Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevemtu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    728

    modern FS linkage design in future?

    After reading this

    http://reviews.mtbr.com/blog/motobec...-pro-titanium/

    It seems to me that BD and Mike are making an impact in the bike industry with progressive use of materials/design/component/pricing synergies.

    So I have a question for Moto followers and lurkers that will hopefully act as a little market research for Mike.

    Would you guys pay a little more for one of the newer full suspension designs (vpp, dw, ict etc) on a Moto bike? I have no idea what the licensing fees would be for one of the patented designs, or how the manufacturing tolerances might have to be adjusted, but it seems to me if Iron Horse can do it, then Motobecane could do it, maybe better.

    I mean, hardtails are great, but the newer full suspension designs are becoming more and more efficient at power transfer. Most of the newer FS designs are coming on alloy frames starting at $2000 and with BD component specs at >$5000. Motobecane might be able to carve out a significant market share if it could implement one of the new, efficient, linkage designs with its' great component package at 1/2 the price.

  2. #2
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    Is this an ad?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevemtu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    728

    no, not an add

    I am just a cheapskate.

    I am looking at the Pivot Mach 4 and just wondering if BD could do it almost as well but cheaper. I have no bike industry experience, so my comments may be irrelevant.

  4. #4
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    Ok, first thing-

    ICT is over twelve years old. It first appeared as the Turner Afterburner, then through careful patent wording, became the EW ICT.

    VPP was also developed ten years ago or more by Outland, then bought by SC and Intense.

    I fail to understand how one can assume that if IH can license, so can Moto. Moto has their specific niche market, one aspect being that price is the biggest concern over performance. Like Ibex, they are designed primarily to fill a price range, and nothing else. Due to that, the business structure is somewhat different.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevemtu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    728

    ok

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    Ok, first thing-

    ICT is over twelve years old. It first appeared as the Turner Afterburner, then through careful patent wording, became the EW ICT.

    VPP was also developed ten years ago or more by Outland, then bought by SC and Intense.

    I fail to understand how one can assume that if IH can license, so can Moto. Moto has their specific niche market, one aspect being that price is the biggest concern over performance. Like Ibex, they are designed primarily to fill a price range, and nothing else. Due to that, the business structure is somewhat different.
    I get it that vpp and ict aren't really new. But it seems they could be an improvement on the current Moto linkage design, certainly from a marketing point of view.

    As far as the implication that Moto bikes are poor performers, I would argue that for me, my timed loops on a Moto hardtail are the same as on a giant xtc alloy/carbon. So the quality differences between these two bikes may exist, but are not quantifiable in my performance. I have never ridden a $6000 orbea alma though....

    I know that motobecane has been a small, niche player in the past, but what they have done with the Ti frame and price structure seems to be breaking new ground for the company. So why couldn't they look into licensing a patented linkage design as another step forward? Is it that expensive? would the change in manufacturing tolerances be too stringent?

  6. #6
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    It seems obvious that this is a question you'd want to email Bikes Direct with, rather than ask dumb users like myself on a message board.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevemtu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    728

    IH v moto

    Actually, it seems that Moto and IH are in the same price range given the RS discounts.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevemtu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    728

    I have read many of your posts

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    It seems obvious that this is a question you'd want to email Bikes Direct with, rather than ask dumb users like myself on a message board.
    I know you are quite knowledgeable and something of an insider, so I can't discount your opinion.

    I was hoping to get enough positive feedback from other members to encourage a serious response/consideration from Mike. I guess we'll see.

  9. #9
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    I would go to Mike first direct. This is purely his choice, and any license fee always gets transferred to the consumer, even beyond the actual per unit amount due to logistics involved in securing the license.

    On that note, if you can get comparable pricing, why are you bound to BD?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevemtu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    728

    fickle

    "On that note, if you can get comparable pricing, why are you bound to BD?"

