the average person would be hard pressed to tell they were eBikes at all from more than a couple of metres away, such has the packaging improved on eBikes
Hmmm. Assuming there was a rider on it, you'd be able to tell 😉
the bearing life on my old occam were excellent, once in four years and they weren’t even that bad
For the sake of balance I'll say that the bearings and pivots in my occams were utterly shit. The bike was brilliant to ride and carry in almost every way but the bloody racket and the stripped main bearing threads were a bit of a downer.
I dropped the hammer and bought a Moterra SL last summer, great bike………BUT, I’ve spent a small fortune getting the spec to where I wanted it. Fair enough (gulp!), but no range extender. I even emailed Cannondale and got a definite No as an answer, now or ever. Which I’m a bit peeved about seeing as big all mountain days I’m a fan of. So as a frame only option, and one that’s been touted by journos as having something special about it. I would have seriously considered this as a frame only. Looks? Couldn’t give a monkey’s over that nonsense. Proofs in the pudding.
I actually like the concept, but having been an early shimano motor adopter I won’t be going there again and also I’m slightly confused by what looks like an attempt to make a less integrated/more user maintainable bike (*imho a very good thing) with what seems to be the least well supported and maintainable engine, also 21.7 might be lightish for full fat it’s not as light as I want. (After an exe I’ve gone cube sl, Bosch sx, 16.2alledged kg)
But it still doesn't mean, in any way shape or form, that it's objectively "better" than a great many other eMTB's that have come to market in 2025...
It's a valid point on the objective stuff of e-MTB spec, but we don't buy bikes for objective reasons and bikes don't stand out for only those reasons.
I was making 2 points really. One is Cotic are smart in appealing to a small number of riders wanting something different, rather than fighting in the scrum of all the big brands doing e-MTB. Red/blue ocean stuff.
Second is how reviews are often personal and subjective and the thinking behind that is what can make it more interesting to read than a lab report. It's not about data or tech newness here, it's about a bike that by all accounts rides great (#1 priority) and is a standout product in the market for various reasons that make it interesting, inspiring even. I could go into a rant about the state of the industry and how hard it is for smaller brands right now but I won't. I'll just say this bike makes me smile and I want to see it selling in sufficient numbers for Cotic carve to out a niche that is (imho and my perception) 2 fingers at the large chunk of the industry that is blindly marching toward a cliff edge.
These aren't road bikes of decades past on 23mm tyres, or skinny tubed XC bikes with little or no suspension...
Not as mainstream bikes from big brands, no. They still have a following though, people who are more fans of those bikes than most new bikes. Small brands who create those loyal fan clubs rather than follow the mainstream tend to do OK.
the Genesis (a former employer @jameso ?) Volare 853 which preceded it (which with oversized 853 round tubes, was one of the stiffest steel frames out there)...
FWIW The 'steel for race bikes?' Q was a discussion with Reynolds when we made some early 953 frames but I didn't stay long enough to be part of the team and steel or carbon race bikes era.
"is a standout product in the market for various reasons that make it interesting, inspiring even."
Really, in what way? From the outside it looks like a bike that the company needed to make but had to compromise to keep on brand. I don't think they made it look like a Sports Direct bike because they wanted to?
The (openly shared) prototype was an aluminium front triangle with an internal battery. I trust Cy enough (currently on my third Cotic) to think that the shift to what the Rocket has become was about more than branding...
The looks have become less jarring to me (I really didn't like it at first, but maybe - I'm a photography teacher - they've just got better at photographing it?) and when I finally need an ebike the Rocket will be on my list if I have the cash.
I'd be interested to know if the battery case was custom to cotic or, by dint of production volumes, it had to be picked out of a catalogue. Assuming it's injection moulded the tooling for a bespoke case would have been unrealistic surely for the number of units they could expect to shift.
Someone above mentioned a longer slimmer battery might have been easier on the eye. I think I probably agree. With the advancements in 3D printing for production quality polymer components in short production runs, I might have been tempted to go that route. A load more faff I'd imagine.
I've had 2 cotics and still enjoy riding my gen 2 flare max but I'm not sure about the ebike . I haven't ridden many ebikes and I'm pretty sure my next bike will be a normal pedal bike but I am curious . I'm stuck between thinking I'd want something with a TQ style motor for that more normal feel with just a bit of help when I'm not feeling strong or getting something with an Avinox because If you're going to go electric you might as well go all in . If cotic built something with those motors I'd be really interested even if I'd be unlikely to be able to afford it although i dont know how realistic that is for a company of cotics size to deal with those companies. The downtime podcast with cy is worth a listen and he explains all the decisions and I've no doubt they got a bike that rides the way they wanted it to , he was also pretty open about it not being a mass appeal bike .
If they'd make a Jeht with that style of frame layout I'd sell a kidney to get it .
Really, in what way?
Having the balls to do things differently to where the mainstream is right now, for a start.
Making your own battery pack and casing means a lot of £ on testing.
Indeed - hence my last sentence. But insurmountable? After all, every firm going down the integrated battery approach is essentially making their own battery casing - it's just the shape of a bike main triangle!
Making your own battery pack and casing means a lot of £ on testing.
Indeed - hence my last sentence. But insurmountable? After all, every firm going down the integrated battery approach is essentially making their own battery casing - it's just the shape of a bike main triangle!
Big firms like Specialized are, many just use the standard Bosch/Shimano units. Canyon had a go at making their own batteries, most of them fell apart and it took them months to recall and replace them.
The other reason not to go 'longer and slimmer' as suggested above is keeping the weight lower down.
I don't own or have any deep knowledge of ebikes, but maybe the forte of this one is how the rest of the bike rides around the battery and motor?
Although based on pretty much every forum thread I've read anywhere on ebikes absolutely nobody cares - all judgements seem to be strictly about the motor and battery. They now seem to be regarded just like any other expensive, semi-disposable Tech - out of date or just generally worn out in 2 or 3 years as the technology progresses so fast.
I totally get it, I'm just not in a financial position to pay to play. Even if I could raise a few grand in the first place, I can't really justify spending it on something with the lifespan of a phone.
What would get my attention though... and this might be a totally ignorant suggestion, I genuinely don't know... would be a bike like this Rocket which could switch out batteries and motors as the tech advanced. If 5 years down the line I still had a great steel framed bike that could have a fresh, up to date motor and a battery half the size retrofitted, that would be an entirely different prospect.
Making your own battery pack and casing means a lot of £ on testing.
Indeed - hence my last sentence. But insurmountable? After all, every firm going down the integrated battery approach is essentially making their own battery casing - it's just the shape of a bike main triangle!
Sure, I was posting to add/ agree 🙂 So many of the integrated DT batteries are made to fit open mold down tubes. Some can be bought as matched battery and tube. There’s also added cost in testing when you mix and match battery and motor, overall it’s far more expensive than regular ISO mechanical tests.
What would get my attention though... and this might be a totally ignorant suggestion, I genuinely don't know... would be a bike like this Rocket which could switch out batteries and motors as the tech advanced. If 5 years down the line I still had a great steel framed bike that could have a fresh, up to date motor and a battery half the size retrofitted, that would be an entirely different prospect.
if I was buying an e-mtb that’s exactly what I would be looking for. The lifespan of the bike would need to outlast the electronics >3x.
As it already is the Intradrive motor will fit Shimano EP8 pattern mounts and the Shimano battery mount is used by a few battery pack makers in Asia.
I can understand a steel hardtail winning bike of the year etc as it offer something different. Whether this offers anything that much different to all the other 150/160mm rear travel emtbs out there i'm not sure.
Motor choice is a bit of an odd one, it's not pushing the boundaries in terms of power/weight/integration yet has a pretty locked down motor system so this is one of the worst motor options if something internal breaks after warranty or you want to change wheelsize etc
"is a standout product in the market for various reasons that make it interesting, inspiring even."
Really, in what way? From the outside it looks like a bike that the company needed to make but had to compromise to keep on brand. I don't think they made it look like a Sports Direct bike because they wanted to?
It's pretty well explained in the review at the start of the thread. Makes a lot of sense once the reasons are on the table. The looks have grown on me fwiw, probably prefer to normal chunky ebikes although doubt I could ever afford one.
I wish they'd made a "universal" cradle mount, to which a variety of welded cradles could be bolted to take a selection of motors
I've a 2018 Vitus Esommet and you can buy an upgrade kit to fit the newer motor and the bigger battery
Regarding the battery, it is the standard Shimano external battery. We did look into custom packs, and actually Shimano are one of the brands that are more open to this than most, but the legislation, testing, validation and just general making-it-safe work is a massive, massive amount of work, and Shimano won't work with you unless you commit to buying a LOT of drive systems because of the work they need to do.
All the other brands aren't making custom batteries, they're putting (extremely ugly I might add) standard batteries from the motor provider inside the down tube.
I don't think the casing shape of the battery is fundamentally bad, it's just that it's been the same for 10 years so there is an association with older ebikes there. I can't help that, even if the internals and cells are all much better than those older batteries. The interesting thing for me from a performance perspective (and it's one of the bigger reasons why the external battery and sensible sized frame tubes made more sense) is that they are lighter than the internal batteries for the same capacity. I don't know why, but they are.
As for upgradability, nothing I have seen from Shimano leads me to believe that you won't be able to bolt a newer motor on the bike in years to come. Certainly the current battery plug/architecture will continue for some time as well.
the legislation, testing, validation and just general making-it-safe work is a massive, massive amount of work,
All the delivery riders seem to manage it fine 😉
Honestly can't believe all the fuss about this eMTB. First and foremost it's a bike to which it's had a motor and battery added in a way that makes most sense from a designer/engineer's perspective. Is that not what we'd all want from an eMTB? Something that rides like a MTB first and foremost, but with the assistance for the ups? Sounds perfect to me.
I'd bloody love one. Just not in a place to be spending anything close to that on a bike of any sort.
More than happy to be told I've bought into the marketing bollocks as a Cotic fanboy 😀
Something that rides like a MTB first and foremost, but with the assistance for the ups?
But my Levo rides like an MTB - a 160mm travel carbon enduro MTB. Yes, it's heavier obviously, but other than that it doesn't ride differently to an 'MTB'
As does my Heckler SL - one of reasons I went with a lighter eMTB* was after riding Mrs a11y's 26kg Cube FSer and hating it. Levo might be different but that ****ing Cube definitely didn't ride like a normal MTB.
* reason definitely wasn't for the Fazua motor 😆
I appear to remember an article in STW (yes, there’s a magazine) de-bunking the myths around frame “compliance”.
I know on my fancy steel road bike the biggest improvement to handling and comfort is from high TPI tyres and in my, albeit limited, knowledge on a full suspension bike a stiff frame is better so that the suspension can do it’s work?
Surely a flexible frame (even though barely perceptible) will inhibit the correct suspension action, as bicycles were designed in a triangulated form for a reason, strength and stiffness?
that ****ing Cube definitely didn't ride like a normal MTB.
Cube have always had a uniquely awful grasp of geometry, so no big surprise there
Surely a flexible frame (even though barely perceptible) will inhibit the correct suspension action, as bicycles were designed in a triangulated form for a reason, strength and stiffness?
Sounds like it should be the case and maybe all the time your bike is upright it’s true but as soon as it’s leant over it all gets more complicated. At least that appears to be the case for bikes, e-bikes or motorcycles
@Rubber_Buccaneer I appreciate that having had the good (?) fortune to have ridden a tuned KH500 over the Cat and Fiddle I would have loved a much stiffer frame with no “compliance”!
"I appear to remember an article in STW (yes, there’s a magazine) de-bunking the myths around frame “compliance”."
Yes, I read that too. Unfortunately it was written by someone with no formal education in engineering and clearly not a lot of self-education on that either, who is also very light for their height. That's not a great starting point for writing an article to explain complex engineering concepts or feel-based rider stuff that needs enough rider mass and strength to get a bike to flex more obviously.
The time when a bike needs the most sensitive suspension is when riding on the limit on flat rough corners - and that's when the force directions mean that the suspension works the least well and the system relies more and more on tyre, wheel and frame compliance.
Yeah, I'm the same. Seat tube insertion and being able to carry a full size bottle are the only two negatives I've got with the current RocketMax. If they updated to the Rocket layout I'd push the button on one straightaway
So, @chiefgrooveguru to get the benefits from a “compliant” frame the rider needs to be heavy and strong? I’ve still not read any articles that explain that a bendy frame is a good thing, it may be that I lack the ability to understand these things, or it may be a case of The Emperors new clothes?
I’ve recently replaced some excellent Shimano Pro carbon handlebars with some OneUp bars, I tell myself that I can tell the difference and they’re more comfortable but I’m sure it’s all in my head, which is ok as I get a thrill just looking at the beautiful shape!
I understand that suspension doesn’t work as well when the bicycle is leaning over as there will be friction and pressure acting on pivots and fork bushes. This is when I would have thought a stiff frame and perhaps bushes instead of bearings would help the suspension work correctly instead of tubes that are bending in an uncontrolled way?
I think there are too many variables to comprehensively say one material or frame design is better. This bike will likely have a more flexible front triangle than a carbon eBike with a massive internal battery in the downtube but the rear triangle might have a similar amount of flex or the ebike having more. When you start thinking of flex in components (wheels, tyres, bars etc) and which direction the flex might be occuring then it's almost impossible to pinpoint one thing.
"So, @chiefgrooveguru to get the benefits from a “compliant” frame the rider needs to be heavy and strong?"
Not at all. But a skinny rider will notice less flex than a bigger stronger rider. I may be biased because I bought a waterproof jacket based on said writer's glowing review and when riding hard downhill there wasn't enough space in the sleeves for arm pump...
"I understand that suspension doesn’t work as well when the bicycle is leaning over as there will be friction and pressure acting on pivots and fork bushes. This is when I would have thought a stiff frame and perhaps bushes instead of bearings would help the suspension work correctly instead of tubes that are bending in an uncontrolled way?"
That wasn't the main problem I was referring to - I was referring to how the bike is leant over so the suspension is no longer working up and down. That's the big difference between cars and bikes - a stiff chassis helps a car's suspension work better, but because a bike leans over then the chassis flex is essential for when the suspension is working diagonally.
I've generally reached the point I can't be bothered arguing online about complicated things because the world is very complex and most people like to simplify it too much, sometimes based on a lack of technical understanding and sometimes based on an assumption that if they can't tell a difference then clearly no-one else can. In recent years I've realised that I'm a bit different and I notice more than most, for better or worse...
still not read any articles that explain that a bendy frame is a good thing, it may be that I lack the ability to understand these things, or it may be a case of The Emperors new clothes?
flex is useful for racers for defo (just see bike checks from DH pros - see amory bike setup as well as other charlie hatton etc talking about more flex)
as an avearge joe i think it doesnt really matter too much as i`m nowhere near the limit of traction ( i might think i am on occasion - but really - no ) . however i do I notice if my spokes are loose or if my rear axle isnt bastradd tight.
i think manufacturers for average bikers rather sell a bike to be predictable in every scenario (and cheaper to manufacture) rather than flexy in specific scenarious as most people 1) dont care) or 2) just dont ride enough (or well enough) to get used to specifics.
you can buy top end kit where you can alter frame components for flex (atherton, commencal dh race bikes for instance)
the cotic will have more inherent flex/complinace due to the smaller tube diameters. which could be nice if you like that (steel hardtails are nicer than ali ones for teh same reason). I`d like to try the cotic but i cant afford it.
Its a single pivot (with a linkage) so bearing life should be OK as there is less force on the bearigs because of this- i`d keep an eye on the rear bearing though as that will go first.
still not read any articles that explain that a bendy frame is a good thing, it may be that I lack the ability to understand these things, or it may be a case of The Emperors new clothes?
flex is useful for racers for defo (just see bike checks from DH pros - see amory bike setup as well as other charlie hatton etc talking about more flex)
as an avearge joe i think it doesnt really matter too much as i`m nowhere near the limit of traction ( i might think i am on occasion - but really - no ) . however i do I notice if my spokes are loose or if my rear axle isnt bastradd tight.
i think manufacturers for average bikers rather sell a bike to be predictable in every scenario (and cheaper to manufacture) rather than flexy in specific scenarious as most people 1) dont care) or 2) just dont ride enough (or well enough) to get used to specifics.
you can buy top end kit where you can alter frame components for flex (atherton, commencal dh race bikes for instance)
the cotic will have more inherent flex/complinace due to the smaller tube diameters. which could be nice if you like that (steel hardtails are nicer than ali ones for teh same reason). I`d like to try the cotic but i cant afford it.
Its a single pivot (with a linkage) so bearing life should be OK as there is less force on the bearigs because of this- i`d keep an eye on the rear bearing though as that will go first.
still not read any articles that explain that a bendy frame is a good thing
At the extremes, a 100% rigid frame and fork would be horrible to ride. But a frame that's too flexible wouldn't be possible to ride.
So the conclusion has to be that some flex is a good thing, there is an element of flex that is good and how much variable and subjective. There is no right answer but there will be a consensus of general opinion.
There is no right answer but there will be a consensus of general opinion.
You can't go wrong with 'vertically compliant but laterally stiff'.
https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2007_08_13_archive.html
You can't go wrong with 'vertically compliant but laterally stiff'.
TLDR that link - what it's saying?
'vertically compliant but laterally stiff'.
thats not what racers are doing though. they are adjusting lateral frame compliance with bolted in plates. longevity isnt a need for them though as they`ll get new bearings every race. do that on a 'normal' bike for sale and manufacturers get a roasting and frames will snap.
It's a Bike Snob blog post that always pops into my head whenever people start talking about stiffness (missus).
It also shows that bike industry marketing/journalism hasn't changed much in the last 15 years.
.. the point being?
Do you think it doesn't matter or we can't feel differences in this area, or a reviewer is making this stuff up? Genuine Q.
"You can't go wrong with 'vertically compliant but laterally stiff'."
Post, opinions, blogs, information, data etc regarding this for road bikes are almost entirely irrelevant to mountain bikes, especially ones with suspension. Our suspension gives us far more vertical compliance than any road bike can hope to have. The lateral compliance is what we need (in the right amount) to eke out very last bit of grip in corners, especially flatter rougher ones. This is something that teams have been experimenting with at WC DH, not for marketing reasons but to find fractions of a second on a race run.
Cotic made a steel front triangle for Framework Cycles:
I can't recall what's in that video but I know the final conclusion was that when racing at full pro speed the steel frame wasn't stiff enough and felt unpredictable in the highest G corners, so although it was nicer feeling most of the time the flex was too much for how hard they ride their bikes.
