[Honus]

Has anyone ever seen this Solstice?
http://www.ridesolstice.com

I'll see if I can get a bigger pic from the magazine.

While I don't really care for the appearance it's an interesting design. I'd be curious to see how well the front derailleur works since it's mounted to the upper swingarm. The article in the latest issue of Mountain Flyer (#20) mentioned the swingarm sections were cold forged 6061 -bet that wasn't cheap to produce.

Medium frame specs are:
23.3 TT
17.1 CS
14.1/13.6 BB and 66/67 head angle -adjustable via lower link
160mm travel
7.25 lb.
$1700 retail cost

 

[time-bomb]

Great price assuming the frame is good. The rear shock looks like it might be a bit of a mud catcher but I like the low CG and it looks like rear end would be pretty stiff. Moar pics?

the link doesn't seem to working for me

link works fine on my computer at home

 

[time-bomb]

Here's a link to a little more info a few pictures of the bike built up:

http://www.bikerumor.com/2011/03/18/solstice-mountain-bikes-inverted-4-bar-suspension-bikes-made-to-ride-it-all/

 

[Pslide]

I must admit, that shock actuation is a befuddling. I'm thinking it's ultra progressive. It gets good comments in the bike rumor link. I kinda like it. Great to see something fresh.

Better picture of the bike:

 

[xy9ine]

i like the compact, low cg industrial aesthetic of the rear assembly. pair that with a svelte, less noodly front triangle and it might be pretty rad. looking, that is.

 

[MinorThreat]

Chuck Dunlap, the suspension's inventor explains the design (with some decent close-ups and too much B-roll):

 

[OGRipper]

Pretty groovy and fresh approach.

Am I the only one who thinks that lower link will get smashed thoroughly on rocky trails?

 

[mattmatt86]

But who owns the patent?

 

[Steve M]

Looks like FSR turned upside down. Has potential to be tuned well, but doesn't appear to have any inherently amazing/different qualities to most other suspension designs on the market.

 

[FarkinRyan]

But who owns the patent?

bradflyn, surely.

 

[nelsonjm]

Pretty groovy and fresh approach.

Am I the only one who thinks that lower link will get smashed thoroughly on rocky trails?

That was my first thought too. I wonder if a bash ring would take care of that issue.

I like the look

 

[slyfink]

seems to me that the shock is pretty exposed to mud... looks cool otherwise. Also, he didn't mention squat characteristics...

 

[norbar]

Looks like FSR turned upside down. Has potential to be tuned well, but doesn't appear to have any inherently amazing/different qualities to most other suspension designs on the market.

Probably the main quality is not paying for the FSR patent. Not to mention in the day of "bike a looks like bike b" it's good to be different from a marketing point of view. Imho that's the biggest reason why see more and more new designs instead of refining the existing ones.

 

[marshalolson]

is this the second golden age of wacky full suspension designs?

 

[Kevin]

Probably the main quality is not paying for the FSR patent. Not to mention in the day of "bike a looks like bike b" it's good to be different from a marketing point of view. Imho that's the biggest reason why see more and more new designs instead of refining the existing ones.

I was thinking lower center of gravity = better riding?

 

[Kevin]

bradflyn, surely.

 

[NoUseForAName]

I was thinking lower center of gravity = better riding?

What does a shock weigh?

How much do you weigh?

Which has more effect on the CoG?

Low bikes look cool, but that's it IMO.

 

[karpi]

a bike with a lower COG is a world diference in terms on handling and stabability.

 

[Steve M]

a bike with a lower COG is a world diference in terms on handling and stabability.

If by centre of mass you mean including rider, then yes, I agree, hence why BB heights affect the feel of the bike so much. If you're talking about just the frame, then within reasonable limits, I don't think it makes much if any difference at all, from my own experience. If you CAN lower and centralise the mass then great, go right ahead, but I would be surprised if a rider could even pick the difference in CoM heights between two frames in a blind test (all else being equal).

 

[Kevin]

What does a shock weigh?

How much do you weigh?

Which has more effect on the CoG?

Low bikes look cool, but that's it IMO.

Good one, never thought about it like that but yeah makes sense.

 

[Honus]

Probably the biggest advantage of mounting everything so low is that you can build a really small frame size.

 

[time-bomb]

The more I look at this the more I like it. It does have a unique look to it and I really like the forged stays on it.

With that being said, I do have one and a half gripes to make about it. First off, shock options look very very limited. You can probably forget about putting anything in there with a reservoir if you wanted to. The half gripe I have is the top 1 1/8" headtube. Why?!?! I just don't by into that tapered crap. Run a full 1.5 so people have more options.

Other than that, I really like it. The price is pretty sweet too.

 

[Honus]

Here's some bigger pics-

It certainly would be interesting to see a DH version with a coil shock. Clearances would be very tight and you would need a longer CS length to make it work.

A note about that lower link- from the article:
"The small lower swingarm link is protected from impacts with a smash-resistant protective coating and is meant to come into contact with occasional trail objects, which in turn activates the suspension and helps the rear wheel over whatever rock the rider failed to clear." This is also explained in the patent. Be curious to know what the warranty is on the frame.

It looks like the swingarms/chainstays are comprised of four separate forgings that are bolted together- an unusual approach for sure. The magazine article also mentions that Chuck Dunlap was Yeti's lead designer from 1999 to 2003 and previously worked for Titus developing their custom frame program.

 

[Lelandjt]

With everyone using adjustable seatposts these slack seat tube angles have to go. Even when the seat is 5" lower than climbing height it's still nice to sit down on it without humping your stem. The alternative is to have it too far back when extended and climbing and that results in lots of sag and wheelies.