Accessibility Widget: On | Off

MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation

Create New Tag

8/12/2020 3:01 PM

madparts2018 wrote:

Spotted these Forbiddens the other day. Seem updated or maybe different to anyone? Photo

chriskief wrote:

Maybe, maybe not... but a ZEB (minimum 160mm travel) would be a bold choice for a 130mm Druid.

Lew Buchanan just received his 38 for his Druid, saying he'll reduce it to 150mm. So why not a Zeb wink

|

8/12/2020 4:50 PM

madparts2018 wrote:

Spotted these Forbiddens the other day. Seem updated or maybe different to anyone? Photo

chriskief wrote:

Maybe, maybe not... but a ZEB (minimum 160mm travel) would be a bold choice for a 130mm Druid.

vweb wrote:

Lew Buchanan just received his 38 for his Druid, saying he'll reduce it to 150mm. So why not a Zeb wink

Perhaps... but that sure doesn't look like a 150mm ZEB to me.

|

8/12/2020 11:39 PM

I want to say the shock mounting area looks sharper, but I'm not sure... And there are no pictures of the druid from the left side anywhere...

|

8/12/2020 11:56 PM

Primoz wrote:

I want to say the shock mounting area looks sharper, but I'm not sure... And there are no pictures of the druid from the left side anywhere...

I'd agree with that.
With the Druid the shock seems more nestled into the downtube, than on those pictures.
Then again I actually didn't find a non-driveside pic from the Druid.
(Maybe it looks incredibly hideous from that side?)

|

8/13/2020 2:25 AM


2021 Trek Slash 7 (Alloy)
looks very much like a kona process 153
Photo

170 Front 160 Rear
HTA: 64.6 High 64.1 Low
STA: 76.1 High 75.6 Low (Could be better)
Reach: 20-30mm longer compared to last generation
Internal Frame Stage (Carbon and Alloy)
Super Deluxe with Thru Shaft (spec'd due to 'clearance issues')
34.9mm Seat Tube
Threaded BB




|

8/13/2020 3:33 AM

Trek's effective seat angles are always amusing, they should state what seat height its measured at.

|

8/13/2020 6:24 AM

Even if they add 20-30mm on the reach in there they’re still missing 20-30mm to be considered modern. Treks bikes were the best in the business a few year ago but in 2016 they just got lazy and ceased to innovate which is exactly what geometry they still use. Seat tubes slack as hell and long as hell, head angles from the early 2000s and reach straight from 2014... no wonder their factory riders like Reece Wilson are 5ft 7in and on an XL with a +7mm reach adjustment Headset. Get with the times already. And wtf is that Color? Looks like a sweater from the 80s.

|

8/13/2020 6:35 AM

Sir HC wrote:

Trek's effective seat angles are always amusing, they should state what seat height its measured at.

As a rule they are measured at the stack height. Since the 'effective' seat tube angles are usually measured at the effective top tube length level, which is by definition the stack height.

Which is exactly why these bent seat tubes and effective seat tube angles are such bullshit when it comes to XL bikes (yeah, it's personal).

|

8/13/2020 6:55 AM

Philip_Rossetti wrote:

Even if they add 20-30mm on the reach in there they’re still missing 20-30mm to be considered modern. Treks bikes were the best in the business a few year ago but in 2016 they just got lazy and ceased to innovate which is exactly what geometry they still use. Seat tubes slack as hell and long as hell, head angles from the early 2000s and reach straight from 2014... no wonder their factory riders like Reece Wilson are 5ft 7in and on an XL with a +7mm reach adjustment Headset. Get with the times already. And wtf is that Color? Looks like a sweater from the 80s.

😂

|

8/13/2020 7:51 AM

mitch160 wrote:
2021 Trek Slash 7 (Alloy)
looks very much like a kona process 153
Photo

170 Front 160 Rear
HTA: 64.6 High 64.1 Low
STA: 76.1 High 75.6 Low (Could be better)
Reach: 20-30mm longer compared to last generation
Internal Frame Stage (Carbon and Alloy)
Super Deluxe with Thru Shaft (spec'd due to 'clearance issues')
34.9mm Seat Tube
Threaded BB




looks like they scrapped the knock-block, or was it only on the carbon bikes? bike looks very similar to the old slash, was hoping for a little more evolution lookwise.

|

8/13/2020 8:00 AM

mitch160 wrote:
2021 Trek Slash 7 (Alloy)
looks very much like a kona process 153
Photo

170 Front 160 Rear
HTA: 64.6 High 64.1 Low
STA: 76.1 High 75.6 Low (Could be better)
Reach: 20-30mm longer compared to last generation
Internal Frame Stage (Carbon and Alloy)
Super Deluxe with Thru Shaft (spec'd due to 'clearance issues')
34.9mm Seat Tube
Threaded BB




krabo83 wrote:

looks like they scrapped the knock-block, or was it only on the carbon bikes? bike looks very similar to the old slash, was hoping for a little more evolution lookwise.

They have kept the knock block but it’s now got more rotation compared to the previous headset. Also you could take them out as the fork will not hit the frame.

|

8/13/2020 8:05 AM

Philip_Rossetti wrote:

Even if they add 20-30mm on the reach in there they’re still missing 20-30mm to be considered modern. Treks bikes were the best in the business a few year ago but in 2016 they just got lazy and ceased to innovate which is exactly what geometry they still use. Seat tubes slack as hell and long as hell, head angles from the early 2000s and reach straight from 2014... no wonder their factory riders like Reece Wilson are 5ft 7in and on an XL with a +7mm reach adjustment Headset. Get with the times already. And wtf is that Color? Looks like a sweater from the 80s.

Adding 20-30mm would make a size Large have a reach out at ~485 which seems 'modern' to me and similar to the new Process X and nearing the sort of 490mm that most are getting to for a Large. Head tube angle is within a half degree of other bikes too. The seat tube angle is admittedly still a bit shallow given the bend but it's much better than before. It's taken Trek a while to get there but I'd argue Giant and Specialized are on a similar timeline with their geometries.
It does also seem like they got rid of the 'Straight Shot' downtube so knock block isn't necessary. I understood that they were looking for more frame stiffness with that but I could never tell the difference compared to older Trek models.

|

8/13/2020 9:08 AM

Philip_Rossetti wrote:

Even if they add 20-30mm on the reach in there they’re still missing 20-30mm to be considered modern. Treks bikes were the best in the business a few year ago but in 2016 they just got lazy and ceased to innovate which is exactly what geometry they still use. Seat tubes slack as hell and long as hell, head angles from the early 2000s and reach straight from 2014... no wonder their factory riders like Reece Wilson are 5ft 7in and on an XL with a +7mm reach adjustment Headset. Get with the times already. And wtf is that Color? Looks like a sweater from the 80s.

Masjo wrote:

Adding 20-30mm would make a size Large have a reach out at ~485 which seems 'modern' to me and similar to the new Process X and nearing the sort of 490mm that most are getting to for a Large. Head tube angle is within a half degree of other bikes too. The seat tube angle is admittedly still a bit shallow given the bend but it's much better than before. It's taken Trek a while to get there but I'd argue Giant and Specialized are on a similar timeline with their geometries.
It does also seem like they got rid of the 'Straight Shot' downtube so knock block isn't necessary. I understood that they were looking for more frame stiffness with that but I could never tell the difference compared to older Trek models.

i think it's good they didn't go below 64 HA.

|

8/13/2020 11:07 AM
Edited Date/Time: 8/13/2020 11:23 AM

|

Where the white women at?

8/13/2020 1:26 PM

Sir HC wrote:

Trek's effective seat angles are always amusing, they should state what seat height its measured at.

Primoz wrote:

As a rule they are measured at the stack height. Since the 'effective' seat tube angles are usually measured at the effective top tube length level, which is by definition the stack height.

Which is exactly why these bent seat tubes and effective seat tube angles are such bullshit when it comes to XL bikes (yeah, it's personal).

I couldn't trust them to measure it properly! Its well known the previous gen Fuel was quite a bit different from the published geo tables!

Time to abandon the daftness which is virtual seat tube angle. Define the seat height and then the offset between the centre of the bb and centre of the saddle rail. Photo

|

8/13/2020 2:52 PM
Edited Date/Time: 8/13/2020 2:59 PM

Well everybody has a different seat height, so it's not completely relevant for all people again. But there's an easier way. What if... Now, sit down, hold on, this is a wild idea. What if the seat tubes weren't bent, offset and the like and would actually point towards the BB? Like in the old days?

On a serious note, Unno provides the seat tube angle at different heights. And I made a calculator calculating the effective angle at seat height, which even calculates the actual seat tube angle from two different frame sizes, if those two have different effective angles provided (assuming the actual seat tube angles are the same considering manufacturers are mostly lazy in this regard). Or you just take it off a photo, which is reasonably precise, at least it used to be where a 75° virtual bike was actually sub 70 smile

|

8/13/2020 3:08 PM

These don't work BTW...

|

8/13/2020 3:46 PM

Yeah, they were taken off PB as the embargo isn't lifted until September 3rd. Whoops.

|

Where the white women at?

8/13/2020 7:40 PM

Any hints as to what they were?

|

8/14/2020 2:25 AM

BTW, a message to the mods (if it's possible), drop the 2020 from the thread name and keep this thread rolling through eternity? We are well into MY2021 rumors, and it's just a PITA to run two threads, when to define the switchover point, etc. Why not just merge things? smile

|

8/14/2020 6:59 AM

Primoz wrote:

BTW, a message to the mods (if it's possible), drop the 2020 from the thread name and keep this thread rolling through eternity? We are well into MY2021 rumors, and it's just a PITA to run two threads, when to define the switchover point, etc. Why not just merge things? smile

done and good idea. the year removed faster than a poached image from a press release w00t

|

8/14/2020 7:02 AM

sspomer wrote:

done and good idea. the year removed faster than a poached image from a press release w00t

Do we have to start bitching about it being removed now?

|

8/14/2020 7:39 AM

Primoz wrote:

Well everybody has a different seat height, so it's not completely relevant for all people again. But there's an easier way. What if... Now, sit down, hold on, this is a wild idea. What if the seat tubes weren't bent, offset and the like and would actually point towards the BB? Like in the old days?

On a serious note, Unno provides the seat tube angle at different heights. And I made a calculator calculating the effective angle at seat height, which even calculates the actual seat tube angle from two different frame sizes, if those two have different effective angles provided (assuming the actual seat tube angles are the same considering manufacturers are mostly lazy in this regard). Or you just take it off a photo, which is reasonably precise, at least it used to be where a 75° virtual bike was actually sub 70 smile

Appreciate that, but measuring effective seat angle at the stack height is pretty damn useless. Seat height per size is going to vary +/-50mm max, and the corresponding change in seat offset could also be quoted as well, add a few more numbers to the mix.

Straight seat tubes intersecting the bottom bracket would be fine, although pivots tend to get in the way.

|

8/14/2020 11:15 AM

Primoz wrote:

BTW, a message to the mods (if it's possible), drop the 2020 from the thread name and keep this thread rolling through eternity? We are well into MY2021 rumors, and it's just a PITA to run two threads, when to define the switchover point, etc. Why not just merge things? smile

sspomer wrote:

done and good idea. the year removed faster than a poached image from a press release w00t

danposs86 wrote:

Do we have to start bitching about it being removed now?

Is there anything else expected from an internet forum thread?

|

8/14/2020 11:19 AM

Sir HC wrote:

Appreciate that, but measuring effective seat angle at the stack height is pretty damn useless. Seat height per size is going to vary +/-50mm max, and the corresponding change in seat offset could also be quoted as well, add a few more numbers to the mix.

Straight seat tubes intersecting the bottom bracket would be fine, although pivots tend to get in the way.

Don't get me wrong, completely agreed. And I was about to say something similar to your suggestion, to provide the effective seat tube angle at an X height for each size, which would be MUCH closer to reality than what we have now, which is, again completely agreed, completely useless. And is the reason why I made the calculators.

On the other hand, (X)S size riders usually get an even steeper seat tube angle, which though not as big of a problem as sitting over the rear axle, most likely is a problem nevertheless (didn't give it as much thought as the XL scenario, which is a personal problem, as mentioned), while M and L riders tend to have their seats fairly close to the stack height, which actually makes the published numbers reasonably close in reality as well. It's mainly the XL guys that bear the brunt of this issue, at least when it comes to overly slack seat tube angles. But these things are getting better in any case, so a drastic change in this field might not be as necessary as it used to be.

|

8/15/2020 12:04 AM

Photo
|

8/15/2020 4:33 AM

Interesting, the aluminium has a thru-shaft shock, because the reservoir didn't fit, but the carbon has the downtube shaped in such a way to fit the reservoir and they are using the standard Super Deluxe.

|

8/15/2020 7:07 AM

Primoz wrote:

Interesting, the aluminium has a thru-shaft shock, because the reservoir didn't fit, but the carbon has the downtube shaped in such a way to fit the reservoir and they are using the standard Super Deluxe.

Carbon models are still using the thru shaft model (9.8 XT pictured)
Photo

|

8/15/2020 9:04 AM

Ah, but it's a full piggyback shock. But then, what drives the oil to the piggyback? On a normal shock it's the volume change with the damper shaft displacing the oil and driving it towards the reservoir. What's the mechanism here?? Or is it just an elongated mount to keep the same effective ETE and stroke on a standard shock as opposed to the thru-shaft shock? And just screw it onto the bearing mount shock variant. Or use the thru-shaft shock damper body but normal internals.

|

8/15/2020 11:35 AM

Here's a better look of the new maxxis mud tire. Blenki ran them some time ago at Rotorua.
Photo

|