So this just came across my feed....steering linkage so you can have "shorter wheelbase, yet increased reach and stack".......apparently what's old is new again?
So this just came across my feed....steering linkage so you can have "shorter wheelbase, yet increased reach and stack".......apparently what's old is new again?
So this just came across my feed....steering linkage so you can have "shorter wheelbase, yet increased reach and stack".......apparently what's old is new again?
So this just came across my feed....steering linkage so you can have "shorter wheelbase, yet increased reach and stack".......apparently what's old is new again?
Is that front brake a 180mm rotor with single pistons? So some large rider that actually needs a 32" is going to get on this thing...
Is that front brake a 180mm rotor with single pistons? So some large rider that actually needs a 32" is going to get on this thing and get it rocking up to speed....an have absolutely no way of slowing it down. How not to sell bike from your demo rides 101.
I don't recall needing to go larger rotor size between 26 and 29. I'm still 150lbs and that's the main energy that needs to be dissipated...
I don't recall needing to go larger rotor size between 26 and 29. I'm still 150lbs and that's the main energy that needs to be dissipated. I don't see 32" bikes needing 200mm rotors for XC riding.
Leverage. That bigger wheel is a longer lever. That 180mm rotor that was okay on 26" has 19% less power (for the same hand force) on...
Leverage. That bigger wheel is a longer lever. That 180mm rotor that was okay on 26" has 19% less power (for the same hand force) on a 32" wheel. To get the same braking force on the 32" bike with the 180mm rotor you need to squeeze 23% more at the lever. That doesn't yet take into account a 200lb rider vs your 150lb.
I don’t think it works out quite that simply in practice but I could be wrong. And I’d agree a riders weight is going to be a much bigger input versus wheel and rotor size when it comes to braking forces.
In my experience bigger wheels offer more clearance from the ground and bigger rotors offer more surface area to dissipate heat and more mass to heat up in the first place. I don’t there is much more to it than that.
Bigger rotors provide more braking torque to the wheel hub. Bigger wheels do the same in the other way. Proportionally larger rotors on larger wheels will give the same braking force on contact patch if the braking force on the caliper stays the same.
No qualms from me if yall wanna spend your money on 30.5 but this does have me concerned for 27.5 rear wheels. I spent years and multiple bikes on full 29 and now years and multiple bikes on mullet and just prefer the smaller rear wheel, even on short travel bikes.
I’m out here for the turns, not for speed and “efficiency”
No qualms from me if yall wanna spend your money on 30.5 but this does have me concerned for 27.5 rear wheels. I spent years and...
No qualms from me if yall wanna spend your money on 30.5 but this does have me concerned for 27.5 rear wheels. I spent years and multiple bikes on full 29 and now years and multiple bikes on mullet and just prefer the smaller rear wheel, even on short travel bikes.
I’m out here for the turns, not for speed and “efficiency”
For riding steeps, I don't think 27.5 will go away for anyone remotely average height. Getting your rear buzzed by a 29er can be scary, I can imagine getting circular sawed by a 30.5/32 would be worse.
Only way I’m interested is if I can stuff a 30.5 in my 29 fork. No chance I’m buying any new standards, especially when these goofs...
Only way I’m interested is if I can stuff a 30.5 in my 29 fork. No chance I’m buying any new standards, especially when these goofs launch 2 new sizes at once.
Looked it up and Google says ETRTO for 30.5 is 642, so only 10mm larger radius than 29’s 622. Would be tight but seems like you...
Looked it up and Google says ETRTO for 30.5 is 642, so only 10mm larger radius than 29’s 622. Would be tight but seems like you could probably stuff a lower volume 30.5 tire in without contacting the arch/crown/downtube at full compression.
Obviously manufacturers will recommend against it because what’s the point of a new standard if not to sell more parts…
From pinkbike: Asa Vermette's upcoming signature grips from Burgtec. They're Longneck-like, but have a slightly raised portion in the center, and a knurled pattern on the outer edge for extra grip.
I'll admit to being no physicist, but again, would the weight of the rider not be the largest qualifier for how much energy a brake system...
I'll admit to being no physicist, but again, would the weight of the rider not be the largest qualifier for how much energy a brake system needs in order to stop? The leverage over the wheel is in context to how much mass the wheel has, which given 29 vs 32 XC wheelsets have probably 200~g of difference when they're like for like, the stopping force is focused on the rider, not stopping the wheel.
If someone could break down the maths, would appreciate it.
I stated the 150lb part as I was 150 on 26, 150 on 27.5, and 150 on 29, and I've never felt a need to increase rotor size.
