All

You're right, I wrote that like it was a comparison, didn't mean it to sound that way... And even if I did, you're right it's not valid. I haven't been able to find photos of the system you guys were using. I did assume here it was zs56/66. Transition always has a handful of frame details that seem to be finished with an "eh, good enough" type of mentality. That for sure hasn't been my experience with rocky mountains. I assume you guys chose better then transition did. Still, I'm a little bummed to have ended up with a bike...

Prototype aluminum norco range. The oval headset from the Aurum HSP would be awesome in a tapered fit. Mine has been solid since 2019. No ability to run an angleset unless someone made a one-off for the frame. EDIT: . For those not familiar with Norco's system, it's essentially two IS headsets in one bike (yes, yes, I know we hate those but hear me out). The first is an oval shaped IS headset in the carbon frame itself, and the second is comprised of aluminum cups made to fit in the oval recess which in turn have the actual...

No shit, when I had my first gen stumpy evo (in my sig) I would take a spare shock in my car because chances are the side loading would kill one. I wore the head on the shock mount bolt out from removing it so much lol Cane Creek still has a photo of me on their dartboard!

You're all missing the real solution when it comes to headsets and reach / angle adjust. We should just be making bikes that use an EC44/EC56 or EC56/EC56 headset. Simple and easy.

I was speaking with some guys in the sram tent at a crankworx event shortly after transmission was released and they said that it was a request from frame manufacturers to go to 55mm chain line in order to accomodate a wider variety of suspension linkages and rear triangle layouts.

We make them because the bike companies request them. and actually when you start digging into it, we dopnt make a ton of bearings, just combos with bearings for different uses. and we usually have decent stock for our HS. feel free to reach out to us directly and we can usually sort a bearing that works (many are cross compatible). If you have more questions directly related to a HS feel free to DM me.

>Bike manufacturers spec 30,000 different headset combinations on frames over the last four decades >FSA makes something compatible How dare they!

Just going to leave this here...Rocky Mountain Bicycles is using the FSA system on the carbon Altitude and Instincts, and our own designed (FSA made) ZS56|66 round headsets for the alloy models. 10mm of reach adjust possible. The headset guts are just standard components: bearings, races, top caps, etc.

Yeah I know... Someone somewhere (thoughts on forks thread maybe?) just recently commented that pressfit BBs are, theoretically, the most logical thing to do, but given how hard it seems for the industry to make two concentric holes it was an utter failure. And it's 100 % true. There needs to be an SBE (Society of Bicycle Engineers, bike equivalent of automotive counterpart SAE) that would define the standards to all things important - interfaces, dimensions, load ratings and tests, etc.

FSA has a system called the RAS. not a full +/- 10mm (20mm overall) but about +/-5mm. Being shopped to companies right now with an open design so that it can become a standard. Discussions on angle as well (though gets into a MULTITUDE of cup options if you combo it all). We are trying... just need bike companies to buy in. But the designs are out there and being shopped.

A standardized (blasphemy!) oval'ish headset standard would be awesome that give +-10mm reach/lots of angle adjust

Looking forward to quoting this post when it drops.

And an e13 Sidekick hub for safety purposes.

taking all recent discussion into account, I'm thinking this with an ochain will be my next ride.

There isn’t a magic number at which it disappears. It depends on how fast your suspension is getting compressed relative to how fast you are going and what gear you are in. If your suspension were to compress infinitely fast you would need to be going infinitely fast to not have any feedback from the chain. So while it’s most apparent when going slow, it really can happen at any speed.

I’m on board with this idea. I rode my Kavenz VHP last season with no lower guide pulley. The high pivot is great for reducing pedal kickback, but after tearing a derailleur off and riding a chainless lap at Whistler, the rear end without a doubt worked more freely, which I chalked up to having no chain or derailleur. This season Kavenz made a dedicated lower idler guide, the first thing I noticed was how when cycling the suspension the derailleur moved backward instead of being pulled forward. After riding it for the majority of this season, I’m convinced it...

Another cool product I'm curious about. A couple years ago I would have thought it was hokey and unnecessary, but now after testing some of the new pedal kickback devices I'm drinking the Koolaid. Here's a thought to add to the discussion: adjustable lower pulley position to remove as much lower chain growth as possible. Idlers go a long way towards addressing chain growth, but only on the top of the drivetrain. I was having a sidebar chat with Erwan Ghesquiere (fellow nerd on this forum) about lower pulley position, because he's messing around with a moveable lower pulley and...

I just hope one day we as a community will stop trying to compare DH or any form of bike racing to motorsports. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go and try to figure out how to make high pivot moto suspension for ultimate enduro prowess.

Pretty cool concept. I remember first noticing this on Vali Höll's YT. She rode without the pulleys during practice and then they were added for the final. Rulezman also makes them for his Banshee bikes. He claims it completely removes pedal kickback.