You're right. It is time she came out again.Nice bike, but I thought girly pictures were going to be here. Oh well
there's a 200mm version too...Looks kinda nice but 240mm of linear travel? I thought only VPP bikes were still using ****loads of travel for dh while other companies found out that extra travel doesn't mean good.
The 200mm version would be good if it had it's own geo not the same designed for a bike with 40mm more. Lower the BB by 5-11mm as 31mm rise isn't low by any standard. Especialy on a 200mm bike.
All that said I must admit the frame looks nice and the mrp g2 direct mount may be an interesting idea even though it limits the choice.
any info on the price?
Uhh you are Faaaaaaaaar from the truth. 16mm gives real bb height of 14.1''. This is 15mm more so 0.6'' more. 14.7'' is not good.+31 mm = wheelaxle (26"/2) + 31 mm = 361 mm = 14,2 " (without tyres)
It probably depends on the differance between lower handlebar vs higher bb. Also not everybody apparently rides front heavy (though most).what is more important, a absolute low bb or a certain stack height (vertical distance between bb and top of head tube)
If a slightly higher bb in combination with a certain handlebar height would give you a better position on the bike then that would be preferable over a lower bb, or not?
What would be the benifit of a low bb? lower CoG?
http://www.propain-bikes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=115&Itemid=40My question is how are they getting around the VPP patent?
I'm rather shocked with the 200mm version and that geo. The beast with only 10mm less travel has the cog quite low but it probably runs on smaller % of sag. It may not be extremely high. Just not that great. The thing that interests me is that if the thing by any chance sags close to the v10 it means that it's crazy slack at 2deg slacker HA. But I shouldn't complain. Maybe it rides okay. Simply I ride on a bike that is at 29-31mm(adjustable) and 10mm less travell and the Cog doesn't feel that low.14.7 is about the same as a V10, and while not low low low, it's certainly World Cup caliber. And considering they use the same type of suspension and lotsa sag, I'm surprised folks are complaining...
My question is how are they getting around the VPP patent?
Sorry, I might be missing something but I didn't see anything in that link which says how they are getting around the VPP patent?
Ahhh, you're right. I would have thought that SC would have patented all shock configurations, but according to the patent (http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6488301/claims.html) it only covers designs where the shock is compressed between the lower link and front frame.They're driving the shock off of the link, the vpp patent does not do that.