The Demo name has been in Specialized's lineup for nearly as long as riders have been building and sending moves that require such machines, and the bike has evolved over the years from something designed for freeriding to a low and slack bike meant for racing the clock on Sunday. But even though the geometry has matured drastically over that time, the five previous iterations all shared the same basic suspension layout, and its silhouette is one that's instantly recognizable by any mountain biker who's owned some baggy riding shorts or a full face helmet. 2015 sees Specialized make a wholesale change in the bike's design, however, and the result is a fresh looking 200mm travel, 650B wheeled downhill rig that is built almost entirely from carbon fiber and features a stunning one-sided seat mast that is sure to be even more polarizing than the wheel size the bike rolls on.2015 Specialized Demo Explained
Filmed and edited by Mind Spark Cinema Just like the five previous Demo platforms that came before it, the 2015 Demo is the brainchild of Jason Chamberlain, Senior Design Engineer at Specialized, and his aims with the new design were much the same as with the previous race oriented Demo, but to also take them to the next level. "About two and a half years ago I started putting my ideas down, and the goals were lighter weight, better bump performance, and lower center of gravity," he said of those early thoughts. Those goals aren't too surprising given the Demo's intentions as a race machine, but it's the last objective on that list that had him considering moving away from the suspension layout that we all picture when we think of the Demo. He explained that the bike's concentric bottom bracket pivot is the result of wondering what the bike would look like if he moved the main pivot down a few inches from where you would otherwise expect to see it, and then reconfigured the rest of the pivot points accordingly. But while less weight and a lower center of gravity were areas that he wanted to improve on, his number one priority with the new bike was to have it carry momentum better. The 650B wheels and the improved angle of attack that they offer over 26" hoops greatly helps that cause, but, somewhat unexpectedly, it wasn't a foregone conclusion that the bike would roll on 'tweener wheels. "When it comes to wheel size, we explored everything: 26, 29, and 650B,'' he explained to Pinkbike when questioned about if a 29" wheeled downhill bike was ever in the cards. ''We think that for this platform, 650B is best because it give you a balance of light weight and quick wheel response, and also allows you to package the rear wheel in a short chain stay. |
2015 Specialized Demo Details
• FACT 11m frame: carbon front and rear triangles, link • FACT 10m frame: carbon front triangle, seat stays, aluminum link and chain stays • Rear wheel travel: 200mm • Wheel size: 650B • New FSR suspension design • Revised Style-Specific Geometry • 63.5° head angle • 430mm chain stay • Ohlins TTX shock • Full 1.5'' head tube • Internal cable routing w/ interior guides • ISCG 05 chain guide tabs • BB30 bottom bracket • 12 x 135mm rear axle • Frame weight: 7.6lb (FACT 11m w/o shock) • Availability: January 2015 • MSRP: TBA
|
| This is the sixth generation of the Demo platform and we've always had a lot of positive feedback on certain attributes of the bike, and we've tried to carry those on. Even though it's a radically new re-configuration, the heart of the performance is still very similar to the bike that people have known and loved for years.- Jason Chamberlain, Senior Design Engineer, Specialized |
The topic of geometry, and especially chain stay length, is one that's hounded Specialized all year, mainly due to team rider Aaron Gwin
experimenting with a longer rear end that was custom made for his race bike. And while it was certainly no secret that Gwin was looking for some added length to improve stability, likely due to his previous experience on longer bikes, his teammates seemed to be getting along just fine with the stock geometry. "When we brought Aaron on board last year we did a lot of research into geometry because he wanted a frame that he felt he could go fast on and something that he was familiar with, so we made a lot of options for him to race on,'' Chamberlain said of the in-season changes to Gwin's bike. ''Ultimately, we ended up with one single geometry that he felt fast on, but at the same time still honoured the geometry that Troy had been winning on before that. So now we have a bike with a longer chain stay by 10mm than the previous Demo, which is still, for a 650B bike, probably one of the shortest chain stays out there. We also keep the low bottom bracket that is very characteristic of Specialized bikes."
Asymmetrical Frame
If there's one thing that might steal attention away from Specialized anticipated decision to go with 650B wheels, it would be the bike's single sided frame. Technically speaking, it's only the seat mast zone that has gone to a one-sided design, something that was made possible by this area no longer having to serve as home for the linkage to pivot off of, as well as Specialized's commitment to manufacturing the frame out of carbon fiber from the get-go rather than debuting an aluminum version first. ''With this new FSR layout we realized that the upper portion of the seat tube structure only does one thing: it holds up your seat post. We didn't need it to be as massive, and we didn't need the structure to straddle the shock like it had in the past,'' Chamberlain explains when questioned as to how the idea came about. That's all fine and dandy, but we had to ask why, especially when you consider that it doesn't seem to offer any sort of performance advantage. So, what's the point? "It allows the frame to be packaged very tight and very narrow, and it allows very easy access to the shock,'' a reference to a racer who may need to either easily reach the Ohlins TTX's dials or even make a shock swap in a hurry. A more important point is that it will likely mean that any shock made in the future, regardless of its silhouette, will fit the bike due to the clearance that the single sided design affords, especially because Chamberlain has also moved away from the clevis rearward shock mount system of the previous Demo.
The carbon fiber front triangle is molded in two sections - the seat mast and bottom bracket area, and the forward section of the triangle - and then bonded together afterwards, but the single sided design is also said to allow for simpler and more consistent construction methods due to a less complicated procedure in the molding process. Does it make for a lighter frame? Although the 2015 Demo S-Works FACT 11m frame, with its carbon front triangle, carbon link, and carbon chain and seat stays is claimed to weigh 7.6lb without a shock, which is nearly a full pound lighter than the previous Demo, Chamberlain did say that the single sided mast area likely saves only a marginal amount of weight. The FACT 10m frame features the same carbon fiber front triangle and carbon seat stays, but uses an aluminum link (
which weighs 240 grams more than the carbon unit) and chain stay assembly.
Suspension Design - The Same but Different The previous iteration of the Demo that we're all familiar with, the design that led to oh-so-many jokes about surplus chain stays, was a four-bar, FSR layout with eight pivot locations (
four on each side). Despite appearing to be quite different from that bike, the 2015 Demo also sports eight pivot locations and a four-bar, FSR layout that, according to Chamberlain, sports very similar kinematics and instant center location. That said, there's a pretty good chance that even your non-biking spouse would be able to tell you that the two designs look drastically different, likely followed by one of those eye rolling "what does it matter?" faces, as it's pretty obvious that Chamberlain and his team have done much more than a simple re-working of the Demo's back end. The asymmetrical design's main pivot rotates concentrically around the bottom bracket, and its 200mm of rear wheel travel is controlled via a custom tuned Ohlins TTX shock that Specialized says features less mid-speed compression for more control on initial impacts, but also increased high-speed compression damping for more control when pushing hard.
Concentric Bottom Bracket Pivot - There has to be a good reason for Specialized to shrug off all of the expected Rotec comments that are no doubt going to come their way, and it turns out that reason is all about center of gravity and lowering its location compared to the old bike, which is the reason that the main pivot now calls the bottom bracket home rather than sitting up higher as is more common. Why is this important? It's probably simplest to explain it in exaggerated terms: picture yourself holding a 10ft long pole that has a 20lb weight on the end and then holding it out in front of you and swinging it back and forth. Now do the same thing with a 5ft long pole with the same weight - it's not only easier to start the swinging motion with the shorter pole, it also takes a lot less effort to change its direction from left to right. What the hell does that have to do with mountain bikes? Well, the pole is the bike and the weight is its suspension components, which are the heaviest part of the frame. The lower those components sit (
the shorter the pole), the easier it will be to move the bike around. Yes, we're talking small percentages here, not game changing stuff, but there's no doubting that the new bike features a lower COG than the Demo we're all familiar with. "I started by thinking about what it would look like if we just moved everything down three inches, and naturally what happened was that the main pivot moved into the same real estate as the bottom bracket, so it became natural to just integrate those into one pivot,'' Chamberlain explained about the design. ''Then I reconfigured all the other pivots around that. The FSR, four-bar performance is still there even though the pivots are in radically different locations."
Does the concentric pivot dictate the axle path, though? And couldn't you easily run it as a single speed setup due to the lack of chain growth? Sorry, wrong on both accounts. The rear axle isn't located on the chain stays, but rather on the seat stays that pivot off of the chain stay, meaning that the path of the axle is a separate deal that's not tied into the concentric main pivot. And speaking of axle path, Chamberlain wasn't sold on the idea of a drastically rearward trajectory in the never ending search for better momentum carrying abilities, a topic that seems to make up much of the word count in many reviews and marketing spiels relating to a lot of downhill bikes: ''At the onset of this project we purchased every bike out there with every imaginable wheel path so that we could really understand them,'' he said when questioned on the subject. ''We filmed them all from the side with high-speed film and really got an idea about what bikes did what. What we found was that we could achieve the same level of performance through a properly tuned FSR with an Ohlins shock as you could with some of the radical designs with crazy wheel paths.'' He went on to cite the drastic geometry changes, possible chain tension issues, and also difficulty lifting the front end for a manual due to the lengthening rear end as it compresses as all being valid reasons for tackling the momentum carrying challenge from different angles.
Going with a concentric main pivot wasn't without its challenges, however, as it means that the area around the bottom bracket becomes much more complicated than a more traditional layout. First, the massive main pivot bearings - there's one on each side of the shell - are pressed into machined aluminum bores, with a milled out spacer in between for each bearing's inner race to come up against. The pivot axle is equally massive, having to run through the swing arm and thread into the non-drive side, and it also serves as home to the BB30 bottom bracket bearings that the bike uses. Oh, and because the carbon swing arm rotates around the bottom bracket shell, Specialized has been able to locate the bike's ISCG 05 chain guide tabs on it, thereby allowing the guide to follow the movement of the rear axle and chain as the bike goes through its travel.
Frame DetailsThe Demo's revised suspension layout presented a few fresh challenges to the design team, especially when talking about lateral rigidity. The goal was not to make a stiffer bike than what they already had, however, only to equal the numbers of the existing Demo - too rigid and a bike can feel harsh, especially when leaned over in a corner and on an angle that doesn't allow the suspension to absorb the ground. And while you might assume that matching the current Demo shouldn't have been a difficult task, a look at the new layout from above shows that the left and ride side seat stays are actually completely separate units that are no longer tied together with a bridge over the tire like on the old design, meaning that matching the old bike in term of stiffness might not be such an easy job. Specialized approached the challenge from two different directions, literally, with a new keyed 12 x 135mm thru-axle at one end, and a massive rocker link at the other.
Rocker Link - The previous design saw the shock actuated essentially by the swing arm itself, with just a short clevis between the two, while this new layout has the shock being compressed by the rocker link. That's not the rocker link's only job, though, as it replaces about a third of the length of the seat stays stays as well and also must play a significant role in the frame's lateral rigidity. There are two versions of the link; a hollow carbon unit coming stock on the high-end bike and frame kit, and an aluminum version that weighs 240 grams more being utilized on the less expensive Demo 8 I Carbon. The carbon link might look relatively simple, but it's actually a mostly hollow piece with internal carbon ribs that are strategically placed to increase both strength and rigidity. Tight confines are tricky when it comes to being able to compact the carbon enough to remove any voids in the walls, which is why the cutaway of the link shown below reveals small amounts of foam in such places, and each pivot location features aluminum bearing journals rather than having the sealed bearings be pressed directly into the carbon.
Proper alignment is critical given that the link plays such a major role on the frame, and adding the aluminum bearing journals after manufacturing the link wouldn't guarantee that it would be up to spec. The answer was to install the still un-machined aluminum components during the molding process, with the carbon completely covering each of the small separate aluminum sections before being machined away along with all but only the minimum amount of metal required to serve as home for each bearing. The whole process ensures that not only is each bearing journal in perfect alignment, but also as piece of mind when it comes to replacing pivot bearings down the road that they won't need to be pressed in and out of fragile carbon bores.
L7 Square Axle - The job of upping frame rigidity doesn't fall on the rocker link's shoulders alone, with Specialized employing a keyed 12 x 135mm thru-axle at the other end that they say helps to have the new Demo match the older design when put to the test. Non-round thru-axles are nothing new, of course, but Specialized referring to the axle as being square is a bit misleading as it's round for its entire length except for each end, and it is compatible with any 12 x 135mm hub. It sports a square, conical shape to each end that nests into the frame to better tie the left and right seat stay assemblies together.
Style-Specific SizingSpecialized feels that seat tube length should have next to nothing to do with downhill bike sizing, and that choosing the correct size for you should come down more to top tube length and reach than anything else. This approach makes a lot of sense and is one that you'll find in the BMX and dirt jump worlds where handling and being able to throw the bike around means everything and proper leg extension counts for nothing. They feel that the same principles apply to downhill bikes, and that as long as the seat tube is low enough to afford enough clearance, the bike's length should be the deciding factor when it comes to sizing. Style-Specific Sizing, or S3 geometry for short, is the realization of this, with the new Demo being available with four different top top lengths that are split between two relatively short seat tube heights.
The idea behind S3 is to allow the consumer to choose the size that best suits their riding style and terrain. For instance, at 5' 9" I've often found that I can ride either a medium or large traditionally sized bike but usually prefer to go with the longer option due to the added stability of its stretched out wheelbase. Specialized calls their sizes short, medium, long, and extra-long, and if I was looking for a more lively, playful machine I might prefer the medium length Demo. Team rider Mitch Ropelato, at 5' 8", goes with the medium for this exact reason, but Gwin says that he prefers the long for its more stable wheelbase, despite being the same height as Mitch. Specialized Development Rider Brad Benedict is 6' 1" and reaches for a long Demo for days in the park but an extra-long for race weekends. The two seat tube lengths - 394mm for the short and medium, 419mm for the long and extra-long - are both short enough to even allow a relatively small rider to try out a longer bike if they're really looking for that added predictability that comes from a long wheelbase.
S-Works Demo 8Demo 8 I CarbonS-Works Demo 8 FrameThat's a load of information to digest, especially when all that really counts is how the 2015 Demo performs on the trail. We'll be spending the next two days in the Whistler Bike Park with both a brand new 2015 Demo and last year's Demo to find out exactly how it's different from the old bike, so stay tuned for a comparison article that goes well beyond the usual "First Ride" impressions.www.specialized.com
fotoalbum.mtb-forum.it/albums/25162/thumbs_800/835945.jpg
Afterall it is also easy to access a shock in frames like Knolly, Giant, Canyon, but they just have both sides there. As for me Spec released an experiment and it was not so hard to predict that there would be more haters. There is not much sitting in a DHwc, so thinking this way, why would I need a seat at all? It would be at least 1kg lighter without a saddle, post, tube, clamp etc.
@gabriel Still it is a rider that risks health a some sense of psychilogic confidence is also important. I am just discussing.
Way exclude half your market , don't get me wrong I love it
puh... not easy.
i try ( u should feel honoured... my lifetime is super important ) ! .... just imagine the bike is on the ground ( which is essential to put real stress on the seattube )... if there is weight on the pedals or not doesnt really matter. because the wheels are on the ground and there is a damper in the frame, the swing arm just stays where it is or maybe moves a bit upwards. and the upper link connects the seattube with that swing arm. the link defines the distance between swing arm and the seat tube. when u now put force on the saddle, the link will support the seat tube because it is supportet by the swingarm, which is supportet by rearwheel, lower link and damper. .... i hope, someone understands what im writing
@gabriel You're doubts as well as this discussion is helpful. This is why I will try to explain it again, but in one more different way. I bet you've seen a parade or some circus clowns who are trying to keep an umbrella or a long stick in vertical posidion by supporting it with just one finger or a palm. You can try it at home. Take an umbrella or any long stick like a pencil, a rod or something like that. Put it on your open palm and try to keep it steady in vertical position. You will probably move your hand around back and front, from side to side in almost horisontal plain to keep it beneath the mass centre of the umbrella. This is close to how the V10 upper link works to support the seattube. Since the umbrella is still in the air, you cannot deny you're supporting it up even when your hand is moving. Your hand is supported by your moving spine and legs and finally by the ground you're standing on. The V10 seattube stays there using similar rules. Links are like bones, Pivots are like joints and a shock is like a muscle. It does not matter if its support moves. It works in each position because there is a shock tension and the whole system to hold it. The weakening of the joining between the seattube and the main frame is designed especially to make it a bit flexible in this point. This is because the support we are trying to clarify is dynamic. Supports changes from stronger to weaker depending on shock tension, load and terrain. Too rigid seattube joining would crack. It has to bend a bit to stay strong. Just like plants structures under wind and the whole idea of carbon composite. Notice the frame is only offered in carbon version, because it is only possible (or much easier) to make it this way. Aluminium would be too rigid and would probably demand some additional type of pivot there.
I understand your likening it to a skeleton, which allows for movement whilst remaining flexible, but you have overlooked the fact that the skeleton is held up by the interplay of forces between bone and muscle, bones without muscles would flop to the floor. Muscles without bones would do the same. They need each other to perform the task of supporting your structure.
The top link on a v-10 is essentially similar to a bone with no muscular support. when unladen it would flop freely if it wasnt supported by the seat tube and swingarm. In this example the shock plays the role of "the muscle", but the shock is not directly connected to the upper link. This is why the upper link can offer no vertical support to the seat mast, in the same way the cable on a crane does not hold the crane up. That is not a very clear explanation I know, but I hope it helps.
"simpler bike that's easier to make and yet sells more expensive"
He said he stopped selling big brands for that reason - (and now only sells frames he designs on his own and welded by some local pro welder).
He also said that there was such a huge move on carbon mainly because it take way less time to make a carbon frame than to weld properly a metal frame. Same stuff for press fit BB (which can be a creaking pain in the arse): a threadless BB is much faster to make. The miracle with carbon is that it takes less time to manufacture and yet sells more expensive: win/win.
He finally told me about some famous wheel manufacturer (Mavic not to cite them) tech center guy on the phone that once told him that they "redesigned" some wheelset because the older model was "too strong" and customers did not return enough of them for buying new parts/wheels.
I found it interesting...
I'll bet one coffee one third of the retail price goes to pay marketing costs.
A carbon part is more expensive than a similar aluminum part in production. Mather of fact, like it or not there is no conspiracy going on here.
Samsung, it's not only cost directly related to production of the product like development. don't forget the marketing dollars, the race team, gwins salary, shipping, logistics, stocking spares for 15 years, the money your dealer wants to earn...
All those costs usually add up to a point where the the actual cost of a product 20-25% of retail price.
Yea. you think about everything made today. its made to break, not to last. Look at ur parents stoves, washers, driers, fridges. Those things lasted 30+ years before needing to be replaced. My fiances parents just bought a new stove, and within the first 2 years, needed 5 services covered under their 150$ a year warranty for 3 years. When i was there for one of the repairs, he plugged in something that got 'unhooked' and stopped the electrical from working.
My parents bought a washer, within the first 3 months theres a leak. My family fixes things instead of buying warranties. We looked in the back of the washer, and the sealed tubes were half assed.
it was made to leak, it was made to unhook
any big company will exploit their 'brand name' to benefit from it. We as consumers are the chumps. thats why when companies go big, its usually time to make a switch (for me.)
"Potężna cywilizacja nasza dąży do wytworzenia możliwie nietrwałych produktów w możliwie trwałym opakowaniu. Nietrwały produkt wnet musi być zastąpiony nowym, co ułatwia zbyt; a trwałość opakowania utrudnia jego usunięcie, co sprzyja dalszemu rozwojowi techniki i cywilizacji." Stanisław Lem 1971.
Which means: The might civilisation of ours aims at making possibly undurable products in possible durable packaging. Undurable product has to be replaced quickly, which supports sales. Durability of package makes it harder to get rid of it, which supports development of technology and civilisation. In other words consumers should buy more and more, and civilisation and technology should focus mainly around managing trash and garbage.
I'm annoyed now by you. The price has NOT been announced and here you are pulling sh*t out of your *ss to hate.
If you don't like the bike or if $5K+ bikes are too expensive for you, WELCOME TO THE CLUB, but don't make up sh*t.
I'm thinking of the longer-term future development of mountain biking as a sport, for which we all have massively high expectations. But we're never going to gain such a large scale of exposure to the rest of the sporting world when pricing is as high as it is becoming!
I believe that by trying to plateau costs in the short run (in what are still the relatively early stages of the development of mountain biking) the sport will reap the benefits of larger-scale exposure to the rest of the sporting world. This, then, will pay dividends in the future to these bicycle companies. Their financial stability for the future will always remain secure as the world will always have bikes!
As a mountainbiker, someone who simply enjoys riding bikes, a Customer, what the f**k do i gain from exposure to the rest of the sporting world?
Why do so may of you here on pink bike worry so much about media exposure of DH world cup and BS like that? I want to see it to, yes, but i actually perfer it online with no freaking advertisement. The market can do what ever it wants, i don't care. more people riding on the trails? longer lines in the parks? rather not!
Anyway, bikes did not really get that expensive. Think about it:
1) look at what you get for 2000 Dollar in 2014 vs what you got in 1994... 1994 you might have gotten a high end bike but it would have by no means worked better than your 2014 entry level full suspension.
Yes now there is a 10K option to. So what?
2) a f***ing I-Phone is 700-900 Dollars. Most people i know have a new one about every Year or so for a completely useless status symbol dooing a yob tht a 50$ piece of plactic could do just as well. Thats freaking 5000 Dollars in 5 years!
Stop bitching, go riding, all of you!
I have given some thought to the point you have made. Firstly, i think we need to travel back in time, not too far back though. A little history lesson.
Ok, so.... to make a top end product you need to put a tremendous time into r&d. this is where the majority of your money is going. So lets go back to the 2004 demo, [cue time machine] the top model would have seemed real expensive back then, however, the people that could afford it are funding for the next top end model for the next year.
We are back to the present, and have been exposed to one of the most beautiful frames i have ever seen. This is not for the everyday person/rider/shredder/legend.
The people that will inevitably buy what will be an extortionate vélo are just funding for more beautiful items like this to appear in the future. Without top spec bikes, the lower, more affordable bikes would never improve, and you and i would still be riding on the equivalent of a Halfords Trax Tr.1 and spending a grand on it too.
As for @abzillah... well i have no words for you, but as you like your stars, here are some more ***** wooo.
to layup an average quality carbon fibre road frame takes 9 hours and 30 pairs of hands. This frame will use 3,500km of single filament which has been woven into cloth, and then impregnated with expensive resins. Takes a huge amount of energy, time and investment to be able to do this.
Tooling is another very expensive up-front cost, typically for the front triangle of a road bike frame in 1 size, its about $50-70,000 depending on the design. Then add in multiple sizes. Tools require ongoing maintenance as they wear during use, working life of a tool is approx. 3 year and then its retired.
As far as I know, Specialized carbon frames are still made in Taiwan. The cost of labour in a factory here is between $600 and $1000 USD a month. A month is 22 days at 11 hours each. Lets use the top of that bracket (which I doubt people working with carbon are at) for the sake of argument. Hampstead Bandit you say 9 hours to lay one up and 30 people doing it. I don't know where you're getting that figure from, but frankly I find it very hard to be believe. I'm not attacking you personally on that, but like I said I doubt 30 people are involved. You could be right, but even if you are they aren't all working on it at the same time. Even if they were, the labour cost would be a little over $1000 USD at the top end of $4.13 USD an hour.
More likely is there's a production line with two people max doing the same thing at the same time. So 9 hours, two people, 18 hours at $4.13 is $74.34 USD for labour cost on one frame.
I've got a few mates who work in bike factories and I've heard a lot of times that the actual cost of making a carbon downhill bike frame is less than $300 USD.
You guys saying they aren't making money on this bike are having a laugh. You guys saying carbon is very expensive to make are a marketing department's wet dream.
Carbon is an accountant's wet dream. It's cheaper to make and more desirable, hence they can sell it for more. It's a win-win for the companies.
Also it's worth noting that Taiwan is being priced out of the market at the bottom end of the manufacturing scale because the costs are a lot lower in China and Vietnam. I'd be willing to bet a cup of coffee that a carbon frame made in Vietnam is well under $200 USD at cost price.
Of course, cost of manufacture is not the only cost to recover, but like I said, it's supply and demand. Plain and simple.
After 15 years in the industry as a product developer a factory that is able to build a whole carbon frame for 300$ is my personal work related wet dream...
My information comes directly from the world's largest manufacturer who has their own carbon division 'c-tec'
There is substantially more to manufacturing carbon fibre than basing your pricing on labour costs, Taiwan is not as cheap as some believe which is why some brands have moved production to China, Cambodia and Vietnam.
Of course, there is a lot of poorly made, sub standard carbon fibre flooding into the market, but their 'costs' bare no relation to the costs of doing if properly (and safely) with quality materials.
30 people working on a frame does not mean all at the same time. That would be physically impossible. There won't be one working on it and 29 standing around waiting for their turn either. So I'm going to stick to my belief that the cost of labour on one of these is well under a hundred american. I am open to being proven wrong about the raw materials cost.
The high retail price is because that is what people will pay. The shops need to make their 40% of the final price, the distributors their cut, the tax man wants his slice (and it's not a small one... 34% of import value in the UK no?), the design brand want their bit, and of course the factory has to clear a profit.
All in all it adds up and the consumer foots the bill. You pay your money and you take your choice.
I'm not being negative, they have a right to charge what they want. A lot of people who obviously haven't thought it through always get involved saying BS like the manufacture cost is high, the company isn't making money on it and other such rubbish. Bottom line is, bike companies are in it to make money, not because they want to do favours for the bike riding public!
Cost of manufacturing a carbon fibre frame is substantially higher than for aluminium alloy frame, regardless of whatever labour inputs you think you know about. Bear in mind the labour input on an aluminium alloy frame is substantially lower than carbon fibre which is time / labour intensive
I've dealt with 100's of warranty and crash replacement jobs on all of the big brands and smaller brands the past 7 years. Seen the differences in cost pricing on carbon fibre and aluminium frames, its a big gap and not because of perceived value.
I also owned a bike brand with a manufacturer (offshore). I stood in the factory and watched my frames being welded. I manufactured my own aluminium alloy prototypes in the uk using basic machining, welding, alignment and heat treatment equipment. The setup costs were minimal, compared to the huge investment required to tool up a single size mould set for a carbon fibre frame.
Very good friends of mine own a well known Canadian frame brand, they won't get into carbon fibre because the setup costs are simply too high. This is why a number of small brands use OEM with open mould frame tooling, nothing special apart from different paint and graphics to the other 10 'brands' using the same mould
I am very interested to know what it really costs to make a frame, so come on... spill the beans!
Of course I am not going to release commercial information on a public forum...
Anyway the bike. I have some doubts about the chainguide mountings attached to swingarm or swinglink. Antidote tried it some time ago and I think they replaced it with a stable chainguide, but I have to check it. It is always an issue when trying to use bottom bracket like a suspension pivot. As for the asymmetry, I am sceptic as usual, but I see a possible future of people being proud of their five year old asymmetric frames in 2019. In my opinion a solid critics helps in overall product development and even when I relate seeing disadvantages and regardless if anyone cares, I have not decided if I like it or not. I am sure it is not a trivial evolution stage of the demo frame. It's radical and this way controversial. Especially when compared to the new V10 which is almost the same like the 26" version. In this demo they introduced the larger wheel platfrom, asymmetricly mounted shock, carbon swingarm with a spining chainguide, and a strange bulky shape of left dropout, so it is definitely a radical design.
If you think everybody's rich and not working in Switzerland, then do like I did 10 years ago: move to Switzerland.
If you think everybody's rich and not working in Switzerland, then where the hell would this money come from? Surprisingly enough, there are quite a bunch of working-poors in Switzerland. But if your education level is good, then you can make a comfortable living and even buy a nice bike from time to time. Not sure this Demo will land in the garage of my mansion though. Oh, I don't have a garage. Nor a mansion,,, Sorry to disappoint you!
Now the asymmetric thing: It's at first surprising but in the end, there are plenty of bikes which don't have the shock crossing the seat post tube, making for a continuous single seat tube. Here it's just a bit shifted, well the support of the seat tube as obviously the saddle is still in the middle of the bike. I hope!
Please read again:
I am nervously overreacting because I read the news about eastern Europe. Apart from this I never mean to say anything negative about any Pinkbike user. In fact I didn't mean anything rude in my first comment on this. In my country, it could be read almost like a joke. There is irony common among poles. I was nearly sure to expect an answear like: "yeah right, you're kidding me. we all need to work." or something like that. It was Old-Man-Eggy who caused my reaction.
What I meant was a kind of a joke just to start some conversation. Sorry for causing this misunderstanding, or making you feel any of the kind you are talking about. Different languages, different cultures. All this needs our patience and understanding while communicating. Lets stay cool on both sides.
Perhaps they might push the status a little more???
Besides any of the bikes norbs, hunter or berrecloth ride they will rip on anyway.
Also, find it kind of hilarious how they put a boxxer team on what could be a 10k bike... give me some worldcups, please!
Is it redundant to point out that there has never been a successful suspension design that pivots directly around the BB? When you hit square edge bumps with a BB that low there is no way the suspension can absorb them as effectively as a bike with a higher pivot. Because the rear axle is higher than the BB the rear tire is in effect bounciing off of square edge bumps instead of absorbing them because of the impact angle. On drops to flat this super-low BB pivot placement works great because the rear axle goes directly up but the majority of impacts you encounter on a DH trail are square edge. So a higher BB placement would help the bike absorb bumps and carry momentum better. They sacrificed suspension performance significantly to get a slightly lower center of gravity. Bad trade-off.
Jason Chamberlain, Senior Design Engineer, Specialized:
"What we found was that we could achieve the same level of performance through a properly tuned FSR with an Ohlins shock as you could with some of the radical designs with crazy wheel paths.''
This statement flat-out acknowledges that other suspension design are more effective at absorbing bumps and holding momentum, period. But they are going to make up for it with the performance of the shock? So what if you put that Ohlins shock on one of the other brand's superior designs? It would be even more superior. The new Yeti switch infinite design is the most promising to date
This also implies that if you are riding a new Demo with shock other than a Ohlins you are getting sub-par performance. Wonder how the team guys sponsored by Fox and Rockshox feel about that?
Combining a concentric BB with a BB30, hmmm... Why not combine the worst BB placement with the worst BB standard of all time?
I'll be surprised if this design sticks around for long, honestly. But I will not be surprised to see them proudly displayed on the top of Audi's.
And to defend the engineer, he does admit that other designs probably do better with absorbing head on bumps, they also have disadvantages, like changing geometry and chain tension issues. I think he was saying that through shock tuning they can get close to the same performance through the rough stuff, but without the disadvantages that dramatically rearward axle paths also seem to have.
Your third point about Gwin though I agree with 100%. This geometry setup might be good for other riders, but Gwin was so unapologeticly dominant on the Session that this has to be a compromise for him.
No, but it makes it much less reactive to square edge bumps and in no way helps the bike keep momentum. That is why Specialized says they bought all the bikes and watched them but have no scientific proof this design is superior. They have banked everything on good looks and producing a lower center of gravity and have sacrificed pretty much every other aspect of DH bike performance to achieve those weak goals. They should have just copied Commencal's design, they would have had a proven performer with a lower center of gravity.
It is also worth mentioning that the concentric BB pivot is notorious for being one of the worst pedaling-performance designs out there, which is why it was ancient history until Specialised decided to re-innovate it. This is also why I guarantee Specialized will never try this design with any of their XC bikes. The low BB puts too much force on the shock during pedaling efforts and makes it want to engage. I suppose the supposedly moto-superior Ohlins shock is supposed to make up for this suspension design deficiency as well?
Gwin and Brosnan are getting decent results in spite of this bike, not because of it.
Just riding my bicycles. Nice to hear from you, my friend. Continue your creative work.
The chainstay appears to be at the same angle from a distance but if look closely you can see that the old Demo has a significantly higher BB pivot. Quit lying to yourself, It's fairly obvious. Considering that at least 25% of the travel is used in sag, the bike doesn't have much rearward movement.
Also, what are the big disadvantages of rearward path suspension designs? In its various variations it is the most successful design in gravity racing history, pedals more efficiently, absorbs straight edge bumps better, and maintains momentum better. Meanwhile I will remind you again there has never been a suspension bicycle with a concentric BB pivot that has stood the test of time and been successful. A great shock can't make up for a bad design, and it makes no sense to do that unless your priorities are confused.
hamncheez agreed with me on the chainstays, so have others in the past. Don't listen to me, just look at the most dominant two seasons any rider has ever had in the history of World Cup DH...Gwin had long chainstays.
Also, nice try on a lie, but the new V10 appears to have the same length stays, and the new Session does have the same length stays as the old one. Don't listen to me, listen to Trek engineer Dylan Howes:
"On a downhill race bike, simply having the shortest chain stays isn’t the best option. So, with careful design and adjustment to parts, we kept the chain stay length the same."
The same length as they were when Gwin was a guaranteed win.
It shouldn't take an armchair engineer to convince you that the suspension design platform of a bike is inferior when the actual engineer who helped design it (Jason Chamberlain) willingly admits it is inferior.
What bike with dramatic rearward movement is the winningest DH bike? All bikes that don't use a floating BB, internal transmission, or idler pulley (like the Canefield Jedi) have very similar amounts of rearward growth; they just have slight variations on the growth curve plotted against the travel. I am willing to bet that this new Demo has a comparable amount of chain growth to the older one and other "traditional" DH bikes.
This doesn't mean I think this bike is good; without riding a bike I think its hasty to judge its ability to carry speed. There are other things I think are kind of stupid, like the 1 sided seat tube and how a $10k+ all carbon frame is still over a pound heavier than the first carbon Trek Session.
@hamncheez: no prices have been set so I don't know where you are getting $10k for a frame? The 1 sided seat tube was discussed in the video. But I agree don't judge until riding the bike. This concept is lost on a lot of people.
brimages.bikeboardmedia.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Specialized-Demo-Carbon-2015-650B_1313-600x400.gif
Chainstay lengths that get longer with growing frame size should be mandatory!
I guess this modification is too complex and costly for big "S".
At 6ft I am always torn between medium and large but end up compromising with medium due to the more sensible seat tube length/standover height. Other bike manufacturers PLEASE TAKE NOTE AND FOLLOW SUIT.
I hate this current trend for pushing large sizers to 29rs. I don't like the ride on the 29r, I want a 27.5. I can get a Speciailzed to fit me but the pricing is unrealistic for carbon models. I am really trying ti persuade myself I can fit on a Capra (accroding to their stupid sizing chart it shoud fit). Also considered a Canyon, again, only upto large. a Radon Slide 160 Carbon LE is looking best bet which comes in a 22" (but in CM's is actually around a 21"!).
I understand being really tall is out the question but I consider 6'4" to be borderline normal sizing. There are people riding 25" frames over 6'6", they have to use 29rs, they simply don't look right with small wheels.
well done specialized the new line up looks amazing
2. Whats up with the two holes by the headtube? And no fork bummers? Shaking my head...
3. I wish I could be there to see when other companies like santa cruz and trek cut one of these frames open to see it's inner secrets
4. But what I really cant wait to see is this bike ridden by the richest """"shredders"""", reserved for them factory racers, and kept from the riders that would put it to work and will continue to drool at the art that specialized made into a bicycle
It looks rad, I'm pretty sure its fast as f*ck, and it will turn heads, specialized hit the goldmine
www.mtb-news.de/news/2014/08/13/specialized-demo-carbon-650b
"Im Aftermarket werden zusätzlich Öhlins-Kartuschen für Fox und RockShox Federgabeln angeboten werden. Es scheint, als ob das komplette Öhlinsfahrwerk in greifbare Nähe gerückt ist – nicht nur in Form eines Nachrüstkits, sondern vielleicht auch bald in Form einer kompletten Gabel von Öhlins, was schon letztes Jahr in diesem Artikel im Gespräch war."
Google Translate:
In addition Aftermarket Ohlins cartridges for Fox and RockShox suspension forks are available. It seems as if the entire Öhlinsfahrwerk is within reach - not only in the form of a retrofit kit, but maybe soon in the form of a complete fork kit, which was last year at this article talking. www.mtb-news.de/news/2013/09/01/brandaktuell-usd-gabel-von-oehlins-passend-zum-neuen-ttx-daempfer
Seriously though - this is very likely to be one of, if not THE, best performing downhill race bikes currently to be found anywhere on the planet. Both Gwin and Bronson are have posted top 5 results in the first two races - and either could easily win the overall.
Kuddos to Specialized for the downtube protector. As the owner of an S-Works Enduro 29, I can tell you that the one major oversight is that the increased traction from the larger wheels also serves to toss fist size rocks at my carbon downtube when I am at speed. It's painful to hear the sound of carbon being pummeled.
KJP1230: To say that people who don't have the jobs know nothing is nothing short of simplistic hogwash. There are tons of people with a lot of know how, knowledge, and extremely logical thought processes. Those are the ones that aren't going to accept what a company has to say just because the company says it.
Companies are very well known for trying to manipulate what you think, without regard of facts. If this is something you don't know then you'll forever suffer from blind fanboi brand-allegiance, buy whatever polished turds they shove out there and claim to be the next best thing.
Companies do try and have an effect on our thinking - that is called marketing. Deciding that just because a company is large, they must be motivated to put out an inferior product is the hogwash. It's like the same losers who continually hate on the iPhone simply because they don't like to see the popular company's reign continue.
As I said once again: this bike is very likely to be amongst the absolute best downhill bikes in history. At least 99.8% of all pinkbike participants are unlikely to be technically savvy enough to offer an engineering critique from photos online.
With this comment, it sounds like you are doing exactly what you are accusing us of. The only difference is that you are saying it with absolutely no input as to why?
So tell us "WHY" you think this instead of attacking people that have explained why they don't believe you.
People love to come on Pinkbike and throw around engineering terms as if they actually know a damn thing about suspension design, engineering or even basic physics. People love to come on Pinkbike and hate on larger companies like Specialized, Trek, etc. simply because they are large companies. I get it - it is easy to want to go after other people's success.
The Specialized Demo lineup has received universal praise from nearly every major publication since its debut. The Specialized Demo is one of, if not the, best selling DH bike in the history of DH bikes. No matter how you feel about the "big S" - the Specialized Demo platform has been and is LIKELY to continue to be one of the best DH bikes on the planet.
Meanwhile, every time they release a product people on Pinkbike jump on message boards to sound off on why this new frame is the biggest POS to have ever been produced. It's not. It is meticulously thought over and engineer by some of the best engineering minds in the bike industry.
The whole point of my post was to demonstrate that the people throwing negative comments toward this frame are behaving in an ignorant fashion. Not a single person on this thread has had access to actually riding this frame - and I would be downright shocked if this bike were not an improvement over the previous model. Again - one of the best reviewed and most loved DH bikes on the planet.
2) Receiving universal praise for older designs doesn't mean the new one is good.
3) I never mentioned how I felt about Spesh and it's besides the point here. I actually like some Spesh stuff. Just not the Demo. But considering this is about the Demo, this line of questioning/derision is another straw man.
4) "The whole point of my post was to demonstrate that the people throwing negative comments toward this frame are behaving in an ignorant fashion." Prove that! The person that said the most and was the most and was very clear in his reasoning was Protour. His commentary on the topic shows an understanding of the topic. But if you think otherwise, tell us why as opposed to flinging about the "arm-chair engineers" moniker in an attempt to be dismissive.
Fact it fact and opinion is opinion. Neither are things that should upset you.
1. I asked you to re-read the quote and note the term "Likely" as it is significant to the purpose of my contribution to this thread. I, quite literally, did not question whether you had read the quote. Is that settled?
2. I would suggest that there is, at a MINIMUM, a tendency for well engineered bikes to improve with each new iteration. Can we agree with this basic pattern as being a useful heuristic?
If you disagree with this assertion then I suppose we are operating on fundamentally different perceptions regarding manufactured goods in this day and age. I can think of a nearly endless list of bike companies that have shown dramatic improvement in frame design and suspension performance with each passing generation of bikes in their lineup. I cannot conjure one single, salient, example to the contrary. This does not mean a counter-example does not exist; nor does it imply that this observable tendency would be degraded should a counter-example exist.
3. I didn't once accuse you specifically of having any opinion about Specialized bikes. Can we agree that this statement is true?
4. I went on to discuss and support this assertion IMMEDIATELY after - with the very next sentences. I clearly supported this accusation of "ignorance" by pointing out that anyone citing problems with this bike frame were doing so with limited or no actual experience with the bike. This is the literal definition of the term ignorant. Can we agree on this?
I know that I have typed a lot of words - and they are carefully chosen words, because I believe in their meaning and intention. Please read and respect all of them as you have done a poor job this far of demonstrating their lack of validity or truthfulness.
www.pinkbike.com/u/bdkr/blog/so-pbrs-dont-know-jack.html
I can't imagine how it must feel being the creator of such a machine which is being used so much in such ways around the globe.
You: Dr Evil, this is 2014! That amount of money doesn't even exist. That's like saying "I want a kajillion bajillion dollars."
I'm not yet convinced by the new sizing idea though. I'd like to hear more from Specialized about how that's going to work
i would have thought a larger rim would make you want a wider hub for strength, but maybe the other way round?
doesn't matter to me anyway, i'd have to change my 26 wheelset regardless if i swapped frame :'(
isn't the rear end stiffer on a 150mm rear design? or does the stiffness only come from the wheel?
Wonder if this was just on preproduction/team bikes... I say this because the holes are absent on the big flat pic in this article of the non-driveside... Maybe just photoshopped out when they did the shoot.
Yes... I know I am geeking out on such a small detail.
With that said, it's crazy to think that even the EP on this bike will still probably be around or more than 5K but its understandable considering the new engineered design.
Other than that, you have a wonderfully written critique of a brand which is clearly failing to produce popular, well-reviewed, well-loved bikes.
The way the axle houses the B/B etc is all very similar. The design works great on the Rotec so it should here too.
For me personally though it's dog ugly.
Say what?
its asymmetrical and that is what does kills the optic.
No. Wasn't the first demo released in like'08 or something? I remember seeing Big Hits falling off of cliffs at least 4 years before that...
LOL @ marketing.
@ Spesh - you guys made a pretty sick looking bike. Gwin and Troy are awesome riders at the top of their game right now. I want to re-edit your video to have 1/2 the middle age men in offices talking while people draw on computers, 2x as much riding and swap out the music for some form of metal. That is all.
Someone please take on this project as I have no video editing skills what so ever.
BTW, it's probably one of the slickiest design I've seen in a long time... And I guess we're going to see a bunch of those next year, despite the price...
www.pinkbike.com/photo/11290965
explore them.... wow they must have wild collection then I would mind to own it ;P