[Tantrum Cycles]

Again - you need to stop thinking you're a special case here - it's the year 2016 and people are in general skeptical (perhaps moreso in your case since you've already released one design that was by some reports here a bit of a flop).

I think it's pretty reasonable that no one will just take your word for something, in a world where there is a lot of marketing about, and a lot of tools (and knowledgeable people) to help verify these claims.

I don't just "choose to believe" anything ANYONE says. In fact, even for something as simple as a frame weight, a scale pic is nice to have. Not doubting you on that one, but I'm just illustrating something that should be obvious to you - it's no longer the age of jesus and his supposed bible, people want proof for everything.

I am just another grunt, just like you. I encourage skepticism..Especially when presented with engineering fact.

I don't want anybody to take my word on anything. Ride the bike. Word. But, yet, you're taking the "word" of a guy that by his own admission, is way far off. If you respect his opinion, maybe you should pay attention to it. Maybe being off by a factor of 10 is meaningless to you. Let's see, that means the LR could vary from 2.0:10 to 20:1, or 0.2: 1. I don't know, and it doesn't matter! Numbers are fun!!

Even your comment on the weight, c'mon, I couldn't tare the scale before I put the bike on it? Wait, now I need a VIDEO of me taring the scale before I put the bike on. With some kind of absolute time signature to show it wasn't spliced. If I want to lie, I can fake anything.

Anything but the bike.

So ask yourself, why would I want to? Why would I subject myself to this if it was going to come out in a few months that I was absolutely lying thru my teeth. Maybe I don't ever want to work in the bike industry? Maybe this is all a big joke?

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

I'm on a large Evil Following with a 50mm stem. I stick to those reach measurements. Had a L Enduro 29 before the Evil. Both fit great.

Vietnam is a series of stunts connected by relatively smooth trails. It's a local favorite, no doubt, but it's not really a great place for a technical exhibition.

My favorite local place is Russell Mill. It combines technical spots with decent singletrack and is an out-and back loop from an easily accessed parking lot. I call it the proving ground because I usually fuck my shit up there, and can walk back to the car when I do. It's north of the city in Billerica on Rt 3.

Harold parker forest is supremely technical, also north of the city. Lynn woods is also OK, but not my favorite. A lot of companies run demos in the Fells, as it's so close to the city, but it's a pretty big loop compared to some of the others.

Sandwich, would you please drop me an email from our website, www.tantrumcycles.com

The bikes are a little small for you, let's call the frame M/S. If you're much over 6 feet, it might hurt a little.

 

[Udi]

@Tantrum Cycles yeah but you can't blatantly lie about a blueprint that matches your actual frame - if you publish a leverage curve along with that, then an independent party can verify the curve by creating their own. This will give an accurate true/false answer on your claims, which is what the public wants.

As for the weight thing - I think the point you're missing is the last thing I said. A picture is worth a thousand words, and an LR curve is just that - a curve. It's infinitely variable and best represented on a 2D graph with accurately labeled axis. That's all Hugh asked of you - I was the one who requested a point of verification.

This is no longer about engineering, it's just about good marketing - no one cares about you dropping a few random numbers - it's not useful data to most people - and not even close to a complete representation. Post up the supposed leverage curve in IMAGE form, put your money where your mouth is. It seems to me like you are the one who is afraid here, since you've been asked multiple times to post the supposed accurate leverage curve and all we get is walls of text. Afraid your bike actually DOES suck? If it doesn't, why not provide some tangible evidence that can be pitched against other bikes? Afraid it won't stack up?

Of course you can lie about anything you want - but right now you're replying to a reasonable attempt at mapping your bike in Linkage with the equivalent of "I know you are so what am I". By all means continue to do that, but it's not going to earn you any respect here, nor sell you any bikes.

I'm ejecting from this discussion until you post an actual leverage curve of your frame that "corrects" the one posted. Feel free to keep blabbing on, I'll reply when I see the picture.

 

[AngryMetalsmith]

Hi Angry,

"lack the funds" isn't exactly right. More like, "have at least 100 things that are a higher priority to me". Like production, demo bikes, eurobike, interbike, etc. Massive expenditures that I think are more important.

Yes, when I pull this off, I'll even be impressed. This is a huge undertaking, with many hats not able to be paid for, yet. But, my "plan" seems to be working and we're on schedule to deliver bikes this year.

I will take your good luck wishes, thanks.

I still gotta call Bullshit. For a company owner who plans to go global in 4-6 months with full production runs of 2-3 models and distribution, you spend way too much time arguing with us in this thread. With all the tasks to complete, and the many hats to wear, you don't have the time.

Some of us on here are small business owners and do actually have a grasp of the scale of your project. But you'll probably just tell us we don't understand or that we are not your customers. Either way I doubt seriously that we'll be seeing your bikes in shops by November or January.

And normally I wouldn't call out another business owner online or be as aggressive as I have been with you. But you have done nothing but come on here and insult us and beat your chest. RideMonkey is the last place to proclaim one's genius. We pound on blowhards who are determined to swat the hive.

 

[djjohnr]

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

I still gotta call Bullshit. For a company owner who plans to go global in 4-6 months with full production runs of 2-3 models and distribution, you spend way too much time arguing with us in this thread. With all the tasks to complete, and the many hats to wear, you don't have the time.

Some of us on here are small business owners and do actually have a grasp of the scale of your project. But you'll probably just tell us we don't understand or that we are not your customers. Either way I doubt seriously that we'll be seeing your bikes in shops by November or January.

And normally I wouldn't call out another business owner online or be as aggressive as I have been with you. But you have done nothing but come on here and insult us and beat your chest. RideMonkey is the last place to proclaim one's genius. We pound on blowhards who are determined to swat the hive.

I certainly would hope you would call bullshit. Somebody has to take up the mantle if Udi goes thru with his promise to leave (please).

Let me clarify "global" and my plans. I am producing an initial production run of 200 frames. Why 200? Simple, that's standard MOQ for just about anything. Out of these 200 frames, I have the ability to divide them into the Meltdown @ 160 x 27.5, the Outburst @125 x 29, and them mixed wheel Downburst, with 150 x 29 front with 165 x 27.5 rear.

This is done with a combination of different bolt-on dropouts, rockers, shock and lower shock mount. The same bolt-on drop out feature allows me to offer both 142 x 12 and 148 x 12. All bikes will fit up to 3.25 tire width.

When I say "around the world", this should never be confused with worldwide market saturation. It just means I have orders from Europe,(oops, I guess I need to count England separately again), Asia, Australia and New Zealand. So they will be out there in different parts of the world.

As for arguing on this thread, one of my main jobs is to get the word out. The PB article (and more to come) and various forums are all part of it. no, I am certainly not worried about losing a potential customer because he saw me tell various forum pundits that their info is very wrong. To the contrary, if your info was right, how would ANYBODY be my customer.

That's the funniest thing of all, that you think my best course of action is to say "wow, thanks guys, you have set me straight, what WAS I thinking all my life?" Plus, I'm working about 16 hrs a day, so this is great comic relief in my spare time.

oh ya, you never heard me say I was a genius. I could care less. Or insulted you or anyone else (unlike, hmmmm, many of you). What you heard me say was that the info presented is grossly incorrect. Period. Because it is. You don't even have to be smart to get that.

You also heard me say that I have invented a mechanism that does things conventional suspension can't do. You don't even have to be smart to do that, maybe I'm just lucky. But it still does what I say. Otherwise I'm just a liar, smart or not.

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

@Tantrum Cycles yeah but you can't blatantly lie about a blueprint that matches your actual frame - if you publish a leverage curve along with that, then an independent party can verify the curve by creating their own.

This just doesn't make sense. I can easily make a blueprint to show what ever LR i want. And easily make a really cool LR graph with axis and numbers and EVERYTHING!!! They would match exactly. I could give the coordinates for such a drawing to everyone and they would produce the exact same LR curve. It's not rocket surgery, it's not even hard.

The only way they could ever dispute it is by measuring an actual bike.

Which, by the way, is the only way anybody can ever dispute the numbers I have already presented. A blueprint with a pretty graph is no more creditable than me saying "70% of your numbers are off the chart".

It's the same thing. You will not believe my numbers, no matter how they're presented, until you have a bike to measure.

Fair enough, then let's talk about theory in an objective manner, without name calling. No interest? It seems not.

 

[AngryMetalsmith]

oh ya, you never heard me say I was a genius. I could care less. Or insulted you or anyone else (unlike, hmmmm, many of you). What you heard me say was that the info presented is grossly incorrect. Period. Because it is. You don't even have to be smart to get that.

You also heard me say that I have invented a mechanism that does things conventional suspension can't do. You don't even have to be smart to do that, maybe I'm just lucky. But it still does what I say. Otherwise I'm just a liar, smart or not.

Now I'm starting to wonder if you're being subtle with the insults or are just oblivious to it. Either way you're condescending and combative in your replies to this thread. I don't recall reading posts by other bike company owners and designers behaving that way.

But keep swatting the hive and alienating potential customers.

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

- but right now you're replying to a reasonable attempt at mapping your bike in Linkage with the equivalent of "I know you are so what am I".

Actually, my response is more like "sorry, your numbers are grossly in error. My responsibility to my IP prevents me from sharing exact details, but I can tell you that 70% of your graph is off the charts, the falling rate you show continues far too long and is too steep."

Also, "the conclusions you are drawing are incorrect". I can say this because I know it is true, no other reason.

No name calling by me (mirror included)

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

So let's get back to theory, now that UDI has bowed out.

This is independent of any debate about what LR curve my bike may or may not have. It IS a lower LR (numerically) at topout and has a pretty good falling rate to sag. Vague, yes, but enough for this question.

It has been presented here by quite a few, that a low MR means it will be very harsh at full extension, such as when the wheel leaves the ground and comes back to earth.

I have a couple of questions about that

1) Would there be any agreement, that a coil spring, with no preload, would have zero force at full extension, regardless of LR?

2) what about the front fork? It is a 1:1 LR. With an air spring. Why isn't it horribly harsh?

3) If, said suspension was designed to sag 30% under the riders weight, wouldn't that indicate an overall force that was similar to another suspension design at 30%, with the same rider? So, if I can gently sit on the bike and get it to sag easily to 30%, how can there possibly be enough force at full extension to be harsh? It's not like the bike can hold itself up (unless climbing).

These are serious questions about one aspect of the presented analysis. No exact info is needed. I hope some of you can be objective enough to discuss this in a logical manner

 

[troy]

@Tantrum Cycles all we are trying to say here is that a low and digressive initial LR gives harshER response than the opposite situation (not harsh as it is struggling to move, but harsher compared to other designs). Especially with an air shock, where having higher initial LR helps with added air seals friction and pressure difference between positive and negative chamber. That is why people are having a hard time believing that You bike has the best bump absorption ever.

 

[hmcleay]

So let's get back to theory, now that UDI has bowed out.

This is independent of any debate about what LR curve my bike may or may not have. It IS a lower LR (numerically) at topout and has a pretty good falling rate to sag. Vague, yes, but enough for this question.

It has been presented here by quite a few, that a low MR means it will be very harsh at full extension, such as when the wheel leaves the ground and comes back to earth.

I have a couple of questions about that

1) Would there be any agreement, that a coil spring, with no preload, would have zero force at full extension, regardless of LR?

2) what about the front fork? It is a 1:1 LR. With an air spring. Why isn't it horribly harsh?

3) If, said suspension was designed to sag 30% under the riders weight, wouldn't that indicate an overall force that was similar to another suspension design at 30%, with the same rider? So, if I can gently sit on the bike and get it to sag easily to 30%, how can there possibly be enough force at full extension to be harsh? It's not like the bike can hold itself up (unless climbing).

These are serious questions about one aspect of the presented analysis. No exact info is needed. I hope some of you can be objective enough to discuss this in a logical manner

This is essentially the same question that you asked me in post #520, so this answer covers both questions.
1. of course, yes.

2. I suspect that most decent air forks have a larger negative spring volume (relative to +ve spring volume) than their rear shock counterparts (rear shocks are quite limited by packaging constraints). Perhaps someone else here can validate this?

3. The thing is, that humans are incredibly sensitive to the rate of force change, aka wheel rate, not just wheel force.There are plenty of first-hand accounts from riders in this forum, who would argue that they certainly can feel the stiff wheel rate near top-out (despite the low force values) of various designs that exhibit this characteristic.
And there's even a product on the market that specifically addresses this characteristic by increasing the negative spring volume, the Vorsprung Corset, designed by RideMonkey's own @SteveM. This product has been very well received, and evidently, riders ARE noticing the improvements in the wheel rate in the early part of travel, and are voting with their wallets.
Steve doesn't post much here these days; presumably he's a multi-millionaire now and is relaxing on his private island without an internet connection.

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

This is essentially the same question that you asked me in post #520, so this answer covers both questions.
1. of course, yes.

so, how does harshness in the first part of the travel equate to this statement?:

This is a quote from your post on page 13:

"The Total Wheel Force graph posted shows that under hard acceleration (climbing), the Wheel Force curve becomes pretty much flat in the zone between 10-50mm travel. This means under these conditions, the wheel can pretty much occupy any position in this zone without any resistance"

I realize you are talking about climbing, when there is even MORE force due to AS, so how is less force, (since there can be no AS when the wheel is off the ground), equate to "harsh"

You have stated above that the wheel can move from 10-50 mm of travel without ANY RESISTANCE. None. Like it can just fall thru the first 50 mm of travel. BTW, this is 31% on a 160 mm travel bike, where you might set the sag level.

So if it can fall to sag while at max AS, how can it be harsh without that added force? Please explain this conundrum.

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

No takers on the problem stated above. Somebody told me privately that it was a question intended to harass. If, by "harass", you mean "ask you to look at these numbers objectively, then yes.

So, I won't to pose the question in a more detailed way. Hugh, these are based on your numbers and graphs, so if I misquote you, please let me know.

To set this up, as you all know by know, there is a claim that a falling rate will be harsh off the top, do to it's lower LR. In particular, that the Missing Link will be VERY harsh off the top due to the low LR at the top of the stroke.

Here is the exact quote "As you can see, the first 10mm of travel has an incredibly steep force curve, which gives a very high wheel rate. This would be noticeably harsh when the suspension extends into holes such as braking bumps."

At the same time, it has been presented, by the same person, that, while pedaling at a high effort, the suspension would have a floppy area where the suspension could compress between 10 and 50 mm with no resistance. What the graph actually shows is NEGATIVE resistance, as if the bike might somehow is getting sucked into the travel.

Again, here is the exact quote

"his graph actually correlates with what the graph on the Tantrum Cycles website is trying to display. As you can see, at about 80% pedaling effort, the Wheel Force curve becomes pretty much flat in the zone between 10-50mm travel. This means under these conditions, the wheel can pretty much occupy any position in this zone without any resistance (except its movement is still damped by the shock). This is very unique behaviour, and the best way I can think to describe this is ‘floppy’.

Normally, such a flat force curve would result in huge oscillations when pedalling on smooth ground (due to body movements up and down), but I think that might not play such a role here, since the suspension is being held hard against the top-out position.

So I believe Brian when he says that the wheel can ‘instantly react’ to bumps when climbing hard, because there is no spring force resisting its movement! Whether this trait is desirable is another issue, proper ride reviews will tell.

Now, let's take actual numbers from Hugh's graph, forgetting there relative accuracy or not. Let's say there is a bike with these exact characteristics.

With no pedaling, there is no AS force, so the force at the wheel from the shock is the only resistance to compression. Hugh shows a starting force of about 400N, or 94 pounds. Note that I am not counting the ramp up he shows starting at a zero force, we know that is just a graphing error, airshocks have a breakaway force that ids not zero. This is worst case for my argument.

What it means is that you must weigh at least 95 pounds to get the suspension to move when you sit on it. Or, a bump force must be at least 95 pounds to break thru the "preload" (note: this is similar to a preloaded coil spring).

Now we go to the graph of combined AS and spring force. Again, ignoring the rmap up from zero, which again, we know is not true, because the bike is at full extension ONLY because of this AS force. So the starting force shown at max AS is about 970N or 218 pounds.

Just as above, this means you need to weigh 219 pounds to move the shock just with your weight. Or the bump force needs to be over 219 pounds.

