OK, I know there are few things more geeky than a pivot position thread, but I thought precise location was supposed to be the key to making a single pivot bike work. It seems that Orange have “evolved” the location over many years, eventually setting on somewhere in front of the chainring and in line with the chain (in a particular gear). That meant the axle went through the downtube.

I see they’ve now moved the pivot to above the chainring, so it sits in a bracket on top of the downtube (rather than going through it).

So is this really a better location for the pivot or have they just done it because the newer (lighter gauge) frames kept cracking ?

I wonder if it’s linked to the geometry evolution.
Possibly ‘slacker, lower & longer’ means that the pivot position needs to ‘evolve’ to complement the change?
Plus, it gives them another buzz point to help sell the bikes..

Just means we need more anti-squat this year. It’ll change again next year

I presumed it was with ever increasing travel you need to raise the pivot to keep the axle path from just being forwards (or needing obscenely long swingarm/chainstays).

I presumed it was with ever increasing travel you need to raise the pivot to keep the axle path from just being forwards (or needing obscenely long swingarm/chainstays).

Yes, I guess that makes some sense and I see that the new Stage 4 has 12mm shorter chainstays than the old Segment. As legend says though, it presumably gives a fair bit more anti-squat. But then I guess (as always) it’s all just a trade-off anyway, so it may be different but not necessarily better or worse.

Any difference between the 2017 and 2018 five?

I presumed it was with ever increasing travel

I guess it’s not just travel, but also the bigger wheels. I see that the 27.5 Four now has exactly the same length chainstays as my old 26″ Five. Actually, the geometry looks pretty much the same all over really!

2012 Orange with 180mm travel…

2017 Orange with 160mm travel…

The Patriot was my old bike and I couldn’t fault the suspension up or downhill, it was probably the best I’ve had – thanks to that CCDB and 66 coil.

Thanks, that demonstrates it pretty well. With the new setup, whatever gear you are in, a line projected along the top of the chain will never pass through (or even near) the pivot, but with the old setup it was usually close as long as you were in the 32T chainring.

To increase stiffness with wider rear end I was told by a member of the orange demo day crew

That sounds like they were talking nonsense I’m afraid. Moving the pivot on a single pivot bike can have quite and effect on the suspension, you wouldn’t do it just for stiffness.

Roverpig, remember this also effects feedback through the pedals too. I would take less feedback with a more active rear end personally

legend – Member
That sounds like they were talking nonsense I’m afraid. Moving the pivot on a single pivot bike can have quite and effect on the suspension, you wouldn’t do it just for stiffness.

maybe they tested it and found a way that worked? 😆

Found a way to move the pivot without affecting the way the suspension works? Not really possible, as folk mentioned above it affects the arc of the wheel

Found a way to move the pivot without affecting the way the suspension works? Not really possible, as folk mentioned above it affects the arc of the wheel

True, but more than one way to skin a cat.

Look at Trek (or umpteen other brands), their pivot is behind the BB and get’s much less attention/criticism despite being a single pivot with a linkage.

It makes a difference, but could simply be down to a change of opinion over which is the best set of compromises to make. Maybe it sprints better out of the saddle for #enduro, and the compromise is a bit more feedback when seated (on a smoother fireroad climb)?

Maybe it sprints better out of the saddle for #enduro, and the compromise is a bit more feedback when seated (on a smoother fireroad climb)?

Feedback happens on rougher ground due to the chain stretch, mostly noticeable when sprinting out of the saddle. So this should sprint better on flatter stuff, but you’ll possibly feel more kick-back pedalling on rougher ground.

I’m not critising this move as Orange are forever moving pivot locations. Pivots across the market are always moving around – there are even BB pivot bikes and high pivot bikes with idlers back on the scene these days!

Leg-end – Five rider

As their new bikes run a single front chainring then the pivot point can be positioned where it will work best rather than having to be designed to work with 2 or even 3 different sized front chainrings that each affect the suspension characteristics differently .

Yep, I think that’s the real reason- pivot position is a compromise of lots of things, single ring setups change that compromise. So it’s probably not so much that they’ve discovered a new, better position, it’s that after years of having it somewhere they didn’t want it now they can move it.

timc – Member

To increase stiffness with wider rear end I was told by a member of the orange demo day crew

Should probably not have put a wider rear end on it for no good reason then.

I think they’ve always designed their bikes to work “best” in a 32T ring. Since I must spend around 80% of my time in my 24T granny on my old Five I guess I shouldn’t worry too much about this change. But I’m suspicious that the process might have been something like: switched to a lighter gauge aluminium to save weight, found frames were cracking near the pivot point and just moved the pivot to the closest spot they could find that didn’t go through an existing tube.

Northwind – Member
Yep, I think that’s the real reason- pivot position is a compromise of lots of things, single ring setups change that compromise. So it’s probably not so much that they’ve discovered a new, better position, it’s that after years of having it somewhere they didn’t want it now they can move it.

That sounds like you think they won’t move it again next year 🙂

Axle path is a distraction, it’s the last thing to worry about, so it is what it is.

The vertical position most controls the anti-squat. Oranges have moved up and down a lot over the years – recent bikes are pretty close to just over 100% except the Alpine 6 which is oddly high.

The fore-aft position affects the leverage curve because the more you move it rearwards, the easier it is to get the rear shock mount moving forwards then down rather than down then forwards – the former is more linear (good), the latter is more regressive (bad).

The brake-squat is stuck at around 100% because the pivot is usually close to a 45 deg line drawn from the rear contact patch – it’s not like a four-bar bike where the instant centre (pivot point) can be projected much further forwards.

With a lot of companies there was a progressive raising of pivot points (and thus anti-squat) in a given gear, as bikes went from 3x (so designed to climb in the granny), to 1×11 (30-32t), to 1×12 (32-34t). And designing for smaller chainrings with bigger wheels.

Can’t remember where I read it but Orange said as above last year when the new 5 came out. Single front ring means they can put the pivot where they couldn’t before and where they want it.

Interesting. That would suggest that the pivot position on my old Five isn’t actually optimized for the 32T ring as I thought. They would have liked to put it higher, but knew that I’d spend a lot of my time in the 24T granny ring, so didn’t dare!