[SuspectDevice]

I choose my bikes on the "fun" factor, because that is all I really care about.

Exactly. To give an honest answer to "how well does the R9 pedal"

Our team riders who are all between 160 and 180 run either 350 or 400 pound springs and no pro-pedal on the DHX shocks. Frank had pedaling as one of his top priorities when choosing the pivot location, and unlike a higher single pivot it still remains somewhat active under acceleration. It does not pedal all super-badass like a DW, VPP or VST linkaged bike, but it is one of the more active single pivots under pedaling.

 

[Jeremy R]

Exactly. To give an honest answer to "how well does the R9 pedal"

Our team riders who are all between 160 and 180 run either 350 or 400 pound springs and no pro-pedal on the DHX shocks. Frank had pedaling as one of his top priorities when choosing the pivot location, and unlike a higher single pivot it still remains somewhat active under acceleration.

Yeah, I have never heard anything negative about the pedaling of the R9. They looked to pedal well (away from me) when Jamie Ford passed me in a wet grass corner at Snowshoe practice this year, all while sliding sideways.

 

[snowskilz]

pedaling depends on the course. keystone you can pedal up to 50% of the course where as crested butte your pedaling 75% and telluride you barely pedal 20%.

Pedaling efficiency should definetly be consideration when buying a dh frame to race on. if your buying it to ride on the weekends then pedaling doesnt matter as much.

 

[thaflyinfatman]

It seems the only threads we see these days are a BB-height thread, or an axle path thread, but what about pedal feedback, leverage curve, front-rear weight bias during straight bombing v. cornering, wheelbase changes during corners?

haha, maybe you should read through what myself and Udi often end up posting (actually if you saw transcripts of our MSN discussions you'd probably think we were the world's biggest bike nerds). Some of us DO actually pore over that stuff... but yes on the whole, I am inclined to agree with what you've said. This may sound condescending but I think there are only about a dozen people on this board who do pay enough attention to all those tiny bike factors to make it worth discussing in such detail. Plenty of people like such and such a bike and use X marketing reason behind it to justify why they like it... but arguably the most usefully-opinionated guys are the ones like Acadian who can happily state what they do/don't like about a bike without feeling like they need to pull out the e-physics textbook to justify their opinion.

However - if you're willing to put in the time and effort to understand how bikes work, and how the geometry/suspension relates to technique and terrain, I think there is a tangible benefit to discussing it (certainly it's helped me over the past year or so - not that I claim to have a 100% understanding of everything on a bike but I do honestly believe that understanding a lot of stuff better has helped my riding). Like you say though... the vast majority of people just don't understand their own equipment that well, and a lot of bikes are fairly poorly set up, and that does kind of shoot in the foot any purported technological advantages or whatever else.

 

[dsotm]

haha, maybe you should read through what myself and Udi often end up posting (actually if you saw transcripts of our MSN discussions you'd probably think we were the world's biggest bike nerds). Some of us DO actually pore over that stuff... but yes on the whole, I am inclined to agree with what you've said. This may sound condescending but I think there are only about a dozen people on this board who do pay enough attention to all those tiny bike factors to make it worth discussing in such detail. Plenty of people like such and such a bike and use X marketing reason behind it to justify why they like it... but arguably the most usefully-opinionated guys are the ones like Acadian who can happily state what they do/don't like about a bike without feeling like they need to pull out the e-physics textbook to justify their opinion.

However - if you're willing to put in the time and effort to understand how bikes work, and how the geometry/suspension relates to technique and terrain, I think there is a tangible benefit to discussing it (certainly it's helped me over the past year or so - not that I claim to have a 100% understanding of everything on a bike but I do honestly believe that understanding a lot of stuff better has helped my riding). Like you say though... the vast majority of people just don't understand their own equipment that well, and a lot of bikes are fairly poorly set up, and that does kind of shoot in the foot any purported technological advantages or whatever else.

Hmmm, I wonder if F/R bias whould matter at all. A good rider should be able to changer their riding position to counteract for that. Unlike a car (where F/R bias is rather important), a bike's weight bias can be drastically changed by the rider with not much input. This is of course not including a rather drastic weight bias (like 90/10).

 

[sbabuser]

Hmmm, I wonder if F/R bias whould matter at all. A good rider should be able to changer their riding position to counteract for that. Unlike a car (where F/R bias is rather important), a bike's weight bias can be drastically changed by the rider with not much input. This is of course not including a rather drastic weight bias (like 90/10).

Ooooohhhh, burn!!
Proper form rules.

 

[toodles]

Like you say though... the vast majority of people just don't understand their own equipment that well, and a lot of bikes are fairly poorly set up, and that does kind of shoot in the foot any purported technological advantages or whatever else.

Strangely I think that many people (myself certainly included) spend far too much time worrying about the physics of the equation to the point where they're thinking about that stuff even when they're riding. In the end, the advancement of their ability is limited by what they're concentrating on.

 

[kidwoo]

Strangely I think that many people (myself certainly included) spend far too much time worrying about the physics of the equation to the point where they're thinking about that stuff even when they're riding. In the end, the advancement of their ability is limited by what they're concentrating on.

I usually think about boobies.

 

[sriracha]

I usually think about boobies.

official thread re-derail!

 

[dsotm]

Ooooohhhh, burn!!
Proper form rules.