    I am looking at the IH xc offering, although I guess this is discontinued in the near future because IH is changing the linkage design license agreement. They'll probably all be gone by the time I decide. And then there is the $2000 dw mach 4 pivot frame and the $2300 dw flux frame and the $1600? maestro Anthem x frame...

    I do like my Moto Al hardtail and road bike, however. BD would definitely be in the running as a choice for my FS if they had an efficient 'name brand' linkage design near (within a few $100) their current price point.

  11. #11
    Former Bike Wrench
    Reputation: mtnbiker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,985
    First off...while the Faux Bar Link design is not the greatest out there, it still is a solid design. There are still plenty of companies using it with good success...such as Kona, Jamis, Gary Fisher (29ers). So unless you've rode a Faux Bar Link...don't instantly discount it. I've owned a DW Link, FSR, Single Pivot, and Faux Bar Link (which is really a single pivot as well). The DW link was probably my favorite, but it wasn't without flaws.

    I'd rather see Motobecane drop the Faux Bar Link and go to a strait single pivot ala Santa Cruz or GF HiFi. If you want a discounted FSR, check out KHS or Fuji

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevemtu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    728

    I admit

    I am looking for a full suspension that is an efficient peddler but does not suck the life out of you on steep, smoother climbs in a big gear, but still takes the edge off of trail chatter (1-3 inch roots and rocks) at high speed. I would like it to do all of this without need of a manual lock-out. So I understand not everyone is going to have this criteria as i could care less about doing big drops and downhill racing

    I have not ridden the fantom, but I have ridden the older 4 bar trek design, the older scalpel and the 3.5 inch maestro (anthem). The maestro was the best for what i am doing and the trek was the worst. My anthem was ripped off last year and i have spent this year being so disappointed with the scalpel that i went back to my Moto hardtail.

  13. #13
    Former Bike Wrench
    Reputation: mtnbiker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,985
    Quote Originally Posted by stevemtu
    I am looking for a full suspension that is an efficient peddler but does not suck the life out of you on steep, smoother climbs in a big gear, but still takes the edge off of trail chatter (1-3 inch roots and rocks) at high speed. I would like it to do all of this without need of a manual lock-out. So I understand not everyone is going to have this criteria as i could care less about doing big drops and downhill racing
    I found the DW-Link to be the best at "floating" through the trail chatter...it was efficient in the saddle but would start bouncing around if your pedal stroke got erratic or you started climbing out of the saddle. However, I didn't have a "Pro Pedal" type shock so maybe its better with one.

    I felt most "efficient" climber was actually the single pivot (again, without "Pro Pedal") as it tended to "dig in" under heavy pedaling loads. But of course, it was not sensitive to trail chatter when it was under heavy pedaling loads.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stevemtu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    728

    interesting

    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbiker72
    I found the DW-Link to be the best at "floating" through the trail chatter...it was efficient in the saddle but would start bouncing around if your pedal stroke got erratic or you started climbing out of the saddle. However, I didn't have a "Pro Pedal" type shock so maybe its better with one.

    I felt most "efficient" climber was actually the single pivot (again, without "Pro Pedal") as it tended to "dig in" under heavy pedaling loads. But of course, it was not sensitive to trail chatter when it was under heavy pedaling loads.
    what dw link and single pivot bike were you riding?

  15. #15
    Former Bike Wrench
    Reputation: mtnbiker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,985

    IH and KHS

    Quote Originally Posted by stevemtu
    what dw link and single pivot bike were you riding?
    2002.5 Iron Horse Hollowpoint was a first generation DW-Link. I broke the frame and it took Iron Horse over 4 months to warranty it. While I was waiting, I purchased a single pivot KHS (XC504 I think) frame and built it up. I rode it for a few months then my 2003 Iron Horse Hollowpoint Team (2nd generation DW-Link) frame showed up. I actually debated for a couple of days whether to just keep the KHS and sell the IH frame or build the IH and sell the KHS frame. In the end, I built up the IH and rode it for over a year before transitioning into my "Freeride Phase" and buying a Kona.

Posting Permissions

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