First Ride: Nicolai Mojo GeoMetron

Sep 28, 2015
by Paul Aston  
First Ride - Mojo Nicolai Geometron


Mojo Suspension and Chris Porter have a history of ruffling feathers: Remember the PVC style skinsuits that popped up at the Fort William World Cup in 2008? Technology taken from ski racing that gave two team riders their best results ever? What about strapping lead weights to his racer's bikes to improve the sprung - unsprung mass ratio? More recently, Chris has been seen riding chopped out monster bikes with crazy angles and even racing an EWS with FOX 40 downhill forks on his bike. After years of testing and timing, Chris has put his money where his mouth is, and in conjunction with Nicolai, the 'GeoMetron' has been born. The black beast is now available through his Mojo Suspension Centre in South Wales, so I headed down to Risca to ride and get the low-down direct from the source.


GeoMetron customers have various build options, starting from a frame kit with custom-tuned Fox Float X or X2 shock, for £2100 GBP, to a top-range complete build for £6700 GBP. For that price, you're not only getting a bike. Included with your complete build is a full day of testing and tuning with Mojo, where you can try a choice of frame sizes, tires, damper tunes, handlebar widths, gear ratios and anything else you might fancy. Once you have decided on all of the above, Mojo will build your fresh frame up to your personal spec's and include two pairs of wheels (Crossmax SL and Crossmax XL) for different riding styles. Plus - if you're not happy - you can keep going back to Mojo to try different options until you are - an unparalleled service in the mountain bike industry.
GeoMetron Details:

• Intended use: all-mountain/enduro, going insanely fast.
• Wheel size: 27.5''
• Rear-wheel travel: 150mm
• Fox 36 fork and Float X or X2 shock - custom tuned.
• Welded aluminum frame
• 77° seat angle
• 62-63.5° head angle, dependent upon shock and fork length.
• Sizing: Long, Longer, or Longest
• ISCG 05 chainguide tabs
• MSRP: £5200-£6700 ($8150-$10,500 approx) dependent upon build kit and service package.
• Contact: Mojo Nicolai GeoMetron

Nicolai GeoMetron Review


Frame Details

All Nicolai frames are 100-percent hand-built in Lübbrechtsen, Germany. Nicolai say this helps them to create some of the best bikes in the world as design to final test riding can all be performed under one roof. The tubes are cut and welded, dropouts and links are machined, frames are straightened, painted and assembled then shipped worldwide. The GeoMetron sports a ZS 44/56 tapered head tube, a 73mm BSA threaded bottom bracket surrounded by ISCG 05 chain guide tabs, a PM 180mm brake mount and a 142mm x 12mm rear axle.

Nicolai GeoMetron Review
It's all in the details.

Nicolai GeoMetron Review
A custom tuned Float X shock with an EVOL air can.
Nicolai GeoMetron Review
Replaceable drop outs and hanger.

Nicolai GeoMetron Review
More hand-crafted goodness.


GeoMetron geometry 2016


The GeoMetron is a result of a lifetime of fiddling, testing and timing from Chris. After years of running a race team, the crucial measure is the stopwatch. Every angle, setting and detail has been timed and tested to find what he thinks is the fastest recipe on the market. So what is the GeoMetron all about? It's the longest bike on the market, and Chris says his personal bike is the longest mountain bike ever made with a limo-like wheelbase of 1370mm. He also says that, against the clock, it's the fastest bike they have taken down the 'Mojo Test Track' (and several) others between the legs of three different riders and pitched against many other bikes time and time again. He was also keen to point out that the Mojo track is one of the tightest and twisty in the area but the biggest bike still shone through.

The geometry certainly is extreme but as current trends continue to get lower, longer and slacker Chris says "Why not keep going!" The head angle sits between 62° and 63.5° with rear-wheel travel between 145mm and 155mm. The seat angle is around 77° and the bottom bracket height drops around 17mm below the axles. On my 'Longest' test bike, the wheelbase was 1320mm. Why such vague values? Your GeoMetron will be built with different fork travel, fork offset and shock length, dependent upon your riding style and favorite terrains.

Nicolai GeoMetron Review
Nicolai GeoMetron Review


The GeoMetron's Suspension Explained

The GeoMetron uses a basic design taken from a Nicolai ION 16 bike. A four bar linkage using a Horst-style pivot, with a solid, CNC machined rocker link to drive the customized shock. Of course the kinematic isn't just lifted from the standard ION, the pivot placement and leverage curve has been tweaked to give certain anti-squat ratios and progression. Chris built my bike with a Fox 36 fork set at 180mm. This was to raise the front end and slacken out the head angle even more in to the 62° degree range. He also built the fork using a crown/steerer assembly from a 26" travel Fox 36 fork, which has a shorter offset than the 27.5" version, meaning the steering feel will quicken slightly to offset the lag given by the slacker head angle.

Chainring size is also considered for suspension set-up. Decided not by leg power but by the required level of anti-squat for the rider and style. My bike was built with a 36t chainring, which raises the chain in comparison to the main pivot. This was chosen to suit my riding style - I try to pump to create speed more than pedaling through rough sections, and care more about going downhill fast than speeding up hills.

Being the UK's FOX distribution and service center for the last two decades, the damping should be the jewel in the crown. Suspension will be tuned to your riding style using air pressure, volume spacers, shim stacks, oil weights and whatever other 'Suspension Hoodoo' they have up their sleeves.



Riding the Geometron


Climbing: I often find that being a tall rider on L or XL frame sizes with modern, short chainstays that my mass is too far over the rear axle when climbing. This can lead to an overly saggy rear and a wandering front end. The GeoMetron solves this 'lanky riders' issue with the super steep 77° seat angle, combined with the long-ish 445mm chainstay and the elongated front triangle that moves your mass into a more central position between the wheels and reduces the wheelie effect. This was taken even closer to the extreme by the saddle being slammed as far forward as possible on the rails, even the seat clamp had seen and angle grinder at some point to gain couple of extra millimeters forwards. As for the strange looking seat angle - this bike is designed for going up and then down, on steep climbs it's more comfortable than it looks.

I rode the bike for two full days, only at the end of which, I realized that not once had I felt the need to reach for the compression lever. Normally I feel the need to stiffen the compression in order to keep the bike sitting high at the rear and give better climbing geometry. Admittedly I never got in to any super-technical climbs, but trail center hairpins were manageable and however steep the incline I was more centered and comfortable than anything else I have ridden.

Descending: When turning back down the hill a change of riding style is required. If you're used to hanging off the back off your bike like Fairclough, or getting your weight back for the steep stuff, a massive, high speed accident is more than likely. A more central riding position is required, and when conquered magic things can happen. You can charge down steeps in a neutral riding position with plenty of front end grip and braking traction, without the fear of going out the front door. The massive wheel base makes front to rear weight distribution a cinch on flat corners and long camber - subtle fore to aft movements can gain grip at one end or the other. A short travel downhill machine, and possibly a bike that would out-descend many true downhill bikes.

Nicolai GeoMetron Review


Suspension: The customized suspension has next to zero breakaway and the support in the fork mixed with the super slack head angle leads to no noticeable dive at the front end even on steep, stepped switchbacks. As mentioned previously, being tall makes life difficult with seat angles but another problem I face is weighing 72kg, but riding fairly hard and having a downhill and BMX background where pumping and driving the bike in to compressions and corners is the norm. What does this mean? It's hard to get suspension supple enough for small bump compliance and grip, but also progressive enough for the big hits (RockShox suspension offerings over the last few years with Bottomless tokens have been a godsend).

