Knolly is pretty much about top-end manufacturing; high tolerances, expensive bearings, extensive machining. He's not really competing with the Special-Eds of the world.Nice looking, but seem to be on the expensive side.
he doesnt need to call it an FSR (Spec' marketing term btw, not a real word), the patent isnt recognized in Canada. I know he did do a custom analysis of the "FSR" part of the linkage to suit his needs, he just didnt rip a geometry off. He'll basically tell you that he believes in the FSR 4 bar type, but with regards to a specific..uhh, specification. He's not trying to fool anyone.blah blah
Rant over.
I suppose...all because of the border, but the fact remains its an FSR.he doesnt need to call it an FSR (Spec' marketing term btw, not a real word), the patent isnt recognized in Canada. I know he did do a custom analysis of the "FSR" part of the linkage to suit his needs, he just didnt rip a geometry off. He'll basically tell you that he believes in the FSR 4 bar type, but with regards to a specific..uhh, specification. He's not trying to fool anyone.
Just like all tissues are Kleenex and all photocopiers are xerox, right?I suppose...all because of the border, but the fact remains its an FSR.
and if so you'd expect him to call it that? he couldn't even if he wanted to...well unless he wanted to 'volunteer' to pay a licensing fee, or if he wants to distribute to the US.I suppose...all because of the border, but the fact remains its an FSR.
Well, it's not the fact that the patents don't apply to canada that really bugs me, it's the fact that knolly has tried to deny that he's using an FSR linkage on mtbr before, and when asked about what exactly he is "patenting', it gets a little blurry from there on.and if so you'd expect him to call it that? he couldn't even if he wanted to...well unless he wanted to 'volunteer' to pay a licensing fee, or if he wants to distribute to the US.
No wait you're right Specialized should get their due really
Try telling that to the US patent office.It's interesting that Knolly doesn't call his linkage an FSR, since it is an FSR. The extra linkage has no effect on the rear end of the bike, so rear suspension is a horst link just like specalized uses. It's wierd because Knolly tries to claim his design is 'unique' and therefore patentable, although the exact part that is 'unique" is the extra linkage that drives the shock, just like the brodie 8-ball used and a few other bikes. It seems like he's trying to get around the specialized patent by claiming a part that isn't even affecting the wheelpath is original, which it really isn't.
Rant over.
actually it looks like it may not even follow under the FSR patents; look in the photo gallery and note that the chainstay pivot seems to be inline with the rear axle...i believe the FSR requires it be under?Well, it's not the fact that the patents don't apply to canada that really bugs me, it's the fact that knolly has tried to deny that he's using an FSR linkage on mtbr before, and when asked about what exactly he is "patenting', it gets a little blurry from there on.
That means that it's Ellsworth ICT then :biggrin:actually it looks like it may not even follow under the FSR patents; look in the photo gallery and note that the chainstay pivot seems to be inline with the rear axle...i believe the FSR requires it be under?
anyways, ever here DW tell you the exact nature of his patents before they went through the system?
Jm_, if you know so fuggin' much, why aren't you designing your own bike?
Oh that's right. It's a whole lot easier and safer to be a lamer critic of things you don't understand, than to try to actually understand things and perhaps improve upon them.
Noel's 4x4 is no more FSR than Kona's design is FSR, than Ventana's design is FSR. You show your ignorance by using "similar appearance with extra links" as your basis for claiming 4x4 is FSR.
Face it, Jm_, you're a fuggin' eedjit and you couldn't do what Noel's doing in a million centuries.
The simple truth is that if the suspension rate is modified from FSR, and adds 2 links, and alters pivot positions, it ceases being FSR/Horst and becomes a design derived from FSR/Horst. Noel would be the first to tell you that he had the Turner RFX in mind as one of his benchmarks when originally conceptualizing the first V-Tach. And what was the RFX back then? Oh yeah. FSR/Horst. So Noel took what he liked about that bike, and changed a few things, improved a few things.
Under Jm_'s "logic," everything is a copy of the Wright Brothers' first bicycle. Mainly because they all use wheels, a frame, a drivetrain, a seat, and a steering mechanism.
Fuggin' pathetic lamer pseudo-engineer Jm_, embarrassing himself one post at a time.
You're ridiculous.Jm_, if you know so fuggin' much, why aren't you designing your own bike?
Oh that's right. It's a whole lot easier and safer to be a lamer critic of things you don't understand, than to try to actually understand things and perhaps improve upon them.
Noel's 4x4 is no more FSR than Kona's design is FSR, than Ventana's design is FSR. You show your ignorance by using "similar appearance with extra links" as your basis for claiming 4x4 is FSR.
Face it, Jm_, you're a fuggin' eedjit and you couldn't do what Noel's doing in a million centuries.
The simple truth is that if the suspension rate is modified from FSR, and adds 2 links, and alters pivot positions, it ceases being FSR/Horst and becomes a design derived from FSR/Horst. Noel would be the first to tell you that he had the Turner RFX in mind as one of his benchmarks when originally conceptualizing the first V-Tach. And what was the RFX back then? Oh yeah. FSR/Horst. So Noel took what he liked about that bike, and changed a few things, improved a few things.
Under Jm_'s "logic," everything is a copy of the Wright Brothers' first bicycle. Mainly because they all use wheels, a frame, a drivetrain, a seat, and a steering mechanism.
Fuggin' pathetic lamer pseudo-engineer Jm_, embarrassing himself one post at a time.
You're ridiculous.
While you call my post "misinformation," you can only conclude that way if you misread it and add your own content. As usual, Jm_, it's more important to you to feel and post feelings of superiority, than it is for you to be honest or accurate. Enjoy your sad inferiority complex, pilot boy.Holy crap that's a lot of misinformation.
First of all, an "FSR" is a horst link bike, which is what the knollys are. There is nothing with the linkages or rate that comes into play here. By having different linkage geometry, you get different rates. Hence why you have different rates on things like specialized SXs, turner 6 packs, 5 spots, FSR XCs, and so on. It has nothing to really do with that rear dropout which makes the bike an "FSR".
Konas, single pivot.
Ventanas, single pivot.
Specialized, horst link "FSR".
Knolly, horst link "FSR".
"Similer appearance" has nothing to do with it. That comment probably shows your ignorance more than anything. The design of the dropout and horst link is why. A specialized demo looks nothing like my turner 6 pack, but both utilize an FSR rear end.
I'm not saying that knolly didn't design this bike. I'm not saying that he "ripped off" the design. I'm not saying that he hasn't improved on most "FSR" designs that are out there, but just as a turner fell under the specialized patents, so does the knolly. Both manufacturers designed their own bikes, their own geometry, the amount of progression they wanted, their own frame shapes, and so on.
Next time try learning how to READ that dictionary you ask me to use.Main Entry: ri·dic·u·lous
Pronunciation: r&-'di-ky&-l&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin ridiculosus (from ridiculum jest, from neuter of ridiculus) or ridiculus, literally, laughable, from ridEre to laugh
: arousing or deserving ridicule : ABSURD, PREPOSTEROUS
synonym see LAUGHABLE
- ri·dic·u·lous·ly adverb
- ri·dic·u·lous·ness noun
Next time use the dictionary.
Extreme insecurity. I feel sorry for you. Just think of the hundreds of RM members that aren't so insecure anytime someone calls them on misinformatino.As usual, Jm_, it's more important to you to feel and post feelings of superiority
well i know he wanted to pay as much attention to braking as he did to all else (and of course the shock rate with the extra links); he never claimed ultra-super pedalling efficiency (which we wouldnt argue about for the FSR anyways), but that his goal was to round off all the aspects of the suspension.However, if the pivot is above the axle, it negates the small benefits of the horst link. At that point, you would be better off putting the axle on the seatstay and gaining some simplicity/stiffness. Of course, then it would just be a kona
And I highly agree, because knolly really realizes the shortcommings of the general design (every single design has advantages and disadvantages) and he addresses them, as well as those are some pretty slick dropouts. I think FS bikes should be as lateraly rigid as possible, and the knolly designs definitely emphasize this.the bike still kicks booty.
Damn nice bikes, really nice site, BIG photos.