Accessibility Widget: On | Off

MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation

Create New Tag

7/23/2021 7:48 PM

Poleczechy wrote:

Just got the new Freehub mag and noticed this DVO fork that is not the typical blue/green/black that DVO typically runs. ...more

Looks to be the same chassis to me (36mm stanchions), but new damper/dials.

|

7/23/2021 10:40 PM

AndehM wrote:

I think it's more related to brand size & developmental inertia than geographical location. As you said, Norco is pretty ...more

"a bike with a certain amount of travel and at 30% sag will have the same seat angle regardless of suspension design"
This isn't exactly true, since sag percentages are generally measured at the shock, not the wheel. At least in theory (maybe someone else can back me up on this), leverage ratio can have an impact on the actual wheel travel for a specific % of shock stroke. Say you have 'Bike 1' which is entirely linear, with 150mm travel and a 60mm stroke shock (average LR of 2.5), and 'Bike 2' which has the same amount of travel and shock stroke, but has a linearly progressive leverage rate from 3.0-2.0 (average LR is still 2.5). 30% sag on Bike 1 would give 45mm of wheel travel (exactly 30% of the wheel travel), but 30% sag on Bike 2 gives around 51mm of travel, which is 34.2% of the wheel travel. Assuming both bikes have identical static geometry, Bike 1 will have the steeper seat tube angle when sagged.

At least as a general 'rule', the lower the leverage ratios are in that initial third or so of shock stroke, the less wheel travel you'll have for a set sag value, and therefore less deviation from the static geometry. As for Cocalis' statement, to my knowledge DW-link bikes don't have especially unique leverage curves, so he was likely referring only to the pedal efficiency (which in that case could be a more accurate statement, as DW-link bikes often have a reputation for good anti-squat tuning). I have no idea how much a steeper seat tube angle actually improves efficiency, though.

|

7/23/2021 10:59 PM
Edited Date/Time: 7/24/2021 1:49 AM

Your points are true, both that the sag measurement at the shock is influenced by the leverage ratio (Banshee for example a while ago specified how much shock travel in mm you need to achieve 30 percent wheel sag) and that there aren't such great differences in leverage ratio around the sag point (well, the differences are huge, as bikes with the same teavel have different shock strokes, but yeah).

Let's say I meant sag at the rear wheel. I specifically didn't want to say vertical travel sag (that would cover high pivot bikes too), because different suspension systems aren't that different between each other in the axle path. Or better yet, different systems can be much more similar to each other than the same systems could be made different.

|

7/25/2021 9:30 PM

Came across a new Rocky Powerplay model out in the wild today. Extremely clean frame, didn't even notice it was an Ebike at first. Huge step up from the last one.

|

7/26/2021 2:00 AM

Primoz wrote:

Overall SC is quite progressive, at least the Hightower is quite up there in terms of top tube length and effective seat tube ...more

I also (180cm, shortish arms) went from 440reach to 500 reach bird am9 in the recent years. After the initial surge of confidence the long reach starts feeling quite dull. Now back with 460 on a mullet megatower and building up a M sized 2020 5010.

I think the ultra long reach thing is fading and most suited towards intermediate racers looking for raw speed & beginners looking for safety and confidence.

|

7/26/2021 2:21 AM

Primoz wrote:

Overall SC is quite progressive, at least the Hightower is quite up there in terms of top tube length and effective seat tube ...more

bike_futurist wrote:

I also (180cm, shortish arms) went from 440reach to 500 reach bird am9 in the recent years. After the initial surge of ...more

I think most brands reach measurements are now in the right kind of place. 460ish for a M, 480ish for a L and 500ish for an XL, with 10mm each way or so. I'm 174cm and have a M with 470mm of reach and I think that's about right. With 440mm chainstays I wouldn't want to go any bigger

|

7/26/2021 6:16 AM

melonhead1145 wrote:

I think most brands reach measurements are now in the right kind of place. 460ish for a M, 480ish for a L and 500ish for an ...more

I have also found this to work well, though I'm a touch taller than you with short arms and wish my bikes reach was 480 instead of 470.
I'm surprised more companies have not jumped on the adjustable reach wagon yet like Guerilla Gravity does - to me that makes a lot of sense, especially since you effectively 'double' the number of front ends you offer. With a +/- 5/10mm headset, you could offer only three sizes with low standovers and seat tubes and still serve most people. I suppose that requires a suspension design with an uninterrupted seat tube so your Small and pseudo-XS can fit a decent dropper post inside.

|

7/26/2021 7:12 AM

bike_futurist wrote:

I also (180cm, shortish arms) went from 440reach to 500 reach bird am9 in the recent years. After the initial surge of ...more

melonhead1145 wrote:

I think most brands reach measurements are now in the right kind of place. 460ish for a M, 480ish for a L and 500ish for an ...more

Masjo wrote:

I have also found this to work well, though I'm a touch taller than you with short arms and wish my bikes reach was 480 ...more

I have short legs, around 29" inseam, and struggle with some seat tube lengths. I've got a 180mm Oneup pretty much all the way in with a 420mm seat tube. Some brands have a 440mm on their Medium frames (looking at you Propain and GT)

|

7/26/2021 7:19 AM

Primoz wrote:

Same travel, same sag, same BB drop, how is the ride height higher? (meaning, there is more to it than what you said here)

...more

You are quite incorrect.

When you ride a bike down a trail, pedaling, during undulations/ roots/ bumps, the suspension moves in the the 20% - 60% travel range. It does not sit at 30% sag exactly the entire time. If you don't believe me reset your travel indicator and pedal down any trail and then notice that your o-ring will have used over 50% travel on most bikes before any jumps or obstacles are encountered.

You will find that bikes that have high AS even deeper into their travel and linear suspension ride quite high overall.

For example, a very active suspension bike like say a '19 SJ Evo maybe be at 60% of it's travel over a root where-as a Mach 6 might hit the same bump and only be at 45% travel, particularly when pedaling. As a result DW link bikes will have considerably less average travel being used while pedaling down the trail, that's what gives them their firm feel. Too firm imo, but it does have it's advantages.

|

7/26/2021 9:41 AM

bike_futurist wrote:

I also (180cm, shortish arms) went from 440reach to 500 reach bird am9 in the recent years. After the initial surge of ...more

I specifically did not mention reach that much. Reach is useful for DH and park bikes. For bikes that need to be pedaled, to me, the top tube is much more important. The Privateer 161 has a reach of 515 in the largest size, size 4. My Bird is, as mentioned, 522 in XL. The top tube comparison is 630 mm vs. 680 mm between the Privateer and AM9. The Medium-Long AM9 has a top tube of 630 mm.

Sittin on a Large AM9, I DO NOT want to ride an L. Let alone a medium-long. Because of the top tube.

Want a correctly fitting top tube (cockpit) and a steep seat tube? The reach will be long. Want a 'normal' or even short reach and a steep seat tube? Prepare for an insanely short cockpit (90 mm stem anyone?). 'Normal' reach and a proper cockpit fit? Slack seat tube.

I specifically mentioned shorter chainstays and a steeper headtube, but not a shorter top tube.

The long reach did not come about for the sake of the bike being long. The long reach came about because of the seat tubes getting steeper and cockpits (in the case of companies doing it the right way cockpit fit wise) staying at the correct length. That increases the reach. As for why the cockpit length matters, it's simple (as I've said many times before) - bikes that get pedalled make the rinder spend... 90 % of all the energy riding/climbing seated. Seated fit is the most important thing of any bike like that. Any bike that gets pedalled. If you're an EWS level rider (or a serious racer) there could be an argument made about prioritising for descending fit, but most weekend warriors and 'just riding along' riders benefit most from the seated fit, energy expenditure wise.

|

7/26/2021 9:44 AM

Suns_PSD wrote:

You are quite incorrect.

When you ride a bike down a trail, pedaling, during undulations/ roots/ bumps, the suspension moves ...more

The problem with what you are saying is that you assume pedalling down the hill. We were specifically talking about riding uphill. Pedalling downhill does not fit into the efficiency debate... well, at all, since it's done standing up. Bike kinematics and antisquat values change radically once you're not sitting on the saddle anymore.

As for the suspension movement range, if you're suspension is moving from 20 to 60 % sitting down... Well, sad to break it to you, but that's is some LOW antisquat.

|

7/26/2021 10:05 AM

Poleczechy wrote:

Just got the new Freehub mag and noticed this DVO fork that is not the typical blue/green/black that DVO typically runs. ...more

Interesting…

I have a new ‘21/‘22 Onyx that has a few upgrades. The graphics are new, maybe the one in this pic got to Freehub before those new graphics were ready?

“The biggest changes are the lowers are a new casting and the bushings are new from a different manufacturer that allows us to get the tolerance down to 0.01mm”

“The uppers are a new coating with a new press process thats so far has eliminated any creeking and has a massive reduction in friction”

“We have a new air piston, new damper seal head, new bladder, compression tune, new air bleeders and a firmer OTT spring seat to prevent any rattle” (stolen from a thread from another forum)

|

7/26/2021 10:30 AM

Primoz wrote:

I specifically did not mention reach that much. Reach is useful for DH and park bikes. For bikes that need to be pedaled, to ...more

I had to adapt to a shorter cockpit when going from a 460 reach Strive 2016 with very slack seat tube to a 510 reach Pole, both with same stem length. I actually had to go for a 50mm stem for a while because my back was hurting from wanting to lean forward. After a while, and some strength training og my upper back, I went back to the 35mm stem and love it. High handlebar, short cockpit, steep seat tube, slack head tube, long reach works well, vut you need to let go of the old school leaned forward seating position. I habe been riding mtbs for 30 years, so I had to dig deep into the the relearning pit. Now on a 515 reach XL Starling Murmur with the saddle all the way forward, and I think I could have gone for a large (475/480?) for my height at 185cm.

|

7/26/2021 2:07 PM

Primoz wrote:

Same travel, same sag, same BB drop, how is the ride height higher? (meaning, there is more to it than what you said here)

...more

Suns_PSD wrote:

You are quite incorrect.

When you ride a bike down a trail, pedaling, during undulations/ roots/ bumps, the suspension moves ...more

Primoz wrote:

The problem with what you are saying is that you assume pedalling down the hill. We were specifically talking about riding ...more

You really don't know what you are talking about and I really have no interest in going around and around on this topic with you.

The fact is that Pivot and some others are correct when they say that they don't need as steep as a static STA to equal others dynamic STA because their suspension does in fact ride higher. It's a fact.

|

7/26/2021 7:21 PM

New Mondraker 2022 lineup coming?

Couldn't get any further than this photo on their website.
Photo

|

7/26/2021 11:39 PM

Primoz wrote:

I specifically did not mention reach that much. Reach is useful for DH and park bikes. For bikes that need to be pedaled, to ...more

That's assuming that people pedal for the sake of pedaling. Only reason why I accept to pedal hours is to spend minutes riding downhill and considering how many people accept to pedal heavy DH tires uphill, you argument doesn't seem valid at least for the AM/Enduro crowd. I'd rather do 10% less elevation during my spin if that means that every single downhill is done with the best possible conditions.

|

7/27/2021 2:56 AM

Erwan_Ghesquiere wrote:

That's assuming that people pedal for the sake of pedaling. Only reason why I accept to pedal hours is to spend minutes riding ...more

I've just gone from a slack seat tube, and averagish reach, (73 deg seat tube, 440mm reach, and 610mm top tube) to a long reach, steep seat tube bike (80 deg seat tube, 470mm reach and 580mm top tube) and it's so much better for climbing, the steeper seat tube has bought my weight further forwards so I no longer get aches in my low back from trying to get my weight forward, and the shorter top tube means that I am much more upright when sitting which is a lot more comfortable, it's definitely the way forward for enduro bikes, or any bike geared towards descending.

|

7/27/2021 12:55 PM

Losifer wrote:

Interesting…

I have a new ‘21/‘22 Onyx that has a few upgrades. The graphics are new, maybe the one in this pic got to ...more

Sounds more like a whole new fork as opposed to a few upgrades.

