As this concept is played with, I think we'll rarely see bikes come with anything slacker than 64-ish degree head angles because simply it's not needed, and by maximising the relationship between stays and stack we might be able to get bikes that offer the same level of high-speed stability all while doing so without the handlebar flop at slower speeds. I believe that the next generation of enduro bikes will further explore this, and designers will embrace how much stability can be delivered with a higher front and longer rear-centre. The Unno Burn has some great angles and dimensions. The Commencal Meta SX represents what I believe to be the new frontier of geometry and it's not the only one. When you do have a bike that manages to give you a very upright position all while ensuring the bike has a very good balance, it's amazing how it can open up the terrain and be both comfortable and confidence-inspiring. I believe that stack and chainstay lengths are related very closely to one another and the higher the stack the longer the stays need to be to put weight back onto the front wheel. However, a higher stack can give us a lot of positives when finessed correctly. Like any geometry dimension it plays its role, but it needs to contribute to a balanced chassis and not undermine one. To look at stack in isolation would be to do it a disservice. However, a higher front can also lower our center of gravity by putting more of our weight through our feet, changing our body position to make tackling steeper trails safer and easier, as well as making certain movements like front wheel lifts easier. This can be the drawback of excessive stack. We all know when a bike feels too high at the front, the feeling of the front washing and failing to find grip, as well as a sensation of vagueness as we transition between turns and feel the bike feel quite unpredictable as it goes through the y-axis. That said, both will have an effect when seated too, even if these changes are often considered as a byproduct of getting a particular standing position.Ī higher stack will bring the rider's weight rearward, and a lower stack will place more of it on the front wheel. The two are very relevant to one another, and when combined can paint a very vivid picture of how a bike will fit when you're standing up and descending. Reach, as we know, is the horizontal difference between the BB and the top of the headtube. Stack is the vertical height difference between the top of the head tube and the bottom bracket, and it's a cousin of reach. That said, it was better than nearly everything else when it was released, and probably represented an important stepping stone to the very bikes I'm comparing it to. The 64-degree head angle felt good, but compared to the slackness of the Spire, coupled with small dimension issues, it always felt just a little less capable. It's only small things, but the slacker seat tube angle can result in a stretched-out riding position with its comparatively long reach. While the Enduro does so many things so well, it never felt like a true brute. This was a bike that was truly ahead of its time when it was released, and even though rumors swirl of the revised version it's still a very very good bike. One example has to be the latest and current version of the Specialized Enduro. It finally felt like the enduro bike had arrived in earnest. For years bikes had been getting incrementally slacker, all while reaches had grown and seat tubes had steepened. Both are fantastic bikes, although I would argue that the Spire is a bit more versatile. In that Field Test, there were five enduro bikes, and two of them finally made good on the promise of a 170mm-ish bike that could truly hold its own with downhill bikes - the Norco Range and the Spire.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |