DH bikes just feel more stable and solid in the upper 30s lower 40s range to me.
This thing would make a great really long travel slalom bike. I have to admit, it is a nice looking ride but I am curious to see how well it holds up.
I agree to an extent but I had a V10 around 35lbs and it rode great.I'm in this camp ^^^^
Assuming this bike doesn't even break I think it would be handful on most tracks. I had a Can Diggle that I built up around 35lbs and it was too light for me. I even set up the suspension really soft and I still had a hard time when things got really fast and rough. Granted, a lot of this could also have to do with skill, or my lack of, but I immediately got more comfortable and confident when I went back to a proper DH build. DH bikes just feel more stable and solid in the upper 30s lower 40s range to me.
This thing would make a great really long travel slalom bike. I have to admit, it is a nice looking ride but I am curious to see how well it holds up.
why? with loctite on them, they are no differentUsing the Ti bolts on the rotors is a bit sketchy tho.
He must prefer running 3 steel bolts insteadwhy? with loctite on them, they are no different
Agreed. People would just need to set their suspension up totally differently for a bike like this, and it would feel different. Which people would automatically equate with "unstable" but would probably not be true (I think). The bike might have a higher COG with a rider on it though, so THAT mike make it more unstable? I'm just guessing here though.Physics does not agree with you. Find a race discipline (with both turning and stopping involved) where less weight is not a goal. Reliability is really the only thing that puts a lower limit on weight, and riding smooth helps keep that number lower.
I'd rock a sub 30lb 8" travel dh bike if the geo worked for me and it stayed in one piece.
That's because you set it up, well, really soft. For fast rough stuff (especially if its steep) you want it set up stiff. Or at the very least, a stiff fork. Undersprung forks seem to be the number 1 cause of a bike feeling unstable at in fast/rough stuff IME. They sit too low in the travel, and dive a lot more. I've done a lot of experimenting with my 66 ata lately and the change in how fast I can comfortably ride when I go from like 70-80 psi to 100ish is actualy quite noticeable. Again, especially if its steep, or in rock chutes.I even set up the suspension really soft and I still had a hard time when things got really fast and rough.
So my bike should be 80 lbs as Im 230!I don't see why everyone is so up in arms about "insert fancy term for being to light" the bike is usually around 2/3rd's of the rider weight, aside from durability I don't see how this will affect the way it tracks over the ground. If anything it would make it easier to fly over nasty sections and put it back down where you want.
woah, nice reaction there guy. I got the ratio a bit off there but i suck at the sciences.So my bike should be 80 lbs as Im 230!
What are you talking about 2/3rds LOL I must have missed the weight ratio in the general riding manuals and overall DH build etiqute handbook... LOL
I had a 35lb bike and yes it held up to abuse and was reliable BUT it got bounced all over on nastier terrain and rock chutes to the point it wasnt worth it.37-38 for me is right in the sweet spot.woah, nice reaction there guy. I got the ratio a bit off there but i suck at the sciences.
Yep, like riding it off road. We all though the 951 pics looked pretty bad, wait until these things start snapping left & right.Props to the builder.
But, I bet it's difficult to ride in certain situations...
I plead stupidity and dont want to be on to something, If I have a normal thought and the wife finds out Im screwed Ill be expected to do stuff!I'm sure you are on to something, there must be some reason that on most of the wc tracks all of the heavy hitters are running bikes in that 17-18kg range.
Really! I dont think deflection has anything to do with structural integrity directly, as its a motion caused by an action or ie newtons law for every action theres an opposite and equal reaction. A lighter object will infact have more movement as it takes less to get it moving = more rider correction to compensate!The only thing that would make a bike deflect would be lack of structural integrity. ie: the parts you were using weren't strong enough for you. Extra weight at equal strength only causes additional fatigue.
Ya, it's because they'd destroy lighter bikes, even before they're done with one run. People always seem to underestimate how brutally punishing on the bike that one run of saw Mt. Sainte Anne would be under rennie or kovarik or Hannah or someone like that.I'm sure you are on to something, there must be some reason that on most of the wc tracks all of the heavy hitters are running bikes in that 17-18kg range.
