Canfield. Please gimme a.....- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 96 of 96
  1. #1
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027

    Canfield. Please gimme a.....

    A (26") trailbike...... 5 inches would be plenty.... Shorter chainstays than the old Sauce please. (although I love that name... Bringing it back would be just fine.) with the TT standover that my current Can-Diggle offers.... I use it as my FR/mini DH rig. I'm a short rider and the small Diggle is awesome for me.
    Know that a new rig takes dough to bring to market.... think that you'd have a lot of others in line behind me for one though.
    Last edited by Eastcoaster; 08-18-2011 at 06:02 AM.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  2. #2
    biking is fun
    Reputation: climbingbubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,365
    I would be on board with a bike somewhere along the lines of:

    Adjustable 5-6" travel
    66 degree HA
    13.7ish BB
    sub 17" chainstays
    17-18" seat tube on a large (please!!!)
    Really low standover height
    Progressive suspension design so the bike is extremely lively and has good pop

    Beefy enough to handle FR but able to climb to the top after for laps.

    Something that I could XC one day and then hit the local flowy jump trails the next day.

    Still trying to find this mysterious bike in something other than a single pivot but not having any luck.


    With all of this said I doubt it will happen anytime soon with both canfield brothers being badly injured. Would be awesome though. It would fill the gap between their 29'ers and their 2 DH bikes. It would also fill a place in the market where there are few options. I know a lot of people who would love a pedal friendly, short travel FR rig.

  3. #3
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    I'm with ya on everything that you said except two things.... But, really only one thing...
    5-6 is fine with me... I'd keep it in 5 inch for sure... I need a trail bike... not something that comes close to what my Diggle is. Too much overlap is why I got rid of my last bike.

    I'm coming off of a slack trail bike... I mean I'm currently riding a really slack bike for trail... at 66. Excells in a lot of stuff and is a blast for about 75 percent of the all around aggressive trail riding that I do. Downhills are a blast on it but it's def. NOT a good all rounder.
    The adj. travel will take care of a little of the geo. Just give us a 1.5 HT at 68 and let the Anglesets take care of the rest. May not hit 66... but would appeal to a much wider audience... and allow you to just about get the HA that you're looking to reach.

    And the low standover? Key for me... I'll be needing a Small... I'm a short rider.

    I know about both Bros. healing up... just putting food for thought out there for them.
    Thanks for chiming in with your same interest. Now, we just need some more....
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    897

    +1

    I like what Bubba likes Something like a Can-Can. Ahh, if they only made a little more of them. My Sauce was absolutely outstanding!!! I'm talking the best bike I've ever ridden. I'm still heart-broken it cracked I really loved my One too. Both bikes where really good peddlers that could bomb it downhill.

    I think a tiny bit beefier One would have been the ticket for me (sounds like the Diggle). The new One was just too much for me.

    What was the headangle on the Can-Can?

    Chris

  5. #5
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Sauce.... With a touch shorter chainstays.... and standover/front end designed/shaped like the CanDiggle ..... Perfection.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigcrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,076
    Yep love the ideas, here's mine.

    Based on a 6" fork and an easily achievable 30-32lb finished weight

    5-6" adjustable travel
    67d in the 5" mode and 66"in the 6"
    BB nothing lower than 13.5 and nothing higher than 14.
    1.5 head tube
    12mm thru rear end.

    Basically an all day trail whip, that would love to leave the ground and fly like a bird. At the same time being able to tackle the steep tech stuff with ease.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tartosuc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    675
    your description sounds a lot like the old ONE but with less travel

    I'm a bit disapointed to where the ONE went this year..a nice bike indeed but too much for general trailriding.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    897
    I agree, it does sound alot like the old One. I think a slightly redesigned Can-Can (longer seat tube/higher top tube) would be the ticket. Along with a 1.5 headtube, 66/67 headangle, 6.5" travel.

    Did the Can Diggle have any structure problems? We all know where the One was breaking at the headtube intersection but I have never heard of anything breaking in the back. Maybe an old One with gusseted front and the same gusset that the Diggle has for the toptube/seattube intersection. I know the tubes on the One are thinner than the Diggle.

    I was unworthy of the new One since I'm only an AM guy. Way to much bike for me, plus I would have needed a new rear wheel, new fork, and other bits.

    Chris

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    358
    Just so everyone knows......The BROS. are listening. Great ideas! So judging on recent trends and what people are looking for in an "ideal" bike, what is everyone's take on a 29er dually with Canfield brains? I understand the short travel DH guys, I also understand people want climbing machines with great suspension that aids on the up and the downs. My question is.....are people set on a 26'' dual machine or would you want to try the 29er dually Canfield style?

    Thoughts .......?

  10. #10
    biking is fun
    Reputation: climbingbubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,365
    Quote Originally Posted by gollub01 View Post
    Just so everyone knows......The BROS. are listening. Great ideas! So judging on recent trends and what people are looking for in an "ideal" bike, what is everyone's take on a 29er dually with Canfield brains? I understand the short travel DH guys, I also understand people want climbing machines with great suspension that aids on the up and the downs. My question is.....are people set on a 26'' dual machine or would you want to try the 29er dually Canfield style?

    Thoughts .......?
    It seems they are pretty stoked on the 29er at the moment and maybe for a good reason but I don't think I would be interested. I haven't tried them but I would want mine to be good at freeride (mainly jumping) and jumping a 29er just doesn't sound fun to me.

    It seems like the 29er market only represents a very small group of people. It sure is advertised a lot and I hear a ton of people talking it up but I rarely, if ever, see any people actually riding them on the trails. Maybe I don't get out in XC terrain enough to fully notice them though.

    With that said though a ton of people seemed to be stoked on the new banshee prime and I am sure if the canfield brothers made one it would sell pretty good.

    I guess what I am looking for is something like the Transition bottlerocket, banshee wildcard, or various other AM/FR/slopestyle bikes but a little lighter and with the canfield bros parallel link suspension. Like others said, The can can but with a bit higher seatpost and a lot shorter chainstays would be perfect. Maybe update it to look somewhat like the current One but just a shorter travel, lighter version of it.

    For an example, look at how popular the Banshee spitfire is right now. its been out a year and it is still one of the hottest AM bikes out. I have owned one and had a few things that I wished were changed that many other people wished were changed too. Slightly beefier, shorter chainstays, Bearings instead of bushings, more progressive, etc. This is where the canfield brothers could step in and make a rad AM bike. Actually make a DHers trail bike but in their usual style. one that can pedal better than anything else out there and handle some abuse.

    Just my opinion though...

  11. #11
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by gollub01 View Post
    Just so everyone knows......The BROS. are listening. Great ideas! So judging on recent trends and what people are looking for in an "ideal" bike, what is everyone's take on a 29er dually with Canfield brains? I understand the short travel DH guys, I also understand people want climbing machines with great suspension that aids on the up and the downs. My question is.....are people set on a 26'' dual machine or would you want to try the 29er dually Canfield style?

    Thoughts .......?
    I have to be honest.... "Nope."

    Just not my thing. But, to each their own. All of it is cool. Just not my cup of tea.

    I just want a trailbike... pure and simple.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    897
    Nope for me either.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigcrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by tartosuc View Post
    your description sounds a lot like the old ONE but with less travel

    I'm a bit disapointed to where the ONE went this year..a nice bike indeed but too much for general trailriding.
    I'm not familiar with the old ONE. I have just landed me a new ONE (well next week technically) which I think will suit exactly what I'm looking for. But I do know that in the next 6-12 months I'll be looking for for a new whip and if the Bro's were to build along the lines of everyone's suggestions, I'm pretty sure I'll know where find my next quiver killer!

  14. #14
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,300
    Interesting....

    One guy suggests a trail tough 5 inch bike and soon we are at a 6.5" mini DH bike. Why not make it 8": that should be enough, unless you want 10".

    A tougher than average 5" bike that can be climbed and takes the sting out of the bumps sounds about right to me.

    "it IS possible that you are faster or slower than anybody else who is having at least as much if not more or less fun"

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    376
    5-6" trailbike with the possibility of a coil shock would do the trick for me. Pretty much like my current (old) One but less travel.

    I never tried a 29er and that is not something that is on my radar at the moment.

  16. #16
    biking is fun
    Reputation: climbingbubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,365
    Quote Originally Posted by perttime View Post
    Interesting....

    One guy suggests a trail tough 5 inch bike and soon we are at a 6.5" mini DH bike. Why not make it 8": that should be enough, unless you want 10".

    A tougher than average 5" bike that can be climbed and takes the sting out of the bumps sounds about right to me.
    I would be more than happy with a 5" travel bike. Seems like all of theirs has adjustable travel so I figured going with 5" and 6" would appeal to a wider variety.

    The thing that is important to me is making it strong. There are soooo many 5-6" travel bikes out. There are very few bikes that are in that range that are strong enough to handle freeride but built with good pedalling in mind.

    This is all hopes though, The new Mojo HD and Knolly Chilcotin look like promising options in this category but I know the canfield brothers could do it better.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    897
    Guys, I just googled "Canfield Sauce geometry" then took a look at the Can-Can. This is the bike we are talking about!!!

    It's got:
    - 5" to 6" of travel
    - slightly lower headangle than 67 (geo lists 67 degrees with a 535mm axle to crown, so the normal 545mm a2c of a Fox 36 or Lyrik would get the angle a little lower)
    - not to bad on weight - uses a stronger tube set and weigh with an airshock would be around 7.5 lbs, 8.5 lbs with a coil
    - 17.5 chainstays and wide tire clearance
    - maxle in back
    - 1.5 headtube

    Needs updated:
    - lengthen the seattube to normal
    - take the top of the frame from the Diggle - reinforced seattube/toptube junction, reinforced headtube junction, swoopy toptube for nut clearance!


    Anyone have a medium Can-Can they want to sell?
    Canfield Brothers, we need a revised Can-Can!!!!!!

  18. #18
    biking is fun
    Reputation: climbingbubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,365
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris9702l View Post
    Guys, I just googled "Canfield Sauce geometry" then took a look at the Can-Can. This is the bike we are talking about!!!

    It's got:
    - 5" to 6" of travel
    - slightly lower headangle than 67 (geo lists 67 degrees with a 535mm axle to crown, so the normal 545mm a2c of a Fox 36 or Lyrik would get the angle a little lower)
    - not to bad on weight - uses a stronger tube set and weigh with an airshock would be around 7.5 lbs, 8.5 lbs with a coil
    - 17.5 chainstays and wide tire clearance
    - maxle in back
    - 1.5 headtube

    Needs updated:
    - lengthen the seattube to normal
    - take the top of the frame from the Diggle - reinforced seattube/toptube junction, reinforced headtube junction, swoopy toptube for nut clearance!
    I agree for the most part except shorten those chainstays!!! 16.8-17ish would be ideal for a fun playful bike. The canfield brothers always say how well the jedi can corner with those crazy short chainstays. 16.8" isn't asking too much is it? I love shorter chainstays for ripping corners and jumping.

    And on the seat tube thing. Add some but not a ton. My ideal large would have a 17.5" seattube for a large AM/FR bike. That would also help keep the top tube super low without having to do a ridiculous looking seat tube brace.


    So if the canfield brothers are reading this, a bike that can pedal all over the shoreline and then do laps at I street after is what I am looking for.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    376
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris9702l View Post
    - not to bad on weight - uses a stronger tube set and weigh with an airshock would be around 7.5 lbs, 8.5 lbs with a coil
    Out of curiosity where do you guys live? I live in the northeast and just came back from one week in BC and another in OR/WA. We have different playgrounds. My 32ish lbs 2008 One with a coil shock is plenty heavy and I figure that with the coil the frame is around 8lbs. Making it a bit heavier would be a no-go for me. What those vacations made me realized is it's one thing to climb a fireroad to earn your descents, which is something I have done plenty the last two weeks, and it's another to climb the same amount but in short bursts without hitting any fireroads. I feel more tired doing the same mileage in the east than in the west (with the exception of Comfortably Numb). On the other hand it's more taxing psychologically to climb those fireroads.

