Thinking outside the box
- Thread starter al-irl
- Start date
Looks flexy
That is sweet. I'm surprised someone didn't think of this faster. Although only really useful in a slope style setting IMO for someone who wants a DJ frame with some cushion lol.
Last edited:
already some discussion here
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207991
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207991
hmmm interesting idea.
Last edited:
I think if Brittish media quotes an american, they should have to spell "tyre" with an "i" when they do it.
I have no real technical insight to add except for this: it looks like a good way to pinch inner thigh fat if you're not careful.
I wonder if you could pump up and down to propel yourself down the trail...
Interesting. I'd like to try it out since it looks like it might ride funny, but maybe it's the new big thing in jumping bikes. It is pretty clean for an FS bike, no linkages to get in the way.
Throw that thing in the trash Box.....
Is that Doc Brown?
it prolly rides similar to a cowan ds, looks like the same kinda bb pivot
Be carfeul with rabies. Get syringe soon and get well.
blast from the past - haven't seen your name around here in a long time! How's it going?
no thanks. Concentric BB and no top tube? It'll ride like an Arrow DS3 but with flex between the fork and rear wheel. Boo to that. They're just trying to think of more ways to take people's money...and seriously, if they're designing a custom prototype, why couldn't they design a chain tensioner into the wheel mounts???
they probably didn't incorporate the tensioners into the frame to save money and leave open a deraileur option
In the bike industry many many prototypes come from pre-existing frame parts.....
I know you're way ahead of cannondale's R&D department, but to name a few other stupid companies who adhere to this principal to save money(though you think it's an attempted rip off)....Santa cruz, intense, specialized, turner, trek....the list goes on, but you knew that....
Hey guy, I know you think I'm an idiot, and that's great and everything, but you're honestly going to tell me that cannondale engineered a completely new BB system, new attachments for their lefty fork, and welded in mounts on the top tube in two areas, BB in two areas, and didn't have time to integrate a sliding dropout, such as on the DNA or others? Cannondale doesn't exactly do "to save money" (see gemini, fulcrum concepts- the fulcrum took some ungodly number of HOURS of machining just to create the chainstay yoke). After re-reading the article, I see that it's Chase's design, so maybe he likes the option of either or, but one of the biggest benefits of a concentric is that you can run a single speed with no tensioner. Finally, if it rides like any of the lefties I've been on, it'll always have a little lateral play and a little dead space at top out....hmmm....
So the seat would move, right? That would be interesting. Definitely want to ride that, probably would never buy it though.
weather it rides well or not, i love super-simplified clean design; there's some real genius there in re-inventing the URT....for better or worse.
Really interesting.
Really interesting.
no.....that is the benefit of an ECCENTRIC bottom bracket.....concentric means the main pivot is concentric to( in other words revolving around) the bottom bracket.....
this bike doesn't have an eccentric bb therefore you need chain tensioners or adjustable chainstay length.......
all the aforementioned companies like pissing away money on R&D just like c-dale....all i'm saying is they also do make some attempts to save some dough here and there.....
Sorry, my wording is off. Yes, you need a chain tensioner, but there's no chain growth. So, unlike with the more common single pivot designs, once you set your (chainstay length, eccentric position, chain length, etc) that chain length never changes, so you don't need a chain tensioning device as you would on any other suspension bike (except for URTs).
Lateral play should be taken care of by the pivot, since it it not dependent on the "lefty" shock for its support through the travel, just damping. Top out, can't speak there, you must of just ridden a crap batch of lefty's. I personally think the suspension quality should be fine, any lefty or headshock i've ridden (i ride a headshok for XC) hasn't been like vivid or top notch suspension quality, no, but good enough for that application.
It's funny how the conventionalist will argue this design sux. I personally think that when a pro designs something crazy like this it usually works pretty well. Most usually don't get a clutter of crazy ideas like an engineer will and make something over complicated, they typically just design exactly what they need, and what works. It's definately one of the more aesthetically pleasing designs lately compared to most short link four bar designs. Would i want it for a bike in my stable? No probably not, I just don't have a need for a very slopestyle specific bike like this tho.
Last edited:
that looks like a great setup, wonder how it rides
Unless it comes with some tupe of anti-lawyer guard on the shock i do not see how it can see production in the USA. It is only a matter of time untill some Gomer flubs a move and tries to own a bike company for getting his testicals used as a wiper seal.
sweet, a shrinking TT that slackens the HA.
cool = Very!
practical = doubt it
cool = Very!
practical = doubt it
Maybe better put at teh Number of links neded never changes, but on most any single speeds we have coming in, as the chain wears, we are having to adjust the tension Via either Horizontal dropouts, or eccentric BB. So you still need some way to adjust the chain tension.
your just plain wrong... the HA wont change and the TT length will feel the same throughout the travel. because if you actually look at the bike the downtube is solid witht the bb and the headtube, so your effective TT length will stay constant. and that big gusset between the TT and DT at the headtube keeps the HA constant. your just wrong man