FYI, all the A2C and slammed stem riders, the handlebars are back in the original position. But the BB and the seat (seat tube angle most...
FYI, all the A2C and slammed stem riders, the handlebars are back in the original position. But the BB and the seat (seat tube angle most importantly) are not. I'd prefer a handlebar height change to a seat tube angle change. Slackening the STA and putting the handlebars back closes the hip joint (the angle). Doing it the other way around just opens it, which is supposedly beneficial for most people.
It’s a mountain bikes. How often am I trying while sitting down?
Don't judge other people by the way you ride. Most bikes with a single crown fork are still meant to be pedalled. As to how often? Pretty often. ~90 % of the time you are actually riding your bike. That's quite often to me.
As for high pivot, a up and then rearward path would be very hard to achieve with all the pivots on the other side of the curvature...
As funny as the parking lot test and the reasoning seems daft, I believe it's a big influence. Just as weight has a huge influence, as all the people, when learning how much a bike costs, ask 'how much does it weigh'. And when someone buys something new, everybody lifts it up to see how heavy it is. And it has NO bearing on the performance of the bike, yet is something we all do.
As for sluggishness, I don't see why a high pivot would be sluggish in and of itself. Maybe it's byproduct of the idler, which I think is the real PITA with a high pivot bike, as most people say it's noisy. I can imagine why and I'm often pondering how to solve that.
To be completely honest, I've never ridden a high pivot bike, but would love to, as my prefered style of riding is going reasonably fast on reasonably chundery ('natural', not bermed out, smooth trails) and I can't jump for shit and I'm not a fan of going slow on technical stuff. Point and shoot straightline through rocks? Love it. A long 29er is magical in stuff like that and a high pivot would be even better.
But yeah, I can see how people could not like a high pivot bike as the front-rear weight distribution changes through the travel, the idler can be noisy and the parking lot test. The chain length 'issue' is not an issue as that is dealt by with the idler specifically. I actually think a high pivot design could be the solution to 29ers and the like as we have problems getting big wheels at longer travels under the seats plus the axle paths are getting more and more forward the bigger the wheel gets due to the requirements of antisquat and due to the BB height relative to the rear (or both) axle.
Imagine the rear axle rotating around the BB at a constant distance (giving you little to no chain stretch, so no pedal kickback), the higher the rear axle starts in the travel, the more forwards it will move through the travel. THe smaller the wheel (or the rear axle starting under the BB eight), the more rearward you can go in the beginning of the travel. With an idler you move the 'effective' BB (chainline wise) higher up to whatever height you want.
Like I mentioned, the retail Wilson already is a relatively high pivot bike, just without an idler. It was the same for the old Gambler, that...
Like I mentioned, the retail Wilson already is a relatively high pivot bike, just without an idler. It was the same for the old Gambler, that had the single pivot arrangement with it also relatively high.
With this proto the pivot location moved up even further, making an idler necessary to prevent pedal kickback and not have the antisquat too high.
As for horst link (brake-wise) and high pivot, nobody ever said a high pivot needs to be a single pivot, it's just that the majority of bikes with a high pivot are single pivots (Norco's incoming bikes are not, for example). I'm guessing it's much easier to tune a high pivot and the idler position with a single pivot (less variables), but I think you do get benefits with a 4-bar high pivot bike - less brake squat. With the high pivot nomenclature here indicating a rearward axle path. The pivots can actually be in locations close to what we currently use for 'normal' bikes, it's just the kinematics that are different.
Well I really wouldn't consider the current wilson an high pivot bike, the axle moves forward for the majority of the travel above sag. BTW, you are right, you can get a rearward axle path with a horst link or a dual link design (which are actually pretty much the same in regards to this matter) but the virtual instant center will move around affecring the axle path and complicating things a fair bit, as you have stated. I think this design is really promising. I Might thinker around a bit to see how the norco behabes, conpared to this one, at least on paper.
That's why I said 'relatively high' and (sort of) added that I meant for a bike without an idler. If you don't have an idler, you're more or less limited in where you are putting the pivot for a single pivot bike (which a Split Pivot bike is, just not when it comes to braking performance).
It's basically a single line that gives you X amount of antisquat in a given gear for a given rider and for a given sag value. For the given three variables, the line is the same for a multi-pivot bike, but you need to drop the IC on it, not the pivot itself, which means you can move the links around a bit more. Plus the antisquat characteristic through the gears and travel will then be different.
Anywho, the main limiting factor, besides the antisquat characteristics (maybe not as important on a DH bike though), for the height of the main pivot is the pedal kickback, caused by the chain stretch. That's why I said 'relatively high', as I'm suspecting the two bikes had a relatively high pedal kickback value due to the height of the pivot location and not running an idler. So yeah, 'relatively high for an idlerless setup', not 'completely reaward axle path high'.
That's why I said 'relatively high' and (sort of) added that I meant for a bike without an idler. If you don't have an idler, you're...
That's why I said 'relatively high' and (sort of) added that I meant for a bike without an idler. If you don't have an idler, you're more or less limited in where you are putting the pivot for a single pivot bike (which a Split Pivot bike is, just not when it comes to braking performance).
It's basically a single line that gives you X amount of antisquat in a given gear for a given rider and for a given sag value. For the given three variables, the line is the same for a multi-pivot bike, but you need to drop the IC on it, not the pivot itself, which means you can move the links around a bit more. Plus the antisquat characteristic through the gears and travel will then be different.
Anywho, the main limiting factor, besides the antisquat characteristics (maybe not as important on a DH bike though), for the height of the main pivot is the pedal kickback, caused by the chain stretch. That's why I said 'relatively high', as I'm suspecting the two bikes had a relatively high pedal kickback value due to the height of the pivot location and not running an idler. So yeah, 'relatively high for an idlerless setup', not 'completely reaward axle path high'.
Oh ok. I have to say I have never really felt a lot of pedal kickback on my 27.5 wilson, but I can't compare it with other bikes. On the topic of antisquat, I admit I'm not knowledgeable enough to know how an idler affects it, but I guess for a dh bike it's not the most important factor.
It will lessen it. To a managable level. Not enough antisquat and the bike, when pressing on the pedals, will squat. Then rebound once you let up on the pedals (when you have the cranks vertical). If you have too much antisquat, the bike will actively rise when pressing on the pedals, but then squat back to sag when you let go. Both will produce pedal bob, but one will cause it by pushing the bike further into the travel under power while the other will raise it out of the travel.
With correct pivot placement, the pull on the chain resists this pedal squat. Have too much antisquat (as mentioned above) and the chain will pull the rear axle towards the BB (thus raising the bike).
The thing is that with chain driven vehicles you have two antisquat components, one comes from the geometry itself and the other from the chain pulling the rear axle forwards. With a normal layout the chain is the main antisquat component. With a high pivot the suspension geometry enables the rear wheel trying to 'fold itself under the rider' sort of thing. This gives a considerable antisquat component by itself and adding the chain in a normal orientation will give tons of antisquat. That's why you use an idler to lessen the effect of the chain on the antisquat levels to bring to a reasonable level.
That and to prevent insane amounts of pedal kickback.
The Norco Instagram page has a quick video of the shore and says it will be released on the 14th!
The Norco Instagram page has a quick video of the shore and says it will be released on the 14th!
Pinkbike eluded to the fact they have the two new (high pivot) Norco bikes for the 2021 FieldTest in a recent podcast. Also Mike Kasmer mumbled about a lot of the bikes being on small wheels. My guess is the alloy one will be a cheaper 27.5 bike, designed around the Northshore and the carbon one will be the 29" EWS machine.
Pinkbike eluded to the fact they have the two new (high pivot) Norco bikes for the 2021 FieldTest in a recent podcast. Also Mike Kasmer mumbled...
Pinkbike eluded to the fact they have the two new (high pivot) Norco bikes for the 2021 FieldTest in a recent podcast. Also Mike Kasmer mumbled about a lot of the bikes being on small wheels. My guess is the alloy one will be a cheaper 27.5 bike, designed around the Northshore and the carbon one will be the 29" EWS machine.
That shore sounds like your guess in the right range.
Most suspension designs are equally meant for going reasonably slow whether it be climbing, flatter terrain, Or your more fit but less skilled user. Those type...
Most suspension designs are equally meant for going reasonably slow whether it be climbing, flatter terrain, Or your more fit but less skilled user. Those type of bikes are very plush and extremely quick when going fast but can feel pretty damped compared to a bike which moves forward and up in it’s travel. I’d love to see some a company play with a suspension design which progressively had more rearward travel. I’d sacrifice some small bump sensitivity for some liveliness but would love for some of that feeling when casing a jump, in rock gardens, or pushing the rear wheel thru flat corners.
Thought about this some more... Kinematics wise it would be somewhat achievable, not sure of the specifics of the rear axle path though, but it could be close. In practice it would require multiple idlers to route the chain along the links to prevent insane pedal kickback, which would get worse as you went into the travel.
Plus I don't see why that kind of axle path would work, the 'catch your wheel and try to buck you' hits are usually relatively small and come quickly one after another - they are short travel events that need to be dealt with quickly. The deep stroke events are usually more of a huck to flat kind of event. Therefore I think (could be wrong) that a rearward axle path is most useful at the beginning of the stroke and around sag and later in the travel it doesn't matter as much, if it's rearward or not.
Bruni with electronic lockout (piggyback cover + small tied hose at the bar)
[img]https://ep1.pinkbike.org/p6pb19536065/p6pb19536065.jpg[/img]
[img]https://p.vitalmtb.com/photos/stories/2020/10/08/max_Leogang_Worlds20_AS6I1184_327178.jpg?1602212410[/img]
Bruni with electronic lockout (piggyback cover + small tied hose at the bar)
The telemetry bike must carry verins front & rear, a box and multiple wires all around connected to it to collect full data.
A spare bike for telemetry as Specialized use to do usually doesn't have a custom worldchamp paintjob.
Given how meticolous he is preparing for this race I wouldn't be surprised if he ran some electronic unobtanium lockout after testing it all year long. What if it is something like Fox's live valve? It might come in handy on this track. The cover and the fact that his team members are not using this "system" on their bike suggests it is something more advanced/valuable than a lockout, but who knows
Pinkbike eluded to the fact they have the two new (high pivot) Norco bikes for the 2021 FieldTest in a recent podcast. Also Mike Kasmer mumbled...
Pinkbike eluded to the fact they have the two new (high pivot) Norco bikes for the 2021 FieldTest in a recent podcast. Also Mike Kasmer mumbled about a lot of the bikes being on small wheels. My guess is the alloy one will be a cheaper 27.5 bike, designed around the Northshore and the carbon one will be the 29" EWS machine.
The real question is if they release the 29er only as an Enduro or as a DH and and an Enduro bike. The Norco Factory riders are testing this bike in DH races, so I guess it will be released with a single-crown and a dual-crown fork. Next question: what about the choice of riding it as a mullet? The spy shots were showing it with a full 29er setup.
Or do you guys think that we will get three separate bikes? DH race, Parkbike and an Enduro?
The real question is if they release the 29er only as an Enduro or as a DH and and an Enduro bike. The Norco Factory riders...
The real question is if they release the 29er only as an Enduro or as a DH and and an Enduro bike. The Norco Factory riders are testing this bike in DH races, so I guess it will be released with a single-crown and a dual-crown fork. Next question: what about the choice of riding it as a mullet? The spy shots were showing it with a full 29er setup.
Or do you guys think that we will get three separate bikes? DH race, Parkbike and an Enduro?
Wait until the lineup is released and you will know everything. And I can tell you a lot of people here know all the details
Just spoke to someone in the loop. The 29er is a dual crown compatible 180/180 bike, the reason there using it at the world champs is mainly testing and the fact it has been so successful.
spy shot of the norco shore we've been testing :evil:
[img]https://p.vitalmtb.com/photos/forums/2020/10/09/9960/s1200_Screen_Shot_2020_10_08_at_4.47.14_PM.jpg[/img]
On a side note, anyone got any ideas why the Giant dh team riders are not using the prototype bike they raced with last year? They are back on the old glory. I wonder if Giant will pull out of dh racing.
I feel sorry for the Norco sales guys. There gonna have explain what that "cog thingo" is to everyone who walks in. It's half the reason I'm selling my druid.
Hey Prime Bozz! So is that officially a high pivot Horst link? Or does it become something different when that lower forward pivot migrates up?
Fun fact... I got to meet Horst at the AMP shop in So Cal on my way to my first DH race in Laguna in the late nineties. Same trip that I was accused of burglarizing Marzocci.
Hey Prime Bozz! So is that officially a high pivot Horst link? Or does it become something different when that lower forward pivot migrates up?
Fun...
Hey Prime Bozz! So is that officially a high pivot Horst link? Or does it become something different when that lower forward pivot migrates up?
Fun fact... I got to meet Horst at the AMP shop in So Cal on my way to my first DH race in Laguna in the late nineties. Same trip that I was accused of burglarizing Marzocci.
I think it's technically a linkage driven (high) single pivot because the axel is on the chain stay. but I know there is alot of overlap between suspension designs and it could be debatable.
If talking about the Norco(s), it is a high pivot horst link, yeah. The rear wheel is mounted to the seatstays, there is a chainstay pivot present too. The GT DH bike is the same, the prototype Scott Gambler (when it had the idler) was also sorta kinda the same (with the main/BB pivot not being as high), the Cannondale DH and upcoming enduro rigs are another example of this.
The Druid (if it's being mentioned), the new Devinci (again, pedalling wise but not braking wise, since it's a bit murky due to it being a Split Pivot), the Supreme, both Deviate cycles models, the Actofive designs and the old Zerode DH bikes are all single pivot designs.
If physics is correct, a single pivot high pivot design should have a bit more braking induced squat since the brake link (when braking) wants to be rotated forwards (the link usually does rotate forward going through the travel) and the rear axle pulled back. A rearward axle path enables this second part of the brake induced squat, which is less present on more conventional designs with the more forward moving axle path (where during braking the rear axle is thus pulled back and out of the travel, but the link still wants to rotate into the travel).
For what it's worth, I think high pivots could bring quite a few benefits into mountain bike designs going into the future (more space for the linkages, tyre clearance, less seat tyre buzz, better kinematics, less pedal kickback but still good pedaling characteristics, etc.), but the idler is and will be a big problem. It's logical that it's noisy, it's less efficient than what we have and it makes the bike look a bit more complicated. If anything, gearboxes could be the answer with the output shaft not being concentric with the crankarm axle, thus making the output higher and facilitating a high pivot design without an idler.
As for high pivot, a up and then rearward path would be very hard to achieve with all the pivots on the other side of the curvature...
As funny as the parking lot test and the reasoning seems daft, I believe it's a big influence. Just as weight has a huge influence, as all the people, when learning how much a bike costs, ask 'how much does it weigh'. And when someone buys something new, everybody lifts it up to see how heavy it is. And it has NO bearing on the performance of the bike, yet is something we all do.
As for sluggishness, I don't see why a high pivot would be sluggish in and of itself. Maybe it's byproduct of the idler, which I think is the real PITA with a high pivot bike, as most people say it's noisy. I can imagine why and I'm often pondering how to solve that.
To be completely honest, I've never ridden a high pivot bike, but would love to, as my prefered style of riding is going reasonably fast on reasonably chundery ('natural', not bermed out, smooth trails) and I can't jump for shit and I'm not a fan of going slow on technical stuff. Point and shoot straightline through rocks? Love it. A long 29er is magical in stuff like that and a high pivot would be even better.
But yeah, I can see how people could not like a high pivot bike as the front-rear weight distribution changes through the travel, the idler can be noisy and the parking lot test. The chain length 'issue' is not an issue as that is dealt by with the idler specifically. I actually think a high pivot design could be the solution to 29ers and the like as we have problems getting big wheels at longer travels under the seats plus the axle paths are getting more and more forward the bigger the wheel gets due to the requirements of antisquat and due to the BB height relative to the rear (or both) axle.
Imagine the rear axle rotating around the BB at a constant distance (giving you little to no chain stretch, so no pedal kickback), the higher the rear axle starts in the travel, the more forwards it will move through the travel. THe smaller the wheel (or the rear axle starting under the BB eight), the more rearward you can go in the beginning of the travel. With an idler you move the 'effective' BB (chainline wise) higher up to whatever height you want.
It's basically a single line that gives you X amount of antisquat in a given gear for a given rider and for a given sag value. For the given three variables, the line is the same for a multi-pivot bike, but you need to drop the IC on it, not the pivot itself, which means you can move the links around a bit more. Plus the antisquat characteristic through the gears and travel will then be different.
Anywho, the main limiting factor, besides the antisquat characteristics (maybe not as important on a DH bike though), for the height of the main pivot is the pedal kickback, caused by the chain stretch. That's why I said 'relatively high', as I'm suspecting the two bikes had a relatively high pedal kickback value due to the height of the pivot location and not running an idler. So yeah, 'relatively high for an idlerless setup', not 'completely reaward axle path high'.
With correct pivot placement, the pull on the chain resists this pedal squat. Have too much antisquat (as mentioned above) and the chain will pull the rear axle towards the BB (thus raising the bike).
The thing is that with chain driven vehicles you have two antisquat components, one comes from the geometry itself and the other from the chain pulling the rear axle forwards. With a normal layout the chain is the main antisquat component. With a high pivot the suspension geometry enables the rear wheel trying to 'fold itself under the rider' sort of thing. This gives a considerable antisquat component by itself and adding the chain in a normal orientation will give tons of antisquat. That's why you use an idler to lessen the effect of the chain on the antisquat levels to bring to a reasonable level.
That and to prevent insane amounts of pedal kickback.
Plus I don't see why that kind of axle path would work, the 'catch your wheel and try to buck you' hits are usually relatively small and come quickly one after another - they are short travel events that need to be dealt with quickly. The deep stroke events are usually more of a huck to flat kind of event. Therefore I think (could be wrong) that a rearward axle path is most useful at the beginning of the stroke and around sag and later in the travel it doesn't matter as much, if it's rearward or not.
A spare bike for telemetry as Specialized use to do usually doesn't have a custom worldchamp paintjob.
Or do you guys think that we will get three separate bikes? DH race, Parkbike and an Enduro?
See how long this gets taken down.
Fun fact... I got to meet Horst at the AMP shop in So Cal on my way to my first DH race in Laguna in the late nineties. Same trip that I was accused of burglarizing Marzocci.
The Druid (if it's being mentioned), the new Devinci (again, pedalling wise but not braking wise, since it's a bit murky due to it being a Split Pivot), the Supreme, both Deviate cycles models, the Actofive designs and the old Zerode DH bikes are all single pivot designs.
If physics is correct, a single pivot high pivot design should have a bit more braking induced squat since the brake link (when braking) wants to be rotated forwards (the link usually does rotate forward going through the travel) and the rear axle pulled back. A rearward axle path enables this second part of the brake induced squat, which is less present on more conventional designs with the more forward moving axle path (where during braking the rear axle is thus pulled back and out of the travel, but the link still wants to rotate into the travel).
For what it's worth, I think high pivots could bring quite a few benefits into mountain bike designs going into the future (more space for the linkages, tyre clearance, less seat tyre buzz, better kinematics, less pedal kickback but still good pedaling characteristics, etc.), but the idler is and will be a big problem. It's logical that it's noisy, it's less efficient than what we have and it makes the bike look a bit more complicated. If anything, gearboxes could be the answer with the output shaft not being concentric with the crankarm axle, thus making the output higher and facilitating a high pivot design without an idler.
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation