21/22 Bikes That Make Your Shorts Tighter.

Same my reversed offset bushing raised the bb a bit but its still lower ythan stock. 165 cranks helped a bit too. But then after a few months im used to the low bb and its awesome. On my emtb it was quite low in the low position compared to other bikes(more pedal strikes on emtb's too, pedalling up through teh chunderz). Now the emtb seems evrer so slightly high compared to my mulletized meta am 29. Theres only a few mm in bb height between them so i think im where i want to be. A bit of time is all it takes. Both bikes rail in the corners now with 29f,27r, shorter cranks, and bb's in the pocket. Reminded every corner

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

This might be the year I try 165’s, if I can find a set.

I dont think youll regret it. Just put 160's on the eeb. Zero dead spot. You cant help but spin circles. Feels great aside from the additional clearance.
Finding some shimanos might be hard but maybe theyre rf. RF probably has some stock options, or if its shimano, hope or canfield are purty

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

Ok, so after a few big descents in Perú, and a healthy 5 day adventure in Moab, here are my thoughts. The first thing I had to do was run the ride9 in the tallest position. Pedal strikes were a real issue. Changing to standard SPD’s from the Trail ones seemed to help. Otherwise, no real handling differences (and I mean that in a good way), but it was much easier to wheelie, especially in the short wheelbase position. It did everything well, and I only rubbed tire against ass once, whereas with 29 it happened way too frequently.
If I can, I want to try the 27.5 version of the Altitude with a 29” fork and see if that helps the pedal strikes, but I doubt it will be a huge difference, TBH.
I have two wheels set up, and will likely change them depending on the ride du jour.
hope that helps!

---

I've been thinking this modular shock mount could come in handy for a mullet set up. Or a different ride-9 chip... Anyone with a 3d printer want to do some experimenting?

Been loving the Altitude in pos 2 with short chainstay. I've only had ass buzz once or twice but could definitely see the advantage to mulleting this bad boy with my short legs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VTskibum

Thought of this yesterday as I rode w/ couple younger enduro-bros who I normally have little/no problem keeping up with on the down on my FS 100mm or 130mm trail bike (and I destroy the young'ins going up). But did get a very clear reminder yesterday of bike geo improvements getting dropped on the downs while riding my 10 y/o SS Ti 29er on the same trails. Had been contemplating a more modern HT/SS which yesterdays experience solidified the desire for.

Lots of good options, but not as many SS'able frames in the 68-65* HTA realm. Honzo and Chameleon are standouts, maybe the Spec Fuse 29. Pretty curious about some of the UK offerings, but don't think any have sliders.

---

Was gonna suggest Canfield, the Nimble Nine I got last year is awesome. Ended up buying one for my girlfriend too and she loves it. Looks like they’re sold out like every other bike right now too though.

Attachment 373220

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beaterdit

Was gonna suggest Canfield, the Nimble Nine I got last year is awesome. Ended up buying one for my girlfriend too and she loves it. Looks like they’re sold out like every other bike right now too though.

Attachment 373220

---

Yep was on the short list as well, but none to be found. I was able to test ride a Fuse and put my order in for a L. Hopefully shows up this summer sometime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Anyone interested in a 2020 XL Aluminum Troy frame after I (maybe) get this?
Attachment 373446

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakezee

Anyone interested in a 2020 XL Aluminum Troy frame after I (maybe) get this?
Attachment 373446

---

That Ferrum looks like it has a falling rate leverage curve, which would be a - let’s say, ‘interesting’ - design choice.

Maybe you could justify it with and air shock, and you could throw in a bunch of volume spacers to make the shock more progressive to counteract the regressive leverage ratio. But it also looks like they have a longer travel version, still with the regressive leverage ratio, but with a coil shock - can’t fix that with volume spacers...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beaterdit

Attachment 373220

---

Just here to say: that’s a great looking bike!


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong

That Ferrum looks like it has a falling rate leverage curve, which would be a - let’s say, ‘interesting’ - design choice.

Maybe you could justify it with and air shock, and you could throw in a bunch of volume spacers to make the shock more progressive to counteract the regressive leverage ratio. But it also looks like they have a longer travel version, still with the regressive leverage ratio, but with a coil shock - can’t fix that with volume spacers...

---

Do you have a good resource to understand this concept? I've seen some charts but never really tried to understand.

I like the feel and capability of the 2020 Aluminum Troy I have but I would really like to get a steel frame for all the reasons everyone likes steel - but don't want to give up rear end performance...looking at a few other brands but Ferrum is made in US, has a good value and looks decent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakezee

Do you have a good resource to understand this concept? I've seen some charts but never really tried to understand.

---

Sorry, I don’t have a resource for you, I’m going off design experience. For most of today’s suspension designs with multiple links, or even linkage driven single pivots the only way to get an accurate leverage ratio curve would be to use a software program to analyze the shock compression vs. wheel travel.

