First Look: Mondraker's F-Podium Brings Forward Geometry to XC Racing

May 20, 2019
by Richard Cunningham  



Mondraker tells us that the F-Podium project began back in 2015 with a design goal to make the world's best XC race bike - end of story. That animal, however, turned out to be a moving target.

During the F-Podium's three-year gestation period, World Cup XC venues changed dramatically, from boring huff-and puff competitions staged on unpaved sidewalks in the woods, to realistic mountain bike circuits that required pro-level technical skills in addition to superlative legs and lungs. Mondraker responded with a genre-bending 100-millimeter-travel carbon design that mated their long-and-slack Forward Geometry concept with a pedal-friendly version of their dual-link Zero rear suspension.
F-Podium Details:
Use: World Cup XC Racing
Frame: Carbon, 100mm travel Zero dual-link suspension, 29" wheels
Forward Geometry: 76.5° seat tube, 68° head tube, 440/500mm reach, 432mm chainstays
Sizes: Small, medium, large, X-large
Suspension: Remote-lockout Fox Step-Cast fork, remote DPS2 shock
Stated Weight: F-Podium RR - 9.520kg (20.98lbs), RR frameset: 1.987kg (4.38lbs)
MSRP: 4.999 € to 8.999 €- (RR SL TBD)
Contact: Mondraker


Mondraker tucks the shock into a seat tube tunnel where it pivots on the lower suspension link.

The F-Podium certainly looks the part, especially the top-drawer RR SL model, which features a lighter, higher strength carbon layup and is outfitted with Sram XX1 Eagle AXS electronic remote shifting, six-spoke carbon wheels by Bike Ahead, and an array of boutique cockpit components that would rival any one-off custom build. The RR SL is said to weigh only 21 pounds (9.53kg).

Graphically, it strikes a clean profile, with the front triangle and rear stays blended together by intersecting lines that help mask the the existence of its suspension. What can't be hidden, however, is Mondraker's Forward Geometry. With its massive reach, comparatively short stem and visually slack head tube angle, the F-Podium looks like a wolf in sheep's clothing when compared to contemporary World Cup race bikes.

XC racing
Mondraker photo

The Rear Suspension Wager

Mondraker's press release empties the Oxford thesaurus of adjectives in an effort to underscore the F-Podium's technology and to convey their belief that it represents the quintessential World Cup cross-country race bike.

The short version is: assuming that the UCI continues to encourage technically demanding World Cup XCO venues, a dual-suspension bike with more stable handling characteristics will produce faster lap times than a lighter weight hardtail (as has been the case in every timed comparison).

The bottom line is that you can still win challenging World Cups on a hardtail, but you'll have to work harder to make it happen. Dual-suspension has been more widely accepted in the men's division, probably because the advantages are more easily measured. The parity of bike-handling skills and physical ability goes much deeper into the men's field than it does in the women's.
"...the refined and truly unique Stealth Air Carbon structure used in the F-Podium features latest technologies that have never been used in a mountain bike to date. Here the finest selection of carbon fibers, a revolutionary laminate design and market leading manufacturing technologies blend into one of the lightest full suspension XCO Racing frames in the market - without sacrificing even one shred of strength or durability.

Combined with the likewise optimized Mondraker key technologies Zero Suspension and Forward Geometry the F-Podium is an XCO Racing bike like no other. A bike that wins over with the complete absence of the usual compromises. F-Podium will surprise you with an exquisite handling and unbeatable downhill capability combined with a superb suppleness and overall absorption.
- Mondraker PR

At one time, Nino Schurter could leverage his superior skills to win regardless of what wheel size or suspension he was using. Today, he chooses his bike more carefully, because he must fight with ten competitors who can match his talent. Seconds count.

Will World Cup XC racing continue to be technically challenging? Mondraker gambled three years of expensive development that it would. If that holds true, their claim that the F-Podium is the ultimate XC racing bike may well prove itself. Let's have a look at the future.

Integrated headset cups minimize stack. Remote lockout Step-Cast fork.
Inboard post-mount brake caliper keeps the tail end tidy.

Features and Construction

Mondraker says that they employed 3C, a German firm that is "a world market leader in automotive and aerospace carbon," to assist them in developing the F-Podium chassis. They name their method, "Stealth Air Technology" and the carbon construction extends to the upper rocker link. Reportedly, their World Cup team has been racing prototypes for the better part of two seasons - plenty of time to tweak the layup schedules and frame geometry to get it right.

Two versions of the frame will be available: As mentioned, the elite-level RR SL model receives a special chassis, using a more laborious layup-schedule and expensive maximum-strength materials. The second has a slightly less expensive frame that is shared among three models: F-Podium, F-Podium R, and the F-Podium RR. Sizes available are small, medium, large and X-large in all four models.
Claimed Weights:
F-Podium RR SL: 9.520 kg (20,98 lbs)
F-Podium RR: 10.210 kg (22,50 lbs)
F-Podium R: 10.590 kg (23,34 lbs)
F-Podium: 11.490 kg (25,33 lbs)
F-Podium Carbon RR frameset: 1.987 kg (4,38 lbs)

Mondraker did not sacrifice functionality in their quest to make the lightest possible frame. Generously sized sealed bearings at the suspension pivots ensure your investment will make it through a few seasons. They tucked the post-mount rear brake inside the rear triangle out of harm's way and future proofed the seat tube with a 31.6mm diameter, which fits conventional dropper posts (along with internal routing). Its molded chainstay protector is also designed to silence the drivetrain.

One thing you won't find is a provision for a front derailleur. All F-Podiums are optimized for 12-speed, one-by transmissions. Both SRAM Eagle and Shimano XTR are supported and they will accommodate mechanical or electronic groups.

Up top, an exaggerated sloping top tube minimizes stand-over clearance, and internal headset cups keep the stack height as low as possible. Down low, Mondraker's tucked-in shock location keeps the front triangle looking uncluttered and optimizes the water bottle placement.


Suspension Notes

Mondraker calls it "Zero Suspension System." This dual-link design is configured to remain ultra firm and stable until the suspension receives a significant impact, after which, it releases to follow the terrain. The compromise is said to maximize pedaling efficiency specifically for XC racing. Fox's handlebar-remote lockout system is connected to the 32 Step Cast fork and DPS2 shock for those moments where near-lockout is preferred.

As mentioned, the shock is driven by the carbon upper link, through a tunnel in the seat tube, where it pivots on the lower link. This is said to assist in controlling the shock rate as well as to minimize stress on the chassis. With only 100 millimeters of wheel travel on each end, the rider is going to be moving through those rate changes in a hurry, so the curves are not going to be subtle.

Geometry

Leaning on a decade of rider-forward geometry, Mondraker injected as much of "long-low and slack" as they believed would be accepted by the sport's most reluctant-to-change competition. The stand-out numbers are the F-Podium's 68-degree head angle, which has been livened up with a 44-millimeter fork offset. The seat tube angle works out to a steep, 76.5 degrees at ride height, although its actual measurement is 72-degrees. To ensure balanced handling, the chainstays are set at 432 millimeters and the 325 mm high bottom bracket works out to a 40mm drop. The big news is the bike's reach, which starts at 440 millimeters for the size small and tops at 500 millimeters for the X-large size. To balance those big reaches, Mondraker spec's tiny-for-cross-country-racing stems as short as 50 millimeters. That may irk some competitors, many of whom prefer a radically inverted handlebar position that requires extensions at or beyond 100 millimeters.

Geo



XC bike

F-Podium RR SL

RRSL




F-Podium RR - 8.999 €

XC bikes




F-Podium R - 6.799 €

XC bike



XC bike

F-Podium - 4.999 €

XC bike






191 Comments

  • + 130
 Wow....... That is a great looking bike
  • + 21
 Those wheels might cause many crashes from fellow bikers turning their heads. Maybe that is a good race strategy actually.
  • + 8
 440mm. Reach on a small?
  • + 12
 I love the Mondraker style. I still think the Foxy XR was the prettiest FS ever.
  • + 3
 @endurocat: It's not that extreme. Top tube is only 580mm, so seated position will be reasonable. Wheelbase is pretty normal too. To me this is exactly what a modern XC bike should look like.
  • + 2
 @justwan-naride: agree. The geo is far less 'radical' that the rest of their range. almost conventional !
  • + 1
 Needs 800mm bars 160mm dropper and flats
  • + 45
 And just weighing in at 44 big macs, incredible.
  • + 33
 Dang it Booby, put down the big macs and go outside and get some exercise.
  • + 15
 That you, Randy?
  • + 8
 @MrJimLahey: It's the liquor talking.
  • + 11
 @MBroady: I am the liquor
  • + 29
 That's a lot of words to say "down country."
  • + 25
 It’s not downcountry by any means. It would require 120-140 fork, at least 2 degrees slacker head angle and at least 1 knobby tyre. The whole point of DC is to fit Enduro parts to an XC frame.
  • + 19
 if it doesn't come with a dropper post it ain't down country!
  • + 3
 Would a slackerizer headset and a smaller rear wheel do? No need to raise the front if you can also lower the rear instead. The seattube appears wide enough to accommodate a dropper seatpost.
  • + 0
 @WAKIdesigns: yep. and the 'zero link' suspension is harsh as balls even on their longer travel bikes so this baby is going to be brittle as all hell.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Sounds a lot like a trail bike!
  • + 5
 @gkeele: trail is a little niche stuck between Down Country and Enduro. Not very woke
  • + 4
 @WAKIdesigns: So it is:

XC
XXC
aggressive XC (AXC)
DC
trail
Enduro
DH

I thought we had all mountain between trail and enduro. So is trail between all mountain and down country or between all mountain and enduro? I need to know this stuff!
  • + 3
 @vinay: both All Mountain and Aggressive XC are names from the old speech... new things are in motion and cannot be undone
  • + 16
 The geometry isn't that revolutionary, it can get pushed even further IMO. Unno has been doing this for a while, and a lot of weekend warriors are rocking short-travel trail bikes that have been optimized for XC with shorter forks and shock strokes to reduce travel and weight. These bikes sometimes have reach longer than Mondraker's case-in-point. It all translates to more stability and a forward movement of the center of mass. I predict that Mondraker's STA, HA, and reach numbers will be quickly surpassed by the newer crop of XC rigs from other big names.
  • + 11
 New Norco Revolver shares the same medium reach but is noticeably bigger in L and XL. Numbers are definitely starting to not look very crazy.
  • + 3
 This bike looks amazing, but my Blur in an XL is also nearly as long in the reach as it. At 6' I just stepped up to an XL to get the longer reach and I love it, used a short stem like this bike as well.
  • + 1
 @RoboDuck: Norco revolver has smaller reach then this. Medium is at 448, large 478 and xl at 500
  • + 6
 @Gunca: Not the new 100mm race bike. 460/490/520 for M/L/XL. Otherwise similar geo. I was surprised how short the SB100 was when compared to their new enduro bikes.
  • + 3
 Pretty far out there for a XCO bike. Considering a few years ago a road frame with suspension fork was the go to.

Unno boss started developing Forward Geometry with Mondraker.

67° HTA should become XC standard soon.
  • + 13
 How can possibly call that and XC bike?.....the stem is not upside down!! Lol
  • + 8
 It might be, but hard to tell when it's only 50mm Smile
  • + 6
 It says it is -5deg in the spec list, so I consider that flipped.
  • + 8
 At 65, my racing years are in the past, but this is a fine bike that I would not kick out of the garage.
  • + 3
 Serious question, because I've never actually watched a top-level XC event - But do these super fit, peak human, XC riders actually use the giant 50t rings that these cassettes come with?

I mean, I'm not riding anything near as sketchy as these guys, I'm sure, but I'm also nowhere near their level of fitness and ability, yet I can't remember the last time I used my 42t gear?
  • + 13
 Lots of the top guys are running way bigger chainrings than us mortals. So they are likely counting on that 50t for a usable climbing gear on the steep stuff.
  • + 4
 Some do, some don't. If you work out the gear ratios with a big chainring eagle is pretty close to a 32x42
  • + 6
 You use a 42t, but with what chainring?
These guys move a 38/40t on the front.
  • + 2
 Seriously to the above point what chain ring are you running? And how flat are your "climbs". I'm hardly in race shape but I regularly use my 46 rear with a 34 front on steep climbs.
  • + 5
 Bigger rings have less friction. If you run a bigger chainring and spend less time in the small cogs, you can save about 3 watts. It’s not a huge savings, but measurable.
  • + 1
 @friendlyfoe: Consider the antisquat change with a 34t if the bike was intended for a 30t then that's also part of the climbing battle.
  • + 4
 @jhtopilko: And you seriously think that the XC race bikes are designed for 30t chainring? Big Grin
  • + 2
 Man, I love those wheels on the RR-SL build. They remind me of my BMX bike as kid. I think they were call Tuff rims?? But I gotta say 25# for GX/NX level build w/full suspension is pretty freakin' impressive. The top of line Trek Superfly weighs in at 25#. I do have to say, it's missing the dropper that everyone is going to add.
  • + 3
 Put skinny tires on this a SID up front and you have a 20 pound daul suspension road bike. Probably cheaper than a top of line road bike too. Add knobies and you have a 21 pound dual suspension XC bike.
  • + 2
 Does anyone know of a road bike or gravel bike that has used the forward geometry idea?

My mtb has a 470mm reach woth a 50mm stem and my gravel bike has 373 with a 100mm stem.

Why would the concept not work one road bike? It might stop me getting such a sore neck!
  • + 3
 Unfortunately no one has tried that yet. I have been preaching about forward geometry roadbikes for years but every roadie seems to think their geo is perfect...Maybe one day Mondraker or Nicolai will do one!
  • + 4
 Road bikes don't need stability on single track and tech sections, they need stability at a wide range of speeds and responsiveness. I don't want mountain bike geometry on a bike I'm riding on roads.
  • + 0
 Shorter bike are lighter bike.
And what do roadies want? Yeeees you got it
  • - 1
 @clink83: Responsiveness? For what? Riding on 20m wide roads requires agility? Lol! Road bikes are made for speed so having short and steep geometry makes no sense!
  • + 2
 @fracasnoxteam: True up to a point. Aero wheels used in time trialing are heavier but faster. The problem is roadies just are not open to new ideas. Disc brakes are a great example...
  • + 1
 @SintraFreeride: being able to jump on the pedals and get into a breakaway, taking tight corners at speed, all those fun roadie things that road bike geometry is designed for.
  • + 0
 @clink83: I fail to see how a short bike makes sprinting any better. Tight corners on road? Never seem them and still fail to see how they would be faster on a short bike. Running a long stem and slack seat angle to compensate for fit is a crutch not good geometry...
  • + 3
 @SintraFreeride: I'm glad mountain bikers are now experts on road bike geometry too. Long front centers and short stems are to make a mountain bike descend well on Rocky terrain. Road bikes aren't riding technical terrain so they need geometry to put the rider in a position to make power and be aero. It's not a coincidence that XC bikes and road bikes generally have similar stas. My road bike stem is only 100mm long. You don't have to ride a too small frame to be "aero".
  • + 3
 The last thing you want on road bike is a geometry that shifts your weight back to the rear wheel. Having your front wheel wash at 70kph on pavement is not fun.
  • + 1
 @WhatAboutBob: Long bikes shift weight onto the front wheel. Roadbikes need long stems because if they didn't all the weight would be on the rear wheel!
  • + 1
 @clink83: A roadbike with a slacker head angle, short stem, longer front and back end with drop bars would still be aero. Running a steeper seat angle would provide power and efficiency. Look at road motorcycles.
  • + 2
 @SintraFreeride: How sure are you on the physics on that one? I would like to see a freebody digram confirming that.
  • + 2
 @SintraFreeride: that is 100% incorrect, a long front center makes it harder to weight the front wheel.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=i5R60JHJbxI&t=5s
You might want to watch part 1 first
  • + 0
 @SintraFreeride: It is painfully obvious that you don't know about the priorities and challenges of road racing. Please spend an hour to educate yourself on that topic. It will save you a lot of time in posting unhelpful comments and save others time responding to them.
  • + 0
 @WhatAboutBob: I would like my hypothetical roadbike built to test out these ideas as well. I think if it works in mtbikes it will also work on road bikes. What is certain is that current road bike fit is a joke. Slackening seat angles and adding longer stems to fit taller riders so as to keep wheelbase pretty similar between XS and XL frame sizes is ridiculous!
  • + 1
 @SintraFreeride: I'm with you. Road bike geo has been the same for decades. My gravel bike has a slack seat angle, long stem and short wheelbase. I would like to have a custom frame that reverses all that to see if it feels better.
  • + 1
 @skill7: Gravel bikes are basically rebranded 90s rigid mtb bikes with drop bars. Perhaps one day someone/brand will be bold enough to experiment with geometry again.
  • + 3
 Stunning ID on the bike. That said, nothing revolutionary. The Intense Sniper came out almost a year and a half ago with more progressive geo, a dropper post, and is just as lightweight.
  • + 4
 I'm not sure the Sniper's 73º STA and 468mm reach for Size Large is wildly progressive for an XC/TR bike. Maybe compared to the Epic or other XC bikes of 2 years ago, but the Mondraker is definitely the first World Cup level XC bike with these kinds of numbers.
  • + 5
 @PHeller: the new Norco revolver definitely came before this
  • + 2
 @ericolsen: Interesting how similar the numbers are between the Revolver and this in the medium. Only real difference is chainstay length.
  • + 1
 @creativefletch aside from the odd rearward kink at the dropout and maybe an excess of sharp facets I agree with you on the ID. Nicely done and cohesive overall styling complements the (radical? un-radical?) stance.
  • + 2
 Like everyone else here, I'm a bike nerd. After exhaustive research and self examination, I ended up with first a Foxy 29 for myself, and then more recently a Foxy 27.5 RR-SL for the wife. In a world where there are so many great bikes this Spanish brand truly stands above the herd for it's attributes and my priorities. If I rode XC, this one would be at the top of the list for sure.
  • + 1
 I love my 2018 alloy foxy. It’s so stable and fast. I will probably only replace it down the road with another foxy.
  • + 1
 I love those tuff-wheels ! (or in this case not so tuff wheels). Look so cool, and no more broken spokes. I'm dreaming of the day when they are practical which is probably never based mostly on the assumption that they will never have good compliance. I understand those wheels as shown are very light weight XC racing only style wheels.
  • + 3
 I'd love to try riding something that light with a bit beefier tyres. Must be like a rocket climbing and make flatter stuff loads of fun.
  • + 2
 I'm still going to hold out for trek to update their top fuel into something more progressive. I would also take the epic s-works evo over this bike any day...but I'm also a shorter rider.
  • + 1
 nice, black, light and wheels says biturbo, so it should be superfast, BUT, i have the alloy dune, cracked, my friend carbon foxy, cracked it, 3 days ago i met 60kg heavy guy, he rides nice, summum carbon, already with new rear end, why are mondrakers so BRITTLE??
  • + 1
 Smart move to not release any prices yet. This is the first commentsection in a Mondraker article from PB that does not have 99% of comments related to price Smile

Beautiful bike, and exciting geo. Saw this bike in prototype-stage 2 years ago. And I must say it has turned out to be a stunning race-bike!
  • + 4
 Good they didnt put the price ,in europe the top spec costs 14000 euros And no dropper post Crazy
  • + 0
 I remember my ironhorse Azure weighing under 23lb with a short stem and firm but longer fork and a slightly shorter shafted rear shock. It was considred a little strange but it worked. Forward or not forward geometry. Short stems just make sense.
  • + 1
 600mm top tube but a 460mm reach....7 6 degree STA Scott spark 601mm top tube 424mm reach 73.5degree STA. Hmmmmm it doesn't add up
  • + 2
 Very interesting. I'd like to see how that rides with a 120mm Fox 34 with 20mm of stack height added and a short stem.
  • + 1
 I'm sure it'll ride fine. They are speccing these with 50mm stems, so you probably wouldn't need much shorter. The 76.5º STA would probably become more inline with the numbers of two years ago, but even that wouldn't be bad.
  • + 1
 @PHeller: Yea, 67* HTA and 75.5* STA would seem pretty spot-on for a bike like this. I'd go as short as possible with the stem though since the reach is very long (for me at size M). Although slackening the bike out shortens the reach slightly also.
  • + 4
 "Yeah, let's put off-road tires on this Corvette,I'm sure it will be a ton of fun".
  • + 3
 @nozes: It's just an option and an idea. Many brands even offer build kits with longer forks. Not every "trail" bike needs to be 140mm and not every XC bike needs to be 100mm.
  • + 2
 @yupstate: Wouldn't be a better idea to take a trail bike and make it lighter?
Say a Giant Trance 29 or similar,with lighter wheels,and a few lightweight components, get it below 22lbs,maybe?
  • + 3
 @nozes: Sure, I would take either scenario myself. I'd probably be buying the new Ibis Ripley and building it up light if it wasn't fugly (in my opinion). Or the Pivot Trail 429 if it wasn't 157 spacing.
  • + 3
 Really like the bike but if I could buy I would go for bmc
  • + 2
 Why are steep head angles so marginalized? Running 71 degrees and loving it - yes even in "enduro" trails
  • + 7
 Because most pink bikers are endurobros and don't do XC?
  • + 9
 Steep head angles are marginalized because most Pinkbikers don’t like endos.
  • + 5
 Because a ~68 degree head angle climbs 90% as well, descends much more confidently, and makes it much harder to go over the bars.

Only in an XC race where seconds matter is the 71 degree angle worth the tradeoff
  • + 3
 @Marcencinitas: steep head angles don't cause end of, its more the short front center on old school XC frames that cause them. My HT has a 68* hta and my FS has a 71* and neither pitch me over the bars because they have a modern front center.
  • + 1
 @clink83: That actually sounds like fun because you probably get tons of weight on the front wheel for cornering. Long, low and steep hta cross country FS = upcountry?!?
  • + 2
 @Marcencinitas: the scott bikes(my ht is a scale) are nice because they have progressive geometry so they handle wide open trails and tech stuff well, but they are porky in tight conditions IMO. The FS with the 71* hta is nice to ride on tighter stuff, so it balances out.
  • + 1
 Because steep head angles fold when cornering hard. With a long front end you can have a slack head angle without the front end wandering.
  • + 2
 If you listen to people that have been working on these designs for years, like Cesar Roja who used to design (before starting his own company making $6k frames and now consults for Intense) pioneering this geometry, slacker HAs actually climb better. Just like in DH, slack HAs roll over rocks better while climbing. The key is to get the weight forward with the rest of the bike geometry, such as steep SAs, so it doesn’t loop out. Slack HAs with standard 73 SAs climb like crap and you are always fighting the front end. There is always a limit, but I’m excited to try out this Mondraker.
  • + 1
 That should have read Cesar Rojo who used to design for Mondraker before starting Unno.
  • + 0
 @whambat: oh you mean a designer who has never developed a WC winning bike? Yep, I'm sure he's the guy I want to listen to.
  • + 1
 You might want to tell Nino that his (older) custom geometry bike sucks:
www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/a20032614/schurter-s-scott-scale
  • + 1
 @clink83: No problem I'll do that next time I bump into him Wink He is winner because of who is he is and how hard he trains in spite of the bike!
  • + 2
 @SintraFreeride: most riders have to ride the bike theit sponsors give them and smile and say how great it is. Ninos good enough to get any bike he wants and chooses geometry steeper than stock. Despite the nonsense pink bikers say, I don't know any XC racer(myself included) than thinks slack bikes climb well. You still have to go down though, which is why xc race bikers are slacker than they used to be.
  • + 1
 @clink83: dude, Nino could win with drop bars. And I said before, at this point in his career, he should never change his fit, the neuromuscular adaptation period would take too long and possibly jack his career.

Are you going to tell Fluekliger that he can’t climb on his Fourstroke with a 67.6 HA?
  • + 1
 @whambat: hes sponsored, he has to ride it. When Absalom was riding and winning he was on the 69.5* fourstroke and sure did win more than Fluekliger does.
Lets look at the FS bikes that show up on the podium most of the time:
Trek top fuel: 70* HTA
Specialized epic: 70 hta
Scott Spark: 68.5 HTA ( I think Ninos bikes might be steeper than stock, but noone AFAIK has actually measured it)
Kross Earth: 68.5 HTA
If you factor in all the hardtails, almost all the bikes that the top riders are on conservative bikes with 69* +/-1 degree HTAs, hardly the long low and slack geometry you are constantly trying to claim is the best.
  • + 1
 @clink83: Has anyone tried to race long and slack in XC? I certainly have never seen it. You can't say it is worst if it has never been done. Slacker head angles absorb bumps better going up or downhill.
  • + 2
 @clink83: 69HA was considered trail bike geometry just a few years ago. Anything slacker has just hit the market in the last year or so on XC. Besides it’s not just the HA, it’s longer reaches, steeper SA, shorter stems,... comparing how many wins Absolon had on steep HA means nothing when nothing better in geo was available. Yeah, Tomac won XC races on drop bars back in the 90’s, so effing what? Total wins mean nothing when talking bout equipment. It’s how one bike rider improves with the new equipment. Your rhetoric sounds like what I’ve heard since the 80’s: more races have been won on rigid bikes, more races have been won on steel frames, more races have been won on hardtails, more races have been won on 26”, more races have been won with 71/73, more races have been won with...
Meanwhile, courses are far more technical than they were 5 years ago, last week’s WC excluded, and demand better handling bikes.

Have you tried a bike with this new geometry? For a real time to compensate for an adaptation period? If not, STFU!
To a company like Mondraker, I say thank you for not listening to this BS and working on designing something better that will improve bikes and the sport. I’m sure your new frame will ride better up and down than old school. There will always be dinosaurs, thanks for not being one of them or listening to them. Your new bike looks rad. I’d love to ride it both on trail and in a race, if I still raced.
  • + 2
 Does anyone else feel like modern geo is making modern bikes look incredibly ugly?
  • + 5
 It's all personal preference I suppose. I think it makes them look better.
  • - 1
 Is there internal routing for a dropper? If not, why not?
Is this going to be like the glacial adoption of disc brakes to road racing?
I say this because any XC course worth its weight should have steep enough declines that a dropper is necessary or at the least beneficial.
  • + 4
 The article itself says internal. "...seat tube with a 31.6mm diameter, which fits conventional dropper posts, along with internal routing."
  • + 2
 The article states that is has internal routing for a dropper.

Why did you make this comment?
  • - 6
flag woofer2609 (May 20, 2019 at 9:34) (Below Threshold)
 @Chris97a: Because the description didn't differentiate that the internal routing was for the dropper specifically. They talk about the rear brake in the same paragraph and it looks like it is also internally routed.
I'd never ass-u-me anything.
A better description would have been " The frames will accept internally routed dropper posts"
  • + 7
 @bman33: Yes, Mondraker says internal routing for a dropper.
  • + 1
 @woofer2609:
This is a problem in society and I guess it just rubbed me the wrong way.

If something is not spelled out in incredibly clear language that can only be interpreted in one way someone comes along and jumps to a bunch of negative conclusions and rails on the product or the idea.

Let's just trust that everyone isn't being a*sholes unless proven otherwise.
  • + 0
 @Chris97a: when descrbing something technical, some of us see it as a good thing to use precise language which is not open to interpretation.
  • + 2
 @Ian713:
This isn't really worth discussing more but,

"future proofed the seat tube with a 31.6mm diameter, which fits conventional dropper posts (along with internal routing)."

Pretty precise, if someone reads that and decides to raise a stink about why don't XC bikes have internal routing for droppers they are not being rational.
  • + 2
 You better be as skinny as the top tube before you throw a leg over this beast. Rocket bike needs slim pilot.
  • + 2
 The future of XC geo! Gorgeous bike!
  • + 2
 F-the-podium I'm gonna go do party laps
  • - 2
 What a load of pro 29er BS saying that Nino Schurter held out on 29ers for a long time but was succefull because of his skill. Nino knows what is fast, and if 27.5 was what her rode, it's because it was fast (light and nimble).
  • + 3
 No he rode 650b due to high stack. Think he got around that with that negative rise bar.
  • + 1
 Nino didn't even ride 650b. It was a -custom - slightly bigger size (more like 27,99 ... ) google it, it's true.
  • + 1
 @jclnv: yep..29ers are faster for xc, but often create fit issues in S and M frames. In albstad Nino normalized power was something like 430w..he will be fast on anything.
  • + 1
 Looks like what i would imagine a bicycle in the world of TRON to look like.
  • + 2
 Yet another stunning looking bike from Mondraker, I want one!
  • + 2
 The first XC race bike that I think I could ride.
  • + 2
 I'd ride that harder than my girlfriend
  • + 19
 Probably should've worded that differently looking back on it
  • + 3
 @Jacobwt08: I don't judge. Do you!
  • + 7
 Nah, I think she would ride it harder.
  • + 2
 And how did this team do @ Albstadt?
  • + 1
 Try getting that around a steep up hill switchback at 2 mph , good luck ,ha ha . Nice and light though
  • + 4
 Try the forward geometry first :-) More important than the length of the bike is the mass distribution. Compare a bike like a kona process(long front and short chainstay) to an old propain (long chainstay short front) and to a bike with a balanced geometry. I think you will be surprised. The best bike I owned for climbing was the mondraker factor xr 2013. Amazing climber. This bike proves me that a FS is more efficient than a hardtail.
  • + 1
 @labourde: how does it prove anything. Have you ridden it further than a parking lot yet?
  • + 1
 Another worthless review with no mention of what the actual kinematics are...
  • + 1
 Ive never wanted Pinkbike to have an eggplant emoji until this very moment. Wow.
  • + 1
 Full Floater suspension getting more dialed, there is still room for more rear suspension improvement.
  • + 2
 Mag wheels; "Hey guys were gettin' the band back together, again!"
  • + 2
 backward geometry. less weight on the front.
  • + 6
 Stand up, bend your elbows, straighten your legs. Welcome to 2019.
  • + 1
 Might ride like crap but, DANG it is sexy!!
  • + 1
 Price? 500 kuadrizillions?
  • + 1
 Looks like the guy actually racing one is using a dropper.
  • - 3
 "The parity of bike-handling skills and physical ability goes much deeper into the men's field than it does in the women's."

RC... I have to disagree here... The women's field is stacked... and your writing is looking a bit outdated buddy.
  • + 31
 I think he’s honestly right. He’s just pointing out the truth of the matter which can sometimes hurt peoples feelings. Watch Kate Courtney’s sound of speed video. She doesn’t quite have the technical skills of the top men... yet. Huge props to her for posting a video anyways! She is a champion because she sees her weaknesses and improves on them. The women’s field is gaining depth every year. The front of the race is equally competitive which is awesome but not everyone is technically as savvy..yet. It’s ok to admit that. It doesn’t mean the racing is less exciting to watch.
  • + 2
 RC - I understood your point to mean that a FS bike is outright better than a hardtail XCO style races. if that is the case, shouldn't gender comparisons be irrelevant?

Elite level riders have a choice from their sponsors and depending on the course will excise that option. I saw a lot of usual FS riders in the Elite men and women on HT's this weekend at Albstadt. I doubt that we will see the same trend at Nove Mesto, or MSA.
  • + 22
 I agree that the depth of the women's XCO field is many times better at present - technically and physically. The greater differences in times between the top ten finishes, however, is the point I am making here. The closer the times are, the more accurately it can be judged whether there is an advantage to a new technology, or riding technique, and the harder it will become to overcome a disadvantage. We can see this beginning to occur in the women's field. - RC
  • + 4
 Disclaimer: didn't read the article. Saw this comment and had to point out math.

Statistically: having MORE competitors (men's field) produces MORE depth-of-parity in various skill-sets.

This is not the final bar to measure by, obviously, as no other factors are considered (...like individual skill...); however, it is a significant contributor in favor of RC's point.

If you want to discuss actual perceived skill parity: one of the more memorable examples in recent history (showing lack of skill parity) would be last year's World Champs race, Women's field, last lap. Courtney over the roots clean FTW.

I'm looking forward to the next few years in Women's XC MTB, and hope for a day where everyone is descending like Jolanda Neff.
  • + 1
 I could argue that the XC field as a whole has stuff to do in the skills department. Just because Nino or Jolanda are prime examples doesn’t mean the rest is following right behind them. MVDP is average to say the least, hips don’t lie and his eyes are not on the prize. He can pedal, but if they didn’t pave the track and rode last years sections he’d be in trouble. In womens you have Jolanda, Emily, Maja, then Kate to some degree (although I think Pendrel rides just as well if not better) and then there’s everyone else far behind. Gunn Rita was great at pressing on pedals, not much with holding the handlebars.
  • + 3
 @ericolsen: I think the point was not about the technical abilities of the men or women. It was about how close they are to each other. Because it is the athletes that matter most, not the bikes. Only if many of the athletes are very close to each other in skill, you can start seeing differences between the bikes.
This is more the case in men's xco than in women's, that is what he is saying. And I agree. The reasons for that is a whole different discussion but not what it is about here.
  • + 3
 @WAKIdesigns: Actually the technical level in the women's field nowadays is really high.

Joland is the best by some margin, but she pushes hard, hard enough that crashes and flats are going to happen.

After her you have a bunch of riders about the same level. I have ridden with most of the top riders in the elite women's field and all of them can ride. There are one or two noteable exceptions but by and large they are really fast. And on XC bikes on XC trails will absolutely smoke all but the very best male riders.
  • + 3
 @WhatAboutBob:
I would argue that the women are better bike handlers than the males. Since women have less upper body strength and less power, they typically have to be better technically than men. I see the same thing in skiing, the women may not be as fast and powerful as the men, but they can ski better.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: I'm pretty sure MVDP has his MTB skills on point. Nino had nothing on him in the technical sections at Nove Mesto.
  • + 1
 Not an XC fan but the mondraker with 6 spoke wheels wow what a sexy bike
  • + 0
 I am beyond raging that there is still no sign of updated Summum and Dune. What's happening!?!
  • - 1
 Those 5 spoke wheels kinda look "Ouchy" if one was to get something stuck in them. Like an arm or a finger.
  • + 3
 What wheel doesn’t make you go ““Ouchy" if one was to get something stuck in them. Like an arm or a finger.”?
  • + 0
 Dream all you want. Ain’t coming close to a WC Podium.
  • + 1
 no dropper?
  • + 1
 Road bike winning!
  • + 0
 Anyone have an idea on rear tire clearance?
  • + 1
 Dropper post?
  • + 0
 This bike shares many ideas with 2015 BH Lynx 4.8 29" ????
  • + 0
 I'd ride that
  • - 2
 Is trading a carbon seatpost for the utility of a dropper really that smart of a trade-off?
  • - 1
 The article about the Tech at Albstadt shows one that is the works apparently.
  • + 1
 I agree. No, it's not. Be interesting to see timed runs with and without.
  • + 4
 A lot of die-hard XC guys don't want a dropper, even it will make them a better rider, so Mondraker is probably smart for cutting the cost of the bike by a few hundred bucks and letter those progressive XC riders install their own.
  • + 1
 @PHeller: It's true. Some folks I ride with HAVE a dropper and never use it, even when things get steep. They have 20+ years of riding with no dropper and they feel uncomfortable with no seat there supporting them. IMO, to be a better rider they would truly need to adapt to using the dropper. For me, I think I'd hurt myself pretty bad, pretty often if I didn't have my dropper. Don't leave home without it!
  • - 3
 So basically middle of the road geometry with an ugly humpback silhouette and a tall headtube? Hard pass.
  • + 1
 * not a tall headtube. still ugly though.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.101793
Mobile Version of Website