Dan Atherton's Prototype GT Enduro Bike

May 23, 2013
by Mike Levy  
 
You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
GT Prototype Enduro Bike

The inaugural stop of the Enduro World Series in Punta Ala, Italy, saw the debut of a number of different prototypes as riders worked to figure out what type of machine made the most sense for the event. One of those riders was GT's Dan Atherton, who showed up with a blacked-out prototype that very well might be the replacement for their current Force platform. Aside from the quote below, GT declined to comment on the new bike, but it is a safe bet to say that the 650B-wheeled rig is sporting 150 - 160mm of travel, and that it uses a revised version of GT's Independent Drivetrain suspension design that is also being tested on their prototype Fury DH bike.
bigquotesDan has been working on a new enduro bike for a while now, and while the bike is still in the prototype stages, the decision was made to use the Enduro World Series, and many other races, to maximize feedback for development. We want to take advantage of all the different types of terrain that enduro riders experience, and will have Dan ride the prototype throughout the season to develop the perfect enduro bike. - Bill Rudell, GT PR Manager


Evolved Independent Drivetrain

GT has long been known for their I-Drive suspension layout, referred to as 'Independent Drivetrain' on more recent models. This suspension configuration has been designed to allow for a relatively high main pivot without the drawbacks that are usually associated with it. That high pivot does well to allow the bike to swallow up hard, direct impacts thanks to the rearward axle path that it affords, but it is the bike's floating bottom bracket that lets such a design work without the massive chain growth (think tugging on the chain as the bike goes through its travel) that would usually be associated with such a layout. GT's current Independent Drivetrain does this by allowing the bottom bracket to move roughly in the same plane as the rear axle by locating it on a separate element that pivots off of the swingarm while being attached to the front triangle by a short link, essentially creating a four-bar linkage design. GT's approach has been around for awhile in two different executions, both having seen success on the race circuit and in the hands of everyday riders, and we believe we're seeing the third iteration on Dan's prototype enduro race bike pictured here.

So, how is Dan's race bike different from the 150mm travel production GT Force that his teammate, Martin Maes, rode to a fourth place finish, one higher than Atherton himself? While it does seem to employ an evolved version of GT's Independent Drivetrain, the black bike is an entirely new beast from the ground up. The bike, which has to be said looks much cleaner than the current Force platform, appears to employ a slightly lower main pivot that is roughly inline with the top of Dan's chain ring (likely either a 34 or 36 tooth ring), and a much more compact version of their Independent Drivetrain system, likely possible thanks to the reduced chain growth from the revised main pivot. The bottom bracket still ''floats'' on a separate forged element, but the connecting link looks to have shrunk from the approximately 4'' long unit used on the Force to a smaller 1'' long piece. The main pivot now uses a captive arrangement, with the swingarm rotating between two spars that extend out from the down tube.

Dan Atherton s GT prototype. Photo by Matt Wragg.


Construction Details

Although GT says that the aluminum frame is still in the prototype stage, it does sport some very clean details - hydroformed tube sections and shapely looking shock mounts - that have us believing that the production version won't stray much from what is shown here. And while you'd be hard pressed to find a rider who is a fan of the appearance of the current production Force, Dan's bike is a definite improvement visually. The cleaner suspension layout goes a long way towards that cause, and the bike also forgoes the interchangeable rear dropouts found on the current Force, likely for standard 12x142mm dropouts. Although out of view behind his XTR cranks and chain ring, a set of ISCG-05 chain guide tabs hold the bike's Shimano chain guide in place, and it is very likely that the production model will employ a direct mount front derailleur setup rather than the clamp-style found on the present Force. The bike uses a much shorter interrupted seat tube as well, although that won't present the problem it would have in the past given that the large majority of riders would be using a dropper seat post on this bike.

With a relatively tall bottom bracket height and steepish head angle that required GT to spec Cane Creek's AngleSet from the factory to correct, we took the current production Force to task a bit in our review for its dated angles. You can bet that GT didn't make that mistake with the new bike, though, and it is plain to see from the photos here that it is both slacker and lower. With the proven pedalling capabilities of their Independent Drivetrain, and updated geometry that suits today's aggressive riders, the new bike should be quite a step forward from the current Force.

