering with the DECATHLON FORD team (managed by Samuel Roces). From 2027, VAN RYSEL will be the team's official bike and apparel supplier, with the RCR-XC ridden by world-class names including Luca Martin (UCI world number 1), Samara Maxwell (2 World Cup wins) and Savilia Blunk.
"Developing the fastest machine in the world only makes sense if it's ridden by the best athletes on the planet. Today, it is an honour and an immense source of pride for me to announce: VAN RYSEL becomes the official bike and apparel supplier for the DECATHLON FORD team from the 2027 season!" said Nicolas Pierron, CEO of VAN RYSEL.
Availability of VAN RYSEL MTB products
VAN RYSEL's arrival in mountain biking will begin with a first range of apparel, available in Europe from 2027, with other markets, including the United States, to follow.
The RCR-XC will first be used by DECATHLON FORD's professional riders, so their feedback can be incorporated under the most demanding World Cup conditions. It will go on sale at a date to be announced later.
Our products will reflect the same commitment as in our other areas of our business: enabling every cyclist to access the best equipment on the market at the fairest possible price.
two e-bikes using scottish-made intradrive gearbox powertrain have launched. deets and discussion here (our e-bike forum thread) - https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/e-bike-talk-not-tech-rumor-derailment?page=57#comment-861741
I tested the Intradrive at Eurobike a couple of years ago and the shifting feel was really nice. Positive engagement akin to Sram 11spd days in the best sense of that description. The test bike was built with that Alutech frame.
Watching quarterhp demo 11 review and Henry brought up a good point. Have to think Specialized has plans to use Highgear for the next enduro. Could it be a vertical shock with highgear? Anyone with insight?
Interesting choice with aero-rims on a MTB.
MOAR aero!!
Interesting they claim it's more aerodynamic whilst having considerably larger frontal area.
If they do, they’ll need to figure out the drag with the current system. It’s fine on a DH bike but I wouldn’t want to pedal it all day.
In whistler, you see like five v10's for every one pivot phoenix.
Talking to the shops there, they hardly ever see a broken v10 frame. If they do crack, it's because someone smacked the frame into something. Usually a chainstay hitting a tree or something like that.
There are videos online of people breaking phoenix chainstays from normal landings, and breaking front triangles from heavy landings.
These are single instances being published so it's tough to know if it's representative of a design issue, bad QC, or previous abuse, but the videos of catastrophic failures I have seen are concerning, especially when there are other options available that don't have any instances of failure under normal use.
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker