Anyone seen these from Lewis brakes? Can an 8-piston brake for Surron mean, for example, a lighter6-piston version for MTBs or e-MTBs? ;)
Still wondering why...
Anyone seen these from Lewis brakes? Can an 8-piston brake for Surron mean, for example, a lighter6-piston version for MTBs or e-MTBs?
Still wondering why Hope stopped working on the new version of the 6-pot 2-3 years ago with all the positive feedback they received from the testing guys…
Adam Brayton said it was too powerful and they shelved it… apparently.
A real shame as it might have tempted me back to them. There’s no such thing as too powerful- just pull the lever less
I'm pretty sure Loic studied mechanical engineering in university, as well
i think loic studied marketing, because in some vlog some years ago he was an intern at 100% during the offseason and he said he needed that for university.
Adam Brayton said it was too powerful and they shelved it… apparently.
A real shame as it might have tempted me back to them. There’s no...
Adam Brayton said it was too powerful and they shelved it… apparently.
A real shame as it might have tempted me back to them. There’s no such thing as too powerful- just pull the lever less
Yes, there's such thing as too powerful. But it's relative to your tyre (and your tiredness) essentially. Put some Shimano Saint, Trickstuff Power pas, with 220mm rotors and Maxxis Rekon Race tires, you'll see if there's no such thing as too powerful
Yes, there's such thing as too powerful. But it's relative to your tyre (and your tiredness) essentially. Put some Shimano Saint, Trickstuff Power pas, with 220mm...
Yes, there's such thing as too powerful. But it's relative to your tyre (and your tiredness) essentially. Put some Shimano Saint, Trickstuff Power pas, with 220mm rotors and Maxxis Rekon Race tires, you'll see if there's no such thing as too powerful
Why not take the tyres off altogether and wax your rims!
That’s not a brake issue, that’s a tyre (user setup) issue.
Your tyre choice and setup doesn't make a brake too powerful.
That's akin to getting some griptape pedals and complaining because your feet keep slipping.
Yeah, cause it's much more simple to being very sensible with your finger, especially with some tiredness, than having the right braking power for your setup and just having to start your braking with pushing the lever all the way no matter what (and not having your tire slipping, when your brake is, you know, too powerful) THEN modulating.
I'm not trying to say "ride with a 160mm SRAM Level T and all will be easier" at all. It's just a matter of right setup.
Neko also has been very concerned about being able to manufacture these frames on a small scale while still hitting the required tolerances. I think a...
Neko also has been very concerned about being able to manufacture these frames on a small scale while still hitting the required tolerances. I think a lot of the stuff the Norco proto has in it will be incredibly tight for tolerances (like the eccentric machined BB area, the front shock mount, etc.). Neko was having issues with just getting the swingarm to align well with the main triangle, which is why he went to carbon. Every one of those adjustment features built into the frame adds a lot of complexity and demand for strict tolerance. And besides this being an issue with durability, alignment issues can cause real issues with suspension performance.
I've got a bike by a big name with lots of adjustment built into it, and honestly, I'd rather they spent the time getting tighter tolerances. The angle adjust headset cups are really picky about preload and being packed with grease otherwise they creak. The rear end loves to move the linkage bearings, I'm speculating due to a tiny bit of misalignment between the rear and front. But it's nothing obvious enough that I'd be able to win any warranty claim.
The latest PB podcast with Jessie Melamed goes into tolerance issues. Carbon frames coming out of the mold with minor differences (a couple millimeters here and...
The latest PB podcast with Jessie Melamed goes into tolerance issues. Carbon frames coming out of the mold with minor differences (a couple millimeters here and there). And why two “identical” bikes aren’t riding exactly the same. Well worth a listen.
Sorry to burst that bubble, but carbon parts coming out of the mould perfect every single time is pretty much a myth.
The reason for that is quite simple: Minor imperfections during manufacturing are adding up. At this point, all carbon fibre bike frames are largely manufactured by hand (- except some exotics like Atherton or CDuro). Prepregs are placed and applied (- pressed into the mold) by hand, when dry sheets are being used, even the epoxy matrix is applied by hand. The same thing goes for the application of thread inserts, mould cores, vacuum bags, etc. It's all manual labour and as such it's always done slightly imperfect. Unfortunately those minor imperfections all add up and as a result you'll get a frame that's slightly warped, not exactly in plane, has bolt holes that aren't perfectly straight, has uneven amounts of lateral flex because of localized delamination, etc.
This isn't any different for any manufacturer btw. Doesn't matter if you've bought an expensive Specialized or a cheap Canyon. The only difference between those two is that one has undergone a more thorough quality control process and so, as a customer, you're less likely to receive a frame that's misaligned due to manufacturing errors (- because those frames will ideally have been filtered out during qc).