So on the one hand, it is claimed that we have a bike that is claimed to be harsh at topout, with a starting force of around 94 pounds.

On the other hand, we have a bike that is claimed has a starting force of 218 pounds, which is not only not harsh, but it can cycle between 10 and 50 mm with no increase in force. I

But, in the first case, once you broke thru the initial force, it would go naturally into it's travel.

In the second case, once you broke thru the initial force, it would also move, but the moment your combined weight/bump force fell below the force of 218 pounds, the suspension would snap back to full extension and stay there until a sufficient force spike moved it again. Like a pop-off valve, continually resisting movement on small stuff and finally giving way on big stuff.

For the record, based on Hugh's force graph, his model produces about 480 N (108 pounds) at 40 mm travel, which means a 108 pound rider would be at 25% sag at his force levels. Obviously all forces would be higher if this was a setup for a heavier rider

So, which sounds harsher? A 108 pound rider trying to break thru a force of 95 pounds? Or a 108 pound rider trying to break thru 218 pounds?

 

[WestCoastHucker]

i'mma go out on a limb here, but i don't think anybody gives a fuck anymore....

 

[4130biker]

I'll wait for indipendent reviews and potentially to ride one. Thanks for the shit show!

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

i'mma go out on a limb here, but i don't think anybody gives a fuck anymore....

I do think they care. Or they wouldn't have argued so strongly in the first place. Whether they care to revisit this one aspect remains to be seen. But the topic of top of the stroke harshness with falling rates has been widely and hotly debated, not so much here (ok, a little), but for example, the thread Udi directed me to. It was (almost) just as bad as this one.

So there is serious disagreement on this topic in general and a lot of misconception and opinion being presented as engineering fact. How do we sort opinion from fact? Slowly, logically and step by step. For those that just want to rabble rouse and post funny videos, it'll be a little boring. And to the untrained lay person.

But if somebody wants to have a serious discussion about the variables involved, this is a start.

And it's actually the start of a small article I'm writing, tentative l titled, "Why all falling rates are not the same (and why it can be good for you in controlled doses)". When I'm done, I'll post it in a new thread so we can separate it from my bike design.

Because a lot of these numbers just don't add up. And we're engineers (some of us?). It doesn't count if the numbers don't add up and we just wave our hands and post funny pictures. These are numbers posted by a known expert and they should be able to be discussed with an open mind.

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

I'll wait for independent reviews and potentially to ride one. Thanks for the shit show!

Hey at least it's been entertaining, if not exactly enlightening. One of the big benefits to me is understanding the mis-understanding the suspension will have going forward. The objections raised here, while based on bad numbers, will still be brought up in the future, even when the correct numbers are revealed. Why? For one, it DOES have a falling rate in certain parts of the curve. This has been deemed evil. So I've been preparing some great demos and videos, which I wouldn't have bothered with before. But the new videos add to helping people understand what's really happening, even without engineering knowledge.

I will start a new thread when i'm ready, so we can leave behind the 15 pages of hilarity. Well, and start all over again, but on a more focused subject.

cheers

b

 

[jstuhlman]

 

[Westy]

I predict that in a few years the monkey will be filled with threads titled:

The Missing Link Tuning Thread
Is there a Freeride version of the the Missing Link?
Can you fit a 3" Gazzalodi on a Missing Link?
Looking to trade virgin child for missing link
Will Enter Enter Contest For Missing Link
Will Trade Metal Fillings for Missing Link
I got pregnant after riding a Missing Link
I got EbolAIDS after riding a Missing Link
Bacon
Loco Sucks
Skynet has become Self-Aware
Will Trade Missing Link for a bucket of spit
How To Travel In Time to Destroy Skynet
Will trade Missing Link for crack-baby jerkey
How To Travel In Time to Prevent Someone From Destroying Skynet
Destroy All Humans
Destroy All Humans
Destroy All Humans
MurderBot 2032 Trying to Bunnyhop

 

[shirk007]

I do think they care. Or they wouldn't have argued so strongly in the first place. Whether they care to revisit this one aspect remains to be seen. But the topic of top of the stroke harshness with falling rates has been widely and hotly debated, not so much here (ok, a little), but for example, the thread Udi directed me to. It was (almost) just as bad as this one.

So there is serious disagreement on this topic in general and a lot of misconception and opinion being presented as engineering fact. How do we sort opinion from fact? Slowly, logically and step by step. For those that just want to rabble rouse and post funny videos, it'll be a little boring. And to the untrained lay person.

But if somebody wants to have a serious discussion about the variables involved, this is a start.

And it's actually the start of a small article I'm writing, tentative l titled, "Why all falling rates are not the same (and why it can be good for you in controlled doses)". When I'm done, I'll post it in a new thread so we can separate it from my bike design.

Because a lot of these numbers just don't add up. And we're engineers (some of us?). It doesn't count if the numbers don't add up and we just wave our hands and post funny pictures. These are numbers posted by a known expert and they should be able to be discussed with an open mind.

I'd like to see more discussion on this.

My garage build single pivot fs has a linear LR. I was looking to redesign my next version to something more progressive based on recent readings on here on the gospel that anything not progressive with enough delta is the antichrist.

Possibly we move it out of this shit show of a thread. The haters are just going to keep flinging shit in this one.

 

[StiHacka]

I predict that in a few years the monkey will be filled with threads titled:

The Missing Link Tuning Thread
Is there a Freeride version of the the Missing Link?
Can you fit a 3" Gazzalodi on a Missing Link?
Looking to trade virgin child for missing link
Will Enter Enter Contest For Missing Link
Will Trade Metal Fillings for Missing Link
I got pregnant after riding a Missing Link
I got EbolAIDS after riding a Missing Link
Bacon
Loco Sucks
Skynet has become Self-Aware
Will Trade Missing Link for a bucket of spit
How To Travel In Time to Destroy Skynet
Will trade Missing Link for crack-baby jerkey
How To Travel In Time to Prevent Someone From Destroying Skynet
Destroy All Humans
Destroy All Humans
Destroy All Humans
MurderBot 2032 Trying to Bunnyhop

You forgot "Is the little-endian party dying?"
"Is the big-endian party dying?"

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

I'd like to see more discussion on this.

My garage build single pivot fs has a linear LR. I was looking to redesign my next version to something more progressive based on recent readings on here on the gospel that anything not progressive with enough delta is the antichrist.

Possibly we move it out of this shit show of a thread. The haters are just going to keep flinging shit in this one.

Hi Shirk,

Thanks for the interest.

There are just too many variables to make those blanket statements. You're right, this thread is covered (in it). When I get my article ready, I'll post it. I'll have as close to apples-to-apples you can get to compare rising, falling, straight rate and coil. No, the last two are not the same, even with a linear spring.

Also, still working on some interesting videos, LOTS of filming and editing.

In case you're wondering, I've been designing suspension and dampers for about 40 years, on everything from MX, mtb, Dakar rallye, F1, Indy cars. stuff like that. Not saying I know everything, but I picked up a few things along the way. As we have seen, this can be in direct contradiction to some of the apostles here. Hopefully, the new thread can stay relatively numerical, which cold get a bit boring......for a change?

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

I wonder what would happen if I made a new account and posted it under a different name.....not gonna, but it's be fun. Then I could go argue against myself....hmmmmm

 

[Da Peach]

New model name:

TL;DR

(you could offer a "TLD Race" edition!)

 

[norbar]

Let me clarify "global" and my plans. I am producing an initial production run of 200 frames. Why 200? Simple, that's standard MOQ for just about anything. Out of these 200 frames, I have the ability to divide them into the Meltdown @ 160 x 27.5, the Outburst @125 x 29, and them mixed wheel Downburst, with 150 x 29 front with 165 x 27.5 rear.

This is done with a combination of different bolt-on dropouts, rockers, shock and lower shock mount. The same bolt-on drop out feature allows me to offer both 142 x 12 and 148 x 12. All bikes will fit up to 3.25 tire width.

.

So the Meltdown and Outburst feature the same tubing just different rockers and dropouts? Shouldn't 2 frames with different intended use have different tubing so the weight/durability ratio will correspond with how the bike will be ridden?

 

[Westy]

I wonder what would happen if I made a new account and posted it under a different name.....not gonna, but it's be fun. Then I could go argue against myself....hmmmmm

I think the technical term is jerking off.

 

[norbar]

I could go argue against myself....hmmmmm

That would give you a chance to be right.

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

I think the technical term is jerking off.

Wait, aren't I being bated by masters, here?

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

So the Meltdown and Outburst feature the same tubing just different rockers and dropouts? Shouldn't 2 frames with different intended use have different tubing so the weight/durability ratio will correspond with how the bike will be ridden?

Technically, yes. I was able to lighten up the rockers on the 125 mm x 29er for that reason. but I didn't want to go too far. Both bikes are really in the same general market, aggressive trail bikes. And I could certainly see somebody racing that bike in an enduro, especially with a 150 mm 29 front end and/or the 165 mm 27.5 rear, mixed wheel bike.

If you put a 125 mm front fork on and race it in XC races, the frame is probably a little overbuilt on the 29er. To really make it more XC specific, the main thing would be to reduce the wall thickness on the downtube, which is DH thick right now. But it makes a nice stiff fr triangle and cuts production costs by a disproportionate amount. I had to open my own mold for that DT, which is not cheap. Although a thinner wall tube could still be used, I will first look at how much weight I can save with clever butting for future production.

If you really built the bike in XC trim, I think you could get a 25 pound bike without too many silly parts.

 

[Westy]

Wait, aren't I being bated by masters, here?

Pretty sure you have been chumming your own waters.

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

Pretty sure you have been chumming your own waters.

but you stroke me sooo gently

 

[Jim Mac]

Sheesh, I went away for a week, came back and see that this thread is still rolling...

In total honesty, this whole thing reminds me of Trump's PR strategy: any mention (the good, the bad, the annoying) of the brand is better than no mention at all. Might work well in the primary, but in the general election???

 

[Tantrum Cycles]

Just returned for the second media test ride. Of course, some of the haters may call the guy a hack and deny he could possibly know anything about bikes. He was a pretty damn good young rider and he knew what he was talking about. I asked him to guess the CS length and he was off by 3 mm.

I also went against everything you should do when testing with a mag. I asked him negative leading questions, put bad thoughts in his head. I told him it had a falling rate with a pretty low MR at the beginning. I said "conventional wisdom may predict this bike will be harsh of the top, especially when the wheel is unweighted."

His reply "no sign of harshness anywhere, especially off the top. Plush, bottomless travel."

I asked him" any sign of plunging into the travel? Lack of support for manuevers?

Not a bit.

Bottoming? Nope. About 3-4 mm left with a smooth, progressive feel.

Climbing behaviour?

"brilliant" (he was riding the Meltdown Race with a 64 deg HT.)

Rough climbing?

"great traction and geometry" (64 HT??)

response to bumps while climbing at max effort with the shock fully extended?

"amazing"

pedal kickback?

"unnoticeable."

End of mankind as we know it?

"unavoidable"

Ok, made the last one up. The rest are verbatim. if any of you have experience testing with magazines, you know the last thing you want to do is point out potential flaws that they might not have noticed otherwise. Why did I do it? I'm not afraid. The bike does what I say it does.

This will surface in about 2 weeks. Of course I will let you know, so you can share my trajectory with me. This particular tester was aware of the pb test and intentional did not read it before hand. Then he essentially said the same things.

This will continue to happen with each successive test. Ballsy of me to say so? No. I know what the bike does. I'm not a gambling man. There is no gamble here. Those here who have so incorrectly analyzed and predicted how horribly bad the bike can be, are so far off, I'm wondering how you will reconcile this.

 

[Toshi]

I'll believe it when @kidwoo rides it.

 

[boostindoubles]

That's some funny fuckin' shit mother fucker.

That shit's wack, that shit's funny.

That shit's funny and wack.

 

[AngryMetalsmith]

596 replies and 226 from Tantrum alone and not one mention of how the bike corners. Granted I'm no mechanical engineer, but suspension plays a big role in railing some corners at stupid fast speeds. Going up hill in a straight line is fine and all but...

 

[1soulrider]

I'll believe it when @kidwoo rides it.

This.

 

[4130biker]

I'll believe it when @kidwoo rides it.

 

[troy]

This will surface in about 2 weeks.

2 WEEKZ