Pinkbike photographer Ross Bell caught up with Scott's Brendan Fairclough for a personal tour of his latest Gambler. The black and orange machine may look like a DH racing bike when it's standing still, but put Fairclough on it and it begins to resemble a flying machine. Brendan says he's not into fancy components or picky about his setup, but that may be because he has been on the ground floor throughout the Gambler's development, so it has become exactly what he likes - right out of the box.
The chassis is a yet-to be-released XL size that is 15-millimeters longer than Scott's present large size option, and it has a modified linkage that will soon be available with a more progressive ending-stroke rate. The new kinematics allow for a Fox coil-sprung shock, which replaces the air-sprung damper that previously graced the Scott chassis. Fairclough says he has been on the longer Gambler for two years running and it will be in production, along with the new linkage, sometime this year. Interesting to note that Scott - a carbon pioneer - still welds up the Gambler's front triangle from aluminum, and with titanium springs and hardware, Fairclough's bike comes in at only 35 pounds.
should go sleep;
I was watching deathgrip last night and was surprised at.... whoa... look at the whip... wow, wow, wow, that speed....
..... but not the rear triangle? Carbon rear ends are coming then
www.ergon-bike.com/en/product.html?a=saettel#smd-44080210
I was never talking about use specific. I was talking about use specific design
Use specific yes, absolutely (meaning labeled to be used in a certain way). Designs that are REALLY specific and purpose driven, without compromise in their respective field but compromising in others, not so much.
There has been for example a dh saddle that would fit that description in the past. It was barely more than a tiny piece of foam to clamp with your thighs. That´s what i would consider a very specific design. It never made it to production though, as far as i know.
What the industry is serving us mostly is just a derivative of an existing product with a label for it´s intended use slapped onto it. Different gear ratios, wheel diameters, stem lengths are all just a minor departure from existing designs, often times even just a change in numbers.
That Ergon saddle to me is no more than a slight departure from the usual saddle design.
What the OP is theorizing about would mark a much more drastic change in saddle design imho (if i got his idea right). A saddle which would not be comfortable to sit on, but with the only purpose of improving bike handling in downhill bikes, thus making it suitable only for the smallest portion of the market and even in that small group a lot of people would decide to not use it since most of us need to be able to pedal the bike at least for a short distance. That´s where i personally draw the line. Products that can be easily adapted to other disciplines and those that would not be possible to be used outside their intended environment.
Of course you´re free to view it differently :-)
bmxmuseum.com/forsale/tioga_dh1_copy1_blowup.jpg
I had one on my park bike back in the early 2000s (actually, for the first year whistler was open).
Scott was doing it 20 years ago almost.
They cant be painted as it wouldnt be possible for them to be threaded into the pedal as paint would be in the threads....