Quantcast

And Devinci Enters the World of Carbon DH

Sandwich

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
22,138
7,405
borcester rhymes
norbar said:
We had this discussion before with examples here on RM and the high end stuff is actually cheaper. Only recently we have a new fashion of super expensive new stuff like bos rare, dorado carbon etc.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Top end stuff is cheaper than top end stuff in 96. I still can't wrap my head around $4500 worth of carbon being cheaper than $3600 of DW-linked turnerness a year ago.

norbar said:
As for the why companies go with carbon now. Imho it is 2 things that are kinda connected. First is that FEA wasn't used in the biking community from the start. From what I remember it is quite new and doing carbon without it is a bit silly. People started designing bikes instead of guessing and made more and more carbon bikes for the low end disciplines. They gradually went up the "hardcore" scale from xc to dh just to be cautious. Not to mention DH is getting more and more popular now and am/enduro exploded so it makes sense to make more carbon bikes for dh and enduro than in the thinner years.
Click to expand...
Maybe not from the start, but I'd have a real hard time believing that FEA of some degree wasn't done on the Trek Y bike from 96, the GT LTS Thermoplastic in 97, or even the Kestrel Rubicon of 96. Back then, making the mold investment for those bikes was probably even more significant than it is now, and I'm sure companies didn't want EVERY frame to break. Plus, I'm certain DW has ton a metric butt-ton of FEA on every single one of his frames...the Sunday in 05 and even the work he did on the SGS before that. I'm sure the process is more refined now and carbon frames are better than they were, but I just can't understand why they were not continuously developed and released if the material is just so much better than aluminum.

To the last point, most of the manufacturers I have a beef with- the Devincis and the evils, have less experience than GT or Trek with their carbon process. Perhaps less so with devinci, but Trek releasing a carbon frame is a no brainer. And santa cruz simply broke the mold (no pun intended) by releasing a carbon DH bike. I just shudder to see everybody jumping on board without the background that Trek or others have in carbon work.

dropmachine.com said:
Rubbish. I rode that boat at Bromont and it cracked in a corner.
Click to expand...
was it a 3g corner?
 
Inclag

Inclag

Turbo Monkey
Sep 9, 2001
2,782
466
MA
thad said:
BCD made some really cool bikes, but you can't compare his garage process to the processes used by Trek, Spec, Giant, Hodaka. BCD was doing wet lay up, foam core, vacuum bagging, in an old oven. Comparing that to a prepreg layup, female mold, with air bladder and auto clave, is like comparing a garage built 4130 bike, using a grinder and file for mitering, a MIG welder and a plywood jig, to a modern aluminum bike, with hydroformed tubes, precision mitering, tig welding, quality jigs, and heat-treating.

BCD made cool project bikes, but nowhere near the quality of high end production bikes these days.
Click to expand...
I agree with your points, however my initial comment was more or less a blunt statement for the xenophobes that scoff at Asian manufacturing or somehow think that manufacturing carbon bike frames is some sort of voodoo magic that only NASA folk could possibly accomplish.
 
norbar

norbar

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause
Jun 7, 2007
11,520
1,738
Warsaw :/
Sandwich said:
Fair enough. Top end stuff is cheaper than top end stuff in 96. I still can't wrap my head around $4500 worth of carbon being cheaper than $3600 of DW-linked turnerness a year ago.
Click to expand...
I know it is silly but I think that is has to do more with price positioning than real cost. Make a really really expensive bike for the kids to dream about so it is a bit of a poster bike for the company


Sandwich said:
Maybe not from the start, but I'd have a real hard time believing that FEA of some degree wasn't done on the Trek Y bike from 96, the GT LTS Thermoplastic in 97, or even the Kestrel Rubicon of 96. Back then, making the mold investment for those bikes was probably even more significant than it is now, and I'm sure companies didn't want EVERY frame to break. Plus, I'm certain DW has ton a metric butt-ton of FEA on every single one of his frames...the Sunday in 05 and even the work he did on the SGS before that. I'm sure the process is more refined now and carbon frames are better than they were, but I just can't understand why they were not continuously developed and released if the material is just so much better than aluminum.

To the last point, most of the manufacturers I have a beef with- the Devincis and the evils, have less experience than GT or Trek with their carbon process. Perhaps less so with devinci, but Trek releasing a carbon frame is a no brainer. And santa cruz simply broke the mold (no pun intended) by releasing a carbon DH bike. I just shudder to see everybody jumping on board without the background that Trek or others have in carbon work.
Click to expand...
I dont have exact data but look at the advances in aluminium dh frames in the last 5 years. I would really want to someone from the industry to comment on that. I know about Dave but I remember him claiming he was one of the first few to use or at least use it so much.

As for GT and FEA - I dont know if they have been using it but isnt the Fury their first bike without durability issues from a LONG LONG time?
 
joeg

joeg

I have some obvious biases
Jul 20, 2011
202
148
Santa Cruz CA
When the Syndicate and CG started racing the carbon V10 last year, SCB was pretty honest about why we didn't make a carbon swingarm at that time. We thought we'd end up with something that didn't save much more than 100grams, and didn't think we'd end up with increased strength or stiffness based on what we knew at the time.
At that point, we'd developed swingarms for the Blur XC, Blur LTc, Tallboyc, and Nomadc. We knew for sure that it would cost a lot more money than the aluminum swingarm. As the first lightweight carbon DH frame, we wanted DH riders to embrace the material despite concerns about toughness, and we had a ZERO failure threshold on front triangles as the goal. When released, we included an angleset and kept the frame price the same as the previous revision.

Since then (even before actually), Roskopp has been relentless about making a carbon swingarm. Rob is passionate about pushing the limit for racing equipment and so eventually we came up with a plan to get there - using a new technology and method. The V10 carbon swingarm project is us trying to figure out how to push the envelope - not just make things in carbon for the sake of it. Its a lot of work for a small engineering team to do tooling design and fabrication for something like that. Luckily we have some talented and smart people who embrace challenges that work here. Our friends at ENVE supported us in a huge way with their advanced composites and manufacturing knowledge, and helped figure out a new way to get a swingarm that is lighter, stiffer and stronger. The impact resistance of their specific process (same as they developed over the past two years for the DH rims) is insane. The ENVE people all agreed in the weeks after we delivered the first set of molds: "this is the hardest project we've ever worked on by far". For those not aware, the development teame there have worked on medical, automotive, aerospace, as well as sporting goods.
We're still working on the swingarm project - its far from a finished design (similar to how SCB and ENVE used the Syndicate to develop previous models and DH rims), and will continue to do so through next year's racing season. One issue now is that those swingarms the Syndicate is racing cost at least 20 grand apiece. We have thousands of man-hours and tens of thousands of dollars into the six race swingarms made, we tested and destroyed more in our test-lab than were made to ride. (i did manage to sneak one onto my bike though haha).

This is not a conspiracy, we are developing the technology, and trying hard to make carbon frames that are true performance upgrades from metal. I'm a skeptical person myself, so I understand the distrust - but I suggest you demo some of the bikes to get convinced. While I've been to some ghettotech factories that make composites for other companies in ways that are unspeakable and result in poor performance and durability (but cost much less) - what is true is that developing carbon frames the way that Santa Cruz does is much much more expensive than their aluminum counterparts. This goes not only for expensive tooling involved, but also testing and development costs are much higher, and the finished product is also more. Our current carbon frames cost more than our past US made aluminum frames. They are also stronger, stiffer, more durable, easier to service, have closer tolerances, arrive on time and more fun to ride.

For the next couple years I'll probably be trying to figure out how to make a DH carbon swingarm at a significantly lighter weight that can handle east coast rox but not cost a fortune so we can use if for V10. We'll also apply that technology to our other carbon models as well. I guarantee it'll cost more than the aluminum one though. Funny how that works. Of course, spending lots of time and money to improve things might be part of the conspiracy.
 
Last edited:
Dogboy

Dogboy

Turbo Monkey
Apr 12, 2004
3,221
646
Durham, NC
xy9ine said:
yeah! in carbon! i want me a slammed edition sb66c with numbers like that. with a single ring 9t drivetrain. a 30-ish lb rip sh1t up mini fun bike.
Click to expand...
It would be a good chunk lighter than 30lbs for sure, probably closer to 26-27. The HA with a 160mm fork would be close, but the BB would be a fair bit higher. Sub-13" BB for a 6" travel bike just seems a bit silly (to me). I've had bikes in that travel range with BB heights from 13.25-14" and 13.5" seemed like the sweet spot (to me). My 4" travel XC bike has a sub-13" BB and it feels just right for that amount of travel. Have you spent any time on a dropper post? To me it makes far, far more difference than splitting hairs over 1/4" of BB change.
 
Kevin

Kevin

Turbo Monkey
Sep 6, 2004
4,540
1,007
In Holland sticking my finger in a dike...
joeg said:
When the Syndicate and CG started racing the carbon V10 last year, SCB was pretty honest about why we didn't make a carbon swingarm at that time. We thought we'd end up with something that didn't save much more than 100grams, and didn't think we'd end up with increased strength or stiffness based on what we knew at the time.
At that point, we'd developed swingarms for the Blur XC, Blur LTc, Tallboyc, and Nomadc. We knew for sure that it would cost a lot more money than the aluminum swingarm. As the first lightweight carbon DH frame, we wanted DH riders to embrace the material despite concerns about toughness, and we had a ZERO failure threshold on front triangles as the goal. When released, we included an angleset and kept the frame price the same as the previous revision.

Since then (even before actually), Roskopp has been relentless about making a carbon swingarm. Rob is passionate about pushing the limit for racing equipment and so eventually we came up with a plan to get there - using a new technology and method. The V10 carbon swingarm project is us trying to figure out how to push the envelope - not just make things in carbon for the sake of it. Its a lot of work for a small engineering team to do tooling design and fabrication for something like that. Luckily we have some talented and smart people who embrace challenges that work here. Our friends at ENVE supported us in a huge way with their advanced composites and manufacturing knowledge, and helped figure out a new way to get a swingarm that is lighter, stiffer and stronger. The impact resistance of their specific process (same as they developed over the past two years for the DH rims) is insane. The ENVE people all agreed in the weeks after we delivered the first set of molds: "this is the hardest project we've ever worked on by far". For those not aware, the development teame there have worked on medical, automotive, aerospace, as well as sporting goods.
We're still working on the swingarm project - its far from a finished design (similar to how SCB and ENVE used the Syndicate to develop previous models and DH rims), and will continue to do so through next year's racing season. One issue now is that those swingarms the Syndicate is racing cost at least 20 grand apiece. We have thousands of man-hours and tens of thousands of dollars into the six race swingarms made, we tested and destroyed more in our test-lab than were made to ride. (i did manage to sneak one onto my bike though haha).

This is not a conspiracy, we are developing the technology, and trying hard to make carbon frames that are true performance upgrades from metal. I'm a skeptical person myself, so I understand the distrust - but I suggest you demo some of the bikes to get convinced. While I've been to some ghettotech factories that make composites for other companies in ways that are unspeakable and result in poor performance and durability (but cost much less) - what is true is that developing carbon frames the way that Santa Cruz does is much much more expensive than their aluminum counterparts. This goes not only for expensive tooling involved, but also testing and development costs are much higher, and the finished product is also more. Our current carbon frames cost more than our past US made aluminum frames. They are also stronger, stiffer, more durable, easier to service, have closer tolerances, arrive on time and more fun to ride.

For the next couple years I'll probably be trying to figure out how to make a DH carbon swingarm at a significantly lighter weight that can handle east coast rox but not cost a fortune so we can use if for V10. We'll also apply that technology to our other carbon models as well. I guarantee it'll cost more than the aluminum one though. Funny how that works. Of course, spending lots of time and money to improve things might be part of the conspiracy.
Click to expand...
Post more of this.
Ive allmost convinced myself to sell my alu v10 and go Carbon... :D
 
D

dw

Wiffle Ball ninja
Sep 10, 2001
2,943
0
MV
The seatstay is carbon. I've been testing one for months. It was designed to increase vertical stiffness moreso than lateral stiffness. There is a significant vertical stiffness increase at bottomout, and some lateral stiffness increase as well. It is also lighter and looks better in my opinion. It will be a production part moving forward. One thing that those who have followed Devinci over the years know is that they make incremental improvements to their bikes each year as they see fit.

Love all the speculation, although I only scanned up to page 1.

Dave
 
E

ekimox

Monkey
Jun 17, 2009
102
0
Dave, could you please explain the sizing of the Devinci's? There has been a lot of speculation on here about sizes posted online, in catalogs, etc. With their 2012 website up a running they have sizes that are posted larger than they were last year and seem to be identical to what the catalog sizes were last year as well. I understand they added an XL for 2011.

What's the deal? Have they made the frames a little larger this year (fingers crossed) or was there a discrepancy between the 2011 and 2012 numbers? My only issue with the Wilson is that the 2011 large fits pretty small. I haven't tried the XL yet.

Thanks for your help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom