Enduro/AM - The Weight Game

PB Forum :: Pinkbike Groups
Enduro/AM - The Weight Game
Author Message
Posted: Sep 9, 2019 at 12:52 Quote
shirk-007 wrote:
Tsoxbhk wrote:
Super stoked should be getting my TCI Crowbar in the next few days! Hoping to get the build right at 30lbs

Awesome. What parts kit going on it? Are you going to be running a coil? Does Don custom tune the shock for it?

Yes Fox coil. He does custom tune the internals along with getting his own coils made specifically for these bikes and shocks! Will be running my pike at 160 for with the newest stuff inside it. Gunna run Don's bar and stem, revive dropper, silver 240 straight pull hubs with black spokes and silver nipples black alloy rims. The frame will probably have silver decals.

Posted: Sep 9, 2019 at 13:12 Quote
mtbman1980 wrote:
Yeah I like my codes great lever feel for all the wet and steep riding that we have here. Plenty of power and control.

I was rolling rock slabs and steep loose shoots where not locking up your brakes is the key. I am sure I could adjust to Shimano but I have had no issues with my codes for 2 years.

Rode Pleasure Trail from the front page video and man it was definitely a different riding style than my local trails. Felt like a new born baby deer at first.

I can relate to that! Rode treasure trail last month, and wow. Slabs are definitely different to ride compared to anything in the uk

O+
Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 9:18 Quote
so with the release of the Ripmo aluminum, im wondering how it would feel to have an aluminum frame and a carbon fork (trust shout) in terms of a possible compliance/stiffness imbalance.
R-m-r? i know youve got something to input here

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 10:17 Quote
Compliance imbalance?

God damn.

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 10:20 Quote
sosburn wrote:
so with the release of the Ripmo aluminum, im wondering how it would feel to have an aluminum frame and a carbon fork (trust shout) in terms of a possible compliance/stiffness imbalance.
R-m-r? i know youve got something to input here

The road/gravel set seem to manage fine...

O+
Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 11:02 Quote
Axxe wrote:
Compliance imbalance?

God damn.

compared to a stiff carbon frame and telescoping fork?
i thought itd be an interesting question...

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 11:30 Quote
sosburn wrote:
so with the release of the Ripmo aluminum, im wondering how it would feel to have an aluminum frame and a carbon fork (trust shout) in terms of a possible compliance/stiffness imbalance.
R-M-R? i know youve got something to input here

Short version: It's fine. You wouldn't even notice.

Long version:

The misconceptions about materials drive me nuts. You could build the stiffest bike in the world - or the most flexible - out of any material. Carbon is not inherently stiffer. There's been at least one recent example of a major manufacturer being a little embarrassed about their aluminum frame being stiffer than their carbon version - with minimal difference in weight.

Tires have inches of compliance. Suspension has half a foot. Bearings and bushings have flex and/or play. Your handlebar has nearly a centimeter of flex. The frame material barely qualifies as a drop in the bucket - and it could go either way, stiffer or softer. The material damping properties are pretty minor, too, in the frequency range that can make it past your tires and grips.

Examples of the doublethink surrounding carbon:

• Carbon frames are compliant and smooth; aluminum are harsh.
• Carbon frames are stiff and precise; aluminum are flexible and noodly.
• Carbon frames are strong, stiff, and last forever.
• Carbon frames and components are sketchy because they're prone to damage from rock strikes and crashes; aluminum are sketchy because they're weak and prone to fatigue.
• Carbon rims are more comfortable because they damp vibrations.
• Carbon rims are harsh; buy aluminum for comfort.
• Carbon bars are more comfortable because they damp vibrations.
• Carbon bars are harsh, buy aluminum for comfort.

In the history of cycling, there have been plenty of examples to support each of these statements - and plenty of counter-examples. Don't let anyone tell you all these statements can be simultaneously true due to differences in vibration attenuation and anisotropic material properties. I'll be the one to say it: the emperor has no clothes and carbon is not magic.

If someone tells you their carbon bike is soooo much stiffer and smoother than their aluminum bike, ask them:

• Did it cost three times as much?
• Is it loaded with top-shelf parts, compared to mediocre ones on the old bike?
• Was the old bike several years old and does equipment tend to get better year after year?
• Was the old bike's suspension several times past its service interval ... for the third time?
• Does the new bike have larger tires with softer rubber and more compliant casings?
• Is this the halo effect of your shiny new purchase?
• Would it end your marriage if you had to admit you spent ten grand and it's not much better than the old bike?

A frame made from high-end, nicely engineered carbon will be better than the equivalent in aluminum. I'm not denying that. I'm saying:

• The difference is a fraction of what it's made out to be.
• You'll get better return on investment by upgrading many other components before your frame, particularly springs & dampers, tires, grips, saddle, wheels.
• No material makes an inherently stiffer, smoother, stronger, etc. final product. That's a product of the design.
• Components made from various materials can play nicely together and superior components generally make for an overall superior ride, regardless of whether the materials match.

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 11:49 Quote
sosburn wrote:
so with the release of the Ripmo aluminum, im wondering how it would feel to have an aluminum frame and a carbon fork (trust shout) in terms of a possible compliance/stiffness imbalance.
R-m-r? i know youve got something to input here

Does a Trust Fork cost more than a Ripmo AF? Because that would be funny.

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 11:53 Quote
Circe wrote:
Does a Trust Fork cost more than a Ripmo AF? Because that would be funny.

More than the frame + shock, yes.

That said, if the incremental performance increase of a Trust fork over a telescoping fork were greater than the same for a carbon Ripmo over the AF, then it would make more sense to get the AF with a Trust than a carbon Ripmo with a traditional fork. Not saying this is the case, just that it's not inherently crazy.

I put a nearly $1000 EXT Arma shock on a $1000 frame, for example, and it's rather nice.

O+
Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 12:38 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
Circe wrote:
Does a Trust Fork cost more than a Ripmo AF? Because that would be funny.

More than the frame + shock, yes.

That said, if the incremental performance increase of a Trust fork over a telescoping fork were greater than the same for a carbon Ripmo over the AF, then it would make more sense to get the AF with a Trust than a carbon Ripmo with a traditional fork. Not saying this is the case, just that it's not inherently crazy.

I put a nearly $1000 EXT Arma shock on a $1000 frame, for example, and it's rather nice.

Thanks for your post, it makes a lot of sense and was exactly what i was looking for.
Ive been really interested in the Shout fork as i find my 36 to be solid, but that’s it; its just solid, sort of lackluster, always outshined by the rear end of the bike. after riding a Message, it felt incredibly stable albeit somewhat of a hand destroyer in the chunk so to be, a slackened Ripmo with a dvo jade and a trust Shout on the front end could be the N+0 for me. and if i dont like the shout, can always return it after a few laps and put my 36 on there.

O+
Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 12:41 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
I put a nearly $1000 EXT Arma shock on a $1000 frame, for example, and it's rather nice.

Wanted to ask you about that. Do you feel the EXT worth the extra price over say a custom tune on a Super Deluxe Ultimate DH (say that three times fast)?

Frame with a leverage ratio optimized for a coil (155mm travel frame) so it doesn't really need the extra bottom out help form the hydraulic bottom out control.

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 12:53 Quote
shirk-007 wrote:
R-M-R wrote:
I put a nearly $1000 EXT Arma shock on a $1000 frame, for example, and it's rather nice.

Wanted to ask you about that. Do you feel the EXT worth the extra price over say a custom tune on a Super Deluxe Ultimate DH (say that three times fast)?

Frame with a leverage ratio optimized for a coil (155mm travel frame) so it doesn't really need the extra bottom out help form the hydraulic bottom out control.

Better: Yes.

Worth it: Difficult to say.

It's a better return on investment than a carbon version of the same frame (for those who are faced with the choice) and the hydraulic bottom-out would be even better on a less progressive frame (i.e. pretty much every frame out there). For most people, yes, it's worth it.

There were other factors for me. My previous Bird, the Aeris 145 / 160, was a test platform for a potential build kit for the bike I was designing and spec'ing at that time. My AM9 was an opportunity to test exotic parts that could eventually be offered as upgrades at the time of purchase. Limitations of the design I had inherited meant I wasn't able to make the bike's motion ratio as progressive as I wanted, so the hydraulic bottom-out feature could've been a real benefit.

Despite the extremely progressive motion ratio of the AM9, I still use full travel. I've never clearly felt it, but the dust line on the shaft always reaches the end.

O+
Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 13:40 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
Limitations of the design I had inherited meant I wasn't able to make the bike's motion ratio as progressive as I wanted, so the hydraulic bottom-out feature could've been a real benefit.

Despite the extremely progressive motion ratio of the AM9, I still use full travel. I've never clearly felt it, but the dust line on the shaft always reaches the end.

How progressive would you go if you could? Capra level? Or somewhere in between?

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 13:55 Quote
shirk-007 wrote:
R-M-R wrote:
Limitations of the design I had inherited meant I wasn't able to make the bike's motion ratio as progressive as I wanted, so the hydraulic bottom-out feature could've been a real benefit.

Despite the extremely progressive motion ratio of the AM9, I still use full travel. I've never clearly felt it, but the dust line on the shaft always reaches the end.

How progressive would you go if you could? Capra level? Or somewhere in between?

The AM9 is comparable to the Capra. I like it, but I get that it's not for everyone and I don't think I'd like it as much with an air shock.

The average progressivity percentage among recent models is in the 20s. Kinematics have changed as dramatically as geometry in the past few years and the industry is finally settling on some sensible numbers, so the current averages are pretty good for most customers. A little higher if coil shocks will be encouraged. Also depends on the shape of the curve.


P.S. To clarify: I didn't design the Bird bikes. They were used as pseudo-prototypes because the Aeris 145 shared many geometry and kinematic elements with the design I was working with, while the AM9 - which is remarkably different from the 145 - was similar to where I wanted to go on my next, clean-sheet design.

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 23:52 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
sosburn wrote:
so with the release of the Ripmo aluminum, im wondering how it would feel to have an aluminum frame and a carbon fork (trust shout) in terms of a possible compliance/stiffness imbalance.
R-M-R? i know youve got something to input here

Short version: It's fine. You wouldn't even notice.

Long version:

The misconceptions about materials drive me nuts. You could build the stiffest bike in the world - or the most flexible - out of any material. Carbon is not inherently stiffer. There's been at least one recent example of a major manufacturer being a little embarrassed about their aluminum frame being stiffer than their carbon version - with minimal difference in weight.

Tires have inches of compliance. Suspension has half a foot. Bearings and bushings have flex and/or play. Your handlebar has most of a centimeter of flex. The frame material barely qualifies as a drop in the bucket - and it could go either way, stiffer or softer. The material damping properties are pretty minor, too, in the frequency range that can make it past your tires and grips.

Examples of the doublethink surrounding carbon:

• Carbon frames are compliant and smooth; aluminum are harsh.
• Carbon frames are stiff and precise; aluminum are flexible and noodly.
• Carbon frames are strong, stiff, and last forever.
• Carbon frames and components are sketchy because they're prone to damage from rock strikes and crashes; aluminum are sketchy because they're weak and prone to fatigue.
• Carbon rims are more comfortable because they damp vibrations.
• Carbon rims are harsh; buy aluminum for comfort.
• Carbon bars are more comfortable because they damp vibrations.
• Carbon bars are harsh, buy aluminum for comfort.

In the history of cycling, there have been plenty of examples to support each of these statements - and plenty of counter-examples. Don't let anyone tell you all these statements can be simultaneously true due to differences in vibration attenuation and anisotropic material properties. I'll be the one to say it: the emperor has no clothes and carbon is not magic.

If someone tells you their carbon bike is soooo much stiffer and smoother than their aluminum bike, ask them:

• Did it cost three times as much?
• Is it loaded with top-shelf parts, compared to mediocre ones on the old bike?
• Was the old bike several years old and does equipment tend to get better year after year?
• Was the old bike's suspension several times past its service interval ... for the third time?
• Does the new bike have larger tires with softer rubber and more compliant casings?
• Is this the halo effect of your shiny new purchase?
• Would it end your marriage if you had to admit you spent ten grand and it's not much better than the old bike?

A frame made from high-end, nicely engineered carbon will be better than the equivalent in aluminum. I'm not denying that. I'm saying:

• The difference is a fraction of what it's made out to be.
• You'll get better return on investment by upgrading many other components before your frame, particularly springs & dampers, tires, grips, saddle, wheels.
• No material makes an inherently stiffer, smoother, stronger, etc. final product. That's a product of the design.
• Components made from various materials can play nicely together and superior components generally make for an overall superior ride, regardless of whether the materials match.

Preach


 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.372474
Mobile Version of Website