Because design sells, and a good design is engineered well enough.
????? said:Because design sells, and a good design is engineered well enough.
Yeh, totally. All the people with dead ipod batteries and cracked screens are loving their fashionable looking ipods and not wishing they had spent a bit more money on good engineering..........IE: Apple Computer products
WTF is that just because y'all haven't seen the FEA doesn't mean they're not doing it. Structures got a lot more complicated when suspension entered the mix, and just because you can't visualize how stresses flow through the frames I wouldn't assume that specialized enginerds can't either.Ugly for sure, but more importantly, why the swoopy mess.
They continually make this kind of stuff. Do they really hire engineers to figure out how to design a TRIANGLE to both use more material AND make it weaker..WTF???
Well said!Because design sells, and a good design is engineered well enough. Specialized makes better bikes than just about every boutique brand out there; and while it can be fun to tweak your bike to make it as light and responsive as possible, there are only a handful of top pros that would notice that last 5% of performance possibility and then it doesn't really matter because they're forced to run their sponsors parts that aren't always the lightest.
Because they're sooo good at that too. Have you seen some of the paint jobs they've put out recently?...come up with a paint job to make it look good, ...
Okay "less bad."Because they're sooo good at that too. Have you seen some of the paint jobs they've put out recently?
Eye catching - sure. Good? Debatable.
I don't like the design of the Demo 7 that much, but damn that purple 08 frame is the dobermanns undercarriage.Because they're sooo good at that too. Have you seen some of the paint jobs they've put out recently?
Eye catching - sure. Good? Debatable.
You do realize that you can get another rechargeable battery for your ipod for about $20.Yeh, totally. All the people with dead ipod batteries and cracked screens are loving their fashionable looking ipods and not wishing they had spent a bit more money on good engineering..........
Just as an ipod is a music player, a toaster toasts bread, and a remote control changes channels, a bike goes up and down hills on the trails... they all perform a function and successful design is the only reason that you specifically pointed out the ipod instead of just referencing a music player.I am an engineer.
And it is a mountian bike. Used for riding down and up hills.
Not an ipod, or a toaster, or a remote control or an ergonomic widget of some kind. It won't get you any roots from women. It should be built light and strong, not heavy with excessive tube bending to make it look like a wave break at Hawaii with a hot female surfer riding a malibu board at 4.35pm with a beautiful sunset in the background.
Function over form. It looks freaking ugly and heavier then what it needed to be.
Nah - don't worry about all us sad internet enginerd. The form/function discussion is entirely pedantic and purist (and probably purile).Theres a lot of energy on here debating the form / function of these new frames, and those 'bent' tubes.
.
Bent top tubes generally make little difference in practice - the seat sticks out over the top and negates most of the advantage of bending the TT - the front bit is still as high as it ever was.the bend in the top tube makes a big difference to standover clearance - this is important if your potential customers want a bike with a 14" BB, a 16" frame, and have a 30" inside leg...
Very true, My original point (and some others I would guess) is that the frame is ugly as sin.... and what was done to make it ugly is exactly opposite of cutting edge engineering.Nah - don't worry about all us sad internet enginerd. The form/function discussion is entirely pedantic and purist (and probably purile).
If you like the look, go for it. The frame may be fractionally less stiff than it could be, but unless you're going to plaster it with strain gauges and carry monitoring equipent when you ride, you'll NEVER notice.
Oooh, there's a good poop joke in there (or two).I just placed a deposit on a 08 frame today. I should have it in my hands next week :biggrin:
But threads like these make you wonder how any manu can ignore the focus groups and make form follow function, when 78% of the responses to this thread only mention how ugly those bikes are.
All kids care about today is how stuff looks and how light is it. Function of the part hardly matters anymore. Soon enough all these kids will figure out what we all figured out years ago when we went through this the first time. Purple ano hotcolor parts and bikes that are so light that they break instantly just mean that we spend more of our paycheck on new parts sooner. Its stupid, but most people get fooled only once.Actually they just make me wonder how so many princesses got involved in a sport where dirt and scars are such an integral component.
It's a good thing my new sx trail frame just arrived yesterday. Just in time for me to hang it on the wall and sit on the couch and stare at it. God forbid i scratch the paint or get it dirty!Actually they just make me wonder how so many princesses got involved in a sport where dirt and scars are such an integral component.
i think people's expectations & awareness or product functionality & performance is higher than ever. back in the 90's when everyone was pumping out pretty colored cnc widgets with little or no engineering, we had lower expectations; we were (suprisingly) unsurprised when new bits failed or didn't work that well out of the box (lots of first hand experiences myself). these days (with the help of forums), stuff is scrutinized thoroughly; flawed design just doesn't fly (for long). i'm amazed at the level of performance stuff is at these days - as well as being strong, and lighter than ever. amazing, really. the fact that the market is so competitive means that not only does the product have to work well to be successful, it has to be light, AND look good. which leads us back to the new S bikes. the obvious point - if said bike doesn't offer a significant performance advantage over competing bikes, doesn't have a price point advantage, and is aesthetically unappealing to 78% of the target market, it seems to follow that its a poor design (from a marketing standpoint). i would think the big S could do better. granted, maybe our brains will collectively evolve to love the new serpentine tube forms.All kids care about today is how stuff looks and how light is it. Function of the part hardly matters anymore. Soon enough all these kids will figure out what we all figured out years ago when we went through this the first time. Purple ano hotcolor parts and bikes that are so light that they break instantly just mean that we spend more of our paycheck on new parts sooner. Its stupid, but most people get fooled only once.
if said bike doesn't offer a significant performance advantage over competing bikes, doesn't have a price point advantage, and is aesthetically unappealing to 78% of the target market, it seems to follow that its a poor design (from a marketing standpoint).
alas, you are of the 'other' 22%. go forth, buy that groovy bike & be happy!But this speaks to my point. Spec bikes traditionally have lower BB (real life, not always the website), shorter chainstays and are among the stiffest and lightest in a given genre. Plus it's obvious they've gone out of their way to put the bulk of the frame mass down low. To ME those are some advantages.
Who gives a fvck what shape the downtube is as long as it holds the bike together?
oh yeah.........%78 of the people choosing bikes
Sweet, they totally followed my paint suggestion, "dip the BB area in diarrhea over some sweet tribal graphics and an ironic retro custard color." It's a shame they didn't carry the scheme all the way through to the components, but syncros is only a little retro; not retro enough to get all stylie with the mudbutt colors.