the next big thing
- Thread starter xy9ine
- Start date
id love to see that, like the reebok eliminator but on a more technical course
carbon fibre spokes too could shed a load of rotational weight, and you could use a lighter rim due to better strength under compression/tension than steel spokes.
Last edited:
fairy
Dammit you beat me to it - I love posting that picture whenever these type of threads come up..jpeg)
My future goals are incorporating a simple CVT with at least 90% efficiency into a frame which may or may not be of convential standard.
But I definately think the best thing that could happen for the future of this sport is for it to expand it's variety of venues, because we now have somewhat dependable machines to carry us down a hill reliably for a season, and used bikes are getting cheap enough to invite newcomers to the sport, so hopefully the future of the sport is bright even tho the economic future may not be right now.
You guys are thinking about how a bike could do what its already doing better - you only get small changes from that. What you need to think about is "what else could my bike do for me"
The answer, of course, is: cook bacon and keep my beer cold without spilling it.
Thats what I'd really like to see. A top tube with a built in beer holder (think of yeti) and a bacon cooking damper. Pretty soon it will be a new industry standard.
The answer, of course, is: cook bacon and keep my beer cold without spilling it.
Thats what I'd really like to see. A top tube with a built in beer holder (think of yeti) and a bacon cooking damper. Pretty soon it will be a new industry standard.
May have already been said, but I'd like to see more air shock applications on DH bikes assuming the shock is durable enough and performs well on longer runs. Besides saving some weight, it seems that it would allow you more (easy) tuning options.
Last edited:
So 'resurgance/reappearance' of technology (fancy alloys, Ti etc) already passed over is the next big thing? I hope not.
How about bikes that don't change from year to year? That would be a pretty sweet big thing. That top of the line race bike might not be obsolete in 8 months, there might be less of a rabid clearance of old stock and we could all calm down and climb off the OMGZORS what is Rock Shox doing for 2011/12/13/14. Everybody take a SCB perspective - make a bike, take a couple of years to design it, and be happy that it is good to go for a couple more years.
How much has technology improved in the component arena in the last 5 years, for all the Juicy > Code > Elixir etc etc.
We pay through the nose for 'new' products that are at best incremental improvements on the previous generation, and for the most part, just a different colourway or repackaging of an old design. How about components that you can still get parts for more than 5 years later...
How about 'classic' designs holding their money better? A 07 Marz 888 or any stripe should be worth about 500 times more than an 08 or 09 - try making that sale!
Is that all contradictory? Maybe.
How about bikes that don't change from year to year? That would be a pretty sweet big thing. That top of the line race bike might not be obsolete in 8 months, there might be less of a rabid clearance of old stock and we could all calm down and climb off the OMGZORS what is Rock Shox doing for 2011/12/13/14. Everybody take a SCB perspective - make a bike, take a couple of years to design it, and be happy that it is good to go for a couple more years.
How much has technology improved in the component arena in the last 5 years, for all the Juicy > Code > Elixir etc etc.
We pay through the nose for 'new' products that are at best incremental improvements on the previous generation, and for the most part, just a different colourway or repackaging of an old design. How about components that you can still get parts for more than 5 years later...
How about 'classic' designs holding their money better? A 07 Marz 888 or any stripe should be worth about 500 times more than an 08 or 09 - try making that sale!
Is that all contradictory? Maybe.
how about DH bikes that dont cost as much as dirtbikes? anyone...anyone?
Don't know if it's been covered, but... linkage front suspension. Everyone gets all crazy in the head about brake squat and brake jack, AND how much platform damping sucks but are perfectly happy to use telescopic forks and crank of the low speed compression to combat brake dive. Duh.
Also ball bearings. It's all ball bearings these days.
Also ball bearings. It's all ball bearings these days.
wasnt the Amp Research that they made for the Mercedes Benz bike a linkage design?
it seems like lighter tire technology could happen with the use of more materials similar to Kevlar. There are some really tough fabrics out nowadays.
The main thing I'd like to see is simplification, uniformity and cost reduction. I enjoy the small business side of bikes but let's face it, the over-concentration of the market means manufacturers cannot take advantage of real economies of scale and produce lower cost bikes. Additionally, there are many hands each bike part passes through from its production to its final retail sale. Doing it more like Moto where you have more dealer-direct sales could reduce costs.
I feel like there needs to be a larger dichotomy between the bikes regular riders ride and the bikes the pros ride. I know it makes bikes special to know that Minnar is riding the same bike I could buy, but I don't need that much bike. In all honestly, I could be happy as a clam riding a stock Atomik and would probably be just as fast if lower priced bikes were the norm. If there was more attention paid to geometry and weight on lower priced rigs, then maybe I wouldn't feel the need to ride an $8g DHR.
With the current market, I think that larger capital investments into fewer companies would lead to better, simpler manufacturing techniques that allow for less expensive production of higher quality parts. There would still be a high end niche market, but I wouldn't feel like I was at a disadvantage riding my Yakuza at Whistler compared to the average good rider.
In the end, I know a lot of people that would be dedicated riders and bike consumers if bikes didn't cost so goddamn much.
The main thing I'd like to see is simplification, uniformity and cost reduction. I enjoy the small business side of bikes but let's face it, the over-concentration of the market means manufacturers cannot take advantage of real economies of scale and produce lower cost bikes. Additionally, there are many hands each bike part passes through from its production to its final retail sale. Doing it more like Moto where you have more dealer-direct sales could reduce costs.
I feel like there needs to be a larger dichotomy between the bikes regular riders ride and the bikes the pros ride. I know it makes bikes special to know that Minnar is riding the same bike I could buy, but I don't need that much bike. In all honestly, I could be happy as a clam riding a stock Atomik and would probably be just as fast if lower priced bikes were the norm. If there was more attention paid to geometry and weight on lower priced rigs, then maybe I wouldn't feel the need to ride an $8g DHR.
With the current market, I think that larger capital investments into fewer companies would lead to better, simpler manufacturing techniques that allow for less expensive production of higher quality parts. There would still be a high end niche market, but I wouldn't feel like I was at a disadvantage riding my Yakuza at Whistler compared to the average good rider.
In the end, I know a lot of people that would be dedicated riders and bike consumers if bikes didn't cost so goddamn much.
Burn the heretic!
(nah - I agree completely.... but what you're complaining about is what the global economy relies upon to function so well... oh wait...)
I remember reading an interview with Johnny Waddell in about 2001 and he was saying that technology's progress in DH bikes had really plateaued, and the big focus from now on was going to be on reducing rolling resistance and decreasing drag with better bearings and grease...
Well obviously a lot has happened in the last 8 years, and even a guy up to his eyeballs in the industry couldn't foresee most of it. Things will change, bikes will keep getting better...
.
Well obviously a lot has happened in the last 8 years, and even a guy up to his eyeballs in the industry couldn't foresee most of it. Things will change, bikes will keep getting better...
.
No, i mean the 2009 Core Saveryou mean this?
looks very moto to me
http://sixsixone.com/Catalog_661Bike.aspx?id=03c8d3f8-4914-4072-bc99-7f4a104fcdd6&product=30a97b9f-23e8-47d1-acb1-d7eea677d5b0
"Top 3 back plates are removable to be used with neck braces"
Next big thing? Hopefully more bike parks so I don't have to drive 12 hours or more!!!
bingo.
What good is the most bling bike costing 6-7k if you can't ride it?
I might just be spoiled but I have been riding to trail head since I was a kid and I can't imagine having to drive hours just to ride.
.AMP had a whole series of linkage forks. I think it was one of the ones they were already making... maybe their "long travel" 3-incher? But those all used conventional headtubes and headsets. As did the Girvin.
Nuke proof and Whyte took some stabs at integrated linkage front ends, which is more what I'm thinking of.
Even something as simple as BMW's telever can dramatically reduce brake dive, can be engineered for long travel, and can yield major weight reductions in frame and fork chassis. A 30" long lever arm being smacked repeatedly at nearly right angles is not exactly the most mechanically efficient structure.
yeah the Amp Research that was on the Mercedes bike was during the time when 3" was a lot of travel.
JBP invented that.Say hello to the next biggest thing:
there is also this 6inch travel linkage fork
http://www.kinetics.org.uk/assets/images/SUB100mm_Large.JPG
you could apply the same principal to a regular fork with a bit of adjustment
i get the feeling it was only really known in the uk.. and when i looked for that image i went to their site to find it is now discontinued. pity, it got some good reviews on mtbr too.. it was quite expensive at £600 tho
My prediction for the short term will be moving as much weight inboard from the rear wheel as possible: one single cog on a fixed hub with the freewheel at the crank and braking through the chain all with only a front deraileur or with an internal gearbox. You trade the weight of a stronger chain (only approximately 1/2 of which is unsprung weight) for the loss of the rear cassette, freecoasting hub, brake components, deraileur, etc which will make the rear suspension track the ground much better and small bump compliance will be much better.
The big challenge will be in packaging the the drivetrain between the riders feet without spacing out the BB to wide.
Don't forget that predictions are nothing special unless everyone else thinks they're crazy.
The big challenge will be in packaging the the drivetrain between the riders feet without spacing out the BB to wide.
Don't forget that predictions are nothing special unless everyone else thinks they're crazy.
if Nicolai made their designs smaller and lighter...and cheaper it would be awsomeness
**Supposedly** Rohloff is going to release a new, lighter speedhub this year. http://hubstripping.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/new-rohloff-speedhub-in-2008/ It would be nice to see them produce a gravity oriented 150mm spaced hub with say 7-9 gears instead of 14. It would be nice to see shimano and SRAM putting more effort into a gravity internal hub or transmission.
As for other mentions. CF spokes? maybe if they were a mag wheel style set up, otherwise no. Sure they would be beefed up compared to road spokes, but the cost would be out of this world. Is it really worth it to reduce rotational weight by a few grams? Rims couldn't be made lighter just because of the stiffer spokes, you may end up with a stiffer wheel but they would still dent to all hell. You would also have to be very very careful about the tension on the spokes, no more riding with a loose spoke or two.
How about greater standardization across the board. Personally I'd like to see 1.5 steers go away and be replaced by tapered. More use of the Maxle, that sh!t is awesome. Seatpost sizes, there are fewer than there used to be but why can't we just stick to one or two (27.2 & 30.9). Lighter tires would be nice but even if the sidewalls were reinforced with kevlar for cut resistance there would still be less material there to help prevent pinch flats. Maybe someone could develop a lightweight foam to place between two layers of kevlar to reduce the flats on thin walled tires. Which reminds me of an article I can't find right now but it had to deal with through some molecular level change to rubber and company had produced a tube that would "heal" itself...the only problem was it took ~45 minutes for a small cut (1/2 inch) to mend itself.
Speaking of that. Anyone here ride BMX? Flybikes came out with a cool invention to make flat fixes a lot easier. Who knows when it will come out but it sure would make trail flats easier to fix on bikes with through axles.
http://www.flybikesbmx.com/noticias/cobraeng.htm
There has been a lot of innovation over the last few year IMO. How about tidying everything up? Like shifters, most brake levers have a removable plate so you don't have to take the grips off or remove the bars in some instances, just to get them off. Why can't shifters have that? Why does shimano still have the little aluminum nub on the clamp? It doesn't serve any purpose.
Shimano's new Shadow rear derailleurs, their "medium" cage is longer than the old long cage...wtf?
I know
, but there are so many little things that could be changed. Bikes are so light now, my DH bike weighs less than my original hardtail did back in 2003 after I threw 2.6's on it. Suspension technology is amazing, sure it could be improved, I will never be able to ride fast enough to the point where my suspension is holding me back instead of my ability/fears.
As for other mentions. CF spokes? maybe if they were a mag wheel style set up, otherwise no. Sure they would be beefed up compared to road spokes, but the cost would be out of this world. Is it really worth it to reduce rotational weight by a few grams? Rims couldn't be made lighter just because of the stiffer spokes, you may end up with a stiffer wheel but they would still dent to all hell. You would also have to be very very careful about the tension on the spokes, no more riding with a loose spoke or two.
How about greater standardization across the board. Personally I'd like to see 1.5 steers go away and be replaced by tapered. More use of the Maxle, that sh!t is awesome. Seatpost sizes, there are fewer than there used to be but why can't we just stick to one or two (27.2 & 30.9). Lighter tires would be nice but even if the sidewalls were reinforced with kevlar for cut resistance there would still be less material there to help prevent pinch flats. Maybe someone could develop a lightweight foam to place between two layers of kevlar to reduce the flats on thin walled tires. Which reminds me of an article I can't find right now but it had to deal with through some molecular level change to rubber and company had produced a tube that would "heal" itself...the only problem was it took ~45 minutes for a small cut (1/2 inch) to mend itself.
Speaking of that. Anyone here ride BMX? Flybikes came out with a cool invention to make flat fixes a lot easier. Who knows when it will come out but it sure would make trail flats easier to fix on bikes with through axles.
http://www.flybikesbmx.com/noticias/cobraeng.htm
There has been a lot of innovation over the last few year IMO. How about tidying everything up? Like shifters, most brake levers have a removable plate so you don't have to take the grips off or remove the bars in some instances, just to get them off. Why can't shifters have that? Why does shimano still have the little aluminum nub on the clamp? It doesn't serve any purpose.
Shimano's new Shadow rear derailleurs, their "medium" cage is longer than the old long cage...wtf?
I know
, but there are so many little things that could be changed. Bikes are so light now, my DH bike weighs less than my original hardtail did back in 2003 after I threw 2.6's on it. Suspension technology is amazing, sure it could be improved, I will never be able to ride fast enough to the point where my suspension is holding me back instead of my ability/fears.
Get rid of those heavy ti coil springs....
Say so long to edgy, rampy air.....
No more oil and stiction
Magnets baby. If they can hold a train up, they can hold your fat arse
Say so long to edgy, rampy air.....
No more oil and stiction
Magnets baby. If they can hold a train up, they can hold your fat arse
one of the nz blokes did just that (metzy i think) - gearbox w/ onboard brake. pretty sweet. i too believe that mass centralization / reducing unsprung weight is a good thing.
i'd like to see a universal gearbox that, unlike the gboxx standard, does not dictate crank to pivot &/or output gear distances, so might be better suited to accommodating a wide range of suspension designs.
ive seen that pic, and yes its not something you ever want to see happen to a DH wheel but it is a road bike, therefore weight is most likely of more concern that durability. there was a pic of the supposedly bombproof i9 wheelset here a while ago that was in way worse shape than the above, it can happen to any wheel.As for other mentions. CF spokes? maybe if they were a mag wheel style set up, otherwise no. Sure they would be beefed up compared to road spokes, but the cost would be out of this world. Is it really worth it to reduce rotational weight by a few grams? Rims couldn't be made lighter just because of the stiffer spokes, you may end up with a stiffer wheel but they would still dent to all hell. You would also have to be very very careful about the tension on the spokes, no more riding with a loose spoke or two.
mavic have an XC wheelset kicking around at the mo, i think its a case of when and not if they eventually will be seen in DH
the rim on a traditional wheel has to make up for the lack of the spokes strength under compression so could be made lighter leaving the spokes and the hub to take some of the forces, in theory at least. and even if not, the rotational weight saved from the spokes, even beefed up DH ones would be significant.
all things id like to see too..
the chain could be replaced by a belt drive as it does not have to pass through a rear mech so it will be stronger and lighter that a chain.
magnets are currently being used now in GM performance vehicles and some euro supercars. the only problem is that they use electricity to help magnetize them and they do still use oil. Rod Millen's team invented magnetized suspension for their off-road trucks and they work amazing purportedly.
Are you talking magnets or electromagnets? Big difference.
That is not movable at all it would cut your mobility down in a race way too much.you mean this?
looks very moto to me
to use magnetic suspension on a bike it would have to be an electromagnet, otherwise it would just be way too large
even at that, the strongest electromagnet ive seen that could be reasonably fitted into a rear shock or as suspension (in terms of size) weighed about 2lbs and could hold a 100kg weight.
youd need two of them to repel each other etc, so 4lbs before damping and mounting hardware is even considered.
it was powered by a 9v battery pack
even at that, the strongest electromagnet ive seen that could be reasonably fitted into a rear shock or as suspension (in terms of size) weighed about 2lbs and could hold a 100kg weight.
youd need two of them to repel each other etc, so 4lbs before damping and mounting hardware is even considered.
it was powered by a 9v battery pack
There's something wrong with 'looking moto'?you mean this?
looks very moto to me
I myself am pretty excited about the possibilities of where their development is going with this. I've been looking at Leatt and thinking I should go that route . . . but was really wishing 661 would jump into the fray. Turns out they have.