Hope's Wild HB.211 Enduro Bike - Sea Otter 2016

Apr 14, 2016 at 11:56
by Mike Levy  
Sea Otter 2016


Sea Otter 2016


Hope HB.211

I'm not sure about you, but I think of things like aluminum cranks and stems when I hear someone mention UK component manufacturer Hope. And rightfully so - they've been making their own components in the UK since 1989 and have recently moved towards using carbon fiber for their latest handlebars and seatposts, which are also made in-house. It's that carbon work over the last handful of years that has helped prepare them for the HB.211, a 160mm-travel, all-mountain frame that features a carbon fiber front triangle that Hope produces in their new carbon facility, with a fully CNC'd rear triangle that they also make themselves.

HB.211 Details:

• Intended use: all-mountain / enduro
• Rear wheel travel: 160mm
• Wheel size: 27.5''
• Carbon front end
• CNC'd aluminum rear end
• Suspension design: four-bar
• 17 x 130mm rear hub spacing
• Zero dish rear wheel
• Weight: 30lb (as shown)
• Availability: maybe... maybe not
www.hopetech.com / @hopetech
While the HB.211's UK-made origin is interesting, the real story is Hope's decision to shirk so-called industry standards for the project, one that may or may not reach production.


Sea Otter 2016


Wondering where the HB.211 name, which doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, comes from? Hope is paying homage to another very British company, aircraft engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce, and their RB211 high-bypass turbofan engines that have hung off the wings of everything from the Lockheed L-1011 TriStar to the Boeing 747, 757, and 767.


UK-Made Carbon

Hope has been making their own carbon seatposts and handlebars for a while now, so while them showing up at Sea Otter with a carbon fiber frame might seem like it came out of the blue to some, it's not as far-fetched as it might seem. Consider that you need rather expensive aluminum molds to bladder-mold a carbon frame, something that is rumored to cost well over $50,000 for each size. Hope is pretty handy with aluminum, however, so they simply made their own molds so they could make their own carbon front triangle. That's some British DIY attitude right there, and also, an approach that surely saved them a big chunk of money. Manufacturing is taking place in a new building that's been built specifically for the project, and if Hope do decide to take the HB.211 to production, they'll likely hire a number of new staff for the task.


Sea Otter 2016
Sea Otter 2016

The HB.211 shown here is the only one in existence right now, and inspecting the frame closely does reveal that there are some prototype-ish imperfections in the finish that they are ironing out for the next run of ten frames. And no, none of those are going to be for sale, either. It's all development at this point, but Hope did sound upbeat about the chance of the bike going into production.

The burly looking prototype is overbuilt for obvious reasons, and the bike weighs around 30lb with a coil-spring shock and no real weight-minded concessions. The next run will be lighter, I was told. Hope also wasn't ready to comment on the HB.211's geometry, but it appeared to be contemporary rather than featuring numbers from a few years ago.
Sea Otter 2016


Standards Shmandards

The thought of yet another brake mounting "standard" or proposed hub spacing change is bound to send a lot of us into angry spasms, and rightfully so, but Hope has done exactly that with their HB.211. They are not intending to force any industry-wide changes, however, and the bike may or may not even reach production. All Hope wanted to do was to see what they could come up with if they built a frame the best way they saw fit while taking advantage of their brake, hub, crank and bottom bracket manufacturing abilities.


Sea Otter 2016


''The bike uses very few current standards since it has been developed as a design concept rather than a product design exercise,'' Hope explained about the bike's ethos. ''Maybe not the best solution for compatibility, but when you make every part, it gives you the opportunity to manufacture a bike without compromise.'' To Hope, a bike without compromise features a zero-dish, 17 x 130mm rear hub spacing, a radial mount rear brake setup, a 30mm crank and bottom bracket interface, and a proprietary chain guide mounting pattern.
bigquotesThe bike uses very few current standards since it has been developed as a design concept rather than a product design exercise. Maybe not the best solution for compatibility, but when you make every part, it gives you the opportunity to manufacture a bike without compromise. - Hope


Sea Otter 2016
Sea Otter 2016


Radial Brake Mount - The HB.211's rear-end looks normal-ish from twenty feet away or to someone who couldn't tell the difference between a four-bar and faux-bar layout, but there's some trickery going on here. Or, to put it better, straight up ignoring what the rest of the industry is doing. Let's start with the rear brake mount which appears to be a normal post mount setup but is anything but. It's actually a radial mount, with the two bolts being in-line with the axle center so that the caliper doesn't need to be offset with an adapter as you go up or down in rotor size. Instead, you simply stack or remove washers under it to move it up or down in height to where it needs to be. This is not possible with industry standard 160mm post mount, and Hope looks pretty clever with their radial caliper mounting.

But... There's always a but. Radial brake mounting requires a different caliper due to the position of the mounting bolts in relation to the pistons. Good thing they make their own brakes, so whipping up a new caliper wasn't the end of the world, and Hope actually used to make a radial-mount caliper many years ago. This is system integration taken to, well, somewhere that many riders will have issues accepting. Hope is well aware of this, but that didn't stop them from seeing how far they could take things.


Hope HB.211
Hope HB.211


17 x 130mm Hub Spacing - A wheel with zero dish and equal spoke tension on either side should be stronger than what's currently the norm, so that's what Hope did. The CNC'd aluminum chain and seatstays are asymmetrical to provide the required clearance, and the 130mm wide rear hub sees the rotor and disc-side spoke flange moved closer together. Why 130mm and not 142, 148, or some other random number? Hope says that the slim rear end is less likely to catch on things that don't move, like rocks and trees, which should help to keep your derailleur safer, and 130mm is the space required for everything to fit in nicely.


Sea Otter 2016


What Came Before

In the past, I've argued that all-mountain and enduro race bikes are the most exciting, fastest evolving breed of mountain bike, and I still believe that. Downhill race bikes used to hold that crown, of course, but the demands put on a capable 160mm-travel bike these days are pretty high when it comes to every aspect of its performance. Hope kinda feels the same, it seems, as they considered putting a downhill rig together back in 2005 before looking at something with less travel. That unnamed, fully CNC'd bike with 200mm-travel was never made, and neither was the carbon and aluminum hybrid cross-country bike that they designed in 2006. Those two stillborn projects at opposite ends of the two-wheeled spectrum were followed by a 24'' wheeled kids bike with a CNC'd rear-end that was glued to carbon fiber tubes. Cool stuff, sure, but there's a bigger market for cantilever brakes and purple bar-ends than mega-trick bikes for kids that reportedly cost in the five digit range to make.


Hope HB.211
Hope HB.211

Hope HB.211
So if you're probably not going to end up building it, why not design something really freaking cool. Enter the steel trellis front triangle and CNC'd heart of a wild looking, 210mm-travel downhill sled that looked like a non-motorized offspring of a Ducati Monster and a dirtbike. This was in 2009, so not everything had to be carbon to be any good, and Hope's single-pivot beast looked damn good.

Two shorter-travel machines were up next, with 140mm and 160mm of travel, neither as wild as what Hope had been 3D modeling before, however. And none of them came to life.

Until now. Will the HB.211 actually be for sale at some point? I sure hope so.


Sea Otter 2016



174 Comments

  • + 297
 With several standards for every bike part, we should just start calling them "opinions".
  • + 85
 Standards seems to have standards within standards within standards these days. We could call them onions, like shortened opinions. Only more tasty.
  • + 23
 @ItsOnlyJayke: Standardception.
  • + 60
 Or we could be more accurate and call them cash grabs... or bullshit. Your choice
  • + 12
 Or just "buttholes"
  • + 2
 HA laame^^
  • + 5
 They should be making OPTIONS not bs standards...."like their own separate standards".
  • + 21
 Saw 17 x 130, scrolled right to the comments
  • + 0
 @packfill: same here. Impending new standard?
  • + 5
 Called it HopeFullly.
  • + 107
 These are changes that I actually want! 17 x 130mm Hub Spacing. Zero dish and equal spoke tension. Radial brake mounts. Yes please, please, and please!
  • + 121
 Hope is awesome. This goes back Dave Weagles statement about the short-sightedness of the current "new standards." The industry keeps making small changes to deal with problems as they arise instead of starting from scratch and thinking ahead the way Hope has done here. I could get behind change if it was well thought out and made legitimate sense. Nothing makes sense about 148mm hub spacing.
  • + 10
 @ninjatarian: Talks sense.
  • + 2
 The zero dish spacing makes sense. Why 17mm axle though? Seems like that is random.
  • + 24
 @bsavery: I would be guessing that some quick FEA modeling showed this to be the best size for stiffness to weight with the reduced axle length.
  • - 2
 I also thought the reasoning for not having equal spoke tension was due to the torsion caused when pedaling?
  • + 14
 @ninjatarian word up
@keewi exactly what I was thinking; this is how things should be done.

I have to say though, I wish they would have thrown a gearbox in here
  • + 5
 @bsavery: no more random than 12mm... Right?
  • + 20
 @bsavery: current hope hubs have 17mm I.d bearings, loose the hub axle, use frame axle, stiffer and lighter then current options.
  • - 15
flag bOObdesign (Apr 14, 2016 at 17:35) (Below Threshold)
 @trialsracer: go buy a gearbox if you think its so cool... shimano and sram dont make that stuff because its not as good as the good old derailleur
  • + 4
 Brilliant thing to fit all we need in a 130mm space instead of 148mm! Like Shimano bringing the Shadow rear derailleurs to make it less likely catching stones, this is a step in the right direction for me!
  • + 6
 @ninjatarian: how will we ever fit a 13 speed cassette in a 130mm hub spacing? ;-)
  • + 3
 And with that narrower spacing, I wouldn't keep catching my heal while pedaling. Imagine that!
  • + 47
 Cool design exercise! Lots of outside the box thinking, followed by execution that only a company that manufactures their own components can do.

Remember folks "DESIGN EXERCISE", which means "playing around with ideas". Design exercises I have been involved with in my career usually start in the pub. Probably same for these guys.

Gulp...gulp. "What if we make a rear axle that is 17mm!?"
"Thanks f'ing crazy Tom!, you wanker!" gulp. gulp.
"No, I'm serious mate!" gulp. "think about it. 17 is bigger than 12."
"Tom's talking about his pecker again! ha ha" gulp. gulp."Ahh f*#&ck it, lets do it!"
"The idiots on pinkbike are going to go lose their bloody minds! ha ha ha ha" Gulp.
"Cheers to that!" gulp, gulp gulp, gulp, gulp.

So they have a new building dedicated to carbon manufacturing and they developed and cut custom tooling, but they "may or may not" take it to production?! Oh, they are bringing it! May not be exactly like this little beauty, but they are going to bring something.

Gulp. Gulp.
  • + 18
 Yes! You seem to be one of the few people who actually gets the concept! Hope isnt making new standards, they are just trying to make the best bike possible, and they are giving it a pretty good go!
  • + 12
 Glad someone has said this. This is a concept bike. Like how car manufacturers show things at Detroit and Geneva.They think, what would be awesome to make/use and they show off their ideas. That's what hope has done and i thoroughly commend them for it, we need more sensible concept bikes.
  • + 3
 Shame it doesn't have a gearbox... Respect to Hope for seeing what is possible. It makes total sense starting with a blank piece of paper and starting fresh. It does make things like boost look silly.
  • + 39
 In your face bike industry! We don't need your stupid extra 3mm Boost. We need 17 millimetres of axle thickness and no dishing.... apparently.
  • + 9
 Who said you 'need' that? Hope sure didn't.
  • + 5
 I think that's part of why this will be so well received. It's a "small" (company to other, unnamed component companies), and they aren't shoving "THIS IS WAY BETTER THAN BOOST BECAUSE .... " in your face. Thanks for showing this, Pinkbike. Good choice!
  • + 6
 masochism mode on: it's worth pointing out that boost was made to stiffen 29er wheels because of how long the spokes are, & that this is not a 29er.
  • + 11
 @groghunter: it's justthat if you draw it quickly in cad you will see that Boost is not really made for 29ers, rather very wide rims of plus bikes which have substantial offset in spoke holes. Most importantly their chainstay lemgth argument is pure bollocks. Boost is god damn stupid
  • + 8
 @WAKIdesigns: Sigh. Hit me daddy, hit me again.
  • + 4
 @WAKIdesigns:
Well, Boost is an incremental improvement. But, exactly like that Richard Cunningham article said at the time, it didn't go far enough. Boost is meant to bring the spoke tension closer to equal, at the cost of kicking out the chainline a tiny bit. What they should have done is what Hope did here- just make a goddam zero dish wheel for equal tension.

Now that I've typed it up, it does actually look rather stupid.
  • + 1
 @tsheep: That would have required all bikes to go with asymmetric rear ends, as that is why this wheel can be dishless. You'd have probably had a hard time convincing all the brands, as some of their suspension designs would probably make that hard.

That said, I've known for 10 years or more that if I ever design a bike, the rear end would be asymmetric.
  • + 0
 @groghunter:
I think pretty much all new FS bikes today have asymmetric rear ends anyway. I can't think of one that is symmetric off the top of my head.
  • + 1
 @tsheep: really. You can't think of a modern bike that uses a dished rear wheel? We must be taking about 2 different things, because the opposite is true. Even specialized is running standard rear wheels now, & they were some of the banner wavers for dishless, I don't think they make any "ART" bikes anymore.
  • + 1
 @groghunter:
I said "I think pretty much all new FS bikes today have asymmetric rear ends anyway." How did you misread that so badly as to get "dished wheel"? Asymmetric rear end != dishless wheel. We must be talking about two different things because you're not making any sense.
  • + 1
 @tsheep: we are, because that's exactly what asymmetric rear ends do. Asymmetric=dishless rear wheel. Symmetric=tire sits exactly halfway between the dropouts. Which is every modern bike I can think of. Which means having to dish the wheel towards the drive side, to make up for the fact that the drive side flange is farther from the dropout. I've owned 2 asymmetric bikes, & even built wheels for them.
  • + 1
 If you don't believe me, here's Lee spouting some wisdom: www.leelikesbikes.com/specialized-asymmetrical-rear-end.html
  • + 16
 Giants long ago DH bike before the Glory name ever existed had an off set rear end with zero dish rear spokes. I never taco'd a rear wheel on that bike and it was very hard to knock out of true. Theres some definite benefits to zero dish.
  • + 3
 demos up until very recently at least has some goofball variation of this as well
  • + 3
 As did Big Hits.
  • + 9
 @groghunter: Boom! Big Hits rule! With a 48 spoke rear you can jump off a building
  • + 4
 @skidrumr: eveything old is new again. the way bikes with 2 different wheel sizes corner is a thing of beauty.
  • + 3
 @skidrumr: and people did. lol
  • + 13
 That's a great looking bike with some engineering driven design changes rather than financially driven which is a nice change for the bike industry. If they put it on the market now I think they'd sell a load. If they could produce a light weight gearbox for it they couldn't keep up with the demand.
  • + 12
 I haven't even finished reading this, but I have to say, regardless of how the bike rides or anything else, this is why I love Hope. Making their own moulds, trying new things, keeping it in house. f*ck yeah, that's good ol' fashion innovation, having a go at some creative destruction. We need more of this in the mtb world; fewer slightly-fatter-tired revolutions (important, but not worthy of the hype), and more of THIS!
  • + 13
 Genius! The brakes ,the dish ,the looks debatable ,I would not mind after it got a gear case instead of the derailleur.
  • + 2
 this!
  • + 13
 Thumbs up from me lads - Hope NEVER disappoints, a great ambassador for British engineering and design
  • + 7
 "gimme hope joanna gimme h......."
  • + 12
 I would like all of these new standards in my life please.
  • + 19
 The first time I've ever seen anyone say that on pb
  • + 8
 Not sure if you caught it but they also built special 28.25 wheels for this particular bike. Interesting and really makes sense given the current market.
  • + 21
 That sucks i was really hoping for 28.75 wheel size, and triangle rotors.... maybe next year or next month.
  • + 3
 @mikebigface:
28.75 front/28.25 rear
  • + 6
 I really like the thought process Hope went through here. even if some of these things don't make it to market it shows the industry that there is a different way of looking at things. Reinventing them, so to speak rather than just adding 3mm on either end and calling it innovation. Radial brake mounts make a ton of sense. How is this not a standard already is beyond me. On the other hand, not fitting that thing with DVO fork and shock is criminal.
  • + 5
 What I like about the rear brake set up is how it seems to be a 135mm hub, but with a much shorter cone on the disc side. When you think about it it is actually weird that disc brake set ups have not been set up like this from the beginning. The downside of this set up is the post mount style mount for the caliper. It means the thread is in the frame, so if you'd mess up the thread you can buy yourself a new frame. I like how they are experimenting with so much things. Even if these things don't work out as good as they wanted, they can always be an inspiration for other improvements later.
  • + 4
 You would probably have enough aluminum on the frame to Helicoil the front mount, and due to the design of the rear you could probably drill through and use a through bolt setup. Not ideal - but it should get you back up and running. I've personally never stripped a break bolt in a mount in my 13 years of riding with many different disc brake setups - but that surely doesn't mean it won't happen in the future haha.
  • + 2
 There's ways to make those replaceable, as well, with a threaded insert. But I'm sure Hope would sell you a new swingarm, if nothing else.
  • + 2
 I would bet these guys are smart enough to have helicoil inserts in the aluminum. You will ruin a bolt before stripping those out.
  • + 3
 Dished wheels have imbalanced center to flange distances on both sides of the wheel. I noticed that this causes problems because my rear wheel frequently looses tension and my front wheel remains unchanged. Looking at the slightness of the improvement that boost can deliver, a dishless approach seems promising. 142mm brake side 32.25mm, drive side 19.25mm 148mm brake side 35.25mm, drive side 22.25mm
  • + 7
 Ok the radial brakes are an awesome idea.
  • + 4
 as has been used on motorbikes for years now...
  • + 4
 @ad15: I'm sure hope are well aware of that.... After all, didn't they make trials bike brakes years ago?
  • + 1
 @mgolder: the comment wasn't aimed at hope, it was for dk1996
  • + 3
 Can someone explain to me this part: "...you simply stack or remove washers under it to move it up or down in height to where it needs to be. This is not possible with industry standard 160mm post mount..." because just adding washers is exactly what the post mount on my Boxxer needs when I use a bigger rotor.
  • + 1
 Downvotes? Why? I just asked a question about something I don't understand.
  • + 1
 @Pedro404: I think that the correct position of the calliper describes a curve as it gets further from the axle. If I remember I will compare a 6" adapter with an 8" adapter.
  • + 2
 @Pedro404: like iamamodel says, the caliper needs to move away and rotate when going from a 160-180mm disc with post mount. If you look at a 180mm and a 200/203mm front adaptor side-by-side you will see that the lower bolt is moved further away from the fork (only a bit but still needed) than the top so as to rotate the caliper enough that the pads still line up square with the braking surface on the disc. It's a legacy from the change from IS to PM as the two ran side-by-side for years before PM became the popular choice.

Your Boxxer may not need this as IIRC some MY's had a different setup and required different mounts, probably closer to a radial setup. Radial makes sense on so many levels, from managing forces to the adaptability problem. As they say in the article, Hope tried the Radial mount years ago but it wasn't adopted so was dropped.
  • + 1
 @DaMilkyBarKid: Ah OK. I took a better look at the Boxxer adapter – although it doesn't offset the caliper to the side (it's just two thick "washers" connected together), the lower "washer" is shorter than the upper one, so the caliper does actually rotate. Thanks for the explanation!
  • + 4
 If you designed the frame from scratch wouldn't you put a gearbox in it? Solves the rear wheel dish problem and no derailleur to whack on rocks, another problem they wanted to solve.
  • + 2
 Part of the reason this bike exists is to help them advertise parts(if it was purely a mule they wouldn't be showing it off at Sea Otter) & they can't advertise their cranks on a gearbox transmission.
  • + 6
 @groghunter: They can make cranks to suit.
  • + 2
 @iamamodel: Of course they can, but the point is that making cranks to suit doesn't do much to advertise their cranks, & you know the 5 people who own Pinons would never let up until they made those cranks.
  • + 4
 @groghunter: You're killing my dreams, man Smile
  • + 4
 @iamamodel: I am Ken Titus, the dreamstomper.

"Dad, teacher told us today that we could be anything we want when we grow up!"

"Aww son, she didn't mean you. now take this shovel & go practice digging holes in the back yard."
  • + 1
 @groghunter: that's funny.
  • + 2
 Because there are good weight and efficiency reasons not to use a gear box? As much as pb loves to drool over gear boxes (and I'll admit I do too), a gearbox will always be heavier and less efficient than a derailleur drivetrain.
  • + 4
 @tsheep: I wouldn't use the word "always" - weight will be solved by descent cash spent on research. When the Rohloff hub first came out, it was the same weight as XTR was at the time, only the hub has barely progressed and XTR has. Derailleur systems have inefficiencies too, and are barely more efficient than a gearbox system - R&D will solve that too when only the active cogs are driven.
  • + 1
 @iamamodel:
As much as I'd love for that to be the case, it wont happen. If we could increase gear box efficiencies to derailleur levels, your car would be getting better mileage. A gear box will always have more meshing surfaces than a derailleur, which will always result in greater efficiency losses, even with only the active cogs being driven.
  • + 1
 Why not make their own gearbox then and equip it with, you will not believe this, their own cranks. Sound like win win!
  • + 4
 Holy crap, a pile of new standards that actually make sense!

Sadly it's far too sensible to see production, as it won't be "obsolete" by next year.
  • + 2
 Like how they appear to take into account the direction of brake torque into their mount, straight to the main pivot. Flipside of the radial mount though is that's a lot of shear force depending on the length of the screws if you're running a 200mm, something post mount standard gets rid of.
  • + 6
 The fastest sportbikes in the world use radial mounted brakes. Wayyy higher leverage rates on not much larger bolts. Just sayin'.
  • + 4
 Sexy as fuck! How bout keeping the weight where it is and concentrate on making a frame that last. now that would be innovative!
  • + 4
 Finally, some one not taking the Microsoft approach to designing something new!
  • + 4
 Actually a really cool concept and it's nice to read their arguments for each decision to strafe from standard measurements.
  • + 2
 Nice job...a proper engineering exercise and not some sort of band-aid solution. Take note, bike industry. At this point theres too much standards, but who cares, just ride your godamn bike and enjoy
  • + 3
 I guess new standards are hard to swallow, but I am digging the rear brake mount and the axle spacing. At least it make logical sense.
  • + 2
 No new standards here- only Hope parts fitted to a Hope bike. I'm sure they'll still make components to fit whatever joke standards the rest of the industry comes up with.
  • + 4
 Hope: Have CNCs. Will innovate.
  • + 0
 The way this radial caliper mount is designed is not good at all ! The radial mount was made to avoid shear stress in the screws. In the IS standard the screws are loaded in shear. In the postmount standard (radial) the caliper is compressed to the mount under the braking forces. Here Hope made a radial mount but the contact plane is in the braking force direction ! So the calipers tends to slip and the screws are loaded in shear. Bad job Hope.
  • + 3
 The Bugatti Veyron of Mountain Bikes. Built without comprimise, just to see if they could.
  • + 1
 Good ole Mountain Cycle. While they fell from favor sometime back, they did innovate heavily. The industry might have taken longer to get where it is now without them.
  • + 1
 If the rest of the bike performs like their brakes it will be a done deal. Consistent, excellent year over year with virtually no maintenance.
  • + 1
 Dont judge me pls but looks like a front triangle from a YT and the rear triangle from Santa Cruz, but yeah I fc**g like it, damnn what a beauty guys Wink
  • + 3
 Can't wait to build that wheel!!
  • - 1
 Hmm. With the rear hub "standard" I'm not sure if this isn't a little late for an April's fool ;-)

With 10, 12, 15, and 20 millimeters already established in either the front or rear, 17 mm surely was the logical choice.

But the comments go to show, that a smaller company will get away easier with "new standards". Probably good to know for everybody who wants to establish another size for anything.
  • + 2
 Zero dish AND narrower back end which keeps the RD away from stuff that kills it. The bike industry needs more of this!
  • + 1
 You just made the point why Sram and Shimano won't like it. A RD can last a looooong time without getting banged on rocks every other ride...
  • + 3
 Lots more info and pics on the hope site www.hopetech.com/hb-211
  • + 3
 Love everything about it, Except water bottle option.
  • + 2
 Glad to see they're following the new standard of creating their own standards.
  • + 1
 "The 130 rear should help keep your derailer safe"
AND
"it allows Boost chainline."

please make up your mind.
  • + 1
 is it just me or does it kinda look like a nomad 3 and a nomad 2 hooked up and had a baby
  • + 2
 OH MY GOD FUCK YES I just bikegasmed in my pants
  • + 2
 make a rear derailleur already then Hope!
  • + 1
 As all things I have ever seen come out of that factory....tidy and precise with some tasty color to go. Very well done!
  • + 2
 Holy dreams do come true, colour it hope purple and I'll preorder one!
  • + 1
 Availability: maybe... maybe not

I hope those test subjects make it to the Pacific Northwest
  • + 2
 Absoloutly love Hope products. This would most definatly be my next frame!
  • + 2
 Shut up and take what little money I have!!
  • + 3
 Finally.
  • + 2
 My tongues on the floor and i'm drooling.
  • - 2
 This looks great but in fact it is just pure business for me... All the patents that are present in this bicycle like hub size or this radial mount of brake caliper can be solved just with hope components,and as we all know,they are not the cheapest.
  • + 1
 Good. Because the cheapest parts wouldn't be as good would they.
  • + 2
 of course it's about business
they want to make money because they Need to survive
I like the "not so usual" solution to the "dish Problem"
  • + 2
 That CNC'd rear triangle tho...
  • + 1
 Porn
  • + 2
 Don't paint it. Keep the raw CF look. Sexy as FK!
  • + 0
 If the pricing is competitive within the industry (YT/Trek/Yeti/Spec) - I would like to buy! Great job Hope.
  • - 2
 None of the brands you mentioned have competitive prices ...
  • + 2
 @torero: Do you want cheap or free or both? Enlighten me with your business & pricing model - then let's talk. Give me some numbers, models and manufacturers of competitively priced rides and we'll see how the cards fall.
  • + 0
 So the only bits they don't make are the mech, tyres, And suspension. Bar bought in items like rim tape.
  • - 1
 Bike parks world wide will be filled with this bike bike and the over paid managers that shouldn't be riding them... I hope they don't release it...
  • + 1
 imo it looks like a mini intense 951, but i do like it.
  • + 1
 I would rather choose hope tech with my nomad lol
  • - 1
 looks like a nomad...
  • + 2
 Fuck yes go on hope
  • + 1
 I like it, well done Hope.
  • + 1
 Now if it had an öhlins fork it would really look great!!!
  • + 1
 I have never wanted a new frame more then right now, please hope!
  • + 0
 This was good until I hit the 17mm axle. At least if you're running hope hubs they would obviously make a cheap adaptor
  • + 4
 Is that not the internal diameter of their bearings? Therefore this is the largest axle they could use without changing the bearing spec and no need for adaptors?
  • + 1
 fancy! talk about evolving as a company... whew!
  • + 1
 So many rad concept's in this bike, albeit new ones.
  • + 1
 Cool concept bike. Why does it still use a derailleur?
  • + 1
 cleanest looking bike i have seen in a while
  • + 1
 Anyone notice the floating brake rotors front and rear ????
  • + 1
 Hope they make us that hardtail from the article.it looks really nice
  • + 1
 20 grand later...
  • + 0
 That rear triangle is fugly.
  • + 1
 *money
  • + 1
 Oh look another 4 bar
  • - 3
 Carbon fiber's been a cottage industry in the UK for decades, so this shouldn't surprise anyone. Show me a Brit with teeth that look like they all came from the same shop and I'll be surprised.
  • + 1
 Now that is a bike.
  • + 1
 I hope it rides well.
  • + 1
 we all HOPE so
  • + 0
 Who doesn't love a good Halo Project
  • + 1
 rad!
  • + 0
 I've got high hopes for this bike!
  • - 3
 I keep throwing ???? into my screen...
  • - 2
 looks like a nomad
  • + 2
 agree...no wait...looks like a Lapierre Spicy 2012
  • - 2
 Is this going to be the new standard?
  • - 2
 I sure *HOPE* these new "standards" don't catch on...
  • - 2
 finally a hope bike which doesn't blind me
  • - 2
 Badabennggggg there goes Hope for your Boost standard...
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2017. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.106368
Mobile Version of Website