Laurence--Trials Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 (edited) Not sure why you think its ugly, it looks good for a mod I think. Edited January 28, 2012 by Laurence--Trials 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alistair14 Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Not bad :3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eskimo Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 I think your bike is gonna be way to much for the bmx community. Alumininum, no seat, and hydrolics. I can understand why you chose that geo with the way you ride, but that's all it's really suited to. You should really consider a 20" rear wheel by the very least though. It would suit your riding more, i don't think i've ever seen you do any back hops. I guess your video should prove us all wrong though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sayshell Posted January 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 I think your bike is gonna be way to much for the bmx community. Alumininum, no seat, and hydrolics. I can understand why you chose that geo with the way you ride, but that's all it's really suited to. You should really consider a 20" rear wheel by the very least though. It would suit your riding more, i don't think i've ever seen you do any back hops. I guess your video should prove us all wrong though http://broadbandsports.com/node/10940 You haven't seen my videos then This video is like 6 years old though and I have come a long way.. but if I could ride trials on the toxsin 20.1 I sure as hell can on this frame heh.. and no their won't be 60 side hops in my new video, probably just 1. Most the trials I am adding in is static spin moves rather than pure trials, but yes their will be some pure tgs in it as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eskimo Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Seen that before on here. Will be sweet if you mix things up on the next video. My 20" tyre argument still stands though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence--Trials Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 in my new video, Please, do NOT put your stupid headbanging in a field or standing in a field in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD™ Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Please, do NOT put your stupid headbanging in a field or standing in a field in. It's his video, he can do what he likes! Just don't watch it eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence--Trials Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 true i guess.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 The cockpit distance is good, I have tried bmx bars and stems and its way to cramped. Not sure why you think its ugly, it looks good for a mod I think. I think it looks really nice, really straight clean look. I guess you get used to it, but for people saying it looks ugly I think you are just trolling... compared to a normal mod it really doesn't look that different. Trials bars and stems are much lighter and quite durable and the geo is preferable, if the cockpit gets any smaller trials becomes really crumby. so I would prefer to keep it as is + the brakes are hard to mount as the lever clamp hits the curved part of the bar. I am not saying the seat makes it harder to get off the side, I am saying a higher toptube would. The carve is good, its not too twitchy or sticky. For disc brakes I don't mind them up front, but I usually carry two sets of pads with me when I ride, squealers and slowers and interchange them if depending what I feel like riding on. I don't want them in the back because I can't run them... if they make a 116 disc hub I could, but I hate track cogs and fixed hubs, they totally fack up your manuels so hs-33 is only option for now and hopefully someday their will be a better 116 10mm freehub than profile. If you think it looks dorky.. their is absolutely nothing I can do, but ask your self how does a bmx or regular mod look any less dorky? The only reason people don't think a bmx looks dorky is cause lots of people ride bmxes so its normal and accepted. Some pretentious road biker would say your 24" inspired looks dorky... Appearance isn't a valid reason to change the core fundamentals of the bike. This bike is optimized in this priority... 1)Strength... Must be safe never break ever... You land smooth you land rough it doesn't break.. you ride the way you want and it lasts period... Strength = safety... 2)Geo... it must be well balanced geo that allows you to do what the part is designed for, though this bike focuses slightly more on doing kinetic moves i didn't take away its ability to ride static, everything you need is there. 3) Weight.. everything that can be saved is saved 4) Appearance.. as far as appearance goes the only thing I care about is colour.. people saying a super low frame designed to save weight and improve strength look stupid is like saying a ferrari looks stupid because its appearance is all performance based and doesn't look like a conventional car, and it does look stupid you just are prejudice against the appearance of my bike, but have accepted a ferrari as a good looking car cause its common and fed to you that it looks good. If you ride then you would agree with me that these priorities are by far the most pragmatic logical way to design a frame... and on my priorities I am sure as hell not going to jeopardize weight, geo, or strength to improve looks. That would be like making a Ferrari shaped like an SUV so its more "normal looking" learn to appreciate the appearance is what I am getting at. This is the 4th and final prototype. I haven't built one of these this is the 4th time I have tweaked the geo to get it perfect, and I can safely say nothing can be improved. The main issue I have with looks is due to the fork and a little due to the bars I think, the frame looks fairly normal. If you had some better looking forks it would improve the whole bike soooo much! I think appearance is pretty important personally. Take 24" frames, you could have those with the toptube pretty low and still have a seat (Echo urban for example) but they look really bad. I would have made the toptube higher just to give the frame a nicer shape. I really don't know where you get the idea a lower frame is stronger? I'm no engineer so I open myself up to some ridicule if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure a taller frame would be the stronger way to do it. I would be really interested to have a go on your bike just to see what it's like, all I can go on is previous experience and speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dann2707 Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Not bad :3 Gayest f**king emotion ever. Stop that. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD™ Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 I really don't know where you get the idea a lower frame is stronger? I'm no engineer so I open myself up to some ridicule if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure a taller frame would be the stronger way to do it. definitely agree with this, I'm sure equilateral triangles are stronger than the other types. Isn't that why they're mainly used in construction, as they spread the load most evenly? So getting the 2 triangles of a frame close to that would mean more strength. I'm no engineer either, but then I don't think Clifford is either? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 They needn't be equilateral (in fact, it'd be pretty tough to do on a bike frame without some seriously slack angles and ting) but yeah, big triangles > thin skinny ones when it comes to frame strength. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD™ Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 They needn't be equilateral (in fact, it'd be pretty tough to do on a bike frame without some seriously slack angles and ting) but yeah, big triangles > thin skinny ones when it comes to frame strength. Hence 'close to' i like bikes to look like bikes, silly really! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aener Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 This is very interesting. I'm also fond of BMX and trials, and love to try do a bit of both - sort of. I also want a bike that merges the two. I prefer trials, so would want a slight tendency toward that but I fully understand you want to ride BMX with a bit of trials in there - opposite to me. I'd sacrifice a few inches of sidehop to have nicer bunnyhop and spinability, but I've gotta say, I think you're attacking it from completely the wrong direction. I'm not saying it's wrong, don't think I'm hating. I'd love to have a go on it to see what it's like. I've done a fair bit of experimenting with different bar/stem combinations on BMXs and trials bikes. What I've found is that (also, theory just makes sense even if you were never to try it) the closer to the BB your centre of gravity is (like a BMX), the easier bunnyhops and spins become. The further towards the front of the bike the centre of gravity is (long mod stems), the harder they become. Putting a very short bar/stem (BMX) on a trials bike does a fair bit to rectify it's lack of spinnyness. Your CoG lies between the BB and handlebars, obviously, so even though the bike is long, your CoG is immediately moved further back than the headtube making hops/spins far easier. What you've done, in essence, is take a very steep head angle and put it on a very short wheelbase. This straight away puts your CoG rather near the front wheel. With BMX bar/stems, that would be as far forward as your weight can go - but since it's such a short bike that's not much of a problem. That's fine... That's what BMXs are mostly like anyway. What makes it a problem - in my books - is that you then compounded an already teetering CoG with a far longer reach stem, putting your CoG almost on the front axle. Further forwards even than a regular trials bike. I'd wager the BMXers you mentioned trying it out were nosediving those 360s simply because that's how the bike responds, rather than them really wanting to. Again - I'm not hating. I'd love to ride it - I think it's certainly going to be easier to ride BMXy than a trials bike, and easier to ride trialsy than a BMX - but from a stability point of view, I'd guess it's not the best. I'm standing by my theory that a more regular trials geometry (although a lower BB) with a custom stem that puts the bars somewhere between where they end up with a BMX bar/stem and a trials bar/stem would do a similar