I’m having the opposite experience. First bike I’ve had in years that I just can’t jive with. I don’t know if it’s the short chainstays paired with the long front end or what. I just can’t seem to get in sync with it. I probably should’ve gone with the large. I’m 6’2” and went with the XL which has a 515 reach and 425 chainstays. On sustained DH runs, it’s a pretty fun bike, but for most of the riding I do here in Mass, tight, technical quick up and downs, I’m not digging it at all.
I'm short so 425mm is great on an XL I can see wanting longer stays.
As @jackalope mentioned, I love mine. I built it up from a frame but unfortunately didn't get a frame only weight. I can say that Kona traditionally leans towards the overbuilt end of the spectrum but they took a ton of weight out of the 134 compared to the 153. Everything is slimmed down (though still super stiff as Kona does) and the carbon chainstay helps too. My complete with nice parts (metal cranks and wheels, only other carbon is a OneUp bar) but nothing crazy exotic weighs under 29lbs.
Hell yeah.
My first thought was SC against it too.
Yea it does, although kinda looks like its inspired by the Dissent and is single pivot. Also what's up with that fork crown? Is that what they're doing with short offsets these days?
"let's build a lightweight enduro bike, then use the heaviest tires available"
If only they made this in a tall human size.....They're essentially shorter travel Dissent frames:
I'm talking about the Dissent. The Giga is interesting, but I've no interest in carbon and Nukeproof is transitioning away from being a value brand.
Canfield One? Pretty cheap all things considered. Stack is pretty tall for a bike designed to be dual crown compatible, but may not be an issue for you.
Everyone else "why do bike companies spec bike with lightweight fragile tires?"
My bad. Those are the dh 34, not 22. The 22 weighs 1500g, one of the heaviest tires available. The 34 is still like 12 or 13 hundred grams.
I'm actually more annoyed with companies putting EXO shite on Enduro bikes.
you doubting german engineering?
Another bonded disaster waiting to happen?
dentites.
www.bikemag.com
If you're a small company doing full carbon bikes, trying to do chainstay-length-by-size is going to be a massive investment in tooling and increase in cost for a new frame. Instead of 5 front end moulds and one rear end, you all of a sudden need 5 front and 5 rear, so don't be surprised if some companies don't offer it.Esker Cycles Introduces the Rowl | BIKE Magazine
The most underrated bike of 2018 was the Esker Elkat. We've been waiting for a 29er ever since, and today we got one. Meet the Esker Rowl
I had wondered previously why there hadn't been more on the "Orion" linkage after their first bike launched last year. But this new one confuses me with chainstay length, I thought bikes were supposed to have something slightly longer to balance out the modern long front centre measurements, giving more stability at speed. 425mm seems very short.
yup. this is one reason why GG, among others, is still doing alloy rear triangles
In a size medium this is actually ideal for me. I have 414mm and its just a tad to short. I honestly would be all over this 140/160mm is what I ride now, but the regressive end leverage ratio is my stopping point. Id want to coil it.Esker Cycles Introduces the Rowl | BIKE Magazine
The most underrated bike of 2018 was the Esker Elkat. We've been waiting for a 29er ever since, and today we got one. Meet the Esker Rowl
I had wondered previously why there hadn't been more on the "Orion" linkage after their first bike launched last year. But this new one confuses me with chainstay length, I thought bikes were supposed to have something slightly longer to balance out the modern long front centre measurements, giving more stability at speed. 425mm seems very short.
or, you just tweak the BB to pivot relationship (like norco & (i believe) forbidden) to achieve different rear center distances with the same swingarm. no excuse, rather than laziness really.
Doing it with a monocoque rear triangle such as the ones used in most dual link designs is complicated. You might use interchangeable dropuots to achieve it, but it'd complicate the design.
i'm no enginerd, but i've heard some of you enginerds talk about how a mm or 2 drastically changes ride characteristics. wouldn't that just make each size bike be a different monster in suspension handling?
Not if you do it right. Moving an individual pivot a few mm (especially on dual short link bikes) can do some weird stuff, but imagine instead moving all of the pivot locations and shock mount points the same amount. Let's say the size medium bike is the "default" and the small moves everything forward 5mm, and the large goes back 5. The suspension kinematics are going to be the same in terms of leverage curve and whatnot, because the relationship between all the moving bits hasn't changed at all.
That's what Nicolai offer, their mutators.
The piece on the chainstay of the G1 is the length adjustment mutator, the adjustments at the dropout are for correcting rear wheel camber/track during the final assembly of the frame; https://en.nicolai-bicycles.com/shop/accessories/parts/rado-2-set.html
