Loki87

I honestly can´t see that thing cracking any time soon. Just take your average four bar rocker link as an example. There´s so many out there with much wider spacing, which are not one solid piece and with arms much thinner than what´s still left on that Fury link. Maybe i am missing something, but this really seems like the logical way to lighten such a piece, or in this case, give it some more flex. Also i believe i read somewhere that they did the appropriate stress analysis prior to cutting it up. Which would further indicate that this is in no way prone to cracking any time soon.

Agreed. Is anyone aware of any aftermarket solutions for the rear wheel?

@fred-frod: I see your point to a degree, but especially when it comes to flex it´s pretty safe to say that you can never really get it right. Speed, rider weight and personal preference all play into creating a perfect flex pattern. With huge variance across consumers, they will inevitably settle on something which a professional racer might want to optimize. And even if in this case the bike might be slightly on the stiffer side, it´s hard to imagine this being a dealbreaker for the average rider. Sure, there´s always something to optimize, but the bike tracking slightly better across off camber sections isn´t gonna impact the average park shredder while slapping bermed tracks all day.

@Glory831Guy: Interesting. So it was at least a consideration at some point. Then again, the ride dynamics between MX, street racing and downhill are still vastly different, so i guess there´s not too much value in prior research from those areas. hopefully those guys keep it going and we see a market ready solution soon.

@jokermtb: Trail skins were the worst knee pads i have ever tried on in the last 23 years. I think a cut to size milk carton would be more comfortable and likely offer as much protection. Glad you´re happy with them, but god damn i really hated those things.

@Leaveamessage: Got any pictures or a link to that proto Loic´s been testing? Would be interesting to see. As far as the level 1 front goes, i think that´s fine honestly. Most important feature for a front protector is penetration prevention. I´ve seen more people harmed from a stick to the chest or abdomen and really none from frontal blunt force trauma really. It´s always more the impacts to the side which crack ribs, where i´d gladly sacrifice frontal impact protection to a degree in exchange for some more coverage around the rib and abdominal areas as well as longer back protection which actually covers the entire spinal column and not just the upper part. The Scott Softcon Hybrid is something you may wanna check out. It´s level 2 front and back and seems to have a decent length back protector as well.

It does have some relevancy, as it tells us that the transferred energy does not surpass a certain threshold, with level 2 obviously being better. That said, where the standard is seriously lacking is in distinguishing between different products besides the very broad level 1 and 2 certification. A bad level 2 could be almost identical to an exceptional level 1, but the consumer will never know. You can find the exact testing procedures and threshold via google if you´re interested in details. I do agree though, we really need better testing procedures overall, especially when it comes to helmets. For body protection i can live with what we have now as the current standards and a simple first hand inspection usually will give enough of an idea of a products general capabilities.

I can totally see a mass damper be a really useful thing for downhill racing. Does anyone know if there´s a similar thing available in motocross or was it tested at any point in time? Regardless, with the light weight of modern dh bikes and an increasing number of racers strapping additional weights to their bikes, this seems like an absolute nobrainer to go for. Especially if they design another option to go into the seattube, which would essentially replace the external weights.Maybe manufacturers could even add a mass damper compartment in future designs?

@sportstuff: Well, idk about pidgeon warfare, but bat warfare was apparently a real thing. The US apparently plotted an attack on major japanese cities at the end of WW2 by utilizing fire bombs strapped to bats which would get released over major cities. The bats would then seek shelter under the roofs of houses and the fire bombs would set the easily flammable japanese houses on fire. They scrapped the plan when the nuke became an option.

I wouldn´t say it´s about listening to the marketing guys as much as it´s a generally noticeable trend. Things are moving at a rapid pace, as is typical for most young market segments. Manufacturers usually have the next big thing ready to go, they just don´t release it until they feel like they made enough profit from the "old" tech. It´s why i was never interested in buying an ebike until now, because i always knew the light ebike trend was gonna be the next big thing and would fit my riding profile a lot better. But now i´m in a pickle because i´m almost certain the next gen will either be lighter, feature a lot more power/range or become much more affordable. That´s also why phones these days are a bad comparison. Ten years ago, smartphones moved at a rapid pace. These days, you can buy a 5 year old phone and not miss anything besides maybe system updates. Give it another 5 to 10 years and ebikes will be at a similar stage in their development cycle. Sure, if you need a bike right now, buy whatever fits you best and enjoy it. Nothing wrong with that. It´s just a tad frustrating to know it will rapidly depreciate.