Dan Atherton and his 27.5 GT prototype



www.gtbicycles.com

250 Comments

  • + 193
 not digging it sorry GT
  • + 63
 Looks like an old Enduro.... No dig from me either.
  • + 70
 Looks like a.....no it actually does look like an old Enduro.
  • + 200
 But lets be honest GT has always looked terrible
  • + 26
 ......... Fury.....
  • + 12
 their prototypes always look chucking with ugly welds. their 2013 bikes are wayyyyyy to smooth to release that in 2014 or 2015
  • + 13
 It probably is great to ride. But i honnestly hope that ther change the ending of the top tube when production kicks in. It's really is fugly.
  • + 1
 Ever since I saw this bike from the early photos, I always thought the bike/aesthetics looked so UNflowing. It's like GT held a project on the wonderful internet and let everyone submit a single design that was then put on the bike...my biggest problem is the swingarm area, then the 2x tubes under the seattube. Look so out of place.
  • + 17
 Looks don't matter. And a lighter, stronger, more modern equipped 'old' enduro sounds like the perfect bike
  • + 6
 Of course looks don't matter and I do appreciate the actual designing that goes into any bike..but this bike's looks just somehow compels you to comment..
  • + 18
 Prototype guys...not being done for fit and finish. DEFINITELY not a fan either; but at this point too early to start picking apart the finishing welds and tube ends. Besides it'll move to carbon shortly as they've been doing all their bikes that way for so long. A lot easier to throw together a bunch of alu bikes to test geometry etc than it is to make them from carbon.

