Somewhat like when Dave Turner swapped out the hallowed “fully active” chain stay Horst link for a seatstay link, and no one could tell the difference, no matter how hard they tried!! Probably indicates that the variables ( that are assumed on the CAD ) are somewhat different when the bike is ridden in the dirt.
Revised my opinion, having bought a 130/120 bike for the long wet/slop winter UK riding, it is a revelation, the short travel aids "pop" in the trail slop, less feel of wallowing, and the ability move the bike around fast and accurately is great fun!!
Go back and read about Dave Turner’s change from 4 bar Horst to faux bar, not a soul could tell the difference in the dirt, in the armchair maybe!!
So the rear axle moves rear wards when it hits a bump on the trail... but presumably it has to return to the original position at some stage, what happens when that return movement coincides precisely with another bump? Thanks
Not amongst the lads ( much younger than me) that I ride with that have E bikes, they give the bikes some serious stick, which also may account for pretty much all of them being warranted within 18 months irrespective of brand!!
Is this not in part being led by E bike requirements?
stock bike with stock provided tyres, no question the Tallboy will be a better bike in gnarly terrain, once one starts altering the spec, tyres angle set brakes etc its no longer the stock bike, and as you say " you have chosen the wrong bike!!"
Or maybe its related to how fast fatigue sets in when riding tough terrain on short travel bikes?
Fine if you fit and skilful and the bike doesn't get into a fight with ground, otherwise a fraction more suspension travel does reduces fatigue, and to a degree can get you out of trouble, given very similar geometry.
All ok, until the geometry leads you into terrain that gets pretty exhausting to hold on, unless very skilled!!
Local ex World Cup DH rider Sam Dale has a Tallboy, which for him is a fabulous bike 140/120 travel, but for most without his trail vision and skills soon get into a battle with the ground, and either crash or have to back off the speed considerably. A bit more travel ( with similar geometry) for those of us less skilled makes a huge difference!!
A close friend and top 35 EWS rider was talking about this from a different angle. I had just bought a new 150/140 FS trail bike, and he said take all settings off, set sag and then dial in the manufacturer’s compression and rebound settings appropriate for your weight.
Then ride in the centre of the bike upright as much as you can, it will generate grip at both ends, if it feels “ mushy “ at the back, then you are not riding in the centre of the bike!
Many folk, instead dial in more compression damping and more rebound damping to compensate for poor body position, thereby reducing rear end grip particularly over low speed chatter, or claim the shock is no good and swap it out!!
Rider error not the suspension/ shock..... the old saying “ poor workman blames his tools” springs to mind.
His final comment was try to ride the bike off the pedals through the bottom bracket like a polo pony rider!
In the era of super sophisticated FS bikes, with leverage curves, anti Rise and anti squat being argued on every bike site, Andrew posts a writeup of his Waltworks V2 fully rigid funky single speed, and gets as many replies on NSMB as I have seen in a long time!!
The hardtail is dead, long live the hardtail !!
Great write up of a unique bike!!
Must say having built up a Cotic Solaris Max on the basis of some of your previous musings Andrew, 29 er hardtails are most excellent.
Lovely bike, ridden one briefly in the UK.
Just one thing I am curious about, presumably the very rearward axel path is great for the rear wheel to get out of the way when it impacts something, but it does have to return and then may be returning at the point of impact of another item, surely this leads to a “choppy “ rear ride in short sharp chunder, or am I missing something?!!