What matters here is the ratio of wheel diameter vs. rotor diameter. While the overall kinetic energy converted to heat is about the same, the force you need to make the wheel slow down changes when your lever does. Say you lock the lever at some position and try to spin the wheel by hand. If you spin it by the tire, it's much easier than spinning it by the rotor. The closer to the center you go, the harder you have to push to rotate the wheel against the braking force applied at rotor. Since the ground is the one trying to spin your wheel, the bigger the wheel, the bigger the lever you provide for the ground to overcome your clamping force.
I'll admit to being no physicist, but again, would the weight of the rider not be the largest qualifier for how much energy a brake system...
I'll admit to being no physicist, but again, would the weight of the rider not be the largest qualifier for how much energy a brake system needs in order to stop? The leverage over the wheel is in context to how much mass the wheel has, which given 29 vs 32 XC wheelsets have probably 200~g of difference when they're like for like, the stopping force is focused on the rider, not stopping the wheel.
If someone could break down the maths, would appreciate it.
I stated the 150lb part as I was 150 on 26, 150 on 27.5, and 150 on 29, and I've never felt a need to increase rotor size.
What matters here is the ratio of wheel diameter vs. rotor diameter. While the overall kinetic energy converted to heat is about the same, the force you...
What matters here is the ratio of wheel diameter vs. rotor diameter. While the overall kinetic energy converted to heat is about the same, the force you need to make the wheel slow down changes when your lever does. Say you lock the lever at some position and try to spin the wheel by hand. If you spin it by the tire, it's much easier than spinning it by the rotor. The closer to the center you go, the harder you have to push to rotate the wheel against the braking force applied at rotor. Since the ground is the one trying to spin your wheel, the bigger the wheel, the bigger the lever you provide for the ground to overcome your clamping force.
from sedona bike fest, trek super fly 32 - some available for demo.- Small-XL, size Large pictured- Travel: 110mm frame, 120mm fork. Size Small is 100mm...
from sedona bike fest, trek super fly 32 - some available for demo. - Small-XL, size Large pictured - Travel: 110mm frame, 120mm fork. Size Small is 100mm travel f/r) - Hopefully January release - Normally don’t show bikes until they’re in the warehouse, this is an exception. - Pro Caliber 32 hardtail also expected in January.
Is that front brake a 180mm rotor with single pistons? So some large rider that actually needs a 32" is going to get on this thing...
Is that front brake a 180mm rotor with single pistons? So some large rider that actually needs a 32" is going to get on this thing and get it rocking up to speed....an have absolutely no way of slowing it down. How not to sell bike from your demo rides 101.
From experience, dual 32" didn't need any abnormal braking setup. I rode one with SLX 4 pot brakes, and although I dislike Shimano, they weren't bad with stopping power. Spin up and slowing down weren't substantially changed with the larger wheel size.
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months behind the headtube from the fork bumpers.
I just prototyped that for REEB. Lots went into this update after learning a ton on the V1. Custom drawn tubing, refined 3D printed elements, huge...
I just prototyped that for REEB. Lots went into this update after learning a ton on the V1. Custom drawn tubing, refined 3D printed elements, huge improvement on pivot hardware and bearings.
Both of your wishes are true! CS length is 7mm longer now, and stack came up 10mm.
Still early in the prototype phase, some small things will get updated as they get more miles on it, but it's pretty dialed as is!
Feel free to ask about anything else.
Stoked to see CS grow, but also wish it was longer in the larger sizes. As a tall guy who loves to dabble in light snappy bikes, 442 rear paired with the XL front center is still quite a bit off IMO (you said +7 from the v1 435 RC). Mostly thought long stays were just for bruiser bikes until I started realizing how beneficial they are on hard technical climbs, which is exactly what I want to be using a short travel bike for.
Are you working with them on the next gen steezl too? Pls pls pls tell me Steezl v2 will come with a better FC/RC balance…would absolutely kill for a US made steel bike with Reeb quality that actually had balanced geo in the larger sizes. Hopefully adjustability so it’s just a non issue and everyone can be happy? 465+ RC on the existing XL/XXL would be amazing.
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months...
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months behind the headtube from the fork bumpers.
Any info on how that happened? I'm building one of those up right behind me.
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months...
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months behind the headtube from the fork bumpers.
Stoked to see CS grow, but also wish it was longer in the larger sizes. As a tall guy who loves to dabble in light snappy...
