Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Non ICT Options

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xl_cheese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    504
    Might also be influenced by the cost of producing completely new front triangles.

    The tnt allows him to use the same stuff with a slight alteration to the rear triangle.


    ...edit... why does my post appear on top of yours? I'm seeing a lot of mixed timelines on mtbr these days.
    Last edited by xl_cheese; 09-30-2005 at 08:58 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    29

    Non ICT Options

    Hello All,

    I've been lurking on this post for a while and as an XCE owner who has been looking at a Spot upgrade, have been fascinated at the latest TNT debate.

    At first I was as taken aback by this shift in design by Dave as all of us but after some thought and consideration of several excellent points made on this forum, have some thoughts I'd like to put forward for discussion.

    Why are so many of us so disappointed with the shift to a seatstay pivot?

    I think that we fear a major compromise of performance (and of future development paths) due to what many of us feel is the inherent superiority of H-L designs. However, as pointed out on this board, Dave clearly had the option of returning to earlier H-L designs that did not impinge on the ICT patent (a la XCE).

    He clearly chose not to do this, regardless of the excellent performance (and potential) of this design as seen in the last generation XCE and in Specialized's ongoing development. Could this be because he felt that the potential of the newer design's rocker arrangement more than offset any potential compromise from moving to a chain stay pivot?

    I can only say that I still feel that if Dave believes that the TNT designs are better than my old XCE, this is still pretty elite territory. It also says that Dave believes that the TNT design offers a better development envelope than that offered by H-L/Specialized. If we all think that Specialized's creativity has been compromised (regardless of of personal preferences regarding their products) by not using ICT, I've got to question why we think that ICT is the Holy Grail of bike suspension design.

    After my initial disappointment, I'm back to - "Let's see where Dave's designs take us". Recent accounts still say they are excellent rides. After back-to-back comparison of my ride with other H-L designs, there is a uniqueness to the handling and feel of a Turner that to me is representative of Dave's brand, as is Service, and Durability.

    Let the flaming begin.

  3. #3
    No, that's not phonetic
    Reputation: tscheezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    14,364
    I kind of wondered why DT didn't just adjust the rocker angle and make the chainline not point towards the instant center. Perhaps he would have had to move it a lot so that NO gear combo fell within ICT. No idea. Whatever.

    The good news is that the TNT Turners mopped the floor with the other demo bikes at Interbike. Good enough for me. I've heard more "this is my next bike" comments from people here at Interbike who rode them than the type of "the sky is falling" comments seen here on the boards from people who have not ridden them.
    My video techniques can be found in this thread.

  4. #4
    Team Sanchez
    Reputation: El Chingon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,363
    You think that you've enough criticism of TNT on this board.....wait til Crash and i see you tomorrow!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,817
    Quote Originally Posted by hardstop
    Hello All,

    I've been lurking on this post for a while and as an XCE owner who has been looking at a Spot upgrade, have been fascinated at the latest TNT debate.

    At first I was as taken aback by this shift in design by Dave as all of us but after some thought and consideration of several excellent points made on this forum, have some thoughts I'd like to put forward for discussion.

    Why are so many of us so disappointed with the shift to a seatstay pivot?
    Because for years there have been people on this forum belligerantly claiming that the Turner Horst was the best possible system on the market.

    Now Turner contraddicts his own many past statements and "introduces" the "Torque Neutralizing Technology" ( )

    And in the blink of an eye the whole Fantasy-around-turner-horst-is-the-best comes crashing down

    As you can see the fanatics ("formaggio/Tcheese" first) are already spinning the news around, but truth is that according to Turner we are all now riding an obsolete design and it appears that Ventana suddenly becomes the best bike on the market
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Davide; 09-30-2005 at 09:50 AM.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Davide
    truth is that according to Turner we are all now riding an obsolete design
    You ===>

    //
    Last edited by greenskin; 09-30-2005 at 10:59 AM.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    29

    Concrete Business Issues

    So Dave had some un-enviable decisions that he needed to make - he now has to look forward as do we as bike purchasers. Let's be real. I think it is unrealistic for us to expect that Turner ignores the business practicalities of competition and of business (finances, production, marketing). Some hype re. Turner 4-bar, TNT, etc. is a norm in business as would be the decision to preserve tooling, front triangle stock, and a product line being well received in the market.

