[Closed] Remaking the San Andreas: Welcome to the 90's.

Doesn't do anything for me either, but then I never had Meccano as a kid.

People have been hating on this bike for the last year, but in green I think it looks brilliant. Far too expensive, but it makes more sense putting the money into machining that than spending thousands building some ballsed up niche-core titanium rigid 29er singlespeed that's no use whatsoever on properly exciting trails. THAT is a waste of materials.

hmm ok. but that's another question.

meanwhile, high single pivot, bolt on interrupted seat tube, short headtube, ugly as sin.

some ballsed up niche-core titanium rigid 29er singlespeed that's no use whatsoever on properly exciting trails. THAT is a waste of material

*Refills coffee, reaches for a croissant*

This could be good.

That is flippin' fantastic. I want one.

🙂

high single pivot

But is it? I think not. That pivot is bang inline with the chain on the big ring.... And that's a double chainset, not a triple, so that's the ring you'll spend most of your time in, isn't it?
Drop to the inner ring for climbing, suspension tightens up a bit.
Spot on IMO. 🙂

Liking it.

Good to see something that looks different.

Plus, it's simple and we all know how much people like Orange 5's for simplicity.

hmmm. a cutting edge solution there then...

Does it come with someone to scrape the mud out of all the collection points? Would double in weight with the amount of mud it could gather.

Also, it looks rank.

I wonder how different this thread would be if that had 'Orange' written on it?

And there's a passing resemblance, isn't there? 🙂

Does it come with someone to scrape the mud out of all the collection points? Would double in weight with the amount of mud it could gather.

Again, doubtful. That's exaggerating at least.
Q- Where does most mud gather?
A- Fork crown, inside of chainstays and seatstays.
And as we all know from the Orange 5, elevated single pivot stays have plenty of mud room, don't they...?

Still, why let the facts get in the way of a slagging match?
🙂

but, in it's defense (and whilst it is staggeringly overpriced) the orange is built using reasonably efficient and sensible manufacturing methods.

and since the orange is the butt of SO many jokes, why remake it?

I do find when I ride my bike TONS of mud ends up clinging to the outside of the swingarm.

Oh, wait, that never happens. Sorry.

weight of mud aside... how much of it is going on the shock?

Shouldn't we be worrying more about where all the various bits of the bike are in relation to each other, how the suspension works etc.

The choice of material to keep everything in the right place plus how the material is formed is secondary, isn't it?

On the other hand, I quite like the aesthetics of it. Like Nicolai have gone even more 'function over form' with the cnc machine than normal.

[i]Where does most mud gather?[/i]

GregMay definitely has a point - I get a fair bit of muck in the 'fluted' sections of my 575's chainstays. I'd hate to clean that Empire.

(apologies to the owner of this pic, just used for illustrative purposes)
[img] [/img]

The choice of material to keep everything in the right place plus how the material is formed is secondary, isn't it?

not if they are chosen for the sake of being chosen and different, and at the expense of sense and function.

'machining from solid' is just about the most expensive, wasteful, time consuming way to make something.

i don't hate this bike, i feel sorry for it. so much effort has gone into this deeply flawed design, it should have been left on the back of an envelope.

quoting:

The entire rear swingarm is machined from one solid piece of aluminium which starts life as a 42Kg lump before ending up as the intricately machined 1Kg swingarm

oh dear.

it's cast isn't it?

bosh. good stuff adam. there's a man that talks sense.

CNC milling and casting have a place, and could be used to make a really exciting structure that you couldn't do with tubes....

but they haven't. they've made a very basic frame structure. and therefore tubes and hollow structures are far and away a better solution.

it's cast isn't it?

the first 'Dh' ones were...

i believe they were made in the building next-door-but-one from where i'm sitting now...

it's cast isn't it?

think bits of it are, then machine finished. - still not exactly an efficient concept.

and (as they boast) the back end is proper machined from solid...

The San Andreas is infinitly better looking than this.

bosh. good stuff adam. there's a man that talks sense.

it's what i do for a living innit.

they should give me a call, i could probably help reduce their machining costs by at least 50%.

and that's more or less my professional sales pitch.

some ballsed up niche-core titanium rigid 29er singlespeed that's no use whatsoever on properly exciting trails. THAT is a waste of material

Where do I get me one of those?

Is it too early for waffles with my coffee?

Dez, I was thinking that. But, tell me, where is that fluted section exactly? Low, right near the front mech and (partially behind?) the chainset, both mud traps in their own right, yes? 🙂
I've just been looking at the pics and that is one stunning bike.
I didn't realise it wad UK made either. It's just not flavour of the (29er) month or niche (Jones) enough to make people think its worth the moolah.

Tell me, what's the price range of Jones bikes these days?

Solution looking for a problem. Also who in their right minds builds a 6" travel bike with only the provision for a 27.2 post, with the explosion of dropper posts over the last 2 years?

Not to mention it's ugly as sin. Pass the eye bleach. That thing makes the AP1 I had years ago look half decent.

for the record i have a 26" wheeled 5 inch traveled FS bike from a very major brand.

i am not on the niche 29er bandwaggon.

whether anyone else spends 4k on a ti niche 29er frame or not... that empire is ****in daft.

deeply flawed design, it should have been left on the back of an envelope.

Not to mention it's ugly as sin

WARNING - Opinions only. Other opinions are available.

How many bikes have you designed and sold..? 🙂

who in their right minds builds a 6" travel bike with only the provision for a 27.2 post

i'd not even noticed that. why build a bolt on tower in a smaller diameter than FS/Alu standard? that's completely illogical...

Not sure if this pic will work - but this is the original DH'er I saw in Dirt yonks ago. Tasty mochine.

[img] [/img]
http://www.mtb-news.de/forum/showthread.php?t=490155&page=3

How many bikes have you designed and sold..?

?

are we only allowed to comment on design and manufacturing if we are in the trade?

I'm not really interested in a bike that's heavier and more expensive than most of the alternatives (leaving aside the aesthetics) - but I wouldn't wish ill on a small British bike business.

So I hope some of the people defending this will buy one.

(Also, isn't that BB rather high?)

?
are we only allowed to comment on design and manufacturing if we are in the trade?

Not at all. I never even suggested that. But it would be nice if you could stop passing opinions off as facts, thanks.
🙂

passing opinions off as facts, thanks

when?

and why does opinion/fact on engineering technique relate to number of bikes sold?

How many bikes have you designed and [s]sold[/s] built..?

three?

But it would be nice if you could stop passing opinions off as facts, thanks.

they are my [i]professional[/i] opinions... reducing waste in manufacturing processes is what i/we do for a day job. i/we are very good at it.

I think it looks great.

I also think it's a solution that doesn't really have a problem.

CNCing it isn't the best way to make it though to be fair, any number of people (myself included) buy things not on a purely functional basis. The cost is high (considering that it's unlikely to have a performance benefit over cheaper design/manufacturing methods) but then people buy other more conventionaly frames at those sorts of prices for which you could say the same.

I wouldn't be buying one but I'd have no issue with people that do so long as they don't try and claim that it's somehow functionally better.

So Hope producing things by CNC is fine but it's not ok for a bike itself.

So Hope producing things by CNC is fine but it's not ok for a bike itself.

er... yes.

i'm not sure if you are joking? or agreeing?

reducing waste in manufacturing processes is what i/we do for a day job. i/we are very good at it.

Erm, the excess metal from CNC machining isn't wasted, it's recycled. Do carry on with this silly spiteful thread though.

Erm, the excess metal from CNC machining isn't wasted, it's recycled. Do carry on with this silly spiteful thread though.

why is discussing a product silly and spiteful? it's ok to have an opinion...

also:

it's recycled

using what process? and what is it recycled into?

He is right - it can be recycled (and usually is) though turning 42kg of metal into 1kg of metal isn't very efficient even if you do still recycle the 41kg.

Arrwh it's like an old Kirk and San-andreas had a baby
- but not a Mg one.