The problem is that I wouldn’t release it into the wild without somebody checking the math. The number of people that I would both trust to get that right and that would know what the hell I was talking about is very small. Throw in the torture of wading through somebody’s excel formulas...I don’t think I could do that to somebody.
A few people have talked about this. It hasn't been a problem for me. I spent a bit of time trying to get the exact position that I was happy with, and once it was there, it has been pretty comfortable, just about everywhere. It makes a lot of sense that this wouldn't be the case for everybody. I think a smaller wing would probably reduce this somewhat, as there would be less material to get in the way.
Totally agree. Just like not everybody needs a super wide or a narrow bar and not everybody needs a 50mm rise handlebar. The point is that this is something that might work for certain people and it's worth a shot in experimentation.
Yes, bar width plays into this, for sure. That's been talked about a lot already, though. As well, it was my experiments in bar width that got me to this point. I'm at about 780mm on most of my bars and I was thinking about going a bit narrower, but the impact that had on my wrist angle seemed fairly minimal.
This is like DRM for grips. I had no idea they did things like that.
This morning, I woke up and thought about all the things I wanted to change on this article and hoped it wasn't posted. But alas, it was.
This was the point I wanted to drive home a bit more strongly. These grips are a pretty good solution, for me. It's not going to be for everybody (but it might be for some). The process of experimentation is what I was hoping to push. Try different things and don't worry too much about what it looks like.
I think you need to try this on the full suspension bike.
This is amazing! And reminds me that I think I neglected to state the diameter of the bar and stem.
I've got to admit that I try to not let the comments bug me, but this one did.
First of all, there's some poetic license here, in this article. Am I getting older? Yes. Does bad fit make my body feel worse? Yes. Could I be stronger and in better shape? Absolutely.
Honestly though, I have no time for this scolding that gets handed out by people about how we should all be in better shape for our riding. You know what? I just like to go out and ride my bike. Would I ride better if I spent a few hours in the gym each week? Probably. You know what I'd rather do with that time? Yep...ride my bike.
This needs to be a sport for all body types and all fitness levels. We should be pumped that people are just out there riding their bikes, and if you can spend 100 bucks on a handlebar to make that more comfortable I can't really think of too many better places to spend that money on your bike.
Lastly, don't judge what other people need to make their bike work for them. Tall people do not have the same needs as shorter people. Bikes and bike parts are generally not designed for the fringes. I'm learning to worry less about how things look, and worry more about how they feel. I think the article Andrew wrote a few months back about the Answer bar does a great job of explaining this as well (and was a bit of motivation to head down this path). I think flat bars look stupid, and I'm proudly going to rock a high rise bar from now on. Probably.
As well, did you edit your comment? I feel like the way it reads now makes me a bit less mad than it did before.
Fair point. I was thinking about this as I wrote this. How I meant it:
- Reach - The standard form of measurement spat out by bike companies
- Effective Reach - The actual distance we are reaching to the handlebar
There's a tremendous amount of variables to effective reach. Stem length, stem rise, spacers, bar sweep, bar rise, etc. So, all I meant when speaking about an "increase in effective reach" was that the bars got further away from me. Same argument for Effective Stack, but I think that one is probably easier to nail down.
Apologies if I get this wrong. It's been a while since I wrapped my head around degrees of freedom.
First, I didn't really want to leave the impression that this was a big problem in the review, just that it was different.
Next, I must say that I don't think I've ever really struggled with a single faceplate system on a stem. I certainly have never damaged a bar with one. I cracked a Thomson faceplate once, but that was probably my fault.
What's a bit strange about the Burgtec system is that if you look at most stems, the top and bottom bolts run parallel to one another. This allows for one axis of movement for your faceplate (in and out, parallel to the bolts). There are probably exceptions to this rule, but the Burgtec seems particularly extreme.
If you look at the Burgtec system, the bolts are at a fairly substantial angle to one another. In essence, there is really only one position for your faceplate to be in, and it only allows for very limited amounts of movement from that position. In that sense, it feels "over-constrained". There's no free axis of movement with the bolts in place. I guess there are two ways of looking at this:
- One, the faceplate is going to naturally go to the right position because that's the only one where it sits comfortably
- Two, if you don't get it all lined up perfectly, (or if the tolerances are off) there's a chance you're putting some weird loading into something
Again, it's not a huge deal, it's just not what I'm used to dealing with. Once you have it all lined up, it's fine. In my mind, it seems a bit easier to just have one part to worry about, and not two. And if you are going to have two, it seems a bit easier to have something like the Renthal system where you have no gap on the bottom and a gap on the top.
A mechanical designer could probably tear everything that I've said here to shreds, but there is (probably) no arguing that what they've done here is different than what most do. It felt worth a comment.
This is a good point Pete, and something I hadn't really thought about. I just flew into a "why isn't my bike perfect!" rage. It did seem a bit weird that they had only left room for one spacer.
Okay. I will spot you that not all metallic pads offer more power than resin. However, these brakes are night and day with metallic vs. resin. Same with other XT brakes that I have tried.
I saw a Hukk on Fromme as well earlier this year! I didn't know how to feel.
I wandered into a bike shop off Commercial Street a few years ago looking for an emergency tube and it was filled with Hukk's! He had moved on to e-bikes, but still seemed to have a few for sale. Somebody needs to tell that guys story.
Interesting. Thanks for the explanation.
As they say...user name checks out?
I'll start with a question. Why are you concerned about losing a few mm of travel due to the OTT? It seems like a lot of people talk about this online, as well, and I feel like I'm missing something. If the fork works better with a few mm less travel, then why worry about it? I actually have no idea if mine does this or not.
For settings, I was lucky enough to have DVO pass along some personalized settings. I'll compare that to what is in the Ibis guide.
The differences from DVO:
- Ibis pressure recommendation - 60-70 psi - DVO 75-80 psi - I ran 75
- Ibis OTT recommendation - 8-10 turns - DVO - 9-10 turns
- Ibis HSC - 3-5 turns from closed - DVO - 1/2 to 1 turn from open (that's a bit confusing...)
- Ibis Rebound - 16-22 clicks from closed - DVO - 11-15 clicks from closed
That's for my weight at 195-200 lbs. I set it up within the range DVO recommended and didn't feel a need to change much of anything, other than air pressure. I tried everything from 70-77.5, but wound up back at 75 every time I left.
To add even more confusion...there's the DVO tuning guide.
This suggests even more OTT, even higher air pressures, and damping somewhere in the middle.
My take on all of this? I think I touched on this a bit in the preview article. I feel like the beauty of this fork is that you can really adjust it based on feel. You can worry about how it reacts to medium and large hits without turning it into a 2x4 at low speed, or needing to play the token game. This should give people the freedom to try running it slightly stiffer, I would think.
So, set the air pressure so that it gives you the level of support and feel that you prefer. Dial in the OTT based on that pressure...don't be afraid to crank it, is what I get from the DVO documentation. Overall, you'll probably want settings that are a bit stiffer than what Ibis recommends, and a bit softer than what DVO recommends.
Hope that helps!
Oh...as well...DVO recommends releasing pressure before you mess with the OTT.