    Even if the current design is a compromise forced by patent issues (there I've said it) - it doesn't mean that the current bikes aren't comparable to pre-TNT bikes (in all material ways) nor does it mean that Turner is impeded going forward.

    In future, if the current TNT design's aren't as well received as the HL versions, Dave's got all kind of innovating he can do and has proven he can do. I'm kind of excited to see if this spurs some additional neat work from Dave's shop.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,817
    I love it! Ok, humor wins ... I'll stop! (and work on my Project Push review)

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,817

    nm

    nm nm nm

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by greenskin
    You ===>

    //
    Shouldn't you really have a pic of Turner being beaten to death with his own HL marketing BS!.
    Looks like Turner lovers will be riding tarted up single pivots soon!
    Not that there's anything wrong with that, I ride a Blur and a Heckler and there's not that much difference.
    IMHO the most important thing is the quality of the bike (and the rider).

    paul

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    25
    Uh, HL marketing BS? Care to link to an ad or forum post where Turner says HL is the pinnacle of suspension design?
    Yeah, that's what I thought.

    //
    Last edited by greenskin; 10-01-2005 at 04:55 AM.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    34
    They have "mysteriously" disappeared from his site!
    I Just hope nobody has copyrighted TNT or the design might have to change again! Hope he checked with AC/DC first. Oi Oi Oi it's dynamite.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    34
    wax on, wax off.
    Good night

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    25
    Support your words with a link or shut up. The freaking sense of drama on this forum becomes annoying as of late.

    //

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    34
    Ah grasshopper, the master has become the student!

  16. #16
    My cup runneth over
    Reputation: rmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Davide
    Because for years there have been people on this forum belligerantly claiming that the Turner Horst was the best possible system on the market.

    Now Turner contraddicts his own many past statements and "introduces" the "Torque Neutralizing Technology" ( )

    And in the blink of an eye the whole Fantasy-around-turner-horst-is-the-best comes crashing down

    As you can see the fanatics ("formaggio/Tcheese" first) are already spinning the news around, but truth is that according to Turner we are all now riding an obsolete design and it appears that Ventana suddenly becomes the best bike on the market
    Not sure that Turner has called the HL/ICT an obsolete design - more that he feels pushed in a direction that forces him to consider other options hence TnT. I haven't waded through all the posts again but I think he calls the TnT 'as good as' HL/ICT... Correct me if I am wrong .

  17. #17
    Flyin Canine
    Reputation: shanedawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,281
    Quote Originally Posted by Davide
    Because for years there have been people on this forum belligerantly claiming that the Turner Horst was the best possible system on the market.

    Now Turner contraddicts his own many past statements and "introduces" the "Torque Neutralizing Technology" ( )

    And in the blink of an eye the whole Fantasy-around-turner-horst-is-the-best comes crashing down

    As you can see the fanatics ("formaggio/Tcheese" first) are already spinning the news around, but truth is that according to Turner we are all now riding an obsolete design and it appears that Ventana suddenly becomes the best bike on the market
    Yeah, You'd like everyone to believe all of what you said but the problem is that you are inventing it and therefore only you actually believe it. Turner never said the old design was obsolete. He never said the new design is "better". It's my opinion that the older design is still the best and you are still a numbskull.

    And no this doesn't make Ventana the new best bike. They have different tubing, pivot construction, and geometry that many people don't like. They are really well made bikes with fabulous craftsmanship but just because turner changed his pivot doesn't somehow magically make the Ventanas better than they were last week.

