Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

442 Posts
Since no one else posted...

I think that the bike itself is of 2003/2004 quality. The linkage is simple, but from the looks of it, it will endure a lot of bob. It also seems that the frame geometry is too weak.

65 Posts
Nice concept!
Mad better then anything I could draw…

But from an engineers view:
I don’t think that you can have the rear triangle stays so parallel.
I think, without doing the math, that you will have binding issues
Or it could even not actuate at all, just swing around with no dampening/spring for part of the travel
The shock swing link needs to attach to the seatstay higher,
Good idea to get the shock assembly lower for CoG issues
Take a look at an Enduro setup if you want a low shock mount

You also might have issues with the pedaling with the shock/frame hole,
Haro had the shock with a similar hole in the same place, but is a really funky design
Oh and I guess the afore mentioned Enduro is also similar…
Tho, the hole for the Enduro is a bit higher up.

I also think that the seat post is also too far forward
To weight the rear wheel it has to be just ahead of the mid-point of the chainstay
You need a much more radical angle or move the whole post rearward.

Also, SLR’s on a 130mm? Those are XC race wheels only, I mean come on…

Sweet overall!
Wait just a sec…no carbon?

Don't take all this wrong, it really looks cool no matter what, I am a function over form guy

1 - 9 of 9 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.