Product launches often focus on one item, giving it all the limelight it needs to shine in its all-new guise. Down a 300-year-old mine in Kamsdorf, Germany, DT Swiss pulled back the curtain on not one, but three new products, revealing two-and-a-half years of work on their 232 ONE platform of fork, shock and dropper post.
All three products are aimed at the XC racing segment, and all are ruthlessly engineered as only the Swiss could. Forks and shocks are no new territory to DT Swiss, but during development it quickly became apparent that they needed, and wanted, to bring more to the market than just that. An XC dropper post was added into the development and completes their trio of new components that adorned a special edition Canyon Lux.
F 232 ONE ForkThe F 232 ONE came first in the development, and somewhat quietly has already won an XC World Cup under Mathias Flückiger in the horrendous conditions of the
Albstadt WC last year where he channelled his inner Sam Hill and rode the saturated course like it was bone dry.
ChassisThe chassis of the F 232 ONE, as the name suggests somewhat, uses 32mm diameter stanchions. But this wasn’t the diameter DT Swiss were wanting to benchmark it against in terms of stiffness. They looked up a class to the Fox 34 as to how they wanted their fork to perform. Torsional and bending stiffness were considered, as was the effect of braking and air spring forces that go towards creating asymmetrical loading situations.
DT Swiss used topology optimization to help design the fork, a process where material placement is optimized in a fixed design space with a fixed set of loads, boundary conditions and constraints. The goal in the case of the fork was to achieve a desired stiffness for the least amount of weight. It took the computer 3 iterations to achieve what DT were after and 2 mold modifications brought it to the real world. The lowers of the fork bear the most visible signs from this quest, and there are cut-outs, chamfers and pockets scattered around. The result is, according to DT Swiss, a fork that matches or exceeds the stiffness of their benchmarked Fox 34.
XC racing is still heavily focused on weight, and as you zoom in on the fork more and more details jump out to show the extent of DT's weight saving strategy. The damper and air systems start pretty high up the fork leg, and there are cut outs at the back of the lowers and every single nook and cranny is pocketed out to ditch weight. Even the rebound adjuster is machined from all directions. At 1,480g for the 100mm version (w/o axle and 230mm steerer) it comes within a packet of crisps of the Fox 32 Step Cast and equals the Rockshox SID Ultimate Carbon.
The steerer and stanchions of the fork are pressed directly into the crown without the need for cooling or heating. They maintain a certain roughness from the machining process that, along with an added surface treatment, helps retain the specific Loctite when they are pressed into the crown.
Other interesting details include the included bolt-on fender, which not only protects the rider from flying mud, but also helps prevent the build-up of debris around the seals of the fork. The inside surface of the fender is smooth with an almost mirrored finish to inhibit mud from sticking. The T10 Torx that is normally found inside the lever of the axle is now an optional extra and the fork shares its brake hose clamp with the F535.
Small details, but ones that show that someone was thinking, include the requirement to use 15ml of lower leg bath oil to ensure proper coverage of all the inside surface of the fork with enough oil for operation while not blowing the seals off. On that note, DT mentioned they even saw a difference in fork performance depending on riding style, explaining that the more active riders saw better performing forks than the static, perhaps knackered, ones, with the added liveliness splashing more of the bath oil around in the fork.
SpringThe F 232 ONE fork uses a familiar 2 chamber system, adjustable with
tokens. A traditional bypass port transfers air between the chambers shortly after zero travel and DT Swiss played with its position, along with the size of the chambers, to achieve a ride feel that they believe works well for XC. The resulting air spring curve looks more like the natural air spring curve, with rapid change in the first and last portion of the stroke with the middle being a little flatter. It’s this flatter portion that DT stressed was important for them as it allows the fork to activate, and absorb impacts easier while the rider is wanting to cover ground fast. The small amplitude but high-frequency hits would be absorbed by the fork and allow the rider to keep pedalling forwards to cover the ground as fast as possible.
The fork comes with 2 spacers installed and the option to add a further one or subtract to zero to suit your preferences.
DT continue their focus on the details with printed messages on the inside of the air top cap to check their website for setup guides.
DamperThere’s no position sensitive architecture to be found in the F 232 ONE, like on the inside of their F 535 fork. Weight was of high priority and a more standard system finds its place in the fork. There’s no bladder, but instead a doughnut shaped IFP to handle volume changes. The damper uses a familiar 3 compression modes to alter the ride characteristics. Open, Drive and Lock increasingly restrict
oil flow to provide more damping force as needed. The modes can be switched via a lever on the top of the forks or by remote on the bars, the two systems being interchangeable.
Low-speed damping is provided by oil flow through orifices, and in the case of the rebound and compression it’s adjusted by a metering needle. For the rebound its tool free and at the bottom of the fork. For the compression it’s via a T10 Torx at the center of the compression lever and only affects Open mode.
High-speed damping is provided by a shim setup and with the change of mode to Drive from Open the oil is forced exclusively through the high-speed circuit, which needs a higher force to allow flow past the shims and so provides more compression support in the Drive mode.
For anyone who’s taken apart their fork to find their bladder swollen like a puffer fish, there’s a re-circulating measure inside the fork to allow excess bath oil that has found it’s way past the seals and into the damping circuits to be fed back into the lowers as the IFP moved through its travel.
F 232 ONE Fork DetailsWheel size: 29
Travel: 100mm, 110mm, 120mm
Offset: 51mm
Weights: 1,480g (100mm, remote version, w/o axle, 230mm steerer), 1,510g (110mm)
Hub/Axle Standard: 110mm x 15mm (Boost)
Price: 979 EUR or 1113 USD (lever version), 999 EUR or 1135 USD (remote version)
More info: DT Swiss
R 232 ONE ShockThe R 232 ONE shock was developed at the same time as the 232 fork. It’s available in 4 different strokes from 40mm to 55mm in only metric lengths. Standard eyelet and Trunnion mounts are available. From what we could see all parts are replaceable, so no issues if you accidentally snap off your air valve.
Interestingly, DT use spherical bearings in their eyelets. That's not something new for the company, but in the age of huge shock extenders, rigidly bolted shocks and designs focussed on weight rather than stiffness it’s something to give a performance advantage. The spherical bearings negate side loading on the shock, or alignment issues, and allow the shock to function more smoothly with reduced bushing binding or friction from twisting or bending going on in the bike.
The rest of the shock chassis follows a familiar design with the damping system at the heart surrounded by the air spring system.
SpringSimilar to the fork, there’s a 2-chamber setup that can be adjusted for stroke and volume with the use of separate spacers. The air volume spacers are bolted into the shock to reduce any risk of them rattling around during operation.
Again, the spring curve was tuned to generate a flatter portion in the mid-stroke to aid small bump absorption around the sag and pedalling zone. If further support is needed during pedalling the Drive mode ups the damping support given to the rider.
While the fork is on a 1:1 ratio the shock is actuated by the suspension linkage system, and so the while the R 232 ONE is adjustable in air volume and damping tune, it does work better on bikes with some degree of mechanical support built in to go hand in hand with the air spring's flatter mid-stroke.
DamperThe Open, Drive and Lock modes found on the fork are present on the shock too, and they can be selected either via a lever or a remote depending on the configuration. A similar design is also employed for the
oil flow with the low-speed damping being solely orifice controlled and the high speed being shimmed. From Open to Drive mode the system shuts off oil flow through the low-speed compression circuit and directs it through the high-speed circuit where it provides more damping support to the rider. Lock mode shuts off the low and high-speed circuits to provide the maximum support on smooth climbs and sprints. There’s a blow off in place to open the system up at a pre-determined force in case of impacts.
There are 4 damping tunes available from Super Low to High to offer options to help get the shock matched to the bike.
R 232 ONE Shock DetailsEye to Eye x Stroke Standard Eyelet: 190x40mm, 190x45mm, 210x50mm, 210x55mm
Eye to Eye x Stroke Trunnion: 165x40mm, 165x45mm, 185x50mm, 185x55mm
Air Spring: Two chamber, adjustable with tokens
Weights: 230g (190x45mm w/o hardware, remote version), 300g (165x45mm Trunnion)
Price: 406 EUR or 463 USD (lever version), 429 EUR or 486 USD (remote version)
More info: DT Swiss
D 232 ONE Dropper PostAfter the fork and shock development began it wasn’t long before DT brought up the idea of a dropper post. With the rigorous focus on XC racing their design took off down a different, upside down, path. This was the first dropper post for DT, so they set about analyzing the market, bike angles and rider biometrics to define things like drop, setback and total length as well as what exactly an XC racer required.
Canyon was brought on in the development as an aid in design and also to confirm their research and development direction. Their reward for this is exclusivity with the D 232 ONE seat post for 2020.
As is evident with all products in the 232 ONE platform, the concept is clear to see in the finished product. For this it was weight and simplicity that drove all further decisions in development. The D 232 ONE uses an inverted design that sees the seat clamped to the exterior sliding element. The requirement of serviceability while on the bike and trying to achieve the lowest weight possible saw DT Swiss flipping the design to allow the post to be taken apart while still fitted to the bike and giving them enough space to have a simple
locking mechanism inside. The post has only 29 parts and can be given a small service while still mounted on the bike with the cable still attached.
The simplicity continues with only 2 positions available for the post – up and down. A bar-mounted remote uses a standard gear cable to activate the post at its base (internal routing only) and then a straight pull spoke to transfer the lever movement up to the locking mechanism. As the lever is pressed the post moves a locking ring out of the way and allows the balls inside the mechanism to fall back a little and the post to move. It's very similar to the system in ratchets to hold the socket. It’s then a single coil spring that moves the post up, and the rider’s weight is used to put the post down.
There aren't any hydraulics internally, and everything is mechanical and simple, meaning that the post fires back quickly to the up position. It's not so fast that you'll need to worry about your undercarriage, but it's swift enough to not waste time.
There’s a single large keyway between the fixed and sliding parts of the post, which with their design can be accessed, cleaned and greased with no tools and in 5 minutes. The lower half of the clamped portion of the post and the upper sliding part are constructed from carbon fiber. The top piece of the saddle clamp is carbon too and all parts use cut pre-preg layered up and molded for construction.
DT provide their own lever to actuate the post, with the small lever operating in a similar fashion to KS levers. Although, with the post being mechanical you can, of course, choose your preferred dropper remote to work the post. Even on the lever DT Swiss pay attention to the details, with the small screw that tightens the bar clamp being contained in the lever, so there’s no chance to drop it and watch it roll off under the washing machine.
D 232 ONE Dropper DetailsTravel: 60mm
Diameters: 27.2mm, 30.9mm (31.6 possible with shim)
Positions: Two - up & down
Total length: 400mm
Offset: 0mm
Mechanism: All mechanical
Weights: 369g (30.9mm diameter, w/o shift cable and cable shell)
Price: 499 EUR or 566 USD
More info: DT Swiss
Canyon Lux CF SLX 9.0 DT LTDAs mentioned, the D 232 ONE post is only available with Canyon for the first year of its life. But in conjunction with DT, Canyon are releasing a limited edition of their Lux XC bike adorned with all the 232 ONE components and some eye-catching DT Swiss wheels.
In the form of hyper car manufacturers, only 32 will be available and are available to order right now for €7,499.
Other changes to this special edition Lux include a smidge more party up front with a 110mm travel fork rather than the standard 100mm and 30mm inner width rims and 2.35” Maxxis tires. When asked if this was the way Canyon saw XC going, they agreed and cited athlete testing with the benefits of meatier rubber outweighing the added weight that concerned racers. There was a mention of the D word, but the Lux remains very much an XC bike.
Lukas Flückiger will be racing aboard this limited edition Cayon Lux at the UCI World Cups this year.
First ImpressionsIn addition to DT's wonderful lack of PowerPoint presentations, they also chose somewhere a little different for their launch.
January weather can be unpredictable, so DT chose to show off the new products underground, inside an old disused mine. While literally everything was new to the experience, including the top tube hugging riding positions as we darted through mine shafts, we did get enough time aboard the kitted-out Canyon to make a couple of first impressions.
Firstly, and wrongly, I made some pre-conceptions after seeing the products before riding them. The prime amongst them being that 60mm is not enough drop for a dropper post. While personally I’m looking at moving up to a 210mm dropper, I’m also personally not a cross country racer. 60mm might seem like not a lot to the enduro crowd, but it’s just enough to take the seat out of the way for anything technical on the way down. It’s also still at a reasonable height for quick spurts of pedalling between technical sections. So, with the up position being your favoured seat height for pedalling, the down position does a nice job of allowing you to attack a little more with a freer body position. It’s a light action too, with the simple internal mechanisms offering little resistance. Return speed is super-fast, and the seat always made it back to full height as soon as I needed to pedal.
The fork does a really good job of being efficient with its 110mm of travel. Once we’d got the right air pressure the fork was smooth, comfortable and controlled on the rocky little loops we had to test on. Those loops included a couple of tricky descents, with manmade and natural features dotted around them, where the fork didn’t show any signs of being floppy both under hard braking or twisting it round some berms.
The shock felt controlled and predictable too, although to give it a thorough test we’d need to try it on a few bikes to see the effects of different leverage ratios. Setup was quick and easy, with there only being air pressure and rebound to set. One thing we noticed is that every single click of rebound, on both the shock and fork, had less of a perceivable feel than on a Fox unit. This means that those who are less in tune with feeling what the bike is doing then may need to make bigger changes in order to make a noticeable difference.
The Canyon Lux test bike was fitted with DT Swiss’s remote to adjust the mode of the fork and shock simultaneously. The remote works well and is a good option for the race scenarios when every second counts, but it’s also a nice option to have non-remote options available and easily convertible.
In all the parts of the new 232 ONE platform it’s clear to see their initial concept, and for the XC crowd and on the Canyon Lux we tested them on they're very well suited to their purpose.
https://www.marccerdan.com/portfolio/xc-gravel-dropper-post-st-mk5/
www.pnwcomponents.com/collections/adventure-cx
www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7tlskJ_3Z0
it's "gnarly" only because the racers are riding basically road bikes with thicker tires... it has nothing on today's XCO tracks
Sure Nino has better handling skills, but it’s not like Van der Poel is awful.
But he certainly does have a bigger engine and has won in three disciplines at the highest level.
Really and truly, no cares if you predict anything, it’s stoopid, and proves nothing but that you’re full of yourself... which by the way, most everyone knows.
Thanks for the fish
Yes... we are as compatible with each other as Sram standards... what was it this time? Your CX feelings got hurt?
Yes I am quite full of myself. If you want to be a douche, you better be it all the way... it makes them even angrier.
Lateeeeers! (May be soon though)
Keep posting your pics, I'll keep riding my bikes.
I thought pinkbike had that guy write somethings in the past or collaborated in some way. I'm sure after seeing the way he acts in here they regret that decision. Yikes.
It has been months now but i still don't understand the charm of the Supercaliber, it's way to heavy for a compromised design with no real advantages, XC riding and XC tracks pushes more towards more travel anyway, maybe soon 120mm is the XC norm so Trek going in the other direction is kinda odd!
That is to say: It IS very pretty. but when that prettiness came at the expense of being a competitive weight, somebody overrode the engineer who came back and told management "this design doesn't work."
That's how you describe a shitty air spring that's no better than any other low end shock?
Seriously? Im pretty sure doing lower leg services on RS forks most manufacturers probably know how much oil goes in without damaging the fork!
This is just BS advertising spiel made out to be content.
There is literally nothing new:
* the fork damper's IFP system with oil return is from Fox's GRIP
* both air-springs are just normal port-equalizing air springs with a small negative chamber (while everyone else goes to large negatives for more linear curves)
* dampers with ports for low-speed, shims for high speed, and lockouts with blowoffs are literally everywhere
* the dropper's lock mechanism is basically what Specialized's posts use
From experience, that amount of fluid works fine, as long as you do your lowers services on schedule, every 50 hours of use.
No thanks!
Like you said, there is certainly room for improvement in the weights of all these 200mm dropper posts too. This 232 almost half the weight of a 210mm OneUp dropper - it's also a 1/4 of the travel. Are we nearing "peak dropper"?
Is it too much to ask for some critical thinking before copypasting tarted up techno-speak? I know Pinkbike is floated by partnerships and sponsored content, but that's a long winded way to describe a pedestrian aspect of mechanical design. Depending on the software, 3 iterations is a very small number (not useful information) and having to re-do the mold twice just means they didn't nail it on the computer screen. Nothing abnormal, good or bad. Not relevant information... smells like a the same cynical "bewilder them with bullshit" you get across the bicycle industry. Just sick of it!
If you want a weird inverted dropper post, there are several out there already that are much, much lighter: bikerumor.com/2018/05/23/jbg2-dps-claims-to-be-worlds-lightest-dropper-post-at-240g
I'm only 14 days late responding. lol
www.9point8.ca/index.php?route=information/information&information_id=46
PENIS ENLARGEMENT ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION DIABETES type 1 and type 2 HERPES GENITAL WART
LOW SPERM COUNT WEAK ERECTION
BREAST ENLARGEMENT
PROSTRATE CANCER
HIV/AIDS
PREMATURE EJACULATION
Kidney cure
so if you need his help contact him on dronobunherbalhome@gmail.com or whatsapp him on +2348100339813,
So a bypass (equalization) port is "traditional", but a "natural air spring" is... no negative spring? Coil negative spring? Separate air negative spring?
All they did was make a relatively tiny air negative, complete opposite of EVOL, DebonAir, and MegNeg. This will just make it feel firm (which people think is fast, but isn't) in the parking lot test, and ramp fast at the end with relatively fewer tokens (save single digit grams of plastic token weight?). It's also going to feel quite firm whenever landing the front wheel, which has been considered a deficit of the Trust forks...
Why not charge $1000.00 and give us a dropper post that has a minimum of 125mm?
that is like 10 bucks US a mm
Uh, if it makes sense to someone, please let me know.
Last time I checked, most pros run seatback rigid post and this post has 0 seatback.
They do not run droppers with seatback because there aren't many on the market (as it will make the post weaker).
Just spare us with the marketing copy.
Why most pros run seatback?
Because depending on geometry and "biometrics" i.e. the proportions of femur vs tibula (btw long femur/short tibula = stronger cyclist) on "modern" bikes with steep seat angles, most people need to use a seat back to obtain an healthy knee position. So in ten years, after they stop racing, they will keep their knees. You don't notice the damage right away, but it comes back after years. I am amazed how the bike industry is potentially creating heath issues to a generation of new riders. Then again, most "consumers" do not ride bikes long enough to have any consequences.
If your theory is true why don't people on recumbents or unicycles have super bad knee issues?
Everything I have read shows no corralation between knee position over spindle and knee problems. This is of course assuming that you keep the saddle position the same distance from the bb spindle(moving seatpost up if you move saddle forward, down if back)
It is not my theory. It is the basic of cycling as a sport. Every single racing team follows the same rules for fitting the lower part. Don’t look too close at pros position, because sometimes is hard to understand. The hip rotation may be easy to miss. But they all follow the same standards.
Do you know how to squat?
The basics is to put the weight on your heel. If you put the weight on the front of your foot, knees are damaged. Nobody questions that.
This is a similar concept. With the knee too much in front (or rear) of the pedal, you are putting stress on the weaker points (besides not being able to put the same power down). You are using parts of your knee that are weaker. Little parts. When young, you will not feel anything. You are like a new car, with all the rubber puffy and shiny. But you are producing excessive wear to your parts. Your body can keep up and regenerate, but older you get, more wear you have and less quickly the body repairs.
The consequences of excessive wear will be showing after several years, not when you are in the 20’s or 30’s. It is not cool to be 40 with the knees of a 60 years old.
Recumbents rarely (actually never) pedal hard. Once people start taking the bikes uphill (and need to pedal hard) they will inevitably overstress the knee. That’s why you only see them on flats. If they did measure power output, just because of the position of the leg and the hip, I ensure you they could only put down a fraction of a upright bike. I have ridden a couple.
Unicycles I rather not comment.
Obviously if people ride 20 miles a month for 2/4 years they will be fine. Which I assume is the average bicycle consumer nowdays.
Your reference to doing squats has no relevance to the leg/crank system that you deliver power through on a bike. You are using a series of levers and then pushing through a pivot point which is the pedal spindle. There is no solid ground which we can change the leverage on our joints without repositioning our feet.
The only role that our fore/aft seated position has is how much effort our upper body has to do to keep us stable. If you are well forward and pedaling along flat ground, you will need to use more core and upper body strength than is optimal, to hold yourself up. If you are positioned well back and are pedalling up a hill, especially if you are putting down a lot of power, you will have to use a lot of core and upper body strength to keep from sliding off the back of the saddle. In both cases your knees will not know about the difference as they are still operating with the exact same leverage system with the same amount of knee extension during the power phase of the pedal stroke.
People that put out low power and ride less steep terrain should have their saddle back more than someone that puts out a lot of power and pedals up steep terrain, on a road bike. On a mountain bike, things are quite a bit different. The climbs are often many times steeper than anything that one encounters on a road bike, which is the type of riding the KOPS system was marketed towards.
You should read this as a starter piece.
www.sheldonbrown.com/kops.html
Do you ride solo or with other people?
How long have you been riding?
Ever raced?
What is your longer ride?
Road bike?
What bike(s) do you ride?
How many bikes have you had?
Where do you usually ride?
Some mountains you climbed?
KOPS system marketed? Maybe in the US is a relatively new thing, But in cycling countries it has been followed since the 40's if not before. It does not have a specific name in French or Italian. It is just abc fitting.
I guess from Fausto Coppi to Nino Schurter all cyclist have been following some marketing trend while Sheldon Brown opinion has more value.
While the new crops of bikes designed with supervision and input from business and marketing people are a tangible "innovation".
I agree that KOPS is a good starting point for a road bike setup. The problem with being tied so heavily to it is that you cannot name the force which would act upon the knee that may injure it. The only force available is gravity.
Do you ride solo or with other people?
-I ride mostly solo nowadays, used to ride a lot with others on road and MTB.
How long have you been riding?
-First rode a bike at 5 but started racing road and MTB at 12. I'm 42 now. Absolutely no knee problems in my knee that I didn't explode in a fall and need 2 surgeries on.
Ever raced?
-Yes, for 10 years.
What is your longer ride?
-3 to 4 hours right now, but looking to get into the longer endurance stuff.
Road bike?
- Use to a lot, I actually prefer it over lap style riding at MTB trail centers, the road feels like a death wish where I live though so have backed away from it in the last few years.
What bike(s) do you ride?
-Several, I put the most time on a steel gravel bike, I also have a 120 travel FS bike right now, I am building up a modern geo adventure style MTB in the near future, and I putt around on an old(1994) Fat Chance when I'm out with the family.
How many bikes have you had?
-Dozens. Only like 5 road bikes and 2 gravel bikes, but a lot of MTB's as I always end up breaking the frames, or selling them when they were still worth money when I worked in shops.
Where do you usually ride?
-Stuff near my house here in the Pacific Northwest of Washington, there are a huge network of logging roads with some trails connecting them for the gravel bike right out my door. I also ride my nearby trail center on my MTB, it has over 60 miles of singletrack and logging road climbs.
Some mountains you climbed?
-Never really travelled a lot for cycling, but I did do a road race in Switzerland that ended on top of some mountain once. I also got to climb Stelvio Pass on that same trip from the Italian side, that was an amazing day. Really depends on your definition of mountain is, my most common rides involve climbing several thousand feet in a few hours, but we call them hills here as the mountains are 40 miles east.
The reason that most pro cyclists are in a position roughly in line with KOPS is because they are all making about the same power, are all in good shape weight wise, and are all riding the same terrain. The fore/aft positioning is to try and use gravity to do most of the work of keeping the rider in place on the bike instead of the riders core and upper body. If the rider had to use their upper body and core they would be less efficient. It really has no place in MTBs that are ridden in non flat places, as the bulk of the pedalling effort is done on steep roads or trails. You could even argue that if you use KOPS for MTBs, you should position the bike on an angle that equals the average incline expected by the rider, then do the plumb bob check.
KOPS system has been around forever here in the states as well, as it is a good starting point for fitment on a road bike. The one time I got set up that way as young Junior racer I quickly moved away from as it felt really awful. I didn't move far away but KOPS put too much weight on sit bones and I slid back in the saddle when I was really young and had low upper body mass, so I moved my saddle forward and up and put a longer stem on my bike. Then as I gained upper body mass due to competitive Nordic skiing, my position needed to move back to take weight off my hands.
You should actually read that article, it is clear that you didn't since it was written by Keith Bontrager, and is just hosted on the Sheldon Brown site.