Coming into 2023 our goal is simple – we want to make the fastest pure downhill race bike that we can. Go behind the scenes and check out our latest downhill prototype, the Intense M279 HP6.— Intense Cycles
A 3D printed proof of concept.
The first complete prototype frame prior to fabrication.
@Fabris: Nope, try buying the DH bike you see the team actually riding; probably ain't gonna happen ever. Albiet it is as you mentioned regarding the show of their bike.
@krumpdancer101: You miss the point of which bike is being refered to here. The M16 can be purchased , it's a production model that is currently on their website for sale. Not the case with the last proto or any prior to it if there were any. The Factory team has not been racing on the M16 lately from what if seen.
Don’t forget, it is international law that if something is in the pits at a World Cup (err World Series) race for any period of time the manufacturer is REQUIRED BY LAW to offer it for sale in Dicks Sporting Goods within 6 months. Those are the rules.
@brass-munky: Everyone (or almost)races prototypes, but I would agree that it seems like the Intense WC team has been solely on prototypes for what seems like forever, while most other teams seem to throw them in for one rider, or during practice, or seemingly for a shorter span of time while their production bikes do the heavy lifting. Just a perception I can see people getting based on the news releases and articles around Intense WC team bikes.
@brass-munky: I don't think neither. Your trying to engage me, into a moot point . Thus, prototyping and testing is what companies and test riders do to eventually decide on a production blueprint, before investing heavily into mass production.
@likeittacky: fact is they can't race something that will never see the market and I believe it has 5o be out within the race year, so they at least do small runs so you do have a chance to get one it's just the frames sell as fast as they are made.
IKWYM but I suspect they're not THAT bothered about selling a tiny number of DH bikes anyway. Their ever-changing prototypes might still help them sell enduro, trail & ebikes if the racers do well on them.
I do not understand how they continue to be able to do this. Is there not some requirement to produce the frame? Is there not some homologation requirement?
@likeittacky: I bought Dean Lucas' 2014 Worlds Devinci Wilson which was a prototype for the 650B bike. Had a one off CNC machined linkage, a coil converted world cup boxxer too.
@Brasher: That's really cool and all ! I'm just trying to figure out what you're indicating is just a statement, that you own Dean's 2014 worlds bike or attempting to make a point along with a handful of others who misinterpret what was actually being described regarding Proto bikes and what Intense has to offer for consumers to actually purchase, not being the previous proto model or anything prototype after the M16.?? Sorry, i'm not being a smart ass; its just context gets skewed easily and the obvious occurs when people just respond according to popularity votes not keeping within context of the discussion.
I was certainly humbled my first time there. It was super dry and rock hard dirt to top it off. I ended my first day only bleeding from three separate locations with all bones intact so it was as good as can be expected.
My home mountain, when it gets steep, it's always manageable because it's over a short distance. Windrock's pitch is relentless and mistakes are exacerbated quickly if you are an average rider like myself. You have to know how to use catch berms at speed.
@swellhunter: This makes we want to visit even more. My local hill also has steep, but short(er) pitches. I'd be keen to try one continuous insanely steep run.
Oh man, my first Windrock experience was in the mud and fog and it was hands down the most humbling experience I've ever had on a bike. It's a prime example of a bike park that by all conventional wisdom shouldn't work since it caters to a very niche market / true DH experience, yet it works so well. I'm glad Windrock exists to humble mortals and to give the pro's a real place to train and test!
@kleinblake: I did a Command F to locate your comment before I posted exactly what you've already written. Reminds me of a Sender too. With higher link and idler...
@wildedge586: I bet there's specific numbers from multiple prototypes that they were going for. Numbers that Intense wants and Canyon doesn't meet. Just because it looks the same doesn't mean performance will be exactly the same lol
Sooo the goal of the previous designs was not to be the fastest?? Or were previous designs not pure downhill?? How do they determine if they made the fastest bike???
Step 1. Claim that bicycle design is really hard due to variability of x y z, e.t.c.
Step 2. Get high and come up with a rear triangle shape.
Step 3. Make it trendy. You wanna show off that you are researching new technology? Give it a high pivot idler pulley, an extra link here and there, e.t.c. You wanna stick to the O.G roots? Make it shaped like all the other bikes, claim that the low pivot is more responsive, e.t.c
Step 4. Tweak the linkages to get the rider preferred anti squat and progressivity
Step 5. Make the frame, give it to the riders. Riders will have feedback based on how they are feeling that day.
Step 6. Make adjustments, repeat testing, e.t.c.
Step 7. Riders race the frame. If they win, say it was because of a well handling bike. If they lose, its because they are not up to speed fitness/mental wise.
Step 8. Everyone still has a job, and got paid over the course of the last year, and bikes are selling due to marketing. Thats the important bit. Go back to Step 1 next year.
@Tambo: Not always. There are a few brands in the industry that actually care more about putting out good consumer products with good engineering behind it. The top one (which coincidentally gets talked about very little) is Nicolai/Geometron. If you would have bought one of their bikes back in 2015-2018, which were considered extreme, you would have a bike with "modern" geometry today.
@8a71b4: I never said the process doesn't result in good products or isn't backed by good engineering; it's just how it goes. Also, if you bought a hardtail that I made in 2012, you would have a bike with modern geometry today (but not modern wheel sizes)
@Tambo: 29x2.8 is a great setup for trail riding on a hardtail. You can tune pressures for different terrains just like you would suspension. If you go higher pressure, you essentially get a larger diameter wheel that has great rollover which is good for efficiency, if you go lower pressure you get a more compliant ride.
In comparison, fat bikes are great for traction, but you can never get the pressure high enough safely to have decent efficiency, whereas 27.5+ bikes have smaller wheel sizes that aren't great for rollover.
I know it is contemporary to say bad things about Specialized, and sometimes they carry their products for 4-5 years which seems uninnovative to some, but honestly, they came up with the Demo in 2019, it is 2023 and other brands' protypes looks like exactly a rethought Demo. Same with Enduro and SJ Evo, they are still considered as standard of their own class.
@SonofBovril: it’s in the kinematics of the suspension design. Canfield’s CBF formula uses a unique way of keeping the center of curvature in the same spot in all parts of the travel. IFR incorporated Canfield’s “formula” in their kinematics.
dumb question but why does gwin always wear that protective vest outside of his jersey? trying to cover up some sponsors or is it just a comfort thing? just thinking that ideally you would practice like you race but hey what do i know
The old sende was a brilliant bike, so why not. The new sender is kinda ok, but with the old one not having room for 29 they had to make compromises - now most dh bikes are on 27.5 rearwheels again, so canyon could actually bring back the old one.
@drjohn: true, making good aligned alloyframes in relatively small batches is hard (You can watch Nicolai vids of what they do to make it work). If you ad a vpp system, which needs more than every other design good alignment, your in for a world of trouble. Another way is to make onepiece (or more accurate two piece) pivothousings like Banshee or canfield -or like on this prototype.
Nah, Aaron put in his time with YT to have the years that he did, and made a name for himself. Now he is just getting paid. He is gonna be what Minnar is to Santa Cruz. No need to go extra hard and risk injury to run with guys that actually have something to prove and can put it all on the line.
@t-rick: I was about to call BS on ya, but looked it up and you are right, he had FOUR podiums at world cups, all 4th places…how soon we forget. He cursed himself with his early career, where all we want is wins out of the guy.
@jmhills: Why does that matter if they produce her or not? If you're talking about fair, companies like intense have vastly less resources than a Trek or Specialized. Shouldn't they be light years that everybody else? MTB spirit is a little bit outside of a traditional (boring/ homogeneous) road bikes or similarly over regulated sports. Rigid & narrow rules are boring
@bman33: We are not going to see eye to eye on this but I do believe that there should be some expectation of something coming out of the series you are participating in.
No, there needs to be fewer rules not more! Homologation would massively stifle innovation. Think about a few seasons ago when Cannondale tried out the twin shock bike; clearly it was crap because they binned it but at least they gave it a shot. There's no way they would take that risk if they had to make hundreds of them. Also, it's not like theres that much of a performance difference between a bike you can build with the off shelf components and one that the Pro's are using. In fact, not being constrained on component choice by sponsors means you can probably do better in a lot of cases
134 Comments
Their ever-changing prototypes might still help them sell enduro, trail & ebikes if the racers do well on them.
Best thing he did was move to Tennessee.
Sometimes similar could have been available way earlier and way cheaper, so why wait to be similar?
(nicely played though - golf clap)
Step 1. Claim that bicycle design is really hard due to variability of x y z, e.t.c.
Step 2. Get high and come up with a rear triangle shape.
Step 3. Make it trendy. You wanna show off that you are researching new technology? Give it a high pivot idler pulley, an extra link here and there, e.t.c. You wanna stick to the O.G roots? Make it shaped like all the other bikes, claim that the low pivot is more responsive, e.t.c
Step 4. Tweak the linkages to get the rider preferred anti squat and progressivity
Step 5. Make the frame, give it to the riders. Riders will have feedback based on how they are feeling that day.
Step 6. Make adjustments, repeat testing, e.t.c.
Step 7. Riders race the frame. If they win, say it was because of a well handling bike. If they lose, its because they are not up to speed fitness/mental wise.
Step 8. Everyone still has a job, and got paid over the course of the last year, and bikes are selling due to marketing. Thats the important bit. Go back to Step 1 next year.
Don't you go an spoil it for everyone .....
On a sidenote, Gwinns beard looks badass.
In comparison, fat bikes are great for traction, but you can never get the pressure high enough safely to have decent efficiency, whereas 27.5+ bikes have smaller wheel sizes that aren't great for rollover.
Def still capable of Gwinning when healthy...just like 5-8 others.
Every racing type has some sort of rules to keep things level and somewhat fair.