[jonKranked]

to be fair a concentric idler pulley performs identically to a jackshaft, though i agree with your other statements. though it doesn't look quite as neat, i liked the single sided jackshaft that doc tried on on his mini; same benefits, but allows the use of conventional cranks

Explain this to me. All the concentric idler does is to create a triangle of 3 main routing points of the chain. The distance between your chainring and the idler will remain constant, and the distance between the idler and the rear wheel (cassette) will remain constant. The distance between the the rear wheel (cassette) and the chainring however, is going to increase as the bike moves through its travel, and will increase this distance because of the fact that its a high mount single pivot. how is this not chain growth?

edit, after looking closer, there is a front lower pulley on the bottomside of the swing arm, but this is still going to pull away from the chainring, resulting in growth.


Yes, the idler performs almost identically to a jackshaft in the sense that it eliminates pedal feedback (although supposedly not quite as effectively as a jackshaft, but the difference is too minimal to tell, at least for me).

 

[sikocycles]

Maybe I need to ride it. Call me old school I like the left hand drive double chain thing. It is what made BMW unique. Maybe when I see one on the mountains I can take one for a run or two. I do like the anno bits though.

 

[Sandwich]

I think what xy meant to say is that they'll perform the same, which is true. The single idler is not nearly as clean, IMO, but does get the job done and does allow the use of standard cranks. However, BMX cranks are getting lighter now and many of them still come in LHD. plus, with the tree sprocket you don't need crank bosses, and could therefore run RHD cranks.

anyways, I haven't ridden the new bike, but much of the appeal to me of the link frames was their compact packaging. Shock, cranks, linkage, chainguide, all of that crap was integrated in a nice tight package. I'm also a fan of short swingarm length, which the links do very well. The mid forward pivot IMO does not offer a large performance advantage...in fact, it almost seems to me like the bike could get away without an idler, and suffer minimal chain growth.

 

[xy9ine]

Yes, the idler performs almost identically to a jackshaft in the sense that it eliminates pedal feedback (although supposedly not quite as effectively as a jackshaft, but the difference is too minimal to tell, at least for me).

and that's all that matters from a performance standpoint. yes, the chain extends on the idler bike as the suspension compresses, but this is taken up by the derailleur; there is no effect on suspension or pedaling performance.

 

[jonKranked]

that's all that matters from a performance standpoint.

Performance wise, I agree. But on a bike this expensive from a company who has, historically, had such amazing attention to detail, I'm a little disappointed.

 

[Eastern States Cup]

Eric Hudson was on his new rig this weekend at Plattekill. More than a few comments on the team TEAL blue.

aarrrgh....the roots are fading

 

[xy9ine]

Performance wise, I agree. But on a bike this expensive from a company who has, historically, had such amazing attention to detail, I'm a little disappointed.

i agree with you on that. the rl / mini were unique & sexy. this new design looks comparatively clunky (purely subjective aesthetic commentary here). alas, the brooklyn of old has changed and it's time to move on.

 

[oiswego]

the chain extends about 1 link. this is hardly enough to cause any problems.

as for the jackshaft--sure it's cool looking but for what it provided why not keep it simple? i can live with the chain extending 1 link for the same overall performance. and being able to use the cranks i want is a definite plus.

jonkranked---your arguments are nearly valid and i'll admit that chain growth is not zero (although 1 link is hardly anything to complain about, much less notice). as for the sprocket, i'll have to check when i get home but with different cranks than i have i don't think it will be an issue to use a smaller one.

and dhs---you're an idiot, from what you've said i can tell with all certainty that you:
1) you haven't ridden one, since you made no reference to what you found objectionable about your experience. nor did you mention what you found to be so great about riding a racelink compared to this rig.
2) you have your mind made up about it anyways.
3) what is "real steel"?? that makes no sense. 4130 IS steel, and if you bothered to look at the specs of this particular alloy you'd understand the strength to weight ratio versus "steel" (i guess you'd want to compare to all the different steel alloys to validate your argument, disregarding the pricing of course).
4) how is using nearly identical tech for a swingarm stupid? again you're stating your preference and not a disadvantage. was it stupid for jeep to use the same V6 in the CJ and then the YJ , and then the XJ? not at all, since it was a great technology that was able to be effective in multiple models.