    Considering that I don't do huge drops, 6-7' being the max for me as long as the landing is smooth, a revised Sauce would be probably be plenty for me. I certainly don't want a bike heavier than my current One.

  20. #20
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    I'm with ya on that... (I happen to live in the East as well).... Revised Sauce would be what I'd be after...

    Front end (as I had previously mentioned above) shaped more like my Can-Diggle (TT/Standover especially)... 1.5 HT is even fine with me.... adds options for folks...Angleset, etc.... If they went with say... a 68 HTA... to satisfy the masses and someone wanted 67? Done.

    But, I would like to see the shorter chainstays also.... DEF. sub-17.... Mid to High 16's would be preferred
    .
    I kind of like how Pertime's post went about how this thread has gone at times....something similar to, " A guy askes for a 5" trailbike frame and now we're talking 6.5" mini DH? "

    Everyone wants a "Do it all" bike... I've tried that in many forms before....

    I LOVE my Can-Diggle... I use it for DH. and I'm not looking for anything to overlap too much with it...

    I want a trailbike... the reason for starting the thread....I ride trails aggressively... I'm not asking for a Lycra/tight jersey/use a waterbottle cage frame....

    The Bros have other current offerings....that do plenty well with bigger drops and DH....

    Full sus is their forte... the hardtail 29ers are cool and whatnot.... the thing that's missing in the line up is fer sure a "trailbike"..... that's not a criticism... it's an observation.

    And if I had my way? I'd pick THEM to bring me my next Trailbike.

    Not an "All Mountain" (whatever that means) not a "Freeride bike"...... Plenty of options to do that with The ONE....

    I'd be looking for a revized Sauce... with the changes mentioned.... (Chainstays and Standover)...Oh and yeah... a WAY shorter seat tube length than on the orig. Sauce...Goes with the Diggle esque reference front end reqest....
    Last edited by Eastcoaster; 08-07-2011 at 04:15 PM.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    862
    Modern trailbike geometry - 67 HA - and built around a 150mm fork. Not a big burly beast, something for the all day trailrides where The One is overkill. Aggressive trail you might say, the kind of thing a 150 revelation is good for. The canfield suspension is top notch, its too bad its not available in a bike that's more XC oriented.

  22. #22
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Ansible View Post
    Modern trailbike geometry - 67 HA - and built around a 150mm fork. Not a big burly beast, something for the all day trailrides where The One is overkill. Aggressive trail you might say, the kind of thing a 150 revelation is good for. The canfield suspension is top notch, its too bad its not available in a bike that's more XC oriented.
    Awwwww.... yeah...... now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about!
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigcrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by climbingbubba View Post
    I agree for the most part except shorten those chainstays!!! 16.8-17ish would be ideal for a fun playful bike. The canfield brothers always say how well the jedi can corner with those crazy short chainstays. 16.8" isn't asking too much is it? I love shorter chainstays for ripping corners and jumping.

    And on the seat tube thing. Add some but not a ton. My ideal large would have a 17.5" seattube for a large AM/FR bike. That would also help keep the top tube super low without having to do a ridiculous looking seat tube brace.


    So if the canfield brothers are reading this, a bike that can pedal all over the shoreline and then do laps at I street after is what I am looking for.
    I'm in the same boat with you. I've also been thinking if possible, head angle adjustment, without the having to employ an Angle Set ect.

    I haven't had any experience with an adjustable wheelbase, but might that be a suggestion that could make it a little more appealing for wider user group?

  24. #24
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Ansible View Post
    Modern trailbike geometry - 67 HA - and built around a 150mm fork. Not a big burly beast, something for the all day trailrides where The One is overkill. Aggressive trail you might say,...
    As long as it is tough enough that it does not break when a 100 kg guy rolls over some rocks and roots or catches a few inches of air.

    "it IS possible that you are faster or slower than anybody else who is having at least as much if not more or less fun"

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tartosuc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Sylvain View Post
    5-6" trailbike with the possibility of a coil shock would do the trick for me. Pretty much like my current (old) One but less travel.

    I never tried a 29er and that is not something that is on my radar at the moment.
    same here.

  26. #26
    The White Jeff W
    Reputation: jeffw-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,675
    Quote Originally Posted by gollub01 View Post
    Just so everyone knows......The BROS. are listening. Great ideas! So judging on recent trends and what people are looking for in an "ideal" bike, what is everyone's take on a 29er dually with Canfield brains? I understand the short travel DH guys, I also understand people want climbing machines with great suspension that aids on the up and the downs. My question is.....are people set on a 26'' dual machine or would you want to try the 29er dually Canfield style?

    Thoughts .......?
    Id be interested...at 6' 3" 29er makes sense for me. I love my Yelli, its as playful and fun as any 26" bike ive owned. Canfields take on a dually 29er would be sweet.

    Seems there's a lot of companies heading in that direction. Transition has the Bandit 29er coming out, Ragley was talking about an AM 29er dually, Niner RIP and WFO, Lenz, Specy, etc. Might be a saturated market soon.
    No moss...

  27. #27
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,847
    Trance-X frame, Revelation 150mm/Maxle up front, some sort of dropper post. 10mm thru-bolt on the rear wheel. Tapered headset to run an Angleset if you want it slacker. Or drop the fork down lower for the lower BB height, then slacken it with the cups.

    Downside: press in bb cups, no iscg tabs. No good guide options, unless you run something off the seat tube, and a bash ring.

    If my Spitfire shits the bed, this is what I'm eyeballing. Or short shocking a Reign to get the shorter travel, slacker angles, lower BB height.

    Upside: buy the cheap low end version just to get the frame. It sells for less than buying the things as a "frame only" option.
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    376
    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    Trance-X frame.
    69.5deg head-angle. Adding an angle set gets you to 68.0deg. I guess after it depends on the fork you want to put on the frame to get down to roughly 67deg.

    Edit: Can you use a coil shock on a Trance or Reign?

  29. #29
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,847
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Sylvain View Post
    69.5deg head-angle. Adding an angle set gets you to 68.0deg. I guess after it depends on the fork you want to put on the frame to get down to roughly 67deg.

    Edit: Can you use a coil shock on a Trance or Reign?

    Bumping to a 150mm Revelation from the stock 120-125mm forks gets you ~ 1-1.5*.

    Coils: lots of pics floating around of Reign and Reign-X with coils, not sure on the Trance-X though.

    There are also threads in the Giant board about short shocking the Reign and Reign-X. Slacker, a bit lower, less travel. Downside is it apparantly limits you to a single ring up front, as the way things move with the shorter i2i gets screwy with the front derailleur. YMMV - just what I've gleaned from a few threads.

    Lots of possibilities to tweak to suit.

    I'm in the middle of building up a 2011 Reign-X frame - just waiting on a new crank/bb set. After a bit of ride time, I have a spare 7.5x2 shock I'm going to toss in and see how it feels.

    With stock shock, and a Domain 180mm and internal headset cup it's a hair over 66* on the head angle, and barely over 14" bb height. The shorter shock will drop those more, and give me 6" rear travel, with the 7" up front. This is going to be my "big bike" though, so it'll probably get an angled headset in the end, to keep the larger rear travel, but still get slacker.

    Anyhow, my only point is that if you can't find what you're after in stock form, there are now a lot of options to tweak stock setups to suit.
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dango Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    80
    Canfield Bros designs a 29" trail bike (6" travel front and rear) and I'll place my order today! Do it!

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    295
    I have an (old) One, Diggle and Jedi.

    Pretty much all of you are describing the old One. It's a bit long on travel but it does not ride like it-until you need it.

    I seriously have no idea how the old One was not more popular. It's several years old and still stacks up great against all the "hot" bikes right now (Mojo HD, 5spot, Reign etc etc.)

    I say beef up the front end of the old one and remove weight from the links to keep the weight down. Just improve on what you already know was an excellent ride. I would have no prob. with shortening the rear stays but don't see it as totally necessary. However, the 12mm rear thru axle is a must!

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    862
    Well almost - the old one was designed around at least a 160 fork. I got a chance to take one for a spin and thought it felt a hair steep with the 160. A 150 fork would have been too steep for sure. A 180 would have been perfect I bet, but then we're talking real beef. Too bad the angleset wasn't an option back then. I think it pedaled as well as the SB66, mojo HD, etc.

    The sauce was almost a light trailbike but it was still built around a 160 fork also. But on the other hand it wasn't supposed to be built for the kind of abuse you expect with a 160 bike. If that's the case, why carry around an extra pound or two of fork?

  33. #33
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Again, couldn't say it much better than Pertime did earlier in the thread.

    "Interesting....

    One guy suggests a trail tough 5 inch bike and soon we are at a 6.5" mini DH bike. Why not make it 8": that should be enough, unless you want 10".

    A tougher than average 5" bike that can be climbed and takes the sting out of the bumps sounds about right to me."

    -Pertime

    I must say that I kind of wish that I'd have titled the thread differently... using the word "Trailbike" in it or something... 26" as well.....

    29er talk, FR, DH, long travel....multi use, do it all bike.... not my intention.

    Sheez.....
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  34. #34
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Again....

    Sauce.... With a touch shorter chainstays.... and standover/front end designed/shaped like the CanDiggle ..... Perfection.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  35. #35
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    and... again...

    I need a trail bike... not something that comes close to what my Diggle is. Too much overlap is why I got rid of my last bike.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jtnord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    521
    This sounds like roughly the kind of bike I am wishing for. A slacker (I want 1.5 HT and 66-67 HTA) 140-150mm bike built to take some abuse, and weigh in at around 30-32lbs. Something like a lighter weight BottleRocket or a more aggressive and slack Blur LT (which are the main bikes I am considering currently). The Rune, Mojo HD, and Covert are other close choices. Saar's Custom Head Angle Sets (HAS) will be a likely option to slacken any of these.
    Ofanaim.net Head Angle Set
    6'5" 230lbs
    My Build: Vitalmtb - Bike Check

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,410
    EWOK... HEHEHEHEHHEHE... I have been waiting for one for 4 years, but....

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    488
    My Yelli is so dialled that a Canfield 29er FS might just tempt me away from my Tracer 29.

  39. #39
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Again...... Let's hear from some folks that are interested in a TWENTY SIX INCH trailbike.....

    I don't use the "Smilies" much but.......

    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    91

    +1

    I'm in. I loved my Diggle but was really looking for the Can Can. I am now getting ready to replace my Intense Slopestyle. I probably won't because I can't find anything that can replace it. I would want something that can climb but still handle aggressive riding and jump trails. I would prefer to give my $ to Canfield Bros instead of another company. Hopefully it happens

  41. #41
    maker of trail
    Reputation: essenmeinstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,008
    I always looked at the can can as the almost ideal "trail" bike for me, except it needed a bit longer seat tube.

    I also have no real interest in 29'ers. If someone put one in front of me and said here try this, I'd give one a go, but I'm not even interested enough to go and find one to try...

  42. #42
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by essenmeinstuff View Post
    I always looked at the can can as the almost ideal "trail" bike for me, except it needed a bit longer seat tube.

    I also have no real interest in 29'ers. If someone put one in front of me and said here try this, I'd give one a go, but I'm not even interested enough to go and find one to try...
    Yeah... diggin the HA on the CanCan. The low standover as well.... not the chainstay length or frame weight for a trailbike though. Something of a blend between it and the Sauce? Oh, and did I mention shorter chainstays? Heh heh....
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  43. #43
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Oh... and while I wait.....

    If anyone has a small Sauce that they'd want to let go.....
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    92
    even though i'm revising a 2 week old thread, i'm very curious to see some of these ideas come to life.

    26" 5-6" travel trail bike suited for aggressive xc, am and light fr is my holy grail for northwest trails. i don't need a frame that can moonlight as a dh bike. i have a jedi for that .

    the one looks awesome for aggressive am to dh and there's definitely a strong market for that, but put it on a diet with proportioned or lower standover and you can take all my monies in 2012.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigcrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,076
    I'll change my stance a little from my past post. Just being enjoying a little dirt time on my trail whip and because I've been spending so much time on the ONE, it has got me thinking.

    A nice progressive 140mm rear end, 67 ha built around a 140mm fork, with an option for a 160mm. I'd like it to be able to take some punishment, keeping in mind a easy 31lb finished weight would be great. Don't forget tabs for a dropper post, a 1.5 HT and dare I say an adjustable wheelbase...

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,410
    Yeah... We NEED an Ewok!!!

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigcrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by KillingtonVT View Post
    Yeah... We NEED an Ewok!!!

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by bigcrs View Post
    i think he's making a play on the star wars theme with jedi being the dh rig. i'm guessing ewok would be the forest friendly short (travel) furry cousin of the jedi.

    "jub jub"

    chris/lance, by god, please do not call your next frame "the ewok."

  49. #49
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,300
    Quote Originally Posted by spikey_korean View Post
    chris/lance, by god, please do not call your next frame "the ewok."
    Sounds OK to me

    ... or maybe Jar Jar?

    "it IS possible that you are faster or slower than anybody else who is having at least as much if not more or less fun"

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    410
    Good lord I lost the Canfield thread this Summer under "Custom Bikes". Congrats on your own forum!

    Interesting thread here. . .

    Would be nice to see something like 5-6"
    Low and slack (13.5ish bb, 66-67 ha)
    150-170 compatible fork to cover Revelation-36-lyrik range.
    Be able to be reasonably built from 28-30lb.
    Somehow get the CS short with those parallel links and still have room for 2.5 tires. . .

    Pretty tall order.

    Maybe I should just try a weight weanie equipped One before I complain. . . After all, the One passed the very reliable "pedal up and bomb down a flight of stairs in your flip-flops while hammered on sake at Whistler" test. . .

  51. #51
    Dinner for wolves
    Reputation: buddhak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,566
    Quote Originally Posted by martin_uk View Post
    My Yelli is so dialled that a Canfield 29er FS might just tempt me away from my...
    ... Yelli Screamy.

    I like the idea of a trim One AND a Yelli with some bounce out back. Any hints or rumors to keep us warm and snug over a long winter?
    Responds to gravity

  52. #52
    maker of trail
    Reputation: essenmeinstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by KillingtonVT View Post
    Yeah... We NEED an Ewok!!!
    lol genious.

  53. #53
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by bigcrs View Post
    I'll change my stance a little from my past post. Just being enjoying a little dirt time on my trail whip and because I've been spending so much time on the ONE, it has got me thinking.

    A nice progressive 140mm rear end, 67 ha built around a 140mm fork, with an option for a 160mm. I'd like it to be able to take some punishment, keeping in mind a easy 31lb finished weight would be great. Don't forget tabs for a dropper post, a 1.5 HT and dare I say an adjustable wheelbase...
    Bump.
    And, sure, I'll agree with you on that.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigcrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,076
    And if the wheelbase could also adjust the HA, say if it was set in the longer base option the HA would be 66d and then when it's set in the shorter option in would make for a snappier trail bike sporting a HA at 67 even 68ish. I dunno....

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    93
    How about 140mm travel
    142 rear wheel spacing.
    direct mount front derailer
    30.9 seatpost
    like my Sauce but updated.
    VM
    DH CBros One 11
    XC CBros Sauce
    29" CBros Nimble 9
    4x Staats
    BMX Specialized S-Works 20
    Road Specialized Allez cromo

  56. #56
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Yup to the above on the travel and rear spacing.... BUMP!
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    177
    I agree. 5-6" adjustable or 5-5.5" if it's non-adjustable, coil-friendly, and tougher than average. I too looked at the Banshee and was put off by the notion that it probably wasn't built quite well enough but otherwise thought it looked sweet.

    I just got my first 29er sorted out and I love it (Nimble 9) but if it had longer chainstays I probably would not. I had a Ventana El Bastardo with 650b wheels and 140mm of travel for a short time. The wheelsize was great, and short enough chainstay could probably be achieved (the Ventana was too long, but I'm sure there was room for design improvement). However even if the frame geo was perfect I think I'd rather have a 26" bike for tire selection alone over 650b. The difference between decent tires and great tires is greater than the difference between 26" and 27" wheels.

  58. #58
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Revamped/Updated Sauce is really all that I'm looking for. Throw a Revelation on the front... chainguide tabs would be nice. Put some bend/drop in the top tube to give a short guy like me some standover and I'd be all smiles....
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  59. #59
    It's time for a road trip
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    55
    Yeah, give us a Spitfire with shorter chainstays, or a Stumpjumper EVO fighter. I'd be down.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    66
    I just need to add my two bits. A lot of you say that the new one is overkill. Possibly too much bike. I may be safe to assume that one intention of Canfield was to make a bike with nearly all of the riding characteristics mentioned in this thread and then to throw in several more inches of travel as a bonus. Or possibly the other way around. There is one question I think would be valuable to ask yourself. Have I ridden the new ONE and know how it handles, or am I assuming I know how it rides? There are probably both kinds of people, but I assume there are more who haven't.
    This is my problem with people's perceptions on bigger travel bikes. There are a lot a assumptions made about how they ride. The truth is that I used to think that way. Now days the DH bikes have one of the most advanced suspension designs in existence. I rode a xc and all-mountain bike my whole life because I believed what I heard. Then I tried one. I've never been more wrong.
    I can climb my FR/DH bike better than any of my xc/all-mountain bikes. The better geometry and weight focused on the rear tire keep it glued to the ground and you never spin out. Spinning out happened all the time before. Now nothing can stop me as long as I can keep the pedals turning. If you want to climb hills all day long without stopping then the ONE isn't the bike, but if you want an amazing technical climber that you can climb for 60% of the ride then the new one has it all.
    I do think another bike from Canfield would be totally awesome. I just get tired of hearing people knocking on DH/FR bikes that have never seriously ridden them. They are stuck 10 years in the past. I see them as 10x the bike in everything a biker is looking for, plus magic DH/FR capabilities. I'm speaking from my own experience and I'm actually quite frustrated that I wasted the best biking years of my life riding xc and all-mountain bikes because I believed all the assumptions to be fact. You couldn't give me one of those bikes now. It would be sold in a week or never ridden. Just try them out before you make up your mind. They are safer, stronger, better design, better geometry, better suspension, better traction, better climbers, far better DH, more control, more stable, faster more flick-able, handles the rocks better, and a little heavier which just makes you in better shape. If you still don't like them after a fair go, then that is just wonderful, that is your decision and your style. There is nothing wrong with that. But at least that way you have a decision. I never did- because I took all the assumptions (like-you can't pedal them, they are too heavy, the head angle is too slack, they are too big and hard to maneuver, 7 and especially 8 inches is too much, there is too much bob, blah blah blah) being said as true. You might find yourself eating your words just like I did. Maybe not, at least you will know. Now I can't figure out why you would ever want a 5 in travel bike when you could have one that does the same things even better, but with 3 more inches. It doesn't make any sense. Why not?? I'm done ranting, sorry anyone had to put up with it.
    The new ONE is ridiculously amazing-thank you Canfield! It is my dream bike! My only complaint is that it is too much too late

  61. #61
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Very nice dissertation......

    And, to each their own. I can honestly say that I haven't ridden The One. I do think that it's an awesome looking bike. And, super versatile.

    I do LOVE my Can-Diggle. I will continue to use it for DH.
    Just not what I'm looking for to slay trails. (the Diggle or the ONE)

    And, the reason that I started this thread. Looking for a light, trailbike.
    I know that I'm being redundant with this dead horse beating.... BUT,
    a modernized Sauce would do just that for me. I'd be the first one in line.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  62. #62
    It's time for a road trip
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    55
    Yeah, I'm with Eastcoaster - I don't need more than 6" of travel. I have a 4" travel 4x bike (slack, short cs and low bb) as my trail bike now, and when I replace it, I'd like something that pedals a little better, is a little lighter, and maybe has a bit more travel. For me, fun is whipping around switchbacks and is easy to toss around in the air. I'm not going to be swapping forks around, and don't see a need to carry around the heft of a 160mm+ fork. I keep up to anyone just fine on the local trails with my current ride - I'm not looking to make the downhills any easier. And for really going fast downhill, I have my Jedi. Actually, maybe what I really want is a Canfield 4x frame...
    Last edited by SecretAgent23skidoo; 02-04-2012 at 11:04 AM.

  63. #63
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by SecretAgent23skidoo View Post
    Yeah, I'm with Eastcoaster - I don't need more than 6" of travel. I have a 4" travel 4x bike (slack and low) as my trail bike now, and when I replace it, I'd like something that pedals a little better, is a little lighter, and maybe has a bit more travel. For me, fun is whipping around switchbacks and is easy to toss around in the air. I'm not going to be swapping forks around, and don't see a need to carry around the heft of a 160mm+ fork. I keep up to anyone just fine on the local trails with my current ride - I'm not looking to make the downhills any easier. And for really going fast downhill, I have my Jedi. Actually, maybe what I really want is a Canfield 4x frame...
    Funny... as I'm currently on an Xprezo Gamjam doing just the same thing as you for my trail riding. But, next time around, I hope to have a better "all rounder" geometry wise for trails. Long, slack and low has been great for a while. I'm a fan of slack. But, 66 degr for trails may be a bit much in my book. 67.5? Cool.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tim Barrett Jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    81

    Trail bike, 26er please

    I have to admit, I am torn on the new One. I feel like Canfield now has 2 downhill bikes. I have been going back and forth on my new 2011 One on whether or not to keep it. I road it yesterday, downhill it is awesome, better than version 1. Uphill, OK. Cornering, it is not as good. I guess the trails here in WNC and SC are tighter than out west. As I have said a lot, Canfield is second to none with the customer service and quality but I scratch my head as to why the new One is so different and slack. It seems everyone out there either changes the HT angle or runs short cranks or a 6 inch fork. The rear suspension is much smoother I do have to say.
    But hey, it's not my company and of all the bikes I have made, all of the Bros. bikes outshine mine. (that would be zero on the bikes I have built)
    The length of the new One and the HT angle is longer and slacker than just about every other bike out there, even the full on DH bikes. And yes, I have researched them all.
    6 inch travel, 26 inch wheels, at least 67 degree HT angle. I'm in on that frame.

  65. #65
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    I'm just glad to see this thread is still going. It definitely shows that there's plenty of interest.

    Outside of the comments that it seems that Canfield has two DH bikes, etc. that were mentioned above...
    I think that I may have mentioned it earlier when I started this thread.... The "trailbike" segment is the only place that there's a "hole" in the Canfield line up. DH, AM/FR, hardtails.....
    That's not a criticism. Only an observation. But, in keeping it "trailbike" oriented and less AM oriented, it'd seem to fill this niche nicely without overlapping the other frames that currently exist.

    And remember. The Sauce was adjustable. 5 OR 6" rear travel. That slightly tweaked the geometry as well. Combined with ~43.4" wheelbase. Not a long bike at all.

    I'd probably throw it in 5" mode and never touch it again.

    22" effective TT on a small (the size that I'd need).... I wouldn't want the TT any longer. BUT, the 16" ST is a touch long for my liking.... and coming in at 6lbs with an RP23? Pure bliss!

    About the only "wishlist" thing that I'd have is to shorten the Chainstays a bit.

    Sauce 5 Canfield Brothers

    But, to add to the NC/SC thing about looong wheelbases, I'm in PA. And with my Gamjam coming in at ~45" wheelbase, it's too long for my liking for the trail terrain that I ride up here as well. And, the reason that it's for sale. Love the bike. And, knew what I was getting into with building this particular frame and using it for trail. Just didn't work out to what I was looking for in a trail ride.

    Sauce. Remodel. Period.
    Last edited by Eastcoaster; 02-04-2012 at 08:47 AM.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    91
    I was down at Bootleg Canyon this weekend for the Reaper dh race and each time I went by the Canfield camp I would look over with hope and anticipation that I would see a smaller travel frame/bike waiting for me. It happened 10-12 times before I finally gave up hope of a surprise addition to the family....the wait continues.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cSquared's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    354
    Hey guys,
    We love to hear what everyone wants-
    But- just so everyone knows... New bikes take a very long time to design, prototype, test, and then finally produce. Some where around 2 years.


    You will not be seeing anything in the full suspension frame side this year.
    We are keen on a 26" 140 and a 29" 100mm.
    We are mocking up the suspension platforms- and will most likely have proto's next spring.

    And FYI for all the fans- We are always reading, watching, and aware of the market, forums, and trends. We have wanted to do a more AM/XC frame or frames for awhile now.
    But, remember-
    We are self funded. And like it that way.
    We have been working on other projects (ie- components, and hardtails) that make more money- which will allow for more cool stuff in the future.
    And we don't always just build stuff with money in mind. We build stuff a lot of the time, for the love of the perfect ride- and not for what the market is asking for. (9t micro drive)
    Like our Jedi- a rearward Pulley DH frame- We know a traditional frame with a tradition wheel path is what the market is all about- and we could make a unreal version of that. (and might one day) But if you have ridden a Jedi- you know. It is magical.

    So just wait. We are bring some really mind blowing stuff out in a few years. A couple of frames with a new suspension platform that changes the game.


    Keep demands coming- We're listening.
    c2

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    91
    Yeah I realize it takes a while for frames to be developed, tested and produced. I knew that there wouldn't be a new frame at Bootleg but the little kid in me kept waiting for one to magically appear.

    You guys personally funding and running your company is what brought me to you in the first place. I really dig small companies and their ideas. I bought a CanDiggle and climbed it, jumped it and had a blast at Whistler with it. I sold the frame and now that I'm a better rider I fully understand what I am missing. I really wish I had kept the CanDiggle and can't wait to see what you guys come out with in the future.

  69. #69
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Just glad to hear that you're totally on board with 26" 140.....
    Would the "tech" and research already "be" there for such a rig? Sauce's rear already figured out.... Give me a lighter built front with a dropped TT like my Diggle has....
    Wouldn't be reinventing anything. Just improving upon what already exists(ed).

    Hey... I love that you guys are keeping control over everything from start to finish. Def. know that it's not as simple as what I said above.

    Just thoughts pouring out after hearing that magic 26" 140mm thing mentioned.

    Glad that you stay tuned in to these venues (forums) for what your loyal followers are looking for. Knew that, and the reason for the start of this thread.

    I'll keep watching and waiting!

    Funny what Seppe71 mentioned about his Can-Diggle. The guy that I bought mine from emailed me to see how I was liking it. Seems that after he moved on to his next bike from the big "S", he had the realization of how good the Diggle was... Missed it.... and wanted to know if I'd sell it back.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: V.P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by cSquared View Post
    Hey guys,
    We love to hear what everyone wants-
    But- just so everyone knows... New bikes take a very long time to design, prototype, test, and then finally produce. Some where around 2 years.


    You will not be seeing anything in the full suspension frame side this year.
    We are keen on a 26" 140 and a 29" 100mm.
    We are mocking up the suspension platforms- and will most likely have proto's next spring.

    And FYI for all the fans- We are always reading, watching, and aware of the market, forums, and trends. We have wanted to do a more AM/XC frame or frames for awhile now.
    But, remember-
    We are self funded. And like it that way.
    We have been working on other projects (ie- components, and hardtails) that make more money- which will allow for more cool stuff in the future.
    And we don't always just build stuff with money in mind. We build stuff a lot of the time, for the love of the perfect ride- and not for what the market is asking for. (9t micro drive)
    Like our Jedi- a rearward Pulley DH frame- We know a traditional frame with a tradition wheel path is what the market is all about- and we could make a unreal version of that. (and might one day) But if you have ridden a Jedi- you know. It is magical.

    So just wait. We are bring some really mind blowing stuff out in a few years. A couple of frames with a new suspension platform that changes the game.


    Keep demands coming- We're listening.
    c2
    Sounds awesome Looking forward to what you guys pull of in the future. Are you ever going to touch carbon as a frame material?

    *crossing fingers for a carbon ONE *

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cSquared's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    354
    Carbon is a bit tough with our size and budget. But we are looking into it. But it will be at least 3 year down the line to get to the public.

  72. #72
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Carbon? Pffft......
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    897
    Don't want no carbon here.

    I just absolutely love, love, love my Can-Diggle.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    92
    new suspension platform? i've been happy with the current suspension platform so i'm curious to hear more...if there are any details to be shared at this point...

  75. #75
    Canfield Bikes
    Reputation: flymybike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,111
    As we continue to learn about how suspension works, We keep pushing for the BEST (12 years now). We have a amazing new platform that is simply a progression beyond what is on the market now. We have lead parallel link suspension bikes design since the begining and plan to be the leader in technology moving forward. Keep your eyes open, regardless of the name, it will be mind blowing.
    https://canfieldbikes.com/
    Building bikes that make you smile!
    www.mtbparks.com
    All Bike Park, All the time.

  76. #76
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,731
    I'll definitely be watching for your new products. Good luck-

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    66
    This is one of the many reasons I love canfield! Keep it up!

  78. #78
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by cSquared View Post
    Hey guys,
    We love to hear what everyone wants-
    But- just so everyone knows... New bikes take a very long time to design, prototype, test, and then finally produce. Some where around 2 years.


    You will not be seeing anything in the full suspension frame side this year.
    We are keen on a 26" 140 and a 29" 100mm.
    We are mocking up the suspension platforms- and will most likely have proto's next spring.

    And FYI for all the fans- We are always reading, watching, and aware of the market, forums, and trends. We have wanted to do a more AM/XC frame or frames for awhile now.
    But, remember-
    We are self funded. And like it that way.
    We have been working on other projects (ie- components, and hardtails) that make more money- which will allow for more cool stuff in the future.
    And we don't always just build stuff with money in mind. We build stuff a lot of the time, for the love of the perfect ride- and not for what the market is asking for. (9t micro drive)
    Like our Jedi- a rearward Pulley DH frame- We know a traditional frame with a tradition wheel path is what the market is all about- and we could make a unreal version of that. (and might one day) But if you have ridden a Jedi- you know. It is magical.

    So just wait. We are bring some really mind blowing stuff out in a few years. A couple of frames with a new suspension platform that changes the game.


    Keep demands coming- We're listening.
    c2
    Bump to see if there's any new news on possible R&D on a trail frame/sus platform?
    "We are keen on a 26" 140 and a 29" 100mm"
    -c2
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  79. #79
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Bada-BUMP..... C'mon. You know that I can't let this rest. ANYthing that you can update?
    Gimme 140 or below, yo! in the rear..... mated to a 140 or 1fiddy fork.... Remember to gimme LOW low low low low low low standover....
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  80. #80
    Formerly dvo
    Reputation: mtbrdan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,894
    Full suspension trail bike? 27 lbs range? Pretty please?

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kameraguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    440
    Although my One is working well for a (35lbs currently) trail bike, I also would love to see a sub 30 lbs trail bike from the Bros.

    And I know alloy is what is traditionally the material of choice, it would be sweet if a carbon offering of such bike would be possible. But understood, this is all only possible with money and would bet carbon anything is just crazy expensive to delve into.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    194
    How hard would it be to make a new rear end for the One to make it 650b compatible? Seems like everyone is awfully excited about the 650b these days? Just curious to see what the brothers are thinking about in that wheel size?

  83. #83
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by confused View Post
    How hard would it be to make a new rear end for the One to make it 650b compatible? Seems like everyone is awfully excited about the 650b these days? Just curious to see what the brothers are thinking about in that wheel size?
    A perfect subject for which you should start your own thread....
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rob1035's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by cSquared View Post
    We are keen on a 26" 140 and a 29" 100mm.
    c2
    My N9 needs a friend!

  85. #85
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    ... soft goods look great...... now... a nice frame to go with the clothing bling......
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heyheyitselliej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    215
    Thanks for listening Canfield! I'll cast another vote for a 5-6" 26" wheeled trail bike that would be suitable for epic all day rides with gnarly trails and lots of climbing. Something that could be built up sub 30lbs.

    I have a nimble9 now and am a convert! I've looked at bikes like the Remedy, Blur LT, Slayer, etc. They are great bikes but I know you will do even better!

    P.S. - NO need for carbon. Skulls and carbon don't play nice together (and I prefer long term durability).

    Keep up the good work!

  87. #87
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    I've been getting to be a big fan of "mismatched travel"..... Like a 140 front 125 rear.... Slack. 67-68 degrees.....I'm a big fan of the SC TRc's geometry. I am not into carbon either. Give me alu fer sure.
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  88. #88
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Can't wait to see what this new sus platform will look like!
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rubicon73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    78
    Any chance the Yelli would get a 142x12 axle?
    I ride faster than I should...

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    376
    Quote Originally Posted by Eastcoaster View Post
    I've been getting to be a big fan of "mismatched travel"..... Like a 140 front 125 rear.... Slack. 67-68 degrees.....I'm a big fan of the SC TRc's geometry. I am not into carbon either. Give me alu fer sure.
    I don't mind carbon but I also like the idea of a travel mismatched and have always liked the idea since Transition come out with the Preston FR (5" rear up to 7" front).

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,188
    Wrong thread
    Last edited by phsycle; 09-20-2012 at 06:08 AM.

  92. #92
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by phsycle View Post
    Please make the next batch of Yelli's with a PF30 BB. I'd love to run it with an EBB. My N9 is nice, but wouldn't mind something lighter.
    Sheez.... Again, fodder for you own thread, or to post in a thread about Yellis...
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,188
    Oops, sorry man! I foolishly didn't even read the thread assuming it was just for inputs on any future bike. Carry on...

  94. #94
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Eastcoaster View Post
    I've been getting to be a big fan of "mismatched travel"..... Like a 140 front 125 rear.... Slack. 67-68 degrees.....I'm a big fan of the SC TRc's geometry. I am not into carbon either. Give me alu fer sure.
    So, yeah.... a bump for sure.... still digging the mismatched travel deal.... for a full sus trail bike.... still LOVE to see this.....
    Now that 27.5 seems here to stay..... I am down with that. As long as the standover is there....

    BUT (and since I started the thread)..... I'd even be down with a "Nimble7" kind of frame..... Been giving thought to going back to a hardtail for trail....
    SHORT chainstays, LOW standover, and SLACK head angle.....
    Being a short rider, I'm just more for jumping on 650b than 29......
    So.... Either one!
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  95. #95
    No Gansta Lean here.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,027
    Oh... and since I bumped the thread with the 125R/140F 27.5" susser OR
    Nimble 7 hardtail....
    140 up front if you ever did Nimble 7 it out........
    EWR-HE-148-11-4-97
    Microbeer's Better!

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cSquared's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    354
    I hear you about jumping the 29er...... but lately, I've been doing rides on my N9 with a 140mm fox and a 50mm stem. Loving how it feels like a 4x bike. But, after a few runs on Galby in bellingham, I'm feeling the 29er wheels on the jump line now.

Similar Threads

  1. Gimme Shelter.......
    By rickthewelder in forum Intense
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-22-2010, 08:07 PM
  2. Gimme Some Fat Rubber Please!!!
    By dosboy in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 160
    Last Post: 02-18-2009, 01:00 PM
  3. gimme your best!
    By Scott the Biker in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-17-2005, 09:51 PM
  4. Gimme a brake!
    By CanzoTi in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-17-2005, 08:36 PM
  5. Gimme an Enduro!
    By Fooly_CoolyOo in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 02-01-2005, 11:23 AM

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.