are they using the "trust effect" too?
Pole Bikes hates Ridemonkey
- Thread starter norbar
- Start date
I believe a lot of bike geeks in the market for a new bike fill-up big spreadsheets in order to compared all aspects of the bikes they consider. (I know I do... 
)
Marketing your bike as a forward thinking geometry marvel (i.e.: aimed at bike geeks), but making sure your bike cannot be compared to other bikes in the buying process is quite a strange marketing decision.
We're not talking about divulgating critical manufacturing secrets here... Once they will have sold a few bikes, people will measure the geometry on their bikes, spread the info and Pole will look like fools.
)Marketing your bike as a forward thinking geometry marvel (i.e.: aimed at bike geeks), but making sure your bike cannot be compared to other bikes in the buying process is quite a strange marketing decision.
We're not talking about divulgating critical manufacturing secrets here... Once they will have sold a few bikes, people will measure the geometry on their bikes, spread the info and Pole will look like fools.
given the wheelbase / stack / head tube are more or less identical to the machine, and the seat tube angle has been stated already, it's pretty easy to guesstimate the remaining numbers are going to be pretty similar (ie, 510mm reach on the large, 64* ish hta). not sure why the cloak of secrecy. regardless, i still want it, even if leo is a dick.
I'm shocked by lahar owner's desires
Fuck pole (heh). I'll enjoy not giving them my business.
Should just upload a bunch of different fake-but-plausible geometry charts based on their template for the Machine so when people search for geometry of this thing they get only fake results.
This is so weird. It's not like this can be kept secret once the bike is released. Will new owners have to sign an NDA promising not to disclose the geometry of the bike as a condition of owning it?
This is so weird. It's not like this can be kept secret once the bike is released. Will new owners have to sign an NDA promising not to disclose the geometry of the bike as a condition of owning it?
Having no money and the insane STAs would be what would stop me from riding the Pole. With my current 76deg STA my seat tries to penetrate me if I even think about riding something moderately enjoyable without dropping the seat.
I think I'd be screaming the "R" word if I rode the Pole!
ENDURO saddles need to be a thing, you don't have to move around on the saddle now because geometry is not aimed at dirt roadies so you should be able to remove the taint tickler bit at the front.
Well in his old discussion on RM he basically argued against anti squat and suggested some really crazy idea about suspension. I get it the geo here may be really nice but the susp has me worried.
Compare this to Nicolai (probably GG too but I talked to GG less) - if you ask for any info they will give you the info. Leverage curves on email? No prob. They may be a bit too german in their designs but I respect that and any company that is open about what they are doing. Why'd gladly give money again to Banshee for example.
He's afraid of criticism and since his new bike is better than the limited selection of bikes he tried (for whatever reason. I guess geo, not susp since the claims are silly) he decided he made the best bike only for the people who know it's the best bike. It's not really marketing. Its a delusion. Too bad since the bike looks nice, geo seems nice. I'd seriously consider it if not poorI believe a lot of bike geeks in the market for a new bike fill-up big spreadsheets in order to compared all aspects of the bikes they consider. (I know I do...
Marketing your bike as a forward thinking geometry marvel (i.e.: aimed at bike geeks), but making sure your bike cannot be compared to other bikes in the buying process is quite a strange marketing decision.
We're not talking about divulgating critical manufacturing secrets here... Once they will have sold a few bikes, people will measure the geometry on their bikes, spread the info and Pole will look like fools.
This guy lost all credibility for me when he came out with that environmentalist article and stoked the fire around carbon being the worst thing ever for the environment, people throwing the waste in the ocean, blah blah blah, and then proceeded to CNC MACHINE an entire frame. Sure, it looks rad, but you want to talk about wasting resources? I'd love to see the pile of chips created in the process of making one of these frames.
It felt ok bouncing around in the parking lot. Which is the only test that really matters right?
And when you are finished with the frame you recycle that too, you can probably send a carbon frame back to China so they can put it in the ocean with the resin Pole man talked about. Wonder if they are actually allowed to dump resin in to the ocean? I guess if Melamine in milk was okay.......
"Allowed" has nothing to do with it, really.
Nah, in the Pole article I'm pretty sure they said it was okayed by the Chinese Government.
About that.......
Solid machined aluminum parts will often cost more because of the chips........and where those chips go. Here's 2.
Here's another 2
You can do it. Get them together......
Thank for stating something I've found seems to be true based on my experience with a Yuge bike with a fairly steep seat angle. I'm also hovering around a 76 STA and have found that I need to ride with my saddle a smidge lower than ideal to compensate for the shittier position I'm in when riding flattish or punchy up/down/technical trails.
The benefit is that when the trail is pointed up, the front/rear bias is better, but that doesn't magically disappear when the trail points a different direction and the seat is still raised.
Also bullshit on the notion of "this is what dropper post are for". Maybe I lack squid powers, but I'm not going to be activating a dropper every 15 seconds.
Anyway, at least for where I live I think I've found the limit for what is acceptable for me. I most certainly would not want to go steeper.
Oh definitely, but aluminum recycling is notoriously energy-intensive. I'm mostly saying that when you consider at the size of the aluminum billet that is presumably needed to create one half of that front triangle, it's a ridiculously wasteful endeavor...
I was at the Kárahnjúkastífla. They fucked up a couple of rivers and some beautiful wilderness areas for an Al smelter.
I think that would sum up most bikes/parts, we are a pretty wasteful bunch of humans.
The new Unno frames take 200hrs+ to make and each piece of carbon is positioned by a fancy robot rather than a Chinese person.
Are you suggesting the no numbers is because they are using Variable Geometry perfected by Intense ?
For race only
Funny thing is their numbers seem not stupid. The idea that might get some flak is suspension but geo seems like something that would get a lot of support online so it's more of a "forums were mean to me so I will behave like I'm a contestant on Desperate housewives of Helsinki"If You won't publish the numbers, no one will whine about them being stupid.
. 76/77 ST 64/65 HT . 170/165 travel
I kind of agree with this but I downsize my frames in this day of super long reaches. I'm just under 6'2" and ride a large Capra with a 465 reach. They recommend an XL. Pole would tell you that the downside you feel to the steep ST angle would go away if you increased reach.
Thank for stating something I've found seems to be true based on my experience with a Yuge bike with a fairly steep seat angle. I'm also hovering around a 76 STA and have found that I need to ride with my saddle a smidge lower than ideal to compensate for the shittier position I'm in when riding flattish or punchy up/down/technical trails.
The benefit is that when the trail is pointed up, the front/rear bias is better, but that doesn't magically disappear when the trail points a different direction and the seat is still raised.
Also bullshit on the notion of "this is what dropper post are for". Maybe I lack squid powers, but I'm not going to be activating a dropper every 15 seconds.
Anyway, at least for where I live I think I've found the limit for what is acceptable for me. I most certainly would not want to go steeper.
I have a AM hardtail which I only use for XC, it has 468mm reach, I am 6ft and I'd go for 500mm if I got a new bike.
I am thinking of going back to one of those crazy long 50mm XC stems and a straighter bar to make up for my lack of trust in the "Progessive Geo" movement.
Last edited:
Pole is correct about the steep actual seat tube angle and long reach numbers as a system.
As far as the Capra, that makes sense for you as the actual seat tube angle is pretty slack on that bike. And, with your giraffe legs, your saddle is probably pretty far behind the BB. A long reach with that setup would be really stretched out.
I totally agree with the long reach and steep ST angle working together to make a good climbing position that doesn't feel like you're on top of the front wheel when pedaling on the flats. I just haven't come around to the handling feel of really long bikes so I'm still running somewhat conservative reach numbers (I don't think we can call 465mm short) compared to what Pole, YT, or you recommend. I'm not saying I'm right about this, it's just the way I like my bikes to handle right now. I have yet to feel a ST angle that's too steep, the Capra is a slightly compromised climbing position. I'm just not ready to commit to the handling of a longer reach/front center/wheelbase that a steeper ST needs to feel good while pedaling on flat or downhill with the seat up.
The biggest challenge I've found with longer reaches/wheelbases is it magnifies any feelings of not being in the middle of the wheels when it occurs. So given two bikes with similar reach/stack and wheelbase numbers, if the chainstays are too long or short in comparison to the front center the effect in terms of weight shifts needed are much more pronounced.