Forum menu
I think I can tell some of them... My main bike is 8 years old in a couple of months and I change bikes infrequently - so I don't think it's a case of emperors new clothes.
15mm vs QR - most definitely but I went QR to 24mm first and that was a huge difference. Can also tell difference between current 20mm and 15mm axles on my bikes, although both different forks so that might be a lot of it
Taper vs straight - Not ridden enough to make judgement.
The spring of steel - massive difference and even between different qualities of steel.
The comfort of Ti - huge difference alloy to Ti and even high-end steel to Ti.
Pick up - Yes, but this don't bother me much
Crank stiffness - from square taper through 24mm to PF30 never noticed a blind bit of difference other than non BSA BBs - Yes, but doesn't bother me much.
I think part of reason I can tell is down to mass though. I'm a heavy SOB at the mo.
Depends on what bike and how hard it's being ridden.
Big bike in the alps? All of them.
Small bike on XC trails? Some, but not enough that it makes much difference.
Squirrel - Member
Some of you should learn to recognise hype
I do and ignore it.
Can I specifically tell individual differences?? No. But overall is my new bike with tapered steerer, 15mm front and 12x142 rear better in all departments than the old bike with 1 1/8, 32mm forks and QR? Without a doubt, especially downhill. Couldn't tell you which bit made the most difference though!
change from cheap 'fixie' cranks to proper track cranks was like fiding another 15 watts every commute. Normal now though. 🙁
15mm vs QR - Yes, quite easy to tell when you tracking in a rut or hard into a berm.
Taper vs straight - dunno?, never rode a bike with tapered.
The spring of steel - Yes…so much yes, my custom steel (Columbus & True Temper) Soulcraft.
The comfort of Ti - Not so much on my Cove Hummer but definitely without any possible doubt when comparing my Ti Tripster to my Bro's alloy Tripster.
Pick up - Yes, my Chris King R45 hub on my Tripster is so much better than the Hope on my Cove Hummer, i recently stripped my Hope down as i thought it had a broken pawl as the pick up is so inferior feeling to the CK R45- there was no broken pawl in the Hope. Previously to having the King hub i was perfectly happy with the Hope pick up but i now realise there is better.
Crank stiffness - yes, but you also have to take into account the BB used (if square taper) and you'll need to use the same frame as a datum which would rule out comparing different standards.
I can't remember any big mountain bike manufacturer saying "we've carefully made this bike more flexible because we think it's better for grip" anyway. Some individuals, like nico volauvent... But I think it'd take a pretty brave product lead and marketing team.
Voila!
http://www.commencal-store.co.uk/PBCPPlayer.asp?ID=1481782
Didn't Fox make the 40 less stiff because they were too far the other way?
How did the top race guys in the 90s and early 2000s manage without all this stuff? I'm with the OP on this one, although you'd be hard pressed to buy a new bike now without some of those features.
Like a lot of things, once you 'learn' to recognise crank flex it begins to really annoy you. But if you never know about it, you can live a cheaper life of blissful ignorance.
I can say yes to most of your questions, but I'm damned if I can feel the difference between suspension traits. Cheap shock vs posh shock, single pivot vs VW link etc I'd never be able to tell in a blind test.
Re: Pickup - yes I can feel the difference but it doesn't bother me a lot. Like someone else mentioned, for me this comes from riding trials. But most times if you want to put power down, you've already 'preloaded' the chain so there's no real delay in pickup. I would much prefer a dependable hub with 20 pickups than a hub with 50 points of engagement that skips all the time.
On the being able to tell front there's a bit in the Phil Burt Bike Fit book discussing how some people are super sensitive to changes in bike set up and others basically don't notice it. This is partly in the context of picking up strains and so on of their position is off but I imagine it's a similar thing.
Of the listed things the only one I've got comparable experience of is pick-up and I definitely notice that in slow speed bits where your having to constantly give a quick crank turn to keep momentum up.
15mm vs QR - Totes Amazeballs
Taper vs straight - Mega Boke
The spring of steel - Fo Sho
The comfort of Ti - wallowy crap
Pick up - what? - yep
Crank stiffness - Yep, until my cranks fell off on my PF30
chiefgrooveguru - MemberVoila!
I'm going to kiss Max Commencal. I'm still not going to buy one of his bikes though.
How did the top race guys in the 90s and early 2000s manage without all this stuff?
I bet anyone in the WC DH top 50 on a modern bike would beat Vouilloz at his best on a year 2000 bike down any of the gnarlier WC tracks. But if everyone is on a bike with less good technology then it's a level playing field.
I was sceptical about steel vs alloy hardtail frames - I bought a Soul because of the geometry/purpose/reputation, the steel was incidental. It managed to feel smoother over the rough yet easier to keep on track than the alloy frame it replaced, like letting a few psi out of the tyres and making the forks less bendy. (It's not steel vs alloy though, it's certain steel vs certain alloy, you can easily make a steel frame feel utterly rigid).
I was sceptical about stiffer cranks - then I broke my Truvativ ones and was shocked to feel an obvious change with the Zees that replaced them, much more responsive.
The biggest difference I've noticed is from a cheap stem and XC bars to a Renthal stem and Easton Havens - they felt about five times as stiff - massively obvious! However, I swapped those carbon bars for the alloy ones last year and they feel identical.
Some riders just don't feel these subtleties and that doesn't make them bad riders - I know I'm very sensitive to this stuff. I'm sure there are thousands of quicker MTBers than me who are oblivious to gear differences that I notice. I notice my tyre pressures being out by as little as 10%. To be honest, it's bloody annoying!
I bet anyone in the WC DH top 50 on a modern bike would beat Vouilloz at his best on a year 2000 bike down any of the gnarlier WC tracks. But if everyone is on a bike with less good technology then it's a level playing field.
Be nice if there was a way of placing a bet and holding your challenge for real..
using the longest running track on the circuit, Mont Saint Anne as an example. Vouilloz used to put almost 30 seconds into 50th place in his day. the difference between 1st and 50th last year at MSA was closer to 20 seconds. if you are correct you are saying Vouilloz on his 190mm travel single pivot Bos engineering damped Aluminium V-process would have been 20seconds slower than hill riding his 205mm travel rockshox damped Aluminium single pivot Nukeproof.
Personally I think you're massively underestimating just how good Nico actually was and also how much more consistently winning in DH has to do with a riders mindset than the equipment.
[b]So 15mm/20mm vs QR.[/b]
Explain to me where the flex is in the QR system?
To my mind it either involves the QR not gripping the dropout which would lead to wear (which I've never seen)
Or that the hub itself flexes, which considering that most are made of non flexible aluminium alloys I'm not getting either?
just how good Nico actually was
Best DH rider of all time IMHO.
Be nice if there was a way of placing a bet and holding your challenge for real..
using the longest running track on the circuit, Mont Saint Anne as an example. Vouilloz used to put almost 30 seconds into 50th place in his day. the difference between 1st and 50th last year at MSA was closer to 20 seconds. if you are correct you are saying Vouilloz on his 190mm travel single pivot Bos engineering damped Aluminium V-process would have been 20seconds slower than hill riding his 205mm travel rockshox damped Aluminium single pivot Nukeproof.
Personally I think you're massively underestimating just how good Nico actually was and also how much more consistently winning in DH has to do with a riders mindset than the equipment.
Fair enough, it's an exaggeration! But my point that incremental improvements do make a useful difference when stacked up still stands, even if it just means that Nico may have been beaten by the 3rd place rider. And I know Nico is still known as a brilliant test rider, who can not only feel the difference between different components or set-ups but also do such consistent runs on a track that the differences can be measured on a stopwatch.
I was surprised at how much effort Zink put into his suspension tuning to let him hit the huge jumps at Rampage without overshooting, coming up short or getting bucked.
BMXing has made me ultra sensitive to any any changes, to the point i could tell the difference in back end length between fresh chain, and pulling it back to take out the "stretch" that occured, maybe 3-5mm changes in CS length, but could definitely detect it.
It obviously also comes down to what you're doing with the bike, if MTBing for you is just comfortably spinning the pedals, seated, on fireroads, you are going to notice sod all difference, most probly still not going to notice that much if you venture off the fireroad, but are a bit of a mincer.
The faster, harder, the more you do with the bike, the more you're going to notice, the more you become the pilot, rather than a passenger, the more things are going to matter.
The you get those wildcards who ride the shonkiest stuff, flat out, who don't sense differences.
20mm and 15mm vs QR - Yes, my big rotors don't rub any more.
Taper vs straight - Yes, less for twang under heavy braking.
The spring of steel - Yes, I feel much better after a long ride on my steel hardtail than on my super stiff aluminium hardtail. There are big differences in frame design though.
The comfort of Ti - possibly, but I bought a Lynskey and it snapped.
Pick up - No.
Crank stiffness - Definitely.
All the positives (and maybe the snapped frame?!) may be as a result of me, fully kitted up tipping the scales at about 20 stone.
I have been known to forget to unlock my forks and not notice until the bottom of Homebaked at Gisburn.
So no, to all of above 😀
20mm vs QR - When I first went to 20mm from QR I didn't really notice. Then I went back to QR and they felt very noodley, 20mm definitely track better.
Taper vs straight - Not noticed tbh.
The spring of steel - more frame design
The comfort of Ti - not ridden a ti frame but again it's surely it's down to design.
Pick up - what? Noticed the difference between my cheap SS hub and my Hope hub.
Crank stiffness - not a massive difference.
OS bars - again not a massive difference.
richpips - MemberSo 15mm/20mm vs QR.
Explain to me where the flex is in the QR system?
I am far from an expert, but drawing parallels with motorbikes: My understanding is that the main difference is in torsional stiffness, mainly the front forks (it should be possible to design a rear swing-arm that is stiff without having to beef up the spindle, IMHO). A QR allows the fork legs to 'hinge' a small amount around the dropout and rotate slightly, whereas a rigid spindle, solidly mounted to the fork legs acts as a stiffener which prevents the fork legs rotating, so increasing the torsional stiffness betweeen the wheel and the bars, all else being equal. (Stanchion diameter & fork crown design are, of course, also very important)
As a demo, wedge the front wheel into a grid, or something and observe the amount of flex as you try and turn the handlebars.
The faster, harder, the more you do with the bike, the more you're going to notice, the more you become the pilot, rather than a passenger, the more things are going to matter.
The you get those wildcards who ride the shonkiest stuff, flat out, who don't sense differences.
I'd always assumed the 'wildcards' outnumber the sensitive yet quick riders - maybe it's just that the latter group don't talk about it that much?
There's a lot of force going through a MTB if you ride it hard and the levers applying the forces (wheels, fork, swing arm, bars, etc) are long and bike frames and components are very light - it stands to reason that things will bend! And when you're riding fast it doesn't take much divergence from your line to result in an unplanned dismount...
A tiny bit of flex induced divergence will not phase most fast riders.
As for your previous assumptions. You get very fast riders who are super sensitive/picky about set-up/component choice. (Vouilloz would be a classic example) and other very fast riders who are far less interested and just charge regardless.
As for your previous assumptions. You get very fast riders who are super sensitive/picky about set-up/component choice. (Vouilloz would be a classic example) and other very fast riders who are far less interested and just charge regardless.
Exactly my point. You only have to look at F1 to see that amongst a load of very skilled drivers, some are outstanding when their car is perfect for their driving and the track and conditions but are awful when it isn't but some can manhandle a very difficult set-up to a great result yet not go that much quicker with a better car.
No. I really don't have to look at F1.
it's dull and has very little in common with how to ride a bicycle well...
Of the things listed in the OP there are one or two where I haven't the experience to know if I'd tell the difference (Ti, tapered steerers). There are several where I really haven't noticed the difference (QR vs thru axle, different crank axles/BBs, pick up).
I have however had several Alu hardtails and a Cotic Soul (so a steel frame). There have been occasions where I have noticed the difference, but for me when I'm noticing its properties, steel feels flexy rather than springy or anything positive sounding. Generally it's only been something I've noticed when I've switched between frame types.