Nicolai GeoMetron Review
The takeoff is behind that tree, and I went waaay too deep, missing the landing and just about holding on to the barge. Suspension? Ten millimeters of travel left at either end.

The custom tune from Mojo also solved this - meaning I could run 30-percent sag and get great support thanks to volume spacers and valving. In fact the suspension progression is unlike anything I have felt on any other air suspended bikes - Here's the proof: Going straight in to our photoshoot on the first run, I overshot a big hip jump, going about 45 feet out and 15 down pretty much to flat and just about holding on at my limit of strength and range of motion; my chin was almost on the stem and crown jewels on the top tube. The result was exactly 10mm of suspension travel left at each end. I suggested to Chris that it should have bottomed out here and his response was, "If you did bottom out when you where that close to blowing up, the extra impact of hitting the bottom-out stops might have sent you past your limit."

Nicolai GeoMetron Review


Pinkbike's Take:
bigquotesI remember saying to a friend in 2007, "why doesn't somebody just make a six-inch travel trail bike with downhill geometry, that you could pedal up the hill?" Eight years later and this is what we have! The GeoMetron is the ideal machine for people who want to get to the top in their own time, then challenge the downhillers' on the way back down. The customized suspension is sublime, with initial breakaway unnoticeable. Progression is unreal from the air units, not even bottoming out when overshooting a huge jump, even though I was sitting well in to the travel with 30-percent sag. The cockpit isn't as enormous as it looks, with the longest size having the exact same bottom bracket to handlebar measurement as my XL Specialized Enduro, bearing in mind different stem lengths and stack heights. The support offered by the fork and the super slack head angle means I could load, and charge at the front end whatever situation I was in and keep it under control. The GeoMetron is a bit futuristic, but take the time to get used to the geometry and you'll be having a blast. - Paul Aston


Visit the high-res gallery for more images from this review


The latest addition to the Pinkbike Technical team, Paul Aston is a racer and dirt-jumper at heart. Previously competing in World Cup DH, now he's attacking Enduro and has been since before it was fashionable. Based in the UK, but often found residing in mainland Europe allows him to experience a huge variety of terrains and trails.Stats: Age: 29 • Height: 6'1” • Ape Index: +4" • Weight: 161lb • Industry affiliations / sponsors: Rockwell Watches


Must Read This Week

324 Comments

  • + 81
 I like to follow what CP is doing and saying, I agree with his geo philosophies. The only thing I think should be mentioned alongside the 'longer, lower, slacker = faster' thing is that yeah it probably is a rocket but not everyone rides fast enough to take full advantage of it and even the ones that can don't necessarily pin it 110% everywhere they go. A bike with more balanced geo can be more fun across a range of terrain and moods and more appealing to a wide audience, which is why the big brands won't stick their necks out.
Having said that, if I could afford one of these I would be buying one right now.
  • + 7
 In the summary he mentions the length from bb to bar. That is the only measurement that is actually important in determining fit and bike size. Top tube length, reach, stack and everything else should be replaced by one measurement, bottom bracket to head tube top dead centre. I like this bike. If they could make it look good I'd like it even more.
  • + 1
 Seat tube length is very important if you have long or short legs for your height. I won't be buying these super long and low bikes, because my legs are too long for the stupid short seat tubes on these bikes.
  • + 21
 You could get a long seat post?
  • + 19
 to get accurate measurements you need the XY measurements = stack and reach. your single measurement could mean the headtube is anywhere is space within a radius of "whatever measure you want to insert"
  • + 56
 I teared up when I read threaded bb
  • - 1
 @jaame as mtbpp says, stack and reach are all you need to determine "fit".

@mountainbiker24 ST length is one of the least important geo details. Longer post!
  • + 7
 Bottom bracket center to handlebar center is what you need to look for you to fit. It is the diagonal of reach and stack. Reach and stack have the additional influence that they determine the angle between bottom bracket and handlebar. More reach and less stack at equal diagonal length mean more stretched out and thus power friendly bike. Less reach and more stack mean a more upright position with more range of movement for handling the terrain.
  • + 10
 Seat tube length and standover height gets important when you have stumps for legs like me.
  • - 3
 I know you can use reach and stack to calculate length. Since everyone is using wheels, forks, cranks etc with the same geometry, and stems and seat posts can be changed, a single length figure would be more relevant than two unimportant sides of the triangle. Since you're never sitting down when riding hard, reach and stack are largely pointless measurements. Or maybe I'm just missing the point. as I see it, the only thing that matters is how far your hands are from your feet
  • + 9
 You are missing the point Smile

Stack and reach are in some respect even more important when standing up since they are relative to the BB (i.e. your feet) and are independent of the saddle position/ ST angle. Exactly what you describe.

The two "unimportant" sides of the triangle are actually very important as you can have two bike with the same BB to Bar length but very different fits and feels (explained by Sontator)
  • + 2
 I think that all the measurements are important. Reach and stack are relevant as well as your suggested 'downtube' (dunno what to call it) measurement @jaame. Your hands could be the same distance from your feet and be right on your nose (unlikely I admit) or way out in front. When I'm doing quick compares of bikes I measure from the centre of BB to the grips, if other numbers are comparable (not a massive discrepancy in stem length or height for example) you can get a good idea of whether it's close to what you want/ are used to, etc.
  • + 4
 I have a long torso and stubby legs, and I feel best on larger frames but the standover is always an issue. I ignored it in the past, but I rode a bike with low standover and it really makes a difference! Its way easier to dip the handlebar into a turn when the top tube is out of the way. Its more than just the bb to bar length/angle.
  • + 2
 @hamncheez : I noticed this same effect recently after going from an '08 Khyber Elite to a '15 Canfeild Balance. Same (or very close) EFT and WB numbers but very different stack numbers.
  • + 2
 Brilliant!!
  • + 2
 Dropper posts are usually around 400mm. This is too short for me with an 18.5" seat tube, which is about the average for large frames, now. The reach on the x-large frames is too long for my riding preferences, so I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place. Looking at the new geometry on new models, I will be severely limited with my next bike options.
  • - 2
 On paper this bike makes sense. The problem though is that many trail builders are still building trails that suit 90's geometry bikes - short wb, steep head angles, and high bb's. I know that's an issue that I am finding here where I live. Think about all the older trails, they were built with small bikes and 26" wheels in mind. Even an modern geo enduro bike can feel like too much bike on these trails. I can't imagine that Nicolai.
  • + 5
 Or companies are building bikes for the new style trails. I like the older style trails. You don't have to go fast to challenge yourself or have fun.
  • + 2
 I don't mean to flog a dead horse over this, so apologies.

Two bikes with the same bb to head tube length could theoretically have very different reach and stack figures, but in practice they couldn't, since every large size enduro bike this year has a the same 160mm Pike fork, 65 degree head angle, 120mm head tube (give or take 10mm) and 175mm cranks. If the fork crown and bb are in the same place, the only way to alter reach and stack is by altering the length of the head tube isn't it?

It seems I am missing the point. Would someone mind explaining it again please? BB to head tube is the long side of a right angled triangle yes? The reach is
  • + 0
 the top horizontal side, stack is the vertical side above the bb. The right angle is just in front of
  • + 1
 the seat. Sorry for the multiple posts my tab has some problems, or my thumbs have. I can't understand how those figures could be altered significantly without lengthening the head tube or moving the bb. Oh bollocks just ignore me.
  • + 1
 I hear you. I'm riding a nomad (xl) right now and my seat is up all the way to the line. Why not just make the seat tube a bit higher??
  • + 0
 So in my case I like large frames. But I always want the seat tube as low as possible. I've had a nomad and yeti sb66. And I have cut the frame down by 1 inch on both of them to get the right seat hight for going down hill. Hard to think that any one would want longer seat tubes on bikes. Why not just raise ur post up? I mean if a dropper post has 425 mill on that goes in the frame and it's a 150 mill dropper. That's 16 inches With 4 inches in the frame. U still have 12 inches of hight. Must be a cross country thing.
  • + 1
 @jaame If you assume all bikes are the same then of course you could use this BB to stem measure to size frames- but they are not the same!

"Two bikes with the same bb to head tube length could theoretically have very different reach and stack figures, but in practice they couldn't"

You are assuming way to much.

Stack and reach are affected by a combination of HTA angle, HT length, TT length (forward of the BB) BB drop, fork offset, fork AC height, headset stack the frame is designed for, etc, etc

Take a look at 3 random popular ~160mm travel frame. Maybe YT Capra, SC Nomad and Yeti SB6. Med YT has slighter shorter reach than the Yeti with about half and inch less stack, whereas the SC has half and inch less reach than the Yeti but the same stack. Even with 3 very similar frames you get subtle "fit" differences that will suit some people more than others. The "fit" differences also get skewed when you size up or down from this medium example and different manufacturers change the stack/ reach relationship differently across frame sizes (i.e. stack and reach do not usually have a linear relationship across the different frame sizes)

Stack and reach tell you everything about "fit" (BB to HT relationship). You need stack and reach because variation does exist even between apparently similar frames.

This isn't too hard to understand and you gain nothing by trying to make two simple measure in to one meaningless measure Wink
  • + 1
 I agree jaame, the distance between bb and head tube and the angle of that line are the only important measurments.

However, reach and stack are the easiest way to differentiate between them. Otherwise manufacturers would have to provide measurments for effective downtube length, and downtube angle. As Jaame says, that angle is never gonna change much if the fork length and head angle remain the same (as with most modern enduro bikes). However, very subtle changes to that angle make a massive difference to the ride of the bike. I think rather than changing the DT angle by 0.2 of a degree, it is easier to see what actual change has been made by looking at the reach and stack.

Basically its two different ways of looking at the same measurement, but one is just a lot more user friendly, if that makes sense.
  • + 1
 Yes, Mojoriders, pedaling is a cross-country thing..
  • + 2
 Maybe a better measurement would be reach-stack, the hypotenuse of the those two measurements. And then the a reach-stack angle, the angle between the ground and the reach-stack hypotenuse. Then its pretty simple to look at a bike's fit. You know the BB to headtube length you prefer. And then you know whether you prefer a steeper or slacker angle. For this to work someone would have to come up with better names for it first.
  • + 4
 Maybe the best measurement is for all of us to take a few semesters of multi-variable calculus and do a partial differential on the reach, stack height, heatube angle, front-center length, and seat tube length and optimize against your height. Or, you know, throw your leg over a bike at your LBS and see how it feels.
  • + 1
 @jaame You are correct. Nevermind the keyboardistas.
  • + 1
 @jaame @fatenduro
It is not ; ) What you say is at same head angle, atc lenght and bb to head tube top distance there is not much variability possible in stack/reach apart through change in head tube length.
bb drop together with atc+head tube length will determine the reach/stack ratio. At same bb to head tube top distance a higher bb will have more reach and less stack and the other way around. add to that even little differences in head tube angle with considerable effect and you get a lot of possibilities.
  • + 1
 "absolutely bolloxed, otherwise mint"
  • + 1
 I'm definitely late to the game, but never mind. Reach and stack are useless for fitting a bike that needs to be pedaled while sitting down.

Reacha nd stack are great, when you're concerned about the downhill fit, since they give you handlebar to BB relation. It can make the enduro bike feel more like a DH bike on the down sections, cockpit wise. But when it comes to pedalling, oh boy is it a useless metric!

'What the hell are you talking about' i hear you say. Simple. Seat position. You can have two bikes with the same reach and stack, but one has a 75° effective seat angle, while the other has a 70° effective seat angle (i will leave the actual seat tube angles out of this, since i'm with the author of the article, i have massively long legs, that necessitate me to fully extend my post, throwing me even MORE rearwards).

The difference between the two will be the position of the ass, the 70° bike will, for the upper body, be much much longer. And will therefore have a much longer cockpit and thus fit.

Top tubes are, with today's virtual and actual seat angles, just as useless as reach and stack. When it comes to cockpit fit, pedalling is important. THe most of the time and most of the energy spent on an enduro bike is STILL pedalling while sitting down. Therefore the fit of the cockpit needs to be right. So we need an equivalent of reach and stack, but for the handlebar to seat dimensions. But for that every individual rider will need to know how high the seat must go for him. So yeah, what a nice world we live in Smile
  • + 1
 Oh, what i'd really like to try is this geometry cross-bred with Commencal's Supreme V4. And maybe a gearbox. 3
  • + 1
 Primoz, you are half way there but getting a bit confused. The whole point of reach and stack is to fit the front of the bike correctly irrespective of seat tube angle- that is the whole point of why they are used. You can then look rear of the BB to the STA and ST length to decide if a given frame will be able to get your saddle in the correct position relative to the BB. STA and ST length give you all the info you need to judge if your saddle can be placed correctly relative to the BB and what seatpost you may need. Saddle to BB relationship shouldn't ever change when swapping frames for a given rider IMO. If a STA is too slack then you have to just discount the frame. It's daft wacking the saddle all the up and then choosing a short reach frame to compensate for the extra length- you'll be sat far too far over the back of the bike and feel cramped when you are out of the saddle. Lose lose. It is all about balance. You are quite right that most long travel frames put the saddle way too far back which is one of the things this Nicolai is trying to address but not quite right in your explanation disregarding reach and stack to come to this conclusion.
  • + 2
 'Fit' is for road bike riders.
:-P
  • + 1
 @BeardlessMarinRider you say "The whole point of reach and stack is to fit the front of the bike correctly irrespective of seat tube angle- that is the whole point of why they are used."

And i said "Reach and stack are great, when you're concerned about the downhill fit, since they give you handlebar to BB relation. It can make the enduro bike feel more like a DH bike on the down sections, cockpit wise. But when it comes to pedalling, oh boy is it a useless metric!"

Don't know about you, cool if you use your AM/enduro bike for park duties or push it up the hill. Personally, i tend to ride it on flats and uphills for an hour, two or even more on rare occasions and then descend with it for ~15 minutes, maybe half an hour.

To me, the AM/enduro bike is something that pedals well, but also descends well. But given the time and, more importantly, energy ratio between the two use modes, pedalling mode should be the one these bikes are optimised for. Maybe not for pros, maybe not for really good riders with lots of energy and stamina, but definitely for the average rider.

Also, with a 91 cm inseam, where i'm a couple of cm from min insertion mark on the XL Reign and on the limit with the L version, yeah, i'll just throw out all the bikes that have a slack actual seat tube angle and be left with... What exactly? GeoMetron and Nukeproof's Mega AM? Besides bikes having really slack seat tube angles they are also getting ridiculously low, GeoMetron being a nice example of this (490 mm seat tube length, which could easily be 3 or 4 cm longer in my opinion, at least for me), Also, a 640 mm top tube on the L Reign isn't exactly short, even though it has a ~62° actual seat tube angle - the XL Capra measures in at 625, but does indeed have a more sensible seat tube angle, which then shortens the cockpit at (my) extreme.

So yeah, not much point in reach and stack numbers on anything you intend to pedal for a prolonged time. If you don't intend to do that or just don't care (people have been doing crazy stuff with DH bikes after all), by all means, compare away! In the mean time I'll still be looking at the top tube figures.
  • + 1
 Reach and stack is all about seated pedaling too- it's the top priority in sizing road frames... but it assumes that the STA allows you to place the saddle correctly. It's not reach and stacks fault that AM bike have slack STA angles. Reach and stack aren't useless. The general modern AM/ Endurbro ST angles are useless Wink Smile
  • + 2
 Seat tube angle is not useless. ETT is useless.
  • + 2
 Why so geometry prejudiced? Every single measurement you can take has relevance. It is said that reach and stack pertain to descent and TT, ETT to seated pedalling but all are linked and all are useful when comparing bikes. I'll take as many measurements as possible, in a well formatted chart pls.
  • + 1
 "Seat tube angle is not useless."

The measurement itself isn't, I didn't mean that. I mean that slack STA's aren't generally helpful

Some measurements are misleading. ETT is one of these since you assume it tells you how roomy a frame will feel but need to break it down to stack/ reach and STA to see what proportion of the ETT length is going to be forwards or backwards of the BB.
  • + 1
 Sorry Beardless, my comment was aimed at Primoz really!
You're right, it can be misleading but if you cross reference it with the others, like you say, it all helps I think.
I also agree that STa are stupid on many modern AM/ Enduro bikes. The idea of these bikes (in my mind) is to get you to the top in the saddle, then to fly back down. Why wouldn't you put a steeper seat angle for the climb since it's just getting slammed out the way at the top anyway. Most of us aren't really using our saddle for support on descents as much as DH racers might so we don't need a slack seat angle like DH bikes, we just need steep ones to get us to the top efficiently.
  • + 1
 Just realised your comment probably wasn't aimed at me either...lol. Forget me, I'm going back to the rugby!
  • + 1
 @BeardlessMarinRider well, yeah, road bikes are far more equal when it comes to seat tube angles and they usually go directly down into the bottom bracket, if that was the case with the majority of mountain bikes, reach and stack would be awesome metrics.

As to what sucks at the moment, either the reach/stack metrics r the seat tube angles, it's a bit of the chicken or the egg issue in my opinion. I'd much prefer having a more uniform seat tube angle set across enduro bikes (so, a situation that's identical to hardtails, seat tube angles of ~75° with tubes going straight down to the BB), but the reality is different, thus we must work with what we've got. For better or for worse.

Also, ETT and seat angle measurements are in the useless ballpark as well, like you said, yeah, because of the virtual and effective seat tube angles. Some companies actually provide actual seat tube angles, the majority don't (Santa Cruz saying it would confuse people. It would, but many would in fact be grateful for the number, since they could do a better fit).

So, we agree, all current virtual measurements are useless and the industry shoudl start making proper bikes with sensible geometry numbers that are actually comparable one to another? Smile

***

As for the geometries being like they are, there's a concerning trend of offering four at most, in many, MANY cases only 3 sizes of a bike. That means that besides the BB to seat length the effective cockpit length (seat to bar) must also change quite a bit within one size. A slack actual SA helps this (it moves you upwards and backwards). You can then fine tune it with the stem and seat position.

Secondly, giving the riders enough room in the cockpit (600 to 650 mm top tubes and all) with a straight, 75+° seat tube would mean massive wheelbases. Look at the GeoMetron. A 75° SA, a 630 mm effective top tube, a 420 mm chainstay and a 65° head angle on a 160 mm 27.5" bike will give you something around 1270 mm of wheelbase. Which for the current state of the industry (and most likely for the average rider) is too long. So the bent/broken/etc. seat tube gives you the cockpit length while not giving you an extreme wheelbase.

The third thing is that fitting a suspension system under a 70° to 75° seat tube that's not bent is actually hard, at least at the shorter chainstay measurements and with four bar linkages (Nukeproof does that with a 445 mm chainstay on the Mega AM). The wheel itself might fit, but you can get into problems with the linkages themselves, pivot locations, etc. A bent seat tube with a more vertical bottom part gives you more space.
  • + 1
 @mountainbiker24: MEGATRAIL......
  • + 1
 @acali: thumbs up for this
  • + 2
 Just saw this. So, as for the better names, let me suggest... Downtube length and downtube angle? Razz
  • + 1
 I suggest reach, stack and length. You can calculate length from reach and stack. They should just tell you it.
  • + 47
 " I wish I looked liked a session"
  • + 35
 Ugliest bike ever. May have to run a virus scan to check it hasn't damaged my computer.
  • + 66
 The bike can be perceived as ugly but for all the right reasons. That in itself is a beautiful thing in a world full of hydro-swooping crap.
  • + 82
 Still better looking than an Ellsworth.
  • + 64
 genital warts look better than an Ellsworth
  • - 4
flag eviluprising777 (Sep 28, 2015 at 9:12) (Below Threshold)
 LOL! But yeah, I work hard and so if I spend that kind of money, looks are important to me too as well. Love everything about this bike, just spice it up.
  • + 14
 On a scale from Ellsworth to Redalp, how ugly it is?
  • + 2
 A lower top tube is all it would take to make this thing pretty.
  • + 29
 "On a scale from Ellsworth to Redalp, how ugly it is?"

It's about a Klein and a half
  • + 6
 If they would lose the fender and put the seat on properly it would look ok.
  • + 10
 That fender... KILL IT WITH FIRE!
  • + 4
 This thing isn't pretty, but apparently it rides well. Doubt I'll ever be in the market for a bike like this, but good on Nicolai for delivering a product that (from the writeup at least) seems to make a lot of sense, and isn't the typical neon and carbon #enduro #epic spectacle so prevalent in the industry.
  • + 1
 Yeah it might be fast but dam this long geometry looks ugly!
  • + 1
 Jess @faul, that is one ugly scale
  • + 1
 *jesus damn autocorrect
  • + 40
 Is it possible to manual it?
  • + 26
 Its all about the rider, proof of this is on many youtube vids of south american children manualing cruiser bikes. Wink
  • - 9
flag RedBurn (Sep 28, 2015 at 4:47) (Below Threshold)
 I can't imagine a jump on such a long bike. Senders must be so progressive !
  • + 8
 I'd say with chainstays that long it's not going to be the easiest bike to manual. Chainstays longer than 420 mm rip my shoulders out of joint and ruin my riding season. No way I could charge a trail on this frame. If you like long chainstays, fill your boots, I bet the frame will let you hit warp speed.
  • + 7
 The chainstays aren't that long. Most chainstays on most bikes were that long or longer until the Big S decided that shorter was better.
  • + 1
 It'll be hard to get into a manual on the flat, but once you're there, it'll be really stable. It's going to depend on the terrain. On mtb trails, it might be hard to do, but on a BMX track, it'll manual easily if the dips are deep enough.
  • + 13
 With all due respect, if you can manual, then you'll manual a rental city bike in Amsterdam nearly as well as a BMX. You can or you can't. Sure it is easier to LEARN on shorter stays but once you are good at it, you can do it on anything.
  • + 1
 yeah, its just about balance ...
  • + 2
 truth, waki.
  • + 5
 Getting into a manual properly is mostly in the hips and displacing center of gravity, not yanking the bars to go up.

A long chainstay makes movements longer but also slower and less loopy.

I probably manuals just fine.

Hop 3:s though, with that wheelbase? No way..
  • + 9
 Chainstay length is one thing... if you can get your weight over the back in the first place! I Find these newer longer slacker bikes with big wheels are getting harder and harder to manual and maneuver around, replacing style and finesse with 'monster trucking plow over everything like a hack' style, I guess either way works but I know which I prefer!
  • + 1
 It's possible!
  • + 1
 I am learning to manual, training few hours a week. All I can say is that I tried it on all 3 of my bikes and those best ones I pulled so far, (record like 20m, 5-6 back/forward cycles) were done with nearly effortless lift and done with weight shift and working my bum. No yanking involved at all.
  • + 17
 don't knock it until you try it! I got a frame and fork and built the rest up myself and have had 2 weeks of riding on this beast and it's every bit as good as CP says it is! I thought the front would wonder on the climbs but the who bike as a combination of the far out geo just works! The climbing position is very comfortable and when going down its so stable and the Tunned fork and shock are a dream! It's nice to get such a smooth initial stroke to the fork and shock but have confidence that there is enough progression to never bottom out harshly! One happy customer
  • + 17
 He also built the fork using a crown/steerer assembly from a 26" travel Fox 36 fork, which has a shorter offset than the 27.5" version, meaning the steering feel will quicken slightly to offset the lag given by the slacker head angle.

This statement is wrong!
A slacker angle, as well as a shorter offset both 'increase trail which slows steering.
  • + 5
 I found this strange too... It would have made sense to have the crown of a 29" fork in order to increase offset, thus decrease both trail and wheel flop.
  • + 0
 It's true if you ride in a straight line, but if you are railing corners it's a whole other story.
  • + 4
 Can you explain more @michodb ?
  • + 5
 If one is riding in a straight line, there's not much steering going on, is there?
  • + 17
 where do I get a 26" travel fork?
  • + 1
 Yeah hes wrong
  • + 2
 Maybe he just misworded the hell out of it? All adding more trail is going to do is make it even more stable in a straight line kinda.

to the best of my knowledge a new 27.5 Boxxer has a 48mm offset. He's running 42 on this.

He's either a genius or nuts. Or both. It makes no sense to me on paper.
  • - 1
 This bike have a headangle slacker than 63. 63 being on many bike the magical barrier where slacker angles give quicker steering (instead of "turning", the wheel "fall sideway"). So "trail" values doesn't work the same.
  • + 3
 Shouldn't single crown forks have stronger CSU's when being ran at such extreme angles ? Can't imagine the forks are designed to be ran at an angle which is effectively the angle it's at when bottomed out ?
  • + 0
 Ah, but with less offset there is less vertical motion when the wheel pivots, meaning the wheel can be turned with less upward motion at the bars, which is slightly easier to turn off center.

But at high speed, yes this makes for a very heavy steering bike because of increased trail.

This bike is still stupid long. At 5'7" I would need a negative 30 stem to approach a comfortable fit. Also i would be unable to fit a dropper with more than 100mm drop for the most part. 6' would be the minimum height to ride this thing, which eliminates about 80% of potential customers.
  • - 1
 With sizes like long, longer and longest, what makes you think this bike is for isn't for lanky UK or Euro riders looking for downhill geo with custom tuned suspension on a bike that goes uphill too? @ 5'7" it's not for you. Why not shorten the front center on a trail bike with a 62 head-angle and 52" wheelbase, sounds good to me.
  • + 3
 Yeah I would love to read a re-wording of that fork offset thing. Currently it goes against pretty much everything I understood to be true about fork geometry.
  • + 1
 I will give you some food for thought.

Higher offset increases vertical upwards montion of the bars off center which reduces flop in tight switch backs. However, bikes oversteer quite a bit, especially with big tires up front, and thus when countersteering on rough terrain the extra motion is justed wasted in the sawing correction, forcing the rider to do more work.

The "push" on exit described in that article, which is absolutely exceptional by the way thanks, is a common occurence on vehicles with lots of rearward, highly polar mass and is correctable by accelerating out of the turn earlier, which conviently is exactly what one attempts to do anyway.
  • + 20
 what is that seat doing!?!?
  • + 17
 Guessing that perching like a triathlete is the only way to reach the bars? :O
  • + 10
 Tilted back looks cool but doesn't work very well. Tilted forwards gives great support on the climbs but looks shit. On the way down the angle doesn't matter because you're not going to be sitting on it.
  • + 6
 The saddle is angled down because CP has a bad hip and this relieves some of the pain.
  • + 2
 I would assume if you're only going straight up or straight down that this saddle position would be fine... but what does that angle feel like on flat sections of trail? Probably better than having the saddle angled up, but it doesn't look particularly comfortable.
  • + 13
 I relly don't mind how it looks. Even better, immagine you are on the sleekest looking carbon rig and then ride like a weekend warrior - shame. But immagine you are on something that looks like 10 years old and kill it - cool. Plus it only looks 10 years old, in truth it has the most tricked out stuff going on - understatement. I like.
  • + 10
 In the immortal words of Rob Warner "Uglier than a box of mashed up arseholes" Sorry not a fan.
  • - 6
flag DoctorWatson (Sep 28, 2015 at 0:38) (Below Threshold)
 yep me too. in germany is a lil fanclub of the Nicolai Bikes....can´t understand why :/
  • + 3
 Is that a production model? Looks like one of Brunel's ...
  • + 3
 At least it's bombproof and quite a rocket.
  • + 50
 If you care more about how pretty it looks like than how it rides then you are probably not the target audience.
  • + 3
 The fender is not doing the bike any favors, looks wise.
  • - 2
 Looks like a recicled frame. Looks like they cut an old frame ang weld it with another frame so... Ugly as hell....
  • + 0
 Point taken, but couldn't they produce it with a more finished look? They might find them easier to sell, which I'm sure is their objective
  • - 2
 @Karatechris, I've seen pics of your bike so I know where you're coming from , but Good looks sell, plain and simple. It could be the best bike in the world but if people don't like how it looks that's their call. There are undoubtedly bikes that handle better than this but also look better. True there are beautiful bikes that handle like shit , but the fact is they sold on looks and once you've spent your hard earned cash the company couldn't give a shit. So what do you do, you put a nice glossy pic on PB for people to drool over and get rid of if and move on. So your "Target Audience" comment is a bit wide of the mark.
This bike could well be a Nightclub scenario, you spend all night drooling over the hot girls but get nowhere, so you go home with the plain Jane that gives you the best night of your life.
  • + 8
 Target Audience = People who are sold on the radical geometry & ride characteristics who are less concerned about aesthetics.

Not Target Audience = People who disregard non-pretty bikes, even if they offer something no other bikes company does.

Yes, there are lots of bikes out there that look pretty AND work well but that's not what these guys are focused on right now. If it takes off, and I hope it does, then subsequent models may get aesthetic face lifts but for now they are putting all their money into developing the best handling bike possible.
  • - 2
 Target audience = People who need to make a flow trail as easy to ride as possible.
  • + 0
 If no one Enduro racer use 62 head angle why should I? Because this bike has a revolutionary geometry??? This bike geometry is like plus tires looks good but no one racer use it.
The bike is ugly not because of the paint is not flashy neon, its ugly like a Frankstein its an abomination... Thats anyones taste... But this bike is so ugly
  • + 7
 I'm so happy to see this getting the attention (positive AND negative) that it deserves. I'm 6'3" and have never been on a bike that fits me properly, I can't imagine what it's like being taller (or heavier). All these long front center, short chainstay designs on the market today (I ride a Devinci Spartan) put me WAY over the rear wheel when the seat is at climbing height and force me into 40% sag territory seated (vs a wickedly performing 30% when standing in attack position). This makes the bike wallow and feel less than energetic. Still climbs like a tractor but I'd love it if I didn't feel like I slipped into the back seat of a tandem every time I pop my dropper up and settle into the saddle. If I could change anything about my bike (Spartan) I would lengthen the chainstays a bit and steepen the seat angle considerably.

Secondly, I am super psyched that ONE person/shop/brand is finally getting serious about modern geometry as opposed to tip-toe'ing into it like every major framebuilder. I think the big brands are taking the (rumoured) Usain Bolt approach to geometry improvements:
The rumour is that one of Usain Bolt's sponsors wrote a sizeable cash bonus for breaking world records into his contract. This is why he continually broke his own record by just a little bit every time (several times in a row at world-level track meets).

The big brands probably have a very good idea of where things are going geometry wise (probably a lot like this bike, like it or not) but are afraid of alienating current customers if they jump straight to the "current state of the art". Furthermore it then puts the pressure back on them to innovate and find the next big improvement.
Instead, they release slow iterations towards the "current state of the art" so as to profit at several points (years) before achieving the final design. THEN and only then do they have to work on the "next big thing" (though surely they are in the background constantly).

And for what it's worth, in my opinion this type of innovation (frame geometry and suspension rate curve tweaking) is in a completely different league to wheel size, hub spacing, BB design, etc. - the component changes do effect ride quality but in my opinion, nowhere near the "paradigm shift" that occurs between geometry "generations". Just go hop on a top-of-the-line xc, freeride, or dh bike from 2008 or so and then back on one of todays comparable steeds - lighter and bigger wheels help but really, it's all in the geo in my opinion.
  • + 6
 I have got feedback from five riders who have either bought the Mojo Nicolai or would/will buy it after having tested it and they all say the same thing....AMAZING BIKE! Does everything well, DH, uphill, twisty singletrack. Engineering quality is exceptional on this bike, you need to see it in the flesh to fully appreciate it.
  • + 6
 Well if you want a pretty looking bike go out and buy a carbon shit frame you have a lot of choice out there. If you want a proper hardcore, handbuilt rugged bike that will last the test of time and obviously rides amazing the buy this. Simples!
  • + 5
 Funny you mention the Rune. Looking at the 2016 something jumped out at me. The low setting could be augmented with an angleset to make a really radical bike. Currently 64.5ha, 74.5 sta, 13.3 Bb height, wheelbase not to short not too long. Slacken it out 1.5 degrees up front and you'd be at 63 HA( DH bike territory) and a STA likely steeper than my troy( 72.4, and climbs well). Not sure what it would do to the bb height. If I had more disposable income, I'd love to do that experiment. Certainly would be more attractive than that Nicolai.
  • + 5
 I have read a lot from Chris Porter and have utmost respect for that guy. One of very few who make sense and can talk details of setups and technology. But when he goes so extreme with numbers, then I am starting to wonder why won't he just remake a proper DH bike to make it climbable? Shock and fork with lockout, Travel adjustment lowering the fork (it is doable on DC fork with no consequences to spring rates, due to prolongued chassis) Given his expertise insuspension and the fact that with carbon and latest tyre sidewall technology development/procore you can easily build a 30lbs bike with rotating mass of enduro bike. I don't know...
  • + 1
 and 30t narrow wide chain ring of course
  • - 1
 36t to 45t back and you roll up
  • + 6
 There's not a downhill bike on the market, nor has there ever been one, with that sort of reach length or seat tube angle. He's looking to do some things that could not be done without building a new bike.
  • + 1
 I am sure Kirk Pacenti could sort you out with a seat post bent forward, with a dent RIGHT in the middle, that could put your seat in favorable position. Chris said it on several occasions that he is after a bike with DH bike's handling characteristics that can climb. Anyways, you may like it or not, but Enduro conversion kit for DH bikes from some little German company is coming soon.
  • + 4
 "Enduro conversion kit for DH bikes from some little German company is coming soon." No argument here.
  • + 1
 It will come free with Canadian roost device, in your fac... Transistor!
  • + 5
 Has anybody tried riding a DH bike on a normal trail? Can you say snooze fest. Take a trail that is a lot of fun and makes it about as technical as a gravel path. A trail has to be fairly steep in order for a DH bike to really sing, trails with sufficient grade are actually pretty rare.
  • + 1
 In the offseason (no lifts) I turn my DH bike into an Enduro bike (telescopic seatpost, bigger cassette). You can ride it anywhere though tight slow trails are hard work because of the slack geo.
  • + 1
 ^ Ditto. Slap a 160mm single crown fork, big cassette and light(ish) wheels on your 200mm rig and you are laughing.
  • + 1
 @fartymarty Well not a 160mm single crown but perhaps a 180mm and yeah then we are talking!
  • + 5
 it's great to see PB getting more reviews of bikes from home grown companies - that other Finnish bike comes to mind with the rear pivot hanging off the bottom bracket...forget the name
  • + 2
 Pole
  • + 4
 I had a LG Megatrail for almost 5 months. I rode it everyday on 10-15 mile loops. The bike is almost as long as this and much of what he said became apparent while riding it. The nose stays down on climbs, it is super stable at high speeds, it is planted in turns and the steeps dont seem all that steep anymore.

The people worried about the long WB really need to ride a long bike. It never became apparent while riding the Megatrail. I am sure if you are riding super tight switchbacks it may happen but nobody really likes riding those now do they?
  • + 7
 Looks awesome, but is it better than the proud Geo Metro? Aka the best car ever made
  • + 7
 Bike companies take note, this is the future
  • + 6
 I hope not. This new geometry does not mesh with my body type or riding preferences.
  • + 8
 The level of service, not just the hardware......
  • + 2
 Don't worry, you'll always have a supply of outdated bikes, just choose your company carefully
  • + 3
 Not the prettiest bike admittedly.... but it seems to rock ! I think Mojo would improve any personal set-up on any bike and make it ride better, but will be interesting to see if this gets taken up.... and there is the small issue of price !!! seems you have to pay loads for this inventiveness......
  • + 19
 Theres enough $10,000 bikes in the world, and none of them offer a fraction of this much personalisation. Doesnt seem to be stiffling the sales of every carbon enduro bike with enve wheels. Just depends how vain the buyer is, nice shiney smooth carbon bike or giant aluminium rocket. Depends where your priorites lie
  • + 4
 Very good point. See enough c£7K Santa Cruz Nomads, Yeti SB6C etc out on the trail. I can;t afford either but if I could this would be where I went.
  • + 4
 The future is dh bikes and enduro bikes will be mixed. Enduro bikes will have steep sta, slack ha and 7-8in travel that can climb. Canfield already did this in 2011 with their one
  • + 6
 Freeride is the future. Cool.
  • + 7
 No figure on the saddle angle?! Wink
  • + 6
 Not the seat post Smile I was refering to the crazy nose down saddle Wink
  • + 4
 The saddle is angled down because CP has a bad hip and this relieves some of the pain.
  • + 3
 I use the same kind of saddle angle, easier on the crown jewels for long seated climbs, especially when your bike is better at downhill and with big rear sag Wink
  • + 2
 Can someone explain me the seat angle thing? Different angles on different bikes, but one would position their seat to suit his size right? I mean put it in place where you knees point straight down to your toes. It means that you have your custom seat angle on any bike, right?
  • + 1
 Yeah, that's exactly what I've been trying to figure out. If all you do is climb and descend, a super far forward seat makes sense. Does nobody ride flats anymore?
  • + 3
 No you don't have a custom seat ANGLE on any bike. You have custom seat POSITION. When you climb you ride on an extended seat and unless you have a 90deg seat angle the higher your seet the more far backward it is. The whole idea of a steep seat angle is to move your seated body more far forward so your center of mass isn't over the back wheel. That helps mitigate the front end lift that happens when going uphill. So yes different angle for different size makes sense as a longer seattube and a longer seatpost move your seating center of mass more over the back wheel when pedalling up the hill. With different angle for different sizes the weight distribution while seated can be the same for different sizes. It's a great idea.
  • - 1
 Moving the seat does change the effective seat angle and seated reach. By average extended seat height, an inch of seat position equals a full degree of seat angle, so if your bike has 72degree seat angle with some seat position, and you shift it forward by an inch, your effective seat angle goes to 73 deg.

XC racers have 72ish seat angles but they ride semi slicks and need to provide weight for rear tyre for grip. They also need better power transmission through the whole race. Slack seat angle is good for riding technical climbs where you stand a lot anyways, but you often want to lift your front wheel to get it over obstacles, like rock steps. For max 1,5-hourish fire road climbing (which most Enduroers do) steep seat angle is indeed a good idea. On Enduro bike, steep seat angle allows you maintain control over wandering front end but I also heard that although it is slightly less efficient, it taxes "DH muscles" less making them fresher for descent. Gotta ask James Wilson about it Big Grin
  • + 4
 But can it turn ?
Non-rotating cockpit will the next big thing in MTB - much lighter, much stiffer, much cheaper and no bearings!
  • + 2
 "Enduro" blew away everybodies mind. What if your going 30mls on more or less flat singletrails with some nice climbs and some gnarly, fast descents. Can you roll fast on the flat sections, climb with ease AND have a confident inspiring descender? If you can spend so much cash better stick with a slacked out 29er, like my TransSmuggler or an EvilFollowing if you can spend the extra bucks. And get yourself a real descender...
  • + 2
 I think a slack ish 29er with a wheelbase that's a tiny bit shorter and short chainstays and an über low bb would offer all the benefits of this but be more efficient on long rides. Just my opinion
  • + 4
 top bike at top money but this long way of thinking really does work I'm a big fan don't dis it till u have tried it….
  • + 1
 CP's approach makes perfect sense to me. I went from a large frame to an XL with fairly massive reach at 477mm and far steeper seat angle. weight distribution front to back is far easier as PA says of the Nicolai leading to a different riding style and higher cornering speed.
  • + 3
 Props to them for trying something different. Even if it isn't for everybody, it gives everybody a chance to learn from the feedback of those who ride them.
  • + 1
 Took this for a quick spin earlier. To start it's way prettier in the flesh. Climbs great due to the awesome shock. The head angle isn't a problem. Going down is awesome. Really turns quick and glued to the ground and it wasn't even properly set up for me. My next bike funds permitting Smile
  • + 2
 Looks like somebody had a terrible bike fit on a bike that's way to big. Saddle pointed way down and slid forward on the rails that far is rediculous.
  • + 3
 I love these over engineered two wheeled panzers. I hope to own one one day.
  • + 3
 My mate has a curvy, swoopy bike. We call it Princess. He isn't happy. This isn't swoopy. It's nice.
  • + 3
 I stopped reading when I saw that the seat was set up like those bikes at Walmart.
  • + 1
 YA PICSUX;DR
  • + 3
 This guy needs to review my 2012 Canfield One Maybe not - I want to keep it .
  • + 3
 " it's all in the details " Yeah , that must be why it's using cable ties...
  • + 3
 it's a mountain bike and zip-ties work fine and can be found anywhere. I'd say its a better detail that those fancy nasa holes like on the carbon trek that will just fill with dirt or infernal cable routing.
  • + 0
 Too much conversation about the frame geometry, stack, reach, fit........blah.

Question, is it good to ride? Does it perform? Will it snap like a twig when I hit some big descents, rocky trails or heavy landings? Coz it looks like it would with the skinny tubing. Is it butt ugly and would my mates take the piss out of me for riding what looks like a budget catalogue bike?

These are the important questions we need answering.
  • + 1
 Wonder how much difference applying the modified suspension to any normal production bike would have or is it the combination of the suspension mods and the alternative geometry that makes it so good.
  • + 4
 You could put amazing suspension on any bike, but it's not going to make anywhere near as much difference to your body position, weight distribution and overall bike stability as the changes to the geometry will.
  • + 4
 Limo
  • + 4
 Gate!!
  • + 2
 I love to see someone doing something different. I would love a ride on one of these but it is a bit rich for my pockets.
  • + 1
 Respect the science but man, that side view looks like you just bent the fork or HT on that big huck to flat. Looks like a broken bike.
  • + 3
 What "science"? There is no data presented by anyone, to include the author of this article, nor Chris Porter himself, to suggest that this bike is faster in any conditions. It's ironic that the main page sub-heading is: "Throw out the rulebook and let the stopwatch determine your perfect frame geometry and suspension setup", and yet nothing of that sort is presented, anywhere in the article.
  • - 1
 I already figure this out, this bike is too slack, and with that 160mm to say 180mm fork and all the abuse, I doubt it will last a long time for a fork without it bending, I'm an engineer, this slack angle contributes to much bending stress on the fork when riding, jumping and all the abuse, putting too much energy must be release on a structure and I doubt the whole system cant handle that. It would be better if they have a computer simulation and prove their claims.
  • + 1
 Tell that to all the DH bike manufacturers...they will laugh at you. BTW I am an engineer too - a keyboard engineer.
  • + 2
 waiting till Gwin wins on it and it will be the best bike ever! i like it....
  • + 3
 Looks pretty good in my opinion.
  • + 2
 No mention in the write-up of any negative side effects of such a long wheelbase... surely there are some??
  • + 3
 You cannot ride it like Brendog
  • + 5
 Less agile, less playful, less stiff, and heavier than traditional geometry.
  • + 1
 Oh, and many more pedal strikes in technical terrain. Basically, if you are going slow for any reason, this geometry will have drawbacks.
  • + 2
 But any problems at low speed on less gnarlier terrain are arguably less problematic than the trouble you can get into at higher speeds on gmarlier terrain. Ie where this geometry shines
  • + 1
 Not everybody rides on high-speed downhills. Most of mine are relatively slow and technical. A long wheelbase is not ideal.
  • + 2
 Don't buy one then
  • + 3
 I won't. I can voice my opinion just like anybody else. This bike has drawbacks that are worth discussing, whether you're on its sack or not.
  • - 1
 I feel bad 4 u, sounds like yr trails suck. The only drawback I can see is the bike doesn't have my sack on it.
  • + 0
 Well, a lot of people like the trails I ride, so maybe it's just you.
  • + 1
 I've no problem with the look of the bike. If it works as the article says it does, I'm all for it - if I had the cash that is.
  • + 1
 I have ridden one. Until you do, you have no idea what you are talking about. It is completely different to anything currently out there!!
  • + 2
 if a huge huck to flat won't bottom out the suspension, what will? Why not just go with less travel?
  • + 2
 Probably a big high speed hole or g-out would bottom it out. Sounds like he's runnin firm suspension for instances just like that one.
  • + 2
 Looks like something I drew during math class in 7th grade...
  • + 1
 With so much progression and so much sag did this thing suck at square edge hits?
  • + 1
 This video shows its good for descending, jumping and cornering, nothing for uphill.

