[syadasti]

I know they've had working protos since mid July or earlier but none of their factory team has really been on the bike. It's almost a new trend in the industry to develop something and just "release" it.

AKA M3, new V10 etc.

DW's DH bike has been in testing for about a year and numerous revisions BEFORE production

 

[dan-o]

From his original post it sounds like Krispy rode the bike. He didn't come back with his clothes mangled

To quote one of Krispy's posts from the original thread: They didn't use hardned steel and had to be kept under the skirt cover to keep clean...There was a possibility of geting pinched by the top rail.

While the thought of getting anything caught in the rails/rollers is pretty harsh, I still want to know how stainless rollers on a stainless rail 1) operate quietly and 2) stay lubed for smooth operation without attracting dirt. The "self-cleaning" theory is cute but the parts will still wear as grit is forced out of the way.

 

[Matt D]

So you all are assuming that Yeti will just release this to the public without proper R&D and testing? Very doubtful you E-speculators

If the bike industry standard holds true, "available in March" means March + 4 months. Which will give them a good amount of time to sort through proto issues. I wouldn't expect them to go from the proto stage they APPEAR to be in now with a brand new technology for bikes, to full production in less than 6 months.

And with the attitude "cute design, but I'll stick with XYZ," you'd still be riding a fully rigid with drop bars . Innovation, change, progression, evolution... any of those words mean anything to you?

Edit: There aren't any Yeti engineers here to answer very specific design questions, all you're going to get is e-speculation which isn't worth it's weight is dirt.

 

[spoke80]

So you all are assuming that Yeti will just release this to the public without proper R&D and testing? Very doubtful you E-speculators

If the bike industry standard holds true, "available in March" means March + 4 months. Which will give them a good amount of time to sort through proto issues. I wouldn't expect them to go from the proto stage they APPEAR to be in now with a brand new technology for bikes, to full production in less than 6 months.

And with the attitude "cute design, but I'll stick with XYZ," you'd still be riding a fully rigid with drop bars . Innovation, change, progression, evolution... any of those words mean anything to you?

Edit: There aren't any Yeti engineers here to answer very specific design questions, all you're going to get is e-speculation which isn't worth it's weight is dirt.

Word up Matt D!

A little birdy told me that Yeti has been working on the design for two years.

 

[binary visions]

Hm.

People get a little too worked up about speculation.

Those who base their purchasing decisions on e-speculation would otherwise base their purchasing decisions on their own ignorant guesses; either way, they're making uninformed decisions and nobody will be able to help them.

Everyone else is just talking about it as something to occupy our otherwise bored brains, and most of us know better than to pass final judgement on the product without some actual knowledge. Correct the clearly ignorant and wrong posts, but there's no harm in a theoretical discussion of what problems something might have.

Relax, let everyone speculate it to death. It's better than letting our brains rot or actually - gasp - working (I shudder at the very thought!).

 

[dan-o]

And with the attitude "cute design, but I'll stick with XYZ," you'd still be riding a fully rigid with drop bars . Innovation, change, progression, evolution... any of those words mean anything to you?

Actually I love innovation and think my VP-Free is the balls compared to the wide variety of suspension bikes I currently own. What I know is that my VP comes back filthy from every ride I do here in the muddy NorthEast, conditions which are vastly different than dry, dusty Colorado which I also know very well since my family lives in Evergreen. Wear on moving parts due to contact with dirt is not e-speculation, it is a fact.

 

[buildyourown]

I miss the lawill. Maybe the patent is up for grabs.

A little bird told me that Rotec will now be building bikes their bikes with a lawill rear end. Albeit with a concentric BB pivot.

A very reliable little bird.

 

[leprechaun]

05 ASX
05 ASX will be the same other than new color(skidmark brown,brushed) and a DHX 5.0.
Testing
Yeti will have pre-production versions ready by interbike,i believe they may not have the monocoque top tube done yet but the rails will be on them.So that gives them from October til March to test the rail geometry,durability,etc.My guess is that Jared Graves will use the entire Aussie national series as a test for the bike.Remember their summer is our winter.That aught to give them some serious feedback.
ZEDRO
Nice work on the graphs.Thank you.I know that you realize that your graph is only mostly accurate.Did you notice that the top rail has a little curve in it?Makes it harder to graph.The curve is at 1/4 travel roughly and curves up just a little.That should give it a little more rearward axle path initially(?).I don't want to sound like an idiot but what does CC mean-i thought it was where power output was-the spot where your chain hits the top of the chainring.Thanks

And YES the re ails are sompletely replaceable.The whole assembly bolts in.

 

[Instigator]

Once again Krispy and the rest of the guys from go-ride, Thank you for all the info.

 

[zedro]

ZEDRO
Nice work on the graphs.Thank you.I know that you realize that your graph is only mostly accurate.Did you notice that the top rail has a little curve in it?Makes it harder to graph.The curve is at 1/4 travel roughly and curves up just a little.That should give it a little more rearward axle path initially(?).I don't want to sound like an idiot but what does CC mean-i thought it was where power output was-the spot where your chain hits the top of the chainring.Thanks

.

well let me put it this way: i would never design something from a second-hand fax-copy-scan dumped into a photoshop program to leech coordinates off of .

and i actually thought that curve in the top rail was a distortion of the drawing....no matter, it was just to give a general feeling of the axle path which people were curious about.

the CC is the Center of Curvature, meaning the center of the axle path circle. On single pivots the CC is the main pivot, on 4 bars you can give an approximate or mean location or show its transient position between axle path intervals.

 

[Kornphlake]

Did I miss something? First of all, there's no such thing as "generic stainless". There are many stainless steels, some of which can be easily hardened to 40 'ish on the rockwell C scale. Linear bearings usually use steel hardened to 58 to 62 on the C scale. I strongly doubt that they will use dinner cutlery grade poop metal for this purpose.

That was my point, saying the guide rails are stainless means nothing, saying they're a high grade hardened steel really means a lot more. Marketing can tell the average schmuck it's stainless (sounds generic to me) and he will assume that if it's stainless then it's as good as you can get. Stainless screws and bolts would be in the same category, I hear about people replacing the SHCS that came with their fork or stem with a stainless fastener because it will be stronger and won't rust, that's a load of crap, in most cases, stainless isn't stronger than a high grade steel fastener, finding a stainless steel bolt that is actually stronger than a cap screw will be quite a chore. That aside some grade of stainless is likely strong enough to be used here I'll agree, it's probablly better than what you'd find in a ginsu knife even, but the general name stainless doesn't really tell you anything.

 

[leprechaun]

Thanks Zedro-then isn't that the same ai IC (instant center)?

 

[mtbman4]

I applaude the effort to start a new, nonsense-free Yeti speculation thread, but people keep posting on the other one, and now I have to read both

Well, at least it keeps me from studying my dendro.

------Flashback from the 80's-------
Dude 1: Man have you heard about the new ABC bike coming out? It has shocks built right into the fork!

Dude 2: *astonished* Totally rad! Like on a motorcycle? But how will they ever keep them clean? We ride through all kinds of mud and crap? The parts will wear down.

Dude 1: Yeah, the designs pretty cute, but I'll stick to my fully rigid Rockhopper.




Gimme a break guys. I don't care if its crap or gold, new stuff gets me excited. And when new stuff does come out, there is years of tweaking to do. Just look at old forks and FS designs! Many of them were loud (squeaky pivots), just as some are speculating the rails to be. And many people were intimidated by lots of moving parts, and now, how many hartails do you see on the lift?

 

[zedro]

Thanks Zedro-then isn't that the same ai IC (instant center)?

no, the IC only describes the point of which the entire swingarm 'link' rotates about at that very moment (or instant). However since it only applies at a single infinitly small point in the travel, it only describes a point vector of the axle path (ie the tangeant of the actual axle path at that point), whereas for the CC we will take two of those of those 'instant' points (or tangeants) and extrapolate a curve from them, where the CC represents the center of that curve.

Since the IC will only describe a tangeant vector, the actual CC can lay anywhere in the axis drawn from the axle to the IC, and in this case, the CCs lay ahead of the ICs, whereas usually the opposite is true in the more common linkages (except for Lawills, where the ICs are behind the rear wheel). Blah blah blah...

 

[Echo]

no, the IC only describes the point of which the entire swingarm 'link' rotates about at that very moment (or instant). However since it only applies at a single infinitly small point in the travel, it only describes a point vector of the axle path (ie the tangeant of the actual axle path at that point), whereas for the CC we will take two of those of those 'instant' points (or tangeants) and extrapolate a curve from them, where the CC represents the center of that curve.

Since the IC will only describe a tangeant vector, the actual CC can lay anywhere in the axis drawn from the axle to the IC, and in this case, the CCs lay ahead of the ICs, whereas usually the opposite is true in the more common linkages (except for Lawills, where the ICs are behind the rear wheel). Blah blah blah...

I think my brain just imploded.

 

[binary visions]

I think my brain just imploded.

Should I be scared that I understood a tiny bit of that?

 

[zedro]

Should I be scared that I understood a tiny bit of that?

heh, so much easier with a diagram, its not complicated at all. Its probably harder to try and explain it using text...

 

[leprechaun]

Oh gotcha .Thanks Zedro

 

[leprechaun]

Thanks-Scott and i just use different words for those coordinates.To me,other than the wavy upper rail which would only slightly change the model,your model is accurate.That looks like a great path.Ever notice that the Foes Mono pivot is close to this(for a single pivot)and how Foes'pivot is located farther foreward on the frame than a straight downtube could offer-the DT goes down to the pivot then there is a box section from the pivot to the BB.It's easy to see how Brent Foes came up w/ his pivot location.

 

[Threepointtwo]

The team guys like it a lot. They have been riding them for a while and really like the way they ride. Of course, they can't say bad things about it but there certainly seemed to be some genuine enthusiasm for getting the new rig.

 

[Slacker]

And with the attitude "cute design, but I'll stick with XYZ," you'd still be riding a fully rigid with drop bars . Innovation, change, progression, evolution... any of those words mean anything to you?

Hey, you got something against full rigid DH rigs

 

[davod]

Hey, you got something against full rigid DH rigs

I was wondering about that bike. In the caption it said it was a dh bike, but for what trails? It looks less dh-able that a huffy or cyclocross bike.

 

[Rik]

------Flashback from the 80's-------
Dude 1: Man have you heard about the new ABC bike coming out? It has shocks built right into the fork!

Dude 2: *astonished* Totally rad! Like on a motorcycle? But how will they ever keep them clean? We ride through all kinds of mud and crap? The parts will wear down.

Dude 1: Yeah, the designs pretty cute, but I'll stick to my fully rigid Rockhopper.

Yeh, well, funnily enough, MTB forks could borrow technology from motorcycle forks. And seal effectiveness is still an issue, even today. Back in the 80's (as you say, but it was more like the early 90's), every time you rebuilt a fork, you spent half the time cleaning the crud out of it... things have improved, as we know, but back then fork sealing was one of the many reasons to justify with sticking to rigid forks. Nothing wrong with technology, you just have to wait until it progresses to a level that makes it suitable for the job without too many downfalls.
This design appears to be totally unique technology for the application, and of course we're allowed to be sceptical... if we did the opposite of your example of above... and just accepted EVERYTHING that was put on the market, and bought it with anticipation without a care for the downfalls, do you think the consumer would be getting the most appropriate and refined product for the job?

 

[mtbman4]

Nothing wrong with technology, you just have to wait until it progresses to a level that makes it suitable for the job without too many downfalls.
This design appears to be totally unique technology for the application, and of course we're allowed to be sceptical... if we did the opposite of your example of above... and just accepted EVERYTHING that was put on the market, and bought it with anticipation without a care for the downfalls, do you think the consumer would be getting the most appropriate and refined product for the job?

True, but if nobody jumped on the bandwagon, all that new technology would just as soon be melted down and used as cutlery.

 

[RaID]

this is where i have a problem with overly complex designs in general, to me theres a point where practicality should outweight any performance gain. Sometimes people get too focused on numbers and loose sight on the bigger picture.

i couldnt agree more, how much is this innovative approach really going to imporve riding?
Really the avaerage rider is not going to realise this difference
then again at that price this isnt really for an average rider
But then again i really think mostly the top riders are the only maybe feel the difference.

Lucky we are still in a sport that a rider governs the results not the equipment
eg
World Champs
1st The "Great" Kona Design
2nd Honda Most Expensive Bike Experiment
3rd The DW Link
with the unlucky looser (who was quickest for a while)
on a Single Pivot


passing all that im always interested to see new designs, especially thinking outside the square, i see a few possible problems with this design most of which have been mentioned above, but its good to see company inovating their product line

now lets see a working model of this thing