Page 3 of 39 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 150 of 1919
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1
    And your impressions about the bike? the ride? and frame stiffness?

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    622

    Eric seems to like it a lot

    My buddy Eric took it out yesterday. He called the ride nimble and supple. He did bottom the suspension a few times, so it's not dialed in yet. I'll try to get a hold of it for a ride at some point and put it through its paces.

    Sorry for the upside down photo.

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    79
    Now I know what an Australian MTB looks like!

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: two-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    594
    I got sick of turning my laptop upside down:



    Looks nice... who's next?

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,663
    Quote Originally Posted by nbwallace View Post
    There are bearings in the lower
    and upper main pivots. Everything else has bolts that act as bushings. I fear for
    the longevity of the pivots.
    Have any pics of these disassembled? That really doesn't good. I'd seriously consider getting a machine shop to turn up some Delrin bushings and custom bolts for you. I really don't see the pivots lasting too long like that and then you'll be looking at worn pivots that will need to be machined round again.

    Also, does front derailleur cable housing anchor into the swingarm? It's hard to tell from the photos, but it almost looks that way.

    It certainly looks nice and I'm glad he's happy with it. I'm personally still in the camp of not willing to be an early adopter.

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reydin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,053
    Quote Originally Posted by two-one View Post
    I got sick of turning my laptop upside down:



    Looks nice... who's next?
    Wow , it might grow on me but right now, fugly comes to mind.
    If I had a black light this place would look like a Jackson Pollock painting.

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,760
    Quote Originally Posted by two-one View Post
    I got sick of turning my laptop upside down:



    Looks nice... who's next?
    I like It.
    15 Yeti ASR-c
    14 Yeti ARC
    16 Bianchi Specialissima
    15 Echo Big Deal
    15 Roubaix S-Works

  8. #108
    A waste of time it is is
    Reputation: emu26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,283
    Quote Originally Posted by reydin View Post
    Wow , it might grow on me but right now, fugly comes to mind.
    Don't know that I would say that but I know I'm not sold on that cable routing under the bb area.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vizsladog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,320
    giant anthem will build lighter than that. I saw a 24lb build on here.

    The anthem frame weighs 5lbs 6oz. including the shock

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    622

    Thanks for fixing the photo

    The medium AC-036 only weighed 2040g without shock. That's about 2270 with, which is still almost one third of a pound lighter than the Giant. I'd think you'd drop a lot more building up the Giant to 24 lbs. I can't tell you what I've spent on the Spider to get it to about 26.2 plus I got a great deal on the frame. Also your bike would then say Giant in about 27 places.

    Eric likes the frame, there is one linkage which needs some kind of washer to keep it from knocking. It's more of an annoyance. If this frame came down to something like $600 it would be a great ride for the money.

    I also think it's a nice looking frame, especially in matte carbon.

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vizsladog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,320
    not busting on you. just saying there are some light anthem builds out there.

    the frame looks great. just wondering about any warranty issues ect.

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation: grouan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    257
    Very cool write and build post- Gracias for posting up the project.

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Napfgeist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    116
    Great review and nice setup, thanks!
    Can you provide a picture with the rear tire clearance?
    Thanks

  14. #114
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    Does anyone else sense something fundamentally wrong with such a chainstay mounted rear disc caliper on a FS bike? From an observational point of view, that's asking for brake jack, since the caliper is clamping the rotor as it's making a downward motion, which would create a force that would also drive the swingarm downward, stiffening the suspension under braking. The typical caliper location creates a force that is up-forward (a little pro brake-squat) at sag and less up and more forward as you get deeper in travel (more brake neutral).

  15. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Does anyone else sense something fundamentally wrong with such a chainstay mounted rear disc caliper on a FS bike? From an observational point of view, that's asking for brake jack, since the caliper is clamping the rotor as it's making a downward motion, which would create a force that would also drive the swingarm downward, stiffening the suspension under braking. The typical caliper location creates a force that is up-forward (a little pro brake-squat) at sag and less up and more forward as you get deeper in travel (more brake neutral).
    Aside from there being no consensus on what is good and what isn't, this isn't functionally different than many single pivot designs, it's just odd for a design that has a pivot on the "seatstay". Simple swingarm designs are like this.

  16. #116
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Aside from there being no consensus on what is good and what isn't, this isn't functionally different than many single pivot designs, it's just odd for a design that has a pivot on the "seatstay". Simple swingarm designs are like this.


