It was like : holy shit, the shock is trying to move the rear triangle and 80 pounds of linkages with all kinds of bearing drag and play. Seriously, look at Kona, Trek and others. You don't have to make a freaking single pivot bike with a linkage that complicated, Scott just seems to do it because they have no freaking clue how to design a FS bike. Similar to cannondale. Throwing **** against the wall to see what sticks. Yes, I've DHed it and other Scott bikes.
Prototype Canyon DH Bike
- Thread starter peecee
- Start date
@Jm_ Freaking hilarious. Can you count? How many pivot points has for example Trek, Kona or Specialized on the rear end and how many has the Gambler? Or the Nukeproof, Madison Saracen or even the Evil Undead if you want to talk linkage driven singlepivots?
Regarding the air shock it might seem to be a sizing problem. With 241mm (Canyon!?) and 267mm (Scott) of shock length you get a gigantic air chamber which might increase the air-spring typical low midstroke support.
A lot of people are raving about the Float X2 in trail bikes. On DH-bikes? Not so much.
But companys want to sell their bikes so they eqip them with the fanciest stuff available, which at the moment is an air spring shock or in Specializeds case the Öhlins.
@HAB , in which bikes did you ride it?
Regarding the air shock it might seem to be a sizing problem. With 241mm (Canyon!?) and 267mm (Scott) of shock length you get a gigantic air chamber which might increase the air-spring typical low midstroke support.
A lot of people are raving about the Float X2 in trail bikes. On DH-bikes? Not so much.
But companys want to sell their bikes so they eqip them with the fanciest stuff available, which at the moment is an air spring shock or in Specializeds case the Öhlins.
@HAB , in which bikes did you ride it?
I just love the annual "well we designed an air-shock that just feels like a coil".... then a few months later "well its not exactly like a coil we have to work out some issues..."
Also gambler doesn't seem to work with some shocks or why do they constantly have to tweak the linkage?
Also gambler doesn't seem to work with some shocks or why do they constantly have to tweak the linkage?
I never said it had more pivots, it's just overly complicated because it requires more material (metal, carbon, etc.) to operate that rear shock. Lots of unsprung weight, dead feeling suspension, poor sensitivity, etc. A simpler frame configuration can save weight, increase strength, and work as good or better in the suspension department IMO.
Swingarm + swinglink + driver link, just like 90% of the bikes made.
You're not allowed to ever defend a knolly again
You're not allowed to ever defend a knolly again
Knolly: Giving you twice the links and bearings in a linkage for the same price since 2003.Swingarm + swinglink + driver link, just like 90% of the bikes made.
You're not allowed to ever defend a knolly again
Does anyone have any concrete info about how linear it is? Old CCDB linear? I thought there no longer are frames that require a progressive shock to work well so I'm surprised people have problems with bottoming out when they run something supposedly linear and not degressive
As it stands the Gambler is fairly linear. Maybe they are experimenting with more progressive curves?
Which by the way Specialized is doing on all their pro bikes btw since two years.
Why not? The Gambler has now a carbon rear end and it seems as the reach got 15mm longer aswell. Look at it in the pitbit gallery on vital.
I'm kind of intrigued for the high CS pivot. In the same school of Rocky Mountain, but a bit higher.
the new canyons look amazing. I like the torque as well. Zero need for one, but a clean looking bike.
Definitely sick bike! What I find interesting is the missing (MX)link (ha!), which they got rid of at the AL version. I find that actually pretty cool as the bushings seem to be prone for developing play.
Can someone in here compare the CF and AL version on linkage? Very interested what difference it makes.
Can someone in here compare the CF and AL version on linkage? Very interested what difference it makes.
It's supposedly more progressive too. I could see them dropping the mx link in the future on the carbon bike for weight, cost and durability reasons.
I had actually the same thoughts. Possibly in the same area as the YT Tues regarding progression as it is a comparable setup now.