Thats a good write up Im impressed with the complete coverage!In the article below Cam McRae said his fastest laps were on the 33 lb Session Trek built for demo/show.
http://www.nsmb.com/2511-trek-session-88/
Is the rear mech now lighter then if you would have used the cage of a Saint short mech(What I did)?karpi: I'll see if I get the time to weigh it later this week, I'll send you a pm.
Jon: Thanks, and I'm sorry I left out the 14 gram cs protector.
Mårten: Sure thing!
Gary: I simply shaved some weight off the LG1+, same thing with the shifter and I also made the derraileur a shortcage. Here's a few pics for you (alu/ti bolts missing in the last two pics).
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/682/lg1110.jpg
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/1148/20100128028.jpg
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/4981/20091107619.jpg
Yup, this is true. My experience could be a combination of different things and also rider preference. It is somewhat counter intuitive. One would think a lighter bike is easier to manage and some cases it is (or for some people it is). I just never felt stable at high speeds and in the rough. I also felt that braking was less controlled as I tended to skid or bounce around a bit more. I could probably learn how to ride it better just as I have learned how to turn and jump a heavier bike. That is also why I mentioned that one major exception in my previous note: My skillz.Physics does not agree with you. Find a race discipline (with both turning and stopping involved) where less weight is not a goal. Reliability is really the only thing that puts a lower limit on weight, and riding smooth helps keep that number lower.
I'd rock a sub 30lb 8" travel dh bike if the geo worked for me and it stayed in one piece.
Because Ti bolts under shear force is a huge no no. Its not a function of adding loctite, but understanding material properties.why? with loctite on them, they are no different
so since Marzocchi sold me a fork with Ti hardware, then i should be in trouble and possibly looking at a lawsuit against them?I don't know if the OP is still reading this thread, but for your safety I would strongly recommend going to normal torx bolts on your rotors, and would also recommend the same for your stem to crown bolts which also experience cyclic shear loads.
i've been using ti rotor bolts for years, w/ no issues. got a couple sets of the stock avid ti bolts currently; you think they'd supply them if there were any shear concerns?Because Ti bolts under shear force is a huge no no. Its not a function of adding loctite, but understanding material properties.
Honestly, I could care less how light bike is, but for those pushing the limit, please don't blindly add lighter components or fasteners without fully understanding how they mechanically function.
I don't know if the OP is still reading this thread, but for your safety I would strongly recommend going to normal torx bolts on your rotors, and would also recommend the same for your stem to crown bolts which also experience cyclic shear loads.
To Inclag and OP: Ti bolts will be just fine on your rotors. I don't want to argue with you Inclag, and I have no point in saying this other than just to set the record straight in case anyone else is worried about their bike. And if you want to ask for references fine... I can PM them to you.Because Ti bolts under shear force is a huge no no. Its not a function of adding loctite, but understanding material properties.
Honestly, I could care less how light someones bike is, but for those pushing the limit, please don't blindly add lighter components or fasteners without fully understanding how they mechanically function.
I don't know if the OP is still reading this thread, but for your safety I would strongly recommend going to normal torx bolts on your rotors, and would also recommend the same for your stem to crown bolts which also experience cyclic shear loads.
Sweet thanks! How did you cut your shifter? Did u just use a dremel? or do those come like that? What about the wholes on the chain guide? Its real cool that you took the next step forward into modifing the pieces on your bike, a couple of grams here and there add up. Have you though about putting some holes on the seat tube? that works too. I think I've seen some lighter pedals around, don't the Ultra Mags weigh like 320? There were a couple that went down to 250 or so (crazy light). Last but not least, what about stripping the paint? I dont think that trek has very think paint anyways, but wouldnt it at leas save you a 150-300 hundred grams? It reminds me of the 14 kg Session 88 trek build when they launched the bike, Nico Vinks bike...karpi: I'll see if I get the time to weigh it later this week, I'll send you a pm.
Jon: Thanks, and I'm sorry I left out the 14 gram cs protector.
Mårten: Sure thing!
Gary: I simply shaved some weight off the LG1+, same thing with the shifter and I also made the derraileur a shortcage. Here's a few pics for you (alu/ti bolts missing in the last two pics).
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/682/lg1110.jpg
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/1148/20100128028.jpg
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/4981/20091107619.jpg