SRAM did indeed make these cranks. If they didn't provide the desired parameters for the end product to meed into the generative design engine, they would...
SRAM did indeed make these cranks. If they didn't provide the desired parameters for the end product to meed into the generative design engine, they would not get that exact result.
Completely right! There are some new features in the latest AutoCAD Release, one of them is the "create cranks" feature. That's it, hit the "create cranks"...
Completely right! There are some new features in the latest AutoCAD Release, one of them is the "create cranks" feature. That's it, hit the "create cranks" button and you're done! Awesome! Unbelievable!
From what I heard someone high up at Sram is heavily invested in autodesk, that's how their little prototype partnership came to be. (By heavily invested I mean a stock owning board member)
The new SRAM stuff does pretty rad, but is there any advantage of the whole derailleur being directly mounted to the frame via the direct mount...
The new SRAM stuff does pretty rad, but is there any advantage of the whole derailleur being directly mounted to the frame via the direct mount option? More ground clearance? Smoother shifting? Isn't that what the hangers were for..if you strike a rock and just the hanger is bent, you can sometimes salvage the derailleur - and in this case being mounted directly, just replace the whole thing? won't come cheap...
The theory is that the AXS motor puts so much force on the shifting, that the speed limitation is to avoid flexing a single shear mount when pushing the chain over. By going to a double shear mount and increasing lateral stiffness, the shifting speed can be increased.
I've looked at that new SRAM mount from several angles, and it looks pretty clever. It is much thinner than it looks. The ability to bend (or break) the slender outer part, coupled with the "breakaway" of the motor, and the narrower footprint overall, seems to be how it is intended to not just ruin everything.
SRAM did indeed make these cranks. If they didn't provide the desired parameters for the end product to meed into the generative design engine, they would...
SRAM did indeed make these cranks. If they didn't provide the desired parameters for the end product to meed into the generative design engine, they would not get that exact result.
Wrong. it was a 100% Autodesk project with minor assistance from SRAM. I know the person from Autodesk who did it. SRAM doesn't have 3D Printers or the software. It was a PR piece for the generative software using a client.
My real question about any new sram cranks is if they made it so you can remove a dub crank bolt from a factory installation without two people hanging off snipe's on the crank and the 8mm on a ratchet. Terrible galling on dub cranks ever since they released them, I've watched someone sprain a wrist trying to get a dub crank bolt out.
New TLD helmet on Jesse’s feed. Called Flowline, released (or announced) on Friday (3rd). Surprised it’s not an over the ears option like the DropFrame.
Regarding Autodesk and crank designs, it's not like topology optimisation is a rare thing in the world of finite element software suites... Speaking with my coworker here he mentioned it's been included in FEA suites for the last 15 years, but has seen limited use because of manufacturing limitations. 3D printing removed that. The coworker also mentioned that apparently Abaqus and Ansys recently added the option to take the manufacturing method into account, so the topology optimisation can create a part within negative angles, enabling injection moulding for example.
@metadave I get around the bolt issue by using a meter+ long steel pipe, rest it on my hand on the handlebar and crank on the pedal with my foot. It's been a challenge once or twice, but at least I can do it alone...
My real question about any new sram cranks is if they made it so you can remove a dub crank bolt from a factory installation without...
My real question about any new sram cranks is if they made it so you can remove a dub crank bolt from a factory installation without two people hanging off snipe's on the crank and the 8mm on a ratchet. Terrible galling on dub cranks ever since they released them, I've watched someone sprain a wrist trying to get a dub crank bolt out.
I think the interesting part is the fork. Everything else seems standard fare. Current Codes, current X01 shifter, Super Deluxe coil, nothing out of the ordinary.
Definitely not Michelin, not Pirelli either.
Conti sponsored GT before so I wouldn't be surprised if they're back. The Kryptotals (and Argotals, too) also seem to...
Definitely not Michelin, not Pirelli either.
Conti sponsored GT before so I wouldn't be surprised if they're back. The Kryptotals (and Argotals, too) also seem to be the best tires to be on right now.
The recently published UCI lists confirm Continental is definitely sponsoring the GT Factory Team, among others.
the release of the transition relay shows us that the new sram groups are called X0 and XX, the 1 in the name is gone...
the release of the transition relay shows us that the new sram groups are called X0 and XX, the 1 in the name is gone. guess an official release is imminent.
Seems about right. The leaked photos of the new AXS drivetrain shows just XX on the derailleur.
The more afforable alu models they've been talking about releasing?
From what I heard someone high up at Sram is heavily invested in autodesk, that's how their little prototype partnership came to be. (By heavily invested I mean a stock owning board member)
those HR Giger pro model cranks trigger some trypophobia in me. no bueno, keep those away
sitting here using creo
Holes! Holes everywhere!!!
The theory is that the AXS motor puts so much force on the shifting, that the speed limitation is to avoid flexing a single shear mount when pushing the chain over. By going to a double shear mount and increasing lateral stiffness, the shifting speed can be increased.
I've looked at that new SRAM mount from several angles, and it looks pretty clever. It is much thinner than it looks. The ability to bend (or break) the slender outer part, coupled with the "breakaway" of the motor, and the narrower footprint overall, seems to be how it is intended to not just ruin everything.
Whoops! Wrong thread lol
Once you finish your installation of Auto Desk you can find the make fork button here.
I'm sorry you've been manually designing this whole time Dave
lmao, right next to the "patent this existing design, but make it slightly different" button on the Dave Weagle version.
Wrong. it was a 100% Autodesk project with minor assistance from SRAM. I know the person from Autodesk who did it. SRAM doesn't have 3D Printers or the software. It was a PR piece for the generative software using a client.
https://redshift.autodesk.com/articles/sram-crank-arm
and now please let’s move on…
My real question about any new sram cranks is if they made it so you can remove a dub crank bolt from a factory installation without two people hanging off snipe's on the crank and the 8mm on a ratchet. Terrible galling on dub cranks ever since they released them, I've watched someone sprain a wrist trying to get a dub crank bolt out.
New TLD helmet on Jesse’s feed. Called Flowline, released (or announced) on Friday (3rd). Surprised it’s not an over the ears option like the DropFrame.
TLD Flowline already in stock on some websites ...
Wow, that is… uninspired.
Looks like a kids helmet...
Regarding Autodesk and crank designs, it's not like topology optimisation is a rare thing in the world of finite element software suites... Speaking with my coworker here he mentioned it's been included in FEA suites for the last 15 years, but has seen limited use because of manufacturing limitations. 3D printing removed that. The coworker also mentioned that apparently Abaqus and Ansys recently added the option to take the manufacturing method into account, so the topology optimisation can create a part within negative angles, enabling injection moulding for example.
@metadave I get around the bolt issue by using a meter+ long steel pipe, rest it on my hand on the handlebar and crank on the pedal with my foot. It's been a challenge once or twice, but at least I can do it alone...
it‘s their new budget friendlier helmet compared to the A3.
Josh Lewis to... Scor (with Deity and Marzocchi)
https://www.instagram.com/p/CoHUb-3qjuN/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
I understand Marzo and Deity want him, jibby things and all is part of their DNA. But Scor... Anyway.
Makes perfect sense to me. Their philosophy is short CS, playing around bikes.
referenced to Vali Hölls Insta Story, the release date is still ahead :-)
https://www.instagram.com/stories/valihoell/3028123555710666225/
Yeah. Tomorrow.
Kinda surprising they're going that way with a budget helmet - I just picked up a '23 colour A3 from Leisure Lakes in the UK for £95..
Defo, I had to use a 24” breaker bar 🤦🏻
I’ll just leave this here…
that's his worlds bike from last year, it's the dh bike they have tested for a while now
I think the interesting part is the fork. Everything else seems standard fare. Current Codes, current X01 shifter, Super Deluxe coil, nothing out of the ordinary.
Nice Range.
Great Vegemite paint job anyway.
The recently published UCI lists confirm Continental is definitely sponsoring the GT Factory Team, among others.
Seems about right. The leaked photos of the new AXS drivetrain shows just XX on the derailleur.
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation