If you're thinking about the fort william shot towards the end, yes, it's bent. Otherwise, yeah, there's a ton of flex, the forces are high and the parts, at the end of the day, quite thin. But you need flex, otherwise the bike would just kill you through the harshness (think hardtails).
I can't say I'm a fan of intentionally using a bumper against the carbon frame (or any material frame for that matter) as a means of end stroke tuning.....that just screams bad idea to me. Everything else seems pretty dang nice though.
The bumper isn't for end stroke tuning. He's saying in a nice way that It's for shocks that bottom harshly or if a shock fails. The bumper will save the frame from catastrophic damage in the case that a shock shaft breaks - such as the double barrels on the demos (also a clevis driven shock).
I was assuming, or at least hoping, his "end stroke tuning" line was actually a very dry joke, so my post was intended to be just as dry.
That said, a frame should never bottom out on itself unless the shock actually blows itself to pieces as you noted. A shock at full bottom out (no matter what shock) should NEVER cause members of the frame to bottom out on each other for obvious reasons.
Also, I find it kind of funny you point out clevis driven shocks as a failure example. While I personally haven't seen these failures, it really doesn't surprise me that there are issues with them. Fastening an extension to the shock inherently increases side loading and the shocks tendency to buckle (note: the driving factor in the Euler column formula, for example, is length).
Spacers on an air fork. And i'm no shock pro... but doesn't that just mean you're shock has too much travel and isn't properly set up for the bike? thats why they come in different lengths yes?
@TFreeman It's air chamber spacers, they don't reduce travel, they reduce the volume in the air chamber, which therefore modifies the suspension curve and bottom out resistance on the fork. The new Pike is a prime example of the use of these, with their "Bottomless Tokens". Same thing can be applied to air shock like the Vivid Air or the Fox Float X.
@klopp as p2rida said, it's not for tuning but more in case of very harsh bottoming or catastrophic failure of the rear shock. The Fox RC4 on the Phoenix is specifically tuned for the bike, if you we're to swap it out for another shock of your liking, the bumper is there in case that shock is not tuned properly for the bike, therefore reducing the risk of damaging anything.
true. it was late at night... and i wasn't thinking. i have a pike... and i even used spacers for a short while. but i'm still wondering, wouldn't that just be an ill fitted shock?
No on the contrary, the spacers are there to furthermore allow adjustability of the rear shock. By decreasing the volume in the air canister, the shock will ramp up more quickly at the end of its travel, resisting harsh bottom-outs while still providing small-bump compliance in the top of its travel.
They could have designed the frame around 26" wheels but later switched to 27.5" after the mold was finished...hence the "high tail saddle" and the "rear bumper stop" on the upper linkage. Makes you wonder...
There are always 'trade off's' internal cables is one of them... nice and tidy but a pia to switch out. Big wheels is another, they roll over fast, but you get considerable flex and a lot of time in the truing stand... take a look at buds rear 3:45
unless the hydraulic line is what's broken, you can disconnect the lever and caliper from the hydraulic line and leave it in place. I've done this before on my bikes and it works perfectly.
I can see only one advantage of the cable routing: -the looks. I believe that it can have a positive aero effect on road racing bikes, but I don't understand it on DH bikes. The maintenance of it is a clear disadvantage. On this bike you could have neat and clean routing on the top of the botom tube and the maintenance would be so simple.
Also, try putting a number plate on that cable routing that comes out midway up the headtube. Better yet, look at the clips in the video. Bernard and Eliot both have mush their cables up above the plate, putting a huge crease in the shifter housing. You know, cause that's good for performance.
I feel like I wouldn't have to mess with my avids after I put them on but having to seperate housing from lever or caliper is a pain. I like clean and fast swaps.
Hm... How is the carbon layup engineered? By the manufacturers? As far as i can see, the models are just solids in Solidworks(?), so they don't have any fabric data in them?
I'd assume they use solid works more for the dimension-ing and then when they have the shapes down they contact their material engineers and get told "No.... you can't do that, the hell are you thinking?" and we mechanical engineers get pissed that they can make the holy grail material we're looking for.
Well Solidworks does handle layered materials where you make a thick part, say 'it has x layeres' where you input the thickness and orientation (and properties) for each layer.
7400 for a top of the line build and bike almost as light as full carbon xc frames, and 3 year frame warranty. Price seems pretty reasonable to me. For an extra couple pounds however I would probably go for the new Commencal V3, build kits not quite as nice but 3700 bucks you cant complain.
My question is : Why the pivot team use X-Fusion suspension (front & rear) as their suspension sponsor while he said they "they might not be has the same progressiveness as the fox shocks".
Chris needs a Redbull... and maybe someone to be honest with him regarding his presentation skills.
He created the bike, whatever, that's fine... but presentation is EVERYTHING.
Wow nice bike for sure, but sub 31 lb. downhill bike. Personally ..... No, I'm 155 ish. , I like some weight for downhill, maybe if you're a pro, sure .
It really is at 420 though! Just a happy coincidence...
props for lugging around a 31lb + XC bike, but go to your LBS man... they've got full sus XC bikes down to around 20 lbs at this point.
That said, a frame should never bottom out on itself unless the shock actually blows itself to pieces as you noted. A shock at full bottom out (no matter what shock) should NEVER cause members of the frame to bottom out on each other for obvious reasons.
Also, I find it kind of funny you point out clevis driven shocks as a failure example. While I personally haven't seen these failures, it really doesn't surprise me that there are issues with them. Fastening an extension to the shock inherently increases side loading and the shocks tendency to buckle (note: the driving factor in the Euler column formula, for example, is length).
@klopp as p2rida said, it's not for tuning but more in case of very harsh bottoming or catastrophic failure of the rear shock. The Fox RC4 on the Phoenix is specifically tuned for the bike, if you we're to swap it out for another shock of your liking, the bumper is there in case that shock is not tuned properly for the bike, therefore reducing the risk of damaging anything.
The point is.
This bike is like Emma Watson of the DH bike.
Still, why did he say that?
It's better not to say that in term to sell your new product.
(some) people would think the way the beast from this bike to come out is use fox shocks.
CMIIW.