Recent Activity

All

hamncheez2003 Liked a reply to forum topic 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker

7/15/2026 11:13am
Excuse me
This forum topic has 6937 replies.

Shinook Liked a reply to forum topic 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker

7/14/2026 12:53pm
We had one locally a few weeks ago that was stolen and recovered due to an airtag.
This forum topic has 6937 replies.
Yeah, my iPhone even warns me that there is an AirTag near me on most flights I take now, since a lot of people throw them in their luggage. Of course Apple does this since people have used AirTags to track unsuspecting people for nefarious purposes, but this makes it difficult to use them to defeat all but the stupidest...

kperras Liked a reply to forum topic 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker

7/13/2026 2:30pm
You guys....sigh.
This forum topic has 6937 replies.
In principle, yes. I'm not sure if they left sufficient room to have sufficient gear range in the casting, and you'd need a way to determine which of the spun the final drive. Unfortunately, it would spin both chains all the time, but perhaps the loss in an unpowered chain would be small.
I was thinking about the 2x transmission in the BB area, in an effort to keep unsprung mass of the rear axle down, so I suppose sort of a fusion of conventional and GB solution. I'm not sure a geared rear hub plus cassette and DR will be a win in that aspect. I suppose it could be electric shifting...
I think if we want to revisit a 2x8, it might make more sense to have something like the 2-speed hubs unicyclists use (KH-Schlumpf). One speed should be essentially zero loss, and the other a single gear stage, so probably 97+% efficient. It might be made to fit in a BB-shell, so perhaps compatible with existing frames. Not sure if...
How wide is that frame around the GB? I'm curious if there is interference with body parts. Looks like it might be a challenge to clean after a race like last year's event in Les Gets, although perhaps more serviceable than conventional systems when riding through peanut butter.
Probably mostly because it isn't compatible with any frame that any of us own. It's always a challenge to get commitment from bike builders on things like this. They would need to invest a ton to support unproven technology. Plus, the mech is divided into 2 parts, which likely creates design constraints for frame builders. Unsprung mass is about the...
Sure, but folks were suggesting that bikes might not use a belt if it weren't for the Gates prize. Zerode, as an example, was using them 4 years before Gates offered up the prize, so clearly, not the driver for them. As mentioned a few times before, I think GBs and belt drives are an interesting solution for gravity sports...
I'm waiting for drivetrain-free systems to catch on. Aaron Gwin demonstrated the benefits of pedal-free DH long ago, but sponsorship for that approach seems to be lacking. Imagine, no DR, no cassette, no chain, freedom to use any crank length or even pegs if you want.
As long as this is now an "innovation of CVTs for bikes" thread, I think it's key to point out that the conventional 1x12 drive train is roughly constant efficiency in all gears, slight worse for cross-chaining, and slight worse for smaller cogs due to increased internal friction in the chain links bending around small cogs. There's data for this...
Also, It seems that Gates is proposing a rubber belt for the CVT. Most modern car CVTs use a steel chain, and google AI has this to say about that: Modern Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT) steel belts provide around 80% to 88% mechanical efficiency. While this is slightly lower than a traditional manual transmission, CVTs offer superior overall fuel economy...
I think the selling point for CVTs in ICE-driven systems is that often gas engines have a pretty narrow torque band where they are efficient, with efficiency dropping off quite a bit outside of the band. A standard transmission with maybe 4 to 6 gears will end up just having a couple of sweet spots where efficiency is good. The...
For what it's worth - here's Google's AI snippet asking about belt CVT efficiency: Belt-driven CVTs are 80% to 88% efficient in cars, and 70% to 75% efficient in scooters. They are less efficient than traditional manual transmissions (which hit 97%) because they rely on sliding friction to transfer power. However, their ability to keep the engine at its most...