frame for me.
i wanted the DH920, but if the price is that much cheaper for the DH720, i can just swap the shock out
i wanted the DH920, but if the price is that much cheaper for the DH720, i can just swap the shock out
new Lapierre DH bikes
- Thread starter IH8Rice
- Start date
frame only plox
Is this a problem or not?
The mass(rider) that the BB-link on this design carries is now being oscillated back and forth..which is fueled by momentum and bump-force from the swingarm. The rider is now standing on something that moves back and forth like sitting on a chair while someone tries to shake it back and forth. Is this an advatage over BBs that don't move under the rider?
The mass(rider) that the BB-link on this design carries is now being oscillated back and forth..which is fueled by momentum and bump-force from the swingarm. The rider is now standing on something that moves back and forth like sitting on a chair while someone tries to shake it back and forth. Is this an advatage over BBs that don't move under the rider?
It's not as bad as it sounds though. The rider is not standing on the rear axle, and the bb is very close to the pivot, so the leverage of the swingarm length is much stronger. Also the weight is hanging.
One of the sacraficial virgins will have to work it out.
I wish we could tell what/if there's an Idrive type system and how much it reducess/isolates the BB movement.
With good riders skimming over stuff, this could actually prove to be quite fast, On big hits the bike still has to pivot at the pivot as the riders weight is right below it, and the riders energy generally going downwards.
I also think a small amount off BB movement will let the rider have more feel for the rear tyres traction.
I had a Trek Y-Frame years ago, with a custom made swingarm I got from a sponsored rider(I'm talking Rockshock DHO era), I modified the swingarm mounts to get 5-6" with I think a 200mm shock. I couldn't really fault it that bad, very efficient, and predictable. Not the plushest, but cant blame that solely on the URT. Gave you a hardtail type confidence, with some back up. Probably be a great 4X bike.
You forgot to ad while sitting and writting at astationery desk.
The rider will get more feel from the rear, and traction should be spread over rear tyre more, I can't see too much benefit with that pivot height though.
Is rider comfort a placebo for speed?
Why??
High pivot is great, but why all this moving BB crap when you could just run a setup like a Superco Silencer?
Lapierre is great at grabbing someone's (DW, FSR, Idrive) ideas and making it look damn sexy. Give em that, but this is such a massive step away from their previous design, to me it is like telling everyone that bought their current DH that it was crap. Design it right, stand by your concept and refine refine. It is the equivilent of a front wheel drive BMW (car). Lacks credibility in my eyes
High pivot is great, but why all this moving BB crap when you could just run a setup like a Superco Silencer?
Lapierre is great at grabbing someone's (DW, FSR, Idrive) ideas and making it look damn sexy. Give em that, but this is such a massive step away from their previous design, to me it is like telling everyone that bought their current DH that it was crap. Design it right, stand by your concept and refine refine. It is the equivilent of a front wheel drive BMW (car). Lacks credibility in my eyes
Wow... no sarcasm or irony allowed in this thread I guess...
The "shiny bikes look delicate" comment was me observing something silly about myself. I do think that every time I see a polished bike, then I think "well that's a silly thought".
The Puerto Rico comment was in reference to stereotypical Amero-centric U.S. ignorance to our neighbors, so... as an American it was also self deprecating.
Again, my apologies for flagrant misuse of sarcasm and irony (in that order) in a non-sarcasm/irony thread
The "shiny bikes look delicate" comment was me observing something silly about myself. I do think that every time I see a polished bike, then I think "well that's a silly thought".
The Puerto Rico comment was in reference to stereotypical Amero-centric U.S. ignorance to our neighbors, so... as an American it was also self deprecating.
Again, my apologies for flagrant misuse of sarcasm and irony (in that order) in a non-sarcasm/irony thread
Wow... no sarcasm or irony allowed in this thread I guess...
The "shiny bikes look delicate" comment was me observing something silly about myself. I do think that every time I see a polished bike, then I think "well that's a silly thought".
The Puerto Rico comment was in reference to stereotypical Amero-centric U.S. ignorance to our neighbors, so... as an American it was also self deprecating.
Again, my apologies for flagrant misuse of sarcasm and irony (in that order) in a non-sarcasm/irony thread
They must be on Windows Vista. That is one of many bugs in that OS. The sarcasm detector never works.
Ummm..... IMO.
I'm amazed the downtube is strong enough.
I thought we'd seen the last of semi-URT crap with GT/Mongoose gimmick patents.
Look at the shock link !? What must the rate change be ?
It looks a bit of mess to me and a refinement of the old design would have been wiser but we'll see I guess.
I'm amazed the downtube is strong enough.
I thought we'd seen the last of semi-URT crap with GT/Mongoose gimmick patents.
Look at the shock link !? What must the rate change be ?
It looks a bit of mess to me and a refinement of the old design would have been wiser but we'll see I guess.
Is all the extra linkages worth the gain in slightly more rearward axel path using a single pivot? I haven’t done the maths but I am sure we are talking about a wheel path on average a difference 5 deg from vertical a lower piv location like a morewood etc
Can it make that much difference to warrant the added complexity?
Can it make that much difference to warrant the added complexity?
Companies change suspesion systems. Its not like a huge disrespect to a customer. If you feel like that buy a nicolai - they tend to produce a lot of their bikes for loooong periods of time. Im pretty sure anyone can name a company that changed their suspension platform not so long ago. Should they stop wanting to make better bikes so their previous customers may feel like they have the bestest bike? Because with that move you would have no progress at all. I was pretty bummed when they announced the 920 as I had the dh-230 but I wasnt telling myself - hell no guys, you told me my bike is will be the festest!
As for the superco being a better idea over this one - for some people yeah but some people want something simpler, want to use regular cranks etc. I actualy like the idea because it goes around idlers and other fancy shmancy chain thingys. Not that I dont like the superco - great bike, I just think this is a nice alternative.
Is it better though Norbar?
I agree that progress is a great thing. But this is not necesarily progress IMO.
Specialized have stuck with their FSR's Orange, single pivot, heck even Yeti have run their rail for a time now. You could run Superco style setup without the opp hand drive crank. But this isn't really the point I am trying to make. I was just saying they chopped and changed their suspension design quite a bit and it lacks consistancy with no real basis that I can tell. I also was curious on the extra links purpose.
We will see. Im not sure if its better but I wont bash it only after the first photo. Yeti dropped their old susp not so long ago, orange is going with linkage now, banshee has recently went into virtual pivot world, trek went from the session 10 susp to abp recently (and Ive seen opinions that it would be better to develop the old rearward thingy). They are not the only ones. Maybe they thought there was more place for development here, maybe its a marketing ploy. Im just saying dont bash it before it really started. It looks a bit overcomplicated but it is the same with idler bikes for many people. Let it
proove itself. Its not like they are trying to produce a 29 WC dh bike
btw. sorry if I seemed agressive - my uni tries to piss me off recently so I am a bit jumpy.
I'd guess they are trying to get rid of more expensive manufacturig => increasing their margin. I know that early XControls used to have issues with pivots. Then with longer-travel models (Zesty and Stereo) they moved to FSR. DH was short link for the last 2-3 seasons, now they are moving it to a nice single-pivot.
I thought such a MTB racing veteran like Nico is will be speaking about suspension and geometry more technically and precisely. And not with such a weak marketing-style simple sentences in the 1st public video of new model.
I thought such a MTB racing veteran like Nico is will be speaking about suspension and geometry more technically and precisely. And not with such a weak marketing-style simple sentences in the 1st public video of new model.
Well, his first language clearly isn't english. He seemed to have trouble thinking of technical terms in english. Orrrrrrr he was restricted from revealing too much tech infoI thought such a MTB racing veteran like Nico is will be speaking about suspension and geometry more technically and precisely. And not with such a weak marketing-style simple sentences in the 1st public video of new model.
Thats funny, we sold over 35 of them in Canada.... I believe we're still part of North America
To be honest, its not whether they can or can't sell them here, they hold the patent rights for those suspension (FPS2 and OST) designs in Europe. Problem is when you come to US there is a bit more protectionism going on in the courts, so its difficult or not worth the $$ to even try to have the patent recognized here.
Think about it, if Lapierre holds the patent in Europe, wouldn't they too be challenging all the other Virtual Pivot patents that are supposedly the same (santa cruz, intense, whatever) that come into Europe???? hmmmmmmmmm
Bottom line is the bike is a nice step forward for them, the current DH bikes was 4yrs old and with someone like Blinky being coached by Nico, it pays to push the envelope.
We sell to the Canadian bike shop, that shop then sells to a US customer. We already know some Canadian dealers that have done this.if we can get it in the States, then im all for it
Let me say that there will not be any international patent infringements with this bike. I was at the pre production meeting almost a year ago, this was a major priority and its been accomplished.I am not so sure about this. The system that GT uses is set up differently than the one Mongoose uses but both are covered under the same patent. Either way, it is too early to tell and there aren't any good photos of how the BB works on the Lapierre so us arm chair engineers can't even speculate very well
21 seconds up in qualis. Must be sht.
I drive past the Lapierre factory here in Dijon every week. Might have to pop in for a gander in the flesh...
I drive past the Lapierre factory here in Dijon every week. Might have to pop in for a gander in the flesh...
So, the black BB section is pivoting around the back frame mounted bolt, with the mini link reducing the amount of BB movement as the swingarm arcs in it's travel, but the BB is moving backwards? Hard to make it all out in that Photo, but I'm guessing that's what's happening.
I had too many beers watching the race, but wouldn't the dsign cancel out most anti squat that the pivot hight would give?
Last edited:
The bb would certainly swing backwards to offset some of the anti squat properties created by a higher pivot - same as the mongoose/GT..
awesome news. do you know how readily available the DH720 or DH920 framesets are?
What do you guys mean by "offset some of the AS properties"? To negate, clear? Or ... ?
Yeah BB definately swings backwards, but not as much as if a proper URT(swingarm mounted BB). It would still have some degree of anti squat, as there'd be some chain growth. Very minimal though, not sure how different to a fixed BB with the same pivot height.
So what's the bennefit of the moving BB?
Slightly less anti squat, and slightly more weight staying on rear wheel(rider COG moving back), and a bit more rear wheel feedback to the rider, and some damping of the suspension from the riders weight.
I can't see any major benefit though, as all gains are small.
Am I missing something?
I'd love to ride this design with a higher pivot in different BB set up layouts.
Anti-squat will change by couple of % when attaching BB to mainframe or rear-triangle. However, the difference in chaingrowth and consequently pedalkickback is significant. I took a look at new GT Fury in Linkage and chaingrowth as well as pedalkickback are 2x higher when BB is attached to mainframe, while keeping almost the same anti-squat.
The main benefit of this solution as I see it, is combination of stable anti-squat and anti-rise with really low chaingrowth.
Also, LP may benefit from knowing about issues GTs used to have with main pivot. They are just following the safe path with almost no risks. Discussions over all forums already started and many claim it's a bad move from LP, but in the end most of the dislikers and haters will change their mind.
For me, the most interesting situation will start if GT will try to forbid LP from selling their new DH rig in Europe and other markets. But, maybe that will not happen, as both companies have strong financial backup and none of them wants to spend milions of EURos for lawsuits. I predict silent life of them like Trek is having with DW because of split-pivot (that will one day come to end in Trek).
The main benefit of this solution as I see it, is combination of stable anti-squat and anti-rise with really low chaingrowth.
Also, LP may benefit from knowing about issues GTs used to have with main pivot. They are just following the safe path with almost no risks. Discussions over all forums already started and many claim it's a bad move from LP, but in the end most of the dislikers and haters will change their mind.
For me, the most interesting situation will start if GT will try to forbid LP from selling their new DH rig in Europe and other markets. But, maybe that will not happen, as both companies have strong financial backup and none of them wants to spend milions of EURos for lawsuits. I predict silent life of them like Trek is having with DW because of split-pivot (that will one day come to end in Trek).
Last edited:
GT Furys pivot is higher though, so it'd make it more worthwhile in regards to both pedal kick back and chain growth.
The piovt on th Lapiere is like an inch higher than chainline. Wouldn't be much chain growth although it would be early in travel(once sag is achieved).
Looking at the photo of the link, I'm struggling to work out if the BB movement will lesson in relation to travel, or get greater.
BB movement will have a similer effect on your feet as pedal kickback.
I agree that the haters will change, not sure what camp I'm in.
All very interesting.
Hope someone's mapping that sucker to see what's actually happening.
Well yes, Fury has pivot higher than LP, but their similarity still applies, IMO. Anti-squat will still be (even though smaller than in Fury) stable throughout the range of travel and pedal-kickback shall be significantly lower than if BB mounted to mainframe.
They should have used some BOS stuff on prototype and some people on here and there would certainly get wet in their pants
They should have used some BOS stuff on prototype and some people on here and there would certainly get wet in their pants
Lapierre (and us) are sold out for the year, its been a very good season.
The next batch will be these new DH bikes, likely for late Nov delivery