Bike brand value

lawman

RockmonkeySC wrote:

When you have an ars* the size of a baby hippo you notice every weakness in a suspension set up.

That's kinda like someone who's 5ft nothing saying a bikes crap because he rode an XL though. Manufacturers have to spec the damping on shocks for the "normal" rider, who is not the size of a hippo. A shock tune for your weight could transform a design. I'm 12st so probably qualify as a manufacturers normal weight, but even I noticed a difference when I had my shock tuned specifically for my weight. IMO if you are at the extremes, either very light or very heavy, a proper shock tune should be one of the first things you change on the bike, otherwise it might not perform as well as it should.

prawny

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

prawny wrote:

They don't feel like a value brand to me anyway, YMMV obviously.

How would you define "value"?

Difficult question. I know that Canyon bikes are good value for money - so in that case that are value. On the other hand, if a Canyon had the same spec/reviews/price as say Trek or Specialized, I wouldn't automatically gravitate towards the bigger brands.

How am I doing explaing myself? I struggle writing it down.

An illustration to help my point (maybe)

Value Brand



Good Value



It's very possible that my idea of a value brand is different to others, because the cheap end of the market is where I spend my money.

YeehaaMcgee

Oh, I see what you mean. I thought you were saying they didn't offer value.
Your "value brand", is what I would have called a "budget brand". I understand now.

rockmonkeysc

lawman wrote:

RockmonkeySC wrote:

When you have an ars* the size of a baby hippo you notice every weakness in a suspension set up.

That's kinda like someone who's 5ft nothing saying a bikes crap because he rode an XL though. Manufacturers have to spec the damping on shocks for the "normal" rider, who is not the size of a hippo. A shock tune for your weight could transform a design. I'm 12st so probably qualify as a manufacturers normal weight, but even I noticed a difference when I had my shock tuned specifically for my weight. IMO if you are at the extremes, either very light or very heavy, a proper shock tune should be one of the first things you change on the bike, otherwise it might not perform as well as it should.

Im just over 13 stone (6'1") now and linear suspension setups like Canyons still feel crap.

LAW4778

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

What you just wrote has no bearing on value.

Apologies, I was just sticking up for Orange on why some might see them as expensive and forgot to include the post I was responding to, don't see the point in the thread anyway everyone has their own interpretation of value based on what they can actually afford in the first place.

prawny

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Your "value brand", is what I would have called a "budget brand". I understand now.

Yeah I was thinking that as I was writing it. I think I call them value brands to make me feel better

My idea of value bike brands are things like, Boardman, B'Twin, Planet X and On-one (weirdly although pretty much the same as Canyon)

YeehaaMcgee

I just misunderstood what you meant, given the context of this thread.
anyway, did you know that planet-x and One-one, are one and the same?

prawny

Yeah, I was also going to say that I didn't really see Titus as a value brand, but didn't for some reason. Maybe because people would think I'm mental. And yep still Brant, still Taiwanese made, still cheap. But I'd still go for a Titus over an On-One all things being equal, which might have been the point I was trying to make a couple of pages ago :oops:

This is where we're talking brand value vs value brands... and there goes my brain :?

supersonic

Linear suspension set ups can be made less linear by air can modification, or even damper mods. In fact this is what most shock tuning is about, getting the feel you want from it in tandem with the natural kinematics of the frame. Weight tuning usually just puts the adjusters in the middle.

rockmonkeysc

supersonic wrote:

Linear suspension set ups can be made less linear by air can modification, or even damper mods. In fact this is what most shock tuning is about, getting the feel you want from it in tandem with the natural kinematics of the frame. Weight tuning usually just puts the adjusters in the middle.

More of a problem on a longer travel bike where you want a coil shock and you also want it to really ramp up for the last third of the travel and resist bottoming.

adamfo

prawny wrote:

Linear suspension is a regular criticism of nearly all the German bikes

Seems to be mainly a UK preoccupation. Still 4.5 out of 5 stars ain't bad.

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/categ ... 9-13-47268

rockmonkeysc

Not a UK problem. If you want to ride hard on a big travel bike it needs a good rising rate to stop it blowing through its travel. With a rising rate you have plush small bump damping but with the ability to control big hits.
With a linear set up if you want it sensitive to small bump it will just blow through the travel on big hits.

prawny

adamfo wrote:

prawny wrote:

Linear suspension is a regular criticism of nearly all the German bikes

Seems to be mainly a UK preoccupation. Still 4.5 out of 5 stars ain't bad.

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/categ ... 9-13-47268

Yeah that's why I put nearly less of a problem on shorter travel bikes like that one, I hear the MBUK review of the strive is bit less glowing. To be fair on my 120mm I couldn't tell you if it was linear or not, mostly my lack or experience but there's less room for wallowing and changing angles on shorter travel bikes.

b45her

the strive does blow through travel with the standard shock but so does nearly every bike with a ctd shock, a £20 volume reducer totally sorts it.

adamfo

When I used to ride motocross most people used to re-valve their suspension. The bike industry has been surprisingly slow to learn.

supersonic

Exactly, position sensitive damping coupled with speed sensitive can sort most things unless the design is a complete lemon.

Kowalski675

prawny wrote:

I hear the MBUK review of the strive is bit less glowing.

They loved the spec and frame, their criticism was all centred around the linear suspension travel giving up its full travel too easily (even when piloted by a 7 stone rider, but set for 10% sag with an 11 stone rider). When questioned, Canyon said that the Strive is set up for average riders, bt for 2014 would be offered with different shocks (with more progressive damping curves) for more agressive riders.

Kowalski675

adamfo wrote:

When I used to ride motocross most people used to re-valve their suspension. The bike industry has been surprisingly slow to learn.

Increasingly common for road riders too, now that the message is getting through that quality suspension doesn't only benefit racers (and the fact that, in the current economic climate, manufacturers are cutting costs, and want to do it where it doesn's show externally, so suspension internals on current bikes are actually lower quality than they were in the 1990s). I had this bespoke built for me by Wilbers in Germany:

YeehaaMcgee

That linearity is why I don't like my RS pike forks, they just readily eat through the travel unless they're so stiff that they become useless.

Kowalski675

My Sektor & Monarch R feel linear too, to me. I'm not hitting anything big (far from it), but using pretty much all the travel (I've not noticed feeling them actually bottom out yet though).

Do any MTB frame designs use a rising rate linkage, like on motorcycles, where the linkage itself makes the damping more progressive further into the stroke?

YeehaaMcgee

Yes, a lot of frames use rising rate. Some couple that with rapid chain extension towards the end of travel as well, effectively using your legs as bottom out dampers.
Then there's often adjustable bottom out resistance on some forks and shocks.

I've said many times that the reason I prefer Fox forks is because they have this nice progression, and manage to remain supple, without sinking through their travel.
I've found Rockshox to be more supple, sure, but irrespective of rebound setting, multiple small hits in quick succession, will always make them use up the full travel.

ej2320

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

That linearity is why I don't like my RS pike forks, they just readily eat through the travel unless they're so stiff that they become useless.

What year are the pikes?

YeehaaMcgee

ej2320 wrote:

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

That linearity is why I don't like my RS pike forks, they just readily eat through the travel unless they're so stiff that they become useless.

What year are the pikes?

I've tried several bikes with all manner of pikes on, the most recent models being about two years ago, I'd guess. It seems to be part of the design philosophy.

supersonic

The air forks can be made more progressive by putting oil in the positive air chamber, or some sort of spacer. As for coil, pretty much stuck that way unless you have a progressive wound coil. All my RS air forks have had a big ramp up at the end.

YeehaaMcgee

supersonic wrote:

The air forks can be made more progressive...

They shouldn't have to be! This is why I don't like RS, out of the box, they just don't work properly, for me.
If I wanted forks on a pootle-along bike, then yeah, the plushness would be nice, but I loathe them when I'm pushing myself, and covering ground at speed.

supersonic

At least it gives you the choice lol. Not easy to make a progressive unit less progressive ;-).

YeehaaMcgee

There's not many reasons you'd want to, really.

supersonic

Unless it's too progressive from the off - a big criticism in many reviews I have read (and indeed I have done myself) is that some forks never achieve full travel or feel harsh under big hits (not damping related). Of course is personal preference what you like, I know plenty who like them linear and run coil for that reason, others that like a big ramp up from half way in the travel. One reason why Fox brought out the XV and XXV cans (then introduced spacers to tune them precisely).

I like to fiddle with mine and get them how I want.

YeehaaMcgee

Would you prefer to fiddle, or to be able to buy something off the shelf that does what you want?

supersonic

I prefer to be able to set my own linearity, and low speed damping as a minimum. If it happens to be that way off the shelf great, if it doesn't (ie too progressive for my liking), I'm stuck. What suits me off the shelf might not suit somebody else though, so I believe adjustment here is a bonus, especially as you cannot make them less progressive.

So for me starting with a linear air spring then adding oil/spacers works best. Is simply personal preference.