All

JM cycles, a retirement project?

Yea, not a Pivot.

I think they just masked off the bottom part of the downtube in that teaser photo, so it looks smaller. Though the avinox Crestline I am looking at is pretty slender compared to the beluga downtube of the specialized levo.

Wasn't expecting that

"The battery is fully housed inside the downtube for protection and clean design." Impressive that they managed to fit a battery inside of the downtube. I'm curious if it is a stock 600w/800w avinox battery or if they needed to design their own.

Wish they gave us a 10mm chip instead of just a 5mm chip. Can someone make one for us? Looking @CascadeComponents

RAAW just dropped updates to the Madonna and the Jibb LT with interchangeable dropouts for more adjustability: https://www.vitalmtb.com/news/press-release/raaw-updates-jibb-lt-and-ma… .

Come on folks, it literally has the same laser etching on the rocker hardware as the Chilcotin. 100% Knolly

Just ugly enough to be a privateer, good enough looking that it would be a nice upgrade for them!

I'm most excited to see the limited edition Maven color! Assuming they do it again

Comparison of bars with rise modeled in. Both have a similar max load. 35 mm bar is on top and 31.8 mm bar is on bottom. Bending moment is at its maximum on the inboard end and zero at the free end so I think it makes sense that the stiffness of the innermost section of bar is quite influential in terms of deflection. It's worth noting that, while the approximate 0.05" difference in deflection is a little more than 10%, we're still only talking about 0.05" difference. Thin vs. thick grips would easily take up that difference. Ultimately you...

Tim at Esker here. You are correct sir, it's not us. The only thing I can say is that every guess in this whole thread is flat out wrong.

Tomorrow I’ll whip up some sort of comparison. Deflection can be analyzed by integrating across the width of the bar so if the outer 75% of a 35 mm bar were identical to a comparable 31.8 mm bar, the deflections would be identical over that length and the only difference would come down to that innermost 25%.

Thank god. I was shopping for bars and stems but just didn’t feel like there were enough options. This might just be the perfect one.

I find it hard to believe that this would be an Esker, simply because the design is more complicated than what is on brand for them. A huge part of their ethos is simplicity: Every bike they sell has external cable routing. Why would they do internal routing, especially if this was a prototype or validation frame? With how much the industry is struggling (Esker themselves have had a bunch of their bikes on sale, including their suspension bikes they just brought back this past year), I would be surprised that they would be trying to expand outside their core...

Maybe I'm mistaken, but before the current Firebird released (after the Phoenix) we saw photos of a carbon prototype of a 2 chains Firebird, that obviously they didn't continue with. This is either and old prototype, or another brands bike in my opinion. @Trocko I think people are staying away from aftermarket Phoenix parts seeing how the frames are doing a good job of disassembling themselves, they don't need extra help.

I'm recalling some article somewhere that someone talked with the owner or someone high up at Phoenix and it was confirmed that some folks ride prototype mules that never go to production but are still worth riding because they're sick bikes. I find it crazy that they'd already be proto-ing a new firebird after they just released an updated version (that had updates to the frame, so new carbon moulds I'm assuming), just doesn't seem likely or feasible. My money's on this is either a firebird prototype they built to test the principles from the phoenix that didn't end up...

I get what you're saying but... Has Pivot EVER used rock shox suspension?

Agreed. Them just releasing a new firebird last year and discussing why they didn’t go with the 2 chain layout in the press. Doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.