|

7/27/2021 1:55 PM

bike_futurist wrote:

I also (180cm, shortish arms) went from 440reach to 500 reach bird am9 in the recent years. After the initial surge of ...more

Primoz wrote:

I specifically did not mention reach that much. Reach is useful for DH and park bikes. For bikes that need to be pedaled, to ...more

Erwan_Ghesquiere wrote:

That's assuming that people pedal for the sake of pedaling. Only reason why I accept to pedal hours is to spend minutes riding ...more

This. I agree with their point that riders spend the most amount of time and energy seated and climbing, but I would think the majority of customers buying aggressive geometry bikes with 150+mm travel are climbing for the descent and that is where they want the performance. Otherwise why wouldn't they buy XC bikes with flat bars/negative rise stems (besides marketing of cousre).

Another long torso guy here, 5'10" 30" inseam, current bike is 27.5 462mm reach (50mm stem), 613mm ETTL, 76.5 ESTA, 65.5 HTA, 1215mm WB. New bike is mullet, 480mm reach (40mm steam, so really it's +8mm reach from old bike), 603mm ETTL 78.1 ESTA, 63.5 HTA, 1266mm WB. It's going to be a decent jump in size for sure, for climbing it's mostly FSR's here so not really concerned, I only care about descending.

Funnily enough I ride a size "small" road bike (54cm TTL, 49.5cm STL).

|

7/27/2021 2:04 PM

Well if descending performance is be all, end all for some people's riding, why buy an enduro bike? Why not go full DH bike?

Also, a lot of people buy too much bike for what and how they ride. Plus my logic is, if you save energy on the climbs, it'll be easier to compensate for the gear on the descents, as you'll be less fatigued.

|

7/27/2021 2:05 PM

Can someone just start a BICKERING ABOUT GEOMETRY thread so that we can get on with TECH RUMORS here?

|

7/27/2021 4:15 PM

Suns_PSD wrote:

You really don't know what you are talking about and I really have no interest in going around and around on this topic with ...more

Sorry we didn’t realise it was a fact. You should have said so sooner. Can probably close this thread now that rational discussion has been abandoned.

|

7/27/2021 5:06 PM
Edited Date/Time: 7/27/2021 5:07 PM

BACK ON TRACK FFS.

Looks like a new (or maybe just cut) DHR2ish tire on the front of Rude's bike from this past weekend's BME race in Big Sky. Side knobs look different to me.

Photo

|

7/27/2021 10:24 PM

Big Bird wrote:

Can someone just start a BICKERING ABOUT GEOMETRY thread so that we can get on with TECH RUMORS here?

Yeah, sorry, it's my fault again :/

|

7/28/2021 6:42 AM

All these rumours and reviews of boutique and expensive suspension and Pidcock goes and wins a gold medal on Suntour suspension. Stock Fourstrokes come with Fox Suspension, so I wonder why he opted to switch it out when Ineos doesn't have a 'suspension' sponsor? Pinarello did make a 'full suspension' road bike for Paris-Roubaix but it's not clear what suspension brand (if any) they collaborated with for that model.

|

7/28/2021 7:14 AM

NateMob wrote:

BACK ON TRACK FFS.

Looks like a new (or maybe just cut) DHR2ish tire on the front of Rude's bike from this past weekend's BME ...more

Doesn't look any different to me tbh

|

7/28/2021 8:18 AM

Here you go, the new 2022 Mondraker range is live: https://mondraker.com/es/en/mondraker_2022

Mondraker has stated this is not the end of the updates for 2022, more are on the way... For now, get a load of what they've shared thus far!

|

Stay prepared for fun with Vital Gear Club

7/28/2021 8:26 AM

They never should've cut the Vantage from their lineup.

|

7/28/2021 5:24 PM

https://intense951.com/

Anyone seen the 951 series from Intense? Haven't paid attention to their bikes to know the context these bikes are landing in, but seems like an interesting little offshoot from the main brand.

|

7/28/2021 6:32 PM

TheArbez wrote:

https://intense951.com/

Anyone seen the 951 series from Intense? Haven't paid attention to their bikes to know the context ...more

1/2 way down page 127

|