MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation

Transition Smuggler, from Mtbr: 

Fair. I was comparing it to a steering damper in that they are trying to solve a similar problem through different means. TBH, that's my first real complaint, they do not directly state the problem(s) they are trying to solve. They state the product aims to  "combat inherent handling characteristics of slacker head tube angles and help control input from rider". That isn't a definition of a problem. That is some marketing buzzword BS. 

They mention "front wheel flop" can be a problem (really?), and the front wheel can be "light" with "80% of the weight on the back wheel" (false if you are riding well). If these are the problems they are trying to solve, a steering damper also is a candidate to solve these, all the while being adjustable, having both high and low speed damping and accomplishing a lot more than just making it easier to (maybe) balance at slow speed going into a chute or keeping your bars aiming the direction you want at speed.

So yeah, if you think in terms of "problem(s) product aims to solve" not "how the product works" you can see why a number of people are comparing the (really silly) idea to a steering damper. 



 

Jeff.brines can u give us any info on that smuggler? Release date?

I too am curious about the new Smuggler.  I love my Spur, it's been a phenomenal bike for my local trails, but on a couple of riding trips to big mountain trails I wished I had a little "more."  I can no longer justify having a long travel Bike in addition to the Spur so I've been contemplating getting something slightly longer travel than the Spur but still want it to be lively on my local trails.  #goldilocksbike

Even if it is there with the intention to prevent handlebar wobble... How often is that an issue with mountain bikes?? o.O I've only experienced it VERY rarely when riding hands free on tarmac fairly quickly. There have been mad men doing the steep snow parts of Megavalanche by holding onto the fork crowns to be more aero. I'm guessing most of the surfaces a mountain bike rides on, bar tarmac, give enough inherent damping to not require a steering damper. On the road though, that's a different story (3:36)

Things I see, or dont

headset cable routing

chainstay pivot, makes me think it’s 140ish rear travel

Geo flip chip, which I was kinda hoping for, or the ability to MX a short travel Transition bike.

much narrower top tube than Spire/Patrol/Sentinel

not trunion mounted shock

teeny weeny link, ala Spur 

smaller dia headtube than big bikes, looks like a 34 on the front, so maybe 140ish front travel.

has anyone posted this new enduro sworks frame already? i dont see it anywhere 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CkBxIz-vJwJ/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_linkhttps://www.instagram.com/p/CkBxIz-vJwJ/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

just new paint

Dang, my bad. I forgot this is the internet. When I said "new frame" I should have specifically said "new paint and new shock" because "new frame" means totally new and redesigned from the ground up. 

The new Enduro is coming MY24

Delete

.

New Intense 6-bar DH bike spotted by Pinkbike:
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/spotted-another-new-intense-prototype-dh-…

Can't believe they STILL make the same mistake, it's pointed out multiple times in EVERY comment section under a wrong news article and the site even has an expert on the topic on staff doing the freaking 'Behind the numbers' series of articles, where an honest to god 6-bar bike was covered. Is it really that hard??

I agree they could make a note about how it appears to be 4 bar with an extra linkage driving the shock, but in that article they are quoting Jeff. He’s the one calling it 6 bar. 

Regardless of who calls it 6-bar, it doesn't make it any more correct.

I wouldn't be surprised if Jeff calls it that intentionally for marketing purposes, not due to ignorance. Someone had to design the linkage and had to be in contact with Jeff (if it wasn't him designing it) and I'm sure that topic would be covered as well. 

This is kind of irrelevant but behind the numbers was rad and they havent done it since like late 2020 I think. I commented on some article over a year ago wondering what was up and they said they were doing a bunch more "soon"... Those guys are blowing it. 

New habit???

Yeah, not available till next year, some in July, some in September and the rest in January of 2024....

A Habit with a Zeb? Wasn't the Habit originally a ~120 mm bike? o.O

New Specialized Dissident??

I just got word that there's a new bike coming from YT.

No reason to get excited though, because unfortunately it isn't the updated Jeffsy a lot of people are waiting for.

It's gonna be a gravel bike and it's called "Szepter".

This.

I've posted under pretty much every PB article on this topic (have seen your comments too, Primoz).

I can't fathom how they are still making the same mistake despite people telling them all the time.

In their defense, from the shock it is a six-bar even if it's only a four-bar for the wheel. But then again there is definitely some marketing angle to be had with the 'fanciness'/novelty of a six-bar. 

Sorry for being off-topic again, fork this conversation maybe?

That's the key, it doesn't matter from the shock's perspective. We never any more say a linkage driven single pivot is a 4-bar, but 'from the shock's perspective', it is. All linkages driving the shock change is the leverage curve. The axle path, the shape of it, the antisquat and antirise characteristics are defined by the suspension kinematics with the shock removed. In that regard you can look at how many links you can remove (or how many need to be present) for the axle path not to change. (Special consideration for the Split-pivot and Trek ABP as these are single pivot antisquat-wise, but 4-bar antirise-wise.)

With a single pivot you need only the swing arm (remove the seatstay and the rocker of a Commencal for example and nothing changes), with the Enduro, Demo, this Intense, Sender you can remove the scissor link and the wheel will move along the same trajectory. Remove the main rocker and the wheel will float in space.

Remove for example the dogbone link off the 160E or V5 supreme (or a Felt) and the wheel again flops around in space, even with the shock still there. That makes it a 6-bar.

FWIW, this is what Linkage offers when you start a new project:
https://i.imgur.com/byviDQI.png
(it's not possible to embed images from links anymore?)

nm

Not to put a damper (pun intended) on anyone's engineering snobbery but at least in North America a 4+2 configuration is still considered a 6 bar linkage. Watt 1 and Stephensen 1 are the typical 6 bars you see used on bikes. Most fully constrained 6 bar linkages include a closed loop 4 bar linkage but those two specifically have the ground element (frame) as part of the 4 bar loop. I can't actually think of any bikes that use a full floater 4 bar loop (Stephenson II) but I do think there might have been one at some point. 

If I understand correctly you're aiming at the Watt linkage being a 4+2?

To cover what Intense is developing (or the Demo/Enduro/Sender) you need another anchor point on the ground (as the scissor link is connected to the frame too) and have a linkage connected to that (and the shock to it as well). The three in your graphic are what would be considered a proper 6-bar in my opinion.

Like I said, in my opinion it's not what the shock 'sees', it's what defines the wheel path.

Scott embargo lifts on the 3-4th