vimeo.com/127136080
  • + 1
 Found this review of one of them on GMB. Gives a closer up view of the one of them.

youtu.be/ZJH4ayFZNK4
  • + 3
 I have a Geo Prismtron.
  • + 1
 i rode this today and i can safely say it'd the best bike i have ever riden. better than my specialised demo!
  • + 1
 Those size are hilarious! Would be concerned about bus bike-racks with that sort of wheelbase. Good job otherwise Nicolai!
  • + 2
 ur hilarious, 10k bike on a bus lolz. It's more of a MOJO/Chris Porter creation than Nicolai but good on Nicolai for taking this geometry Ion and sticking gearbox on it.
  • + 1
 I ll try it in a blink! But I am a hobbit, so I bet it ll take some time to get used to it...
  • + 1
 Did they ask the designer of starwars space-shuttles to draw this front mudguard?
  • + 3
 Drugs are bad....Mkay?
  • + 2
 Looks like a chopper motorcycle.
  • + 1
 Cough cough nudge....... Left the cap of the rear shock Mr mojo suspension guru
  • + 1
 The only bike I've ever seen with a longer wheelbase than my XL Suppressor. What a monster.
  • + 3
 look at the saddle
  • + 0
 The saddle is angled down because CP has a bad hip and this relieves some of the pain.
  • + 7
 @recipher I bet you're getting bored of telling people that
  • + 1
 Funny - most of the new super long reach geo bikes you see the saddle slammed past the max, as far forward as it will go....
  • + 1
 I saw this at BPW yesterday, I didn't really pay it much attention, just thought it was a Nicolai
  • - 1
 If it does its job then its ok. Not really a fan on the looks. Would have look better with a thicker top tube and Down tube (not too thick, but thick enough to make it not look anorexic.)

just my 2 cents
  • + 2
 look at the angle of the seat 0_o WTF is this?
  • + 1
 The saddle is angled down because CP has a bad hip and this relieves some of the pain.
  • + 1
 I use the same kind of saddle angle, easier on the crown jewels for long seated climbs, especially when your bike is better at downhill and with big rear sag Wink
  • + 1
 @recipher thanks for info.

@brutalpedz How much sag? 55%? Smile A agree with seated climbs but it's still extreme for me Smile
  • + 1
 30% sag is already big for me. My DH rig is in the 15 / 20 % range.
30% plus the fact that when you climb the fork doesn't sag very much, this ends with a good angle on the saddle.
Tech talk appart, I don't use such extreme saddle angle, just a bit to avoid mashed potatoes at the end of the ride Big Grin
  • + 2
 Looks like it should have a seat angle of 80°-82° no?
  • + 2
 nothing about the weight? that's never good....
  • + 3
 Nicolai's never have and probably never will be considered light bikes...they're built to last...
  • + 1
 I've had a go around mojos car park and I'd say it's about 31 pounds. Stunning bike up close. If I wasn't out if work I'd sell my Capra and get one.
  • + 1
 I'm sure they are a great bike but if you compare an ION 16 to a Liteville 301, the weight difference is significant, both bikes being almost bombproof (Liteville has a 10 year guarantee)
  • + 3
 *like
  • + 1
 Looks like the seat tube and head tube are from 2 different bikes that are welded together. Just 'cause.
  • + 2
 I want to try one
  • + 1
 i wouldnt say no to 1, especially as im 6`6 ;-]
  • + 1
 and with a sprinkling of BOS
  • + 1
 It almost makes Ellsworth bikes look good
  • + 1
 honestly.. it looks like an old canyon torque ;_;
  • + 1
 I like hanging of the back...
  • + 1
 Wow, sick Man-Bun bro. Wish I could be that cool.
  • + 0
 ugly. throw it in the reject dumpster and recycle it for garden fencing or rebar. no redeeming features
  • + 1
 That is THE TOE ROOM! Great! I like it, want to try.
  • + 1
 Looks like a Sinister Shenanigan.
  • + 1
 Slack angle long chainstays i am driving a bus
  • - 3
 "Throw out the rulebook and let the stopwatch determine your perfect frame geometry and suspension setup."

And yet, no indications that this is faster on any sort of terrain. I'm guessing the stopwatch wouldn't be your friend if, God help you, you were to ride uphill on this bike.
  • - 1
 They said it's faster because they tested it and other bikes against the clock and it won. I don't think they were timing the uphills and I don't think they cared either.
  • + 1
 THE NAME IS RAD. GEOMETRON.
  • + 0
 Geo Metro
  • + 0
 I'm sure it rips like a goodun' but by Christ is it ugly. If it were a toddler, its parents would feed it with a catapult!
  • + 1
 i think the rider is wearing hiking boots.
  • + 1
 If I had the money this would be my next bike!
  • + 1
 Most 'extreme angle' in this bike is seat angle. Steeper than headtube.
  • + 1
 *slacker
  • + 1
 Check out the new Pole bikes. WWW.Pole.fi
  • + 1
 That's "The End". It doesn't get any longer, any lower and any slacker.
  • + 0
 fine if you live in Wales with loads of steep tracks on your doorstep...but then just get a DH bike and uplift.
  • + 2
 Organising an uplift every time you want to ride isn't fun or efficient.
  • + 1
 Get better mates.
  • + 1
 Ha ha, none of my current ones ride so that's a good idea
  • + 2
 Sure this is a bike?
  • + 0
 Can you keep going back to Mojo till it doesn't look ugly as f*#k? Nicolai makes fugly bikes!
  • + 2
 looks weird
  • + 0
 paul astons looking fast!
  • + 1
 Too bad it's ugly
  • + 1
 ewwwwwwww
  • + 1
 Manbun alert!
  • - 1
 This bike just looks all sorts of wrong
  • - 1
 wtf!
  • - 1
 Junk
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2017. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.143569
Mobile Version of Website