  18. #18
    Bunny Hugger
    Reputation: PNWJerry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    216

    Idea! The Faux Bar Brigade Just Doesn't Get It!

    This is just so funny and idiotic for the faux (foo foo) bar brigade to come over here and shout to the FSR HL world that because DT has changed to faux bar for financial and business reasons proves that the faux bar is truly superior to HL. What a joke!

    Turner will now make and market faux bar bikes, but not cuz faux bars are better. DT is on the defensive about his TNT bikes, stating that they are just as good as HL or virtually indistinguishable from HL. He never ever stated they were superior in any way. The faux bar is an inferior design, always has been and always will be. This doesn't mean that all faux bars are worse than all HL, cuz execution matters as well. Ventanas are well executed faux bars, the pinnacle of faux bar bikes (before TNT anyways). But don't tell that to the faux bar brigade, cuz the truth shouldn't get in the way of ridiculous and illogical bragging rights.

    Imagine if there were no FSR/HL/BS ICT patents. What suspension design do you think Turner, Ventana, Ellsworth, Specialized, GT, Titus, Cannondale, et cetera, would be using? All Ventana riders would be riding bikes with Horst links. We all know that. They know it too. Sherwood wouldn't be making top-pivot bikes, that's for sure.

    I stated that in a post over on the Ventana board. I also stated that if I had a choice of faux bar bikes, I would still pick a Turner over a Ventana cuz of the bushings. El Turtlehead then chimed in that Sherwood was a big proponent of bushings over bearings, but that he switched to bearings cuz that's what the market wanted. So what? DT did not go to bearings. Was the market pressure less on DT?

    If you're going to brag about the superiority of your design and state that DT has seen the light, make sure that some part of it is true. But the faux bar brigade would rather cast shadows and throw up smoke screens. FSR/HL is superior to faux bar; always has been and always will be. We know it; they know it; Sherwood knows it; and DT knows it.
    Last edited by PNWJerry; 10-02-2005 at 12:51 AM.
    Hug the Bunny

  19. #19
    "Furruccio....Bite Me!"
    Reputation: Zeke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    214

    Damn good point!

    Quote Originally Posted by crashdang
    This is just so funny and idiotic for the faux (foo foo) bar brigade to come over here and shout to the FSR HL world that because DT has changed to faux bar for financial and business reasons proves that the faux bar is truly superior to HL. What a joke!

    Imagine if there were no FSR/HL/BS ICT patents. What suspension design do you think Turner, Ventana, Ellsworth, Specialized, GT, Titus, Cannondale, et cetera, would be using? All Ventana riders would be riding bikes with Horst links. We all know that. They know it too. Sherwood wouldn't be making top-pivot bikes, that's for sure.

    If you're going to brag about the superiority of your design and state that DT has seen the light, make sure that some part of it is true. But the faux bar brigade would rather cast shadows and throw up smoke screens. FSR/HL is superior to faux bar; always has been and always will be. We know it; they know it; Sherwood knows it; and DT knows it.
    I agree with this. DT went with Horst back in the day because he knows it's the best design. TE just screwed it up for him with this whole ICT BS. (of course DT could have patented it too) And it seems that going Faux bar is the easiest thing to do right now. I think if he just had to Pay S for the license, he'd be good.

    But I find it hilarious that all the HL/ Turner homers, riders who believe in HL are "Let's just wait and see how it rides, if DT changes to it, it has to be superior."

    I think Turner took a small step backwards, he is now producing the best faux bar on the market. A great ride that is not quite as good as his HL bikes.

    I'm sorry, but Crashdang is right, HL IS, and always will be a superior design.

    edit: Almost forgot. Another thing that has cropped up is that all of a sudden the HL bikes are "flexy" compared to TNT rear ends.

    I don't recall Turner owners complaining about "flexy" rear ends on this board.
    Last edited by Zeke; 10-02-2005 at 07:34 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
  •