[Closed] Cotic Rocket update from Cy

I have it on good authority that the main reasons for shelving the 26 Rocket are nothing to do with manufacturing in the UK. The reason for scrapping it was mostly down to Cotics inability to secure a deal with the enduro grade 'pop' suppliers. The abundance of 'pop' was one of the selling points with the Rocket and people who had a natural 'pop' deficit (bad genes) were understandably very eager to sample this phenomenon. This lack of pop wont be as apparent on the 27b version. I'm not overly sure of the science behind it but it's to do with large wheels breathing life into trails or something.

And who touted 650b/the death of 26/the stupidity of those who refuse to embrace the new wheel size? The bike media, who spouted every single platitude spoon fed to them by the manufacturers.

See that guys holding a gun your head who is making you buy new bikes and forcing you read the magazines? If you want i'll have a word with him and ask him to stop.

See that guys holding a gun your head who is making you buy new bikes and forcing you read the magazines? If you want i'll have a word with him and ask him to stop.

I'm a victim of this. I relented and bought Pikes on the back of the fanfair and media hype. They are ok. They aren't the best thing though. I regret selling my sorted-55's. Lots of other kit that was bigged up by the mags that I couldn't see.

The man's running a business, give him a break; if his market feedback and manufacturing costs mean he can't sell enough 26" Rockets to make it economically viable then why would we expect him to make them?

I do feel for those who've pre-ordered one and are still waiting, but personally I would have cancelled my order and bought something else by now.

I do feel for those who've pre-ordered one and are still waiting, but personally I would have cancelled my order and bought something else by now.

brant - Member
Can't wait to see people's reaction to B+

hora - Member

I'm a victim of this. I relented and bought [b]Something[/b] on the back of the fanfair and media hype. They are ok. They aren't the best thing though. I regret selling my [b]Other thing[/b].

^TBF at least this was just about forks - I've done this with whole bikes!!

In fact I can think of 2 but I won't name and shame

For me its normally forks. Frames I just see something shiny/fancy something else. Never full bikes. Thats big wonga!

Fortuntately the 2 I'm thinking of were both bought 'reduced' as last years models 😉

Unfortunately they were both bought 😳

It's only pointless in your opinion. I suspect it has a much greater effect on how a bike rides than the introduction of tapered steerers did - and they've caused equal problems for old frames. I was sceptical but I've spent most of the year riding a 27.5 full-sus and I'm now back on my 26 hardtail for winter. Based on that I've concluded that they're just a bit better for MTBing - I can see a disadvantage for dirt jumping, freeride, slopestyle and very small riders but for everyone else I suspect mountain biking just started out on a smaller than ideal wheel.

It's all very well arguing it's a tiny percentage change but a 2 degree change of head angle is equally small - and it feels really different!

Bang on. Up to you if the difference is worth it or if it's better or worse but there is a difference.

As much as the evil manufacturers and mags force us to buy new stuff the simple fact is people like buying the latest thing regardless of the actual difference it makes. For examples see:

650b.
1x11.
Tapered forks.
Slacker and slacker frames.
Stans rims.
Pikes.
Carbon.
Wider and wider bars.
Shorter and shorter stems.

Most of the above might do the job better then what you had before but the margins are small and you don't 'need' any of them. Doesn't stop the vast majority of us, including those so very upset about 650b joining in to some degree.

Ultimately, this is the problem with having mtb culture tied inseparably to big corporate companies. We, as riders, should decide what we want from our bikes and our sport/activity/lifestyle. I would argue that a lot of the relentless tech progression is why so many talk about bikes rather than about riding, and why there is so little "culture" (literature, poetry, music, art) in mtbing.

Of course, this has nothing to do with Cy, who I feel sorry for.

I would argue that a lot of the relentless tech progression is why so many talk about bikes rather than about riding, and why there is so little "culture" (literature, poetry, music, art) in mtbing.

So on the one hand people spend too long talking about bikes, on the other hand they're not doing it in rhyme? And this is a bad thing because? Anyone care to contribute a haiku about 1x11, or a cubist painting depicting the inner turmoil over the 650b/29er decision?

The "relentless tech progression" is simply the result of people doing a lot of riding and thinking "how can we make this better next year". Yes making a new model for next year makes them more money, but it has to be better/different or no one would buy it! Pretty much every change people have moaned about is because someone sat down and drawn up something better. Frames's haven't be obsoleted by the 4x8 drivechain, or the reverse-tapered forks, or 24" wheels, they've all moved forewards. None of that makes an old bike any worse, just not as good as the new one in the shop.

All Cy's said is they're not making the 26" rocket any more as people now expect something better in that part of the market. The new one will inevitably have other tweeks too, internal dropper guides, maybe the ISCG will disappear as it's redundant, 650b+ tyre clerance, etc.

I think it does us good to be reminded of what a greedy, rapacious, cynical, dishonest bunch of shysters some of those in the industry are.

And the media reaction to 650b will always be there to remind us exactly how we are perceived by those who claim to represent and promote the best interests of 'our community'.

and why there is so little "culture" (literature, poetry, music, art) in mtbing

Shame about the Rocket. Would have had one in black, and customised the decals. It was just about my last hope for 26inch and threaded bottom bracket shell.

Lol masonsoul

I know what you mean. I can't imagine MTB equivalent of Norman mailer the fight anytime soon. Closer to home road photography and writing and bmx photography and video seems to be much richer than mountain bike. Privateer died on its arse. No old pros seem to do much writing. It's not a sport/pastime that seems to want to think about itself. Singletrack excepted of course 😉

[quote=eddie11 ]Lol masonsoul
I know what you mean. I can't imagine MTB equivalent of Norman mailer the fight anytime soon. Closer to home road photography and writing and bmx photography and video seems to be much richer than mountain bike. Privateer died on its arse. No old pros seem to do much writing. It's not a sport/pastime that seems to want to think about itself. Singletrack excepted of course Everyone enjoyed [i]Reveal the Path[/i] so much that it's never been followed.

Theres lots of good writing out there if you look for blogs and suchlike. Not everyone considers Strava to be the ultimate route to ascension.

It's really great that this thread has turned into a wheel size debate, eh?

why there is so little "culture" (literature, poetry, music, art) in mtbing.

Clearly you are not a man familiar with the Pinkbike comments section.

Hmmmm – I don’t agree with the notion that grasping bike companies are hawking kit that doesn’t confer any real world benefits to the sport/pastime and that we’re all mindlessly sucking it up, powerless passengers being railroaded. Granted there will be the odd exception as there is to everything in life, but in the main, as thisisnotaspoon has mentioned, those technological advances are for the betterment of the sport/pastime in terms of making bikes more durable/capable for their intended purpose, otherwise the respective companies just wouldn’t survive or remain competitive. [u]We[/u] are the drivers for this. I don’t feel I have to go 27.5/650b, 29 or whatever. I see it as having more options and diversity, which is good. There’s plenty of product out there to keep 26” alive for years if that’s your thing - as it is mine at the moment.

I think Cotic woukd be mad to bring out a 26 inch fs. A steel FS is already niche product to then make it even more niche by sticking with an obsolete wheel size doesn't make business sense. Not matter how much people on here might want one the market has moved on. I'm currently riding a 26inch 456 with 9 speed a straight headtube and qr wheels and non dropper post and absolutly love it. But my next bike and a i think its true for most will be 27.5 11 speed tapered headtube maxels and have a a dropper post.

They wouldnt wamt to stuck with a load of stock they couldn't shift quickly. Look at the Gyro's that Orange have just have to sell at less than 1/2 price.

It's really great that this thread has turned into a wheel size debate, eh?

Yes; will no-one think of the kittens?

Dig deep enough

http://www.churchoftherotatingmass.com/2014/12/02/are-we-not-journalists-part-2/ really is this what journalists think

And if you follow twitter you get a good idea why it "the rocket" didn't get made in this country, had far more to do with personalities than no ability to manufacture,

It's drilled home by calling it "27.5"( I do wish this bullshit would stop).

Good point! I just measured my 27.5 wheels and they're closer to 28" - and that's easier to say.

[img] [/img]
Still less than an inch bigger than a 26 with the same volume/height tyres.

deluded - Member
Hmmmm – I don’t agree with the notion that grasping bike companies are hawking kit that doesn’t confer any real world benefits to the sport/pastime and that we’re all mindlessly sucking it up, powerless passengers being railroaded. Granted there will be the odd exception as there is to everything in life, but in the main, as thisisnotaspoon has mentioned, those technological advances are for the betterment of the sport/pastime in terms of making bikes more durable/capable for their intended purpose, otherwise the respective companies just wouldn’t survive or remain competitive. We are the drivers for this. I don’t feel I have to go 27.5/650b, 29 or whatever. I see it as having more options and diversity, which is good. There’s plenty of product out there to keep 26” alive for years if that’s your thing - as it is mine at the moment.

The clue is on the user name.

There was a valid argument for 29ers as a wheel size for those who made 26" wheeled machines look like BMXs but for the rest of us there's no tangible benefit at least not enough of one to warrant making 95% of existing hardware obsolete overnight.

I don't know who instigated it or why anyone perpetuated it but it was the biggest con trick in MTB history and most people have fallen for it. OK it's mostly benign in that it's a just a bike with bigger wheels but it's allowed the industry to sell a load of completes at vastly inflated prices where I'd imagine thy wouldn't normally have done so. All in the name of fashion and progress.

Where did 650B/27.5 originate anyway?

Good luck with the new tweener Rocket Cy.

Still less than an inch bigger than a 26 with the same volume/height tyres.

Yes, they have the wrong name too. As do 29ers...

Have you ever stopped to consider that one reason 27.5 has proved popular is that it isn't closer to the 29 size? Maybe it is actually the (usually mythical marketing) sweet spot? 😛

I'm not sure why bigger wheels are such a terrible thing in terms of making frames obsolete when the ubiquity of large diameter dropper posts and tapered forks have done the same for bikes with sub 30.9 seatposts or 1 1/8" head tubes? I bet in five years' time it'll be a lot easier to buy decent 26" rims and tyres than decent 1 1/8" forks!

Speeder - Member

The clue is on the user name.

Well done - have a biscuit.

Have you ever stopped to consider that one reason 27.5 has proved popular is that it isn't closer to the 29 size? Maybe it is actually the (usually mythical marketing) sweet spot?

My brother in law has recently rediscovered bikes and can be excruciating to talk to about the subject. In his eyes, everything is judged on cash value and as such all conversations resolve back to what it cost. It's like a hideous parody of loadsamoney.
Where this becomes relevant is that while he would love my bikes or the time to ride them his opinions are steered by a serial bike swapper who seems to be dropping 5k plus on carbon wonder bikes. That's pretty much concentrating his attention on bleeding edge, and must be pretty much the marketing person's wet dream... He's not alone, and as there's always going to be considerations of 'shiny' and bling in a market essentially selling big kids toys, it's not an invalid point of view, his priorities and mine are just different.
I'm not particularly wedded to 26, except that I have some nice kit I really like riding. I've looked at 650's and fully expect that's what I'll be buying when I finally kill my 'old' alu fs, but I'm expecting my steel Soul and X to last a bit longer barring crash damage. It's not that I couldn't afford to go out and splurge, I just don't need or want to.
I'll join in feeling bad for Cy that the 'made in england' thing has not worked out and that he's essentially tossed a couple of years of sales of Rockets over it, I'm just not sure the wheel size question really enters other than possibly as snide cheap shots over last years' "26 ain't dead" slogan, and mine ain't for a bit yet.

it was the biggest con trick in MTB history and most people have fallen for it.

I'm not sure I buy this. Maybe I'm being naive but are there really loads of people who went "crap, my 26" is now utterly obsolete, I'd better bin it and go and buy a 650b to transform my riding"?
Or did the serial bike swappers and people replacing their bikes after years walk into the shops and come out with a 650b where a couple of years ago they'd have come out with a 26"? If so, how are they being conned?

I'm not that bothered about wheel size, but if I'd bought my bike this year instead of last year I would very likely be on 650b rather than 26" just because that's what's in the shops. And it would ride fine no doubt. I wouldn't feel like the industry had got one over on me somehow.

There is no such thing as a "sweet spot" that's just marketing BS. Even if there were it would be different for different parts of the trail.

The fact is that all three of the currently fashionable sized wheels are perfectly viable options for a mountain bike. None of them are inherently better or worse than either of the others. Yes, they each have certain advantages and disadvantages on specific bits of trail, but overall they work and once you factor in differences in geometry and suspension travel even the inherent differences get lost.

The problem isn't with any particular size of wheel, it is with the refusal to stick with any "standard" (whether that be wheels, forks, bottom brackets, seatposts or whatever) for more than five minutes. Manufacturers clearly don't want us to incrementally upgrade our bikes, they want us to dump them and buy a whole new bike (preferably every year or two).

Getting back on topic; I'm surprised that Cotic didn't stick with the 26" Rocket. They have a design that works and I would have thought they would get enough interest from the die hard 26" fans to make it viable. Who knows, by the time they get the 650B version ready there might be a swing back towards 26" anyway. However, it's not my house that's riding on getting this call right, so I'll just wish Cy all the best.

The problem isn't with any particular size of wheel, it is with the refusal to stick with any "standard"

My brother in law has recently rediscovered bikes and can be excruciating to talk to about the subject

recently had a conversation with a mate returning to the fold. What became apparent is the laughable idea of the "standard";

wheel size; 26, 650b, 29
steerer; straight, tapered, 1.5", 44mm
axles; 9mm, 12mm, 15mm, 20mm, 135, 142
BB's; BSA, BB30, PF30
gears; 1x or 2x, 9,10,11 (and explain why the more expensive bike has fewer gears)
disc; 6 bolt, centrelock.

I'm not the target consumer but it puts me off buying something new, do you want to spend thousands on what ends up being the Betamax standard?

Back to the original point, give up trying to make them in the UK, it was a nice idea but not critical to the image or success of the bike.

and you forgot 10mm rear wheels, and 28.6/31.8 / 35mm handlebars, 30mm seat tubes & who know show many BCDs on chainrings.

I'm not sure why bigger wheels are such a terrible thing in terms of making frames obsolete when the ubiquity of large diameter dropper posts and tapered forks have done the same for bikes with sub 30.9 seatposts or 1 1/8" head tubes? I bet in five years' time it'll be a lot easier to buy decent 26" rims and tyres than decent 1 1/8" forks!

Exactly right and exactly what most people seem to ignore. It happens and has happened year on year from the very start.

For most people a new bike is a special purchase, not just a tool that gets replaced when it's broken. People have different reasons and rational for what they buy whether it's value (Canyon, YT, On-One etc), perceived prestige (Santa Cruz, Yeti etc), comfort of the established (Specialized, Trek, Giant etc) or made in blah (Orange, potential Cotic, US built GT/Trek/Cannodale etc) + many other reasons.

We all like to think the new bike is a step forward from what it replaced so something needs to be different be it new axle size, bolt through, wheels, geometry, weight.......... As long as they can say it's X times stiffer, lighter, faster, smoother, snappier..... people will buy them. 650b is this years reason to buy a new bike, just as something else will be next year. The market demands change and perceived improvements so that's what we get. It has always been so.

I don't know who instigated it or why anyone perpetuated it but it was the biggest con trick in MTB history and most people have fallen for it. OK it's mostly benign in that it's a just a bike with bigger wheels but it's allowed the industry to sell a load of completes at vastly inflated prices where I'd imagine thy wouldn't normally have done so. All in the name of fashion and progress.

😆 I do love the idea that 'the industry' gets together and plots these 'con tricks'...
[img] [/img]

Imo the manufacturers are like sheep themselves and it only takes a 'critical mass' of manufacturers to go with a new standard before the rest follow...the real surprise of 650b was the speed of change.

[i]I'm not sure why bigger wheels are such a terrible thing in terms of making frames obsolete when the ubiquity of large diameter dropper posts and tapered forks have done the same for bikes with sub 30.9 seatposts or 1 1/8" head tubes? I bet in five years' time it'll be a lot easier to buy decent 26" rims and tyres than decent 1 1/8" forks!
[/i]
Well dropper posts are an option, no-one has stopped making standard posts because of dropper posts. As for taper steerers - if it wasn't for the 27.5 bullshit I expect these would be receiving a lot of criticism for the same reason. Can anyone actually tell the difference between a straight and a tapered steerer ffs?

Tapered steerers have been about for years and hardly anyone batted an eye lid.

Tapered steerers have been about for years and hardly anyone batted an eye lid.

shame they didn't make a standard where you could easily swap out the steerer.

I KEEP googling that bloody Yeti SB6C. It's calling my name....

Well I know the geometry is bang on because it's near identical to my Spitfire (within a few mm and fraction of a degree).

However tonight I will be out in the woods for 4+ hours on a 26" steel hardtail with open bath forks with 32mm stanchions, 1 1/8" steerer, and a 27.2mm seatpost - not so coincidentally made by Cotic. It does have a dropper post, tubeless tyres, wide rims and a 1x10 drivetrain with clutch mech and narrow-wide ring though... And we'll have a lot of fun!

I don't know who instigated it

Where did 650B/27.5 originate anyway?

What's next will be 'The First MTB-Specific, Developed For MTB Wheel Size'. 600C x 40mm wide rims. 2.4-2.8" tyres. I'm only half-joking. It'll be great for those that think 29+ is just too big but like the float of bigger tyres and like the option to use a 2.4" that ends up smaller than current 29ers, and think that 650B+ is too wide or not so realistic for sussers. And its only 16mm bigger than 650B so there's not much loss of chuckability, the same difference between 26 and 650. It'll make a nice strong wheel with the new F+R axle width standards that need those wider forks (that bit I'm not speculating on, it's here).

In the meantime Rockets will be out there and they'll be brilliant.
(that bit will really happen) : )

..and Nuke, pretty much spot on. Maybe not sheep, too many keen riders involved for that imo but there's a 'don't get left out' feeling driving things after the 29er process.

Well I know the geometry is bang on because it's near identical to my Spitfire

deluded - Member

Hmmmm – I don’t agree with the notion that grasping bike companies are hawking kit that doesn’t confer any real world benefits to the sport/pastime

The question isn't so much whether there's no real world benefits- it's whether they justify the change. In this case, it's a small change that requires replacing everything- and I don't just mean buying a new bike, I mean every LBS in the world having to do something about their 26 inch stock, early obsolescence of designs and machining, lost opportunities- every bit of tyre "development" for most companies in 2013 and 2014 being "Let's make it slightly bigger but otherwise the same"

chiefgrooveguru - Member

Have you ever stopped to consider that one reason 27.5 has proved popular is that it isn't closer to the 29 size?

That's the [i]exact[/i] reason- it satisfies the magpie's desire for change as stimulated by 29 inch wheels, while delivering a change so small that it's not scary (because you'll barely notice it) But that's not a good thing other than for salesmen.

chestrockwell - Member

Tapered steerers have been about for years and hardly anyone batted an eye lid.

Matter of degrees really, in lots of ways. Frinstance I think either the Pike or the Fox 34 are the first massmarket forks ever made with no straight steerer version? And that's a change that's taken about a decade to come about so there's been a pretty relaxed handover. And the negative impact on the industry are smaller since the redesign to accomodate it is smaller. Also it was compatible with 1.5 tubes. And even if you decide you MUST have a tapered steerer and so you change your frame, you can still use your old wheels.

So yeah it's largely the same thing, but the impact is different, in the same way as 50 wheel size threads are more annoying than 10 wheel size threads...

Sort of looks a little bit like it with a 160mm fork

Spitfire (160 27.5 slack) vs SB6C (both medium)
HA 65.7 vs 65.5
Reach 427 vs 427
Stack 590 vs 599
BB height 342 vs 345
Chainstay 441 vs 442

Fairly similar where it counts!

As everybody is getting their knickers in a twist about wheel sizes (for about the 1,000,000th time...) IF your 26" wheeled bike snapped or was stolen or whatever. What would you go and buy?

I must have been loking in the worng place. Where did you get those number from?
The Banshee site has different numbers (e.g 66deg HA at Low) the numbers put the SB6C as longer (WB & TT), steeper STA.
It does look like a riot though. I very nearly bought one but my LBS couldn't get hold of one and never bothered to tell me. Small wonder they folded.