awai04
12-05-2004, 08:44 PM
As soon as that happens, I'm lining up for another bike!
|
View Full Version : When will come the sub 30 lb., 7-8" trail / freeride bike? awai04 12-05-2004, 08:44 PM As soon as that happens, I'm lining up for another bike! @dam 12-05-2004, 08:51 PM When carbon nanotube composites are perfected. singletrack 12-05-2004, 10:53 PM Why on earth would you want such a thing? awai04 06-18-2005, 09:09 PM Ok, I resurrected this thread I started from months ago. Sounded like the initial reaction was one of astonishment. But with the 05 enduro already out (6" rear travel), santa cruz nomad on its way (6.5"), and intense 6.6 (er, who knows exactly but let's say 6.4" harhar... ha) in testing, is the idea really a crazy one?? If anything rings true time and time again, more is better in the US. What do you all think? :eek: hpc108 06-19-2005, 01:52 PM My Iron Horse Sunday World Cup weighs about 14lbs fully built on the moon . By the way although it probably doesn't qualify as freeride, the Iron Horse MKIII Team weighs about 27 - 28lbs and has 145mm travel in the front. BTW, I have a new one for sale, lol. DeeEight 06-19-2005, 04:27 PM When carbon nanotube composites are perfected. Actually lower production costs for welded magnesium tubesets would do it faster/cheaper than perfecting nanotube composites. cdub 06-20-2005, 02:05 AM thats one sick ride. Warp 06-20-2005, 09:59 AM Uh... it would be cool but it wuld shake like a jell-o over rough stuff unless you wear some ballast. But, hell! Why not?? billybobzia 06-20-2005, 11:41 AM the maverick L7 i believe fits your inquiry, it only cost around $6k though telemarc 06-20-2005, 01:38 PM It is amazing the resemblence this bike has to my Giant Reign 1. RiDE 06-22-2005, 09:19 PM The Nomad is 30lbs isn't it? singletrack 06-22-2005, 09:48 PM The Nomad is 30lbs isn't it? My Banshee could be 30 pounds if I hung a bunch of lightweight, disposable parts on it. :rolleyes: RiDE 06-22-2005, 09:58 PM My Banshee could be 30 pounds if I hung a bunch of lightweight, disposable parts on it. :rolleyes: Really?!!!!!!!!!!!! That's cooooooooooooooooooooool!!!!!!!!! boyRacer 06-22-2005, 11:09 PM My Banshee could be 30 pounds if I hung a bunch of lightweight, disposable parts on it. :rolleyes: You're... (http://www.yourethemannowdog.com/) singletrack 06-23-2005, 07:33 AM You're... (http://www.yourethemannowdog.com/) Naw, I'll never compare to Connery. Thanks tho. ;) shizzole 06-23-2005, 08:34 AM Theres a mag in the UK called Dirt (I'm sure some will have heard/seen it. Anyways this month they've got a 223 built with an air shock and Fox 40's plus a machined down XTR chainset. Apparently its pretty light - I don't know how light but its been done by suspension specialists MOJO so theres plenty of money behind it. frank n. beans 06-23-2005, 09:34 AM Why on earth would you want such a thing? I want a freeride bike with 700x23 tires. Warp 06-23-2005, 09:43 AM The Nomad is 30lbs isn't it? I dunno. But reading last night the numbers of geometry shown in last MBAction, my Warp will have similar geometry as the Nomad once I install a Vanilla Fork. Obviously my Warp will still be the boat anchor it is and with an inch and a half less travel.... anyway, I don't need a 6.5" bike. ebxtreme 06-23-2005, 05:25 PM My Banshee could be 30 pounds if I hung a bunch of lightweight, disposable parts on it. :rolleyes: ST, I'm assuming you have a Chapparal, because a Scream couldn't get to 30 lbs. if had every carbon and ti part in the world dripping off of it. ;) Even a Chap couldn't get that low without dropping serious coin for components that would snap on the first cased gap. But, then again....and as you asked, why would you want to?? I firmly believe that a 6-8" travel bike with a weight ~30 lbs. is gonna be outfitted with components that will break (wheels, bars, etc.) IF the bike is used for it's intended purposes. Some folks that are moving up in the travel department don't grasp that this step often coincides with the lust for going off and over everything in site and down stuff you've never even considered in the past. When this happens, crashes occur and wheels start to taco and carbon parts start to snap. While it's true that I took my FR bike on every ride (XC, Shore & Whistler, Urban, etc.) for a solid year, it was like driving a Hummer to the mall on most XC stuff......total overkill. I've since overhauled my XC rig (4" rear and 5" front) and that bike is ~33 lbs. due to burlier components/wheels and it's plenty durable for most of the technical stuff out there and still totally climbable for XC. I'm definitely biased by where I live/ride, but I think the whole "30 lb. 6-8" trailbike" conversation doesn't make sense. Cheers, EB singletrack 06-23-2005, 09:46 PM it was like driving a Hummer to the mall on most XC stuff Heh, that's a good analogy, although parking is easier. Banshee claims to have built a Chap to 27 pounds using air shocks and flimsy parts. Mine sits at 45 right now.... Anywho, good points, in general if don't want the bulk, you don't need the travel either. I'd take stiff, burly, mid-travel bike to a noodly, fragile long-travel bike anyday. carnetorta 04-21-2006, 07:20 PM My CHUMBA EVO is built up right now at 30.3 lbs. I could probably get it under 30lbs. with a lighter wheelset, tubeless, carbon bars, and seatpost. It is 6 inches of travel, but feels like more because of a progressive compression rate. There will be a version close to 7 inches of travel released later this year I hear. CrystalBay 04-21-2006, 08:06 PM Hmmm that EVO is a pretty interesting design...:) carnetorta 04-21-2006, 08:22 PM Hmmm that EVO is a pretty interesting design...:) Yup, it's pretty cool, pedals really well, I'm loving it so gunfodder 04-21-2006, 11:36 PM ST, I'm assuming you have a Chapparal, because a Scream couldn't get to 30 lbs. if had every carbon and ti part in the world dripping off of it. ;) Even a Chap couldn't get that low without dropping serious coin for components that would snap on the first cased gap. But, then again....and as you asked, why would you want to?? I firmly believe that a 6-8" travel bike with a weight ~30 lbs. is gonna be outfitted with components that will break (wheels, bars, etc.) IF the bike is used for it's intended purposes. Some folks that are moving up in the travel department don't grasp that this step often coincides with the lust for going off and over everything in site and down stuff you've never even considered in the past. When this happens, crashes occur and wheels start to taco and carbon parts start to snap. While it's true that I took my FR bike on every ride (XC, Shore & Whistler, Urban, etc.) for a solid year, it was like driving a Hummer to the mall on most XC stuff......total overkill. I've since overhauled my XC rig (4" rear and 5" front) and that bike is ~33 lbs. due to burlier components/wheels and it's plenty durable for most of the technical stuff out there and still totally climbable for XC. I'm definitely biased by where I live/ride, but I think the whole "30 lb. 6-8" trailbike" conversation doesn't make sense. Cheers, EB I was thinking the same thing - how are you going to build a 30lb bike out of a 14lb frame? Fortunately Light Bikes came to the rescue. Just imagine a Scream with the parts build on this bike (http://www.light-bikes.com/bikegallery/BikeListing.asp?id=916). By my calculations it would weight only 25lbs! And I'm sure it would be a blast barreling down rock gardens with semislick tires and v-brakes. Stuart B 04-22-2006, 01:22 AM It is amazing the resemblence this bike has to my Giant Reign 1. More accuratly the Reign looks like the Ironhorse ;) Both look very nice though. Stu theg1ant 04-22-2006, 06:02 AM Guys its called the foes inferno. 