Save the bitchin till she's ready for it...
  • + 55
 People bitching about how a bike looks is scarily similar to how girls bitch about clothing... That's kinda pathetic, fellas. Time to earn your balls back by judging how stuff rides and not by how it looks.
  • + 40
 I like how the top two comments are by a 17 year old and a 15 year old. The entertainment value of young know it all's on PB complaining about bikes is just amazing.
  • + 4
 It looks freaking sick. I have a fury and it looks freaking sick. The only thing GT has put out recently that I don't like is the Red/Blue fury and the Orange/Blue Fury, but other than that I love em. I will be buried with my Fury it is the best bike I have ever ridden, and this enduro bike looks rad. So does their prototype dh bike that I saw at Sea Otter...
  • - 3
 looks like they knocked it up over a weekend. poor show
  • + 3
 In my opinion, it look's like it's enduro bike from the 2006-2008. I'm not against the GT bikes, the brand is legend, but sorry GT, this one does not attract me at all.
  • + 4
 Let's be honest, if gt would say: "we give you this enduro" nobody would say no and would be pretty happy
  • + 1
 old bike, new parts
  • + 9
 Well I like it.
  • + 1
 davehayz that's a sick design! and idk its not awful, just put some curvature in the part the shock passes through and it'll look fine, not pretty but fine
  • - 1
 Its a bike. I am going to ride it, not make out with it! This is a great example of Form follows Function.
  • + 3
 Looks like an old Norco and GT's triple triangle hardtail had a fugly baby
Who knows though.....looks aren't everything. Maybe it rides like a dream?!!
  • + 2
 Ironically, the split below the seat tube makes it look like an 07 COMMENCAL Supreme DH!
  • + 3
 poozank...what are you talking about? Have you seen the last 2-3 years of GT enduro bikes? The Force LE, 1.0 and Carbon and Sanction are pretty dang sleek not to mention paints schemes are off the hook. Have you even ridden one? IF so, dont dawg until youve ridden the iDrive. Maybe Im just a little bias because my race team as well as myself have a bike sponsorship with GT. But I have ridden several different bike brand, but GT has been one of the best. IndustryMike said it all, its a prototype.
  • + 4
 No one seems to realize that it does not fucking matter what it looks like, it sure as hell shreds. If it rides as bad as it looks, Affy wouldn't be rippin it like he is. Yes, it does look like shit and GT will not, and probably can not, release this the way it is. They'll touch it up and make it look sexy before they release it.
  • - 3
 Ugliest piece of pig shit ive ever seen. The Fury is the best looking DH rig on the market today IMO.
  • + 3
 idk you guys, the redalp enthusiasts are probs getting wet over this prototype
  • + 2
 its your chance to have a good looking, good ridin bike GT, don't waste it!
  • + 2
 Matte black boat anchor.
  • + 5
 Classic pinkbike, form over function always.
  • + 1
 Its still a helluva better than the bike I have now, so I won't judge. And if danny boy likes it, then that has to say something about the bike.
  • + 2
 But I did crack 2 of my Sanctions 2010 2011 both years different spots
  • + 1
 Bike aesthetics to a certain degree for sure,I agree with. but not overly cared , cause if it does the job very well that's what matters most
  • + 1
 Too many 15 yr olds with opinions based solely on asthetics and not enough engineers, as usual. They're protos, FFS! They aren't s'posed to be beautiful!
  • + 0
 Yeah thats right mate, because bike manufacturers like to make their bikes ugly as f*ck cause thats what sells, as long as it works good though aye. Remember the Whyte PRST-1. Worked great by all accounts looked like shit. Can you get one today, can you f*ck. Any way you look at it people are initially attracted to a bike by how it looks, you cant tell how it performs until you buy one, so manufacturers have to make them "LOOK" as attractive to potential buyers as possible. And what, the look of this particular prototype is going to change dramatically when it reaches production I suppose, well no not really or the bikes ride characteristics would also change.
  • + 1
 zer0- use your real member name, you f*cking pussy. Wink
  • + 1
 What do you mean use my real name?
[Reply]
  • + 82
 Im sorry, but my OCD is kicking in... Fox, please make a kashima coated dropper or just color it to match, I dont care how smooth it operates, I just want it to match.
  • + 18
 Glad I'm not the only one that's been bothered by that recently haha
  • + 5
 Don't worry they already thought of that, later on they will release it at the Factory version with kashima for 100 more
  • + 6
 Or they could just murder it like the Reverb.
  • + 3
 I will admit that this bike dose not look to good. But, its probably a shredder. And I know i'd rather have a really great feeling bike that looks like crap than the other way around. Of course both would be ideal.
  • + 3
 There's so many bikes the look great and perform great (Like mine). That's the issue.
  • + 1
 @gordon2456 I'm thinking they should get their fundamentals right first - like not having a fookhueg actuation lever that is difficult to place on the bars... then we can talk Kashima.
  • + 3
 What next, kashima coated bike frames and wheels so it all match?
  • + 2
 Or just get a reverb such is better anyway?!!!
  • + 1
 I honestly dont even have a dropper (rockin' a Thomson cause I'm cheap), but it still bugs me.
[Reply]
  • + 47
 I still can't talk from that Aaron Gwin video about a week ago
[Reply]
  • + 37
 Am I the only one who likes it? Frown It's not incredibly sleek or carbon but as far as looks go I think it's kind of cool. I feel like it might look better in person maybe?..
  • - 4
 It still seems kinda weird that GT didn't make it carbon. That seems to be the new benchmark in frame material and then GT comes out with this..... What's the deal? The Specialized Enduro has just as much travel and weighs 25-26lbs with a carbon frame, you'd think other companies would try and match or better that.
  • + 8
 Its a proto. They arent going to make a mold for a bike thats continually modified
  • + 6
 usually you don't start with carbon prototypes, that's the main reason Wink
  • + 2
 The canyon the Barrel rode was also aluminium, The GT was aluminium and placed 4th and 5th, where was the closest carbon specialized? 16th. Agreed 3rd place was a carbon yeti, but it doesn't convince me that carbon vs aluminium results in an instant win for carbon, despite the cool look, better strength to weight, are the vibration deadening properties of aluminium, steel and not to mention, my personal favorite titanium underestimated.
  • + 4
 Technically the forth place spot was a carbon GT not an aluminium one... and having ridden carbon bikes and alu bikes side by side at CCX races, I would say in general carbon has more vibration dampening than alu.
  • + 0
 I guess my opinion is biased because I'm an XC rider so weight and stiffness is everything.
  • + 1
 Its not even really about you prefering a light and stiff bike or a heavy bike, its the fact that its cost thousands upon thousands of dollars to create a carbon mold and if they dont have a definite design, they would be making $25000 molds over and over again. Its either that or they cut a piece of aluminum and weld it to a frame....which one sounds efficient? Haha
[Reply]
  • + 36
 Everyone's a F@#kin' engineer. Wait to see Dan's results this year. Half of you never even ridden on V-brakes. Spoiled bastards!! Looks good to me!
  • + 2
 Same kids who think Deity is 'da bom' and color coordination of their handlebars to their Nike's take precedence over enjoying the ride.
  • + 1
 V-brakes, yeeaahh booii f*ck the world !!
www.pinkbike.com/photo/6338248
  • + 6
 Didn't Dan get beat last weekend by his own teamate...on the current (soon to be old) GT Force?
  • + 1
 Uggghhhhh headshock.
[Reply]
  • + 31
 Looks like a tre..mendous improvement on their old design!
[Reply]
  • + 29
 looks like it was made in someone's garage
  • + 16
 Strange, considering it's a prototype...
  • + 8
 It's a prototype! I'd put a lot of money on the production frame looking very different
  • + 5
 Can not polish a turd
  • + 9
 Actually yeah, Mythbusters proved you can!
  • + 6
 I believe the saying is..."You can polish a turd, but it's still a turd."

...and that is one shiny turd.
  • + 2
 this bike looks like a Hairy Gary....
  • + 2
 One can not simply polish a turd but one can roll it in glitter.
[Reply]
  • + 14
 IT'S A f*ckING PROTOTYPE!

IT WON'T LOOK LIKE THAT WHEN THEY MANUFACTURE IT!

ARE YOU ALL 12?
  • + 17
 Most , yes ( or close )
  • + 1
 "IT WON'T LOOK exactly LIKE THAT WHEN THEY MANUFACTURE IT!"

There, fixed that for you . Oh and it may not look exactly like that but I will bear more than a passing resemblance I imagine...
[Reply]
  • + 8
 One of the good things about Super D and Enduro was that they were supposed to be racesfor the same bikes we use every day - our 'trail' and 'all mountain' bikes.

