headset-apologist

Seb is mostly rehashing what the authors say. I think it's a quite interesting paper and findings, though the conclusion "kickback isn't real" is sorta missing the point. Scenario 3 is basically classic kickback reacting against cassette inertia instead of the ground. Also they reproduced kickback in low speed tech, and missed the classic kickback reacting against locked up wheel case (which IMO was pretty apparent in the team robot test). Despite all that, I think the most interesting question isn't really addressed: does just crank torque indicate the "kickback feeling"? I would think derivative of torque or sign reversal would be more relevant.

Now limit power please

I'd appreciate a transcript of the tech talk video. Maybe a link below the vid if you don't want to clog up the article. I can't usually watch videos, nor do I think the video format is helpful for tech heavy info

No option for my solution, which was changing forks entirely. The rockshox domain on my freeride bike was binding over braking bumps. Probably shitty bushing tolerances. No issues with the replacement fork, or every other higher end fork I've ridden

Got a short fork on there? Previous iirc was 66.0 to 67.2 with a 120, 65.8 to 67 with a 130. Guessing racers were all in middle or slack, so they decided to move the midpoint down half a degree. Not exactly significant geo changes, especially with all the adjustment

New one spotted at bcbr

@Dougal-SC: RWC have held up for me 3 seasons now. Still running smooth and seals keeping it clean inside. External eyelet bearings before lasted all of 3 months. I think poor tolerance on the cups for those

Genius, last gen stumpy, smuggler, top fuel, trail cat, occam so come to mind as bikes in the 140/140 or 140/130 category with equally light weight

@GlazedHam: frame I have measured 2290 with axle and shock. So about the entire shock lighter.

@big-red: no issues over here with Shimano bbs and 24 mm spindles