Forum menu
So many bikes from back in the day that it some reminds me especially
Turner Stinger
Ibis/ Castillo Ripley softtail
Then the pronghorn from Denmark
I guess with only 60 mm travel the trade off in weight saving might be just about worth it. But I can’t imagine the suspension control is going to be as good as a bike with a conventional 4-bar rear.
I rode a bike with 63mm travel for ages, it doesn't sound like much but it really does help iron out the bumps even if you don't notice it.
Good vid,
Nice looking bike (although it's clearly a FS, not a bloody softtail)
But the bit of the vid where the kid calls the other kid a Joey....
is that really necessary in this day and age?
The video is ace and trek should be applauded for the self deprecating theme. As for the bike I recently bought a 2014 trek superfly 9 full suss which was apparently 2700 back in the day and mine had a been converted to 1x 11. I paid £580 and a new chain and BB and its mint. It needs wide bars obviously 😉 and odi grip sbut what a bike. My point is 4k isnt wildy expensive for a carbon frame and wheels. I have mates that have 8k rrp enduro bikes so it will sell.
is that really necessary in this day and age?
What does joey mean to you?
I thought if was just another noob/grom synonym?
I’m still struggling with the idea that the seat stays are providing the spring rate (or at least part of it) without being damped.
Its not in series, its just not concentric.
Go back to the example of f1 car wishbones, they're springs in their own right, but there are additional springs and dampers. Although f1 is a bad example as they do infact rely on very stiff suspension and a big undamped tyre.
If you dont believe me, sketch out the trek system and replace the seatstay with a pivot and spring. The spring will compress (or stretch depending how you draw it) but its proportional to the travel. No different to the chainstays on a scalpel (or the seatstays on a salsa spearfish or going back a bit for Trek, the GF sugar).
But the bit of the vid where the kid calls the other kid a Joey….
is that really necessary in this day and age?
They clearly didn't have British accents, and you'd need to be British and of a certain age to understand why people might be offended by such an insult.
Brant talked about a long-travel soft tail many moons ago. I think it was 140mm forks and what he referred to as a "damage limitation" rear.
FWIW I think there's a market for something similar in the bikepacking community. 40-60mm of rear travel would be welcome on longer trips.
Yeah joey = baby kangaroo = noob surely, nothing more sinister? Indeed I’m only aware I should be insulted if someone called me Joey because of comments I’ve read on here about it’s origins.
I think it’s quite shrewd - make the Top Fuel a bit of a race/trail crossover, then have this straddling the hardtail/‘proper’ FS divide. Nothing really new, the STP came out in 2001, the Ibis BowTi was in the 90s, as well as other pivotless FS. Bendy single pivot FSs have been done plenty of times too. But there’s nothing new left full stop, so meh.
I’d have a Top Fuel all day long these days though!
Yeah joey = baby kangaroo = noob surely, nothing more sinister?
Back in the 80s I think it was Blue Peter who had a chap called Joey Deacon on the show a number of times to raise disability awareness. He had cerebral palsy and couldn't talk well. But it backfired and children being even more little ****s than they are now adopted the term Joey as an insult. It's also where sticking your tongue into your bottom lip and trying to talk comes from, which was also a common way to call people stupid when I was a kid. Despite Deacon himself having been quite an intelligent bloke.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joey_Deacon
I rode a bike with 63mm travel for ages, it doesn’t sound like much but it really does help iron out the bumps even if you don’t notice it.
I agree without a doubt. I was more speculating on how important sophisticated damping and axle path would actually be with limited travel. I had a Scalpel back in the day and I think it had about 50 mm travel, but it was still very noticeable on ride comfort.
I went out for a 90 min XC smash last night, taking my HT after 4 months of exclusively using my Spark. I appreciate I’m preaching to the converted but by gosh I noticed the difference on dry dusty trails, and it did occur to me with this thread in mind that a small amount of suspension would really help comfort and handling in these situations.
Its not in series, its just not concentric.
Go back to the example of f1 car wishbones, they’re springs in their own right, but there are additional springs and dampers. Although f1 is a bad example as they do infact rely on very stiff suspension and a big undamped tyre.
If you dont believe me, sketch out the trek system and replace the seatstay with a pivot and spring. The spring will compress (or stretch depending how you draw it) but its proportional to the travel. No different to the chainstays on a scalpel (or the seatstays on a salsa spearfish or going back a bit for Trek, the GF sugar).
Being an ex-F1 race engineer and designer I'm certainly happy to go back to the F1 wishbone example. In the F1 application I can confirm that the spring rate of the flexures is indeed negligible in the overall spring/damping system. The flexures are there solely to provide a lightweight frictionless joint. Without the conventional coil spring/damper the whole suspension would simply collapse into full bump. But in any case, all the flexing in the wishbones (however negligible) is fully damped by the shock.
So are you saying that the seat-stays on this trek are in effect rigid compared to the spring rate of the slider and therefore should be disregarded in the spring/damping? I'm not convinced they are and the seat stay "springs" are definitely acting in series with the spring/damper at the top and therefore undamped. Again as an F1 analogy it would be like fitting a flexible suspension pushrod, which you would most definitely avoid.
The chainstays on the Scalpel may provide some additional spring rate, but again they are there primarily as a pivot point and are fully damped by the shock.
just thinking about who is actually going to be buying this bike.
Plentt that have £4-9K to spunk to win lots of races save about 1 second per race but look cool in the car park
Plentt that have £4-9K to spunk to win lots of races save about 1 second per race but look cool in the car park
Sure and you can apply that same logic to almost any piece of high-end sporting equipment. Golf clubs, skis, tennis rackets, whatever. But it's still nice to have great gear if you can afford it, even if you are not winning competitions with it (which probably applies to 99% of people who actually buy high end gear).
It looks like a possible endurance option. That 60 mm on the back would sure help with fatigue on a stupid long trip/24hr racing.
Would love to know if there's room for internal dropper cabling though.
Also whether it would work well around bikepacking luggage
Think the starting price is pretty cheap in today's market.