Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Downhill & Freeride' started by mtg, Jun 20, 2012.
What makes you think I won't *ALSO* have a Yeti DH bike?
Please register to disable this ad.
yo, sucker. what up?
BUMP: for liking to support the small builders and wondering if the 6Fiddy-b proto is already in production? Small builder staying ahead of the times? We all have about.... what?.... 2 years of 26 left?
650b regardless, how are things going over there?
Sammich.... You're actually going to look as if you've known what you were talking about.... pushing for 29" DH all of this time.... Well.... something other than 26" anyway.... ;-)
I'm excited to see another micro-brew frame company get off the ground. If they mess with 650b that's cool, if they don't I still wish them the best. I still also wish the pivot were up higher, but since I'm not in the market for a frame, what I say don't matter...I think 650b is just right for a trail bike, and I think it could work for DH, but I think most riders (myself included) would be pretty happy on 26 for a while. I just don't think 26 is going anywhere for a long time, so people don't need to become DHFoarders.
Wait a minute.... was thinking that you were the one who's been pushing for big wheels all along?
I think there's merit but I don't think everybody needs to be on them. Had a 29er FS, liked it at first then hated it, had a HT 29er, liked it a lot but wanted FS, went to 650b on a Cannondale Rush, and I like it a lot. I ride 26er on my DH bike, but I'd love to experiment with 650b on it just to see what it's like. I don't think you can make 29" wheels and long travel play nice together. I think about 3" is the limit, though I would love to try a Devinci Atlas. I think a small company would do well to stay ahead of the curve with a 650b DH bike (seriously, who bought a lenz downhill bike in the last 10 years except for their 29er DH bike?) but I think it's idiotic to say 26" wheels are dead.
Thanks for checking in.
We've been busy- finished the first half of the Beta frames, and those have been riding dirt for a week or two while we're finishing off the second half of the Betas. The one below went to a friend in Bellingham- it looked even better in person than in the pics. He has since de-stickered the fork and rims, and it looks ridiculous.
We also just announced production pricing and details yesterday: $1995 for the frame with Fox Vanilla RC shock.
Buy a GG/DH
As far as other wheel sizes, we haven't experimented yet. I love to nerd out on this stuff, so I'm sure we will experiment with wheel sizes down the road. None of our suppliers have said a word about 26" wheels or tires tapering off at all, and that would really be the main motivator for change at this point. If there's a clear advantage that outweighs the disadvantages, we'll use it.
Sammich, you need to ride one of these. No, I'm sure it won't eat rocks like a super high pivot, but everybody that's ridden one has come back with a big smile.
I love all black builds.....
I'd love to ride one! Just send it on over
anticipating the arrival of my new brap-mo-bile later this month...
I was wondering if you were going to replace the Sunday with a DW Turner like SylentK did or go local.
I saw a short travel bike on facebook or sumtin a while ago...
any more info?
Inside Guerrilla Gravity's Denver Headquarters, Plus a Sneak Peek of the New Megatrail All-Mountain Bike
Yep, we're prototyping the Megatrail now. We see it being used as a "one bike" for a lot of riders, used for racing in the e-word events, and a "downhiller's trail bike". The geometry is low, slack and still has a roomy cockpit with a short stem. There's also some things we are prototyping in the suspension that we're pretty excited about.
Here's the 25" TT, 27.5" wheel version:
What kind of numbrrs for megatrail? Material?
Megatrail is a good name...
Upon first glance at this thread, I thought the name was Megatroll.
I dunno... Nukeproof have the MegaTR
I agree, made me think (positively) of:
The Megatroll is the version that's designed to ride purely on the internet
Anyway, here's some numbers, which may or may not be tweaked going into production:
BB: 13.2", 335mm
Head Angle: 66.5º
Chainstay: 16.8", 427mm / 17.3", 439mm
ETT: 24"/25"/26"; 609/635/660mm
150mm travel rear, designed for 160mm travel forks. Both 26" and 27.5" can be accommodated, with the front and rear triangles being slightly different for each wheelsize.
Reach? That matters a lot more on an aggressive trail bike than TT or ETT.
huge top tubes, those are like L/XL/XXL
I'm 5'8 and generally ride mediums, and 23" is right at the limit of comfortable length with a 50mm stem.
a lot of medium type people are going with small on bikes like SB66 with these ginormous TT's. long TT makes it way harder to bunnyhop and the bike feels less flickable. I'm a bmxer though so take all that with a grain of salt.
Long top tubes make it hard for girlie men to ride. Long top tubes make it a man's bike. If RV can throw around a 230 pound kx450...
But seriously, if that thing has a reach of 19.25"+ and a seat tube of 23"+ then TAKE MY MONEY
The Megatroll sounds tight
Head Angle: 62.0, angleset compatible but only slacker
Chainstay: 15.9", compatible only with worn maxxis dhr2 exo run tubeless on xc rims
150mm travel rear, requires a special custom yoke for each shock available on the market(but only make it compatible with the ccdb), designed for only the new rs pike. Only 26 compatible, because you can't Canadian flick a 29er as well. Make another enduro compatible version in 27.5 (not 650b).
Ha ha ^^^. The Megatroll also uses 595A size wheels. 27.5" is soo 2014. And, the chainstay is -15.9"; rear wheel is in front of the BB for maximum flickability.
As far as length, that wasn't something that was decided lightly. And trust me, there were plenty of times I thought "that sounds long", but every time I dug into it, it reinforced the idea of going longer. That being said, that's what prototypes are for. If sizing needs to be adjusted, it will be.
Don't forget, it needs a "futuristic" BB30 bottom tube.
mtg and GG make legit downhill frames.
I'm very interested to see how this trail bike turns out.
you gotta be cutting edge bro, don't even bother with bearings. Just punch the spindle through with a small amount of grease. It's lighter than bearings and it'll be stiffer since there's no balls to crush. might work better with carbonz though.
better come up with a new headtube standard too. Reverse tapered, allows for more head angle adjustment.
KHE Affix. Bushing BB system. really only for flatland, but i think there were a few other companies experimenting with a similar configuration for other bmx applications.
Macneil had some rubber bottom bracket bearing cups that never really saw the light of day IIRC (maybe it was a joke?). You know, for the shockzors. Seemed like the perfect bottom bracket for dropping chains and smashing nards... Ooohhhh hey, maybe there is a need for these in the fixie market?
i remember seeing the mcneil setup, but someone else was messing with it. the setup was a machined bushing cup that threaded into the frame, and the bushings were pressed into that. it was being tested but i guess never made it to production.
this reminds me of other crazy stuff that's come from the bmx world... like cobra tubes
Would it not be possible (and better) to make the rear triangle available to take both 26 and 27.5 wheels by using a different set of dropouts? Makes it moar future proof and means people can hedge their bets but also move stuff over from an old 26 frame but have the option of running 27.5 in the future when/if they feel like it.
that's a great setup, but to jonkranked, threads are SOOOOOOOOOOOO 1996. The future is mallets and chisels/specialty tools that cost $75 each and only fit a specific manufacturer without fcking up the cups you're pressing out. Actually, this would be a great way to introduce some forced obsolescence via bushings that fall apart when removed!
I agree that you probably should leave the FT alone and just mess with the rear triangle for wheel swapability, but I also commend you for realizing that simply swapping the larger wheelsize in or cramming it in via dropouts and losing clearance is a bad idea.
Good question. Yes it would be convenient, but there is a trade off for that convenience, which is additional cost, weight and/or flex. We heavily considered making an adjustment that could take either wheel size in the rear (heh heh), but based on experience with the GG/DH, even on a DH race bike, most people are the set and forget type. Rarely do people adjust chainstay length or BB/HA. Granted, a wheel size adjustment is more of a compatibility topic than a performance adjustment, but we ultimately realized that the vast majority of people are going to pick a wheel size and stick with it (and be a d!ck about it) vs actually switching during the ownership of the frame.
Another way to put it, I pose the question: how much additional $$ would you be willing to pay for an adjustment vs a fixed rear triangle?
FYI, the difference in the front triangles between 26" and 27.5" is where the bottom of the HT surface lies. That bottom surface goes up for the taller 27.5" setup/ down for the shorter 26" setup to keep the geometry where it's supposed to be.
My personal feeling at the moment is one of unwillingness, I'm looking at different frames and 26ers are calling to me as I can swap wheels and possible a fork, I know how a 26er will handle but I'm not sure whether 27.5 is going to take off. (I don't want to buy a bike that may be obsolete in a year or so, unlikely but hey, who knows....) I'd like to give 27.5 a try and feel there may be an advantage but also know my 29er race bike ain't as fast on the gnar twisty shiz as my my 26er but it's def faster over the journey.
So yeah, a frame capable of both would def be closer to ideal. What's the difference in headtube length between 26 and 27.5? Would a larger external headset cup not do the same job?
Making dedicated front/rear triangles for each wheel size is infinitely more appealing to me. I'm not a fan of the band-aid approach to adapting for different wheel sizes and the compromises that go along with it.