Copycat.
Rotec? what do you think?
- Thread starter The Rose
- Start date
I don't really know...but I don't see any concentric lawills around still...eg profile, storm (kind of), [woops] strong bikes...Grimey said:
i don't know how it will affect the linkage, I don't really think that it will have that much effect, but my 5" concentric bike bobs more than my 8" lawill, and that's saying something....
The setup they use is just a way around the lawill patent. Will it have the same effect in the real world? I have no idea. I would wait until it's well ridden before I would invest any money.
Attachments
Hey folks,
Got back yesterday from IB, Man what a great show!!
Had a great time seeing all the new goodies for 2005.
Had even a greater time seeing the reaction to our new rig.
Seems that everyone had good things to say
Check out www.mertlawwill.com for the offical word.
And as for the concentric thing, When Mert Lawwill first invisioned his design in a bicycle it was as a concentric. Its how it was designed. The concentric best optimized the performance of the Lawwill 4 bar.
The copycats that followed tried but failed to capture the true nature of of his concept. The Straight 8 and the Yeti were great renderings but not true to his design the Storm was a URT not a concentric. The Profile was close but no cigar and no Lawwill either.
The only design that came close was the Tomac 204 (1st gen). But even that wasn't concentric. The same can be said about the Schwinn and Yetis, they were single pivs behind the BBas well. What it all amounted to was the cost of the BB development and the dollars to produce it. The Bottom dollar demanded it be cheaper, so no concentric. But that didn't make it right either.
Rotecs were designed from the begining as concentrics and had already proven that their BB's worked. But even though I had carried the torch so to speak regarding the new design of 03/04 Motos after I bought Rotec, I as Mert always believed that the best pivot system was the concentric, with a floater and his rear 4 bar.
Hey, granted it may not work for others but were're not them. Our new Rotec RL9 has in a way been proven several times to be a solid design. We've incorporated a solid worldclass performer in the Lawwill design and mated it to a proven Rotec concentric bb swingarm as well as a floater shock and stayed true to the orginal Lawwill concept. Remember, the Tomac 204? were do you think they got the idea?
Lawwill
?
We feel what the RL9 represents is a match made in bike heaven!
and it looks cool too! well ok maybe not in yellow
I'am glad to see that everyone has had good things to say about it. Its been a long road to get it this far. Glad to see it's creating a buzz!!
Keep it up and thanks.
Sully
Got back yesterday from IB, Man what a great show!!
Had a great time seeing all the new goodies for 2005.
Had even a greater time seeing the reaction to our new rig.
Seems that everyone had good things to say
Check out www.mertlawwill.com for the offical word.
And as for the concentric thing, When Mert Lawwill first invisioned his design in a bicycle it was as a concentric. Its how it was designed. The concentric best optimized the performance of the Lawwill 4 bar.
The copycats that followed tried but failed to capture the true nature of of his concept. The Straight 8 and the Yeti were great renderings but not true to his design the Storm was a URT not a concentric. The Profile was close but no cigar and no Lawwill either.
The only design that came close was the Tomac 204 (1st gen). But even that wasn't concentric. The same can be said about the Schwinn and Yetis, they were single pivs behind the BBas well. What it all amounted to was the cost of the BB development and the dollars to produce it. The Bottom dollar demanded it be cheaper, so no concentric. But that didn't make it right either.
Rotecs were designed from the begining as concentrics and had already proven that their BB's worked. But even though I had carried the torch so to speak regarding the new design of 03/04 Motos after I bought Rotec, I as Mert always believed that the best pivot system was the concentric, with a floater and his rear 4 bar.
Hey, granted it may not work for others but were're not them. Our new Rotec RL9 has in a way been proven several times to be a solid design. We've incorporated a solid worldclass performer in the Lawwill design and mated it to a proven Rotec concentric bb swingarm as well as a floater shock and stayed true to the orginal Lawwill concept. Remember, the Tomac 204? were do you think they got the idea?
Lawwill
?We feel what the RL9 represents is a match made in bike heaven!
and it looks cool too! well ok maybe not in yellow
I'am glad to see that everyone has had good things to say about it. Its been a long road to get it this far. Glad to see it's creating a buzz!!
Keep it up and thanks.
Sully
whoa...are you absolutely positive here? Because in its day, the straight six was a no cost spared, 3299$ frameset with hub and rear brake. It had a proprietary rear hub and proprietary rear shock. It used disk brakes when nobody else did. It had a gigantic CNC swingarm. I don't know mert lawwill's story or his plan for suspension, but the original Yeti design was definately NOT on a budget, unless I'm seriously mistaken.John Sullivan` said:
I'm not doubting you, but I really don't think that it would have anything to do with budget. Even this
Of course, none of this is to say your design DOESN'T work, I just don't know if it's ideal. Having owned a concentric pivot bike, I would NOT buy a second one without some significant improvement, although this may be it.
Did you buy the patent from Yeti? Are you the sole liscensers of the patent? Are you making a shorter travel version?