    I'm criticizing the location of the rear disc brake caliper. It doesn't really matter what suspension design it is, except for a few designs that have lots of rearward travel/axle path. They're all designed to go up, and that brake is directing forces downward. That's the dreaded brake jack that most bikes have been dreading before the days disc brakes became popular.


    Niner CVA - the caliper catches the rotor when it is moving forward, which has minimal effect on suspension action. Not sure how CVA looks fully compressed, but considering the relatively vertical axle path of CVA suspension design, I doubt its braking characteristics change much according to where it is in its travel.


    Trek ABP - the caliper catches the rotor when it is moving forward, and a little up, having a very slight effect on suspension action, actually make it feel plusher due to the slight brake squat. Due to the arcing axle path, and how the seatstay tilts a little further in its travel range, it becomes more neutral with less braking squat as you get deeper in travel.


    Zerode G1 - Here's a bike known to have brake jack. The brake is mounted on the primary swingarm, which is the main arm that goes from the main pivot to the axle. The braking forces pushes forward, while the swingarm wants to arc backwards and upwards. As it gets deeper in travel, the braking forces want to push down and forward, countering the forces that bumps have on the suspension. This is why such high pivot designs typically have floating brakes. See YouTube video clip of how its braking habits change significantly as it goes through its travel and why similar bikes have floating brakes. Australians making things backwards... Sorry, just teasing.


    Devinci Wilson - proper disc caliper mounting location for isolating braking forces on high single pivot. The swingarm is not always the chainstay, as seen on the two high single pivots above. Note how the mount comes out to position the brake caliper into a position that catches the rotor during the forward moving part of its rotation for relatively* neutral braking (* still counters the rearward travel/axle path).


    Santa Cruz Bullit - Santa Cruz had very limited space to fit this caliper location in, but they put it in a very good spot, before going with a floating brake mount.


    Another faux bar. Hoping that people see the pattern.


    Fabien Barel's Kona that he won the DH World Champs on. He specifically asked for more brake squat, which is why the floating brake is configured that way--it catches rotor so it has more upward force, which apply forces that would try to compress the suspension or lift the axle. Since this pivot arcs back at first, maybe that was a wise move, as this setup counters that rearward arc even less than a more "neutral braking" setup.

    The chainstay mount works for a hardtail, as it only helps to drive the rear end into the ground more, for extra friction between the ground and wheel. In this single pivot application, it works like anti-squat, extending the swingarm. Taking it further than that, my conclusion is the probably not much more credible than others.

  17. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,663
    Most of the photos you posted aren't "faux bar" like this frame. On a "faux bar", the lower swingarm is where the the caliper needs to be anchored unless the upper linkage shares a pivot with the axle (Trek). Assuming that's where you mount the caliper, it doesn't matter how you orient it. The braking force is going to twist the swingarm in the same direction that the tire is rolling. Mounting the caliper at 12 o'clock or 9 o'clock won't have any impact on how braking compresses the suspension.

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    I'm criticizing the location of the rear disc brake caliper. It doesn't really matter what suspension design it is, except for a few designs that have lots of rearward travel/axle path. They're all designed to go up, and that brake is directing forces downward. That's the dreaded brake jack that most bikes have been dreading before the days disc brakes became popular.
    ...
    The chainstay mount works for a hardtail, as it only helps to drive the rear end into the ground more, for extra friction between the ground and wheel. In this single pivot application, it works like anti-squat, extending the swingarm. Taking it further than that, my conclusion is the probably not much more credible than others.
    I agree with your last sentence, the rest is a joke. You understand brake jack like you understand anti-squat,,,much too poorly to be commenting on it.

  19. #119
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    On a "faux bar", the lower swingarm is where the the caliper needs to be anchored unless the upper linkage shares a pivot with the axle (Trek).
    I thought the main design feature behind split pivot and ABP was not mounting the caliper on the main swingarm, to further isolate braking forces from suspension forces, compared to other single pivots. Who says you *need* to mount it on the "lower" swingarm? Isn't it just because it happens to be a stronger place to put it, for faux bars designs, allowing you to lighten up the seat stays? I'm not saying it should be mounted on the seatstay. It's just the position that looks wrong to me. The designers who mount it between the chainstay and seatstay on hardtails say it improves braking power, but I guess that's more bike industry bullcrap, unless they mean because of greater airflow over the pads. It's in one of the articles about those bikes that I recall reading some comment about how it drives the wheel into the ground for more braking traction.