If Enduro needs highly specialized bikes, then it will no longer be 'races for the masses'. Sure, you can race XC or DH on a Stumpy, Trance, Blur etc, but you won't do as well as you would on the appropriate specialist bike. Now it seems you won't be able to race your Stumpy, Trance, Blur etc for Enduro as well.

At that point Enduro will no longer be about racing, but an exercise in marketing yet another bicycle type. Which I think is a bit of a shame.

If an athlete like Dan Atherton has to walk up a hill, it's not exactly 'everyday' riding, is it?
  • + 3
 Dan walked up a climb to reserve some energy. They aren't racing up climbs so who cares? These are the bikes most people are buying anyway....
  • + 8
 That sounds like everyday riding to an unfit 30 year old like me!!
[Reply]
  • + 5
 Really nice enduro bike !! Those of you saying an independant bb system is useless, it helps you pedal with much more accuracy and agility over bumps, it doesn't more, but the frame does, it's genius, really. I just don't know why people think it's crap. These people obviously haven't ridden an independent i drive bike before, because there is a tremendous difference in how well the bike pedals !
  • + 6
 Accurate pedaling?
  • + 2
 pedal as much as possible when and where you can
  • + 2
 It's called hauling ass..
  • + 1
 LOL best reply i've every recieved on here, i think ! XD
[Reply]
  • + 4
 Shimano needs to make a 40-42 tooth cassette in either 1x10 or 1x11. They're going to struggle against riders on SRAM XX1 system due to them not having a low enough gear, especially on long climbs. Would Dan have to get off his bike and walk up the hill with riders passing him if he had a low enough gear? Would the Gravey train get first instead of third? But that bike looks sweet though.
[Reply]
  • + 4
 Ladies calm down its a prototype its allowed to be a bit fugly... What you are seeing is one of the first "big brands" building a purpose built World Enduro Race bike!! this is what we've been waiting for, this is the World series moving technology forward... its first cut, it aint pretty but its moving forward Yeah bloody haahhh! Yeah Dan get Some on that bad boy!!! Thanks for stepping up GT and who better to foster change than Affy! Respect!
[Reply]
  • + 3
 What i hear here is that most of you are like women,complaining about design.Most of you pay'd the last years to much money just for design.Why do you think that in mx there is not so much diffrent suspension design's because on the end there is one design that works the best.Most of you didn't even rode V brakes and don't have a mtb soul.Gt is making something that works and not making something that looks nice.This is my opinion from a 45 years mtb soul.
[Reply]
  • + 6
 Wait..... No no huge thesis, from WAKIdesigns?!?!?! There be voodoo up in here.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Granted this is a proto, but this is the way future design is going. Dropper posts being the norm, opening up the designers options again. Think towards massive, stiff down tubes, potential of enclosed shock positions to keep the crud off them. Minimal top tubes and interrupted seat tubes again like he early 90's. only this time with engineered flex to add some additional suspension to your arse, and how about on the fly adjustable seat angles, set back for the flat xc sections, then flicking the switch to push the seat forward to grind up hill. (San Andreas bolt on seat tube pods!). Not saying I like it, or the thaught of how these will look, but that's progress........
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Sure. They may sell a few. But just imagine if this was a simple single pivot design non-I-drive crap. They would sell a ton of them. I'll never understand why they hold on to this useless system! GTs quality isn't bad at all,well built bikes,good looks, but just dumb designs.
  • + 3
 It's just a marketing angle isn't it? You're right they should ditch it and basically build a carbon Orange.
  • - 5
 They should borrow the Cannondale designs.
  • - 1
 Ya right - they should listen to people's shoulds until they get all shoulded. The only thing anyone should or rather "must" do, is to do his own thing and not listen to what random people think he should do... some people should make their own version of reality if they don't like the existing one. I should be so lucky lucky lucky lucky, I should be so lucky in loooooove
  • + 1
 OP: Except it's one of the most winning designs in history across various disciplines... Yea, "Just Dumb".....
  • + 2
 Because they have the money to sign the right riders. Hardly surprising is it? Doesn't make I-Drive any less crap if you know what you're looking at.
  • + 2
 And I'm sure you know exactly what you're looking at. Just like I'm sure you can formulate a force vector calculation without the aid of the internet....

The design works, as is documented by hundreds of reviews, and dozens of pro riders testament. The flaws were always durability of the parts that the design encompasses, but looks like they are straining to reduce those risks and as someone who has *experience* on an I-drive system, I look forward to trying out the changes... not just bantering blindfolded on the internet stating a proven design is crap without a gram of evidence to support a stupid claim. I'm the furthest from a fanboy, but I do know what substantiated evidence means.
  • + 2
 Yep I know exactly what I'm looking at and what I see is an utterly pointless link and floating BB that hardly has any effect on chain growth and if anything causes extra mass to what would usually be (on a non linkage actuated high single pivot) unsprung to be sprung. It's a pure marketing design.
  • + 1
 ..but by the same token. Don't ASSUME that the people who don't agree with you are not experienced with the I-drive as well as with various other designs! The argument IS that the system is trying to answer a question that no one is asking?? The soul purpose in racing development is to achieve the most with the least period.
And as stated befor the addition of the EXTRA hardware of the system does NOT increase performance. And I stand by my ( and others ) statement that maybe less than 5% of the DH community will notice/feel ANY riding difference at all,much less a gain in pedaling performance. No one said the system doesn't "work" we are saying its not working to make a gain of any kind. If the system did this we would have seen the marketplace scrambling to duplicate it in various ways.
  • + 1
 The market has been trying to duplicate it for about 10 years now..... Also, this is a trail bike. It's benefits for isolating pedaling forces from suspension is exactly what people were asking for since the inception of the full suspension bicycle. You can disagree with me all you want, and that's cool, but you can't refute both history and fact. And the fact is that historically people have both been asking for it, and praising the benefits of iDrive. Saying it's a complicated system holds weight, but saying it's 'dumb' doesn't. That's all I mean to say.
  • + 1
 It doesn't achieve what is claimed. I suggest you look at the design in detail.
  • + 1
 As a manufacturing engineer, who's done more force vector and leverage ratio calculations than I care to remember, I've not only looked at the design in detail (in linkage as well), but I have experience on them as well. That's called covering your bases. The design worked, but was finicky unless set up right, and required care. The new stuff, with the shorter links, looks to alleviate some of the issues they had. Time will tell.
  • + 1
 So as an engineer you think it's a good idea NOT to have the riders mass 100% independent of the rear axle?
  • + 1
 Where's the bigger trouble with having riders mass more dependent on the rear axle? I'd rather worry about independence of BB and the cockpit. It's all filled with BS anyways because the migration is so little. We can be quite sure that what GT did with developing I-drive is a mutual wank of marketing and engineering in strive to be different, pressured by stupid patent laws, not allowing them to use any of "normal" bike suspensions.

However I am not going to whine that there was such thing as I-drive, because I take "looks like a Session" into deeper consideration - because more and more bikes start to fkng look more and more the same and in 5 years we might end up with 10 bikes from 10 different companies that DO look like a session. If someone is fine with Trek, Norco, Ghost, Canyon and thinks it is alright because the devil sits in details and geometry blah blah blah, then take a zoom out, because you are a fkn nerd and the outer world does not think too much of your considerations. If a random person stopped on the street can't tell a bigger difference other than colour, then something is obviously wrong here.

So I give my thumbs up for diversity - having said that I am nowhere close to buy a GT bike, be it with VPeePee, DW-ink, Horst link or Active Blaise Point - I give my blessing to those who do
  • + 1
 I get the relation to a URT, but the attachment to the rear axle isn't all that noticeable at all. It allowed for a higher pivot placement, and no pedal feedback which felt great for a DH bike in 02. We're talking a very small amount, and the attachment is more with the front triangle, thanks to the dog bone, than you'd think, and if you look at the instant center on linkage, it's not wonky or out of place. If you've had solid DH time on a DHi then you'd understand how, at the time, they were easily some of the best DH bikes on the market. Now we've got VPP bikes that essentially work on solving for x in a different manner, but try to accomplish the same thing. I'm not saying the idrives were sliced bread, but I am saying it's not a 'dumb' design, because it is actually quite clever.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Haven't read comments sorry.
But with the pivot close to the chain line, what's the point of the linkage? It would have a slight bit of beneficial anti squat without it. And looks like a lot of rising rats for an air shock.
Axle path is only rearward in the first 1/2 of travel, hardly much issue for pedal kick back. On larger hits the chain would be getting shorter past half way through travel.
I suspect/hope there's more to what's going on with the I-Drive. Hopefully not deliberate chain growth like the forward moving BB bike Voulios helped design.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 "... to develop the perfect enduro bike"

Sorry boys, The Spec. Enduro and Norco Range are already on shop floors and ride 100X better then any "Idrive" bike ever has, revised or not. But hey, it's a cool look at the new Fox Shock.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 GT's current Independent Drivetrain does this by allowing the bottom bracket to move roughly in the same plane as the rear axle...

Em... WHAT?!? As an engineer (still a student though), this makes me break out in spots. Freaking marketing guys that are completely clueless...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Well it probably makes no different to most but i got to take it for a spin. At the PRO GRT at MOUNTAIN CREEK last weekend and I have to say it is pretty impressive. Even in prototype trimmings, this bike feels amazing. The wheel size, weight and stiffness are almost spot on. It is so laterally stiff it feels like a DH RIG. and pedals like a fast 4in xc bike. It works and works very well. Just ask the man who Put it on the podium for the super D. It is awesome even if you dont like the way it Looks.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 if you are looking at your bike when you are riding it you are doin it wrong & you ARE gonna crash. if someone goes past you on an ugly bike you are still gonna chase them. looks are subjective but good design & proper construction make it work. dont get me wrong i think the Lotus Intense M9 or a Syndicate V10c look great but a Syndicate team rider will make an any bike go past you so fast its irrelavent.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 It's not very attractive - very angular pipe looking. I think the Fury is/was an attractive frame. I'm sure it rides well, the Atherton's aren't going to ride junk - but this is a case of Form deffinitely not following Function.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Looks more like a prototype commencal supreme to me..... 08, not for me but if it works for Dan who are we to argue. I do prefer the meta am shame it didn't work out between commencal, just football three of em looked more comfortable on a commencal.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The canyon the Barrel rode was also aluminium, The GT was aluminium and placed 4th and 5th, where was the closest carbon specialized? 16th. Agreed 3rd place was a carbon yeti, but it doesn't convince me that carbon vs aluminium results in an instant win for carbon, despite the cool look, better strength to weight, are the vibration deadening properties of aluminium, steel and not to mention, my personal favorite titanium underestimated.
  • + 2
 The forth place spot was gotten by a carbon GT actually. So.....
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The head angle looks better in these pics. Before it looked steep, I think that why people were bashing on it. Thats a sick whip in aluminum. Last forever no worries. Carbon probably in the works for race day but those thin seat tubes might be tough to work with.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Its grown on me somehow it looks better than previous pictures, but its still not up they're with the Uprising, Charles Bronson. Austin Powers Mojo HD just to name a few, bit harsh to knock the idrive, the concept is sound, the execution reliability may have been suspect in the past, but I like GTs approach to developing the bike so the final production version maybe something special, that said Dan and the new bike got spanked by the understudy on a 26" bike under a 16 year old! That would piss me off and I smile heaps, Dan is alway looking intense and wound.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 No more dog link....
Interesting how the new gt bikes are due out next month(with this new linkage) but dans proto hasnt made it to carbon mold yet.
So next month, gt markets new bikes(650b) while gt will still be working on the redesign(enduro spec)?
Sadly, all bikes cant look like the new kona op, or evil undead..
Gt was slow to go to tapered ht and lower/slacker geo.
I own a 2010 force c., and its been great (after offset shock bushing install) for me...but I am shoppn for new.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I have to disagree with Mike Levi on his comments about aesthetics... the current GT Force does look in my opinion great, while this mule looks.... well to put it mildly if GT commercializes this mule as it is... they┬┤ll face oblivion. I am sure this is not the final aesthetic for the production bike. I am curious to see what they bring out for 2014, but as it looks right now with this and the fury is that they might have lost their path to creating good looking bikes.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 bikebike69, Ive owned two sanctions, among Many other bikes. Loved the Idrive, works awesome.
As for the looks, could have been modeled after a pile of dog shit and looked better, that being said, they may have just mocked it together
for the sake of testing new linkages/geo ect. That said, no reason for it to look that shitty.
JMHO
  • + 1
 It is a proto. Who knows what production will look like. Maybe they don't want you to "see it" until it's ready.
  • + 3
 I actually like the LOOK of the bike and the stealth thing. The point is..the I-drive "idea" is a waste of engineering and moving parts! There is ZERO performance gain in this design no matter what "pro test riders" get paid to tell you in the mags and web ads. I have been lucky enough to have owned and ridden A LOT of performance bikes in 44 years (including several GTs) and as I have stated above their bikes are indeed good construction quality. I would love for the masses to hear what bike design the top 10 DH pros whould choose to buy if they they weren't pros anymore or getting paid to "love" their current rides. If this frame and a nearly identical single pivot frame of the same geometry from GT could be tested by several riders while not knowing what design they were on, could NOT tell you the difference after a run down Mammoth! Rant over!
  • + 2
 I would have to disagree with you on this one, yes it is just a single pivot, but I found absolutely zero pedal feedback riding the bike, and have experienced lots from other brands. I agree that pros opinions are completely biased, and I only bought my first sanction because of price and build kit, and just loved it. Bike preference is totally subjective, which is what makes these conversations so rich! Happy trails!
  • + 1
 Agreed,these spirited conversations are fun,rich. So with that said let me throw this simple question out there. Money is not in question here!
Let's say your a racer. And you have a choice of two frames to which you can have ANY build option you want. The frame choices are the GT and
the new Corsair Konig 7-8. (If not acquainted with the latter,look it up) you can't get too much closer than those. Which one do you race? Remember we're
talking about racing, NOT casual weekend touring.

.......and go!!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I have to agree with most on this post, not the best looking bike. Hopefully the production model looks better. On the other hand we'll have to wait and see for the performance reviews. As a current GT Force owner, I am very pleased with the performance of the current production Force. Hopefully it outperforms the current model.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Can't wait to see how this Atherton collaboration works out, this thing (and its DH cousin) show serious potential; I just hope they keep 26ers in the lineup.
Must be nice to always have shiny new chains, huh?!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Remember its just a prototype the geo etc will be what they want but the final version will be alot nicer looking and not a one off or very limited run that was probably all made by hand
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Looks are incredibly important. So is performance. They ignore tis at their own peril. Hire a gun industrial designer and sort this ugly junk out. Looks sell bikes.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Its just me that think this bike looks a little bit like the old cannondale V500 .... soo ugly! I own a force and love the bike and the design, i hope they change a lot before release...
[Reply]
  • + 0
 It can be the most amazing bike ever.... (wich I seriously doubt)!

But it looks like an old supermarket bike...!!!! and you have to agree that part of the thing about riding is looking at your bike and want to take it for a ride!
  • + 2
 What part about the word "prototype" do you not understand? They hacked it up out of aluminium stock in a workshop, probably just for the race day. No point in making it look pretty.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I think it looks sweet. first GT I've wanted to look at buying in quite a while. (mostly due to their ancient geometry numbers on their AM bikes, their suspension design has always been good)
[Reply]
  • + 0
 The older ASR Yeti's looked better. I'm sure it rides fine. But I've never been a fan of GT, the looks and styling just don't appeal to me. I know, I'm not supposed to care. But given the amount of time we spend with our bikes OUT of the saddle....it better look pretty. Give me my ASR5c or an SB66c any day. Blech.
[Reply]
  • + 4
 diggin the jet black scheme
[Reply]
  • + 1
 it's a prototype, it's just thrown together to see how it runs once they are happy they will then keep the angles and lines but then design it lol for starters it will probably be carbon not ally. HAHAHA
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I'm so trained to hate interrupted seat tubes but now with dropper posts suddenly they're ok again. I wonder what other interesting designs will come up now that the seat tube limitation has been removed.
[Reply]
  • + 3
 Great to see GT changing things up after so many years. Well done to the Athertons for motivating them in that respect.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I always asked my self,why GT still make the same old triangle
But like every one says:"It's not the bike,it's rider": In case of Dan-enough sayin'!
( And even it's ugly,the technology is great)
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Can't get the image of Atherton pushing his bike out of my head. Timed climb or not, this bike needs some work, if a world class athlete is pushing it up a stage.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 nah not impressed at all it looks like one of them ugly specialized big hits just skinnier
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Why does it have blacked out tyres when it was hanging in the first - maybe casual - pic and then Conti Rubber Queens for the proper shot with Dan it it?
  • + 1
 Probs because Continental didn't 650b AM tyres until very recently.
[Reply]
  • + 4
 I do really like it
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Hmmm, not sure if this wil pass the stage of prototype (or maybe this bike is juste awesome and i'm wrong)
[Reply]
  • + 1
 All of these comments whining about the look of the bike has proven too me once and for all that a lot of mountain bikers are metrosexual.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 i had a distortion before. i have to check if the rear triangle is tight every now and then. got tired, sold it and bought a santa cruz. this new design looks even worse.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 lets be honest not the best looking but it does look fast! slack head angles and slack geometry means it would destroy other bikes on the descents
[Reply]
  • + 1
 It does look like shit and if I drive didn't ride/feel like shit I may defend the proto's looks... hopefully they have worked out some bugs and will work on the look later...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 For all of those that don't like the way it looks... it is a PROTOTYPE. The final design will not look like what you see in this article.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 never liked the design, had a shot of a GT and I kept hitting the rear shock off the seat tube, not liking this one im afraid Frown
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I like. lots of triangles. hopefully a production model will utilise a machined one piece seat stay section, instead of those compromised bendy tubes around the shock
[Reply]
  • + 3
 A whole lotta arm-chair engineering going on...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 what happened to fully hydroformed bikes. GT must have a good excuse to not make this a completely hydroformed bike.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 This is clearly a proof-of-concept level frame design. I wouldn't get too hung up on the aesthetics...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 could work well but most def. not good looking but hey it's just a prototype
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Dont forget everyone that this is a prototype on geometry setup so the frame aesthetics you see will not be the real deal.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 New frame looks rad same with gees dh
[Reply]
  • + 3
 WELCOME TO 1995 !
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Looks like a garage project.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Its the shock mounts/seattube/toptube junction. It looks like an old Norco VPS frame.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 So many stupid comments here it's ridiculous!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 fair play it may be a prototype but i wont be rushing to buy one if ya know what i mean
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I'd say that the new Kona's look better than the new GT's... Talk about role reversal much!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 reminds me of an spez enduro or a norco six. oh well. looks like a step backwards from GT's previous design, IMO.
[Reply]
  • + 3
 bandwagon of haters
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Im guessing the actual production version will be carbon? maybe?
  • + 1
 I read that apparently they cant make the same design as strong and light in aluminium. bull if you ask me
[Reply]
  • + 2
 I think it is just impossible for GT to make a good looking bike
  • + 0
 their hardtails even suck, that triple triangle is the gayest piece of pretentious advertsing bollox ever
[Reply]
  • + 3
 This is going well. Smile
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Gt should have stuck with the original oversize aluminum tubing,hardtail Zaskar and called it good.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 looks like a 2003 norco vps....
[Reply]
  • + 2
 I hope the production version is cleaner.... like a lot
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Specialized Enduro Elite III... I love it. Roll on GT.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Still a single pivot design like the old fury poop
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Woulda looked better in 26" ....
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Football wtf.... how from all get to football doh!!!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 looks like a Solid Mission 9
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Thats a pretty Steep head angle for riding up hills ???
[Reply]
  • + 0
 amongst all the other awesome builds right now, this isnt even in the ball park. Looks like a committee designed it
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Look like a Walmart Mtb frame..
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Glad I got my force already
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Hey look its a late model Enduro
[Reply]
  • + 1
 shittest designs I've ever seen in my life.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 WHY CANT GT END A TOP TUBE RIGHT?!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Has Scott ransom written all over it
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Nah, I like the old one better
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I think i will stick to Norco for the now
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Hmmmm... Looks like a heating device.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Looks like the rear swingarm would hit the frame at full travel????????
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Looks abit tight with the back suspension if you look at the close up
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Conti Rubber Queens in one photo and Blacked out Maxxis HR2's in another!
  • + 1
 Probs because Continental didn't 650b AM tyres until very recently.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Better still, bring back the IT1 with proper geo.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I think they will be carbon. The I drive works well.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 who cares i cant afford one anyway!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 not cool, the only cool thing about GT is Hans Rey
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Well, at least you can't say it's a Trek!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I guess I'm the only guy who likes the Vader look!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Just put a motor on it and call it a day!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The whole design just suck big cocks in hell what were they thinking.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 looks like shiii... a trek
  • + 1
 Session?!
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Comes with it's own fire extinguisher?

I'd have one..
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Low and slack. What more you want.
  • + 11
 a better suspension design lol
  • + 4
 a better looking bike
  • + 2
 And what is wrong with single pivot linkage designs ?

Not enough marketing hype and acronyms for ya ?
  • + 2
 they just suck, nothing more
  • + 1
 This is based upon your 15 years of existence on this planet ? of which what maybe 1 year of that is riding that fake kona you have in your profile pics ?
  • + 0
 GTs were being ridden before you were some spunk in yer daddy's bawbag.
  • + 2
 haha, is that supposed to be a good reason to buy one?
[Reply]
  • - 1
 Dan belongs with Trek not GT. The bike looks okay it's not as bad as some of the other newbies.
[Reply]
  • + 0
 that look like a 2005 bitch
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Looks like a Walmart bike
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Looks like a 90`s prototype
[Reply]
  • + 0
 The equipment doesn't match the rider. Dan should be on an SC Bronson!
  • + 4
 No way Dan should be with Norco!!!
  • + 1
 Are you on drugs you f*****g santa cruz fanboy. Even your profile name is 1 of their bikes. GT are a huge company and more than capable of making a decent bike for Dan.
  • + 1
 Dan will have no probs with GT, take Peaty out of the equation at SC and I think there R&D would take a massive hit, let's be honest without Intense they wouldn't even have VPP tech!!!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Bits of Jekyll?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Bring back the LOBO.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 nah not liking the gt
[Reply]
  • + 1
 GT why-drive are balls
  • + 2
 Who wants the bb to move independantly of the main triangle? And as a time served experienced mechanic I know that they make tremendous noises that a service just won't fix. Fekkin hate GT's. Just a company with a gimmik they won't admit is nonsence
  • + 2
 It's not as bad as the old "URT" (uni-rear-triangle where the BB was on the swing-arm aka Trek Y-Bike) but yeah, they're noisy as Fook and frankly when you have Horst Link suspensions, I-Drive just seems silly and pointless (as do a lot of other systems).
[Reply]
  • - 1
 It maybe a Proto type but this U G L Y Get some colour in ya
[Reply]
  • - 1
 that is one sloppy looking rear end. no way that thing tracks well
[Reply]
  • - 1
 Walmart called. They want their bike back...
[Reply]
  • + 0
 I think I like it
[Reply]
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2014. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv16 0.062544
Mobile Version of Website