7.5 inches travel and all mtn/ freeride capablilitys not sure of the weight though Guyechka 04-22-2006, 06:17 AM Guys its called the foes inferno. 7.5 inches travel and all mtn/ freeride capablilitys not sure of the weight though Didn't MBA review that a few months back? 35 pounds if I recall. But Brent Foes is no dummy. He knows that to build a bike that will take hard hits you must use sturdy components. You've noticed that the latest craze is air shocks for FR/DH. Why doesn't Foes use them on their FR/DH bikes? RideFaster 04-22-2006, 12:08 PM You're... (http://www.yourethemannowdog.com/) You're _________ ill. I can get you help. :p Oh, and the new Ibis is pretty light, 6 inches. Hardtails Are Better 04-22-2006, 02:29 PM I was thinking the same thing - how are you going to build a 30lb bike out of a 14lb frame? Fortunately Light Bikes came to the rescue. Just imagine a Scream with the parts build on this bike (http://www.light-bikes.com/bikegallery/BikeListing.asp?id=916). By my calculations it would weight only 25lbs! And I'm sure it would be a blast barreling down rock gardens with semislick tires and v-brakes. Not to mention how steep the head tube angle would be with a Sid. Would be pretty funny though, if not at all functional. singletrack 04-22-2006, 10:00 PM Not to mention how steep the head tube angle would be with a Sid. Would be pretty funny though, if not at all functional.I put a Judy SL on my co-workers RM7 when he was gone for the weekend. Used one of those 6" rise cruiser stems on it, too. Fortunately, he also thought it was funny. mzungo 04-23-2006, 12:01 PM As soon as that happens, I'm lining up for another bike! And no carbon or Tubless tyres yet ....What do ya think? Pushed RP3 Am sl 150mm fork Hone crank Hope pro 2 hubs with mavic rims and really light bontrager 2.4 earl tyres. SuperNewb 04-23-2006, 12:05 PM Didn't MBA review that a few months back? 35 pounds if I recall. But Brent Foes is no dummy. He knows that to build a bike that will take hard hits you must use sturdy components. You've noticed that the latest craze is air shocks for FR/DH. Why doesn't Foes use them on their FR/DH bikes? Some ppl let others set the standards or new things first before jumping on that bandwagon :p mzungo 04-23-2006, 12:07 PM 30.5 lbs and getting lighter Guyechka 04-23-2006, 04:02 PM 30.5 lbs and getting lighter You have to be kidding, surely. A Gemini that weighs only 30.5lbs? The ones I've seen have been mid to upper thirties. gonzostrike 04-23-2006, 07:01 PM Why on earth would you want such a thing? for the same reason people insist on doing drops to flat or negative transition for the same reason people will spend $$$$ to "upgrade" their bike when more saddle time would make them faster, better at all fundamental aspects of cycling, and less likely to think the problem is the equipment (rather than the rider) for the same reason people would own a gigantic SUV and drive it on pavement mzungo 04-24-2006, 12:49 AM You have to be kidding, surely. A Gemini that weighs only 30.5lbs? The ones I've seen have been mid to upper thirties. The Gemini is a light frame only arround 7.5 lbs the,RP3 is one of the lightest shocks around and that alone saved 1.5 lbs the forkes saved another 1 3/4 lbs the crank set another. the tyres and xc tubes saved 2lbs and the wheels another pound all of a suden a 37 lb bike is hovering arround the 30 lb ish mark (on my bathroom scales) And as to why ! Last year i fractured my spine on a huge drop to a ladder, i stoped being quite as Downhill freeride oriented and wanted a more pedal freindly machine after the accident.i had most of the parts any way so why not.it was a lot cheaper than buying a new Prophet. She's a great ride and really quite nimble the shock is pushed and very active but with the propedal it can be turned on to give a firm platform to climb, its a versatile machine,and i think very All mountain. |