    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    Assuming that's where you mount the caliper, it doesn't matter how you orient it. The braking force is going to twist the swingarm in the same direction that the tire is rolling. Mounting the caliper at 12 o'clock or 9 o'clock won't have any impact on how braking compresses the suspension.
    Do you mind elaborating? Why wouldn't it matter if it's mounted at 12 or at 9 or anywhere else for that matter? If what you say is true, what caused the brake jack of older single pivot/faux bar designs, including designs with rim brakes? I know many confused brake squat with brake jack, but I know some were clear about designs stiffening under braking. Do mind including how your explanation covers designs with floating brakes like the Kona DOPE, Lahar, Bullit, Lawwill, etc.? Also, mind explaining how it works to initiate a nose dive when used in mid-air, if that's relevant?

    I'm assuming I'm asking the right guy, who knows of statics and dynamics.

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    The designers who mount it between the chainstay and seatstay on hardtails say it improves braking power, but I guess that's more bike industry bullcrap, unless they mean because of greater airflow over the pads. It's in one of the articles about those bikes that I recall reading some comment about how it drives the wheel into the ground for more braking traction.
    Yes, that would be bullcrap.

    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Why wouldn't it matter if it's mounted at 12 or at 9 or anywhere else for that matter? If what you say is true, what caused the brake jack of older single pivot/faux bar designs, including designs with rim brakes?
    Mass transfer, the same thing that causes dive in the fork.

    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    I know many confused brake squat with brake jack, but I know some were clear about designs stiffening under braking.
    Squat and jack are directions, not unique phenomena. The rear suspension naturally jacks under braking. The geometry of the rear suspension + brake will generate a force that resists that jacking tendency (though negative values will amplify it). Designers can choose to control this force using a floating brake or they can mount the caliper on the swing arm and let the force be determined by the main pivot. The orientation of the caliper is not what matters.

    There is no agreement on the right amount of brake anti-jack as there is with anti-squat. Anti-jack works by unweighting the wheel so benefits come with liabilities.

  21. #121
    Hi.
    Reputation: jtmartino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,868
    I've got a good experiment. Flip your bike over, spin the wheel and then grab it with your hand. It will apply a force in the same direction of the wheel rotation, regardless of where you grab on the wheel.

    Suspension designs come into play in the direction of wheel rotation while braking. Where the caliper is located is not as important as the design of the suspension itself.

    For hardtails, placing the caliper on the chainstay was popular because the chainstays are usually stronger and don't always require frame reinforcement. I prefer seatstay mounted for convenience.

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,663
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    I thought the main design feature behind split pivot and ABP was not mounting the caliper on the main swingarm, to further isolate braking forces from suspension forces, compared to other single pivots. Who says you *need* to mount it on the "lower" swingarm?
    Sorry, I don't think I was clear with that. My point was that the caliper needs to be mounted to the same arm that is carrying the axle mount. The reason is so that the caliper isn't moving relative to the disc as you compress the suspension. The Trek ABP is unique in that they place the linkage pivot at the same point as the axle. This gives you the freedom to mount the caliper to either linkage arm. You are correct in stating that the whole point behind ABP is to isolate the braking force from acting on the suspension.

    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Do you mind elaborating? Why wouldn't it matter if it's mounted at 12 or at 9 or anywhere else for that matter? If what you say is true, what caused the brake jack of older single pivot/faux bar designs, including designs with rim brakes? I know many confused brake squat with brake jack, but I know some were clear about designs stiffening under braking.
    The force on the caliper causes an equal and opposite reaction at the axle. These cancel out. What's driving the suspension to compress (edit: squat) is that you have the wheel spinning and you are now locking the wheel to the swingarm. This makes the swingarm want to rotate in the same direction as the wheel, which compresses it.

    The design types with a floating caliper and added linkage attempt to separate these forces and drive the resulting force into the frame, not the suspension.
    Last edited by car_nut; 12-22-2011 at 05:40 AM.

  23. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1
    Hey thanks for the write up and pics.
    I'm the guy that got the ebay $639 price before they raised it to $1100 then pulled the frame all together. Happy estore said that they couldnt ship for 5 to 6 weeks and wanted to refund my money. I said "I'll wait". They wrote back "you are the lucky dog...the price is now $1100!"
    Hope it shows up. I'll post the progress.
    Any news updates on the ride?

  24. #124
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    Yea, I was wrong from the moment I was thinking the force created from braking was a vector instead of a torque. That experiment won't really help if I'm dead set thinking it's a vector, as I could just explain it as a force that follows a tangent line, perpendicular to a line drawn from the center of the wheel to the point where I grabbed the edge of the wheel. That's sort of the definition of a torque though, with the axis in consideration. I could just conveniently ignore the axis, though.

    I realized that soon enough when I had people* raising the bullcrap flag and I bothered to look it up, as it was a simple enough mistake. *specifically car_nut, as craigsj seems to like to ridicule others and argue over semantics more than science. Thanks for the extra explanations though.

    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    The design types with a floating caliper and added linkage attempt to separate these forces and drive the resulting force into the frame, not the suspension.
    I guess what I really wanted to know was an in-depth explanation on how the design works on Fabien Barel's floating mount brake, which was designed to induce more brake squat in a controlled manner. I recall a comment saying the brake squat in the rear was intended to balance the bike out with fork dive in consideration. I don't really want to think that is bullcrap. Actually, nevermind, that belongs in another thread.

    It's enough to know that odd caliper location doesn't affect brake jack/anti-squat or squat.
    Last edited by Varaxis; 12-22-2011 at 11:02 PM.

  25. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wobbem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    567
    Re Varaxis.
    Ah just to clarify, the Zerode is a bike designed in New Zealand, far to complicated for the Aussies

  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    160
    I guess what I really wanted to know was an in-depth explanation on how the design works on Fabien Barel's floating mount brake, which was designed to induce more brake squat in a controlled manner. I recall a comment saying the brake squat in the rear was intended to balance the bike out with fork dive in consideration. I don't really want to think that is bullcrap. Actually, nevermind, that belongs in another thread.
    Well for starters that pic of the Kona above does not show how Fabien ran his rear brake. The Stab has 2 mount holes on the frame and in that pic the floater is mounted to the upper hole, with the lower hole by the BB.

    Mounting in the upper hole (as above) gives more neutral braking than mounting to the swingarm itself, as the caliper mount is basically held parallel to the frame throughout the suspension travel, neutrailising any of the rotational force imparted on the caliper when you pull the brake.

    The lower hole gives a whole different feel. havnt got time to explain fully just now but ill try and put together some diagrams later. Just to say tho, its VERY hard to ride a bike like this, the extreme squat of this set-up means the rear brake is much less effective (as soon as it gets grip the wheel shoots through its travel, meaning it unwieghts a little and gets less grip!). This set-up is for serious recers only, who can use it to help them squish right into berms by dragging the rear brake on the way in, pre-compressing the rear suspension so they can really pump though the corner and fire out the other side. Not a set-up for the feint harted, one panic brake and you lose all your rear travel, not fun when lending a drop or hitting a rock garden (personal experience!!!)

    Rich.

  27. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation: two-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    594
    Any updates by people riding these frames? Im really curious about the longevity non-bearing pivots. How are they holding up? And is the rear triangle stiff enough with just a QR?

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    I realized that soon enough when I had people* raising the bullcrap flag and I bothered to look it up, as it was a simple enough mistake. *specifically car_nut, as craigsj seems to like to ridicule others and argue over semantics more than science. Thanks for the extra explanations though.
    I ridicule others who pretend to understand science while passing themselves off as experts. People like you, Varaxis. The more people are informed of your pretense the more they will ignore what you have to say. It's a public service. I certainly don't care whether you learn anything about brake jack since you aren't here to learn in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    I guess what I really wanted to know was an in-depth explanation on how the design works on Fabien Barel's floating mount brake, which was designed to induce more brake squat in a controlled manner. I recall a comment saying the brake squat in the rear was intended to balance the bike out with fork dive in consideration. I don't really want to think that is bullcrap. Actually, nevermind, that belongs in another thread.
    Are you saying you haven't read Foale Chapter 9 or simply that you don't understand it? Hard to believe considering you pretended to have read it in this thread. Understanding these things takes a little more effort than just throwing a few vocabulary words around and then complaining that others argue your "semantics".

  29. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,779
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Does anyone else sense something fundamentally wrong with such a chainstay mounted rear disc caliper on a FS bike? From an observational point of view, that's asking for brake jack, since the caliper is clamping the rotor as it's making a downward motion, which would create a force that would also drive the swingarm downward, stiffening the suspension under braking. The typical caliper location creates a force that is up-forward (a little pro brake-squat) at sag and less up and more forward as you get deeper in travel (more brake neutral).
    My Felt Compulsion had it there and I didn't feel any brake jack
    Tantrum incoming
    Ibis Mojo 3
    Carver 420 TI

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,911
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    My Felt Compulsion had it there and I didn't feel any brake jack
    As was said in post #3, this bike looks similar to the Scott Spark 29. Here's an analysis of the Scott. Run it through your favorite translator as necessary.

    You can see that there isn't brake jack.

  31. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    232
    this rame looks sic and at 26.5 is pretty light but sayin a spearfish is heavier is kinda silly mines built up at 26.3 on a park tools scale. that being said i dig the look of this rig and would have fun building one up in gloss 12k.Im always lookin for a new build project

  32. #132
    Steel is Real
    Reputation: Boberinoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by two-one View Post
    I got sick of turning my laptop upside down:



    Looks nice... who's next?
    Really diggin' the build, looks great!
    #twerkteam #younggohards #JRA
    Fixed gears aint broke // All mountain all the time

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    622

    As far as I'm concerned it's not flexy

    Once begot the upper pivot tightened up the frame is less flexy with a rare QR than my Spider with a 10mm RWS. I think it's a pretty solid frame.

    My reservations would be about the pivots where there are bushings rather than bearings. That's a longevity issue, which won't be answered until many miles are put on the frame.

    The frame really looks like a Fisher Superfly 100. Obviously not as light. If the price cam down $100 it would be a deal, where it stands now at about $1050 delivered with an RT-3 it's the lightest alternative, with more travel than a sprearfish. The quality of the carbon is great.

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: two-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by nbwallace View Post
    Once begot the upper pivot tightened up the frame is less flexy with a rare QR than my Spider with a 10mm RWS. I think it's a pretty solid frame.

    My reservations would be about the pivots where there are bushings rather than bearings. That's a longevity issue, which won't be answered until many miles are put on the frame.
    So there were DU bushings on the smaller pivots? Not just bare steel bolt-on-carbon action?
    Quote Originally Posted by nbwallace View Post
    The frame really looks like a Fisher Superfly 100. Obviously not as light. If the price cam down $100 it would be a deal, where it stands now at about $1050 delivered with an RT-3 it's the lightest alternative, with more travel than a sprearfish. The quality of the carbon is great.
    I'd consider giving the technical drawing to Push, to let them tune a nice Monarch RT3 for me, and building it up with that...

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    622

    Not really bushings

    The non-bearing pivots have small holy into a nut which has a built in sleeve, which acts like a bushing, but it's not really a bushing in that it doesn't rotate independently of the bolt. I requested some spares with my road frame. When I get them, I'll shoot some pics.

    I would say the rt-3 high tune, works pretty well. Clearly a custom tune would be an improvement. If Push can come up with a custom tune, that would be awesome.

  36. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation: two-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by nbwallace View Post
    The non-bearing pivots have small holy into a nut which has a built in sleeve, which acts like a bushing, but it's not really a bushing in that it doesn't rotate independently of the bolt. I requested some spares with my road frame. When I get them, I'll shoot some pics.

    I would say the rt-3 high tune, works pretty well. Clearly a custom tune would be an improvement. If Push can come up with a custom tune, that would be awesome.
    Hm, it's those non-bearing pivots that's holding me off... especially the swing link's, as it makes a pretty big rotation. They dont even contain any delrin/teflon composite bushings? Just metal-on-metal?

    Push should be able to make a nice tune based on the leverage-graph posted earlier, right?

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    622

    It's really metal screw on carbon

    Those non-bearing pivots are really non-threaded metal on carbon. There's no teflon, also when the frame arrived no grease, which made the suspension impossible to cycle, even without a shock installed.

  38. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,663
    Quote Originally Posted by nbwallace View Post
    Those non-bearing pivots are really non-threaded metal on carbon.


    I hope that bike is a garage queen, because it isn't going to last long otherwise. Seriously. Take that thing to a machinist and have them fit some bushings and custom hardware.

