All

should have known, thanks for the link.

https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/modern-geo-talk-chainstays-stack-re…

Tbh I don’t get what the hang up is regarding dual crown comparability. I think that’s more of legal dept. jargon vs its actual capability. Toss a 40 on that hoss and don’t look back. If a frame can take a pro-level rider and a zeb, there’s zero reason it can’t take a dual crown.

Of all the hills people want to die on in this industry, I think brake fluid is probably the stupidest one......

iv got one of these for Christmas and its actually really good. Think I paid £100 ish for the full kit on a black friday sale. The mountain industry has a gaping hole in it. Selling ppl £1000 forks £6000+ bikes and not even a fuck you on how to help setting them up accurately at home.. It is very slick, works seamlessly and I have so far improved my set up. I ride alone. My Mrs isn't gonna help me set my sag. It's allowed to me run deeper into my travel. Couldn't comment on the long term quality...

@sethimus @Evil96 @CascadeComponents I love, like love-love, that someone with an engineering background (and seemingly a degree) and a wealth of manufacturing experience provided factual mathematical evidence, and it has been refuted by "I believe the manufacturer of this shiny new thing I bought", like conformation bias doesnt exist or something.... There's a quote about facts and opinions that I'm trying to remember here...... it'll come to me....

In regard to front axles and stiffness of inverted forks, the angular deflection of a shaft is defined as θ=(T*L)/(J*G). The key variables for axles are J (polar moment of inertia since we're talking about circles) and G (shear modulus of the material). J for a circular cross section is J(r1,r2)=(π*((r1^4)-(r2^4)))/2 where r1 is the OD and r2 is the ID (zero if solid). As for G, the shear modulus of steel is approximately 3x that of aluminum. Now for a comparison between 15 and 20 mm axles... Lets say we have a solid 15 mm axle and want to...

Well, opinions are like (you get the drift...) so take mine with a grain of salt. I think longer travel bikes are a better platform for comparing shock performance then shorter travel in general. As far as the nomad goes, the frame construction is well sorted to ensure no side loading of the shock and it does not change feel with a difference in shock construction (ie 10mm shock shaft vs 15-18mm, think previous gen to current gen dhx2). It has a middle of the road (moderate) amount of frame progressivity (linear progressive) and a rather middle of the road...

It kind of reminds me of the pachycephalosaurus

As the parent of a child on the spectrum, I have to agree...

I know this is dangerously close to a chainstay derail, but I love that Forbidden made a 120mm bike with a 464mm chainstay in the XL size. That's real long, but if you don't like it you can buy literally any other XL lightweight 120mm bike. Curious how it rides. Could be sick. [Editor's note: I THINK THIS COUNTS AS AN INNOVATION]

You're assuming that the advantages of 32" wheels apply to all riders evenly - but that's very likely incorrect. I know a guy who works in the product management team at Cube and they are evaluating 32" wheels for application in XCO and XCM racing. So far, their testing data suggests that 32" wheels are disproportionally more advantageous for larger riders. Very broadly speaking, the taller the rider, the more they can potentially benefit from 32" wheels. On the other hand the data suggests that for riders below roughly 6' 1", 32" wheels are more of a hinderance than an...

That's why I typically try to discuss it in terms of F:R ratio rather than millimeters. My complaint is really against the industry being so conservative on chainstay length on the XL/XXL sizes. Trek, Specialized and Santa Cruz all make XXL bikes with huge front centers but then keep the rear way too short. The XXL/S6 Levo has a F:R ratio of 2.0! They keep growing reach (I don't need a 530 mm reach) and the ratios keep getting worse and worse. I just ordered a Mondraker Crafty primarily because it comes with 465 mm chainstays (1.87 F:R).

If you scale down your XXL hightower chainstays relative to our difference in heights, it's like me riding a bike with 408mm chainstays (i'm 5'11"). You've been riding bikes with chainstay lengths on the wrong side of playful for your entire mtb life, so it makes sense that longer chainstays feel more playful. I love short stays but I would hate 408mm with a passion. it would be so restrictive. If I choose a chainstay length that I don't think is playful, such as 450mm, scaled up for you is damn near 490. You might find that bikes with 490...

Don't worry, I'm in no hurry. The problem I'm trying to highlight is that bikes are less and less easy to live with and less likely to bring people into the sport or persuade them to stay in the sport. Always focussing solely on performance as the most important product attribute is wrong in my opinion. Same with unserviceable and increasingly powerful ebike motors and other 'innovation' in the bike world.

I miss the days of Swiss neutrality...

It would seem they've lost the plot entirely. Hard to believe that they went from fairly revolutionary designs ( for their time ) like the enduro and kenevo sl, to well polished garbage like the levo 4. Only thing I can think of is that they're running a very long (6 year) design cycle or something. Hopefully they buy a little credibility back by releasing the downhill bike soon.

video of seanfisseli riding when? I want to see how absolutely fucking fast and shreddy he gets to prove his superior opinion. Absolute hubris.