Evolution rather than revolution is the theme for four of the five Downhill Bike of the Year nominees, and while that might not be quite as exciting as new-from-the-ground-up designs, it shows that designers are at a point where tweaking existing layouts into finely tuned weapons is the preferred approach. The one very obvious exception to that rule is the latest Demo. The new bike employs the same basic suspension principles as its ancestors, but in a striking layout that's a wholesale change from the Demo platform that many riders have come to know and love over the years. Not surprisingly, 27.5'' wheels rule the roost in this category, with all of the nominees either designed around them or having the built-in adaptability to fit them. And yes, results have to be a factor here, but downhilling is not always about out and out racing intentions - the time we've put in on some of the nominees below has shown that shit eating grins are just as important, with at least one of the bikes below being more of a daily driver in the bike park than a true race rig. We've limited ourselves to just five candidates, which means that there are some great bikes that aren't on the list, but these are the machines that stand out to us given either their performance on the world stage, their capabilities under the average downhiller, and even how much fun they are to ride. Transition TR500 The TR450 wasn't a bad bike, but it was a ho-hum sort of thing in a time when many downhill machines were becoming incredible, and it was also a bit of a one trick pony in that it far preferred to go through something rather than dance around it. Transition's aluminum TR500 couldn't be more of a different beast, though, with it reminding us of that one friend that everyone has who's down for anything, anytime, and it's that easy going sort of personality that makes the bike such a blast to ride like a goon or against the clock. ''
The TR500 has the ability to make short work of the most chopped up and blown out trails while also possessing a flickable and playful side that came out on smoother, jump riddled trails,'' is what we said in
our July review of the bike, and it pretty much sums up the big Transition's disposition. It also doesn't hurt that you can fiddle with its geo to fit either 26'' or 27.5'' wheels, or run 203 or 180mm of travel, making it as adaptable as it is fun and fast. That said, the TR500 isn't just a big improvement over its forefather, it's a great downhill bike, period.
GT Fury Much like a purebred race car or that Usain Bolt guy, downhill bikes are all about going fast and spending as little time as possible between the start and finish lines. One of the best ways to shave off slivers of time during a three-minute effort is to use larger wheels, which is why pretty much every competitive downhill rig worth considering rolls on 27.5'' hoops these days. Forget the conspiracy theories - 27.5'' wheels can be ridden faster over rough ground than 26'' wheels, and the Fury already showed its prowess when using the smaller format: ''
While the GT may have felt long and unwieldy when sitting on it at a standstill, it comes alive when dropped into the environment it was intended for: steep, fast, and rough trails.'' So, like many other companies,
GT took advantage of that and re-designed their Fury to run the larger hoops. However, the difference between GT and most of the others is that the Fury was already one of the best downhill bikes of our time, with the wheel size switch only extending those outstanding abilities.
Specialized Demo Forget about the one-sided seat mast. Toss the concentric bottom bracket pivot and the custom tuned Ohlins TTX shock out of your mind. Ignore the larger wheels. There's just so much going on with the new Demo when it comes to marketing spin or tech mumbo jumbo that it's easy to forget that the new bike simply takes less effort to ride faster than its forefathers. We say that having
spent a load of time on both versions this past summer, riding time that illuminated just how much of a step forward the new Demo really is.
''Riding the 2014 Demo and 2015 Demo back to back on the same section of trail showed that the new machine feels less 'on edge' when it's especially rough or fast, enough so as to make last year's bike feel a bit more nervous than we would have said had we not been switching back and forth between the two.'' Santa Cruz V10 At first you might not think that the legendary Betty White and Santa Cruz's V10 might have much in common. After all, one's a five foot tall, 92 year old actress and the other is a downhill race bike manufactured in Taiwan. On the other hand, both are megastars in their respective fields, and both have evolved with the times to stay not just relevant, but at the cutting edge of their trades; Betty White by not shying away from the odd raunchy TV spot, and the V10 by evolving to the point where it excels on everything from the steepest, gnarliest of tracks to pedal fests like the Pietermartizburg course. Given that sort of history, Santa Cruz did the logical thing for 2014:
they updated the chassis with new geo, altered suspension kinematics and, of course, based it all around 27.5'' wheels. Don't think of it as a complete re-design, though, but rather a consolidation of the V10's already proven strengths, an approach that Josh Bryceland seemed to get along with this season. Then again, Ms. White wouldn't reinvent herself after all of her success, so why would Santa Cruz do such a thing with their V10?
Scott Voltage We know, we know, you aren't ever going to see Scott's World Cup boys on one of these, and calling the 170 to 190mm travel Voltage a pure downhill bike probably seems odd given how the company's Gambler is exactly that, but it's the Voltage's versatility, adaptability, and designed-in fun factor that makes it worthy of inclusion on this list. In fact,
having spent time on both the Voltage and the Gambler, we'd be much more likely to reach for the former nine out of ten times, only relying on the latter if we were going to be pointing ourselves down something really ridiculous. When it comes down to it, we're willing to bet that most riders are going to be quicker, and, maybe more importantly, have more fun on the Voltage. And let's not forget that it can be slacked out into chopper-mode if need be, being able to be set to run a 62° - 66° head angle, or run with 26'' or 27.5'' wheels, all at around a 35lb weight. If there ever was a park machine that could do double duty as a sleeper downhill bike, this thing might be it.
Stay tuned for more PB MTB Awards nominees all month.
forums.mtbr.com/santa-cruz/heckler-26-now-29er-894136.html
www.pinkbike.com/photo/4219546
I'm sorry but i think that Bike of the year is the new MONDRAKER SUMMUM, the design, the suspension, it's cutting edge, the most revolutionary bike of the moment. i don't own one, and don't want it. but the things like they are, Mondraker is selling a bike that it's different to all the others.
the second i put the new Specialized, but cmon, why the transition, the gt? maybe they redesigned it. but it don't have anything new,
No devinci, knolly, glory, yt, banshee, polygon, orange, exprezzo, aurum, karpiel, kona, trek, commencal, canfield, canyon, bergamont, pivot, evil, intense, turner, every other currently made dh bike.
How DARE you pinkbike?!?!?!?
hate to say, but DEMO is certainly ground breaking.. DEMO +1
www.canyon.com/en/mountainbikes/bike.html?b=3670
The fact is the concentric pivot and the way it's designed is damn clever, the single sided frame for shock access, the link that wraps the rear tire for a narrower profile. The general construction and design is very impressive. Go look at one next to a V10.
tiagomano is right when he says it looks like an object than a normal bike. Stand around the bottom of the bike park, it looks 5 years ahead of anything else.
Firstly it's a 2015 bike. Hardly anyone has ridden one (have you @jclnv ?).
Nobody knows if it's any good or if the assymetric design will hold out. On top of that, it's hugely expensive and looks absolutely revolting.
Gwinn must be praying it's better than the last one though.
jclnv: "The fact is the concentric pivot and the way it's designed is damn clever"
Yeah, really clever to combine one of the worst main pivot locations (ala Rotec) with the worst bottom bracket standard of all time (BB30). Two wrongs don't make a right.
The main pivot location don't dictates anything that much, because the pivot between seatstays and chainstay modify a lot the axle path. IC (Or center of curvature.) and IC curb are more significant.
"Speaking strictly about static chassis reaction and negating dynamic concerns:
If your IC is above your ground plane and in front of the rear axle you will have some a suspension compression reaction during braking.
If your IC is below your grond plane and in front of the rear axle you will have a suspension extension reaction during braking.
If your IC is below your ground plane and behind the rear axle you will have some a suspension compression reaction during braking.
If your IC is above your ground plane and behind the rear axle you will have a suspension extension reaction during braking."Dave Weagal
Suspension extension during steep rough terrain, when you are leaning back trying to stay behind the bicycle, has a negative effect on the stability of the bike when it has extreme axle path imbalance: In a steep rocky terrain, if the rear suspension extension is happening just as the front fork is compressing, the wheelbase is getting dramatically shorter which destabilizes the bike and makes an over-the-bars situation more likely. And even if an o-t-b situation doesn't happen, rear tire traction is compromised in these situations because the rear tire is unweighted as the suspension extends.
This extreme wheelbase change on bikes with axle path imbalance also creates traction issues, with the the front tire surging ahead and losing traction when you touch both brakes while the wheelbase is extending because of the rear suspension extension. This would increase the chance of the front tire to lose traction and 'knife' ahead, making the rider more likely to lose control of the bike. A bike with matching axle paths and a more consistent wheelbase would provide not only more stability because of the more consistent wheelbase, but also would provide more rear wheel traction because the rear tire is more planted and in contact with the ground.
The main pivot is the MAIN PIVOT, it is the dominating factor on axle path. Please explain to me how the other pivot could "modify a lot the axle path." All it does rotate slightly and has minimal effect on axle path compared to the main pivot.
The main pivot is a gigantic 3" lower, tell me how the other pivots make up for that. Or maybe @jason-at -specialized can give us a simple explanation.
DW was talking about IC,and, as i said, the IC of both Demos are nearly the same.
And I don't speak english enough to discuss everything you wrote, but there is some wrong (or forgotten) things
Listen.
Instantaneous Centre. The CENTRE of rotation at that INSTANT. The Demo is a virtual pivot bike, not a single pivot.
Hahahahahaha! You really revealed your suspensIon stupidity with that comment. The Demo is a 4 bar linkage, dummy.
The V10 is a virtual pivot bike. Because the suspension appears to rotate around a point in the frame where there is no real pivot it is considered to be a virtual pivot point.
DW talks about the effect of braking on IS, which has a effect on the stability of the bike. But this effect is much more dramatic on the Demo because of the upward and inward axle path, which produces the negative effects on traction and stability that I described above.
At least get some sense of humor You could say that in 2014 Worst link patent expired and now many companies like YT are using it?
Come on you must get it by now? This is page one bike kinematics.
You are right that I am analyzing details of their suspension design. But the consequences are neither tiny nor little when a rider gets bucked over the bars by this suspension ejection contraption, or when the front tire knives and completely loses traction because of the radically changing wheelbase.
jclnv, can you read? Read this again:
Because the suspension appears to rotate around a point in the frame where there is no real pivot it is considered to be a virtual pivot point.
The Demo rotates around a point in the frame where there is an actual pivot, the main pivot. Therefore it is not a virtual pivot bike. You are dumb and done. But you've shown once again that you deserve to be at the top of the list of loyal and disingenuously desperate Specialized fanboys.
@jclnv, you're right, we are waisting ou time.
From the Santa Cruz site;
"VPP suspension designs balance different forces to eliminate unwanted compression without limiting bump absorption. The downward force on your pedals pushes most full suspension bikes down, resulting in unwanted suspension compression. VPP bikes use a patented link configuration and axle path to apply some of the pulling force from the chain to counteract that motion caused by pedaling."
The FSR design obviously doesn't have that patented link, does it?
www.bikeradar.com/us/gear/article/buyers-guide-to-mountain-bike-suspension-part-1-28367
Don't you wish. It has the most upward and inward axle path trajectory of any DH bike out there, right? Which actually goes in a completely different direction than the slacked out front end. Which creates the traction and stability issues that I described above, which you didn't address. But thanks for the response.
The issue with low IC is for stability on hard landings or big bumps, bump absorption, and things like that. But there is advantages like better braking ability, less chain growth (so you don't need chain pulley like a jedi to keep low kickback and ... to keep good bump absorption, the irony! Chain tension can reduce suspension performance on small impacts).
Somebody else has already done it, assuming your new bike has the "nearly identical" "kinemetoc response" as the old Demo, as you claimed.
tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2m3ialw&s=6
But I did get out the old architecture class equipment and charted the up and in axle path of the new Demo:
m.pinkbike.com/u/protour/album/2015-Demo-axle-path-Up-In-WTF
Considering the sag from the rider, there is essentially no rearward movement of the rear axle. Just up and in.
p.vitalmtb.com/photos/stories/2012/07/20/max_Redalp_DH_Team_Bike_white_s.jpg?1342828061
These comments have been an interesting read.
So you think that moving a part that weighs weighs about 1 pound 3 inches lower will make a difference in traction because of the lower center of gravity? Considering the overall weight of the bike and rider is 180- 250 pounds overall, I just don't see it happening. Main advantage of lower cog is that it helps you move the bike around easier in turns, jumps, etc.
I actually don't think rear axle path is that important..... as long as you aren't creating any negative effects from it like the ones I've described with the new Demo.
Average braking force is around 700-800N. With an IC at 340mm height (single pivot bike with main pivot concentric to bb) it creates a 270 Nm torque. It means a equivalent vertical force of 640N (140 pounds) on the suspension (applied on the rear wheel contact point), tending to compress the suspension or a 245N (50 pounds) force lifting the rear wheel around the frontwheel contact point. (tending to void the traction of the rear wheel)
These values are non-negligible. They are the cause of "brake bumps" and 'brake jack". (for brake jack you need to add the braking torque to have the correct value)
The effects you describe just doesn exist in the case ou describe. And you totally ignore the geometry of the bike, which dictates the rider's weight distribution between the wheel, therefore the magnitude of traction issues. And yes axle path is important. Just try a Jedi, or a Zerode, you'll see.
And your bike won't make you win, but it can make you lose.
So, let's examine this claim within the context of Aaron Gwin and World Cup DH races.
After winning about 80% of the races in a two year period on a Session, he moved to the Demo. Two years later, after lots of riding, testing, spending time with the Specialized engineers, tweaking the bike, riding, more testing, more time w engineers, etc.....he still has not won a World Cup DH race on a Demo.
But I though Waki said anybody can win on anything?
Ok, Waki, now give me all the excuses for Aaron Gwin not winning on a Demo, as you slowly back away from your flimsy claim of yours.
Are you completely clueless about public relations, or do you just naively believe everything you hear in every interview.
Your BS is always so easy to pick apart. But you are a very good eccentric, quirky, wannabe American failed internet comedian.
It's part of an athlete's job to protect his sponsors reputation so I don't really consider Gwin to be a liar. He was just trying to do the best he can to deflect criticism of the Demo in a very uncomfortable situation.
Nice to see that neither one of you guys EVER attempted to make counter-points to my criticism of the Demo's stability and traction issues that are due to the too-low main pivot.
I made counter points twice. I said that the """main pivot""" doesn't dictate the IC therefore it doesn't dictate the axle path. And I said what a low IC would do on a bike. So your sentence is false twice. Jason-at-specialized said that they have a lot of racers and riders that didn't notice this issue. What more do you want?
@Dobbs59 : I don't like the Demo, i wouldn't ride it, but it's not as bad as Protour can think.
How it can be considered for bike of the year 2014??!?!
Nobody knows what it's like, it could be brilliant, it could be a dog.
www.pinkbike.com/photo/11742494
I want to publically assure you that this bike has a nearly identical kinematic response as the old Demo, though I'm not providing in public info to back up that claim. The bike also adapts to Gwin's preferences while honoring the geometry Troy has been successful on.
Actually, I just wanted to prove a bad idea by taking it to the extreme. What do you guys think of that upward and inward axle path? Yeah, the wheel would probably hit the frame, but just pretend it won't. See any potential issues with that radically changing wheelbase yet? But hey, now it has an even lower c.o.g.! I'm sure the moto-proven Ohlins shock will make up for any deficiencies.
I'll tell you exactly why. Everyone else caught up, including his team mate. Do you realise the Trek bike he was so sucessful on has a very similar axle path to the Demo?
You're fanatical about this non-existent issue and you keep terrorising the comments section when Specialized in mentioned. It's fanatical terrorism. Take a look at yourself before you do something you'll regret.
This is fanatical terrorism:
bearmarketreview.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/terrorist1.jpg
This is essentially what I am doing:
grewallevymarketing.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/man-on-computer1.jpg
I'm not surprised you didn't comment on my latest drawing, did you finally realize the main pivot on the Demo does largely dictate the axle path? Duh.
www.pinkbike.com/photo/11742494
Upward and inward on the Demo's bad axle path, looks like Devinci for the win:
tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2m3ialw&s=6
The longer you stay in denial the more desperate you become; This was sorta funny:
jclnv: "Take a look at yourself before you do something you'll regret."
Ok Dad, are you going to threaten to ground me next? And if I really hated Specialized, them why would I have suggested in this first comment here that they deserve the product of the year award for their bibs?
m.pinkbike.com/news/pinkbike-awards-product-of-the-year-nominees.html
So far with some rough estimates there is an up and out. This is super simple to do in autocad, but meaningless without dimensions. The rear movement is from the "floating" linkage rotating anti clockwise extending out. The idea of just up and in is false.
www.pinkbike.com/photo/11743393
The rocker arm that connects to the shock moves forward (inward), so it pulls everything forward. It does rotate the linkage slightly as it is moving inward, but with the rocker going inward, it would be impossible for the rear axle to go backwards(rearwards).
Look at these diagrams of 4 bar linkage bikes:
members.home.nl/vd.kraats/ligfiets/pa/pa41.html
Now imagine the main pivot by the bb being 3" lower(which is alot!), and you have nothing but upward and inward, much more dramatically than in those diagrams by Suzuki, actually. It's not much of a problem on a shorter travel bike because the shocks obviously travel less so the wheelbase length stays more consistent. But on a DH bike with a slacked out front end it creates the traction and stability issues I described above.
Excellent drawings on your latest blogs Waki, very creative of you. Nice work. When I finish my drawing of my new concept DH bike. I'll send you a copy and you can use it for a Wakileaks installment if you want. Might make for a good laugh. .. though at my expense. I'll call it the Protour Ridicule.
Actually, that would be an excellent idea, because there is so much bitchin on literally every bike - let the online critics draw their own designs in any technique and level of detail they want and we could ask real designers, like Jason to have the harshest go they want have on those. If we could ask Joe Graney for opinion then it would be ace!
I'll try to setup this up! So, what do you guys think about Troll Gallery?
Seriously though, this sounds like a good/fun idea
Adverti$$$$$ing at it's best.
You got my vote.
Ok, seriously... Made in China used to mean terrible things about 10 yrs ago. Today there are some f*king state of the art products coming out of China and Taiwan. Just look at your iPhone.
You keep talking shit about "axle path imbalance" without the slightest f*cking clue about the Demo's axle path. Have you mapped it? How does it differ to the other bikes in this test? Lets see your data, lets see your graphs.
Until then you're just a guy ranting bias shit like an idiot. Grow the f*ck up.
I also doubt if @jason-at-specialized will defend his design, simply because he never anticipated the issues I am bringing up with the bike's instability and traction issues. Which is why this design won't last. The advantages of a lower cog will not make up for the extreme axle path imbalance and the serious problems that come with it.
jclnv: "Go Specialized! Don't back down to the Internet terrorists!"
You are a complete douchebag. Go ride your carbon 29er up a hill and get lost.
alutech-cycles.com/bilder/produkte/gross/Sennes-Pinion-FR-10-Komplettbike-26.jpg
fthumb0.mtb-news.de/cache/950/auto/1/1/fstatic3.mtb-news.de/f3/16/1638/1638531-vidtyvigeskw-large.jpg
btw, you run your 500 26 or 27.5?
the v10, is the new one?
I'll be rolling along on my Mongoose for now.
What are the criteria to choose these five nominees among all the possibilities?
How many DH bikes have you ridden to choose the nominees? Six, twelve, twenty, all of them?
Why are your advertisers always nominated? Is it just coincidence?
Thanks.
Not because i'm a fanboy, but because the other nominies have pretty much just undergone some minor geometry changes to accomidate 27,5" wheels (not that that's a bad thing), whilest the demo frame has undergone a full overhaul and looks nothing like the older model. The big S has taken an amazing bike and made it even better!
quanto a 500, qualquer dia que va andar ai mais para cima convido te a andar na minha, e ve se é assim tao descabida a opiniao deles.
GT would be my next choice, with Transition coming in 3rd. The Voltage obviously doesn't even belong on this list but whatever.
As mentioned previously, the Demo has the worst axle path balance of any suspension bicycle ever created. They sacrificed virtually every aspect of suspension performance (suspension sensitivity, pedaling performance, stability, and ability to carry momentum)to get a slightly lower center of gravity and improve the appearance of the bike. Specialized engineers also have publicly admitted that it is an inferior design but disingenuouslt claim that the performance of the shock makes up for it, and they have never addressed any of my very public accusations against this bad design. Didn't work for Rotec, won't work here.
Since PB included the voltage on the list, I'm surprised they didn't include the Specialized Enduro S-works 29er; the bike that Mike Levy made this ridiculous claim about: "because the E29 has the wherewithal to offer downhill bike-like performance, and we'd say that it makes more sense for roughly 80% of downhillers to be on an S-Works Enduro rather than their gravity pigs, if cost was no factor, that is."
Pffffft!
@jason-at-specialized I call you out.
And just curious what do you think of spoons because ya know spoons just aren't very ergonomic and even spoons themselves hate their design so I'm just curious as to what you think we should do?
Consider this quote from Dave Weagle about the effect of instantaneous centre on suspension:
"Speaking strictly about static chassis reaction and negating dynamic concerns:
If your IC is above your ground plane and in front of the rear axle you will have some a suspension compression reaction during braking.
If your IC is below your grond plane and in front of the rear axle you will have a suspension extension reaction during braking.
If your IC is below your ground plane and behind the rear axle you will have some a suspension compression reaction during braking.
If your IC is above your ground plane and behind the rear axle you will have a suspension extension reaction during braking."
Suspension extension during steep rough terrain, when you are leaning back trying to stay behind the bicycle, has a negative effect on the stability of the bike when it has extreme axle path imbalance: In a steep rocky terrain, if the rear suspension extension is happening just as the front fork is compressing, the wheelbase is getting dramatically shorter which destabilizes the bike and makes an over-the-bars situation more likely. And even if an o-t-b situation doesn't happen, rear tire traction is compromised in these situations because the rear tire is unweighted as the suspension extends.
This extreme wheelbase change on bikes with axle path imbalance also creates traction issues, with the the front tire surging ahead and losing traction when you touch both brakes while the wheelbase is extending because of the rear suspension extension. This would increase the chance of the front tire to lose traction and 'knife' ahead, making the rider more likely to lose control of the bike.
A bike with a traditional main pivot and a more consistent wheelbasewould provides not only more stability because of the more consistent wheelbase, but also would provide more rear wheel traction because the rear tire is more planted and in contact with the ground.
It is also worth noting that these negative characteristics of bikes with axle path imbalance issues are more exaggerated on bikes with bigger wheels, unless you increase the wheelbase length in proportion to the increased wheel size.
A bike with perfectly matching paths might be impossible, but when it is as imbalanced as the Demo you are creating problems that certainly are not being made up for by the advantages of having a lower centre of gravity.
DH racing is a unique sport because of the light bikes, the steep, rough terrain, and much heavier rider who can't rely on an engine to maintain momentum. So comparisons to other wheel sports where axle path balance isn't so important are irrelevant.
I don't doubt Gwin and Brosnan can go fast on this bike; they are 2 of the fastest riders in the world. But I also have no doubt they would be faster and safer on a bike that did not have such an extreme axle path imbalance.
Do you or anybody else actually have any counterpoints to any of my observations?
@jason-at-specialized is the man I really want to hear from. This is his baby and I would think he should be able to offer some type of defense of it against my serious allegations. And It is serious if people are more likely to get injured because of the design. I'm not just trying to put on a show here or hate on Specialized, I simply want to discuss the merits of the concentric BB main pivot.
.
In fact i spent most of this summer touring america riding most of this years models bikes. So can i have an educated opinion on these bikes? Yes, i can. Thanks for playing.