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    69
    The frame has finally arrived!! Unfortunately I had to give up the matte finish. I would have to wait a few weeks. The frame was ordered in October......Hongfu

    @nbwallace: can you show me what you used to attach the shock to the frame?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Dual Suspension Chinese Carbon  29er-1.jpg  

    Dual Suspension Chinese Carbon  29er-2.jpg  


  40. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    622

    Did you find that your pivots were greased when the frame arrived?

    Have you noticed if you can cycle the pivots manually? When our frame first arrived I couldn't until I lubed all the pivots.

    It takes some doing to get the rear derailleur dialed in since at least with the xt e-mount we used the cable clamping bolt was not readily accessible. I also had to adjust the angle of the front der using a couple of washers under the frame mount.

    To mount the shock you need the rockshox m8x22.2mm kits for both the upper and lower mounts:

    Universal Cycles -- Rock Shox Monarch/Vivid/Ario 3.2 Mount Kits

    I used m8x40mm bolts for both the mounts. For the upper mount I used a m8 lock nut and for the lower mount nut I MacGyvered something together using a brass threaded insert as shown in the attached image:
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Dual Suspension Chinese Carbon  29er-photo.jpg  

    Last edited by nbwallace; 01-19-2012 at 05:10 PM.

  41. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    69
    Thanks nbwallace, very ingenious, I could not think of anything for the lower mount nut.
    About pivots, I also noticed some clutch in motion, what kind of lube did you use?

  42. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    622

    A bit of Polylube

    Quote Originally Posted by LoAl View Post
    Thanks nbwallace, very ingenious, I could not think of anything for the lower mount nut.
    About pivots, I also noticed some clutch in motion, what kind of lube did you use?
    I used polylube, but I'd guess any waterproof or synthetic grease would be fine.

    For the part I showed in the photo above I started with these:

    Amazon.com: E-Z LOK Threaded Insert For Hard Wood, M8-1.25 Int Thread - Brass (Pack of 10): Industrial & Scientific

    I threaded one onto an M8 bolt and put the bolt in a drill chuck (I used an air drill) I spun it up and filed off the outer threads. I had to cut it off a bit too. I'm rather proud of myself for coming up with the idea of a makeshift lathe.

    I found a pre-made fitting online in titanium somewhere. If someone knows of a bike with an 8mm lower link, one could probably order the through bolts for that setup.

  43. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    232
    Anybody else order one of these frames? Any updates from those that did? Do any of the vendors offer a kit for the shock mounts?

    The discussions on the pivots and the shock hardware keep pushing me away from this frame, but then the prices on similar branded frames bring me back to it. That along with there's limited options for 135mm rear and standard bottom bracket since most vendors are moving on from that.

  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    548
    Lack of shock kit is a major turnoff.

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    10
    I'm waiting for the frame. We'll see how I make do with the shock mount

  46. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation: two-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by wiro View Post
    I'm waiting for the frame. We'll see how I make do with the shock mount
    Could you make some pictures of the (disassembled) suspension pivots if possible? I'd like to know if there is any way to put a delrin bushing in there.

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    239
    Hi guys, I have one of these also, im wondering what shocks your all using on yours?
    I'm just about to order my replacement as I had a 190mm i2i on my Gary Fisher and its much bigger, it looks like it should be 184mm so im surprised at the start of the thread you put on a 165mm ???

    Thanks

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    239
    Ok i couldnt see the geometry diagram on page 1, cheers anyway chaps.

  49. #149
    J34
    J34 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by eliflap View Post
    165mm eye to eye

    1950 g the weight in 17,5"

    rear skewer 135mm not 142 , as you can see on picture ( normal mtb )
    Hrmm...this is one high maintenance frameset.

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,663
    WTF? After all I contributed to this thread I get neg rep for a "douchy comment".

Page 3 of 39 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Chinese Carbon 29er
    By crashplayer19 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 9263
    Last Post: 1 Week Ago, 09:55 AM
  2. Chinese carbon 29er frames?
    By Scott O in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 07-26-2011, 12:05 PM
  3. Chinese Carbon 29er from 2011 Hardrock
    By Pininfarina599 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-23-2011, 08:21 PM
  4. Saw a chinese carbon 29er yesterday, nice...
    By madsedan in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 06-09-2011, 05:53 AM
  5. Chinese Carbon 29er - buy it or not?
    By mountaincycle in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-21-2011, 05:57 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •