Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 150

Thread: Helius AFR.

  1. #51
    from 0 - sideways 3.2 sec
    Reputation: derekr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,478
    Hi all,

    Just to clear up all the rumours and speculation here are the *current* spcifications of the AFR prototype but they are not fixed yet.

    Falco sent them through and said it was fine to post some as he put it rumours

    Rear travel: 165 to 195 mm
    Head angle: 66,9°
    Seat angle: 73° (virtual, Helius ST seat tube design)
    BB height: +21 mm over wheel axle
    Top tube at size M: 588 mm (virtual, Helius ST seat tube design)
    Chain stay length: 433 mm FD possible with travel reduction
    Weight: 3,4 kg size M without shock
    Best for forks 665 mm / 180 mm travel
    Rear travel: 160 to 190 mm

    Comes std with Hammerschmidt adapter
    Free rear axle option: Rohloff OEM - QR10 - 12 mm thru-bolt or Maxle
    1 1/8 steerer regular: surcharge options: 1.5 - cone head
    Seat post diameter all sizes: 30,9 mm
    Low top tube and gussets design (like Helius AM)
    3 shock positions at the lever
    *Non* adjustable fore shock mount

    Famous German Dirt- and Freerider Carlo Diekmann and Elmar Keineke from SRAM are currently testing Helius AFR Prototypes. The serial production will be ready for delivery mid of August.

    Best regards

    Derek
    Visit - www.gravity-sports.co.uk - Exclusive high end MTB Products

  2. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: samwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    226
    Bad news is non adjustablee fore shock mount, which implies tailor for me with low BB (+5) and 65 head angle. The other things seems nice to me.
    Never enough singletracks !

  3. #53
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    derekr - thnks for posting this info, got it from Falco also to dispal rumours etc.... LOL...

    Interesting looking frame. Fully opting for the Hammerschmidt as opposed to a front der, cool as in my opinion.
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  4. #54
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    neither a trail bike or a dh bike and not quite a fr bike reading those specs ???

    front der possible on travel amendment, but weight penalty ensues anyway ????

    should've kept in the FR guise and increased travel to 180mm rear to suit the TOTEM 180mm option up front.

    it's a loss leader imo.

  5. #55
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Lecht_Rocks
    neither a trail bike or a dh bike and not quite a fr bike reading those specs ???
    yes kind of seems like it doesnt know what it wants to be , perhaps a new class of bike...

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Lecht_Rocks
    front der possible on travel amendment, but weight penalty ensues anyway ????
    I would say fully aimed at running the Hammerschmidt front system, then moving towards the Nicolai version when it comes to market....

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Lecht_Rocks
    should've kept in the FR guise and increased travel to 180mm rear to suit the TOTEM 180mm option up front.

    it's a loss leader imo.
    I am at a bit of a loss taking into account the FR was built to handle and go well with a 180mm fork up front, so not sure why the almost 200mm of available travel out back.... Guess more will be revealed as we go along...
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  6. #56
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    newer class of bike ?

    ffs, it's already de-generated into XC / extreme XC / FR Lit / FR / DH / Street / Jump.......

    the FR was capable of DH AND trail, just ask dipper or yetiman....those guys run DH and trail on the same machinery month in, month out.

    the FR SHOULD NOT be dropped from the lineup in it's current geometrical configuration imo.

  7. #57
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Lecht_Rocks
    newer class of bike ?

    ffs, it's already de-generated into XC / extreme XC / FR Lit / FR / DH / Street / Jump.......

    the FR was capable of DH AND trail, just ask dipper or yetiman....those guys run DH and trail on the same machinery month in, month out.

    the FR SHOULD NOT be dropped from the lineup in it's current geometrical configuration imo.
    I agree TLR, my FR is a do anything bike, love it to pieces... I am at a loss as to why it is being moved aside.... It was Nicolai's biggest selling frame, of which the biggest selling frame is now the AM.....

    I too can see that Nicolai are feeling there is to many frames in the line up..... But myself, it wouldnt be the FR moving aside.... But hey, I am not running the show... I then find it interesting reading the varying comments on the differences between the FR and AM....... I still would not feel comfortable that the AM could do what I do on the FR........
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  8. #58
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    no, the AM is without doubt a trail bike.

    the FR is simply that - an adaptable FR bike, but compromised for trail, and compromised for DH, although capable of both.

    the AM wouldn't be my choice for DH or mega-drops. a wee bit too steep and trail orientated...although again capable but compromised.
    it's easy to see where the AM is categorised. it's a 160mm 29/30lb trail machine.

    the AFR however seems to blur the line that was well defined with the FR...

    shame.

  9. #59
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    no, the AM is without doubt a trail bike.

    the FR is simply that - an adaptable FR bike, but compromised for trail, and compromised for DH, although capable of both.

    the AM wouldn't be my choice for DH or mega-drops. a wee bit too steep and trail orientated...although again capable but compromised.
    it's easy to see where the AM is categorised. it's a 160mm 29/30lb trail machine.

    the AFR however seems to blur the line that was well defined with the FR...

    shame.

  10. #60
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    no, the AM is without doubt a trail bike.

    the FR is simply that - an adaptable FR bike, but compromised for trail, and compromised for DH, although capable of both.

    the AM wouldn't be my choice for DH or mega-drops. a wee bit too steep and trail orientated...although again capable but compromised.
    it's easy to see where the AM is categorised. it's a 160mm 29/30lb trail machine.

    the AFR however seems to blur the line that was well defined with the FR...

    shame.

  11. #61
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    no, the AM is without doubt a trail bike.

    the FR is simply that - an adaptable FR bike, but compromised for trail, and compromised for DH, although capable of both.

    the AM wouldn't be my choice for DH or mega-drops. a wee bit too steep and trail orientated...although again capable but compromised.
    it's easy to see where the AM is categorised. it's a 160mm 29/30lb trail machine.

    the AFR however seems to blur the line that was well defined with the FR...

    shame.

  12. #62
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    no, the AM is without doubt a trail bike.

    the FR is simply that - an adaptable FR bike, but compromised for trail, and compromised for DH, although capable of both.

    the AM wouldn't be my choice for DH or mega-drops. a wee bit too steep and trail orientated...although again capable but compromised.
    it's easy to see where the AM is categorised. it's a 160mm 29/30lb trail machine.

    the AFR however seems to blur the line that was well defined with the FR...

    shame.

  13. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 0007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    86
    I really like my FR, it's just THE bike to do everything. I'm glad i've got one before they end it.

    Let's see what the AFR will bring. In my mind, it will a nice bike, should be to different from the actual FR.

    The FR had a problem of tire clearence. It had to take 2,35 max tire. Here, by using the ST front triangle, this problem is solved. Nicolai doesn't use hydro tubes, so there was no point of increasing the travel from the FR.
    By using the rear end of the FR, the front from the ST and the gusset from the AM, we have the best of 3 bikes that have been proven to be really good.

    I'm pretty sure this AFR is gona be amazing (minus this head angle )

  14. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 0007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    86
    I really like my FR, it's just THE bike to do everything. I'm glad i've got one before they end it.

    Let's see what the AFR will bring. In my mind, it will a nice bike, should be to different from the actual FR.

    The FR had a problem of tire clearence. It had to take 2,35 max tire. Here, by using the ST front triangle, this problem is solved. Nicolai doesn't use hydro tubes, so there was no point of increasing the travel from the FR.
    By using the rear end of the FR, the front from the ST and the gusset from the AM, we have the best of 3 bikes that have been proven to be really good.

    I'm pretty sure this AFR is gona be amazing (minus this head angle )

  15. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 0007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    86
    I really like my FR, it's just THE bike to do everything. I'm glad i've got one before they end it.

    Let's see what the AFR will bring. In my mind, it will a nice bike, should be to different from the actual FR.

    The FR had a problem of tire clearence. It had to take 2,35 max tire. Here, by using the ST front triangle, this problem is solved. Nicolai doesn't use hydro tubes, so there was no point of increasing the travel from the FR.
    By using the rear end of the FR, the front from the ST and the gusset from the AM, we have the best of 3 bikes that have been proven to be really good.

    I'm pretty sure this AFR is gona be amazing (minus this head angle )

  16. #66
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,228
    Sooo, you get a bike that is the same frame weight as the current FR but does not have the rear clearance limitations and is slightly slacker, depending on fork, of course.

    Hammerschmidt fits and you can use a FD if you really, really must.

    Doesn't sound all bad.
    ** except I think the AM could still be just right for what I really like to do **

    ** and if I wanted a DH bike I'd go for the Ion anyway **

  17. #67
    from 0 - sideways 3.2 sec
    Reputation: derekr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,478
    It sounds good to me so far but we'll see
    Visit - www.gravity-sports.co.uk - Exclusive high end MTB Products

  18. #68
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    Agree, we are inter web masterbating about a frame we are yet to see..... LOL
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  19. #69
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    don't get it.
    what's it meant for ?
    it's not a DH bike , it's not a FR bike and it's certainly not a AM bike...........?

  20. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 0007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    86
    I agree with TLR, but with the specs we have, ok it's only on paper and it's only a proto, the head angle is a massive mistake in my mind. I could deal with the rest, but 67°.....

  21. #71
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,228
    If it is not a FR bike... then I don't see how the current FR could be a FR bike either.

  22. #72
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    I am going to wait patiently, it will give us all a woody when it is no longer a prototype....

    Lets not loose the stoke until we see a final....

    I am sure it is just going to be a slightly beefier FR that weighs the same as the current FR
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  23. #73
    from 0 - sideways 3.2 sec
    Reputation: derekr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,478
    I think everyones reading too much into this (Its only a prototype), the current FR has the problem of reduced travel etc so if they fix that i'll be happy!

    Also noone has ridden the thing so it rip it appart without even trying it is just wrong (Altho i do agree the HA is a little steep).

    Remember if you have some constructive criticism email Falco or Kalle i'm sure they'd take it into account, i have emailed them regarding the head angle although its nothing that cant be tweaked with tailor.

    If your answer to the above is "I dont want one anyway" stop b1tching then
    Visit - www.gravity-sports.co.uk - Exclusive high end MTB Products

  24. #74
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Whafe

    I am sure it is just going to be a slightly beefier FR that weighs the same as the current FR
    so if it weighs the same, how is it beefier ?

  25. #75
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    Quote Originally Posted by derekr
    I think everyones reading too much into this (Its only a prototype), the current FR has the problem of reduced travel etc so if they fix that i'll be happy!

    Also noone has ridden the thing so it rip it appart without even trying it is just wrong (Altho i do agree the HA is a little steep).

    Remember if you have some constructive criticism email Falco or Kalle i'm sure they'd take it into account, i have emailed them regarding the head angle although its nothing that cant be tweaked with tailor.

    If your answer to the above is "I dont want one anyway" stop b1tching then

    lol - the standard FR isn't limited in travel, just the custom specc'd shorter ST versions for increased standover....

    lol - £250 for custom to tweak the HA............

    the FR serves multiple purposes very well, with slight compromise.....

    the current specs you've posted of the AFR are neither coherent or applicable and massively compromised.

  26. #76
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Lecht_Rocks
    so if it weighs the same, how is it beefier ?
    LOL - Perhaps drawn tubing, weight taken away from where it is not needed and added to where it is needed....

    I have never had an issue with travel issues on my FR....
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  27. #77
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    no, neither does dipper or yetiman or acme_eng.
    all local riders on FR's with the full complement of 167mm of rear travel.
    derekr's FR is hampered due to the custom seat tube dimensions.
    my AM has more available rear travel

    of course, the AFR with 200mm of rear travel capability will demand a long stroke shock, even with a ratio of 3:1, so putting the action and ratio's beyond any acceptable trail bias.

  28. #78
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    as an adjunct, why would ANYONE want to haul a 200mm travel frameset around trails and local wooded runs anyway ?
    i see a use for this frameset for DH / FR and shuttler's, but certainly not for trail.

  29. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,979
    I agree with TLR i think this frame is more dh than the old fr.I know it has adjustable travel but it has more similarities to the st than the fr.
    I will be ordering a frame soon and don't think this frame is the one for me.I still think the fr is the one.
    Are they now saying that the am is more fr than we believe.

  30. #80
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    Quote Originally Posted by norcosam
    Are they now saying that the am is more fr than we believe.
    norco - this is a very good thought, I would love to know the answer to this....

    If indeed the cross over of a FR/ST is to move more towards the realm of an ST hard hitting FR / DH type, then what is going to fill the position of all day thrasher Helius FR?????

    Is it to be the AM........... mmmm dont think so....
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  31. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,979
    [QUOTE=Whafe]norco - this is a very good thought, I would love to know the answer to this....

    If indeed the cross over of a FR/ST is to move more towards the realm of an ST hard hitting FR / DH type, then what is going to fill the position of all day thrasher Helius FR?????

    Is it to be the AM........... mmmm dont think so....[/QUOTE


    Can the Am match the fr on the ability to do everything?
    I know that you say the helius is a compromise but surely the Am is More of a compromise for when the real fun begins.Or are they going to update the Am with a bit more metal to make it burlier.

  32. #82
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    my AM is capable as a full on blasting trail riding rig.

    then again , so is my Hummer and my Ti456 which are Ti hardtails.

    ability is merely a perception.

    as long as you've got the skills, any bike will do.

    wheel / tyre choice and geometry are more important than travel for mere mortals.

    go watch seasons and realise the truth

  33. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jon Edwards's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    439
    Saw this at the Mega last week....



    Must be about the perfect bike for the qualifying track, although arguably still a little steep and high. Probably pretty handy for the main race too...

  34. #84
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    jon - thanks for posting.
    not exactly a trail orientated machine then, is it, or is it ?

  35. #85
    Nicolai
    Reputation: AttitudeBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    476
    the AFR is getting confusing now hahah

  36. #86
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,228
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Lecht_Rocks
    not exactly a trail orientated machine then, is it, or is it ?
    Why not?

    Assuming the posted figures are in the ballpark...
    Rear travel: 165 to 195 mm
    Head angle: 66,9°
    Seat angle: 73° (virtual, Helius ST seat tube design)
    BB height: +21 mm over wheel axle

    ...
    - We have a head angle well on the agile side of DH or stabile side of AM.
    - With FR style sag amounts, the BB would be 30 to 50 mm below wheel axle, at ride height.
    - The more angled ST gets the seat far enough back, when raised, or well out of the way when lowered.

    I still fail to see why it would not work.

  37. #87
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    aye - 66.9 is really great for climbs and such a saggy low bottom bracket height will strike on anything remotely risen from the trail floor..............unless you live in Groomsville...........
    we have rocks here in NE Scotland

  38. #88
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    added to that, anything north of 165mm on the same spring setting will slacken the HA even more making steering more vague and less precise.

    the FR was blob on.

    the AFR is going more extreme, slacker , lower and more saggy.......let's hope it ships with a CCDB or RC4 with excellent mid stroke control to control the wallow that's about to ensue on any type of pedally course / trail...........

  39. #89
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,228
    And I thought people were complaining it is too tall...

  40. #90
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    Interesting to see that they are not running a HS FR crank setup, thought they would on a hard core knar machine like the AFR....

    Going to be interesting to see the spec's on the final production model...
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  41. #91
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    perty - i think the inference was the BB was too tall......

  42. #92
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,228
    I think I'll have to save some money and buy one (that may take a while) to find out if it is tall, low, slack, or steep. Pretty sure it'll be better than the 7"+ bike I have now. I'll run it in the short travel setting.

  43. #93
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    I have no doubt it will be a weapon, I mean it is taking over from the FR, which as a bike is a true beasty weapon of a frame......

    So you go perty and get one to let us all know.....
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  44. #94
    from 0 - sideways 3.2 sec
    Reputation: derekr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,478
    You wont have to wait long, i'm getting one very soon i believe

    I think it looks great and the numbers will be spot on if the 66.9 deg head angle is @ 165mm wow what a weapon!

    Add more travel and it gets slacker, perfect!

    I for one like the look, i think its like a slightly burlier AM - Plus if the weight is the same or less than the current FR thats great!
    Visit - www.gravity-sports.co.uk - Exclusive high end MTB Products

  45. #95
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    Sweet derek, when will your new baby arrive? Bring it on
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  46. #96
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,270
    derek - optimal climbing is achieved at around 69 deg.
    66.9 is mighty slack for trail, and any slacker is going to handle like a chopper on singletrack.
    fwiw, the AM is slack on singletrack, but still manageable.....the TALAS really allows you to quicken up the steering by dropping to 130mm, but then i'm used to the Ti hardtails.........

    however.....back to the AFR........is it a FR bike, a DH bike or a compromised FR replacement ?

  47. #97
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,228
    LOL

    I was looking at a German forum, and Falco had a few words about the AFR:

    "Die verstellbare Dämpferaufnahme beim Helius FR brachte oft mehr Ärger als Freude. (...) Tretlagerhöhe und Lenkwinkel sind unserer Meinung nach optimal und bedürfen keiner Korrektur. "
    The adjustable shock mounting caused more problems than advantages. (...) We think BB height and HT angle are perfect. No corrections are needed.

    "meisten keinen Umwerfer fahren wollen. (...) Und wer keinen U-Turm will, der läßt ihn einfach weg. Sieht doch clean aus, ohne."
    Most will not put on a FD. If you don't want the stump, take it away. Looks clean that way too.

    Not sure he meant that the stump is removable or if they'll make the frame without it.

    EDIT:
    I am pretty sure there's more to the ability to climb than HT angle.
    I have not noticed people complaining about going uphill on the beloved FR.

    EDIT 2:
    I just realised the concept looks a lot like the Liteville 901 which German magazines are praising for versatility and ability to go up and down.
    Last edited by perttime; 07-14-2009 at 02:45 AM.

  48. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jon Edwards's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    439
    As i read it, its a DH bike that you can pedal to the top, which is exactly the kind of thing that right for stuff like the Mega which is basically a DH race with a few climbs thrown in to sort the men from the boys

    Head angle has naff all to do with climbing ability. Bar height and saddle position fore aft (ie seat angle/front centre) has far more importance.

    The headangle is not too far out for alpine trails - bit on the steep side if anything, and again a low BB is good for stability, especially when you don't have to do much pedalling (just let go of the brakes isntead)

    Basically it's not a UK-spec bike. Its something for proper big hills where you can get a chairlift most of the way, but you still need to be able to do some climbing to get to the really good stuff.

  49. #99
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,697
    So reading into it, it is closer to an ST than it is to an FR it seems.....

    I find it odd that the German forum states that it is likely that most will run a front der, they should run a HS setup....
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  50. #100
    from 0 - sideways 3.2 sec
    Reputation: derekr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,478
    My current FR has 66 deg head angle and climbs perfectly, as said above there's alot more to climbing than just the head angle. Everyone whos ridden a nicolai knows they climb very very well and also dont pedal as per their weight (Feel lighter).
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Visit - www.gravity-sports.co.uk - Exclusive high end MTB Products

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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