Quantcast

Random new bike thread

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,002
24,549
media blackout
I like Thomson but I fear they haven’t kept up with the times. They are popular with the Paul’s Components / bike jewelry set. Hence the made in Taiwan ti hardtail.
yea, i shard this with hab, and he commented on the dated geometry. my response was that its perfect for the kind of person that would actually consider a ti hardtail from thomson.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,080
5,999
borcester rhymes
i suspect the company themselves pulled it, after they started getting asked for their patent numbers and an explanation as to why none of their alleged trademarks showed up in a TM search
That's what I figured, but the same company that suggested "Make biking great again" as a slogan will probably be the first to blame others...
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,080
5,999
borcester rhymes

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,002
24,549
media blackout
I'm not going to try to wrap my head around the first one, but in the second wouldn't that be a good thing? Don't you want a "better" "angle of attack" as they say? And the third one....lawdy.

I still have mine...and it's still 26". I even rode it last year.
making a pictogram with arrows doesn't mean its compliant with the laws of physics
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,002
24,549
media blackout
Everything on that page honestly made me pretty angry. It's like the cocky dumbshit in your high school physics class yelling over top of the teacher. EVERYONE ELSE IN THE BIKE INDUSTRY IS A MORON AND I'M THE ONLY ONE SMART ENOUGH TO WORK EVERYTHING OUT, SO IT'S A SECRET IN CASE YOU STEAL MY IDEAS. Like anyone was rushing out to copy your grossly falling rate rear end.

"Axle force path"... ok mate. Not sure where to even begin describing that except to say "not a thing". The front wheel does not care where the rear axle is when you're hitting a bump hard enough for OTB excursions to be a concern.
"Scrub radius"... a radius is a straight line for starters, and this is not a scrub radius at all, because the term scrub radius refers to suspension self-steer behaviour when the linkage moves in a plane that is perpendicular to the direction of travel AND has a steering element (in other words, car front suspension...). Absolute gibberish. Maybe they were trying to reference an actual contact patch path when cornering, which would have been almost as good because that still isn't significantly affected by rear wheel size on dirt anyway due to the very high slip angles.
"Force vector"... random arrows attached to nothing. WHAT'S A FREE BODY DIAGRAM ANYWAY. According to Newton's 420th law, "F = whatever I want."

They would have had a better time selling homeopathic bikes. As long as you believe you've got a bike...
it just reeked of the late 90's / early 00's mentality "our stuff is the best you can't even question it". they should call themselves bong resin bikes, because they've probably been encased in that stuff since back then.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,002
24,549
media blackout
@Steve M i also did a quick patent search, i couldn't even find a patent number on their website, which leads me to assume:

  1. Its not their patent, they're just licensing it; or it was someone else's patent they acquired. Nothing wrong with licensing something, but not stating that is more than a little disingenuous.
  2. The patent doesn't cover what they say it does; they talked about pivot placement and such, but then also mentioned bearing combinations? Misleading.
  3. The patent is so poorly worded it wouldn't be able to withstand legal scrutiny if it were challenged - and that's assuming the have the ability (read: "funding") to defend such a challenge. Given all the other nonsense they've posted (combined with the fact that they're bragging about a bike with a regressive rate) leads me to assume this is the most likely scenario.
  4. There is no patent. This is likely false advertising (which is illegal)
i also did a quick TM search, which is generally quicker and easier to return results, and nothing turned up.
 

slimshady

¡Mira, una ardilla!
@Steve M i also did a quick patent search, i couldn't even find a patent number on their website, which leads me to assume:

  1. Its not their patent, they're just licensing it; or it was someone else's patent they acquired. Nothing wrong with licensing something, but not stating that is more than a little disingenuous.
  2. The patent doesn't cover what they say it does; they talked about pivot placement and such, but then also mentioned bearing combinations? Misleading.
  3. The patent is so poorly worded it wouldn't be able to withstand legal scrutiny if it were challenged - and that's assuming the have the ability (read: "funding") to defend such a challenge. Given all the other nonsense they've posted (combined with the fact that they're bragging about a bike with a regressive rate) leads me to assume this is the most likely scenario.
  4. There is no patent. This is likely false advertising (which is illegal)
i also did a quick TM search, which is generally quicker and easier to return results, and nothing turned up.
I don't think a pivot placement for a single pivot frame could be patented. There's no way to protect/trademark a mathematical formula showing you've found the perfect/magical/unicorn jizzed location with relation to any other frame dimensions.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,002
24,549
media blackout
I don't think a pivot placement for a single pivot frame could be patented. There's no way to protect/trademark a mathematical formula showing you've found the perfect/magical/unicorn jizzed location with relation to any other frame dimensions.
i believe there are some patents where pivot placement was an element of the claims, however it was to support other claims for certain kinematics. not the location by itself.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,002
24,549
media blackout
@Steve M i also did a quick patent search, i couldn't even find a patent number on their website, which leads me to assume:

  1. Its not their patent, they're just licensing it; or it was someone else's patent they acquired. Nothing wrong with licensing something, but not stating that is more than a little disingenuous.
  2. The patent doesn't cover what they say it does; they talked about pivot placement and such, but then also mentioned bearing combinations? Misleading.
  3. The patent is so poorly worded it wouldn't be able to withstand legal scrutiny if it were challenged - and that's assuming the have the ability (read: "funding") to defend such a challenge. Given all the other nonsense they've posted (combined with the fact that they're bragging about a bike with a regressive rate) leads me to assume this is the most likely scenario.
  4. There is no patent. This is likely false advertising (which is illegal)
i also did a quick TM search, which is generally quicker and easier to return results, and nothing turned up.

i forgot about non-publication requests here, but that's only for a patent that will only be filed in the US with the USPTO; the requirements for that is a patent that HAS not and WILL not be filed in another country. the only scenarios which that usually applies to are designs that are already patented in another country, or are otherwise un-patentable in other countries.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
86,002
24,549
media blackout
since spomer has essentially asked we cease beating the dead horse over on vital........ i'll continue the flogging here. it was confirmed that the 2 accounts that got banned were not the same person, but 2 people from the same bike shop using the same computer. which to me still represents a coordinated effort.



copypasta'ing myself:

i did check the time stamps on the comments while they were active, it didn't start off bad, but it devolved quickly when they refused to answer questions and it became readily apparent that there were some shenanigans occurring from their side (multiple accounts, etc). i can only feel so bad for them when they start off their press release "No marketing bs...." then proceed with nothing but marketing BS and a stubborn refusal to answer technical questions.

I've seen the identical press release on numerous sites now, with similar coordinated efforts in the comment section. one of my favorites was "I absolutely LOVE that they don’t go in-depth with the frame numbers. I’ve been in the bike biz trenches for almost 30 years and I can’t stand talking to box-reader internet junkie consumers about stack and reach numbers like it matters. BECAUSE IT DOESN’T. EVER." they seem to be oblivious to the fact that posting press release son these websites is only going to invite these kinds of discussions and questions, because that's where the better informed mtb consumer is going for information, and they will be completely written off for the kind of response they had.

for me personally, the fact that they liked to talk about their patented suspension, yet refused to post the patent # or even answer any questions about it is extremely suspect.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,080
5,999
borcester rhymes
I have an x4 as well and it's one of two stems that have ever twisted on me. Hard to get good torque on the 1.5mm stem bolts they use. Now I wrench the fuck out of them every time and will replace the stem when I can.
 

toodles

ridiculously corgi proportioned
Aug 24, 2004
5,518
4,770
Australia
Have these on my bikes... will keep an eye. Is that the 4mm kind or the 3mm kind? Have one of each iirc.
It was the 4mm kind. Ran it on my DJ (probably what killed it) and then trail bike where it finally died one ride. It actually made it back to the carpark (gently) with just the one clamp but yeah I guess everything aluminium and weight optimised will eventually fatigue and die.