Did you get the Missing link, yet?
New downhillers trail bike
- Thread starter Kanye West
- Start date
Yeah, definitely not saying I had anything to do with it, this stuff was being addressed pretty thoroughly years ago by various parties.
Agreed on the shock front, not a big fan of all the new standards myself either, just seems like a way to milk the dentists' wallets every year. On the bright side you can probably get one real cheap in a year...
My 2¢ for what it's worth.
I just monster trucked a straight up climb with washed out ruts and loose dirt today on my Megatrail. I took multiple worstest lines because it was 94degs and humid as fuk and I'm a fat hack. The bike didn't care how awful I rode it. I was actually off the trail for a minute because I sucked that bad today and it never lifted the front tire or spun a tire.
I am pretty impressed with a bike that goes down hill as well as it does but climbs like a bike that is designed for XC.
I just monster trucked a straight up climb with washed out ruts and loose dirt today on my Megatrail. I took multiple worstest lines because it was 94degs and humid as fuk and I'm a fat hack. The bike didn't care how awful I rode it. I was actually off the trail for a minute because I sucked that bad today and it never lifted the front tire or spun a tire.
I am pretty impressed with a bike that goes down hill as well as it does but climbs like a bike that is designed for XC.
do you have some shitty videos and 50 pages of shit spewing to back up this claim?
I kinda like this one at 2:48, seems to be throwing a tantrum of sorts.
Absolutely not, but I can make a graph that is close but not really close to further my point if that would help?
Well, now that I have a ton of RFX time, yes I'm faster on the RFX, like 2nd place faster, vs. mid to lower-mid pack when I tried to race my E29 at the park. I'm usually pretty aggressive, but there were some places where no matter how fast I wanted to go, the E29 wouldn't do it, like those medium radius turns, as the bike would be dragged to the outside, eventually just skidding to the outside if I really pushed it hard, and ultimately losing speed. The roll-over of the E29 was better, I'm almost making up for that with a little more travel, but no denying the roll-over in wheel-catchers and dropoffs was better with the E29. Suspension quality when balls-out is better, but then again I never ran a custom shock on the E29, just upgraded to the monarch+ on it. I'm not necessarily that obsessed with the fastest way down and the Wreckoning wasn't really out when I chose the RFX, but I was also pretty sure it would be a solid choice and not let me down. I wouldn't be adverse to an aggressive 29er with decent travel if I ever get off the RFX, I think something like the Wreckoning can still be an awesome quiver-killer. I'm still a believer in 29er wheels, just picked up a Mack 429SL frame for XC racing and long (100mi or more) endurance racing.
Nor did they ever claim to. At the very least all they did was point out potential errors in relying on maps of bikes that weren't check measured (like this). At the greatest, they were based on riding the bike in question. And that's something I will ALWAYS take over someone else's modeled interpretation of a photograph because I've used that program enough (and checked in real life enough) to know something fairly minor at the end or beginning of a stroke can vary a good bit......enough that it might represent what you see there.
I'm sorry you can't tell the difference, but neither is trying to "change physics". Physics relies on measurements, not approximations. And in the meantime, a real life experience of riding something is still relevant.
Do the part now where you defend someone else's linkage input to death while at the same time pointing out the errors you found with a bike you could actually measure (your sunday). That one's my favorite.
I'd say we both agree that patrol looks better in gen2 though. But I'm more excited about the overall progressive addition than that bit at the top.
Last edited:
Actually, a large amount of theoretical and applied physics relies on approximations. An annoyingly large amount.
Simple Newtonian boy, getcha head out the clouds.
That's not what this is. There's nothing theoretical about levers on planet earth.
How's that patrol? You coming to a stop every time that wheel extends? You breaking wheels every time you land and get that suspension moving again after a little hop off the ground? It must be horrible.
Last edited:
Lol, just stick to posting lame jokes, you're better at it than these discussions.Nor did they ever claim to. At the very least all they did was point out potential errors in relying on maps of bikes that weren't check measured (like this). At the greatest, they were based on riding the bike in question. And that's something I will ALWAYS take over someone else's modeled interpretation of a photograph because I've used that program enough (and checked in real life enough) to know something fairly minor at the end or beginning of a stroke can vary a good bit......enough that it might represent what you see there.
I'm sorry you can't tell the difference, but neither is trying to "change physics". Physics relies on measurements, not approximations. And in the meantime, a real life experience of riding something is still relevant.
Do the part now where you defend someone else's linkage input to death while at the same time pointing out the errors you found with a bike you could actually measure (your sunday). That one's my favorite.
I'd say we both agree that patrol looks better in gen2 though. But I'm more excited about the overall progressive addition than that bit at the top.
FYI - on the Sunday note, with that statement you've just made it very clear you don't understand the concept of a vector (the point I made there was that small differences in magnitude of a graph can vary due to linkage errors, but complete changes in direction/gradient - as claimed by OP in that thread - are very rare), so you can add that to the list of "things kidwoo doesn't really get but pretends to on RM" along with physics and the role of approximation in science.
For anyone using an air shock, that "bit at the top" will make a perceivable difference, and further improvement (as evident on other frames) will be noticeable also. This is fact, often different from kidwoo's opinion.
Last edited:
I never saw your original sunday discussion, you just mentioned it recently. But no that doesn't prove anything other what you and I have both already said regarding using the linkage model.
But FFS, udi there's a difference between disagreeing with the importance you personally place on something, and arguing against long standing mathematical concepts. You've never seemed to really grasp which one I'm doing.
Obviously there's an inflection point there. I get that no matter the variation I've seen for that (and every transition) bike, there's still an inflection point in the curve. All I've ever said is that it's nowhere near as significant as some of the bikes that share that trait in a general sense, and very noticeably ride that way. That's not arguing with the math, that's arguing with you on the significance and magnitude based on a real world ride.
I'm not debating physics with you, I was debating your interpretation in how much it relates to ride quality. That doesn't mean the those traits don't exist in a general sense, or that they can't be quantified, that just means I'm saying you like to make mountains out of potential mole hills and then just act like a dick about it when anyone tries to discuss anything else that might not wholly jive with your infallible analysis.
I appreciate your constant search for the ideal. But some things really just aren't as important as you make them out to be. And someone thinking that doesn't mean they don't get the reasons you have.
No, that's not actually what you said at all.
I like your effort at taking the moral highground here by (yet again) watering down my words and making me sound like I'm being overly pedantic about a small issue - but this is what you actually said, and it's just flat out incorrect, which is why I defended my original (still correct) statements.
Yes - evident in direct comparison.
I've ridden both the Patrol and the Scout and while it's not a huge deal (I never said it was), it's certainly noticeably worse than a bike that optimises this part of the curve better. Yes it's noticeable on a trail, yes it's noticeable on a graph. These are all points you've tried to object, making me out to be some overly pedantic nerd who has never ridden a bike before.
At no point did I ever say it was terrible - that's what you tried to claim I said - however the original post was about picking a trailbike with some level of objectivity and under those grounds I gave a very factual rating of the bikes, and I made it clear where the Transition stood. There are better choices from a suspension standpoint, and indeed there are far worse choices - but to highlight that it's better than those worse choices doesn't somehow correct its flaws.
Here's the lowdown - if people want to hear every bike or part is the greatest thing ever, they can jump on pinkbike or pick up a magazine and read about how great every single bike ever is. There are plenty of sources for generic informative praise everywhere, people don't have to read posts on ridemonkey to hear that a Patrol is a pretty good bike - and that's true, it's a pretty good bike.
If they want to know the finer details of what makes one bike better than the other however, they might gain something from reading my posts. I appreciate that my opinions might not be popular and might upset people who own whichever bike or part I'm saying is less than perfect. I'm also open to numerically-backed counter reasoning.
What I don't appreciate is people who water down my comparisons into negligibility - if I emphasised a small point that makes one product better than another, it's because it's a noticeable factor. It'd make it easier to share this information with those who want to hear it if you put down the watering can.
Last edited:
Just to leave a little practical food for thought on this topic, the two bikes I said are superior to the Patrol in bump absorption (the Reign and Rune) are not actually the best bikes I've ridden from this perspective, when fitted with an air shock. They are noticeably better but certainly not properly optimised for air - which means they also work reasonably well with a coil shock, however this is only useful to people running coil (not many).
The bike that handled this task the best in my experience so far is the Evil Insurgent (tested with Float X2), but I knew this before I rode the bike - because the linkage graphs do a great job of defining this.
Do I own an Insurgent? Nope.
Do I want to sell it to anyone? Nope.
Would it work with a coil shock? Poorly.
Does it have a stupid seat angle? Probably.
Does it feel substantially better than virtually every other trailbike with an air shock? Yep.
The magnitude of difference here is by no means minor let alone negligible - to even the untrained eye there are substantial differences in curve shape (even if you compare to the "new" Patrol graph posted earlier). If you actually knew everything you condescendingly claimed "everyone knows" earlier in the thread then I doubt you would have made the posts you did.
I'm certainly not telling anyone to buy an Evil here (in fact, probably don't) - but having a direct comparative rating on different aspects of a bike make it easy for people to pick a bike which is good across the aspects that are important to them. Geometry and weight are easy to check on paper, stiffness not hard to test. Suspension is a trickier and objective analysis harder to find.
Being 2nd or 3rd best doesn't make for a bad bike or part, but you know as well as I do that each year Mike Levy tells the world Shimano brakes are flawless, is another year that you and I have to deal with the market's most powerful brake having significant flaws that remain unfixed. I have no personal vendetta here - just a little food for thought.
The bike that handled this task the best in my experience so far is the Evil Insurgent (tested with Float X2), but I knew this before I rode the bike - because the linkage graphs do a great job of defining this.
Do I own an Insurgent? Nope.
Do I want to sell it to anyone? Nope.
Would it work with a coil shock? Poorly.
Does it have a stupid seat angle? Probably.
Does it feel substantially better than virtually every other trailbike with an air shock? Yep.
The magnitude of difference here is by no means minor let alone negligible - to even the untrained eye there are substantial differences in curve shape (even if you compare to the "new" Patrol graph posted earlier). If you actually knew everything you condescendingly claimed "everyone knows" earlier in the thread then I doubt you would have made the posts you did.
I'm certainly not telling anyone to buy an Evil here (in fact, probably don't) - but having a direct comparative rating on different aspects of a bike make it easy for people to pick a bike which is good across the aspects that are important to them. Geometry and weight are easy to check on paper, stiffness not hard to test. Suspension is a trickier and objective analysis harder to find.
Being 2nd or 3rd best doesn't make for a bad bike or part, but you know as well as I do that each year Mike Levy tells the world Shimano brakes are flawless, is another year that you and I have to deal with the market's most powerful brake having significant flaws that remain unfixed. I have no personal vendetta here - just a little food for thought.
Last edited:
Well, I did start slashing tires at an astronomical rate once I started using it. Does that help?
is there a 2195 alloy version?
Fair enough but at the same time you're not the only person in the bike world who understands a representation of a slope change on an xy plotted series of pivots. But that's the ilk of your first response whenever someone offers a subjective opinion on the real world manifestation of something. I know these things are quantifiable, but with tire pressure, casing stiffness, axle path, better and better negative spring air shocks etc......it's the kind of thing with those transition frames that's well within the realm of being somewhere between manageable and negligible.....in my opinion. My biggest gripe with a patrol was the lack of overall progressiveness, not a lowered leverage at topout.udi said:
All I was trying to do was give my opinion that this trait on this bike wasn't a reason to cast it aside in a purchase choice, that's not 'incorrect' or trying to negate physics.
With whacked ending leverage curves, goofy 29er offsets on 27.5 dh forks etc, you and I agree on a lot more than we don't. And yeah those improvements on the patrol look good, addressing both your hangup (har har) and my biggest one.
And I never squat about the insurgent in comparison to the patrol. So who's jumping on who's made up statements? The ending leverage curve (and company's past) on that bike is a non starter for me.
Slashing sidewalls?
http://ridemonkey.bikemag.com/threads/what-trail-bike-tire-casings-dont-suck.276601/page-7#post-4152158
No
You should ask transition if they'll be selling those links next year.
my vote in this is the new RFX is the downhiller's trailbike, or possibly the SB5/6.
I gave Udi a fair bit of shit for telling me my Scout (a bike that I love) was "suboptimal", but I think in the end he managed to convince me that he was merely saying it could be improved, rather than that it was critically flawed. I think the hang up here is that to the vast majority of riders having a bike that is 98% perfect is close enough. To some people, that 2% difference is sticking point. I'd be keen to try back-to-back rides on the older Patrol and the new metric version with improved leverage curve just to see how apparent the differences are.
Personally, I think the Transition Scout and Patrol are pretty awesome although not without fault. I'm only interested in changing my Scout for one other bike - the carbon Scout.
If we isolate the thing that was being discussed here (bump absorption / bump transmission, particular with an air shock - which most people run) then the difference is definitely greater than 2% - and given this is the downhiller's forum discussing a downhiller's trailbike I think this is an area of key importance. I know you like the Transition because it's stiff - great, another important aspect, but in reality you *could* have both and that's all I stated.
Anyway, clearly we have a bunch of Transition fanboys here and most of them are unable to deal with criticism. I never said the bike sucked (at all) - I just said it was lacking in a single area which the OP understood and appreciated (and bought the bike and put a coil shock on it). Kidwoo declared this minor problem is not noticeable (still not true) when we could have just accepted it and moved on.
All I can say here is - my genuine respect and props go out to Hacktastic for being the only Transition owner in this discussion that didn't take personal offense to my statement, and instead took the information onboard and used it to set up the bike in the best way possible.
Everyone else - harden up.
If you want someone to gloss over facts and blur every bike into being identical, ask RC.
Man i dunno, my insurgent was the tits with the air shock and when i bolted the 11-6 on it changed the game completely. Bike rides so damn well with it. Now the 11-6 is very different from any off the shelf shock currently available.Just to leave a little practical food for thought on this topic, the two bikes I said are superior to the Patrol in bump absorption (the Reign and Rune) are not actually the best bikes I've ridden from this perspective, when fitted with an air shock. They are noticeably better but certainly not properly optimised for air - which means they also work reasonably well with a coil shock, however this is only useful to people running coil (not many).
The bike that handled this task the best in my experience so far is the Evil Insurgent (tested with Float X2), but I knew this before I rode the bike - because the linkage graphs do a great job of defining this.
Do I own an Insurgent? Nope.
Do I want to sell it to anyone? Nope.
Would it work with a coil shock? Poorly.
Does it have a stupid seat angle? Probably.
Does it feel substantially better than virtually every other trailbike with an air shock? Yep.
The magnitude of difference here is by no means minor let alone negligible - to even the untrained eye there are substantial differences in curve shape (even if you compare to the "new" Patrol graph posted earlier). If you actually knew everything you condescendingly claimed "everyone knows" earlier in the thread then I doubt you would have made the posts you did.
I'm certainly not telling anyone to buy an Evil here (in fact, probably don't) - but having a direct comparative rating on different aspects of a bike make it easy for people to pick a bike which is good across the aspects that are important to them. Geometry and weight are easy to check on paper, stiffness not hard to test. Suspension is a trickier and objective analysis harder to find.
Being 2nd or 3rd best doesn't make for a bad bike or part, but you know as well as I do that each year Mike Levy tells the world Shimano brakes are flawless, is another year that you and I have to deal with the market's most powerful brake having significant flaws that remain unfixed. I have no personal vendetta here - just a little food for thought.
Also the seat tube angle is awesome, if my synthetic hip can dig it, all the pansys with real joints can ride it
I'm sorry I thought we already decided the GG megatrail was the most bestest 
And I also agree the components you use (shocks, forks) can jive with perceptions of said performance. And so does rider experience, skill, etc...pretty soon a free new belgium beach cruiser given to the next employee that reaches their 1st year anniversary is going to win as best trail bike, as long as it has a push eleventy six.
And I also agree the components you use (shocks, forks) can jive with perceptions of said performance. And so does rider experience, skill, etc...pretty soon a free new belgium beach cruiser given to the next employee that reaches their 1st year anniversary is going to win as best trail bike, as long as it has a push eleventy six.
I'm right between 5'10/11 with a 31 inch inseam. I run a 125mm reverb, but want to switch to a 150 or possibly even 170 (if it will fit).
From the pics I have seen, he was on old aluminum patrol from last year. They are videos with him on the same bike from early 2015. He now rides for Hyper and had it sharpied up. He is just like the gazillion other Patrol owners out there shredding the shit out of that bike and grinning ear to ear. Out in the actual world, the patrol has been a total success. Racking up bike of the year awards, turning any trail into a playground, and putting big smiles on people's faces. Fun is tough to demonstrate in charts and graphs though, but it is the only reason I ride bikes.
Based on extensive RM-based data acquired and analyzed over nearly a decade, I am under the distinct impression that anything one cannot express graphically is utter bullshit, malarky, marketing hype, or just the (worthless) opinion of 'Woo. I am now afraid that fun may not truly exist...does this mean I have actually been riding just for the hot MTB women, or even worse, for fitness? So confused...
yeah but what part of the fun curve is accurate? can you post detailed blueprints and growth charts?
What about the 2 gazillion Reign owners having fun?
What about the half-gazillion Banshee riders also having fun?
Maybe we have a few members on Evil bikes having fun too?
Oh nevermind, just another loyal Transition fanclub member I've hurt the feelings of.
I never said the bike sucked, nor that it was unsuccessful, nor that it was no fun (let's be honest, riding all bikes is fun, in fact I've had some of the most fun on some of the worst bikes I've owned since these things aren't really proportional).
Next time someone asks for a direct comparison of two bikes I'll just throw a bunch of bananas in the air.
No offense to you man, but you simply do not have the ability to alter my feelings in any way.
To put it in your terms, throughout my entire travel range my f***s given stay at 0% with no variation.
Also my anti- give a squat stays at 100% through the whole range.
Point to me in my post where it may look to you that my feelings were hurt, and then point to me on the doll where you feel tingly when you take yourself too seriously. Ha, none of this matters and nobodies feeling are hurt.
That said, I never argued with you on the results of the graphs, or their accuracy, and I certainly agree with you that companies need to keep improving on their designs.
I will tell you this though because you care about suspension quality a lot like I do. I only have experience on a carbon patrol with a float x2. And with my shock properly tuned and with the right amount of volume spacers installed (4 on mine), the suspension simply works great throughout the range on every type of terrain it has been on. So, if I did not know that first hand, my f***s given about this stuff might rise to a 1, but for now, it is holding steady an an even 0. Party on.
New Banshee specs to be released end of the month/Eurobike. Initial reports at least on Spitfire are hydroformed tubes (-200g off the 2016), shorter seat tube (for moar dorpstick action), steeper STA. I'd imagine similar changes for Rune. Can't wait to see what they offer.