Stoked to see CS grow, but also wish it was longer in the larger sizes. As a tall guy who loves to dabble in light snappy bikes, 442 rear paired with the XL front center is still quite a bit off IMO (you said +7 from the v1 435 RC). Mostly thought long stays were just for bruiser bikes until I started realizing how beneficial they are on hard technical climbs, which is exactly what I want to be using a short travel bike for.
Are you working with them on the next gen steezl too? Pls pls pls tell me Steezl v2 will come with a better FC/RC balance…would absolutely kill for a US made steel bike with Reeb quality that actually had balanced geo in the larger sizes. Hopefully adjustability so it’s just a non issue and everyone can be happy? 465+ RC on the existing XL/XXL would be amazing.
There's a lot of people that love short rear ends on shorter travel bikes. It makes them feel quite nimble on tight terrain. Have you done much pedaling on tight Midwest or east coast single track? Rear end length isn't the only thing that makes a bike climb well.
As a 6'4" tall rider, I love the 460mm chainstays on my Frameworks, but I do still enjoy shorter rear ends on certain trails.
Feel free to continue bantering on chainstay length over on the thread dedicated for that.
A STEEZL update will happen in the future for sure, but not this up coming season. REEB has taken plenty of feedback what people love about that bike, and any criticism they have. 435mm chainstays still outsell the 445mm chainstay option, so that's a viable data point.
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months...
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months behind the headtube from the fork bumpers.
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months...
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months behind the headtube from the fork bumpers.
@roost66 Had any issues with the TR11 frame denting from fork bumpers?
From experience, dual 32" didn't need any abnormal braking setup. I rode one with SLX 4 pot brakes, and although I dislike Shimano, they weren't bad...
From experience, dual 32" didn't need any abnormal braking setup. I rode one with SLX 4 pot brakes, and although I dislike Shimano, they weren't bad with stopping power. Spin up and slowing down weren't substantially changed with the larger wheel size.
+1, motive ultimates with 180mm rotors was plenty for me on the big wheels.
In two instances where he tucked the front, the bumpers came into contact with the frame at the specified bumper location.
Makes me wonder if there is an issue with heat treat for a batch of frames or something similar, we're the serial numbers on the frames relatively close?
Makes me wonder if there is an issue with heat treat for a batch of frames or something similar, we're the serial numbers on the frames...
Makes me wonder if there is an issue with heat treat for a batch of frames or something similar, we're the serial numbers on the frames relatively close?
Can't speak to serial numbers, but the material in that area of the frame is insanely thin compared to the top tube and head tube itself when felt by hand. Couldn't fit the caliper in there.
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months...
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months behind the headtube from the fork bumpers.
I’m more concerned about what your buddy is about to step on in that photo. It looks like what happens when my Newfoundland finds some spicy food left out.
In other news- your buddy needs some better bumpers that dissipate the energy. The Ooohlins are lovely.
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months...
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months behind the headtube from the fork bumpers.
I previously used odi bumpers on my Trek session and they slightly dented the headtube on both sides... No big incidents, just subtle dents formed over time. I wouldn't recommend them. Unfortunately stock Fox 40 bumpers spin & slide if you even look at them the wrong way, so I thought they'd be worth a try, but nope.
I just built up a TR11... I'm running the stock 40 bumpers with zip ties to cinch them down in place. The way the TR11 tubes flare, you basically have to align the bumper to impact the high point on the tubing (exactly where that dent is). Hopefully the softer durometer fox bumpers don't result in that issue, but it's a pretty high contact area the way the tube flares out...
Curious - Did your buddy get warranty the first time around?
Isn't there a specific test differentiating category 4 from 5 which tests headtube and the surrounding area resisting dual crown forks impacting the frame?
A little more info on Asa’s bars coming
Makes me want a DH race series for cargobikes😅
I don’t think it works out quite that simply in practice but I could be wrong. And I’d agree a riders weight is going to be a much bigger input versus wheel and rotor size when it comes to braking forces.
In my experience bigger wheels offer more clearance from the ground and bigger rotors offer more surface area to dissipate heat and more mass to heat up in the first place. I don’t there is much more to it than that.
Bigger rotors provide more braking torque to the wheel hub. Bigger wheels do the same in the other way. Proportionally larger rotors on larger wheels will give the same braking force on contact patch if the braking force on the caliper stays the same.
No qualms from me if yall wanna spend your money on 30.5 but this does have me concerned for 27.5 rear wheels. I spent years and multiple bikes on full 29 and now years and multiple bikes on mullet and just prefer the smaller rear wheel, even on short travel bikes.
I’m out here for the turns, not for speed and “efficiency”
Might be able to talk race organizers at SOC into a cargo-bike dual slalom event. They've done some other pretty ridiculous demo races.
