Forum menu
Didn't that Team Robot article kind of rubbish the whole Mondraker thing Their bikes are actually no longer than the equivalent Session/Demo etc??
yeah see what you mean molgrips but a longer reach and short stem/wide bars dont prevent you from sticking your ass out further back but short stem/wider bars and maybe even the slacker HA? mean you can lean the bike over to the side easier and dig in as your turning so you dont loose grip at the front?
thats how it should work in my head, if only I could translate that into lighting fast trail riding 😉
Oh I dunno.. I'd have to ride one of these things to comment on the Mondraker concept itself 🙂
That Team Robot article is hilarious.
They make they're dislike of FG pretty clear from the word go and claim that Brook didn't like it yet in the next breath they say it's no different to a Session!
Also - consider this. Brook MacDonald won the Val D'sere WC on a FG Summum.
Finally - no ones claiming FG was ground break technology in the DH market, it's not, DH bikes have always been long and ran direct mount stems. What's new was taking this idea and putting into applications where it wasn't common place - Trail bikes for example.
I understand some people are sceptical. I was too. But the real proof of FG is in riding one and I urge anyone with the chance to do so.
Sure some won't get on with it (just as I still don't get on with 29ers), some won't ride it because of the looks and some will always slag it off just 'because' but a lot of people WILL get on with it.
Chuckable
[img][url= https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3887/14991637429_9e71d2da87_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3887/14991637429_9e71d2da87_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/oQL4vp ]jpeg[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/people/66651884@N00/ ]martinddd[/url], on Flickr[/img]
richiethesilverfish - Member
That Team Robot article is hilarious.
They make they're dislike of FG pretty clear from the word go and claim that Brook didn't like it yet in the next breath they say it's no different to a Session!
I think their point was more that the bikes aren't actually longer, whilst fitting a 10mm stem makes them shorter than some of the competition, in a lot of cased. Plus the 10mm stem comined with swept bars then has the effect of putting the rider behind the steering axis.
Mondraker have pulled back from the 10mm stems, they're at 30mm-ish now - which again is really no different to a lot of bikes out there on 35mm stems.
Mondraker make some pretty cool bikes - just not really all that convinced that the geometry is all that different.
its the FG in trail bikes thats more interesting than the nicher DH bikes
The Mondraker Zero Geometry trail bikes have always been significantly longer than the competition, and still are. Reach on an 2014 XL Dune was 497mm, Reach on a 2015 XL Foxy is 518mm. That is 30-40mm longer than similar bikes from other manufacturers.
what we need is steeper head angles and longer stems 🙂 😉 🙂
Shandy - Member
The Mondraker Zero Geometry trail bikes have always been significantly longer than the competition, and still are. Reach on an 2014 XL Dune was 497mm, Reach on a 2015 XL Foxy is 518mm. That is 30-40mm longer than similar bikes from other manufacturers.
Looking at them now - yes, they're much more extreme.
Mondraker have pulled back from the 10mm stems, they're at 30mm-ish now - which again is really no different to a lot of bikes out there on 35mm stems.
Also as I mentioned earlier, they shortened the top tube by 10 mm this year so they put the 30mm on to compensate.
Don't confuse a long reach with a long wheel base.
The long frame and short stem means that you maintain the same riding position as you would traditionally - it's the long frame that makes the bikes (especially the trail bikes) unique.
I think there are clear benefits to longer bikes, but there's a limit. Furthermore, it depends on the stuff you realistically, regularly ride. They will come into their own on steep, fast terrain. But all things being equal, on more everyday trails, a SLIGHTLY steeper, shorter bike will be more nimble and involving.
E.g. for the trails I ride (red trail centres mainly), the Whyte T130 "trail bike" was far more involving, poppy and smile inducing to me than the "enduro " whyte g150. The latter mopped the trail up. The former made me want to play with the trail.
Wheelbase is the sum of chainstay length, reach, fork offset and (fork A-C length x cosine head angle). Fork offset and A-C length are fixed by the fork choices out there, so frame builders can only change the other three aspects.
This just so ugly that when it is reincarnated in carbon it just might need to be mine
All depends what sort of riding you do doesn't it. Long and slack feels good on the downs with modern bikes also feeling ok on the ups. It doesn't mean a bike with a shorter tt, longer stem and/or less then 750mm bars is redundant, it'll actually be better over certain terrain.
In the early 90's we all moved away from slack 80's bikes as that suited the fashion and the type of riding we were doing. Didn't make it wrong, just as the current trend is not necessarily right. Most important thing to do is work out what will be best for the riding you do, not what you think you do.
The problem with forward geo is you don't know until you try it, it really does need to be riden to be believed. The problem with this forum is everyone has an opinion on bikes they have not ridden! Much better to have a guess eh?!
As far as the length overall of the bike goes, my Summum is certainly longer than a large Demo, by quite a margin. At Cwncarn they have to adjust the top part of the uplift trailer for it, lol.