In the grand scheme of things, mountain biking is still a fairly young sport, but over the last twenty years we've moved into an era where many of the initial bike design hurdles have been overcome. Disc brakes, full suspension, dropper posts – we have it pretty damn good right now. Suspension designs are also more refined than ever, and while there will always be room for improvement, I'd say that the number of high-end lemons out there is at an all-time low. That fact means that companies and riders alike have begun to concentrate more on bike geometry, experimenting with different formulas to see which combination of numbers creates the best handling machine out on the trail.
To the outside world, the fact that it's possible to discuss something as trivial as chainstay length or bottom bracket height for hours at a time is mindboggling, and even in the mountain bike community there are plenty of riders that couldn't care less about things like reach, stack, or head angle – they'd rather leave the number crunching to the designers.
This week's poll is for all the geometry geeks out there, those of you who get a little misty-eyed when a bike is released that has your ideal numbers on its geometry chart.
Is your dream bike extra, extra long, or would you prefer a shorter, livelier ride?
What would your ideal bike look like if you were given free reign over the design process? Would it have super short chainstays for snapping it through tight turns, or would it be a stretched out limo, designed to be supremely stable at speed? Imagine your dream bike's geometry, and make your selections below.
www.mtb-news.de/news/2017/05/17/test-alutech-icb-2-0
If this is the goal, clever from PB to do it in a poll format. We typically kill each other in the comment section but at least they're getting number. Then again, these number mean pretty much nothing in isolation.
"This poll has been rigged!"
#26aintdead
But who knows? Maybe they provide it for free for people that pay for advertising.
m.pinkbike.com/photo/14907563
Have to say it actually is as good as it sounds on paper.
Faster is even funner.
The question about wheel travel is like a filter. I'd hope PB has the ability to sort all the results based on wheel travel for them to use as they wish, be it a more in depth "results" article or to sell (or to start a bike company).
I'll happily admit I've ridden a lit of 27.5 and 29ers and enjoyed them, I'm just too poor to size up.
@UserNumberTwo: That's the first crowd bike (the first ICB). It is a bit more of a longer travel beast. The current bike is built by Alutech but as it is open source, you can get a steel version from portus bikes too . The project page is crowd.bike (easy, isn't it?), you can get the bike or frame (with or without shock) from Alutech directly (alutech-cycles.com/ICB20_1) . Seems like they switched to a different OEM supplier too. The lower end spec (Ergeschloss) used to be a SRAM affair, now it is more Formula. They usually also have a higher end spec. Used to be with Magura brakes and Fox suspension, I wonder what they're working on now. But the best deal is probably just the frame (currently discounted) with the tuned shock.
Now, they could also have asked us which motor to spec. That, my friends, would be the end of the internet.
You'd end up with the "Homer"
I have 4 bikes all 26, there's no way I'm gonna waste thousands of pounds getting rid of my 26inch bikes for tweeners when the performance improvement is none to little but, I guess I'm one of the "94% that aren't pro enough to notice the difference " (nice ad campaign rock shox)
I'm coming from a BMX an skate background an to me the big mtb industry is no better than other big money grabbing industries like automotive or big pharma.
Believe it or not the industry does want one standard it lowers production costs, and that standard boys an girls is...........
E'bike....
It's not a conspiracy if it's true, a good few articles on here have just as much admitted the fact
26FL
74° seat angle, I wish they weren't!
I just reacquainted myself with that clip. So funny, it's well worth a watch
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headset_ First sentence.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_tube first bullet point under bearings.
This link's for you buddy.
youtu.be/j0qm0KUPeD8
...or alternatively, some people may have been keeping records of the geo of the bikes they've ridden over the past decades, may have played with 'flip chips', stem lengths, 650B / 26" interchangeable dropouts and so on, and, shock horror, are actually in a position (albeit far from encyclopaedic or perfect) to be able to know what they like??
It is all out there people, and opens up a world of empowerment once you begin to try a few things out.... go on, you might surprise yourself what you learn.
I still maintain that "most of us" [pinkbike regulars] are deep in the comments battles to learn, specifically because they/we can't/won't/haven't had real time on lots of diverse frames.
Hence the information consumption, regurgitation, and gradual group think that smart bike people and website people have realized helps make tons of money.
For me it's two things... firstly I want to know what the upper limits in geometry are as I don't think we are quite there yet. Companies like Pole and Mojo / Nicolai (etc) are probably getting close. Secondly I want to make an informed choice on my next bike. I don't buy bikes that often so need to choose something that will last geo wise. If you change your bike every few years it doesn't matter as much.
Every other parameter polled is independent of model size, but reach is not.
If they had normalized for body size (perhaps asked "if you were 5'10", what reach would you want?") then the spectrum of answers would provide more accurate insight to reach preferences.
Kona is doing it right. Nice low stand over. Long long reach.
Find this generation of long frames suit me, but essentially just building weaker frames due to these geometries.
230 lbs isn't that heavy. I'm 220lbs and I've had no trouble with destroying bikes
Just kidding, keep sending it, that's what warranties are for
Everyones needs and riding style vary extensively I know, but for this lanky fella the Process does the trick!
Cheers!
I am 2 years in and on my second (650B) and appreciate it more each time I ride it.
BUT NOTHING BEATS A DEDICATED DH BIKE!!!!! Every time I haul the Operator up to someplace like Snowshoe or Bailey or whatever, I'm reminded of how capable a dedicated DH rig is.
Having a "One" or "The One" bike is cool, but if you can, HAVE TWO! You may wonder at times if the price you paid for that dedicated DH rig is justified when it only get's taken to places with lifts or shuttles, but the next time you blast into the chunder and that bike soaks it all up, you'll remember. ;-)
1) What possible disadvantage is there to a steeper seat angle? Anyone that's ridden a bike with a steeper seat angle will immediately see the benefits. This is the main reason (besides cost) that I wouldn't buy a Santa Cruz - combine a longer front end with a slack seat angle and you're in a terrible seated climbing position. I understand preference with pretty much all of the other options, but this just seems common sense to me.
2) Long front end requires long chainstays - just ask Greg Minnaar. A bike needs to be balance, and long chainstays don't reduce a bike's ability to corner... that's marketing bull - again, just ask Greg Minnaar.
My Big Hit did not suck when it came to cornering.
Was thinking about doing this to my downhill bike... Does it affect the geo? Like bar height, bb height and head angle? Currently on 26ers
Coincidentally that also explains why it's so hard to find a bike that fits tall people. Look at the longest reach on that poll. Kind of a small fraction of the overall number of responses, eh?
www.pinkbike.com/photo/4994712
Anyway, yeah I probably prefer 26" wheels too. Not just because moving on to a different wheelsize would be a massive waste of good stuff I have in my garage. If big wheels are better at steamrolling the obstacles and 26" wheels are more agile and are better at generating speed from the ground (which for instance Fabian Barel explained once) I guess 26" is the way to go for me.
Shorter = the opposite, muh playfulness
or maybe it wasn't convenient in case carbon didn't win?
You thinking the wrong way. It's Pinkbike using a poll to see how marketing and tech article has affected our vision of ideal bike geometry.
LOVE the bike though!