Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Soupboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,046

    Why can Titus continue to

    work under the business burden of Speshy patents and DT not? Intense appears to be 100% HL-free now using their Very Poor Performing technology. Turner was captive to Speshy first and then TE.

    Putting aside the technobabble - on a pure business basis why can Titus (apparently) continue to prosper and DT not make a go of it? Is it because they control their own manufacturing and may have more profit margin to work with vs. a pure sales and marketing company?

    Titus continues to clunk away using the same time proven HL designs. They're very stiff - on par with (my) Ventana - and have a HL. Cool.

    I'm not a fan of their interrupted seat tube bikes but the RX is pure teets. Had they been making a 4" 29er I would have gone that route before my Ventana.
    Professional Amateur. Disagree? Submit your grievances here.

  2. #2
    Never enough time to ride
    Reputation: squish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,530
    Just speculation here, but I'm guessing it wasn't the speshy HL patent that was the problem. I'm thinkin it was more than likely the ICT patent issue. Like I said, I don't know for sure and that is just a guess. And I prefer not to speculate to much about it.

    happy trails...

    squish
    Get out and ride!

  3. #3
    ... I guess you won't be
    Reputation: jokermtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,928
    the ICT patent is tied to the use of a horst link in conjunction w/ ICT pivot/rocker placement/s - titus does not violate any ICT patent so they are free to just keep going, paying Specsh their royalty.....DT obviously did not like how the ICT patent limited how he could use a horst link, so he ditched it. It's all interrelated. But not anymore!

  4. #4
    ~~~~~~~~
    Reputation: airwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,785
    I'm getting me one these Fuji's!

    zoom in and check out the decal on the chainstay.

  5. #5
    Team Blindspot
    Reputation: S-Works's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,948
    Quote Originally Posted by airwreck
    I'm getting me one these Fuji's!

    zoom in and check out the decal on the chainstay.

    That looks like a kick ass bike.

    Why couldn't DT do something like this for the HL? Seems to me changing that pivot location is going to change the IC, and maybe get out of dealing with TE.
    Astigmatic Visionary

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    393
    "DT obviously did not like how the ICT patent limited how he could use a horst link, so he ditched it."


    That doesn't make any sense, everybody is free to design a HL bike in any way, once the design is finished It can fall in the FSR Patent or in the ICT but the fees are not that expensive, so It doesn't matter who you have to pay if you're happy with your design.

    IMHO DT ditched ICT bc Ellsworth is one of their biggest competitors and he doesn't wanted to feel/look inferior. 2006 it's going to be a transition year, sooner or later Turner will have their own system and it'll probably be very good.


    Happy trails.

  7. #7
    PSI
    PSI is offline
    I want that one
    Reputation: PSI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,037
    Quote Originally Posted by airwreck
    I'm getting me one these Fuji's!

    zoom in and check out the decal on the chainstay.
    Some one should tell TE to get his lawyers on Fuji's a$$ pronto

  8. #8
    Trail Rider
    Reputation: Quattro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    915
    Quote Originally Posted by airwreck
    I'm getting me one these Fuji's!

    zoom in and check out the decal on the chainstay.
    Check out the other sticker on the seatstay.(Atlas) Check out the Ellsworth site(Joker).
    [size=4]Don[/size]

  9. #9
    -7
    Reputation: lawhoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    255
    Here is the practical business explanation: the ICT patent was the main problem. In order to develop a FSR horst-link, non-ICT bike, Turner would have had to re-design the main triangle and the rocker. This would be too time-consuming, especially considering that the 2006 bikes have to be ready to go. The easiest way to escape the mess was to drop the horst-link, which is a separate patent, but is assumed in the function of the ICT patent.

  10. #10
    FleshwoundGravityResearch
    Reputation: mtn hack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock
    "DT obviously did not like how the ICT patent limited how he could use a horst link, so he ditched it."


    That doesn't make any sense, everybody is free to design a HL bike in any way, once the design is finished It can fall in the FSR Patent or in the ICT but the fees are not that expensive, so It doesn't matter who you have to pay if you're happy with your design.

    IMHO DT ditched ICT bc Ellsworth is one of their biggest competitors and he doesn't wanted to feel/look inferior. 2006 it's going to be a transition year, sooner or later Turner will have their own system and it'll probably be very good.


    Happy trails.

    The FSR patent IS the HL. The ICT incorporates the HL, and therefore the FSR patent as well.
    We have no idea what kind of deal DT had to strike with ell$worth. The fees for the FSR are cheap, but you have no idea what TE was charging. For all we know, he could raise the cost of using ict every year and then not allow DT to use it at all the very next year. DT would be at the mercy of one of his competitors.

    On another note, that fuji looks like it too may fall under ell$worth' $ smothering patent blanket. I wonder if he'll go after fuji for royalties. Maybe then we would have a company big enough to challenge the BS in his ict patent!

  11. #11
    FleshwoundGravityResearch
    Reputation: mtn hack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Quattro
    Check out the other sticker on the seatstay.(Atlas) Check out the Ellsworth site(Joker).
    I don't think it says atlas. Maybe altair or action, but it is definately not an atlas design.

  12. #12
    Do It Yourself
    Reputation: Homebrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Soupboy
    Putting aside the technobabble - on a pure business basis why can Titus (apparently) continue to prosper and DT not make a go of it? Is it because they control their own manufacturing and may have more profit margin to work with vs. a pure sales and marketing company?
    Titus is now outsourcing a lot of their production to Taiwan (still using US made Worth tubing though). So they are cutting costs as well. That's business. I would take Titus Tai over TNT anyday.
    Long Live Long Rides

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,396

    Heh.

    Quote Originally Posted by Homebrew
    I would take Titus Tai over TNT anyday.
    It's made me take a second look @ the moto-lite for sure.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: esquire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,653

    Huh?

    Quote Originally Posted by Soupboy
    Intense appears to be 100% HL-free now using their Very Poor Performing technology.
    What? You ever ridden an Uzzi VPx? I do mean more than the parking lot test...

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Braids's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    811
    Quote Originally Posted by Homebrew
    Titus is now outsourcing a lot of their production to Taiwan (still using US made Worth tubing though). So they are cutting costs as well. That's business. I would take Titus Tai over TNT anyday.
    I was very bummed to read about Titus moving some production off shore but I didn't care because I figured there was still Turner with a HL made in NA. Ellsworth was never on the map because of customer service issues in the past but that may be changing too.
    I'm a little concerned that Titus may no longer be dealing with customers direct though but that's the same policy that Ellsworth has now so...

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock
    "DT obviously did not like how the ICT patent limited how he could use a horst link, so he ditched it."


    That doesn't make any sense, everybody is free to design a HL bike in any way, once the design is finished It can fall in the FSR Patent or in the ICT but the fees are not that expensive, so It doesn't matter who you have to pay if you're happy with your design.

    IMHO DT ditched ICT bc Ellsworth is one of their biggest competitors and he doesn't wanted to feel/look inferior. 2006 it's going to be a transition year, sooner or later Turner will have their own system and it'll probably be very good.


    Happy trails.
    2006 will probably be a transition year for DT. He may be dumping the existing front triangles with the TNT. He may be trying to come up with an alternative as we speak. Did the old XCE type design fall under Es patent? The rockers pointed more straight down to the ground. Would that bypass the ICT crap? I would have considered an E prior to all of this. He hasn't done anything illegal, just really crappy. Somone once told me to only buy bikes from people that I would like to ride with.....

    Anyway, I think Rock Shox and Manitou went through a similar thing back in the day. Rock Shox would invent and Manitou would patent it and before Rock Shox realized what was going on, they were paying to use their own inventions. Plenty of guys from that era won't buy a Manitou for the same reasons.

    Look at it this way. If Elssworth still has willing customers after all that he has done how could DT possibly not succeed?? I think DT just couldn't deal with the increasing crap of E more than anything. He'll bounce back as long as he sticks to the things that got him where he is today.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,389

    Transition Year

    Wouldn't surprise me if kbell hit the nail on the head. 2006 could well be a transition year, during which DT will be developing the next suspension system that rocks our world.

    OTOH, I think that a big part of Turner's incredible ride is the year-to-year fine tuning DT does on the bikes, rather than just about getting things right, then throwing the baby out with the bathwater -- like a lot of the major bike cos tend to do.

    So, a few years down the line, TNT may be fine tuned to the point of sublime perfection. Or not. Only time will tell!

  18. #18
    ajr
    ajr is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo
    Wouldn't surprise me if kbell hit the nail on the head. 2006 could well be a transition year, during which DT will be developing the next suspension system that rocks our world.

    OTOH, I think that a big part of Turner's incredible ride is the year-to-year fine tuning DT does on the bikes, rather than just about getting things right, then throwing the baby out with the bathwater -- like a lot of the major bike cos tend to do.

    So, a few years down the line, TNT may be fine tuned to the point of sublime perfection. Or not. Only time will tell!
    I wonder who he will get to design it for him ?

  19. #19
    Gentleman Loser
    Reputation: Count Zero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    422
    Quote Originally Posted by ajr
    I wonder who he will get to design it for him ?
    You made me laugh. I had EXACTLY the same thought.

    Turner Bicycles strikes me as the tip-top refiner of existing bicycle frame technology. They make really great bikes, but major elements of those bikes are second-hand none the less.

    I'd like to see a journal bearing or angular contact bearing implementation of the DW-link. I stay away from the DW and VPP frames because they appear to destroy regular old cartridge bearings at an accelerated rate.

    Also, it would be nice to see a really stiff Turner frame employing hydroformed tubes and/or monocoque construction.

    A-Pro in Taiwan does great work in that area.

Posting Permissions

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