Sea Otter Classic was winding down. Some vendors were already dismantling their displays while the golden hour's glow cast color and shadows across the still-packed venue. I was lost in thought, threading a long-travel 29er through the crowd towards the media parking lot with two bundles of tires and a plastic bag full of soon-to-be-reviewed bits slung over my shoulder when someone called my name. The face was so familiar, but I could not place it.
Leo Kokkonen introduced himself with some anticipation in his voice. Leo is the brilliant engineer behind Pole Bicycles and the guy who launched the anti-flat, tire-insert trend with Huck Norris.
We had never met face to face, although we had butted heads recently over the
carbon versus aluminum debate. "This could get ugly," I thought. Either way, I knew it was not going to be a "Hey bro, gotta go" trade show conversation.
Any trepidation I harbored was unfounded. Kokkonen is articulate, soft-spoken, and about as genuine as a person gets. We dove in deep into the challenges he faced with CNC-machining an entire frame from aluminum. Remarkably transparent, Leo spoke about the project's failures with the same enthusiasm as he did about its successes. We had a laugh after I shared that, like Pole's prototype "Machine," the first version of what would later become my most popular dual-suspension design broke within a few kilometers of its first ride.
I learned that much of the motivation behind the novel design of Pole's Machine was sound business practice. Computers handle the lion's share of the manufacturing, so Pole doesn't need to manage a factory full of skilled welders and metal workers to produce frames. Inventory is almost unnecessary, as frames can be made to order within a couple of weeks. Aircraft grade 7075 aluminum and CNC machining centers are available worldwide, so as their exports increase, Pole could easily manufacture its frames in the geographical locations where their customers are based, instead of wasting time and resources incurred by shipping and import duties. Like Kokkonen, there is more to the Machine than meets the eye.
As our conversation broadened, it became clear that Kokkonen's aluminum stunner was not the end product, but the continuation of a journey that began somewhere around the time when he was experimenting with long top tubes and exaggerated seat and head angles.
| Walk the same path and you will always arrive at the same destination.—Anonymous |
"When I first rode the prototype
Evolink," says Leo. "I thought, 'Well, this is strange,' but then, after riding it more, I knew that it was better for everywhere. It is easier to ride, so you have more confidence, so you can go faster. The stopwatch proves this." Kokkonen committed to his findings. He disregarded industry-wide pushback for its ugly-duckling looks and put the Evolink into production.
Kokkonen's decision to carve the Machine from aluminum billets and glue it together was similarly inspired: he optimized his frame design to maximize the advantages of a best-practice process. For Pole's limited production, it was an easier way to manufacture, he had complete control, and there was arguably less environmental impact. He'd be happy to show you the numbers. Kokkonen's ability to ignore convention and search well beyond the horizon for solutions was refreshing.
We both thought that that rider-forward geometry has yet to be exploited, that most riders are adapting their present technique to take advantage of its benefits. Kokkonen envisions that, ultimately, it will inspire new techniques that could fundamentally change the way we ride a mountain bike. He shared some video clips of a group of riders ripping a series of tight corners to illustrate his point. Three of the four hit the turns like your basic shredit video stars, but one was compressing each apex with such force that his bike was floating between corners. The speed he carried was impressive. Kokkonen suggested that the next breakthroughs in DH racing may well evolve from trail and enduro.
Ask the sport's luminaries to comment upon the development curve of today's mountain bike and they'll tell you it's flattened out - to expect less innovation and anticipate a period of gradual improvement. Evidently, Kokkonen didn't get that memo. In the course of our thirty minute conversation, the unassuming engineer articulated a dozen ideas about alternative manufacturing methods, riding techniques, integrated tire and rim designs, and suspension, any of which could have been labeled as revolutionary, and yet all of Leo's concepts were grounded in reality and could be implemented with existing technology.
Our conversation ended much too soon. It had been a long while since I had so thoroughly enjoyed tossing around ideas with such a creative mind. Leo vowed to pick up where we left off in the near future and I began my five hundred mile drive home. Plenty of time to think.
No doubt that, given the resources, Leo would tick every box on his wish list. I am less certain, however, that if his visionary solutions do arrive, the sport's elite will embrace them. Today's bicycles and riders are pretty damn good, so its easy to believe there aren't many opportunities left for significant improvements. People don't like change when everything looks rosy, and the product of that complacency is that it doesn't take much in the way of innovation to move the needle.
Leo isn't concerned with wiggling the needle, he wants to zip tie it to the red line. It's laughable to imagine that an industry full of Kokkonens would have tip-toed one at a time from nine to 12 cassette cogs, anointed themselves for squeezing out three millimeters of tire clearance, or wasted a decade to get from a 70 to a 67-degree head angle. One can only imagine what we'd be riding today if he were driving the bus when those decisions were made, but if Leo continues on pace, I am sure he will soon give us a preview of how that may have gone down.
It is in fact true and in Leo's mind justified.
Brand needs a name change now, before they really attack the US market. He already has Huck Norris. I say rename it Chuk Norris Bikes. Boom Done. I'll send you the bill.
The bikes are faster and capable of more. Once you learn to ride them and get them up to speed they are just as fun, but you are going way faster in the process - win/win.
I bought an Evolink 140 29" wheels 50" wheelbase because it's the most do-everything-brilliantly bike I've ever ridden. Try one
Kona Process 111 size XL: reach 510mm, chainstays 430mm, headangle 67.5º, wheelbase 1235mm
Pole Evolink 131 size L: reach 510, chainstays 455mm, Headangle 65º, wheelbase 1304mm
Aside from the same reach in different frame sizing I fail to see how they they are sameish! Not even same proportions!
Anyway, Pole is pushing the limits, try to innovate and to provide different product on a market where 'Look like a Trek' ( a Kona, a Turner from the good ol days ) is the benchmark…
It would be interesting to me to see how you guys who like the Pole (sorry) get on if you switched to a moderate bike right now. My guess - you still have the confidence on straight line speed that you’ve learned riding a long wheelbase but after wrestling the bigger bike through corners you’re now a cornering pro on a smaller bike.
I must iterate I’m over arguments about which is better, if you’re loving the bike then that’s all that matters. But everything is a compromise, you can’t have the best of all worlds. My small bike will probably get left behind by a Pole on many of my own descents which are fast and straight and rocky. But my small bike will have the edge elsewhere, simple as that. Pole haven’t created a magic bicycle, it’s just a bicycle with bigger proportions and everything that comes with that.
ep1.pinkbike.org/p5pb13179236/p5pb13179236.jpg
www.instagram.com/p/BhmkPm6hyzp
Here I is what I showed when I talked about our suspension concept. This is me riding.
youtu.be/Pomo3gch58g
1/ Both of those bikes are remarkable! They both climb and descend faster with more stability and finesse than any bike I've ridden. The steep seat angle works brilliantly to create a very comfortable climbing position that allows you to just churn up anything. Tight switchbacks... no problem at all with 63.5 & 64.5 head angles. The bikes simply offer the best of everything I want in a fun, fast mtb! 2/ Dan was an incredible guide/host who set up the bikes to our specific size and style and allowed us to really experience what the bikes could do. 3/ Pole is one of three companies making bikes like this (Mondraker and Nicholai being the other two) and I think it's the beginning of a mtb revolution. I liken it to the Prince tennis racquets. People first thought they were ridiculous fly swatters. 2-3 years later everyone was making and playing oversize racquets. When I look at the masses of trail/enduro bikes with oh-so-similar geometry I yawn. There's nothing new happening there.
The only people I've heard doubt the Pole bikes are people who haven't ridden them. How convinced am I... I ordered an Evolink 140 EN! I'm in.
What was your impression of the Evolink 140 and Machine on... not-so-extreme trails? Are they fun to ride or they need a proper steep enduro-style trail to really shine?
Now Leigh may have improved this season anyway - he's an out&out rocket, but riding a Pole (stop it!) certainly hasn't done his results any harm - top 15 in the EWS in France, earlier this month is a testament to how fast he's getting, also 1st in Innerleithen, in Scotland - beating big name pro locals who built and know the track. He rocked up to the Welsh Gravity Enduro in Afan last weekend - took one run on each section (it's a 'Mash-up' format, where you can session a section until you're happy with your time) and SMASHED the rest of the field, then promptly went off riding with mates. The kid is a machine - watch out for him
Or anyone else who may know for that matter.
My 2005 Reign 1 had a 67 HA with a 160 fork... Giant's own geo chart spec'd it at 69, but in person that just wasn't correct.
(granted, it also like a 69* seat angle, but who's counting? )
Leo is in direct contact with the rider on with the test bike too. It was superb to see the instant comms between them whenever the rider had any feedback. I'm also told the Leo himself is a pretty fast rider on the gnar as well as switchbacky trails :-)
Since when did anything being easy make anything more fun? We've all been kids and perhaps most of us have done things like play video games on easy mode or play football with flooball goals etc. But ever since I've been ABLE to, I've always wanted things I do for fun to be as challenging as possible. Be it a sport, a craft, an art or any other. I belive the pleasure we get from learning new things and overcoming challenges/difficult things is universal: we all enjoy it one way or the other.
However, this said design philosophy reflects a whole nother idea: it (i this case riding) is the better the easier your equipment make it. I call this "easy mode riding" and to me it's a bit pathetic. What happened to ripping your body to shreds with BMX as a teen, then slowly progressing to more advaned bikes once you've learned to ride better and started to trade some of that riding time for cash? Eventually one gets up to the amazing level our bikes are today, but not because it is easier, but because you can finally both afford it AND have the skillset to weild it.
Of course this could all be part of my huge grudge against what the sport has become - I feel like the 30-something engineers coming fresh into the sport with the latest and greatest gear, barely having any awareness of their movements nor any natural instinct on the bike, are not able to fully appreciate the nuances. Growing up riding your bike, putting in the work and coming back from the inevidable injuries all force you to learn to appreciate the sport, your own and other people skills much more than any gear available. The gear changes constantly but the spirit should remain true.
I can see from your riding that you'd never benefit from a long pole anyway, as youre so skilled already. Skilled guys seem to do better with bikes that can turn, and are not just fast on a straight line. You see, Poles bikes and their clients are only good for riding boring and straight trails slow and safe as you said.
Exactly the same with my Sentinel: incredible at every type of cornering where you have to lean the bike, in fact better than my old scout that was already outstanding. And no problem for really tight switchbacks, just lift the backweel a little more.
Watch out Nino & Gwinn, my Visa and I are a coming for ya! LoLoLoL