Damn True said:
I don't follow..Gonna take a punt and guess that his name starts with E and ends with llsworth... ?Acadian said:
Fair enough. The TT wasn't particularly long, but the back end was (I'm a short-chainstay freak btw, the rear end on my IH is way too long for my liking too). Honestly though - it pedaled like crap. I'm sorry to sound so rude about it, but even with a 5th element it moved a hell of a lot. Obviously it clicks for a lot of people, but it's not my bike, sorry. I also dislike the BB-centric pivot from a design point of view, but since that's now changed (with the Lawwill/concentric setup) I won't bother elaborating there.John Sullivan` said:
I haven't ever been to Whistler, and I don't know when BC Place was? (I'm in Victoria Australia btw, not Victoria BC) I rode it at Thredbo at the end of last year, would have been November or December.
nah...Ellsworth is in California. I think he might be talking about Karpiel?thaflyinfatman said:
ooOOoo...
BTW...looking at the new Rotec pics - did Descent-World design the swingarm? 
sneaky buggers!!
sneaky buggers!!
I was wondering does anybody know what will the so- called prototype rotec retail for? Maybe a ball park??? Also what color options will it come in??
Shirley you aren't serious?John Sullivan` said:
The Profile is a concentric lawill.
You might have a different shock location, rate, and pivots on the rotec that make it work differently, but the profile is most definiltely a lawill linkage (parallel arms, wheel mounted in between parallel arms) and it is most definitely concentric.
Whos Shirley? his name is sully!!
I am not sure, but I don't think Profile ever licensed the Lawill (tm) design. And since I never heard of Lawill suing Profile, I ass/u/me it was not truly a lawill design.Jm_ said:
I think I can safely say that Rotec did not buy the patent from Lawill, they licensed it. As did Yeti, Tomac, Schwinn and if you go back real far, Gary Fisher - and teh GF was concentric too, but too far ahead of its time I believe.Sandwich said:
As for shorter travel version, how about it Sully??????
Looks great. The lawwill setup will really improve the pedalling performance, among other things. With good geometry, the bike should rip.
Also, that profile is a very different beast due to the position of the axle on the 3rd member being so high up away from the chainstay pivot. The profile ends up being effectively more similar to the Yetis and Schwinns.
Also, that profile is a very different beast due to the position of the axle on the 3rd member being so high up away from the chainstay pivot. The profile ends up being effectively more similar to the Yetis and Schwinns.
Snacks said:
excuse my typo, liscense not buy. It Rotec the sole liscenser of the Lawill patent? I read that he has more than one, is this one of the many?
What does concentric mean?
Cone-centric. It means you think about Madonna a lot.
(it's when the suspension pivot encircles the BB shell, instead of being above, behind, or forward of it like most bikes. Rotec, Cove, Arrow, and Lenz bikes are known for it, and it's kind of an internet-controversial design.)
(it's when the suspension pivot encircles the BB shell, instead of being above, behind, or forward of it like most bikes. Rotec, Cove, Arrow, and Lenz bikes are known for it, and it's kind of an internet-controversial design.)
Actually, concentric means two circles that share the same center point.MikeD said:
Such as a BB and a pivot.
What I meant to say was that though the Profile was similar in concept to a Schwinn/Yeti Lawwill, it lacked the correct geomentry and pivot location of a true
Lawwill. Thus I can safely say that yet close they were, it was no Lawwill, and with no backing or blessing from Lawwill.
Even though there are many rigs out their that look like lawwills with their 4 bar rears and such they're not Lawwills and can't be refered to as Lawwills. Merts orginal Lawwills as in the Gary Fishers, Schwinn, Yetis, Tomacs and now Rotec are the only officially sanctioned designs. Being that Schwinn and Yeti no longer produce their versions that leaves the RL9 and we chose to produce our version utillizing Mert Lawwills orginal patent which is around the BB.
Though slightly changed to reflect Roteccycles flavor in design we have with Mert Lawwills blessing feel that we've produced his best design.
We are working on a FR version (6-7 inch) of the Lawwill. So hang in there Snacks!
Lawwill. Thus I can safely say that yet close they were, it was no Lawwill, and with no backing or blessing from Lawwill.
Even though there are many rigs out their that look like lawwills with their 4 bar rears and such they're not Lawwills and can't be refered to as Lawwills. Merts orginal Lawwills as in the Gary Fishers, Schwinn, Yetis, Tomacs and now Rotec are the only officially sanctioned designs. Being that Schwinn and Yeti no longer produce their versions that leaves the RL9 and we chose to produce our version utillizing Mert Lawwills orginal patent which is around the BB.
Though slightly changed to reflect Roteccycles flavor in design we have with Mert Lawwills blessing feel that we've produced his best design.
We are working on a FR version (6-7 inch) of the Lawwill. So hang in there Snacks!
Sweet. 
I didn't get to see it before he left for IB.
I will have to give him a call in a couple days......
I didn't get to see it before he left for IB. I will have to give him a call in a couple days......
Sully
The main pivot is Concentric but now that the suspension uses a linkage is the the CC(centre of curvature) at the BB area?
Is the rear brake torque arm as active as the classic rotec floater?
The main pivot is Concentric but now that the suspension uses a linkage is the the CC(centre of curvature) at the BB area?
Is the rear brake torque arm as active as the classic rotec floater?
Grimey said:
What about the Astrix? I know that it isn't a concentric linkage. But for a while it was being compared to the DH9. Which i'm betting allot of people will compare the new Rotec too.
