Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 205 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
642 Posts
Looks awesome. I'm surprised it doesn't have a bit more reach, bit the slack head angle and slightly longer rear are going to make this thing absolutely rail down hill. More bike than I can use... But really cool. Can't wait to see a blue one built.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
Looks sweet! The reach diff between this and the warden is probably mostly just due to stack being ~30mm higher
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
642 Posts
I wonder if it is the same front triangle as the warden with a different rear triangle...
Similar by design for sure, but enough differences to be unique part numbers.

I looking at this bike... it's a monster. I don't need it. My Fugitive is plenty. But damn...

I wonder if it's dual crown rated, like the Warden?

Also, really surprised we saw this before the Endo. Seems like all the talk was Endo, but I think this bike is obviously the bigger market potential - big 29ers are all the rage.
 

·
hispanic mechanic
Joined
·
2,671 Posts
Looks awesome. I'm surprised it doesn't have a bit more reach, bit the slack head angle and slightly longer rear are going to make this thing absolutely rail down hill. More bike than I can use... But really cool. Can't wait to see a blue one built.
More bike than I can use as well, but if that Fourby4 magic works as well as it does on the Fugitive you may not lose much.

While there's not much local Boise stuff that I could see using this bike for, the idea of setting it up with a (relatively) easily adjustable travel fork like the DVO Onyx or Manitou Mezzer and having the a second shock to go between a burly 151/160 trail bike and a 167/170 is sure tempting!
 

·
sunday
Joined
·
108 Posts
I am so stinking excited for the new Chili! The Fug is definitely plenty and just such a great bike, but chili... Probs gonna do a 160/151 build and grab a second fork and shock for funsies to have a 190/167 park bike. Man oh man, I can't wait!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,293 Posts
I am so stinking excited for the new Chili! The Fug is definitely plenty and just such a great bike, but chili... Probs gonna do a 160/151 build and grab a second fork and shock for funsies to have a 190/167 park bike. Man oh man, I can't wait!
I'm ordering off the hidden menu...159mm rear travel option! Gives it just enough to further differentiate from my Fugitive that I'm in no rush to get rid of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,664 Posts
Similar by design for sure, but enough differences to be unique part numbers.

I looking at this bike... it's a monster. I don't need it. My Fugitive is plenty. But damn...

I wonder if it's dual crown rated, like the Warden?

Also, really surprised we saw this before the Endo. Seems like all the talk was Endo, but I think this bike is obviously the bigger market potential - big 29ers are all the rage.
Hi Glenngineer and alex345:

This is correct in that it's specific to the Chilcotin.

Yes, it's dual crown rated as well.

New Endorphin is currently in development, but will be some time before it's on the market.

Cheers,
 

·
sunday
Joined
·
108 Posts
I'm ordering off the hidden menu...158mm rear travel option! Gives it just enough to further differentiate from my Fugitive that I'm in no rush to get rid of.
Was thinking about that one too, an excellent option indeed! Hits the bridge of all three.. If my Fug weren't promised to a buddy, I'd probably go that route. Actually I still might :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
I am very interested in this bike. I have only been riding a few years and have so far only been on Horst Link bikes (current bike is a 2018 Guerilla Gravity MegaTrail) but I like what I have read so far about the Knolly suspension intent and performance. The more active suspension overall sounds good and I have no qualms about using a climb switch on fire roads but I am a little worried about the comparatively (to my bike) low anti-rise characteristic. Is this something that is intuitive or should I expect it to take a while to adjust my riding style to this bike?

Is the 151 just a short-stroked shock version of the 167 or are there differences in the linkage between the two?

Lastly, I am a little hesitant because, even though I live only a three-hour drive from Vancouver (in WA state), I have not seen a single Knolly in the wild.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,293 Posts
@burkawitz206 - that's wild, as it only took about 20 minutes in the park in Bellingham to run into a the_aaron on his BC Fugitive...I know of a dozen plus in Austin TX relatively far from the mtb capital you all live in, but we all appreciate active suspension as things are pretty tech here.
KNOLLY has been around a while and aren't going anywhere - you'll notice they do gain some adherent following for sure!


As for travel, the Chilcotin travel offerings are similar to the Warden/LT/Delirium in that they are the same frame with different shock specs.

As far as anti-rise/anti-squat...I'll leave that up to the engineers, as this might be the newest iteration of the Four-by linkage. My Fugitive is a step up over the old endorphin when it comes to getting on the gas, but I don't have a current Chilcotin yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
I wonder how the shock behavior 60 mm vs 65 mm stroke. The shock look the same (205 eye to eye) but only stroke length differ from the 151 mm and the 168 mm Chilcotin. Do you think that having a 60 mm stroke can make the shock bottoming out quickly? Does by having the same sag on both shock size can result in a highest air pressure in the lower stroke setup can affect the plushness of the shock? Just curious about behavior difference of the 2 shock strokes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,664 Posts
I wonder how the shock behavior 60 mm vs 65 mm stroke. The shock look the same (205 eye to eye) but only stroke length differ from the 151 mm and the 168 mm Chilcotin. Do you think that having a 60 mm stroke can make the shock bottoming out quickly? Does by having the same sag on both shock size can result in a highest air pressure in the lower stroke setup can affect the plushness of the shock? Just curious about behavior difference of the 2 shock strokes
Hi cabochob:

Good question: the answer is technically yes, but effectively no. :)

All current metric shocks on the market are designed to support a 5mm range of shock travel, in 2.5mm increments. Before metric shocks entered the market, there were more eye2eye lengths with relatively non-standard amounts of shock stroke for a given eye2eye length. Metric shocks have attempted to reduce these issues, increase shock durability (longer bushing overlap) and provide more packaging options while covering a greater range of shock strokes. So, the tl;dr is that the shocks are designed to work this way.

The Chilcotin (both 151 and 167) use a 205mm i2i trunnion shock: we supply these shocks in strokes of both 60 and 65mm and this is what translates to the 151 and 167mm of rear travel.

There are other stroke travel options available as well: since metric shocks are actually incremental in 2.5mm stroke, you can actually generate (on the Chilcotin) 151, 159 and 167mm of rear travel by using a shock with 60, 62.5 and 65mm of stroke. Technically, you can actually further reduce the stroke of this shock down to 57.5mm but I would recommend against that for a couple of reasons: firstly, you're getting close to the Fugitive LT travel so you might as well just get a Fugitive LT and secondly (and more importantly) the end of stroke situation means that the shock will start to activate the negative chamber filling port, leading to a slight notchy feel in the shock.

Now, in terms of how the shocks work, the biggest question is - as questioned - bottom out resistance. This is controlled by two main functions:

  • First Function: Shocks internal air spring curve. For sure, if you're only using 60mm of the 65mm of available stroke, you will have a lower overall compression ratio between the fully extended and fully compressed state of the rear shock. However, shock manufacturers are smart and they design the shock to work at 60, 62.5 and 65mm of stroke by allowing you to change the starting and ending volume of the shock using volume spacers. Hence, you can effectively achieve the same compression ratio at all strokes. Or at least get close enough so that it doesn't really matter.
  • Second Function: damping, in particular high speed compression damping is now typically shaft velocity dependent, not shaft position dependent. Since shaft velocity depends upon how hard your rear wheel hits something, not how much stroke the shock has, the damper works well at both stroke lengths.

For sure, there are minor differences between the two stroke lengths: one is the increase in reservoir gas pressure due to the IFP movement due to oil displaced by the shock shaft. This compression curve maps overtop of the main spring curve and damping circuits. But this is extremely fine tuning and not user serviceable. Almost all customers should be able to achieve excellent bottom out resistance with main cylinder air pressure, spring curve tweaking with volume spacers and adjusting HSC to achieve the desired bottom out resistance.

Hope that helps - please let me know if there are any other questions.

Cheers,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
Hey Noel,

congrats on the new Chilcotin!

How about swaping shocks between Warden and Chilcotin? Is this possible or are the shock tunes too far apart?

And would a 62,5 mm stroke shock be available on special request (probably from Warden stock)?
To be honest, I think that would be a very popular option ;-)

Cheers


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 205 Posts
Top