However, I can give a generalization: draw a straight line from where the shock mounts to the front triangle to where the shock mounts to the swing arm/rocker link, then draw another straight line from where the shock mounts to the swing arm/rocker link to the swing arm/rocker link pivot on the main triangle. If the angle between those two lines is less than 90 degrees, and the angle is increases as the suspension compresses, then you’d have a rising rate curve. If the angle between those two lines is greater than 90 degrees and the angle is increasing as the suspension compresses, then you’d have a falling rate curve. It would also be possible to have design where the angle is less than 90 degrees to start, moves to 90 at some point is the bikes travel, and continues on past 90 – that would have a rising rate early, then switching to falling rate.

This analysis is looking at the rocker link rotation to shock displacement though, not wheel travel to shock displacement. For most designs, rocker link rotation isn’t directly proportional to wheel displacement. However, on a single pivot suspension where the shock is driven directly from the swingarm – like the Ferrum – the above analysis is accurate.

If you want to see an example of a suspension design with a single pivot, but rising rate, take a look at the Orange Stage 6 or Stage Evo.

^^^ the orange stage 6 is essentially straight linear. Just from eyeballing it, I bet the Ferrum is pretty close to straight linear as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

^^^ the orange stage 6 is essentially straight linear. Just from eyeballing it, I bet the Ferrum is pretty close to straight linear as well.

---

The previous Stage 6 was almost completely linear - Pinkbike’s analysis said 0.6% progressive. The newest version has a bit more progression, but you’re right that it’s not going to be much.

I’m quite confident that the Ferrum is falling rate, but it’s not a huge falling rate. Still seems like an odd design choice. Reading some owners talk about the Ferrum on Pinkbike, a number are saying they seem to be blowing through travel too easily, and at least one said Ferrum is shipping the bikes the the max number of volume reducers in the shock so they can’t get any additional help there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong

The previous Stage 6 was almost completely linear - Pinkbike’s analysis said 0.6% progressive. The newest version has a bit more progression, but you’re right that it’s not going to be much.

I’m quite confident that the Ferrum is falling rate, but it’s not a huge falling rate. Still seems like an odd design choice. Reading some owners talk about the Ferrum on Pinkbike, a number are saying they seem to be blowing through travel too easily, and at least one said Ferrum is shipping the bikes the the max number of volume reducers in the shock so they can’t get any additional help there.

---

It looks like the newer stage 6 is something like 3-4% progressive. Still effectively pretty much straight linear. But yeah, agreed that the ferrum is probably slightly falling rate. Maybe -1% or something like that. I'm not sure that'll make too much of a difference in the ride quality of the suspension compared to the Orange, but it does raise some questions about how much the guys at Ferrum really planned out their design.

Either way - lots of volume reducers are probably the ticket on both the orange and the ferrum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

... but it does raise some questions about how much the guys at Ferrum really planned out their design.

---

This basically sums up my feelings. There’s no good reason to make the suspension falling rate, even if only slightly. My concern is that if they aren’t getting that detail right, they’re probably missing some others as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong

This basically sums up my feelings. There’s no good reason to make the suspension falling rate, even if only slightly. My concern is that if they aren’t getting that detail right, they’re probably missing some others as well.

---

"Let's make a suspension design that sacrifices favorable kinematics and still can't fit a water bottle."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong

Sorry, I don’t have a resource for you, I’m going off design experience. For most of today’s suspension designs with multiple links, or even linkage driven single pivots the only way to get an accurate leverage ratio curve would be to use a software program to analyze the shock compression vs. wheel travel.

However, I can give a generalization: draw a straight line from where the shock mounts to the front triangle to where the shock mounts to the swing arm/rocker link, then draw another straight line from where the shock mounts to the swing arm/rocker link to the swing arm/rocker link pivot on the main triangle. If the angle between those two lines is less than 90 degrees, and the angle is increases as the suspension compresses, then you’d have a rising rate curve. If the angle between those two lines is greater than 90 degrees and the angle is increasing as the suspension compresses, then you’d have a falling rate curve. It would also be possible to have design where the angle is less than 90 degrees to start, moves to 90 at some point is the bikes travel, and continues on past 90 – that would have a rising rate early, then switching to falling rate.

This analysis is looking at the rocker link rotation to shock displacement though, not wheel travel to shock displacement. For most designs, rocker link rotation isn’t directly proportional to wheel displacement. However, on a single pivot suspension where the shock is driven directly from the swingarm – like the Ferrum – the above analysis is accurate.

If you want to see an example of a suspension design with a single pivot, but rising rate, take a look at the Orange Stage 6 or Stage Evo.

---

Thank you!

...So if they were to move the lower pivot up the top tube a bit, then it would get to be rising rate (progressive)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakezee

Thank you!

...So if they were to move the lower pivot up the top tube a bit, then it would get to be rising rate (progressive)?

---

...and/or shorter eye to eye and move the mount down the down tube.
I think I get it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakezee

Thank you!

...So if they were to move the lower pivot up the top tube a bit, then it would get to be rising rate (progressive)?

---

Yes, moving the main (swing arm) pivot higher or more forward while keeping the other pivots in the same location would make it more progressive. However, moving the main pivot also changes the rest of the kinematics as well (anti-squat, anti-rise, etc.).

If you only wanted to change leverage ratio, then you’d go about it from the opposite end - move the point where the shock attaches to the main triangle lower, without moving the main pivot at all.

gee its almost like people can't tell fuck all about a bike by just looking at it !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

gee its almost like people can't tell fuck all about a bike by just looking at it !

---

True! Your brain is going to really start hurting well before you successfully visualize how all the links are moving and where that puts the instant center at various points in the bikes travel.

Other than single pivots it’s pretty hard to estimate kinematics just from looking at it (you’re not going to be able to look at a bike and deduce whether it has 80% anti-squat or 120%).

single pivots are a bit easier: if it looks like an early 90’s cannondale Super-V, you have too much anti-squat, if the main pivot is concentric with the bottom bracket - like an old Rotec - you have too little anti-squat.

I am just taking the piss out of every person who has ever said " that bike looks yada yada "

I can usually figure out how something mechanicaly works but no way I can tell you how its gona handle when we are talking mm of pivot placement/ link length and i don't think anyone else can eitehr

Trying to pull this back off engi-nerd suspension rate talk.... just heard my new Hardtail is supposed to be shipped early June (much to my surprise) so far.

So collective question which MTB bike should I sell to keep under the D-1 (like N+1, but in this case D=Divorce).
1) 2014/15 Pivot 429sl v2 non-boost, RS World Cup 100mm fork, XT brakes, XT/XTR mixed drivetrain, RF Next SL w/ carbon Stages PM, Reynolds Carbon wheels, Carbon bar, Spec dropper, XC/light trail tires. Thinking $2200, might be higher but there is a cable rub mark under the BB from brake line that I'd of course disclose.

2) 2010 Ti Lynskey Pro 29 w/ paragon sliders QR front/rear w 1 1/8" steerer tube, w/ even older Fox RLC 100mm, custom Ti seatpost or Thomson, Stans Crest wheels (non carbon), running SS now, with XTR race brakes circa '12, alu bars/thomson stem. Thinking $1000, but that might be some emotional attachment.

Actually have a bit of an attachment to both, and ride both relatively frequently. Already have a '19 Sworks Stumpjumper ST and ordered a Spec Fuse Expert for fun HT/screw-around bike that I'll probably switch between SS and geared and 29x2.6 and 27.5x2.8s (buddy giving me free 27.5 plus wheels). Want to standardize/modernize a bit on Boost and don't plan on much XC racing for the foreseeable future.

Prices seem reasonable? WWMD for selling one or maybe both? Ok off to get my legs ripped off for Tuesday night worlds

Sell the Pivot now to a newb Covid rider who doesn't know about boost/non-boost and just sees CARBONS! I think you can get more like $2500-3000 depending on where you live. It will tank in value in a year or so. Plus your SJ has a lot of overlap with it.

The Lynskey won't draw the suckers... err, newbs... so not really worth the effort of selling, especially if you're emotionally attached.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VTskibum

Trying to pull this back off engi-nerd suspension rate talk.... just heard my new Hardtail is supposed to be shipped early June (much to my surprise) so far.

So collective question which MTB bike should I sell to keep under the D-1 (like N+1, but in this case D=Divorce).
1) 2014/15 Pivot 429sl v2 non-boost, RS World Cup 100mm fork, XT brakes, XT/XTR mixed drivetrain, RF Next SL w/ carbon Stages PM, Reynolds Carbon wheels, Carbon bar, Spec dropper, XC/light trail tires. Thinking $2200, might be higher but there is a cable rub mark under the BB from brake line that I'd of course disclose.

2) 2010 Ti Lynskey Pro 29 w/ paragon sliders QR front/rear w 1 1/8" steerer tube, w/ even older Fox RLC 100mm, custom Ti seatpost or Thomson, Stans Crest wheels (non carbon), running SS now, with XTR race brakes circa '12, alu bars/thomson stem. Thinking $1000, but that might be some emotional attachment.

Actually have a bit of an attachment to both, and ride both relatively frequently. Already have a '19 Sworks Stumpjumper ST and ordered a Spec Fuse Expert for fun HT/screw-around bike that I'll probably switch between SS and geared and 29x2.6 and 27.5x2.8s (buddy giving me free 27.5 plus wheels). Want to standardize/modernize a bit on Boost and don't plan on much XC racing for the foreseeable future.

Prices seem reasonable? WWMD for selling one or maybe both? Ok off to get my legs ripped off for Tuesday night worlds

---

I think the Pivot can fetch far more with that spec. I sold a 15/16 5010 C with SLX/XT, RS Gold fork, dropper and nothing else special for for $2500...