Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
long standing member
Joined
·
3,099 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I'm referencing this thread from the Titus forum, and replying specifically to this post by Noel.

First off, sorry about the oddball comment. :eek: (Even though I used it again in the title of this thread :p ) I didn't mean to imply your bike is weird or anything, just that it seems to be designed totally different from the typical uninterrupted ST mtb. That is to say, "differing markedly from the usual or ordinary or accepted." (link) In this case, though, maybe totally functional. This is where my question lies.

OK, I think I understand (in general at least, not necessarily the specifics) how the 4x4 design affords you some additional design freedom. What I don't fully understand is how such a slack STA works in the context of pedaling while seating. Keep in mind I'm kind of a newb and don't have a background in engineering (but a little in biomechanics and anatomy). And I not totally up on the exact, correct, ideal positioning for pedaling (knee over the pedal spindle when the cranks are at this specific position, etc. or however it's supposed to be). As a bike rider I rely on you guys the bike designers to deal with those details. The reason I have a question about the Knolly is because it is different than most of the others in it's travel-range.

Here's what I think I know about bicycle fit and geometry. The ST, which extends somewhat vertically and rearward from the BB, must be at an angle that creates an advantageous position to pedal from. The pedaling position is of course also affected by crank length, seat position, seat post type (straight, offset) and how low or high the saddle set. This ST angle (in the context of the bike's design) affects and is affected by the desired TT length, suspension/rocker/pivot placement, rear wheel travel/clearance, CS length, etc. Feel free to correct me if I'm way off base on any of these points.

Back to the Delerium T: How does it maintain proper pedaling position with such a slack ST angle? I'll generalize and say the "typical" full suspension mtb uses a STA somewhere in the low 70's. It would seem to me that the Del. T's design will put the rider somewhat back over the rear tire when seated in a higher/normal pedaling position. And wouldn't this in turn take the rider out of the desired position of the legs (feet) and pedals while pedaling in a seated position?

I see the advantages in the Knolly's design. And in regards to the STA I particularly like the fact that the saddle will move downward and forward out of the way when lowering it for technical riding, descending or jumping.

Thanks in advance for any and all responses.

Patrick

BTW, is there any more info about the upcoming Knolly trail bike? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,675 Posts
Hey PCinSC!

No worries about the Odd Ball comment - I was pretty sure that I knew what you meant! I just wanted to post to clarify a bit about our design. This is something that we're actively going to takle on our new website to explain exactly what we're doing with the seat tube.

When you're pedalling your bike (i.e. climbing or more XC type riding), you definitely want to have your seat in a position that enables you have have a proper position on the frame. We all know what that means - being able to achieve the correct saddle height as well as the correct fore / aft position on the frame. Too far forwards and the top tube is too cramped. Too far back and you can't pedal efficiently and the bike wants to wheelie when climbing. This all more or less comes down to the "kops" stuff, but in mountain bikes (at least full suspension ones, especially once the travel gets out of the XC range), it becomes more difficult to maintain KOPS just becuase of the amount of sag in the frame and how the sag can vary depending upon what type of terrain you are riding.

What Knolly discovered (four and a half years ago when we started designing our first bike) was that a straight seat tube just couldn't be concentric with the BB without getting in the way of the rear wheel or rear suspension once the travel starts to hit about 5" to 6" without starting to make compromises in the frame geometry / suspension design. The easy way around this is to make the frame with an interupted seat tube and move the seat tube a bit forwards, and slacken the seat tube a bit backwards to get the correct top tube length. What we did is develop the second link design as well as a way of placing the seat tube so that it gives a normal pedalling position when extended, but also gets out of the way when lowered.

I can't stant interupted seat tube designs and I think a lot of other rider's share that view as well - at least for free ride and all mountain bike designs. Basically, unless it's a dedicated DH bike, or has less than 5" of travel (meaning pretty much purely XC), I think that you have to have the ability to raise and lower your seat easily. This was (along with other design features listed below) a major part of the extra linkage design. The other important features were:

-good stand over height
-ability to fully raise and lower your seat
- use long stroke shocks for lower leverage ratios
-high lateral rigidity (the amount a tube flexes is related to the "square" of it's length, so when you extend the seat stays even only 4 or 5" past the seat tube like a lot of the newer designs do, you enable them to flex a lot more)
-be able to use a large seat tube for added strength (i.e. 31.6mm which has over 50% more fatigue resistance than a 27.2mm seat tube)
-a rear shock that's easy to maintain, service and free from tire roost.
-neutral pedalling influence from the suspension
-minimize pedal feed back
-neutral braking performance.
-be able to make the frames in small sizes for riders in the 5'0" to 5'4" range who typically are forced into larger frames when purchasing longer travel frames.

What we do with our designs is figure out where the rider's saddle needs to be when fully extended. So, for a regular all mountain bike, you're correct in that most designs use around a 71-73 degree seat tube angle. For the Delirium T, it's around 72-73 degrees depending upon the frame size. Now, this is the "theoretical" angle. The actual seat tube is about 61-65 degrees. The theoretical and actual seat tube angles interesect exactly where a saddle raised to proper climbing height would be, so in effect you are positioned EXACTLY where you need to be to climb and pedal properly with the seat extended. When the seat is lowered, it's slightly forwards of where it would normally be with a regular seat tube: this helps to get the seat out of the way for technical riding where the rider is often behind the saddle.

If you look at our frames, you'll notice that the bottom of the seat tube is NOT concentric with the BB shell. Also, what demo_slug was refering to as well, is that if you look at a lot of interupted designs, you'll see that if you were to extend the seat tube through the shock and to the down tube, you'd find out that they interest the down tube IN FRONT of the BB shell, just like our design physically does. Good examples of frames like this are the SX trail / Demo series and also Rocky Slayer, Switch and RMX..

So hopefully that wasn't too confusing! What people are starting to notice with a bunch of the longer travel AM and free ride frames, is that you just can't use a conventional full length straight seat tube location AND still get shorter chainstay lengths, good tire clearence, have decent lateral rigidity, etc... A lot of bikes have tires that buzz the back of the seat tube / seat (or the linkage hits the back of the seat tube / seat or the seat QR).

With the Four by 4 Linkage, we can do a lot of crazy stuff: the Delirium T is a good example: we can run the chainstays as short as 16.4" (or as long as 17.2" - they're adjustable) and still fit in a 2.7" tire with half decent clearance. We can ensure that under full compression neather the tire nore the rear linkage will ever hit the front triangle, seat QT or a lowered seat. We can build the frame with a very low shock leverage rate (2.5:1) and still have good stand over height for smaller riders while enabling reasonable spring rates for larger riders (because of the low leverage ratio). AND the Delirium T can do all this and get up to 7" of travel. The V-tach is similar, but a much bigger bike obviously. That frame has 7.7" of travel, but theoretically could have 9.5" of rear travel (and effecively does, because of the head angle ajustment feature).

Oh ya - this typically only applies to bikes that are designed to pivot around the BB shell to minimize pedal feed back. Bikes that use low single pivots (Rocky RMX / Switch / Slayere etc..., Current Turners and Ventanas, Banshees, Konas etc...), use four bar linkages (Specialized, Titus, Norco, Knolly), and probably some bikes that use dual linkages as well (i.e. DW link). The wheel HAS to rotate around an area that's close the BB shell, otherwise, the chain stay growth increases much more drastically and hence this is a lot of pedal / suspension interaction (i.e. bob and feed back - platform shocks can help with bob, but not feed back).

Please don't hesitate to ask any other questions - I'm more than willing to answer!

Cheers,
 

·
long standing member
Joined
·
3,099 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
knollybikes.com said:
If you look at our frames, you'll notice that the bottom of the seat tube is NOT concentric with the BB shell.


Wow, I never noticed that before. That sucker connects way up on the downtube and out in front of the BB. Pretty cool. Now I understand how you maintain proper pedaling position. And manage to get the saddle out of the way when the post is lowered. Pretty ingenious (but at the same time a pretty simple idea). Nice job.

knollybikes.com said:
So hopefully that wasn't too confusing!
No, I understand now.

knollybikes.com said:
What people are starting to notice with a bunch of the longer travel AM and free ride frames, is that you just can't use a conventional full length straight seat tube location AND still get shorter chainstay lengths, good tire clearence, have decent lateral rigidity, etc... A lot of bikes have tires that buzz the back of the seat tube / seat (or the linkage hits the back of the seat tube / seat or the seat QR).
That's what demo_slug was saying, and now I see how you designed around that.

knollybikes.com said:
With the Four by 4 Linkage, we can do a lot of crazy stuff: the Delirium T is a good example: we can run the chainstays as short as 16.4" (or as long as 17.2" - they're adjustable) and still fit in a 2.7" tire with half decent clearance. We can ensure that under full compression neather the tire nore the rear linkage will ever hit the front triangle, seat QT or a lowered seat. We can build the frame with a very low shock leverage rate (2.5:1) and still have good stand over height for smaller riders while enabling reasonable spring rates for larger riders (because of the low leverage ratio). AND the Delirium T can do all this and get up to 7" of travel. The V-tach is similar, but a much bigger bike obviously. That frame has 7.7" of travel, but theoretically could have 9.5" of rear travel (and effecively does, because of the head angle ajustment feature).
Very versatile. What are reasons for having the adjustable chainstays? Or more specifically, how does the bikes handling change as the stays are shortened or lengthened?

knollybikes.com said:
Please don't hesitate to ask any other questions - I'm more than willing to answer!
Thanks for the response, I'll be sure to ask if I have any more questions.

Patrick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,675 Posts
Hey Patrick:

The idea with the Delirium T was not to build a light weight long travel trail bike like some manufacturers are doing (i.e. Intense 6.6, SC Nomad, etc...). The bike is more in line with products like the Turner RFX, the Specialized SX trail and the Norco 6.

The Delirium T is designed to do double duty as a bike that is a capable climber as well as being stable enough for some fairly serious free riding. It is designed for the person who wants a bike that they can take pretty much on any terrain, but still will do a lot of pedalling with it.

Hence, we wanted to ensure that the chain stay length didn't get crazy long while still being able to get a fair bit of travel and have good tire clearance. Since the bike can also work as a slopestyle type frame, I wanted to ensure that it was very "flickable" - this required a short chainstay. Also, a short chainstay helps in the climbing department as well.

However, since an owner for the Delirium T might build the bike up as lightweight free ride bike (as opposed to more of an all mountain bike) we enable the chainstay to be lengthed for people that want to use the bike for both technical riding and perhaps lift serviced riding like at Whistler Mtn.

Additionally, making the chainstay length adjustable means that both the disc tab and the derailleur hanger are very strong but also fully replaceable. In fact, we have two options wtih this frame: a standard 135 QR rear end as well as an optional 135 x 12mm thru axle rear end. And because the disc tab and the derailleur hanger are built into the dropout, they both move with the rear wheel when adjusting the chain stay length.

Yup, we're currently working on a much lighter duty trail bike - probably around 5.5" of travel, designed for a 130mm fork and with a frame weight of around 7 pounds.

Cheers!

Noel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
knollybikes.com said:
AND the Delirium T can do all this and get up to 7" of travel. The V-tach is similar, but a much bigger bike obviously. That frame has 7.7" of travel, but theoretically could have 9.5" of rear travel (and effecively does, because of the head angle ajustment feature).
Hi Noel,

Your Delirium T sounds fantastic, and will definitly be a serious consideration for my next bike in a year's time. I'm going to be in Whistler this summer, and am hoping to get a look at one. I was wondering if you could elaborate on the travel adjustment on your two full suspension bikes. How much travel does the Delirium T have? Can you get 7" with the stock shock without changing the angles of the bike drastically? And is there a setting for the V-tach to get 9.5" with the same shock that normally gives 7.7" of travel?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,675 Posts
Travel Adjustment

Hey Sweetness!

Thanks for the compliments! The Delirium T is certainly generating a lot of interest - we should be starting to ship them within a month's time!

Both the V-tach and the Delirium T don't actually feature adjustable travel for the frames.

However, the Delirium T - while we ship it only with a 2.5" stroke shock - can fit in a 2.75" stroke shock to increase the travel from 6.3" to 7". The downside is that you lose the ability to adjust the head angle setting since you have to put the head angle ajuster in the most slack position to compesate for the shock's longer i2i. Note that the picture that was posted above is the first prototype version of the frame - the production models have changed quite a bit, especially in the shock mount area. We're just taking photos of the latest pre-production models for our website and general use this week, so there'll be some new media online shortly.

What I mean about the "range of travel" is that both the V-tach and the Delirium T have adjustable geometries. The Delirium T has 1 degree of head angle ajustment (three positions which coorespond to 68.0, 67.5 and 67.0 degrees when using a 6" fork) while the V-tach has a cam which can be set at any position with a 2 degree range. The head angle adjustment effectively moves the rear wheel up and down. The rear wheel still gets the normal amount of travel (i.e. 7.7" for the V-tach), but that travel can occure when the rear wheel is pushed down the furthest (giving the steepest head angle) or when the rear wheel is towards the top of it's range (giving the slackest head angle). So, the travel doesn't change, but the "range" where the travel happens can. So, if you fully compress and extend the shock, the rear wheel is going to move vertically by about 7.7". However, by moving the head angle ajuster between the slackest and steepest settings, you're additionally moving the rear wheel up and down another 1.7", hence a total range of around 9.4-9.5".

Theoretically, we could build a frame that could handle a 3.0" or 3.5" stroke shock and get that much travel. But, frankly that much travel is overkill for a frame like the V-tach. We actually have tuned the ammount of travel to fit the frame's needs in terms of both drops and high speed riding (where more travel is nice) and pedalling, climbing and slow speed stunt riding (where excess travel becomes a hinderence).

The Delirium T is the next lighter duty frame that we're working on, but we have a whole lineup that we will be bringing into existance over the next couple of years including lighter duty full suspension frames.

Cheers!
 

·
long standing member
Joined
·
3,099 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
knollybikes.com said:
The idea with the Delirium T was not to build a light weight long travel trail bike like some manufacturers are doing (i.e. Intense 6.6, SC Nomad, etc...). The bike is more in line with products like the Turner RFX, the Specialized SX trail and the Norco 6.
I agree with your approach, I think. IOW, if the bike's got the travel (say, over 6") then make it big hit capable as well. Otherwise, just make a trail bike (read: lighter weight frame) with less travel.

knollybikes.com said:
The Delirium T is designed for the person who wants a bike that they can take pretty much on any terrain, but still will do a lot of pedalling with it.
Bingo. That's what I want. :thumbsup:

knollybikes.com said:
Hence, we wanted to ensure that the chain stay length didn't get crazy long while still being able to get a fair bit of travel and have good tire clearance. Since the bike can also work as a slopestyle type frame, I wanted to ensure that it was very "flickable" - this required a short chainstay. Also, a short chainstay helps in the climbing department as well.

However, since an owner for the Delirium T might build the bike up as lightweight free ride bike (as opposed to more of an all mountain bike) we enable the chainstay to be lengthed for people that want to use the bike for both technical riding and perhaps lift serviced riding like at Whistler Mtn.
OK, just so I understand correctly.

Shorter stays:
  • good climber, "flickable" and potentially more quick-handling. Will this make it easier to get the front end in the air as well?
  • Are these potential downsides - less stable at speed: on the ground, in the rough or in the air?

Longer stays: opposite attributes of shorter stays - more stable in general, and at speed, in air, etc.; not quite as good climbing and less "flickable"

Obviously there are other factors (other geometry specs, component selection, etc.) that come into play here. Feel free to correct my general assumptions if I'm wrong.

knollybikes.com said:
Additionally, making the chainstay length adjustable means that both the disc tab and the derailleur hanger are very strong but also fully replaceable. In fact, we have two options wtih this frame: a standard 135 QR rear end as well as an optional 135 x 12mm thru axle rear end. And because the disc tab and the derailleur hanger are built into the dropout, they both move with the rear wheel when adjusting the chain stay length.
Is there a big advantage to having the thru axle rear? I'm guessing there's an added stiffness. What are the other benefits when compared to the QR?

knollybikes.com said:
Yup, we're currently working on a much lighter duty trail bike - probably around 5.5" of travel, designed for a 130mm fork and with a frame weight of around 7 pounds.
Nice, that's sounds promising too. Thanks for the reply.

Patrick
 

·
What are you looking at?
Joined
·
949 Posts
I'm a little confused as to what the Delirium T is...Would you classify it as an AM or FR bike Would it be able to do all day rides?

Thanks for the info... I can't wait to test one:thumbsup:
 

·
long standing member
Joined
·
3,099 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
R1D3R said:
I'm a little confused as to what the Delirium T is...Would you classify it as an AM or FR bike Would it be able to do all day rides?

Thanks for the info... I can't wait to test one:thumbsup:
Noel can better answer your question, but he gives a couple of hints to this bikes strengths here:

Knollybikes.com said:
The Delirium T is designed to do double duty as a bike that is a capable climber as well as being stable enough for some fairly serious free riding. It is designed for the person who wants a bike that they can take pretty much on any terrain, but still will do a lot of pedalling with it.
IMO opinion, it's a little (maybe a lot) burlier than the typical "all-mountain" bike. I think it makes bikes like the Reign, Moment, etc. look like toys. The frame is pretty hefty, around 9 - 9.5lbs with a Fox DHX air (according to the spec sheet). So that means it's going to build up a little heavier than those bikes do, also. In an earlier post Noel compared it (in terms of intended usage) to the Specialized SX Trail and Turner RFX.

Tscheezy posted a short review of the bike after he rode it at last year's Interbike Dirt Demo. The Knolly paragraph is about a quarter of the way down the page.

I think I'm in the same place as you, trying to figure out if this is the right bike for my riding. For me, most of my time is spent on the trail, with a decent amount of buff singletrack, lots of technical climbing and descending and the occasional stuntery*. Given that perspective, it seems as though this may be too much bike for me. However, if I don't get a bike that has the Knolly's big-hit capabilities then I will not be able to partake in the stuntery and will not be able to develop that side of my riding more.

The potential final weight of the Knolly is a mild concern, but maybe not really an issue if it pedals well, and by all initial accounts it does. IMO opinion, this bike is on the heavy-duty side of all-mountain, because as Noel said, it's Whistler capable. I hope that helped.

Patrick

*Stuntery = drops, jumps, log rides, steep/technical sections of trail and general goofing off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,721 Posts
maybe I should share more of my opinions.:)

1. never buy a "big bike" that the MFG tells you, you can't put a double crown on.:nono:
2. short chain stays make it easy to ride a wheelie.

Knollybikes are cool. but in 2004 when I was looking for a HD trail bike. one with a 265lb dude compatible leverage ratio. with trail bike geometry. and 6 inches plus of travel , with no rider weight limit. there was only one frame. supermoto.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,675 Posts
Some more "quick" answers!"

Hey R1D3R!

PCinSC is pretty much "bang on" with his description of the Delirium T. We say that it's an all mountain frame that is capable of lighter duty free riding as well.

Now, please remember where Knolly stands (well, at least the V-tach and the Delirium T): my philosophy is that a lot of bikes tend to emphasize only one or two aspects of their design, i.e.:

Best pedaling design,
lightest weight design.

That's all fine if all you're doing is riding in one type of condition constantly over and over again and can totally tune your bike for that condition. However, we have a different approach and realize that often people ride their bikes in all sorts of different conditions and would prefer that our frames never become the limiting factor. This typically means high lateral rigidity, good tire clearance, good pedalling characteristics, proper geometries for both climbing and descending, full seat post adjustability, decent stand over height and VERY PREDICTABLE handing in all situations (no pedal feed back, no weird brake effects, etc...).

For example, a month ago I did a 6 day trip to Colorado to ride with some friends, visit some dealers that we're setting up, visit some potentially new dealers and also hit the Fruita Fat Tire Festival. I brought a late stage prototype Delirium T with a fairly FR-ish build on it - that's just how I like my bikes. I personally would prefer to deal with a bit extra weight, knowing that I can potentially (and safely) ride every line that I want to come across. I'm also 210 pounds, so can get away with some heavier components.

The first day, I met up with Kristian and a friend of his and we rode in Palmer Park in Colorado Springs for close to 4 hours. It's all fairly short climbs (200' vertical maybe?) with lots of technical descents. You're always either going up or down, and what you want to ride down is simply limited by your ability. There is every thing from easy roller lines to full on super hairy lines if you want (with the nice "cheese grater" penalty for falls). The Delirium T has geometry that makes climbing up sustained technical climbs doable (as compared to say a full on FR rig), but at the same time, you can slam the seat down and hit pretty much the hardest lines that you want.

The second day, I rode up near Ft. Collins with a dealer (Larry Mettler from Mountain High Cyclery). The ride was a pretty steep fire road climb (1000' maybe?) that went into steep technical single track. The Delirium T is totally fine to climb this stuff on. Then, it was into the descent back down: hard pack with lots of embedded rocks. We emphasize high lateral rigidity with our frames and this is exactly the kind of environment that they excel in because you can slam rocks and stuff the bike into corners as hard and as fast as you want (obviously not slamming rocks so hard as to pinch flat, but I think you know what I mean). We don't ever want the frame to be the weak link in the whole bike.

Next, it was out to Fruita for 3 days of riding. The first day was a rip around the Kokipelli (sp?) loops. The Delirium T is probably a little over kill for that style of riding because you can ride a lot of the trails on rigid single speeds. However, there are also trails like Moore Fun there which had nice technical climbs followed by fast technical descents including an optional drop or two up to about 4-5 feet. Again, while the Delirium T might be a bit overkill for the lower trails, if you decide to go hit something like Moore Fun, you will not die on the climb (because of the Delirium T's climbing friendly geometry) and still be able to just rail the descent.

The next day we road the Ribbon trail. This is a perfect trail for bikes in the 5-6" travel range. While most of the trail can be ridden on a smaller bike, with a frame like the Delirium T, you can hit ALL the lines, including optional ones and again not have to worry about the bike. Conversely, you can still challenge the climbs as well. After the Ribbon, we hit the technical trails Eagle's Wing and Holy Cross, again perfect trails for a bike like the Delirium T.

The last day, I rode an 18 mile buff single track trail that had just been finished. Completely NON technical - there was ONE technical move in the whole trail - the bike worked flawlessly the whole ride and near the end of the ride, I was riding towards the front of the (20 person) group. After we were done, we rode another 14 miles on pavement back to town. Again, probably overkill for this type of trail, but still totally doable.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that the Delirium T is the kind of do everything bike - it is a bike that can pretty much tackle it all. Sure, it's not ever going to win an XC race, but you COULD ride one in an XC race and still finish - easily. On the other hand, you can just as easily point it down pretty much the most nasty lines around and not worry about the limits of your frame. You might not want to hit repeated 10-15 foot drops with it (that's the V-tach's territory), but it's going to handle what most riders will ever dish out including trips to the bike park (and this is where the head angle adjustment comes into play) and realistically what most riders are going to throw at it in a place like the North Shore.

So, aggressive All Mountain Riding or Light Duty free riding? Call it what you want. It's basically a 6"+ frame that works nicely with forks in the 140-170mm travel range that has geometry and nice enough pedaling qualities that you're not going to be swearing at it 3 hours into a climb while allowing you to hammer the technical sections.

So, anyway, sorry for the long post! I'm just trying to give you a feel for where the Delirium T frame excels and for what it is designed for. It's basically a "take it all on" frame that doesn't punish you on the climbs and long pedally sections. Typical build weights would be 32-38 pounds with 30-40 pounds being the outside range (i.e. full on All Mountain, tubeless tires, etc... vs. full on free ride setup with Marz 66 fork, FR/DH wheelset, DRS chain guide, etc...).

Hope that helps!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,675 Posts
demo_slug said:
maybe I should share more of my opinions.:)

1. never buy a "big bike" that the MFG tells you, you can't put a double crown on.:nono:
2. short chain stays make it easy to ride a wheelie.

Knollybikes are cool. but in 2004 when I was looking for a HD trail bike. one with a 265lb dude compatible leverage ratio. with trail bike geometry. and 6 inches plus of travel , with no rider weight limit. there was only one frame. supermoto.
Hey demo_slug!

I'm not sure I understand the point of your post. The Delirium T is being released in 2006, not 2004. Also, the Delirium T is more of an All mountain design compared to our V-tach which is a more FR design. All of our frames use low leverage rates - the Delirium T has one of the lowest ones in the industry at 2.5:1 and the V-tach is fairly low at 2.7:1. At a 265 pound rider weight, you would run a relatively low 450# spring rate on a Marz Roco or Manitou Swinger shock and a 550# with a Fox DHX on the Delirium T (and 50# higher for the V-tach). I'm 210-215 pounds and use 350# and 450# spring rates respectively on the Delirium T.

And, I'm not ripping Titus bikes. I know Chris reasonably well. They make a very different product than we do and that variation in the industry is what potentially makes one manufacturer's product better for a particular rider's needs. I don't see Knolly doing anything like exo or iso grid frames, road bikes, XC race frames with Carbon stays, or anything along those lines for the foreseable future.

And, finally, as the owner of Knolly Bikes, my opinions are obviously biased. However, I am as honest and objective as possible in my posts.

Regards,
 

·
long standing member
Joined
·
3,099 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 · (Edited)
I was wondering if the chairman of the "two bike advocacy group" was gonna chime in. ;)

demo_slug said:
maybe I should share more of my opinions.:)

1. never buy a "big bike" that the MFG tells you, you can't put a double crown on.:nono:
I don't recall reading that Noel said the Delerium T couldn't take a DC. Maybe it can't, I guess he could clarify. It doesn't matter that much to me, I'm gonna put a SC on whatever I get anyway.

It seems to me the new crop of heavy duty SC forks (Marz 66 series, Fox 36, Manitou Travis Single, upcoming RS forks, etc) are designed for black diamond terrain and will easily handle the abuse that most of us would put out.

As a clyde, if I was going to be doing big (12'+) drops and serious downhilling (which I'm not) I would definitely be getting a DC fork, but I'd also be getting a bigger hit bike, something with more than 6-7" rear travel.

demo_slug said:
2. short chain stays make it easy to ride a wheelie.
That's what I thought.

demo_slug said:
Knollybikes are cool. but in 2004 when I was looking for a HD trail bike. one with a 265lb dude compatible leverage ratio. with trail bike geometry. and 6 inches plus of travel , with no rider weight limit. there was only one frame. supermoto.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here, either. Are you just saying that Titus was the first to put together a bike with these characteristics? The Supermoto does look cool. I'm going to a Titus demo next month and I'm looking forward to riding it. I hope at some point I get to ride the Delerium T also. :D

I remember reading that you were not entirely satisfied with the SC forks you had on the Supermoto and that the bike really came alive when you put the Fox 40 on it. Now, the 40 seems to be a killer fork, and probably can't be beat in terms of performance in abusive situations. But do you think that maybe one of the newer heavy duty SC forks could do (almost) as well with big hits and in the high speed rough and still be light and versatile enough to be a good trail bike fork?

The bottom line is, you're not telling me what I want to hear and I'm gonna keep hounding you until you do. ;) Seriously, though, I for one appreciate your experience and input.

Patrick
 

·
No, that's not phonetic
Joined
·
14,313 Posts
knollybikes.com said:
Note that the picture that was posted above is the first prototype version of the frame - the production models have changed quite a bit, especially in the shock mount area. We're just taking photos of the latest pre-production models for our website and general use this week, so there'll be some new media online shortly.
Interesting. I would like to see the new pics.

Can be bumped to 7", eh? Post the resulting geometry running a 540mm A-C fork if you know the numbers and have a moment. :)
 

·
Formerly DMR For Life
Joined
·
989 Posts
hey noel

couple questions

is it possible to mount a e-type FD on the delirium T?

also when will you be putting up the geo numbers for the delirium?

BTW I really like you design for the seat post

DMR

EDIT: just reading tscheesy's (sp?) ride report from interbike (i realize that he rode a very early prototype) and he mentioned there might be fit issues with long legged people. I'm 6'2" and have a 37" inseam. Have you encountered any problems like this in your testing?
 

·
long standing member
Joined
·
3,099 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
DMR For Life said:
hey noel

couple questions
I'm not Noel, but unless these things have changed since I received specs from him a few months ago I have some of the answers. Hopefully this info is still accurate.

DMR For Life said:
is it possible to mount a e-type FD on the delirium T?
Yes.

DMR For Life said:
also when will you be putting up the geo numbers for the delirium?
The ones from the spec sheet I have are:



I hope that helps.

Patrick

Edit: I realized that the rows aren't labeled because I cut that chart off of a *.pdf that had specs for the V-Tach as well. You can kind of guess which #'s apply to what. If you want the whole *.pdf PM me your email and I'll send it to you.
 

·
Leash Law Enforcer
Joined
·
1,120 Posts
knollybikes.com said:
Yup, we're currently working on a much lighter duty trail bike - probably around 5.5" of travel, designed for a 130mm fork and with a frame weight of around 7 pounds.
Hey Noel - Can you make this new frame so that it will accept a 150mm fork? Please? Pretty please?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
DMR For Life said:
there might be fit issues with long legged people. I'm 6'2" and have a 37" inseam. Have you encountered any problems like this in your testing?
I have about the same inseam length as you so this has puzzled me for some time. On the one hand the Delirium is exactly what I am looking for but on the other hand it might be a tad to small for me. I can't wait to hear what Noel has to say on this matter because this has created quite a few sleepless night, in fact I am approaching borderline insomnia right now:madman:.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Bahamontes said:
I have about the same inseam length as you so this has puzzled me for some time. On the one hand the Delirium is exactly what I am looking for but on the other hand it might be a tad to small for me. I can't wait to hear what Noel has to say on this matter because this has created quite a few sleepless night, in fact I am approaching borderline insomnia right now:madman:.
Same goes for me. Waiting for your answer Noel....
 
1 - 20 of 62 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.
Top