This is wild, Milan Vader replaced the shock and link w/ a rigid strut for XCC today and will (presumably) switch it out for a shock/link...
This is wild, Milan Vader replaced the shock and link w/ a rigid strut for XCC today and will (presumably) switch it out for a shock/link set-up for XCO.
Bets on whether the UCI shuts this down or lets it stay?
Why would the UCI ban it?
By that logic they'd have to ban shocks with full lock out?
Do the bikes have to be identical between...
Why would the UCI ban it?
By that logic they'd have to ban shocks with full lock out?
Do the bikes have to be identical between xcc and xco or can components be changed?
The rules say you have to use the same bike but afaik they don't define at which point it becomes a different bike. (For EDR the fork, rims and front and rear triangle of the bike get stickered and you take a 5-minute penalty if you swap them out).
I'm all for pushing the rules like this, just don't know how the UCI is gonna react (and if it's even the UCI or ESO who makes the call in this case).
Top bike is definitely a new Giant of some sort, seat tube shape is very different to anything they make at the moment, and the top tube looks almost flat.
I'd assume Push pricing is much higher relative to EXT in Slovakia than in the US. Here they are roughly the same price (for shocks at...
I'd assume Push pricing is much higher relative to EXT in Slovakia than in the US. Here they are roughly the same price (for shocks at least; we'll have to wait and see on the Push fork).
I'd assume Push pricing is much higher relative to EXT in Slovakia than in the US. Here they are roughly the same price (for shocks at...
I'd assume Push pricing is much higher relative to EXT in Slovakia than in the US. Here they are roughly the same price (for shocks at least; we'll have to wait and see on the Push fork).
New Pivot phoenix, Reverting away from the Horizontal to a vertical shock layout - assuming itll look like the rest of pivots bikes like the firebird...
New Pivot phoenix, Reverting away from the Horizontal to a vertical shock layout - assuming itll look like the rest of pivots bikes like the firebird.
Looks like its a Lugged carbon prototype. - does anyone have any Info on this and who is making these frames? Spesh and pivot both have these now... is athertons making them some lugs?
i believe This was BK doing some Private solo testing in QT before the journey to Rotorua.
So in the short track race of last weekend's XC World Cup in Nove Mesto, one of the Jumbo Visma guys was running his new Cervelo full-suspension bike with an interesting modification. The bike is a linkage-driven single pivot layout with flex-stays (as most XC bikes tend to be these days), but instead of the regular shock linkage and rear shock, the bike was equipped with a solid aluminium strut that replaced the shock and shock linkage - effectively turning the bike into a hardtail.
The background to this might be that in 20-minute XCC short track events, the racers tend to be on the gas the for the entire time and for this a hardtail might be the preferrable choice over a full-suspension bike because of the optimal power transfer. The problem is that the regulations don't allow the riders to swap bikes for different races in the same event, so they can't have the hardtail for XCC and then switch to the full-suspension for the full XCO race.
As a work-around to this rule, this solutions seems pretty convincing. You could potentially save 300-400g by replacing the linkage and shock (which would be mostly locked out anyways) with a strut made from carbon fiber or aluminium. Any yet, because most of these bikes have seat stays that are designed to flex, you'd probably still get a little bit of compliance out of the rear end, potentially making it a more comfortable ride than an actual hardtail.
The stiffy (anyone remember that classic apirl fools). Yeah, I could see it becoming more common but probably not universal. A hardtail isn't better for every short track course. I'm not certain, but I believe that rule was put in place to make it easier for smaller teams and privateers logistically. If they ban it, then people will just make rigid units that look like a shock. A mock shock if you like.
Edit: for all we know, many teams might already be using a mock shock. Maybe mock bearings too.
This is wild, Milan Vader replaced the shock and link w/ a rigid strut for XCC today and will (presumably) switch it out for a shock/link...
This is wild, Milan Vader replaced the shock and link w/ a rigid strut for XCC today and will (presumably) switch it out for a shock/link set-up for XCO.
Bets on whether the UCI shuts this down or lets it stay?
This is wild, Milan Vader replaced the shock and link w/ a rigid strut for XCC today and will (presumably) switch it out for a shock/link...
This is wild, Milan Vader replaced the shock and link w/ a rigid strut for XCC today and will (presumably) switch it out for a shock/link set-up for XCO.
Bets on whether the UCI shuts this down or lets it stay?
This is wild, Milan Vader replaced the shock and link w/ a rigid strut for XCC today and will (presumably) switch it out for a shock/link...
This is wild, Milan Vader replaced the shock and link w/ a rigid strut for XCC today and will (presumably) switch it out for a shock/link set-up for XCO.
Bets on whether the UCI shuts this down or lets it stay?
thats an interesting approach. kinda surprised nobody has tried it before. although the same bike rule for xcc / xco is only a couple years old...
thats an interesting approach. kinda surprised nobody has tried it before. although the same bike rule for xcc / xco is only a couple years old, no?
When I raced Collegiate cycling in the mid-2000s, you could qualify for Nationals for any discipline in mountain biking (DH, Slalom, Short Track, XC) by having enough points regardless of which type of race they came from. So you could conceivably score all your points from your conference races and a conference championship in XC, qualify for nationals, then decide you want to race DH at Nationals. We had a fairly stacked conference, with several Varsity (scholarship schools) so people that really wanted to make it to Nationals in DH would often race all 4 disciplines to try and maximize their points haul (I did this). There was a guy on another school's team that was primarily a DH and Slalom racer, he picked up a FS XC bike to race short track and XC. For the Short Track races he would remove the rear shock and made an aluminum block that replaced it. He even made the eye to eye measurements of the block slightly longer to change the geometry to better suit the short track courses.
They didn't have a rule about using the same bike for Short track and XC, so some serious racers from the Varsity teams who also raced Cross for their schools, would bring their Cross bikes and race the short track then use their legit XC bikes for the XC races. They would catch a lot of flak from other racers and spectators and get heckled pretty hard while racing.
For the bike with the alu bit replacing the shock, I'm more interested in the forces in play vs the carbon lay up. That can make for cracked bit real quick if parts were designed to move with a shock and are now suddenly fixed in place. I know I had a shock on an xc bike that loved brushing against my leg in tech sections when things got spicy and locking out in 2011 and I ended up cracking 3 times.
Those pivots and tubes are taking a lot more stress than they were ever designed for.
For the bike with the alu bit replacing the shock, I'm more interested in the forces in play vs the carbon lay up. That can make...
For the bike with the alu bit replacing the shock, I'm more interested in the forces in play vs the carbon lay up. That can make for cracked bit real quick if parts were designed to move with a shock and are now suddenly fixed in place. I know I had a shock on an xc bike that loved brushing against my leg in tech sections when things got spicy and locking out in 2011 and I ended up cracking 3 times.
Those pivots and tubes are taking a lot more stress than they were ever designed for.
Depends on if the lock out of the shock the frame is designed for has a blow off for hits above a certain force or not (do xc shocks have this?). If no blow off then it'd be the same as locked out and the frame should be designed for it. Either way I think it'd be fine for sponsored racers who really only need the frame to last a weekend, but perhaps less fine so for us normal people who expect a frame to last a few years.
Depends on if the lock out of the shock the frame is designed for has a blow off for hits above a certain force or not...
Depends on if the lock out of the shock the frame is designed for has a blow off for hits above a certain force or not (do xc shocks have this?). If no blow off then it'd be the same as locked out and the frame should be designed for it. Either way I think it'd be fine for sponsored racers who really only need the frame to last a weekend, but perhaps less fine so for us normal people who expect a frame to last a few years.
I’ve seen some companies use a similar piece of metal/pipe in place of the shock when doing fatigue and stress testing of frames, so you would think in those cases it would be fine.
I can’t imagine the frame would be designed to only survive with a shock in there that is pumped up to a certain pressure or with a certain blow off valve lockout?
it may however cause premature bearing or bushing wear etc.
For the bike with the alu bit replacing the shock, I'm more interested in the forces in play vs the carbon lay up. That can make...
For the bike with the alu bit replacing the shock, I'm more interested in the forces in play vs the carbon lay up. That can make for cracked bit real quick if parts were designed to move with a shock and are now suddenly fixed in place. I know I had a shock on an xc bike that loved brushing against my leg in tech sections when things got spicy and locking out in 2011 and I ended up cracking 3 times.
Those pivots and tubes are taking a lot more stress than they were ever designed for.
Just wondering if you clicked the link to read the article about it at all? James goes into a bit of detail about the piece, noting that it even looks to have more than one mounting option, couple more pics, etc.
Now this doesnt look like it was cooked up in a shed by a couple of hacks, so I dont think I'd be too concerned about the wear and tear on what is basically a factory team, in a World cup XC race. Theres definitely some thought put into creating this piece, and as noted in a previous comment, loads of fatigue testing goes into frame design with solid components to replace shocks.
What is interesting to me, is that there is no attempt to hide it, theres nothing inconspicuous about it at all, and the UCi is notorious for some silly rules. Even a coat of rattle can flat black would have done wonders to make it less noticable. Maybe even a RockShox sticker on it......
Was anyone else surprised by the the listed offset (54mm) on Ohlins special Edition "Race Crowns"? Or was that a typo and it is supposed to be 45mm?
Seems to go against the current ideology of slacker HTA's being paired with shorter offsets for descending and the assumption that longer offsets makes the steering "floppier". I experimented with a short (42mm) offset crown on my DH bike last year and thought it was more natural for cornering than the stock 52mm offset but I'm also not a WC pro...
Was anyone else surprised by the the listed offset (54mm) on Ohlins special Edition "Race Crowns"? Or was that a typo and it is supposed to...
Was anyone else surprised by the the listed offset (54mm) on Ohlins special Edition "Race Crowns"? Or was that a typo and it is supposed to be 45mm?
Seems to go against the current ideology of slacker HTA's being paired with shorter offsets for descending and the assumption that longer offsets makes the steering "floppier". I experimented with a short (42mm) offset crown on my DH bike last year and thought it was more natural for cornering than the stock 52mm offset but I'm also not a WC pro...
I believe ohlins offers 42 46 51 and 54
personally there is no right answer. Other than a longer offset I’ll use a longer stem and shorter a shorter stem. But either direction has positives and negatives and which one to go with is probably going to be determined by other variables that people are more selective about
Was anyone else surprised by the the listed offset (54mm) on Ohlins special Edition "Race Crowns"? Or was that a typo and it is supposed to...
Was anyone else surprised by the the listed offset (54mm) on Ohlins special Edition "Race Crowns"? Or was that a typo and it is supposed to be 45mm?
Seems to go against the current ideology of slacker HTA's being paired with shorter offsets for descending and the assumption that longer offsets makes the steering "floppier". I experimented with a short (42mm) offset crown on my DH bike last year and thought it was more natural for cornering than the stock 52mm offset but I'm also not a WC pro...
its all relative, stack height, how high your running the fork all matter as well. As a rule of thumb, don't place huge emphasis on what pro's run, they want a setup they are use to and is consistent for them, because they are going to go into a corner or berm at insane speed and just want the predictability so they can commit 100%. Its why they often don't swap bikes mid season etc.
Ohlins have a lot of aftermarket crowns for purchase so you can always swap easily
Looks like a new Saint crank on that new Phoenix, or is it just a sticker on some other model ? I can't figure out any other Shimano crank with that shape.
New Pivot phoenix, Reverting away from the Horizontal to a vertical shock layout - assuming itll look like the rest of pivots bikes like the firebird...
New Pivot phoenix, Reverting away from the Horizontal to a vertical shock layout - assuming itll look like the rest of pivots bikes like the firebird.
Looks like its a Lugged carbon prototype. - does anyone have any Info on this and who is making these frames? Spesh and pivot both have these now... is athertons making them some lugs?
i believe This was BK doing some Private solo testing in QT before the journey to Rotorua.
Was anyone else surprised by the the listed offset (54mm) on Ohlins special Edition "Race Crowns"? Or was that a typo and it is supposed to...
Was anyone else surprised by the the listed offset (54mm) on Ohlins special Edition "Race Crowns"? Or was that a typo and it is supposed to be 45mm?
Seems to go against the current ideology of slacker HTA's being paired with shorter offsets for descending and the assumption that longer offsets makes the steering "floppier". I experimented with a short (42mm) offset crown on my DH bike last year and thought it was more natural for cornering than the stock 52mm offset but I'm also not a WC pro...
I was also surprised by 54mm but I’d hope they’d make all the sizes. Also we have no clue if the 54mm is what the team actually uses. Could be different between riders.
I’m running 46mm with Ohlins and agreed, I like the stability and they feel more planted. I think it felt better on the Trek session, but now on the supreme v5, I may try the 51mm just to confirm.
For the bike with the alu bit replacing the shock, I'm more interested in the forces in play vs the carbon lay up. That can make...
For the bike with the alu bit replacing the shock, I'm more interested in the forces in play vs the carbon lay up. That can make for cracked bit real quick if parts were designed to move with a shock and are now suddenly fixed in place. I know I had a shock on an xc bike that loved brushing against my leg in tech sections when things got spicy and locking out in 2011 and I ended up cracking 3 times.
Those pivots and tubes are taking a lot more stress than they were ever designed for.
Just wondering if you clicked the link to read the article about it at all? James goes into a bit of detail about the piece, noting...
Just wondering if you clicked the link to read the article about it at all? James goes into a bit of detail about the piece, noting that it even looks to have more than one mounting option, couple more pics, etc.
Now this doesnt look like it was cooked up in a shed by a couple of hacks, so I dont think I'd be too concerned about the wear and tear on what is basically a factory team, in a World cup XC race. Theres definitely some thought put into creating this piece, and as noted in a previous comment, loads of fatigue testing goes into frame design with solid components to replace shocks.
What is interesting to me, is that there is no attempt to hide it, theres nothing inconspicuous about it at all, and the UCi is notorious for some silly rules. Even a coat of rattle can flat black would have done wonders to make it less noticable. Maybe even a RockShox sticker on it......
I didn't read it all, but I've delt with more stuff that's been "fatigue or team tested" and broken under daily use to think those terms are useless and overused so no one asks questions. Unless that bike was specifically designed to have pivots, bearings, stays and hardware designed from the start to hold up to a pro xc rider smashing the shit out of it at 500w and zero care for how smooth they do it, somethings going to give.
The rules say you have to use the same bike but afaik they don't define at which point it becomes a different bike. (For EDR the fork, rims and front and rear triangle of the bike get stickered and you take a 5-minute penalty if you swap them out).
I'm all for pushing the rules like this, just don't know how the UCI is gonna react (and if it's even the UCI or ESO who makes the call in this case).
I wonder how much those flex stays can actually help with chassis stability..?
Top bike is definitely a new Giant of some sort, seat tube shape is very different to anything they make at the moment, and the top tube looks almost flat.
New Trance X 29 perhaps?
in italy is 1100 for ext and 1900 for the latest S 11.6, that's nuts
https://bikerumor.com/mondraker-summum-dh-bike-packs-mind-suspension-te…
Talking about telemetry, motion instruments has a new enclosure, maybe packing more electrics?
also a good look at the clamps in the new Boxxer. I wonder if the material is removed for weight or flex character, or both?
Keep in mind most US prices are with no VAT while 99% of the prices displayed in Europe as VAT included.
https://escapecollective.cc/cervelo-turned-a-full-suspension-bike-into-a-no-suspension-bike/
So in the short track race of last weekend's XC World Cup in Nove Mesto, one of the Jumbo Visma guys was running his new Cervelo full-suspension bike with an interesting modification. The bike is a linkage-driven single pivot layout with flex-stays (as most XC bikes tend to be these days), but instead of the regular shock linkage and rear shock, the bike was equipped with a solid aluminium strut that replaced the shock and shock linkage - effectively turning the bike into a hardtail.
The background to this might be that in 20-minute XCC short track events, the racers tend to be on the gas the for the entire time and for this a hardtail might be the preferrable choice over a full-suspension bike because of the optimal power transfer. The problem is that the regulations don't allow the riders to swap bikes for different races in the same event, so they can't have the hardtail for XCC and then switch to the full-suspension for the full XCO race.
As a work-around to this rule, this solutions seems pretty convincing. You could potentially save 300-400g by replacing the linkage and shock (which would be mostly locked out anyways) with a strut made from carbon fiber or aluminium. Any yet, because most of these bikes have seat stays that are designed to flex, you'd probably still get a little bit of compliance out of the rear end, potentially making it a more comfortable ride than an actual hardtail.
You guys think this might become a regular thing?
The stiffy (anyone remember that classic apirl fools). Yeah, I could see it becoming more common but probably not universal. A hardtail isn't better for every short track course. I'm not certain, but I believe that rule was put in place to make it easier for smaller teams and privateers logistically. If they ban it, then people will just make rigid units that look like a shock. A mock shock if you like.
Edit: for all we know, many teams might already be using a mock shock. Maybe mock bearings too.
thats an interesting approach. kinda surprised nobody has tried it before. although the same bike rule for xcc / xco is only a couple years old, no?
I suspect doing this as a customer instead of a sponsored rider would probably void your warranty?
Speaking of that, I wonder how RockShox feel about it (and if they had any say in the matter...)
When I raced Collegiate cycling in the mid-2000s, you could qualify for Nationals for any discipline in mountain biking (DH, Slalom, Short Track, XC) by having enough points regardless of which type of race they came from. So you could conceivably score all your points from your conference races and a conference championship in XC, qualify for nationals, then decide you want to race DH at Nationals. We had a fairly stacked conference, with several Varsity (scholarship schools) so people that really wanted to make it to Nationals in DH would often race all 4 disciplines to try and maximize their points haul (I did this). There was a guy on another school's team that was primarily a DH and Slalom racer, he picked up a FS XC bike to race short track and XC. For the Short Track races he would remove the rear shock and made an aluminum block that replaced it. He even made the eye to eye measurements of the block slightly longer to change the geometry to better suit the short track courses.
They didn't have a rule about using the same bike for Short track and XC, so some serious racers from the Varsity teams who also raced Cross for their schools, would bring their Cross bikes and race the short track then use their legit XC bikes for the XC races. They would catch a lot of flak from other racers and spectators and get heckled pretty hard while racing.
For the bike with the alu bit replacing the shock, I'm more interested in the forces in play vs the carbon lay up. That can make for cracked bit real quick if parts were designed to move with a shock and are now suddenly fixed in place. I know I had a shock on an xc bike that loved brushing against my leg in tech sections when things got spicy and locking out in 2011 and I ended up cracking 3 times.
Those pivots and tubes are taking a lot more stress than they were ever designed for.
Depends on if the lock out of the shock the frame is designed for has a blow off for hits above a certain force or not (do xc shocks have this?). If no blow off then it'd be the same as locked out and the frame should be designed for it. Either way I think it'd be fine for sponsored racers who really only need the frame to last a weekend, but perhaps less fine so for us normal people who expect a frame to last a few years.
I’ve seen some companies use a similar piece of metal/pipe in place of the shock when doing fatigue and stress testing of frames, so you would think in those cases it would be fine.
I can’t imagine the frame would be designed to only survive with a shock in there that is pumped up to a certain pressure or with a certain blow off valve lockout?
it may however cause premature bearing or bushing wear etc.
Just wondering if you clicked the link to read the article about it at all? James goes into a bit of detail about the piece, noting that it even looks to have more than one mounting option, couple more pics, etc.
Now this doesnt look like it was cooked up in a shed by a couple of hacks, so I dont think I'd be too concerned about the wear and tear on what is basically a factory team, in a World cup XC race. Theres definitely some thought put into creating this piece, and as noted in a previous comment, loads of fatigue testing goes into frame design with solid components to replace shocks.
What is interesting to me, is that there is no attempt to hide it, theres nothing inconspicuous about it at all, and the UCi is notorious for some silly rules. Even a coat of rattle can flat black would have done wonders to make it less noticable. Maybe even a RockShox sticker on it......
Was anyone else surprised by the the listed offset (54mm) on Ohlins special Edition "Race Crowns"? Or was that a typo and it is supposed to be 45mm?
Seems to go against the current ideology of slacker HTA's being paired with shorter offsets for descending and the assumption that longer offsets makes the steering "floppier". I experimented with a short (42mm) offset crown on my DH bike last year and thought it was more natural for cornering than the stock 52mm offset but I'm also not a WC pro...
I believe ohlins offers 42 46 51 and 54
personally there is no right answer. Other than a longer offset I’ll use a longer stem and shorter a shorter stem. But either direction has positives and negatives and which one to go with is probably going to be determined by other variables that people are more selective about
I heard an interview with the Gamux guys a while back (Bikes & Big Ideas, I think) about the bikes and the UCI rule changes. Definitely interesting.
its all relative, stack height, how high your running the fork all matter as well. As a rule of thumb, don't place huge emphasis on what pro's run, they want a setup they are use to and is consistent for them, because they are going to go into a corner or berm at insane speed and just want the predictability so they can commit 100%. Its why they often don't swap bikes mid season etc.
Ohlins have a lot of aftermarket crowns for purchase so you can always swap easily
Looks like a new Saint crank on that new Phoenix, or is it just a sticker on some other model ? I can't figure out any other Shimano crank with that shape.
Some solid Brooklyn Machine Works vibes goin on here
Nice to see a jackshaft design on the WC level, Starling would be proud
I was also surprised by 54mm but I’d hope they’d make all the sizes. Also we have no clue if the 54mm is what the team actually uses. Could be different between riders.
I’m running 46mm with Ohlins and agreed, I like the stability and they feel more planted. I think it felt better on the Trek session, but now on the supreme v5, I may try the 51mm just to confirm.
I didn't read it all, but I've delt with more stuff that's been "fatigue or team tested" and broken under daily use to think those terms are useless and overused so no one asks questions. Unless that bike was specifically designed to have pivots, bearings, stays and hardware designed from the start to hold up to a pro xc rider smashing the shit out of it at 500w and zero care for how smooth they do it, somethings going to give.
Out at the weekend. New Ibis spotted in the park....
Couldn't get another pic as time was short
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation