- New Bike Day: Cotic FlareMax
So handily I have a large flaremax a specialized zee cage (bought on way home tonight) and a camelback podium 610ml. It just goes in with cage slammed right back but rests on cables on downtube. I don’t think I’m happy with it. Shame the bosses aren’t 10mm back as there is loads of room to my cc shock. I think the large is 500ml bottles unless you can try loads of bottle and cage combos.
Cheers for cage recommendation.Posted 7 months ago
I looked at it, only a few mm on the front. I got quite close by putting 4mm of washers between the frame and cage at the rear bolt to angle it upwards. The plastic cage seems quite flexy so I want decent clearance or every bump will have the bottle flattening the brake hose. I looked at the bolt hole spacer you suggested but as it takes up some height it’s not a definite gain as it pushes the bottle down into the downtube. I reckon with some effort you can make it work, if I get time I’ll go back to shop and measure up different cages to see if any are that 10mm further back that I need. For me over the winter I’ll live with a 500ml bottle for post work rides and live with a pack on anything longer.Posted 7 months agoBigmantrialsSubscriber
Wolftooth Morse cage might work, it has 3/4 different mounting locations.Posted 7 months ago
Okay so I’ve just been to a go outdoors with tape measure and bike in van. Camelback podium dirt series 620ml fits as it’s a different shape to the one I already had. Its got 3or4mm clearance to the plastic hose guide rather than to the hoses themselves so I’m happy if it clashes over bumps. Large frame, specialized zee bottle cage.
I want ten geek points for posting this on the internet.Posted 7 months ago
So I’ve been out a few times now and love the bike. However I’ve read in reviews that I shouldn’t like the seat angle. A bit of a google talks about opening up hip angle for better power transfer on time trial bikes but surely our high handlebars mean we’re already pretty good for this. So is it just for wheely versus wheelspin bal<span style=”font-size: 0.8rem;”>ance on climbs? I think it’s seems well balanced, maybe because of the long stays? I’m a bit confused as to the problem and don’t have any access to bikes with steep seattubes to see the benefit. I don’t want to go all cotic fanboy and claim it’s perfect but am genuinely interested, can anyone explain why?</span>Posted 6 months agoShackletonSubscriber
I tried a large (I’m 6ft dead with 35″ inside leg) and when seated felt like my weight was too far back and was pushing forward through the pedals not down while at the same time being stretched out. A very odd sensation. The nose got wandery and I had to shift the saddle all the way forward on the rails and then perch on the end for steep climbs. I suspect that if you have long legs for your height the very slack actual seat angle puts the saddle too far back so the effective seat angle is slacker than quoted. But it is also personal experience and preference.
Heading down with the saddle out of the way it was an absolute monster, loved it.Posted 6 months agokelronMember
I did find it easier to pedal after shifting the saddle forward, and it still feels further behind the cranks than I’m used to. I’m considering trying shorter cranks but it’s not a priority, it might be more efficient if it was steeper but maybe that would have knock on effects on the handling in other areas?Posted 6 months ago
I’ve said it before, but I still find the balance on seated climbs amazing. The way I can pretty much come to a standstill but still keep going still surprises me. I’m 6’ tall too, but a more conventionally proportioned 33” inside leg 🙂 Most modern bikes have true seat angles that are slacker than the effective (I think the FlareMax may actually be steeper than many) so I guess leg length could be crucial to whether it feels too slack or not.Posted 6 months ago
I’ve about a 32″ inside leg so schoolboy maths puts my saddle about 20mm forward of Shackleton’s saddle, using effective rather than real post angle. Maybe that’s enough to explain the difference in feel as its similar to a degree and a bit of seat angle. Seems odd though otherwise why aren’t seattubes at 90 degrees with an offset, surely all bikes have this issue and anyone below average height wouldn’t get on with steep seat angles. I don’t really get it, maybe I’ll just accept my bike feels fine!Posted 6 months agoLummoxSubscriber
Quick question to owners, have a frame hopefully arriving mid November, was planning a parts transplant but suddenly thought boost rear end am I going to run into issues using my current xt m785 chainset with single ring or do I need to factor in a boost chainset to give adequate chainstay clearance?Posted 6 months ago
So I’ve now ordered a frame, got a set of 140mm 2019 Pikes that I got for a bit of a bargain (relatively speaking) and some DT Swiss XM481 rims laced to 240 hubs coming from Germany next week. New tyres, stem, headset and a couple of other bits arriving Christmas day (all being well) and I should be good to go. Drivetrain, saddle post etc. all coming off my current bike.
First 29er and I can’t wait, all I need to worry about now is Invisframing and building it 🙂Posted 5 months ago
So, my frame is here and invisiframed, its bloody lovely 🙂
Anyway, I’m in the process of building the rest of it but not sure on one thing. The gear cable where it goes in and out of the frame, do you need a ferrule or is it just the Jagwire thing one end and the rubber bug the other? Ta.Posted 4 months ago
Thanks @roverpig got the cables sorted.
Last question hopefully, I’ve never had so many little issues when building a bike. Is anyone else’s chain very close to the chainstay when in the smallest sprocket, by the time I put the protector I’m pretty sure it’ll be touching? (32t ring/10t sprocket)Posted 4 months ago
I’ve got an 11t and it is close but doesn’t touch when stationary, my bike was an ex-demo and there was a fair bit of paint missing on the flat bit on the top of the chainstay so it definitely touches when ridden. I got the sticky back velcro out and covered anywhere paint was marked. The bike is quiet so I shouldn’t be bothered but the ‘free with MBUK in the nineties’ Neoprene chainstay protector is definitely my least favorite bit of the bike by a good margin.Posted 4 months ago
Also I’ve upset my friends by getting a Dakine Gripper rather than using insulating tape. Fits a tube, 2x20g C02 and tyre levers nicely on the downtube under the shock. It did spin round when landing some jumps so I used a bit more sticky back velcro on frame and back and it’s been great since.Posted 4 months ago
Is it a boost chainring? I’ve not noticed it being a problem and haven’t lost any paint. I’m running a standard GX eagle boost drivetrain. I do have the Cotic chainstays protector pushed up towards the cranks (so it covers the flat bits) and am very rarely in the 10 unless I’m on a road, so maybe that’s a factor.Posted 4 months ago
I haven’t ridden anything with a steep seat angle and would be really interested to try. I haven’t yet seen a good explanation of what the steep seat angle gets you to improve climbing so much, is it weight balance between the wheels or a more open hip angle? A few pages back I asked a similar question and it seemed that if you downsized the frame so you ran a lot of post you were more likely to have an issue with the front wheel wandering. For me 178cm on a large I’m happy with the weighting of the wheels and have a much more open hip angle from the long reach so feel great on it. I think you have to demo different bikes to be sure. I wonder if forward offset seatposts will become a thing?Posted 4 months ago
Well, according to the great God Strava I’ve set a fair few PRs on climbs since getting my FlareMax. So, you could say that I’ve compared it to every other mountain bike I’ve owned (four full-suss, two hardtails and two rigid fatbikes) and found that it’s better 🙂
On a more subjective note; I’ve probably said this more than once already on this tread, but the climbing was the thing that most surprised me with the FlareMax. Not just the speed but the balance. I do like a climb but this is the most comfortable I’ve felt climbing off-road. I can (and do) push it and get PRs, but it also allows me to set a more comfortable pace and winch my way to the top without ever really feeling off balance. I don’t know if the SA plays a part in that, but it feels good enough that I’d be reluctant to mess with it.
Now for the rambling bit 🙂 I’ve also never really understood the modern fashion for a steep SA, but maybe just because I haven’t spent much time with one. Everyone seems to say that they help climbing, but I’ve never heard a convincing explanation for why. Years of evolution of the bike has led us to the conclusion that a SA around 72 degrees is about right for all day comfort and efficiency. A bit steeper for a TT bike, but not for anything you’d want to ride all day. So why are we suddenly being told that mountain bikes need a steeper SA to be good at climbing? Is it just a matter of shifting your weight forward to keep the front down when it gets steep? If that’s the case then I wonder if it’s just a crude fix for the problems caused by short chainstays. The FlareMax has longer that average chainstays and I’ve never had a problem with the font lifting on any long climb that I could actually ride up. I think I probably do shift my weight forwards for those short super steep sections. But those sections are short enough that shifting forwards isn’t an issue. For sustained climbs it feels totally planted anyway, so I’m not sure why I’d want to move away from the SA that has proved to be the best compromise for over a hundred years! As I say, that could just be because I’ve not tried enough steep bikes. I suspect the next iteration of the FlareMax will be steeper as that’s the current trend and I think the RocketMax is. But will it be better? I don’t know. The current one is a tough act to beat.Posted 4 months agomccraqueSubscriber
I’ve only spent a day on the Flaremax but echo @Roverpig’s thoughts. it’s no weight weenie but flew up climbs. Technical and drags. And when things got steep it didn’t wander. That may well be down to the stays. I would go as far as to say that for a bike of that nature it felt pretty zingy on the hills.
I’m no engineer but guessing that the steeper seat angle is a bi-product of the fashion for long bikes. A slacker seat will only push you even further back from the bars. So is it for climbing prowess as the marketeers will have you believe? Or just so you can feel like you’re not overly stretched?Posted 4 months agosamuelrMember
A steeper seat angle in theory should put you in the middle of the bike when seated. It should rotate your hips allowing for a better down stroke.Posted 3 months ago
If you have a slack seat post then the larger the post extension the further over the rear axle you will be. Which in turn unweights the front wheel, unless you sit right on the tip of the saddle.
A steeper seat angle in theory should put you in the middle of the bike when seated.
Surely that depends on how long the front and rear centres are. To take a silly example, if you had long chainstays and a really short top tube then you’d want a slack SA to get you in the middle of the bike. Which is why I was saying that I thought steep SAs were a response to bikes that had got longer at the front while keeping the chainstays short.
It should rotate your hips allowing for a better down stroke.
If that’s the case, why don’t those Tour riders use a steeper SA? Surely they want to put out more power too.
Not trying to be argumentative. I just don’t understand the logic for having a steeper SA on a mountain bike. I suspect there is something too it as so many people seem to prefer it. I’m just not sure why.Posted 3 months agovincienupSubscriber
As far as I understand, the whole point of the ‘long/low/slack’ movement is to get riders more centred ‘in’ the bike, so this probably makes sense. Obviously front is going to come into it, but I think someone pointed out above that leaving seat angles where they were would tend to shift weight back and lighten the nose – exactly the opposite of what the new geo is trying to achieve.
I think the takeaway is that if you’re prepared to embrace the new thinking, current geo trends work well, but if you’re going to try and old-school it, a more conventional shorter bike may be better. I’m also noticing that the geo debates are heading the way of the 27.5/29 saga with ‘long bikes for speed and unskilled riders, short bikes for pros’ type comments coming up fairly often. Hopefully that’s not going to be the next couple of years of arguments!
Disclaimer: my main bike is currently one of the first generation Soul275’s…Posted 3 months agoShackletonSubscriber
The difference is in straight vs seat tubes that either don’t emerge from the BB or are cranked. If you have a straight seat tube then SA remains the same regardless of saddle height. If you have one with a cranked seat tube like the FlareMax then the effective SA gets slacker and slacker as the saddle goes up.
So for me at 6ft with a 35″ inseam on a large I had to put the saddle all the way forward on the rails (and it would have been even more so if I could) to get a comfortable climbing position on the FlareMax. If you have shorter legs for your height then it becomes less of an issue.
From chatting to various friends and others at the demo I suspect that the SA on the FlareMax was designed to suit the short legged fraternity.
Or my personal suspicion is that the wrong design was signed off on (compare to the RocketMax). I simply can’t believe that they didn’t take a range of body shapes into account when designing which doesn’t leave many other explanations…….
Shame really as it was fantastic down the hill but pedalling it back up was an awkward experience. Not wandery but just like it was trying to bend me into a wrong shape that was very inefficient for pedalling. My hips felt miles behind the BB yet was quite stretched out to the bars which meant that I felt like I was pushing forward not down through the pedals.Posted 3 months ago
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.