[karpi]

the new 7 looks great, but I'm not liking the 303, with 225 grms less, I feel they could have made it much lighter, I was disapointed to read this, since the only draw back on the 303 is the weight, other than that, the geo is spot on, and just works flawlessly, oh well, just have to weight for the 09 version

 

[Full Trucker]

the new 7 looks great, but I'm not liking the 303, with 225 grms less, I feel they could have made it much lighter, I was disapointed to read this, since the only draw back on the 303 is the weight, other than that, the geo is spot on, and just works flawlessly, oh well, just have to weight for the 09 version

I dunno man... a half pound seems like quite a bit of weight to lose from a frame...

 

[Mani_UT]

I dunno man... a half pound seems like quite a bit of weight to lose from a frame...

It is better than nothing but what about using 8 screws, 2 removable aluminum blocs, 2 sleeves and 8 steel insert to make a freaking rear wheel dropout. Seriously that's retarded. That's too bad because they are great frames but some of these details are just stupid (not to mention heavy and costly)

 

[MDJ]

anybody else feel like the new yeti is ugly.. thank god i got the 07

anybody else feel like the old yetis were ugly too...

I'm just glad they finally went to a 30.9 seatpost on the DJ. Never understood why they clung to the roadie standard of 27.2 for so long.

 

[frorider]

I'm not calling it stupid at all. As a matter of fact, I said right in my post that it may all come together and be just fine. There are some necessities in the mountain biking world, though, and one of those is the highest strength to weight ratio you can achieve because we provide our own power. So, from my perspective, I see them trying to force a non-traditional design into an application where it is not ideal.

It can work, for sure, but again - my whole point was that, IMO, it's a solution where a problem didn't really exist, and there are many challenges to overcome the defects in such a design, so.. why?

my point was that until we know what the strengthtiffness:weight ratios turn out to be for this new frame design, we don't really know whether it was or was not worth their design efforts. needless to say, we know that the Yeti engineers are very focussed on stiffness:weight in all their new frames. it's not like they're overlooking the fact that bikes are human-powered. i'm not a big Lefty fan, but i do admit that it enabled a better stiffness:weight ratio than traditional designs. who knows how this'll play out?

the square profile / needle bearing design of the lefty was a means to an end---i.e. it was required for them to have a single fork leg. thus i'd argue that the bearing solution was not the real innovation of the lefty -- it was one of the many engr solutions necessary to bring out an innovative single leg fork. there was no 'problem' to solve there---trad forks did work--but cannondale thought they could improve the stiffness:weight ratio, and did so.

my bigger concern is having a CF chainstay that gets smacked by rocks regularly....

 

[spoke80]

"The idea is that the one-chainstay design will lessen chain slap and the concentric rear axle/pivot location and chainstay-mounted brake mount will eliminate brake jack. Plus, the overall package – a 7-pound/7-inch travel frame – promises to hit a sweet spot in the market, especially if you live in a part of the country with terrain as burly as Colorado."

http://bikemag.com/news/freshproduce/Yeti-preview-08/index1.html

 

[bdamschen]

I'd ride it. why the bent seat tube though? Why not just leave it straight?

 

[manhattanprjkt83]

yeah agreed the bent seat tube is a bit annoying im sure there is a reason...a bike like that should allow for full seat extension or colapse.

 

[gadafi]

I'd ride it. why the bent seat tube though? Why not just leave it straight?

...rear tire would hit the seat tube when compressed....

 

[Ian Collins]

looks intersting......like binary visions mentioned earlier, it's kind of a solution to something that really isn't a problem.....kind of like a lefty, it's different, but it's really not inherintly better, or really fixing anything, so all in all i think it's gimmicky....

the only think i can think of that i give yeti major props for is the fact that since the bike does have alot of travel, and 3 chainrings, it is more prone to chain suck and chain slap due to a slightly longer chain being nessecary, but on the contrary....a chainstay may help guard against bushes, rocks, branches....kinda silly, but kinda cool too

 

[Lumagent Morple]

Can someone please explain how a chainstay-mounted brake mount can eliminate brake jack? Might as well be a single pivot faux-bar design.

 

[XGrantX]

It works and it makes sense. The chainstays are only under a tension force i.e being tugged backward by the wheels travel and we know materials are much much stronger in tension rather then bending or compression and so yeti is able to use only one chainstay.

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

It works and it makes sense. The chainstays are only under a tension force i.e being tugged backward by the wheels travel and we know materials are much much stronger in tension rather then bending or compression and so yeti is able to use only one chainstay.

yea.............no

the chainstay is subjected to A LOT more than tensile stresses....however check this thread out.....wiscodh gives some pretty cool insight to composite materials

http://www.bustedspoke.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=39203

 

[AtTheGates]

It works and it makes sense. The chainstays are only under a tension force i.e being tugged backward by the wheels travel and we know materials are much much stronger in tension rather then bending or compression and so yeti is able to use only one chainstay.

If the stay is under tension loading during suspension compression, wouldn't it be under compression loads during rebound?

 

[binary visions]

It works and it makes sense. The chainstays are only under a tension force i.e being tugged backward by the wheels travel and we know materials are much much stronger in tension rather then bending or compression and so yeti is able to use only one chainstay.

You think a chainstay is only under tension?

What do you think happens when you corner?

 

[Polandspring88]

You think a chainstay is only under tension?

What do you think happens when you corner?

It tensions in a different direction, DUH. :biggrin:

 

[4xBoy]

What do you think happens when you corner?

I go a different direction, or fall down.

 

[frorider]

looks intersting......like binary visions mentioned earlier, it's kind of a solution to something that really isn't a problem.....kind of like a lefty, it's different, but it's really not inherintly better, or really fixing anything, so all in all i think it's gimmicky....

it's easy--and fun--to throw out the phrase 'solves a problem that doesn't exist', but think this through. every frame designer faces the 'problem' of designing a stiff, light, and strong frame. ideally, stiffer or lighter than the competition. this frame apparently weighs just 7 lbs and has 7 inches of travel. i haven't ridden or flexed it, but if in fact it tracks well on off-camber landings and corners, then it has in fact solved a problem i.e. it has pushed the envelope in terms of being a light/stiff/strong/7 inch travel bike.

the fact that accomplishing this goal required a single chainstay would almost be besides the point.

one thing armchair frame designers sometimes overlook is that much of the weight of a frame is associated with pivot hardware and the formed portions of the structural members where the pivots and other junctions are located. so, sometimes it might make sense to remove one structural member (e.g. chainstay) and beef up the other structural member (left chainstay, including a large pivot)...and save weight overall while maintaining or increasing overall stiffness.

i'm not a huge fan of single pivot chainstay bikes in the 5+ inch travel category, so i doubt i'd consider this yeti. also i haven't seen any photos of the rear axle design here. so i'm still skeptical.

but i don't see this as a gimmick.

 

['size]

Can someone please explain how a chainstay-mounted brake mount can eliminate brake jack? Might as well be a single pivot faux-bar design.

my understanding is that it can't and it will act just like a single pivot faux-bar design.

 

[ÆX]

7" travel frame with a 1-sided, carbon swingarm?



I'll pass.

yeah, me too!

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

yeah, me too!

Was they sarcasm?

I would be interested to hear your take on this.

 

[ÆX]

Was they sarcasm?

I would be interested to hear your take on this.

yeah, it was. they should have painted it and called it alum.

to hard of a sell. i know.

i think the bike rules, if it was a smaller frame with long tt.

 

[ZHendo]

oh man, after seeing that pic, i'm pretty turned off on the whole thing. i thought it would be burlier looking, but something about the design has me thinking long travel all mountain rather than freeride. i think it will be really stiff, that is a freekin' massive amount of carbon used for the stays. it looks pretty good, just not really my style i guess.

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

yeah, it was. they should have painted it and called it alum.

to hard of a sell. i know.

i think the bike rules, if it was a smaller frame with long tt.

See, the thing is, even if it was alum I wouldn't want to ride it. I feel enough flex in my bikes as is, and that's with an alum chainstay on EACH side. I can't imagine the flex/pivot bearing wear on a one sided swingarm frame......but maybe that's just me.

 

[XGrantX]

yea.............no

the chainstay is subjected to A LOT more than tensile stresses....however check this thread out.....wiscodh gives some pretty cool insight to composite materials

http://www.bustedspoke.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=39203

Yes, but by using beefy seatstays to handle some of these loads alot of those stresses are reduced. As in the seat stays are designed to take most of the left and right forces while the chainstay is just there for axle path and tension forces. Im talking in principles and relativly.
This design only really benefit riding dispiplines where the extremes of conering are not reached. Hence this being a freeride design rather than a downhill race frame.

 

[bdamschen]

I'd ride it, and I bet it would be fun. I seriously doubt a company like yeti could sell a bike like this that's going to have failure issues. It's just not good business to manufacture a whole bunch of bikes that you're going to have to recall or replace the swingarm on.

Only things i'd do differently on the bike in the pic would be to put the seat down and get a shorter stem on it. Lighter bikes are the way to go, they corner easier.

 

[djjohnr]

I'll take one for the team and test it

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

Yes, but by using beefy seatstays to handle some of these loads alot of those stresses are reduced. As in the seat stays are designed to take most of the left and right forces while the chainstay is just there for axle path and tension forces. Im talking in principles and relativly.
This design only really benefit riding dispiplines where the extremes of conering are not reached. Hence this being a freeride design rather than a downhill race frame.

you make less and less sense each time you post.

 

[jvnixon]

Yes, but by using beefy seatstays to handle some of these loads alot of those stresses are reduced. As in the seat stays are designed to take most of the left and right forces while the chainstay is just there for axle path and tension forces. Im talking in principles and relativly.
This design only really benefit riding dispiplines where the extremes of conering are not reached. Hence this being a freeride design rather than a downhill race frame.

just stop posting.

 

[binary visions]

you make less and less sense each time you post.

just stop posting.

 

[Full Trucker]

...stuff...

Your @ss. You're talking out of it.

 

[bikenweed]

I seriously doubt a company like yeti could sell a bike like this that's going to have failure issues. It's just not good business to manufacture a whole bunch of bikes that you're going to have to recall or replace the swingarm on.

Well, they released the '04 AS-X, then had to warranty a ton of broken swingarms. So you never know, sometimes things just don't work as intended.

I think this bike is gonna be pretty sweet. I'd love to ride one for a bit. It's a bit gimmicky, but not completely retarded either. The split pivot or whatever seems like a great idea. I'm imagining an AS-X that doesn't pedal like poop.

 

[Sandwich]

what xc/am rider needs 7" of travel? I'm a travel whore and even I know that...I wouldn't mind switching my prophet out for a 5" bike. Shedding weight is great...but this is pretty clearly a bike that shouldn't be used for freeride...

IMO they should have made one in 5" or less first...then taken the technology up. Plus, 7" of single pivot travel in a pedallybike frame? nothx