Giants for instance act like single pivots

more xmas party brain fade?

Basically there are two types of people; those who are prepared to pay for an image/brand, and those that aren’t.

So the fact that you are comparing Orange with Santa Cruz immediately puts you into the first ‘camp’.

Now, all that has really happened is that you are pi55ed off that you (for some reason) can’t afford to buy the one you really want.

wwaswas – Member
Giants for instance act like single pivots

more xmas party brain fade?

Nope, just the truth.

Don’t! Don’t! Don’t!
Don’t believe the hype!

interesting description of it here;

http://www.socaltrailriders.org/forum/general-discussion/42652-review-2010-giant-reign-x.html

so the answer seems to be;

“Yes the axle path behaves like a single pivot but with the pivot placed outside of the frame”

Behaviour around sag is what’s crucial Shirley – and there the design behaves like a single pivot between the lower pivots.

Not sure what relevace the forum link has, and as for believing mfr’s guff….WTF!!!

And Giants for instance act like single pivots but have the added complexity and weight of a dual-pivot design.

Giant frames are very light. Even the six-inch travel Reign is lighter than the Five or Heckler frame.

And they don’t ride much like a single pivot at all IMO.

If they had the same geometry as the Five I’d probably buy one.

cynic-al – Member

wwaswas – Member
Giants for instance act like single pivots

more xmas party brain fade?

Nope, just the truth.

Don’t! Don’t! Don’t!
Don’t believe the hype!

agreed.

Totally agree with Gary. By the looks of it Orange sell out of Fives every single year, so surely that means their pricing is pretty much spot on?

If you think it is expensive then don’t buy it.

chakaping – Member
Giant frames are very light. Even the six-inch travel Reign is lighter than the Five or Heckler frame.

Shame they don’t make single pivots cos they’d ride as well and be lighter or stiffer!

The usual rule of thumb is that the ‘virtual pivot point’ is at the intersection of the lines drawn from the two links. Seeing as lose liks are rotating the point moves!

So yes, at any given point in its travel for an infitesimaly small time it is a single pivot arround a point, but a nano second later that point has moved slightly.

3 things to considder.

1) singlepivots are all mildly regressive, you can’t build them progressive or even linear without a linkage, most designs just opt for getting it as linear as possible (SC, Orange and the old prophet for example). So your pivots give you a different rate of shock rate change. Giants may well be linear/mildly regressive arround the sag point, then ramp up at the end, this is what most manufacturers do (notably SC VPP, and Nukeproof’s new Mega IIRC)

2) Axel path. Ona theoretical, chainless bike you would build a suspension system that moves the wheel back at the smae rate as the fork moves the front backwards (i.e. a ~66-68 degree angle from horizontal) to maintain the wheelbase and absorb impacts. However this is impractical to engineer. So some kind of comprimise is aimed for, usualy with the axel moving backwards upto about 60% travel to allow the chains tension to keep it stable, and forewards afterwards to limit chain growth.

3) As alluded to in point 2, chain growth is a factor, and can be used to enhance pedaling ability. e.g. SC VPP have an S shaped axel path to encourage the axel to sit arround it’s sag point, chain is at its shortest ~33%. Things like the MOJO idler demonstrate how much ‘pedaling efficiency’ impacts on prerformance, the 224 with it is much quicker over the rough stuff.

So no, Maestro isnt a single pivot in either its implimentation or behaviour.

If Orange are currently making less margin on a Five, than SC are on a Heckler as alluded to somewhere above…….

…….then until quite recently, when they dropped the price, SC were really “ripping the punters off”!!

SCoundrels that they are/were………

wow thats was impressively way over my head but I enjoyed reading it. More to the pivot malarky that just some bolts.
I am in the second camp of living very close to said Orange manufacturer and for some reason, (Im going to put it down to being poor) cant afford a Five, although I yearn to own a skip/scaffolding built bike, maybe one day…..sigh!!!

spoon.

re point 1:

wrong – you can make progressive single-pivots, not by much i’ll grant you, but still…

the 5 is a little progressive, the heckler regressive.

sorry – i am a pedant.

(i’ve done my homework on this – CAD models and everything)

TINAS all great theories…but…I don’t accept that a lack of chain growth in 60-100% of my travel, or keeping the wheelbase constant or most of what you say matters a jot to the vast majority (if not all) riders.

It’s not like folk say “My wheelbase momentarily got a bit long at 80% travel and it really hampered the handling” or that it’s even a factor.

Ahwiles, granted its possible, but I dont think anyones done it comercialy (IIRC shock has to be mounted closer to the pivot on the frame than on the swingarm, which limits its length/stroke).

Cynic-al,

No, its a case of comprimise, an ideal bike would have constant wheelbase, otherwise as you hit obstacle the wheelbase shortens, just as you want stability, like I said an ideal/theoretical bike, actualy building it would be seriously hard work, and would have to be run chainless as chain growth would essentialy lock the swingarm down (or rip the pedals off your feet).

The point is there is an ideal setup, and an easiest setup, and there’s more than one criteria. So you can’t possibly build the best pedaling bike thats also the most supple, as the two are mutualy exclusive.

Empire DH

Axel path – almost constant wheelbase (high pivot)

Supple suspension – chain in line with pivot

Pedaling – no chance

Sorry, not buying it!

Sorry, not buying it

What you not buying? Are you saying that single pivots are good enough for most people and that’s that?

It sounds to me like you are saying that all other suspension types are just hype, was that not said about single pivots from hardtail riders for a long time? I think its called progression and innovation, and then marketing to sell the ideas, though i do understand you are a cynical type 🙂

It’s possible that SC set a price based on selling the Heckler for x years that included their development costs in with the production costs. After x years they’ve said that development is paid for, so we’ll price only based on production costs now.

si_progressivebikes – Member
What you not buying? Are you saying that single pivots are good enough for most people and that’s that?

Pretty much, I guess.

I’m not saying the others are all hype, but many are little more IMO, certainly to 90% of riders.

Much of it is about mfrs trying to be individual & convince folk their system has benefits.

I’d agree with you, if someone is faster than you its you not the bike. And if it is the bike, its more likely the geometry than the suspension.

It seems strange how you dont feel that way about single pivot though? Or did marketing not exist when they were designed? It seems a little odd how they arrived at FS nirvana at the first attempt.

Si all I’m saying is it’s good enough for me and I believe it’s good enough for most.

Sure it’s good to keep ideas being developed and for sure folk will buy stuff for other reasons, mfrs need to be seen to be coming out with new ideas even if they make no difference to the ride.

TBH I don’t remember much marketing about SP other than “it’s simple and it works” tbh – whereas an unbelievable amount of tripe has been printed about 4 bars, VPP, DW etc.

Now shut up or I’ll report your spam threads!

re “It’s possible that SC set a price based on selling the Heckler for x years that included their development costs in with the production costs. After x years they’ve said that development is paid for, so we’ll price only based on production costs now.”

ha i think you might be giving them a bit more credit / forward thinking than they deserve! They aren’t Specialized you know.

Also how do folk reckon Orange make less money on a 5 when they are the actual manufacturer selling ‘direct’ to dealers – i.e. with no middle distribution margins to worry about? Coining it but good for them. A product is only worth what somebody will pay for it.

I wonder how much of the Five’s market will be taken by the Nukeproof Mega next year which seems to have similar geometry, travel etc. but will cost a lot less.

Not astroturfing by the way….

I wonder how much of the Five’s market will be taken by the Nukeproof Mega next year which seems to have similar geometry, travel etc. but will cost a lot less.

But there are other uk/taiwan based manufacturers and it hasnt affected orange.

you could say that a santa cruz nomad selling for £1900 is no different to giant reign X selling for £1000 or so….

I bet santa cruz are making their margin on the nomad… another point to note that the MDE damper SX made and sourced in Italy which is similar frame to the nomad (made in taiwan) but £200 cheaper!!!!

I reckon people are prepared to pay mega bucks for the all dancing VPP nomad but they would not be able sell the now lesser, cheaper and superseeded heckler hence the price drop, I think an orange 5 would have more car park kudos than a “cheap” santa cruz.. however is the nomad really worth nearly twice the price of the heckler? i think not!

At the end of the day its what you are prepared to pay for it

si_progressivebikes – Member

It seems strange how you dont feel that way about single pivot though? Or did marketing not exist when they were designed? It seems a little odd how they arrived at FS nirvana at the first attempt.

what was SP competing with back then though? URT’s?….and other rubbish designs? As Al says SP’s just work.

The head guy at Chumba knows a thing or two about marketing BS aye? 😉

what was SP competing with back then though? URT’s

kinda my point, was single pivot then called all hype and marketing becasue it was the next big thing? Some people would argue that SP doesn’t work for them, i like SP so does Al, but thats not to say innovation is not needed.

There is a point to be made about bike design just for the sake, all the head set standards do my head in, as do things like press fit BB, pro pedal shocks etc but it would be a boring industry if we always stood still.

It is amazing how SC can sell the Heckler for £899, its a lot of frame for the money, and to me looks as good quality as the 5.

wiil the Heckler still be in production in a few years time,if its an oldie now?

Did’nt realise orange only made 1000 5’s a year? seems to me this year has been a big one in reagrding Orange as a company and the whole 5 and reviews of it.

Some people would argue that SP doesn’t work for them

Indeed, I reckon they all pedal in squares!

Press-fit bbs seem a good idea to me, until they bring back square taper but charge us 10 x the price.

I’m not sure SC’s pricing structure does them many favours to the critical eye. Look at a Heckler next to a butcher and theyre effectively saying it costs £400 to add a shock link (and then another 500 notes to put a VP pivot on and turn it into a Nomad).

Pricing is always about what the market will bear rather than intrinsic cost. I moved to the US in ’97, and noticed that the top of the range Triumph sold for the same price in $ there as it did in £ here. They priced according to the competition and basic prices for that type of bike (most 1000cc sport bikes were all around $8000, £8000). Given the exchange rates at the time that meant they were crating them up in leicester, shipping them 3000 miles, paying import duties and still making a profit when selling them for 2 grand less than in the home market. Did that make them a rip off here, when they cost as much as an equivalent Honda etc?

Let us not forget that the Heckler has only recently been reduced to £900 to make room for the Butcher. It used to be nearer the 1300 mark.

Same could be said for many ‘Luxury’ cars.

While we are at it. Maybe it is great to get cheap stuff for other countries but then look at why it is so much cheaper…
– Economies of scale. (Due to demand from cost)
– Less tax.
– Cheaper wages.
– Less environmental protection.
– No state healthcare.
– No pension.
– No holidays/work benefits

Now in the world of economics it could be argued that they just do things better so it should be allowed. But if our economy is going to survive/compete then does that not mean that the average man in the street in the west is going to have to go back the Victorian age so that we can be as cheap. Great idea to have world trade but probably not for the workers in the west. That probably means you me and our kids.

What exactly can we sell to countries like China that they can’t make cheaper themselves except special stuff like whisky?

In reality if SC had kept the Heckler at the same price point as the Butcher/Nickel, they would probably have stopped selling Hecklers.

By dropping the price SC can still sell Nickel/Butchers to the folk who would have bought Hecklers etc, but now also enter an entirely new market segment of people who weren’t/aren’t prepared to pay that extra premium – and still make money out of “old tech”.

SC (at least until now) has been an aspirational brand, now many more people can now “aspire” to an SC – albeit a mere SP bike( 😯 ), and they clever thing is they (and the people who used to buy Hecklers) will still have aspirational hankerings for APP and the APP crowd will still have aspirations for VPP, etc,etc.

Marketing genius really…….

IMHO!