Those both sound like typos.The PB article didn't say much except it's like three pounds lighter than the current model. Also says the framset is to run about $1600....not sure if that's a typo or just misinformation, but if it's true that's pretty cool.
Interesting, but that doesn't have to be a bad thing. Extremely complex/successful things have been designed and built before autocad and fea. Maybe r&d is slower, but design software doesn't come up with and execute good ideas.I read an article a while back where someone at Tomac was extolling the benefits of having designed their latest bike without the use of computer drafting tools. I stopped expecting them to be a driving force in the industry then and there.
I have been checking it with the Linkage program and it's a weird system, It seems too progressive but maybe I'm wrong, I really need a better pic to be sure.its always good to hear tomac is still in DH. Personally, I really like where this is going. The old bike seemed a bit of in terms of geo, this LOOKS a bit more dialed. Low BB, short chainstay, slack angels, and a nice linkage... anybody know some hard facts about it?
The main difference from the prototype displayed at Sea Otter 2011 that I see is the longer linkage that connects to a pivot that's further rearward and higher up on the seat tube.The head angle is a World Cup worthy 63º and bottom bracket height is 13.6″. US retail will be just $1,599 with rear shock. Frame/shock combined weight is about 10.5lbs (claimed)...
...and it has ISCGo5 tabs built right in. The leverage ratio and wheel path are very similar to the old Magnum 204 that John Tomac raced back in the day.
My guess would be that it is there for when the shock is out of the frame (for shipping, etc.).so why is there velcro on that cross brace? does it contact the front triangle? why else would it be there