job without being as twitchy (something like 100-110mm of horizontal extension). I think your front end will be so sensitive, and so much more of your weight running through the front wheel, that turning at speed will be more difficult than both a BMX and a trials bike. I might be completely wrong, but that's how I feel as someone coming from a pure trials background. I know I've said it twice, but just to clarify: please don't think I'm slating you. This is just what my experience tells me, and I wholeheartedly want to be proven wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh barker Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 not really keen on that build, wheelbase seems too short, headangle is a bit steep, stackers, forks and the bmx crankset, for what it is it needs a seat but looks like some good fabrication dude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 In all honesty I am thinking of just dropping the trials market entirely and selling it to the bmx market. If you put a seat on it it will sell better to that market. Gayest f**king emotion ever. Stop that. :3 :3 :3 :3 :3 Aaaay. :3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 i can haz facts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sayshell Posted January 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 (edited) I actually agree the fork looks bad lol. But like I said I don't have the time to design a custom fork... and mods don't have much selection in terms of forks. For the single big triangle design the best way to visualize it is trying to crush a stick vs trying to crush a stick shaped like < The bent stick will take a lot more pressure on the bend and will need to be stronger to not snap. If its reinforced on by the seattube which normal frames are this area will flex instead of snapping. The way force works when landing a drop is the main area of impact would be your bb which makes the frame want to fold inward, by having the toptube/seatstays staight it reduces flex a lot at the seatstay/toptube/seatube weld because it is crushing the tubes into each other rather than pushing them outward. and the bb welds as a result are more rigid since the frame can't fold inward the slightest bit, making them less prone to snap as I have found the 3 spots that snap a lot on mods are the bb weld, and the headtube/downtube, headtube/toptube welds. (from street riding) Their is also an extra guesses at the bb/downtube weld on the innerside (you can see it) I have snapped trials frames 180ing a 3 set, this thing takes a 10 set no problem multiple times. For the toptube and downtube welds I have put in special gussets that help spread the load bearing onto the side of the tubes as well as the top instead of just the top. Having the gusset cnc'd out down the center makes the center of the gusset flex causing most the weight to shift onto the sides spreading load much better. Also the frame uses thicker tubing than most normal mod frames. Most use 2.0 or 2.1 where as this is 2.2... how much does .1mm matter? A ton. I rode a 1.8mm frame and snapped it in 1 bunnyhop (literally)the tubing actually tore apart, where as my last frame was 2.0 and has lasted a year of abuse. This is 2.2 so its much stronger. I know your position and I agree, I trust practice more than theory... seeing danny mac ride a fourplay gives me a lot more confidence in its design than someone explaining why its strong. I will take it on some hard hitters.. but I mean you probably bought your current frame without talking to the designer, but hopefully I can convince you. I am giving a video part demonstrating practice as opposed to me just saying its great. Well I am saying its great, I mean as opposed to me only saying its great. For the COG its fine. The headtube angle doesn't move the bars that much forward, it doesn't feel off from a normal trials bike. I have ridden A LOT of different frames (as compared to a because simple, echo team, revel, toxsin 20.1, bionic b2r, GU, dob, fans, bionic b5r etc etc.. (though some of those I wouldn't call normal heh) What frame do you ride? I have probably tried it and can give you a fair comparison. The steeper headtube angle is absolutely essential and makes spinning and nose manuels significantly easier. The stem isn't a long stem, its the shortest steepest strong mod stem out there, and I have tried it with bmx bars and its horrible. Well no its not, it basically is an aluminum bmx, and as you no doubt know doing pedal kicks and moves where you need to shift your weight forward are very hard on a small cramped cockpit. Like I said coming from bmxers they say the bike feels very natural to them it takes them no time to adapt and are landing manuel 180s first try, I would like to have more elite trials riders test it though, Put it this way I can do what you do -25% and most the trials testing is done by me. But you are a lot better than me at trials. If you rode it it would probably be -5% for static moves and +15% for street. That is a pretty realistic comparison. I can almost bunnyhop 540 this thing. But I just don't know any mod riders in calgary who can test it so i am sorry I can't give you a better assessment from a trials standpoint. What makes COG suck is when you have long chainstays and a far forward cog. The short chainstays make it feel great and having the weight closer to the center of the front wheel helps spinning as you use the front wheel to offset your weight, the closer your weight is to where you are offsetting the easier it is to spin. This is why long ass frames are so hard to spin. Edited January 28, 2012 by sayshell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 For the single big triangle design I will explain the theory in a diagram, at the moment I don't have time... but the best way to visualize it is trying to crush a stick vs trying to crush a bent stick. The bent stick will take a lot more pressure on the bend and will need to be stronger to not snap. That has no relevance at all to the triangles created by designing a frame. Equally, I'd disagree with your 'idea' about the straight-line top tube/seat stay thing being strongest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alistair14 Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Gayest f**king emotion ever. Stop that. :3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sayshell Posted January 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 (edited) That has no relevance at all to the triangles created by designing a frame. Equally, I'd disagree with your 'idea' about the straight-line top tube/seat stay thing being strongest. yes but you are the mother of all trolls so I have learned to ignore you... I am not saying its strong becaue its one big triangle, as opposed to a diamond like a normal frame. I am saying itss strong cause.... because of bb flex blah blah blah the stuff I said I don't want to just restate stuff. But if you were to look at it like that I think it would be true anyways. A diamond with a line hitting two corners, is weaker than a triangle with a line hitting a corner and the center of an edge. I will ask my friend he is an elite engineer, but I mean I didn't design this frame just my self, Cao did lots of input and help with the designing and he designs all the frames for speedrace/fans. So we worked back and forth a lot for 3 years getting it good. For people who aren't interested please don't criticize. If you are not actually interested in potentially buying one, then your opinion is quite irrelevant and I don't want to wade it equally with someone who does. I am listening to feedback and considering adding the seat, personally I think the bike looks weird with or without a seat might as well just accept that. My friend gets asked where is his seat and he has a seat on his bmx. Its a mini seat and low so people can't even tell. , lots of bmxes run plastic mini seats, remember when trials riders used to have those? All they need is a pro to go seatless and they will all be. I am totally open to feedback, I personally want to push the limits of kinetic street moves on this bike and have optimized it the best for my self as I feel I am one of the few riders who have serious interest in this area and probably have the most experience of anyone as I have devoted my entire riding experience to getting a mod compatible for this. Seats are nice for transportation, but my question is do most riders just drive there bike to where they want to session and then ride, or do you usually ride your bike to get places? I get the impression most people don't use their bike for transportation much cause any trials bike is usually pretty bad for this But yeah I am open to ideas for improvement as long as they are from people who would actually consider riding it, otherwise I will just design it entirely based off what I like. Edited January 29, 2012 by sayshell 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Yeah, Mark. GTFO with your troll science, it's getting checked out by an elite engineer. With regards to seats though most riders use them to, er, sit on. If you've got a few extra pairs of knees or something then you might ride to spots but yeah, spinning the cranks sat down on most trials bikes is a challenge so it's more of a chilling and a cruising thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyseemonkeydo Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 If you are not actually interested in potentially buying one I have a feeling that might mean excluding pretty much everyone I'm afraid. It works for you and that's great but you're the only person I've ever seen riding the way you do... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eskimo Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 I have a feeling that might mean excluding pretty much everyone I'm afraid. It works for you and that's great but you're the only person I've ever seen riding the way you do... This was what i was kinda getting at. I'm now fully decided this is a bike for riding nothing but curbs and flatbanks on. This video better better prove us wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyseemonkeydo Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 This was what i was kinda getting at. I'm now fully decided this is a bike for riding nothing but curbs and flatbanks on. This video better better prove us wrong. I'd say your version of a street mod (still a little odd looking but far less so!) would be far more saleable than this (to both BMXers and trials folks alike). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.