Oh god... 'We can't fit the shock to the frame... Let's make a completely custom shock that no one ever will stock parts to service and...
Oh god... 'We can't fit the shock to the frame... Let's make a completely custom shock that no one ever will stock parts to service and won't know how to service it!'
Logic.
I'd love to see the process which the crayon holders use to come up with these bikes. Bike like the rail should fit any shock.
Bike industry has planned obsolescence and early life failure down to a tee though! Saw a video of the Levo SL, open up the charge plug and there is water in there...
With a completely electronic system and a 6 speed cassette with the correct ratios, you could halve the cassette width and still keep the current 12 speeds and their ratios. Which would be beneficial for the chain line, spoke angles and so on. Might even be possible to go back to narrower rear ends with relatively wide spoke spacing.
With a completely electronic system and a 6 speed cassette with the correct ratios, you could halve the cassette width and still keep the current 12...
With a completely electronic system and a 6 speed cassette with the correct ratios, you could halve the cassette width and still keep the current 12 speeds and their ratios. Which would be beneficial for the chain line, spoke angles and so on. Might even be possible to go back to narrower rear ends with relatively wide spoke spacing.
The system above offers 1:1 and 1:0.7 so you would still have to run a 9 speed to get the same number of gear ratios. It is certainly an interesting product and line of thought. I'm sure with a dedicated MTB hub built with larger cassettes in mind (even if the 'minimum' was 34 instead of 28) the extra real estate in the hub could potentially offer better sealing or more range.
With a completely electronic system and a 6 speed cassette with the correct ratios, you could halve the cassette width and still keep the current 12...
With a completely electronic system and a 6 speed cassette with the correct ratios, you could halve the cassette width and still keep the current 12 speeds and their ratios. Which would be beneficial for the chain line, spoke angles and so on. Might even be possible to go back to narrower rear ends with relatively wide spoke spacing.
The system above offers 1:1 and 1:0.7 so you would still have to run a 9 speed to get the same number of gear ratios. It...
The system above offers 1:1 and 1:0.7 so you would still have to run a 9 speed to get the same number of gear ratios. It is certainly an interesting product and line of thought. I'm sure with a dedicated MTB hub built with larger cassettes in mind (even if the 'minimum' was 34 instead of 28) the extra real estate in the hub could potentially offer better sealing or more range.
Nope, 6 cogs can give you 12 ratios
I'll write a bit more about this in the afternoon, I already did some quick calculations in Excel yesterday.
Thoughts on this having a place in the MTB world?
https://cyclingtips.com/2020/07/this-rear-hub-has-2x-wireless-shifting-inside-and-11-gears-on-the-outside/[img]https://cdn-cyclingtips.pressidium.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Classified-hub-internals.jpg[/img]
With a completely electronic system and a 6 speed cassette with the correct ratios, you could halve the cassette width and still keep the current 12...
With a completely electronic system and a 6 speed cassette with the correct ratios, you could halve the cassette width and still keep the current 12 speeds and their ratios. Which would be beneficial for the chain line, spoke angles and so on. Might even be possible to go back to narrower rear ends with relatively wide spoke spacing.
The system above offers 1:1 and 1:0.7 so you would still have to run a 9 speed to get the same number of gear ratios. It...
The system above offers 1:1 and 1:0.7 so you would still have to run a 9 speed to get the same number of gear ratios. It is certainly an interesting product and line of thought. I'm sure with a dedicated MTB hub built with larger cassettes in mind (even if the 'minimum' was 34 instead of 28) the extra real estate in the hub could potentially offer better sealing or more range.
Thoughts on this having a place in the MTB world?
https://cyclingtips.com/2020/07/this-rear-hub-has-2x-wireless-shifting-inside-and-11-gears-on-the-outside/[img]https://cdn-cyclingtips.pressidium.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Classified-hub-internals.jpg[/img]
Not technically new technology but here’s another brand selling the Mullet setup straight from the factory. Seems like it’s almost part for part the same bike that wyn and Martin are racing on
The system above offers 1:1 and 1:0.7 so you would still have to run a 9 speed to get the same number of gear ratios. It...
The system above offers 1:1 and 1:0.7 so you would still have to run a 9 speed to get the same number of gear ratios. It is certainly an interesting product and line of thought. I'm sure with a dedicated MTB hub built with larger cassettes in mind (even if the 'minimum' was 34 instead of 28) the extra real estate in the hub could potentially offer better sealing or more range.
You are definitely correct! I was thinking gear range, my bad.
I actually read it as that. Anywho, the way I'd use this, completely integrated, is with a cassette of 6 cogs, which would be 10, 14, 19, 26, 35 and 49. With a ~0,85 easy gear ratio of this planetary gearbox, you very nicely drop just in the middle 'cogs' of the cassette once engaged (as opposed to 1:1 ratio), meaning you get virtual 11,8, 16,5, 22,4, 30,7, 41,3 and 57,8 toothed cogs. And almost 580% of range.
The planetary gearbox ratio was determined by trial and error, same goes for the cassette (smaller cogs emant weird jumps between gears in at least one part of the cassette) and it gives a very smooth drivetrain jumps wise with a minimal jump of 14 % (only one under 15 %, going from 30,7 to 35 'cog'), max jump of 18,6 % and an average jump of 17 %.
Pic (jump 1 is 10 to '11,8' or 10 underdriven):
I've added the current crop of Sram Eagle systems (shows how utterly stupid the 52T cassette is) and Shimanos' 10-51 cassette. This combo geartrain is more constant throughout the range than both and gives more range than both as well.
How to achieve that? You start in the 10T cog and in 1:1 mode on the planetary. Pressing the shifter to choose 1 gear lighter switches the internal hub. Pressing it again switches BOTH the internal hub and the chain on the cassette.
Minuses? The jumps on the cassette are very big, it might be hard to get reliable shifting with the current state of affairs, shift ramps in the style of front shifting might be needed. And I don't see this happening without electronic shifting as you simultaneously shift two different systems. And the timing of the shifts might be an issue. It maybe could be possible with a twin indexing system in the trigger shifter by using two cables, but yeah, this is a challenge.
The benefits? Narrower cassette, narrower hubs and/or wider flange spacing on the hubs. That's the main thing and I don't think it'd be worth it unless either Sram or Shimano went that route for total integration. As to why? Well if you have a system that shifts smoothly under full load, you want to use it all the time. It doesn't make sense to me to use with a DH cassette or as a Hammerschmidt, because those are cassette double-uppers, where, once you reach one end of it, you have to move across the WHOLE cassette (and shift the fast and smooth mechanism only once) in order to get to the 'next gear'. And we all know how well that turns out. So why not use it all the time? I agree, using small DH like clusters seems nice (weight wise, production cost wise, shifting performance wise), but the negative, in my opinion, is just too great. You're effectively back to 2x gears of yore. And nobody likes those too much, the simplicity of 1x systems is just awesome.
i've always felt / said that the hammerschmidt was ahead of its time.
Yes and no. The issue with Hammerschmidt for example was that it wasn't really compatible with the bikes it was put on. Because it was mostly an either-or spec list with 2x drivetrains. And when you design antisquat curves for ~32T chainrings (or larger), the 22T (was it 22T?) of the Hammerschmidt will cause unwanted bob. Design a bike specifically for a Hammerschmidt and a normal 2x drivetrain will be crappy.
It would work very well with the current crop of idler bikes though, there would be no antisquat changes there.
One of the Cannondale lads is riding an interesting bike in the new 50to01 video, looks like the proto dh bike from last year but eagle drivetrain suggests maybe more of a long travel "superenduro" type bike
It's the bike that has been seen in the whistler lienup before. It's an 'enduro' thing, this isn't the DH bike as it doesn't have any front/upper shock mounts.
One of the Cannondale lads is riding an interesting bike in the new 50to01 video, looks like the proto dh bike from last year but eagle...
One of the Cannondale lads is riding an interesting bike in the new 50to01 video, looks like the proto dh bike from last year but eagle drivetrain suggests maybe more of a long travel "superenduro" type bike
I posted about it a few days back. It looked like the proto habit.
I posted about it a few days back. It looked like the proto habit.
Saw that exact proto at Mountain creek a few weeks back. Doesn't have an upper shock mount, but does have a mottle cage mount. That particular bike did not have a dual crown fork, instead it had a 170 mm fox 36, and Float X2.
Yea the DH based c-dale Enduro bike has been floating around this and the 2020 team rumors thread since last year. Waiting on those numbers and it's time to own a Cannondale.....
You can actually buy the new Slash at the moment, but no press release? Weird. Reading the comments there the new Knockblock 2.0 is removable and isn’t required if you dont want it.
Bike industry has planned obsolescence and early life failure down to a tee though! Saw a video of the Levo SL, open up the charge plug and there is water in there...
https://cyclingtips.com/2020/07/this-rear-hub-has-2x-wireless-shifting-…
I'll write a bit more about this in the afternoon, I already did some quick calculations in Excel yesterday.
https://www.bikeexchange.com.au/s/dual-suspension-mountain-bikes/trek?s…
I would love a new, lighter Hammerschmidt that you could pair with the e*13 DH cassette and an even smaller derailleur....
Not technically new technology but here’s another brand selling the Mullet setup straight from the factory. Seems like it’s almost part for part the same bike that wyn and Martin are racing on
The planetary gearbox ratio was determined by trial and error, same goes for the cassette (smaller cogs emant weird jumps between gears in at least one part of the cassette) and it gives a very smooth drivetrain jumps wise with a minimal jump of 14 % (only one under 15 %, going from 30,7 to 35 'cog'), max jump of 18,6 % and an average jump of 17 %.
Pic (jump 1 is 10 to '11,8' or 10 underdriven):
I've added the current crop of Sram Eagle systems (shows how utterly stupid the 52T cassette is) and Shimanos' 10-51 cassette. This combo geartrain is more constant throughout the range than both and gives more range than both as well.
How to achieve that? You start in the 10T cog and in 1:1 mode on the planetary. Pressing the shifter to choose 1 gear lighter switches the internal hub. Pressing it again switches BOTH the internal hub and the chain on the cassette.
Minuses? The jumps on the cassette are very big, it might be hard to get reliable shifting with the current state of affairs, shift ramps in the style of front shifting might be needed. And I don't see this happening without electronic shifting as you simultaneously shift two different systems. And the timing of the shifts might be an issue. It maybe could be possible with a twin indexing system in the trigger shifter by using two cables, but yeah, this is a challenge.
The benefits? Narrower cassette, narrower hubs and/or wider flange spacing on the hubs. That's the main thing and I don't think it'd be worth it unless either Sram or Shimano went that route for total integration. As to why? Well if you have a system that shifts smoothly under full load, you want to use it all the time. It doesn't make sense to me to use with a DH cassette or as a Hammerschmidt, because those are cassette double-uppers, where, once you reach one end of it, you have to move across the WHOLE cassette (and shift the fast and smooth mechanism only once) in order to get to the 'next gear'. And we all know how well that turns out. So why not use it all the time? I agree, using small DH like clusters seems nice (weight wise, production cost wise, shifting performance wise), but the negative, in my opinion, is just too great. You're effectively back to 2x gears of yore. And nobody likes those too much, the simplicity of 1x systems is just awesome.
It would work very well with the current crop of idler bikes though, there would be no antisquat changes there.
[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7vJcvhwkf8][/url]
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation