I'd bet that a lot of that is that people haven't built a new bike in the last couple years. The overwhelming majority of new higher end AM bikes are running 1x10/11. You'll build a better bike aiming for 1x only.
[UP! 3rd page - uninterrupted ST] Proto EN01
- Thread starter troy
- Start date
To play devils advocate:
- Pretty much no one would not buy a frame because it was designed to allow 2x as well as 1x
- A decent amount of people would not buy a frame because they couldn't run 2x
- Pretty much no one would not buy a frame because it was designed to allow 2x as well as 1x
- A decent amount of people would not buy a frame because they couldn't run 2x
Front mech will thrash out idler quicker. I say dictate to those fool enough to want a front mech by not offering it, and be thankful they don't buy it if that's the case, because they'll be the annoying customers.
You could probably spec it 1x with a non-functional derailleur mount that no one would ever use vs. a 1x with no front derailleur mount and people would still think they need the "front derailleur" version. I think the suspension tweaking possibilities of 1x vastly outweighh the gears people will never use, but you are going to have a tough time convincing them.
faaacckkk
riding bikes in the woods is so complicated!
Speaking of which, I better be able to mount two water bottle cages! And where does my GPS go!
If it were me, I'd figure out a way to get a front derailleur on there. I will never use one again but by not having it, you basically force someone to either pay way too much for a drivetrain, or run a gear limited 1x10 that they may already know doesn't work for them.
I wouldn't change the kinematics of the frame to do something like that.......but I'd figure it out.
But hey the new nomad's leverage rate is determined by a bottle cage and they sell like crazy. So what do I know?
WTF happened to the hammerschmidt? Pretty neat idea that seemed to work, if a little heavy and complicated.
Seems like a refined one of those would be better than 2x?
Anyway, I'd say do front derailleur, only if it doesn't screw with the other more important parameters. 5 years ago with less1x options, it would have been a different story.
Seems like a refined one of those would be better than 2x?
Anyway, I'd say do front derailleur, only if it doesn't screw with the other more important parameters. 5 years ago with less1x options, it would have been a different story.
That's reasonable. Design the kinematics for 1x, and slap a front derailleur mount there on there just because. Both people that try to put a front derailleur on them probably won't notice that the suspension is a little wonky in the little ring.
That said, I actually went 1x9 for the first time because the kinematics on my first gen Spitfire sucked balls in the little ring, so I just gave up on it. Haven't looked back.
It did work, except for the drivetrain drag, weight, complexity, standards and price. Other than that, perfect.
I estimate we are about 3 years away from having new bikes speced with 24T front rings and 11-48 rear cassettes. As we get more obese and weaker we will need even lower gearing than we have now. I envision some sort of gates belt-drive that can run a 9t front sprocket for even lower gearing.
Autobike FTW?
I don't get all the hate towards front derailleurs. I used to ride for approximately 4 years without one, but last summer I put it back and have not regretted it. It's nice to be able to crawl up steep hills even when you are pretty tired and do not want to push high gears anymore.
I haven't even dropped a chain since I started to use Shimano clutch dear derailleur and modified the front derailleur cage with a block of wood (and of course I'm using a 2x chainguide).
With a Sram clutch derailleur and unmodified front derailleur I managed to drop the chain a couple of times, which almost turned me back to 1x drivetrain, but now I'm really happy with the 2x.
By the way, it's not even 2x10, but 2x9! Unrideable by today's standards!
I haven't even dropped a chain since I started to use Shimano clutch dear derailleur and modified the front derailleur cage with a block of wood (and of course I'm using a 2x chainguide).
With a Sram clutch derailleur and unmodified front derailleur I managed to drop the chain a couple of times, which almost turned me back to 1x drivetrain, but now I'm really happy with the 2x.
By the way, it's not even 2x10, but 2x9! Unrideable by today's standards!
not everyone will buy a steel frame, i think. Weight weenies might prefer 2x drivetrain..
why not make a custom frame instead since most steel frame builders offer custom frame option. 27,5" wheels, front derailleur, whatever..
I doubt the potential buyer (middle aged guy in midlife crisis) considers Ibis Mojo, Yt Capra and a steel frame at the same time.
why not make a custom frame instead since most steel frame builders offer custom frame option. 27,5" wheels, front derailleur, whatever..
I doubt the potential buyer (middle aged guy in midlife crisis) considers Ibis Mojo, Yt Capra and a steel frame at the same time.
Troy, ignore these trogs and look to the future: 1 X 3
Unlike a street hooker, the moar teeth the better.
Unlike a street hooker, the moar teeth the better.
If you can figure out a way to make a dynamite packed top tube that blows up in the crotch of anyone who gets on it with a fanny pack, I'll personally fund the initial 10 frames.
I'd offer an easier, if less permanent, means to accommodate fanny packers
7point
Figures......
Figures......
Actually you're right.
That's a sunday.
That's a sunday.
I agree...you aren't going to be selling a ton of these bikes...I'm guessing. Better to make it the hardcore shredder with exactly the specs you want and see what sharks come swimming.
I'm a big front derailleur homo and I wouldn't buy a bike with an idler and a FD. Nobody has been able to do it right even with lots of resources. I'd stick with 1x and a small guide, especially with a higher pivot. Besides, the 1x conversions are good enough that you don't have to pay out the butt to take advantage.
I'm a big front derailleur homo and I wouldn't buy a bike with an idler and a FD. Nobody has been able to do it right even with lots of resources. I'd stick with 1x and a small guide, especially with a higher pivot. Besides, the 1x conversions are good enough that you don't have to pay out the butt to take advantage.
I will make a proto with 2x compatibility for sure. If my idea for idler will work, then it will stay for production. I will probably add secondary idler mount location for 1x so no worry...
Exactly... with my current production capabilities I'm not trying to compete on "high end" market.
Pricing is still to be done, but I'm thinking of something around 2k USD price tag.
Last edited:
ooooh. adjustable idler locations? me likey!
Maybe in future we will make some in 29" ver. Please, tell me how do You like the geomtery on Your 29" Lenz bike and how tall are You? Would You make any changes to Your current setup?
I like it. Just a little lower and 1 degree slacker.
But I rather ride a steel bike. I miss my BMWs
But I rather ride a steel bike. I miss my BMWs
Full seat tube is a nice touch, but it isn't as high on my list since droppers help with the "getting enough extension to pedal" issue I would have with some bikes.
I like the looks of it- are those aluminum plates for the front of the swingarm?
I like the looks of it- are those aluminum plates for the front of the swingarm?
I missed this gem until now. Do tell.
Previous version had like 4" of seatpost adjustment for the large size, so not very much for an enduro bike, even with a dropper post. Shock cage was heavy too. I'm hoping to achieve much lower weight with this one too.
Like everyone keeps saying, the top link mounted shock VPP bikes will have that hammock leverage curve (or conehead if you prefer). Bottom link mounts can get a clean straighter curve like an m9 or a v10. That proto nomad thing that graney posted up last month and was circulating around a long time before the bike came out was a bottom link mounted setup. I've heard a lot of people, in person and repeated on a few forums saying they went with the current design or at least the exact linkage points because of a bottle mount. It makes sense because I know a lot of horribly misguided people, I mean SC customers, griped about no bottle mounts on the previous one.
The truth or part of it is probably in there in some capacity somewhere. With how 'vpp' that current nomad is, at least some of it has to be intentional. It does have a very characteristic feel. Not one I like but lots of people do. Horrible horrible people like jsthulman. It's probably more the case of exact linkage and shock placement. They don't have any other lower link mounted trail bike so maybe they bailed on that for other reasons..........important reasons like chainstay lengths since they were forced by gunpoint to go 27.5s.
These are stories I'm telling myself at least. I hope one day they do some 160mm bike with a lower mount. At the very least I'll die holding my breath and then jsthulman can get some sleep. But I'd probably buy that bike even if intense made it.
Second set of pics
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/first-ride-santa-cruz-nomad-2014.html
I have no idea why they bailed on that setup. Maybe JG will get annoyed enough to jump on my case with a reason.
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/first-ride-santa-cruz-nomad-2014.html
I have no idea why they bailed on that setup. Maybe JG will get annoyed enough to jump on my case with a reason.
people still use bottle cages? da fuq?
I use the one on my bike. If it weren't there, I still would have bought it though.
Short rides without a pack are nice. Water is nice.
Short rides without a pack are nice. Water is nice.