For riding steeps, I don't think 27.5 will go away for anyone remotely average height. Getting your rear buzzed by a 29er can be scary, I can imagine getting circular sawed by a 30.5/32 would be worse.
Dust off that old 29+ fork tooling, yo!
paging Kirt Voreis
From pinkbike:
Asa Vermette's upcoming signature grips from Burgtec. They're Longneck-like, but have a slightly raised portion in the center, and a knurled pattern on the outer edge for extra grip.
What matters here is the ratio of wheel diameter vs. rotor diameter.
While the overall kinetic energy converted to heat is about the same, the force you need to make the wheel slow down changes when your lever does.
Say you lock the lever at some position and try to spin the wheel by hand. If you spin it by the tire, it's much easier than spinning it by the rotor. The closer to the center you go, the harder you have to push to rotate the wheel against the braking force applied at rotor.
Since the ground is the one trying to spin your wheel, the bigger the wheel, the bigger the lever you provide for the ground to overcome your clamping force.
Thats why (dry) V-brakes are the best! 👍
From experience, dual 32" didn't need any abnormal braking setup. I rode one with SLX 4 pot brakes, and although I dislike Shimano, they weren't bad with stopping power. Spin up and slowing down weren't substantially changed with the larger wheel size.
Has anyone heard of head tube issues on the most recent generation of TR11s? A buddy of mine just dented his second frame in 2 months behind the headtube from the fork bumpers.
Stoked to see CS grow, but also wish it was longer in the larger sizes. As a tall guy who loves to dabble in light snappy bikes, 442 rear paired with the XL front center is still quite a bit off IMO (you said +7 from the v1 435 RC). Mostly thought long stays were just for bruiser bikes until I started realizing how beneficial they are on hard technical climbs, which is exactly what I want to be using a short travel bike for.
Are you working with them on the next gen steezl too? Pls pls pls tell me Steezl v2 will come with a better FC/RC balance…would absolutely kill for a US made steel bike with Reeb quality that actually had balanced geo in the larger sizes. Hopefully adjustability so it’s just a non issue and everyone can be happy? 465+ RC on the existing XL/XXL would be amazing.
Any info on how that happened? I'm building one of those up right behind me.
The odi bumpers arent particularly forgiving...
There's a lot of people that love short rear ends on shorter travel bikes. It makes them feel quite nimble on tight terrain. Have you done much pedaling on tight Midwest or east coast single track? Rear end length isn't the only thing that makes a bike climb well.
As a 6'4" tall rider, I love the 460mm chainstays on my Frameworks, but I do still enjoy shorter rear ends on certain trails.
Feel free to continue bantering on chainstay length over on the thread dedicated for that.
A STEEZL update will happen in the future for sure, but not this up coming season. REEB has taken plenty of feedback what people love about that bike, and any criticism they have. 435mm chainstays still outsell the 445mm chainstay option, so that's a viable data point.
In two instances where he tucked the front, the bumpers came into contact with the frame at the specified bumper location.
@roost66 Had any issues with the TR11 frame denting from fork bumpers?
+1, motive ultimates with 180mm rotors was plenty for me on the big wheels.
Makes me wonder if there is an issue with heat treat for a batch of frames or something similar, we're the serial numbers on the frames relatively close?
Sexytime
https://www.instagram.com/p/DfiCF0PiLyZ/?exln=MTJubGtyMHh5OGsxMw==
Can't speak to serial numbers, but the material in that area of the frame is insanely thin compared to the top tube and head tube itself when felt by hand. Couldn't fit the caliper in there.
I’m more concerned about what your buddy is about to step on in that photo. It looks like what happens when my Newfoundland finds some spicy food left out.
In other news- your buddy needs some better bumpers that dissipate the energy. The Ooohlins are lovely.
I previously used odi bumpers on my Trek session and they slightly dented the headtube on both sides... No big incidents, just subtle dents formed over time. I wouldn't recommend them. Unfortunately stock Fox 40 bumpers spin & slide if you even look at them the wrong way, so I thought they'd be worth a try, but nope.
I just built up a TR11... I'm running the stock 40 bumpers with zip ties to cinch them down in place. The way the TR11 tubes flare, you basically have to align the bumper to impact the high point on the tubing (exactly where that dent is). Hopefully the softer durometer fox bumpers don't result in that issue, but it's a pretty high contact area the way the tube flares out...
Curious - Did your buddy get warranty the first time around?
Isn't there a specific test differentiating category 4 from 5 which tests headtube and the surrounding area resisting dual crown forks impacting the frame?
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker