Not quite an open standard. SRAM will grant you a license, at no cost, if you apply (I've done it). But it isn't open, and there's...
Not quite an open standard. SRAM will grant you a license, at no cost, if you apply (I've done it). But it isn't open, and there's nothing saying they have to grant said license. When you apply, you interface with the SRAM legal team. I wouldn't be surprised if they're doing everything they can to make things challenging for Shimano, it's what big brands do to each other.
Isn’t the license for the frame manufacturer? Assuming that’s the case, anyone can build a derailleur to mount to those frame specs. Or am I missing something?
Not quite an open standard. SRAM will grant you a license, at no cost, if you apply (I've done it). But it isn't open, and there's...
Not quite an open standard. SRAM will grant you a license, at no cost, if you apply (I've done it). But it isn't open, and there's nothing saying they have to grant said license. When you apply, you interface with the SRAM legal team. I wouldn't be surprised if they're doing everything they can to make things challenging for Shimano, it's what big brands do to each other.
Yeppers, same as when ISIS was a thing. I'll wager there's probably a bit of IP swapping happening in the background as well since SRAM were particular in their patent for their derailleurs.
2025 Rail is up on Trek EU websites with all builds & prices, but the bike is still not released or shown anywhere else (no US/CAN...
2025 Rail is up on Trek EU websites with all builds & prices, but the bike is still not released or shown anywhere else (no US/CAN prices/builds or review out).
Why does the Rail+ look like something old people would ride on the bike path next to a river on a sunny weekend dayalso can we...
Why does the Rail+ look like something old people would ride on the bike path next to a river on a sunny weekend day
also can we please call Horst link bikes „crab link“ from now on it is fantastic
Sounds like you work in a Trek dealer.
It looks like it, because it is. It's a comfort tourer for oldies that equate suspension to comfort. They get loaded up with kickstands (in the provided mounting holes), mirrors, smartphone holders and Ergon wing grips.
Sounds like you work in a Trek dealer.It looks like it, because it is. It's a comfort tourer for oldies that equate suspension to comfort. They...
Sounds like you work in a Trek dealer.
It looks like it, because it is. It's a comfort tourer for oldies that equate suspension to comfort. They get loaded up with kickstands (in the provided mounting holes), mirrors, smartphone holders and Ergon wing grips.
They ride like a pig and have done since gen1.
How come when I say this I get shit 😂 well said tho
It's not the first time the Rail is getting some negative feedback for weird sizing/geo.The L is more XL and their XL is XXL so you're...
It's not the first time the Rail is getting some negative feedback for weird sizing/geo.
The L is more XL and their XL is XXL so you're right that they're not offering any size large...not sure how they can mess that up in 2024.
Santa Cruz Vala sizing is much better as a reference.
Anyway, what kind of product launch is this from Trek ? Bike kind of soft launched in Europe only.
It’s pretty silly to say any size is too big or to small because that’s subjective, and im guilty of being sarcastically subjective just a page or so back! But id like to think that most manufacturers by now would be doing reasonable sizing increments 5 sizes = 425, 450, 475, 500, 525 or 4 sizes = 430,460,490,520 with +/- 5mm reach adjust - of course this is just some made up numbers so play with it as you will.
It's not the first time the Rail is getting some negative feedback for weird sizing/geo.The L is more XL and their XL is XXL so you're...
It's not the first time the Rail is getting some negative feedback for weird sizing/geo.
The L is more XL and their XL is XXL so you're right that they're not offering any size large...not sure how they can mess that up in 2024.
Santa Cruz Vala sizing is much better as a reference.
Anyway, what kind of product launch is this from Trek ? Bike kind of soft launched in Europe only.
Well my other 3 large size bikes fall in the 490's..... and for me at 6ft are perfect, some even have 50mm stems.
I disagree about the L being like an XL.... 490 for an XL is tiny.
most larges are to small for me despite my size falling in the middle of most guides/brands Larges Treks fuel EX gen 6 - large is like 485 and its feels smaller.... i measured mine and it was 486 but felt like my old s4 evo did at 474.
When bikes come out and the large is 475 and XL is 498...... I keep asking myself why am i riding a XL at 6ft I had an s4 & s5 SJ evo, the s4 offerd nothing over the s5, they both went through tight stuff the same etc but the XL was way better when it got rough - the i tried mullet on the s4 with both WRP & spesh link(shit) and thats the only time i thought it was more nimble.
Sizing is so personal and so, Personally for me... the Rail+ Large is a perfect fit(at a guess but i've orderd one)
Apologies if this is pedantic or already discussed. Is VPP not also a 4 bar suspension design? Confused why Santa Cruz is using that terminology to...
Apologies if this is pedantic or already discussed. Is VPP not also a 4 bar suspension design? Confused why Santa Cruz is using that terminology to differentiate the Vala from their other bikes.
Not pedantic but easily explained with a quick google search. Easiest thing to distinguish 4bar/horst link is the pivot near the rear axle. Their new ebike...
Not pedantic but easily explained with a quick google search. Easiest thing to distinguish 4bar/horst link is the pivot near the rear axle. Their new ebike has it, all the VPP bikes do not.
Horst link is one of the variants of a 4 bar design.
A Horst link is also a Virtual Pivot design, but it's not a "VPP TM" design. Any bike that uses two links, connected to a member that the rear brake and axle are connected to is a 4 bar and a virtual pivot. VPP, Horst link, DW Link, the layouts that We Are One and Prime use, Breezers M link, and more all fall into that description, so we differentiate them by lower link length and the rotation of the links themselves. 4 bar or Horst typically means bikes with a long lower link, rear pivot close to the rear axle, and Co Rotating links, like the new SC, most specialized, Norcos, Transitions etc... Where "VPP TM" are two short links that counter rotate relative to each other. I am being pedantic.
Apologies if this is pedantic or already discussed. Is VPP not also a 4 bar suspension design? Confused why Santa Cruz is using that terminology to...
Apologies if this is pedantic or already discussed. Is VPP not also a 4 bar suspension design? Confused why Santa Cruz is using that terminology to differentiate the Vala from their other bikes.
Not pedantic but easily explained with a quick google search. Easiest thing to distinguish 4bar/horst link is the pivot near the rear axle. Their new ebike...
Not pedantic but easily explained with a quick google search. Easiest thing to distinguish 4bar/horst link is the pivot near the rear axle. Their new ebike has it, all the VPP bikes do not.
I’m well aware of the definition of these suspension designs. My question is more as to why is santa cruz refering to this horst link layout as four bar, when VPP is also technically “four bar”. I understand it’s probably because of patent/copyright/other legal nonsense but IMO it seems confusing to the consumer.
I’m well aware of the definition of these suspension designs. My question is more as to why is santa cruz refering to this horst link layout...
I’m well aware of the definition of these suspension designs. My question is more as to why is santa cruz refering to this horst link layout as four bar, when VPP is also technically “four bar”. I understand it’s probably because of patent/copyright/other legal nonsense but IMO it seems confusing to the consumer.
I'd guess most consumers are not familiar with any of this.
SC has two very different looking bikes. If they were to call them both VPP or both four bar, that would be very confusing to your average buyer.
VPP has always been an exercise in branding of a specific type of four bar layout going back to the 90s.
Re: SC Vala. Thing to keep in mind is a Horst Link specifically calls out the placement of the pivot as forward of and lower than the axle. SC's unit is forward and slightly above the axle, so it has a bit more in common with Rocky's old link circa 2013 (forgot the name, sorry) prior to the Horst patent expiring. That's all a long way of saying technically it isn't a true Horst link, but letting people blab about it as such makes it easier to discuss as a Horst is a known design. Bonus: it also stops the forums/comments from exploding with "IT'S A HORST LINK" if they did decide to call it something else. Bypass the BS and get straight to ride characteristics.
Re: SC Vala. Thing to keep in mind is a Horst Link specifically calls out the placement of the pivot as forward of and lower than...
Re: SC Vala. Thing to keep in mind is a Horst Link specifically calls out the placement of the pivot as forward of and lower than the axle. SC's unit is forward and slightly above the axle, so it has a bit more in common with Rocky's old link circa 2013 (forgot the name, sorry) prior to the Horst patent expiring. That's all a long way of saying technically it isn't a true Horst link, but letting people blab about it as such makes it easier to discuss as a Horst is a known design. Bonus: it also stops the forums/comments from exploding with "IT'S A HORST LINK" if they did decide to call it something else. Bypass the BS and get straight to ride characteristics.
So... the new Altitude is using (Not actually) VPP and the new Vala is using Smooth link
Do we have to get upset with sizing everytime!?Surely everyone here already knows what geometry numbers they prefer. So it's pointless worrying that your last bike...
Do we have to get upset with sizing everytime!?
Surely everyone here already knows what geometry numbers they prefer. So it's pointless worrying that your last bike was a M/L/XL.
The clothing industry hasn't been able to standardise sizing so the bike industry doesn't stand a chance in that respect.
That said it you're actually cool enough to be a proper Vital member you should be taking that size sticker off anyway!
you can, although, say that it's dumb to have 40mm reach difference between Medium and Large especially if an in between would be the number that fits most people according to statistics no?
Do we have to get upset with sizing everytime!?Surely everyone here already knows what geometry numbers they prefer. So it's pointless worrying that your last bike...
Do we have to get upset with sizing everytime!?
Surely everyone here already knows what geometry numbers they prefer. So it's pointless worrying that your last bike was a M/L/XL.
The clothing industry hasn't been able to standardise sizing so the bike industry doesn't stand a chance in that respect.
That said it you're actually cool enough to be a proper Vital member you should be taking that size sticker off anyway!
To be entirely clear, I wasnt complaining about a size - I actually went out of my way to say its silly to say a “size” is wrong, its as I said earlier and zesty just repeated, its the gap between sizes in this case that is the problem. You say that all of us should know what we prefer and i would agree with you - but the real world problem is when someone who doesn’t know what they should be on rolls into their local trek dealer (that’s ran by track cyclist that have no care in the world for those dirt bag mtb riders that walk into the store!) and then they sell them on a bike that is either too big or too small, all because they fit perfectly into that trek sizing scale but the gap between sizes is hugggge! Each of those outcomes can have negative effects, especially for a “novice.” . Fast forward 3 weeks and you bump into them at the trail head, covered in elbow pads, sporting some nasty grazes, with 60mm of spacers under their stem to get that fitment just right. If there were smaller increments this issues wouldn’t be such an issue. If you want to make a small with 550mm reach go for it! Just make sure there’s an extra extra small with a 475mm reach in the line up aswell.
Isn’t the license for the frame manufacturer? Assuming that’s the case, anyone can build a derailleur to mount to those frame specs. Or am I missing something?
FFS, it's just a hole!
One of my favorite comments in a while 😂 Horst link = crab
Also, @cantstop you best be getting that crab-link trademark buttoned up...
Yeppers, same as when ISIS was a thing. I'll wager there's probably a bit of IP swapping happening in the background as well since SRAM were particular in their patent for their derailleurs.
It's not the first time the Rail is getting some negative feedback for weird sizing/geo.
The L is more XL and their XL is XXL so you're right that they're not offering any size large...not sure how they can mess that up in 2024.
Santa Cruz Vala sizing is much better as a reference.
Anyway, what kind of product launch is this from Trek ? Bike kind of soft launched in Europe only.
Sounds like you work in a Trek dealer.
It looks like it, because it is. It's a comfort tourer for oldies that equate suspension to comfort. They get loaded up with kickstands (in the provided mounting holes), mirrors, smartphone holders and Ergon wing grips.
They ride like a pig and have done since gen1.
This could be the start of a new thread....
New Orbea ebike
How come when I say this I get shit 😂 well said tho
new kona hei hei mid 2025
New Hei Hei looks like a Faux-Crab design…
It’s pretty silly to say any size is too big or to small because that’s subjective, and im guilty of being sarcastically subjective just a page or so back! But id like to think that most manufacturers by now would be doing reasonable sizing increments 5 sizes = 425, 450, 475, 500, 525 or 4 sizes = 430,460,490,520 with +/- 5mm reach adjust - of course this is just some made up numbers so play with it as you will.
Imitation Crab?
That's it, that's the entire post... Sorry... Couldn't Help it...
Well my other 3 large size bikes fall in the 490's..... and for me at 6ft are perfect, some even have 50mm stems.
I disagree about the L being like an XL.... 490 for an XL is tiny.
most larges are to small for me despite my size falling in the middle of most guides/brands Larges
Treks fuel EX gen 6 - large is like 485 and its feels smaller.... i measured mine and it was 486 but felt like my old s4 evo did at 474.
When bikes come out and the large is 475 and XL is 498...... I keep asking myself why am i riding a XL at 6ft
I had an s4 & s5 SJ evo, the s4 offerd nothing over the s5, they both went through tight stuff the same etc but the XL was way better when it got rough - the i tried mullet on the s4 with both WRP & spesh link(shit) and thats the only time i thought it was more nimble.
Sizing is so personal and so, Personally for me... the Rail+ Large is a perfect fit(at a guess but i've orderd one)
A Horst link is also a Virtual Pivot design, but it's not a "VPP TM" design. Any bike that uses two links, connected to a member that the rear brake and axle are connected to is a 4 bar and a virtual pivot. VPP, Horst link, DW Link, the layouts that We Are One and Prime use, Breezers M link, and more all fall into that description, so we differentiate them by lower link length and the rotation of the links themselves. 4 bar or Horst typically means bikes with a long lower link, rear pivot close to the rear axle, and Co Rotating links, like the new SC, most specialized, Norcos, Transitions etc... Where "VPP TM" are two short links that counter rotate relative to each other. I am being pedantic.
So
Horst Link = Crab Link
Linkage Driven Single Pivot = Faux Crab Link
High Pivot = Spider Crab Link
Single Pivot = Rock Crab Link
VPP & DW = Blue crab Link
Hardtail = Lobster
6 bar = king crab
I’m well aware of the definition of these suspension designs. My question is more as to why is santa cruz refering to this horst link layout as four bar, when VPP is also technically “four bar”. I understand it’s probably because of patent/copyright/other legal nonsense but IMO it seems confusing to the consumer.
I for one welcome our new crustacean overlords.
TEAM CRAB
All hail TEAM ROBOT CRAB
I'd guess most consumers are not familiar with any of this.
SC has two very different looking bikes. If they were to call them both VPP or both four bar, that would be very confusing to your average buyer.
VPP has always been an exercise in branding of a specific type of four bar layout going back to the 90s.
https://mbaction.com/the-return-of-the-virtual-pivot-pointmay-15/
Re: SC Vala. Thing to keep in mind is a Horst Link specifically calls out the placement of the pivot as forward of and lower than the axle. SC's unit is forward and slightly above the axle, so it has a bit more in common with Rocky's old link circa 2013 (forgot the name, sorry) prior to the Horst patent expiring. That's all a long way of saying technically it isn't a true Horst link, but letting people blab about it as such makes it easier to discuss as a Horst is a known design. Bonus: it also stops the forums/comments from exploding with "IT'S A HORST LINK" if they did decide to call it something else. Bypass the BS and get straight to ride characteristics.
So... the new Altitude is using (Not actually) VPP and the new Vala is using Smooth link
Do we have to get upset with sizing everytime!?
Surely everyone here already knows what geometry numbers they prefer. So it's pointless worrying that your last bike was a M/L/XL.
The clothing industry hasn't been able to standardise sizing so the bike industry doesn't stand a chance in that respect.
That said it you're actually cool enough to be a proper Vital member you should be taking that size sticker off anyway!
you can, although, say that it's dumb to have 40mm reach difference between Medium and Large especially if an in between would be the number that fits most people according to statistics no?
I forget to check the site for a day and miss most of the biggest and most amusing thread derailment ever...
Anyway my contribution to this unholy mess is that, IMNSHO, faux-bar designs should be referred to as seafood extender, aka crab sticks.
To be entirely clear, I wasnt complaining about a size - I actually went out of my way to say its silly to say a “size” is wrong, its as I said earlier and zesty just repeated, its the gap between sizes in this case that is the problem. You say that all of us should know what we prefer and i would agree with you - but the real world problem is when someone who doesn’t know what they should be on rolls into their local trek dealer (that’s ran by track cyclist that have no care in the world for those dirt bag mtb riders that walk into the store!) and then they sell them on a bike that is either too big or too small, all because they fit perfectly into that trek sizing scale but the gap between sizes is hugggge! Each of those outcomes can have negative effects, especially for a “novice.” . Fast forward 3 weeks and you bump into them at the trail head, covered in elbow pads, sporting some nasty grazes, with 60mm of spacers under their stem to get that fitment just right. If there were smaller increments this issues wouldn’t be such an issue.
If you want to make a small with 550mm reach go for it! Just make sure there’s an extra extra small with a 475mm reach in the line up aswell.
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation