This this this and this

**grinch** · 09-27-2017, 01:08 PM

Especially trail bike geo. Sorry for gloating, I remember getting hammered when I joined the forums on a lot of this. More recently trail bike geo, triple clamps and stem lengths. He did leave out the fact that the Michelin wild rockr2 is amazing. Or maybe you don't believe him. I do find it funny that he wants to have a lifetime warrantee even if they're not the original owner and he dislikes dents in pop can wall thickness frames that are a shit design for their usage and he's pumping up intense. Other than that bang fkn on

http://m.vitalmtb.com/features/The-I...ro-Design,2045

**grinch** · 09-27-2017, 07:55 PM

Haaa figured bump for crickets. Creaky? Woo? Need any help with your bike set up. Pm me. Small fee tgr mag discount

**kidwoo** · 09-27-2017, 09:33 PM

2/3rds through

What are you thissing all about?

**creaky fossil** · 09-28-2017, 07:43 AM

Originally Posted by grinch

Haaa figured bump for crickets. Creaky? Woo? Need any help with your bike set up. Pm me. Small fee tgr mag discount

I like the way Cesar Rojo thinks. Like Cesar, I don't know why BIKE MAKERS couldn't figure out steepening the seat tube angle to remove the "lousy steering" created by slacker HA and longer TT/DT.

I know people who call 69deg HA "slack." I blame them. They all seem to think they're on road bikes, on pavement.

Now, when are CX bikes going to get rad and drop their HAs to 69deg?

Cesar lost a few respect points when he pointed toward Tesla the company as admirable. I didn't realize Cesar was such a big fan of con men.

**grinch** · 09-28-2017, 11:36 AM

Ya it seems the public is all about buying the latest acronym whiz bang shock but slacken a bike more than a degree or shorten the stem more than 5mm/year and it's just tooo much. It's taken over 20 yrs from 71/73 and 135mm stems were the norm because the public can't think for themselves. I think we're there now. Some tt's and bikes are a little too long now but maybe they fit some people. Maybe a few too slack. I like transition but I'm just not ready to drink the acronym koolajd 64 degree ha , as a one bike/enduro/trail machine, until I try it. My 64 degree ha 160bike is a handful on steep climbs but it does need a steeper SA.
I like that he admitted aluminium is stiff enough as well. One ride on carbon wheels and I'm not sold....yet

**kidwoo** · 09-28-2017, 12:16 PM

I guess I take this stuff for granted but I've been hopping on small and xl frames ever since I've started riding bikes.

I already know what bikes longer and shorter than mine feel like. I've also put -2degree headsets on 63 deg headangle bikes. I just don't see any of this as revolutionary, although cesar is absolutely correct vis a vis chickenshit companies afraid to try things. But he's far from the only one saying it. I guess he's in a position to address it at least.

(because you knew it was coming)
http://theteamrobot.blogspot.com/201...by-shocks.html

Hell you can go back on this very forum and listen to people (mainly named shirk

) telling me how the BB heights I wanted on bikes were totally unrideable. I'm a pioneer yo. Every time someone would say lower bbs, shorter chainstays, slacker headangles, he's absolutely correct, they'd get jumped on. I'm just glad we're kind of past that now. Although things are getting pushed to the other extreme a little now, it's better than where we were before.

Cesar seems to have a lot of fuck off money via investors or whatever. I certainly don't think this sport needs more 'exclusive' zillion dollar bike parts/frames but hey, at least he's doing something with design that might trickle down someday.

**bagtagley** · 09-28-2017, 01:28 PM

Tell Sponsel to dig his bike out of storage and come down to Stokesville to ride. Maybe we can revive Team Robot.

**ACH** · 09-28-2017, 01:46 PM

@ around 00:40:00 he talked about lateral stiffness...
Spot on - So many people get hung up on lateral flex at the rear not understanding that there is such a thing as "too stiff", ultimately compromising traction.

**kidwoo** · 09-28-2017, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by ACH

@ around 00:40:00 he talked about lateral stiffness...
Spot on - So many people gut hung up on lateral flex at the rear not understanding that there is such a thing as "too stiff", ultimately compromising traction.

Yeah but I don't think I've ever ridden a mountainbike where that's the case. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't exist. Maybe in a carbon hardtail but ouch. Not saying there isn't a point where it happens (because of course) but I don't think it's ever made it to production. So there's no reason to go bagging on the idea when someone says they want a stiffer bike. It's laughable in terms of trail bikes because none of them even come close to what you can get on dh rigs. I think the stiffest bike I've ever ridden is a carbon YT Tues and that thing tracked like a champ in the horrendous mid summer dry chatter of whistler laps all day long. I don't think Gwinn is getting them toned down because he goes faster either.

I've got a carbon patrol and a carbon RFX right now and the RFX is way way stiffer. I can tell you which bike gets tossed around more in chattery corners. It's not the RFX. Seems like kind of a non argument until we reach that point to me. I don't think we're there.

I'm not sure moto gp is where you want to be pulling influence from when it comes to descending burly bike trails at a fraction of the speed and a different universe of rider weight to bike weight. If I start hitting 200mph on pavement with a bike a few hundred lbs heavier and it's own 300hp driver, maybe.

**shirk** · 09-28-2017, 02:20 PM

Hey when did I say low bb was unrideabru?

**kidwoo** · 09-28-2017, 02:32 PM

god the search function on this site sucks dick

Eons ago you and I got into a discussion about 14" bbs and you were saying that was the absolute minimum you could ride on the shore cuz rocks.

I remember it because we met up that summer and I was looking forward to the first thing out of my mouth being 'hey nice to finally meet you, why is your bike so high off the ground?'

edit: my google foo is unstoppable (and not 14" apparently)

Originally Posted by shirk

Hey I wasn't turning this into a Shore vs the rest. Just relaying that super low bb bikes aren't liked here. By super low I am talking the sub 345mm ish range. A quick glance at a few of the bikes shows:

Demo 8 368mm (low setting for the Special Ed bikes)
Demo 7 362mm
SX trail 356mm

Norco Shore 373mm
Six 356

Transition Dirt Bag 364

Hukk 383mm low setting (Darren B was on a Hukk last year)

Giant and Scott don't post bb height numbers. I know the Reign is low, but don't have the number to back it up.

Kidwoo to get to GMG just turn right at the tree and hike a bit. When you up this way?

https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...-Reign-X/page3

I think we were debating 12mm or some shit.

But anyway, I rode a nomad with 26" wheels and a 12.7" bb all over the whistler valley a few years ago. Felt great (for a nomad). Stability gains > scraping a piece of plastic that's made to be scraped. But Vancouver, Arizona and parts of the northeast all have the folks who say 'but you can't ride that HERE'.

I think you've outgrown that.

**shirk** · 09-28-2017, 02:40 PM

hahahaha hmmm possible I guess...in 2008. Certainly not in the last 5-6 years.

**ACH** · 09-28-2017, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by kidwoo

Yeah but I don't think I've ever ridden a mountainbike where that's the case. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't exist.

Maybe, I was more thinking about the guy that pushes on the bb with his foot (same guy that hand flexes a ski on the show room floor) and says, "wow, look at how much flex there is"...

Originally Posted by kidwoo

I've got a carbon patrol and a carbon RFX right now and the RFX is way way stiffer. I can tell you which bike gets tossed around more in chattery corners. It's not the RFX. Seems like kind of a non argument until we reach that point to me. I don't think we're there.

From my point of view these are two completely different bikes/suspension systems, so it's hard for me to draw any conclusion from your observation other than the Horst style on the Transition may not be as effective as the DW on the Turner at maintaining traction through a corner (?).

**creaky fossil** · 09-28-2017, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by ACH

From my point of view these are two completely different bikes/suspension systems, so it's hard for me to draw any conclusion from your observation other than the Horst style on the Transition may not be as effective as the DW on the Turner at maintaining traction through a corner (?).

Got me a tin o' worms here, and a Swiss Army knife too.

I think the Patrol has CS a fair bit shorter than the RFX.

**shirk** · 09-28-2017, 02:50 PM

Dammit I can't find it now, one of the EWS/ enduro bros posted a clip in the last week of railing a rough corner and the back end of the bike was flexing all over the place. I don't remember who posted it.

**shirk** · 09-28-2017, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by creaky fossil

I think the Patrol has CS a fair bit shorter than the RFX.

8mm shorter on the Patrol.

**grinch** · 09-28-2017, 03:09 PM

You sure that wasn't DS. I might be confused , I get those two mixed up

Yes you nailed it with the low bb's. It's just hard to find bikes with them, or atleast low enough. When I got my demo ,a few years ago , it felt perfect in the first 50ft and now my transition scout(although I've slackened that to 65.5ha and slid the seat up a cm). Nice to get back to proper bb height(they used to be there and cs were short to but then angles and tt's were wack). Still tempted to get a triple for the enduro bike though as Cesar alluded to.
I certainly never started any of this but maybe an early adopter only because I've been around so long. I initially resisted but I like to try shit. An old friend of mine that came from a moto background and is an amazing welder and builder and rider(he designed in ,partnership with Stacy Kohut, the sit ski that Stacy won several world/para titles on and later sold the design) built his bike out of a muffler pipe "donated" from the town of banff. The pipe served as a burly downtube , so no toptube, for massive standover clearance . Long reach and stubbly little stem with full length and rise moto bars(31 or 32). He cut his bullseye cranks and rewelded them ultra short (probably 155 or so). This was early 90's. I thought I was progressive with my 28" bar and 35mm stem and thought I needed 175 mm cranks. I wish I had of tried his setup. His bb was too high though. Sky high. He could pedal figure 8's in dirt parking lots and drift nearly all the way with those shorty cranks and sky high bb(probably did it on his moto for practice in the past). He didn't give a fuck what people thought was right. He knew what worked(apart from the bb, but I bet he would have got there). He rationalized the bb because of the huge so he had and he liked a bit of trialsy super tech

**kidwoo** · 09-28-2017, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by ACH

Maybe, I was more thinking about the guy that pushes on the bb with his foot (same guy that hand flexes a ski on the show room floor)

I do that.

I do however expect some flex. I do it mostly to see where the flex is

Originally Posted by ACH

From my point of view these are two completely different bikes/suspension systems, so it's hard for me to draw any conclusion from your observation other than the Horst style on the Transition may not be as effective as the DW on the Turner at maintaining traction through a corner (?).

A horst link bike is just a dw with a longer lower link eh? They both weigh about the same and have almost identical numbers and intended use. The patrol flexes and chatters a little more because there's just less beef in the rear end. Some of the stiffest bikes I've ridden have been horst link setups, that just isn't one of them. When I say chatter, I mean laterally as the wheel skips. Suspension design doesn't really have much to do with it.

**kidwoo** · 09-28-2017, 03:26 PM

Hey Grinch, you should see if you can track down one of those e150 specialized forks. See if you can get a boxxer damper in there. You need the hub which sucks and you'll need to mess with the air spring a little bit but I can tell you some things to do. I really wish they'd developed those instead of just dropping them when they completely screwed the pooch on the dampers.

Next best thing would be do the same with an old coil totem. Cesar's right, there's no 35 or 36mm stanchion fork out there that comes close. Those things are noodles.

**grinch** · 09-28-2017, 03:29 PM

I'm thinking I should've held out and ordered revolution spokes in place of the competitions . I have a bit of extra psi in my tires for the first ride so hopefully that's the majority of the deflection

**ACH** · 09-28-2017, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by kidwoo

I do that.

I do however expect some flex. I do it mostly to see where the flex is

A horst link bike is just a dw with a longer lower link eh? They both weigh about the same and have almost identical numbers and intended use. The patrol flexes and chatters a little more because there's just less beef in the rear end. Some of the stiffest bikes I've ridden have been horst link setups, that just isn't one of them. When I say chatter, I mean laterally as the wheel skips. Suspension design doesn't really have much to do with it.

Interesting...
By way of suspension difference, I was thinking more in terms of what separates them physically.
IE, Horst (and I suppose split pivot type designs) employ two sub-frame parts with a pivot whereas the DW (and similar designs) employ a unified sub-frame.

**kidwoo** · 09-28-2017, 03:49 PM

I really don't think it matters. I can put several more frames I've owned against each other in the same way. The stiffer ones are always more composed when sliding around sideways in the shit on the ground here we call dirt. Frame and wheel deflection suck which, going back to my original statement, I don't think we've seen frames that are 'too stiff'. Maybe some of the dh bikes under a few 100lb riders. I do think the enve m70s I had were too stiff. Vertically though, not laterally. Those things cornered friggin awesome. But damn they hurt my back on longer rides. And I do think they gave up some traction in some places just from chattering around too much.

oohhhh grinchy...................

https://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/2257286/

**grinch** · 09-28-2017, 03:57 PM

Haha amazing. I actually still see those being ridden. Couple around town. The triple enduro fork will happen again I bet

**kidwoo** · 09-28-2017, 04:01 PM

Like 2008 era 36s were stiffer. They thinned 'em up too much. I do wish totems were still around. You'd be all about those.

damping aside those e150s were pretty awesome in my opinion.

edit: whoa...c.r.a.p. gets a picture? Sweet

**scrublover** · 09-28-2017, 04:01 PM

Originally Posted by kidwoo

Hey Grinch, you should see if you can track down one of those e150 specialized forks. See if you can get a boxxer damper in there. You need the hub which sucks and you'll need to mess with the air spring a little bit but I can tell you some things to do. I really wish they'd developed those instead of just dropping them when they completely screwed the pooch on the dampers.

Next best thing would be do the same with an old coil totem. Cesar's right, there's no 35 or 36mm stanchion fork out there that comes close. Those things are noodles.

So… I need to figure out how to get the charger damper from the 170 mm lyric to retrofit into my 180 Totem. that would be fucking tits.

Even more so if I could update the air gubbins.

Anyone want to buy a totem solo air with a really short steer tube...?