The secret to a good frame (alloy or carbon) is a thorough and strict quality control process.
Sorry to burst that bubble, but carbon parts coming out of the mould perfect every single time is pretty much a myth.
The reason for that...
Sorry to burst that bubble, but carbon parts coming out of the mould perfect every single time is pretty much a myth.
The reason for that is quite simple: Minor imperfections during manufacturing are adding up. At this point, all carbon fibre bike frames are largely manufactured by hand (- except some exotics like Atherton or CDuro). Prepregs are placed and applied (- pressed into the mold) by hand, when dry sheets are being used, even the epoxy matrix is applied by hand. The same thing goes for the application of thread inserts, mould cores, vacuum bags, etc. It's all manual labour and as such it's always done slightly imperfect. Unfortunately those minor imperfections all add up and as a result you'll get a frame that's slightly warped, not exactly in plane, has bolt holes that aren't perfectly straight, has uneven amounts of lateral flex because of localized delamination, etc.
This isn't any different for any manufacturer btw. Doesn't matter if you've bought an expensive Specialized or a cheap Canyon. The only difference between those two is that one has undergone a more thorough quality control process and so, as a customer, you're less likely to receive a frame that's misaligned due to manufacturing errors (- because those frames will ideally have been filtered out during qc).
The secret to a good frame (alloy or carbon) is a thorough and strict quality control process.
Well you are correct that a carbon frame can have alignment issues but I think what Neko is referring too is that warpage and the misalignment issues that result from welding is are more severe and harder to overcome manufacturing wise than something that comes out of a mold like Carbon. A post machining process on a jig would solve these issues in either method of course. My big concern with CFRP in a non Aerospace application like Bicycle frames is definitely QC because as you pointed out, there is countless ways to f-up such a labor intensive process like laying a carbon frame. Hoping that the rumors of a weldable 7075 aluminum alloy come true in the near future, would make carbon obsolete.
Sorry to burst that bubble, but carbon parts coming out of the mould perfect every single time is pretty much a myth.
The reason for that...
Sorry to burst that bubble, but carbon parts coming out of the mould perfect every single time is pretty much a myth.
The reason for that is quite simple: Minor imperfections during manufacturing are adding up. At this point, all carbon fibre bike frames are largely manufactured by hand (- except some exotics like Atherton or CDuro). Prepregs are placed and applied (- pressed into the mold) by hand, when dry sheets are being used, even the epoxy matrix is applied by hand. The same thing goes for the application of thread inserts, mould cores, vacuum bags, etc. It's all manual labour and as such it's always done slightly imperfect. Unfortunately those minor imperfections all add up and as a result you'll get a frame that's slightly warped, not exactly in plane, has bolt holes that aren't perfectly straight, has uneven amounts of lateral flex because of localized delamination, etc.
This isn't any different for any manufacturer btw. Doesn't matter if you've bought an expensive Specialized or a cheap Canyon. The only difference between those two is that one has undergone a more thorough quality control process and so, as a customer, you're less likely to receive a frame that's misaligned due to manufacturing errors (- because those frames will ideally have been filtered out during qc).
The secret to a good frame (alloy or carbon) is a thorough and strict quality control process.
I agree with what your saying but Carbon is still considerably more repeatable than Alloy.
Whether is QC or what but ive had some absolutely terrible Alloy frames, The best frames are the premium brands made by Merida, including their own, this is both alloy and carbon for e.g Specilized are manufacturerd(and half owned) by Merida
Im currently on a Merida one sixty alloy, the latest one and man they are so nice Quality wise.
The merida replaced a Canyon torque(alloy) and my goodness the difference in quality is like comparing Toy RC cars at Kmart etc to proper hobby ones. 4 brand new torque frames in my garage, all massively out of alignment. - For reference, Canyon did replace with a Carbon frame which had Zero issues and aligned perfectly. Ill never forget the CS guy saying: "theres a reason those models are cheap right now"
Why exactly would a weldable 7075 alloy make carbon obsolete? It's a bit stronger than 7005, but just as stiff... Where you are stiffness limited, not strength limited, the frame will be just as heavy. It's not a magic bullet, nothing is really... Maybe beryllium 😂
Why exactly would a weldable 7075 alloy make carbon obsolete? It's a bit stronger than 7005, but just as stiff... Where you are stiffness limited, not...