That actually wasn't meant as I burn, I really am wondering how much a few ounces added or subtracted would affect a bike. The thing is, one's form does affect how one rides a bike. So a nose heavy bike, would place you in a rearward position which seems like it would be a less aggressive position.

 

[SuspectDevice]

As far as weight distribution goes, I had to change the fork settings on my xc hardtail when I swapped it to single speed. With less weight on the rear wheel the rear end was skipping on the descents. A little more air pressure and faster rebound sorted things out.

There are real "princess and pea" types out there when it comes to bike setup. I am certainly one of those people...

 

[thaflyinfatman]

That actually wasn't meant as I burn, I really am wondering how much a few ounces added or subtracted would affect a bike. The thing is, one's form does affect how one rides a bike. So a nose heavy bike, would place you in a rearward position which seems like it would be a less aggressive position.

He did actually say F/R weight bias "when cornering vs straight bombing" - ie body position when plowing, body position when cornering etc. This stuff is affected by your riding geometry and your riding style, but that's not to say it's irrelevant to discussion. For example, I just swapped my 50mm stem out for a 70mm one, and it has helped my body positioning significantly. How you setup your suspension etc also affects it - forks that are very soft make it harder to get right over the front in corners etc. Yeah all this is hugely affected by how you ride, obviously, but I don't think that renders it a useless point of discussion at all.

 

[Udi]

Strangely I think that many people (myself certainly included) spend far too much time worrying about the physics of the equation to the point where they're thinking about that stuff even when they're riding. In the end, the advancement of their ability is limited by what they're concentrating on.

Hmm I don't agree with that one. I'll agonize over bike setup when i'm not riding but once the run starts, that's it. 100% of my concentration will be on the riding, line choice, and ripping sweet skids. The next time I think about bike setup would only be at the end of the run, and only if something went wrong (maybe excess LSC caused me to slide out and kiss the dirt on that loose corner?)

If you're thinking about bike setup during a run, then something is likely wrong with your setup and you should have probably agonized over it more the night before... haha. The only excuse you'd have for thinking about it during an actual run was if you were riding someone else's bike and therefore felt uncomfortable/different on it in some regards.. but on your own I don't think you should (or at least I don't anyway).

you'd probably think we were the world's biggest bike nerds

speak for yourself, nerd!

 

[thaflyinfatman]

Strangely I think that many people (myself certainly included) spend far too much time worrying about the physics of the equation to the point where they're thinking about that stuff even when they're riding. In the end, the advancement of their ability is limited by what they're concentrating on.

Pretty broad statement there. Some things do unequivocably help, some are just placebos, a lot are a bit of both. Worrying about how much OMG BRAKE JACK your bike has whilst riding, unless it causes physical issues that you're pretty sure you're not dreaming up, is a waste of time. However, spending a while playing with how your bars are rolled back/forwards, or your brake lever positioning, or wider bars/different suspension setup/different tyre pressures etc etc is totally worthwhile IMO.

 

[sbabuser]

Yeah all this is hugely affected by how you ride, obviously, but I don't think that renders it a useless point of discussion at all.

No, not useless, but much less significant. If you sit straight and upright, then your stem length is going to have a huge impact on where your upper body is in relation to your bb. If you keep your body low, then the slackness of your arms will allow your body to stay centered much easier, regardless of stem length (to a degree).

 

[toodles]

Pretty broad statement there. Some things do unequivocably help, some are just placebos, a lot are a bit of both. Worrying about how much OMG BRAKE JACK your bike has whilst riding, unless it causes physical issues that you're pretty sure you're not dreaming up, is a waste of time. However, spending a while playing with how your bars are rolled back/forwards, or your brake lever positioning, or wider bars/different suspension setup/different tyre pressures etc etc is totally worthwhile IMO.

Ah yes but I'm not saying proper setup isn't paramount, just that we tend to focus on the interesting aspects of bike nerdery more than the other aspects. Count the number of threads on any forum about suspension, then look at the number of threads on tyre choice and pressure for any given condition and terrain, bar width and height, technique, whatever and you'll see what i mean.

 

[toodles]

I usually think about boobies.

Me too. Ah you meant whilst riding.

 

[thaflyinfatman]

No, not useless, but much less significant. If you sit straight and upright, then your stem length is going to have a huge impact on where your upper body is in relation to your bb. If you keep your body low, then the slackness of your arms will allow your body to stay centered much easier, regardless of stem length (to a degree).

Less significant? Than what?

Really, I think in spite of the difficulties, technical info is conveyed a lot better than how-to-ride info is, over the net. If you don't like it, that's fine... just don't jump on those of us who do actually get something out of it.

 

[dsotm]

He did actually say F/R weight bias "when cornering vs straight bombing" - ie body position when plowing, body position when cornering etc. This stuff is affected by your riding geometry and your riding style, but that's not to say it's irrelevant to discussion. For example, I just swapped my 50mm stem out for a 70mm one, and it has helped my body positioning significantly. How you setup your suspension etc also affects it - forks that are very soft make it harder to get right over the front in corners etc. Yeah all this is hugely affected by how you ride, obviously, but I don't think that renders it a useless point of discussion at all.

Ok, I actually thought you meant the bike's front rear bias (without rider or suspension setup included). I already know about the effects of suspension setup and things such as stem length on riding position and therefore riding style. What I was referring to was how much of an effect adding 200g to the rear wheel would make (or something similar).