ohio profile

Surprised at the negative to lukewarm responses. This is an astounding deal on a bike that is totally state of the art, and doesn't *need* a single upgrade to be up for anything you throw at it. Industry needs more of these. Major props to Ibis.

Great find. That A30 seems like a killer bike for the price, whether you leave the parts on or not.

Great to see a product manager engaging like this, 1:1 with customers. Thanks for the responses and details.

Given the choice between not having to touch your shifter for years, and having to plug it in monthly, I'd say it's a pragmatic choice, especially when you start to factor In water ingress and either a quick release shifter or requiring the user to colocate their bikes with outlets.  Even the Tesla key fob uses a coin cell. It makes good sense for the low power RF protocol SRAM Is using (I believe Zigbee)

Wasn't meant as a critique of NSMB. Love you guys. More the Specialized press release - I. wish they would have let the video be the fun part and given us more substance In their written release.

FWIW, this looks like an absolutely stellar bike - checks more of the boxes for a burly trail bike than any other I can think of. I was already considering an older EVO, so now I'm just trying to understand what a '21 S3 has to offer that an old '20 S2 doesn't especially since I liked the aluminum version.

Would be great to see a simple list of the incremental changes from the last (thru-2020) SJ EVO. Looks like:

• Added size range, now Including S1, S4, S5, and S6
• Reach reduced significantly to line up sizing more closely to rest of line - new S3 now shorter than old S2, new S4 shorter than old S3
• Steeper SA by about 1.5deg
• Longer chainstays on the S5 and S6
• Raised main pivot point (I think) to increase anti-squat and rear axle path
• Change from tapered dropset to adjustable upper cup for +/- 1 deg adjustable HA
• Revised link and yoke (maybe?) to use 55mm stroke shock (up from 52.5mm) and get to 150mm travel
• Looks like a touch less BB drop, maybe related to the longer travel and revised link
• Others?

Appreciate the creativity put Into the PR copy, but It really obscures the substance In this case.

I know this Is a bottomless abyss of speculation and opinion, but I think the Shimano design has two issues, both addressable: 1) placement of the port and It's ability to collect/hold microbubbles (addressed by a two way bleed and lots of vibration like you describe), 2) rattling of finned pads. On the latter, It takes surprisingly little vibration to have the Inertia of the brake pads push the pistons back Into the caliper/slave cyilnder. This happens on motorcycles just from head shake (which adds the terror of no brakes on top of the terror of surviving a tank-slapper) - I'm fairly certain It can happen from lateral forces on a bike combined with the relative weight of finned pads.

Not actually true - no one uses the same size pistons for their 4 pots as their 2 pots. If the 4 pots' *total piston area* is the same as that for the 2 pots, you'll generate the same travel. Some are sized for exactly the same amount of piston area, some slightly more to Improve power. See the google sheet posted above In the comments for total piston area by brake model.

Perfectly liner suspension curves are not an advantage - manufacturers work very hard to make sure that both front and rear are progressive. The linear nature of a telescopic force becomes a thing that MFGs have to work around with air assist, bottom out valves, etc. And a standard shock has no challenge on valve area or oil volume, since It can grow to the diameter It needs to be. Telescopic forks are limited to the cartridge diameter AND have to deal with/compensate for bending forces on the damper shaft.

The only Inherent advantage of the telescopic system is clearance and packaging for long travel, rider habits/muscle memory built around the natural dive characteristics, and the refinement that comes from decades of evolution.