Why exactly would a weldable 7075 alloy make carbon obsolete? It's a bit stronger than 7005, but just as stiff... Where you are stiffness limited, not strength limited, the frame will be just as heavy. It's not a magic bullet, nothing is really... Maybe beryllium 😂
Hmm a little lost on what you are saying as stiffness is not a material property but more of an assembly property? As a machinist 7075 always seemed like a pretty neat material to me, and it has a very high strength to weight ratio, plus it machines nicely, so this article from few years ago always sticks on the back of my head when the subject of frame materials comes up. https://newatlas.com/welding-aa7075-aluminum-alloy/58449/
I take it back on the strength front, as the ultimate and yield stress ratings for 7075 are 572 and 503 MPa while only 350 and 290 MPa for 7005. On the other hand this is of little use as fatigue strength rating is 159 MPa for 7075 vs. 150 MPa for 7005. So functionally, for cyclically loaded parts (bike parts), it's more or less the same, a benefit of ~6 %.
As for stiffness, I'm talking about the modulus of elasticity - usually 70 GPa for aluminium alloys, 140 GPa for steel and so on. That AND shape give you the actual stiffness of the structure. With a stronger material you can of course make the structure thinner and larger to gain back stiffness, but you're often times limited with dimensions (BB shell width, steerer tube diameter, etc.), so a stronger material that has the same modulus of elasticity might not be much of a benefit.
TL;DR: seeing a larger number in the ultimate tensile strength field is not always the golden ticket.
Looks like an all new sb165 mullet to me. The area where the shock mounts to the downtube looks different to the sb160 and there isn’t the big yeti branding on the downtube. So not just a 160 with a new link. I think this is the same bike Richie was spotted on earlier on this page of the thread. Also not an old 165, it has the new cable routing and upper link that all the other models received.
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how slack it is (<63) - both the HTA & STA are really raked back.
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how...
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how slack it is (<63) - both the HTA & STA are really raked back.
Can't speak to this frame or photo, but I do know that they're testing some mullet links (and/or rear triangles) with their local guys in CO on their SB160s
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how...
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how slack it is (<63) - both the HTA & STA are really raked back.
it is not as the link is inside like the sb160, it's the new one and it's mullet
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how...
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how slack it is (<63) - both the HTA & STA are really raked back.
Can't speak to this frame or photo, but I do know that they're testing some mullet links (and/or rear triangles) with their local guys in CO...
Can't speak to this frame or photo, but I do know that they're testing some mullet links (and/or rear triangles) with their local guys in CO on their SB160s
Interesting… I ran the geo numbers with just throwing a 27.5 wheel on the back of my 160 and a lot of the numbers were very close or exact as the new ibis hd6.
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how...
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how slack it is (<63) - both the HTA & STA are really raked back.
it is not as the link is inside like the sb160, it's the new one and it's mullet
Yeah, looking at it again you're right (how the upper link connects to the seat tube is like the SB160 instead of the old 165). Although in the first photo, the linkage is raw silver, so maybe it's just a proto mullet link for a 160?
Adam Brayton said it was too powerful and they shelved it… apparently.
A real shame as it might have tempted me back to them. There’s no such thing as too powerful- just pull the lever less
i think loic studied marketing, because in some vlog some years ago he was an intern at 100% during the offseason and he said he needed that for university.
Yes, there's such thing as too powerful. But it's relative to your tyre (and your tiredness) essentially. Put some Shimano Saint, Trickstuff Power pas, with 220mm rotors and Maxxis Rekon Race tires, you'll see if there's no such thing as too powerful
Why not take the tyres off altogether and wax your rims!
That’s not a brake issue, that’s a tyre (user setup) issue.
So you basically say exactly what I said, the most important thing is the brake power relatively to the setup. Thanks.
Your tyre choice and setup doesn't make a brake too powerful.
That's akin to getting some griptape pedals and complaining because your feet keep slipping.
Yeah, cause it's much more simple to being very sensible with your finger, especially with some tiredness, than having the right braking power for your setup and just having to start your braking with pushing the lever all the way no matter what (and not having your tire slipping, when your brake is, you know, too powerful) THEN modulating.
I'm not trying to say "ride with a 160mm SRAM Level T and all will be easier" at all. It's just a matter of right setup.
Oh man I appreciate a powerful brake even more when I’m tired… I don’t have to pull hard to make them work.
There's pulling all the way, and pulling all the way hard, I tried to say about the first one.
On this quote I see what you mean tho'.
Sorry to burst that bubble, but carbon parts coming out of the mould perfect every single time is pretty much a myth.
The reason for that is quite simple: Minor imperfections during manufacturing are adding up. At this point, all carbon fibre bike frames are largely manufactured by hand (- except some exotics like Atherton or CDuro). Prepregs are placed and applied (- pressed into the mold) by hand, when dry sheets are being used, even the epoxy matrix is applied by hand. The same thing goes for the application of thread inserts, mould cores, vacuum bags, etc. It's all manual labour and as such it's always done slightly imperfect. Unfortunately those minor imperfections all add up and as a result you'll get a frame that's slightly warped, not exactly in plane, has bolt holes that aren't perfectly straight, has uneven amounts of lateral flex because of localized delamination, etc.
This isn't any different for any manufacturer btw. Doesn't matter if you've bought an expensive Specialized or a cheap Canyon. The only difference between those two is that one has undergone a more thorough quality control process and so, as a customer, you're less likely to receive a frame that's misaligned due to manufacturing errors (- because those frames will ideally have been filtered out during qc).
The secret to a good frame (alloy or carbon) is a thorough and strict quality control process.
Custom link and possibly something hiding around the stem?
Looks like the next marketing gimmick will be steering damper of some sort
Well you are correct that a carbon frame can have alignment issues but I think what Neko is referring too is that warpage and the misalignment issues that result from welding is are more severe and harder to overcome manufacturing wise than something that comes out of a mold like Carbon. A post machining process on a jig would solve these issues in either method of course. My big concern with CFRP in a non Aerospace application like Bicycle frames is definitely QC because as you pointed out, there is countless ways to f-up such a labor intensive process like laying a carbon frame. Hoping that the rumors of a weldable 7075 aluminum alloy come true in the near future, would make carbon obsolete.
I agree with what your saying but Carbon is still considerably more repeatable than Alloy.
Whether is QC or what but ive had some absolutely terrible Alloy frames, The best frames are the premium brands made by Merida, including their own, this is both alloy and carbon for e.g Specilized are manufacturerd(and half owned) by Merida
Im currently on a Merida one sixty alloy, the latest one and man they are so nice Quality wise.
The merida replaced a Canyon torque(alloy) and my goodness the difference in quality is like comparing Toy RC cars at Kmart etc to proper hobby ones. 4 brand new torque frames in my garage, all massively out of alignment. - For reference, Canyon did replace with a Carbon frame which had Zero issues and aligned perfectly. Ill never forget the CS guy saying: "theres a reason those models are cheap right now"
Kinda funny how tiny the bike looks when he is on a size medium, with how long bikes are getting these days.
Why exactly would a weldable 7075 alloy make carbon obsolete? It's a bit stronger than 7005, but just as stiff... Where you are stiffness limited, not strength limited, the frame will be just as heavy. It's not a magic bullet, nothing is really... Maybe beryllium 😂
Hmm a little lost on what you are saying as stiffness is not a material property but more of an assembly property? As a machinist 7075 always seemed like a pretty neat material to me, and it has a very high strength to weight ratio, plus it machines nicely, so this article from few years ago always sticks on the back of my head when the subject of frame materials comes up. https://newatlas.com/welding-aa7075-aluminum-alloy/58449/
I figured it was this exact article, yes.
I take it back on the strength front, as the ultimate and yield stress ratings for 7075 are 572 and 503 MPa while only 350 and 290 MPa for 7005. On the other hand this is of little use as fatigue strength rating is 159 MPa for 7075 vs. 150 MPa for 7005. So functionally, for cyclically loaded parts (bike parts), it's more or less the same, a benefit of ~6 %.
As for stiffness, I'm talking about the modulus of elasticity - usually 70 GPa for aluminium alloys, 140 GPa for steel and so on. That AND shape give you the actual stiffness of the structure. With a stronger material you can of course make the structure thinner and larger to gain back stiffness, but you're often times limited with dimensions (BB shell width, steerer tube diameter, etc.), so a stronger material that has the same modulus of elasticity might not be much of a benefit.
TL;DR: seeing a larger number in the ultimate tensile strength field is not always the golden ticket.
is that something new? looks like a sb165 built for slopestyle. I ride a yeti and i still have trouble telling some of their models apart.
Looks like an all new sb165 mullet to me. The area where the shock mounts to the downtube looks different to the sb160 and there isn’t the big yeti branding on the downtube. So not just a 160 with a new link. I think this is the same bike Richie was spotted on earlier on this page of the thread. Also not an old 165, it has the new cable routing and upper link that all the other models received.
Pretty sure it's just the old 165 with a 29er fork & wheel slapped on it. People have been doing it since release. Look at how slack it is (<63) - both the HTA & STA are really raked back.
Kind of amazed no one has noticed the aluminum prototype from Gee’s post
Can't speak to this frame or photo, but I do know that they're testing some mullet links (and/or rear triangles) with their local guys in CO on their SB160s
Jackson on that new-ish Maxxis tire from his IG story
it is not as the link is inside like the sb160, it's the new one and it's mullet
Interesting… I ran the geo numbers with just throwing a 27.5 wheel on the back of my 160 and a lot of the numbers were very close or exact as the new ibis hd6.
Yeah, looking at it again you're right (how the upper link connects to the seat tube is like the SB160 instead of the old 165). Although in the first photo, the linkage is raw silver, so maybe it's just a proto mullet link for a 160?
Did anyone watch the Yoshimura live video with Dak today? Any confirmation of new product?
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation