Jason222

Whats the geometry on that bike?

run 175's if you run 18:15. 170's with 18:16. I don't think a harder gear has any real benefit in trials, as you can't hit the drivetrain with the same speed... Likewise...if you're using a harder gear so you can pedal up higher, then you should probably reassess your pedal up technique...

Did no one else read this? 18:16 with 170's on a stock.

Great video. One of my favorite riders. Does he have any relation to Hegedus Laszlo?

I'd trust them. They should be calling these frames "Zhidroxx" lol

Wow. Those look stunning

Looks light.

I ordered one

I had a chris king bmx hub. It worked great with snail cams...I'd like to buy a heavy duty kit, but I'm kinda iffy on it. It does cost quite a bit...although, it's not much more than getting a new hub.

It doesn't look like there would be enough room on the ends for a snail cam...and running them on the outside doesn't make sense because it's then not holding the axle, it's holding the bolt or QR.

LOL I never thought of that! Would that not hinder the clamping ability though? And don't they fit snugly on the axle?

So, I'm getting one of the new ZHI Z3 frames with 135 mm horizontal dropouts. I'm going to need a new rear hub, as I doubt my quick release king will do the job. I'm going to use snail cams, but it appears that most 135 hubs don't have extra room on the axle for snail cams. I noticed the try-all rear hub is designed for this application, but it costs too much. What hubs do you use/recommend?

Found these:

Dave lives in Canada?

That's the old Z3 frame though, with different geometry. He means have the new one with horizontal dropouts and 135 spacing like the new echo/koxx/etc frames. 116 is a dying trend. PS I still want to know the head angle and reach...

oh my god that looks so sick!!! What's the reach measurement and head angle?!?!? Is it 135 or 116 spacing?!?

Are you riding the 26" version? I'm talking about 26". I find it's quite noticeable around the seat stays and front end. Yeah, well this thread wasn't supposed to turn into "Best geometry" thread like it has. It's an improvement thread. So, if a frame has some kind of flaw, whatever it be, this is the place to discuss it. So I'm going to show how my old GU LE could have been improved... One of the main things I found with this frame was the flexyness of the seatstays. They're too long and welded too far apart(end to end), so the brake has a lot more leverage on the stay. I found it was too flexy even with a 4 bolt booster. It was really difficult to get this brake setup properly...This could have been remedied in 2 ways. Firstly, this frame could have had a booster built in. Although that would add a bit more weight to this frame than desired, as it's aimed to be on the light side. Secondly, he could have made the seat tube either straight or slanted slightly in reverse, and made the seat tubes more robust and thicker, like a ZHI z1 frame. Also, these frames flex a lot around the head tube. It's quite noticeable. Actually, I think my DOB frame was stiffer in that area. The obvious solution is to join them...doesn't have to be a long join like with frames like Adamants or Czars, but at least some kind of join to improve stiffness.

WOW! Sick vid dave!

You don't have to be hermance to notice the geometry in the bike you're riding...

I would argue that it is drastically wrong, which does make it hard to be ridden for it's purpose. I found it extremely difficult to stay on the rear wheel in a confined space with 375 CS, and it's much more difficult to turn in place as well.

Not really all that weak either. Quite strong for the weight actually. And quite a lot stronger than some of the more recent deng frames to be released (GU ST comes to mind).

Yeah, but geometry is usually based on how it's going to be ridden. So, the echo control short is meant to be a mixture of street and TGS. But the length is a little odd and the CS are too short. No, but he does have quite a few already! Think of this thread as better in general, not better to the individual. Yes, but the difference in weight is almost 400 grams. There is a point as which a frame could be strong, light, and stiff. Look at most of Koxx frames... Actually, the GU LE could have been much stiffer if the top and down tubes were joined...or if the tubes were welded together in a different way.

Alright, so I just thought about this... I like deng frames, but it seems that all of his frames have something that makes them just imperfect. I've gone through 4 frames in the last year. All have been chinese made, and 2 were deng. I find each has something about it that just plain out turns me off. Echo control short 06: Good features: Excellent frame strength Very stiff Improvements: 375 mm chainstays are too short, should have been between 380-385. Weight. Geometry? GU LE 08: Good Features: High bb height Lightweight Good tire clearence Good TGS Geo Improvements: These frames are too flexy. The top and down tubes should be joined somewhere to improve stiffness. The rear end is also quite flexy, thicker tubes or a built in booster would be great. They are also on the short side for a TGS/Comp style bike. The reach should be at least 5 mm longer, and head angle should be a bit sharper. Feel free to post your deng bikes, and how you'd like them to be improved. Also feel free to argue with the improvements of others...