5) read up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking

hence, you're an idiot.

 

[ridiculous]

Saw Joe and company this weekend at diablo riding these and the new sr8 proto at 41 lbs. The teal looks bad ass! keep up the good work.

 

[jonKranked]

jonkranked---your arguments are nearly valid and i'll admit that chain growth is not zero (although 1 link is hardly anything to complain about, much less notice). as for the sprocket, i'll have to check when i get home but with different cranks than i have i don't think it will be an issue to use a smaller one.

I was referring to clearance from the ground. With the LHD sprocket and the transfer from left side to ride side, you don't have to rely solely on your crank chainring to determine your gear ratio. Hence everyone is able to get away with running a 25T sprocket with no bash gaurd (I think its 25T, if not its close to that). The RL has a step-up on the cocentric spindle as well. This idler pulley does nothing of the sort, and as a result you are required to use a regular size chainring to get the proper gear ratio. Not to mention you're required to use a bashgaurd which further decreases your ground clearance.

and dhs---you're an idiot, from what you've said i can tell with all certainty that you...

This is one of funniest things I've read in a LONG time. DHS is one of the original racelink owners (his RL is #42 IIRC) - not to mention he was downhilling long before a lot of people on Ridemonkey were even riding seriously (myself included). He is a very long time owner (also owned a TMX) and has very, VERY in-depth knowledge of how these bikes work, arguably one of the most knowledgeable.

4130 is honestly the crap of steel. Its strength to weight ratio is very, very low. There are many better grades of steel available now that are still easy to work with, yet with much better StW. Before he parted ways with BMW, Doc was cruising around on a prototype RL that dropped around 2lbs just by using a higher grade of steel.


Oh, and if you go back and actually read his post, you'll see where he states that he HAS ridden both bikes.

Read up: http://hooked-on-phonics.com/

 

[Sandro]

awww I bet you're just sad face because you're not going to Germany in 3 weeks :biggrin:

You coming to Willingen?

 

[jonKranked]

You coming to Willingen?

I wish! I can barely afford to leave town for a weekend, yet alone jet-set over to Europe

 

[oiswego]

note to you and your buddy---i can say anything i want.
doesn't make it true.

hooked on phonics? seriously??
was that a random attempt at a dig, or were you researching it?
i ask these questions because the relation of hooked on phonics and your argument are entirely unrelated. as you can plainly see, my grammar and spelling are more than sufficient.

and i would like to see the source for your steel argument. a valid source, not some internet forum about engineering.
and your other arguments are simply subjective, so they're not even worth my time to debunk.

it would have been better for all of us if you had simply said in your original posts that you were not speaking facts, but simply your misguided opinions. of course, you'll probably have another strange argument about my last statement so why don't we try this: back up your claims by citing some references, or preface your claim with "in my opinion". i'm sure you must have learned how to do that in your schooling.

 

[Sandro]

I wish! I can barely afford to leave town for a weekend, yet alone jet-set over to Europe

Oops, i thought your rebuttal to bullcrew meant that you were the one going to germany. Fortunately i just checked the Euro 2008 schedule and since there are no good games on the 15th i'll probably head over there and shoot some video for you North Americans to enjoy.

 

[jonKranked]

as you can plainly see, my grammar and spelling are more than sufficient.

But your ability to read and comprehend a paragraph in its entirety, apparently, is not.

 

[jonKranked]

If you really need proof that there are grades of steel far superior to 4130, you need to jump into the 21st century. Here's a good place to start: http://www.reynoldsusa.com/english.html

 

[oiswego]

here we go on the retard merry-go-round....
i'm not going to quote myself, since that would be asinine.
instead, i'll simply state that i never said there were not better materials to use, since i know this to be true. my argument was that no specific grade of alloy was mentioned, making the argument to use better "steel" stupid. why not use a titanium alloy to build your frames, i'm sure someone somewhere at sometime will eventually have the money to afford it. you've linked to a site obviously dedicated to a company who provides different steel tubing for various applications. and again, you make no reference to what "steel" they should now be using.

i'm sure they could build bikes with different alloys, and i'm sure they would have their own benefits (stronger, maybe cheaper, no rust, etc etc). however, i'm also sure there was a reason 4130 was chosen and chosen again for different bike frames. i'm also sure there is a reason it is used for car crankshafts and pistons, for example.

i'm sick of your half-arguments. it's like arguing with a grade-schooler, since your arguments all boil down to the grade-schooler's catch all explanation "because". i've provided an quick and easy to read guide to critical thinking, maybe you should look it over and discover how to produce a valid argument.

 

[jonKranked]

Fine you want some real info? When the RaceLink was designed, it was about 7~8 years ago, and Doc chose that material to use since it was readily available, cheap, and easy to work with. Over the lifespan of the bike, it wasn't changed. Now that he's left BMW and they're designing other bikes, they're still using the same grade of 4130. Why? I have no idea.


Doc is currently heading up Superco. The 2 frames he currently has available are made of True Temper Supertherm, and True Temper Platinum. While both are grades of 4130, they are a much higher grade than the 4130 that BMW is using. He is also currently experimenting with the use of both Reynolds 853 and 953 (the latter proving very difficult to work with).

 

[jonKranked]

And just a tad more info on the reasoning behind using TT Supertherm and TT Platinum for the superco's... Both frames (hardtails, one 26" one 24") are both sub 5lb frames. Very light and very stiff. FWIW the weights these bikes are at are comparable to high end bmx frames, basically all of which are sub 5lbs nowadays.


Edit: for the record, the difference between low grade steel and high grade steel is almost as great as the difference between steel and aluminum.

 

[sikocycles]

Wow this thread went to the sh!tter fast.

 

[oiswego]

yes, i'll agree.
probably i just get a little stubborn and hot-headed sometimes, and the comments by dhs set me off a little and in turn i set off jonkranked.

it's not my intention to flame anyone here, so apologies to you two if i've offended.
but i still stick with my assessment of this bike, and i weighed seriously my options between this and a racelink (including the prices being similar); in the end this was definitely a better bike for me and the way i ride and what how i want to ride in the future, and i'm sure there are quite a few people who would agree with me. i wasn't looking for a bike with lots of rear travel, but would give me a good quality freeride/dh bike and i'm extremely satisfied with bike. price really is no object to get what you are looking for and what you want want, as long as you are satisfied with it.

i'm sure a few of you will be seeing me around the mountains of new york this year...you're all more than welcome to check it out.

and i'll try to get some good pictures of all the parts up soon since there really isn't a good place that i've found that has them.

 

[jonKranked]

yes, i'll agree.
probably i just get a little stubborn and hot-headed sometimes, and the comments by dhs set me off a little and in turn i set off jonkranked.

it's not my intention to flame anyone here, so apologies to you two if i've offended.
but i still stick with my assessment of this bike, and i weighed seriously my options between this and a racelink (including the prices being similar); in the end this was definitely a better bike for me and the way i ride and what how i want to ride in the future, and i'm sure there are quite a few people who would agree with me. i wasn't looking for a bike with lots of rear travel, but would give me a good quality freeride/dh bike and i'm extremely satisfied with bike. price really is no object to get what you are looking for and what you want want, as long as you are satisfied with it.

i'm sure a few of you will be seeing me around the mountains of new york this year...you're all more than welcome to check it out.

and i'll try to get some good pictures of all the parts up soon since there really isn't a good place that i've found that has them.

I thought the purpose of the internet was so people could sh*t talk each other?


No hard feelings here yo. The topic touched on in this thread has been delved into much deeper in other threads... and that is in regards to the status of BMW AD.... After Doc. To many of us, up until last fall, BMW was synonymous with the name Chris Bordreaux. Historically, he was fountainhead of innovation at BMW (and was essentially single handedly putting BMW on the map and making it the company it is), and now that he's gone, so is his innovation. I'm certain that the SR is better than the majority of the other bikes on the market, but for those of us who are good friends with Doc, it doesn't really hold a candle. Its a little bit more personal than a jackshaft or a certain grade of steel.


Edit: i love talking about steel. Its my frame material of choice. I'm no metallurgist but I've got a decent understanding of the material.

 

[Defenestrated]

I'm interested in what Doc has in the works as far as a superco full sus bike. If there is one planned it should be sweet.

 

[jonKranked]

I'm interested in what Doc has in the works as far as a superco full sus bike. If there is one planned it should be sweet.

I can tell you with certainty that it's more than just one.

 

[Defenestrated]

sick

 

[Eastern States Cup]

you go Jon !! said well for all of us. BMW dead and uninteresting anymore. Superco, very excited to see what come out of SLC. I know it will be good instead of just different.

 

[jonKranked]

you go Jon !! said well for all of us. BMW dead and uninteresting anymore. Superco, very excited to see what come out of SLC. I know it will be good instead of just different.

I've been pushing to find out if Doc has any plans for Reynolds 953, but I'm not getting anything in the way of a yes or a no....

I'm willing to bet that this means "eventually". And it also means we might see a sub 37~38lb steel dh bike.

 

[Sandwich]

eek. I'd be happy with 853 or true temper OX or something. 953 is way up there in difficulty and cost. I'd rather have a 1lb heavier frame and $1000 in my pocket.

 

[DHS]

eek. I'd be happy with 853 or true temper OX or something. 953 is way up there in difficulty and cost. I'd rather have a 1lb heavier frame and $1000 in my pocket.

there we go. thats a good answer.

ride whatever you want.
i'm just saying the SR should be more in the range of 1600-2200 for a frame. if not cheaper. the main pivot could be made a little smaller, and use different parts, then the same bearing that the RL uses. which in turn made a bit lighter. the idler would be better as just a roller. no need to have the friction of a cog.

atleast they got the headset right. there's just no backbone to the company anymore. its just joe, and a bunch of new random kids he hired.

just expected better from them, really disappointed

 

[EVRAC]

the idler would be better as just a roller. no need to have the friction of a cog.

A cog is many times more efficient, and quieter, than a roller. The top chain is under enormous tension. The larger the diameter of the idler, the better as well. It's quite different than the rollers and tensioners we see on the bottom chain, which are just taking up slack. A roller on the top chain would be a huge mistake.

Your other points are quite right.

 

[Jimmy_Pop]

my dream bike =

long wheelbase & slack superco dh w/ jackshaft/Gboxx ??, 9.5" e2e piggy back shock compatible, 135mm Qr rear end for wheel selection and narrow footprint.

 

[DHS]

A cog is many times more efficient, and quieter, than a roller. The top chain is under enormous tension. The larger the diameter of the idler, the better as well. It's quite different than the rollers and tensioners we see on the bottom chain, which are just taking up slack. A roller on the top chain would be a huge mistake.

Your other points are quite right.

i see what you mean, i just can't believe they went with it like that. i meant more, its the same hardware as the RL. it shouldn't be. there's no need for it. such a waste

 

[jonKranked]

its not so much waste as just over-engineering. They're beefing it up to handle abuse levels that a frame like this is never intended for, IMO.

Just as clarification, my understanding is that the SR is intended for freeride, and slopestyle, whereas the RL is intended for DH. having hardware intended for a DH bike on a freeride/SS bike just seems like overkill (to me anyways, and DHS as well).

 

[no skid marks]

The SR8 is going to be a very nice bike. Take off the rose tainted glasses,the SR8 will be great,I'm staying on my RaceLink because I love it,although soon I'll get lower slacker links made.
Can't wait for the Superco dream bike though.
The SR6 has a more limited market,but what a tough little ballsy bike. I rode one for a couple of weeks and it was heaps of fun, but a bit limited at nearly 40lbs for me with very rocky DH tracks.Pedals like an XC bike,and that was with DH rubber. If you're super fit,or have limited time for rides,or never want to worry about your trailbike or buying another, or if you ride smoother tighter DH or gag "Slopestyle",or if you just want one bike to do it all, the SR6 will keep you happy forever. I'll be getting one for keeps when money permits.

 

[jonKranked]

the SR6 will keep you happy forever.

It gives out "Happy Endings" too?

 

[no skid marks]

Yeah,but the chain lube irritates my skin.