Newly Released Suspension & Components General

beeb

Dr. Beebenson, PhD HA, ST, Offset (hons)
Nuno Duarte is a very talented dude.

Carbon composite layup techniques are quite amazing, a hybrid approach ( aka what easy composites defines as “optimised”), using both woven fibre cloth and chopped tow (short pieces of chopped up fibres) outperforms cast aluminium



I know the science of it, but it's still a "no" from me. If they're designing a sub-1000g, 32mm stanchioned fork I don't they had my body mass/hack line choices in mind during the design brief (nor the fact I still slapped 203mm rotors on my 'downcountry' build).

When I can watch how much a Fox 36 deflects under hard braking I just feel like I'd rip a lightweight carbon fibre CSU to pieces (if not with braking, then whenever I jammed it into a ledge or trail bomb-hole), and then there's the whole instantaneous failure of carbon thing.

I know it's technically capable of being stiffer, stronger and lighter - but my 'id' remains unconvinced.
 

SummitFever

Eats Squid
Lovely looking fork and if made properly I don't see how there would ever be a problem with the CSU. However, the arch on the lowers looks weird. It's very thin in that frontal cross section which is the plane in which uneven forces in the direction of the fork legs are primarily exerted. Fork legs always cop uneven force through lean angle and terrain and the axle can provide some assistance to tying the lower legs together. This design seems to almost entirely rely on the axle strength as the arch will have almost no compressive strength in that plane.

It is made out of carbon fibre though, so it will have huge tensile strength and maybe that's what the engineering thinking is: the leg getting more upwards force will will 'pull' the other leg along through the arch. That will however put a sideways loading on the tops of both outers and that's never good for smooth sliding.
 

Rorschach

Paid $250 for this custom title
I know the science of it, but it's still a "no" from me. If they're designing a sub-1000g, 32mm stanchioned fork I don't they had my body mass/hack line choices in mind during the design brief (nor the fact I still slapped 203mm rotors on my 'downcountry' build).

When I can watch how much a Fox 36 deflects under hard braking I just feel like I'd rip a lightweight carbon fibre CSU to pieces (if not with braking, then whenever I jammed it into a ledge or trail bomb-hole), and then there's the whole instantaneous failure of carbon thing.

I know it's technically capable of being stiffer, stronger and lighter - but my 'id' remains unconvinced.
Probably not aimed at chubs like us @beeb :(
 

shiny

Go-go-gadget-wrist-thingy
Lovely looking fork and if made properly I don't see how there would ever be a problem with the CSU. However, the arch on the lowers looks weird. It's very thin in that frontal cross section which is the plane in which uneven forces in the direction of the fork legs are primarily exerted. Fork legs always cop uneven force through lean angle and terrain and the axle can provide some assistance to tying the lower legs together. This design seems to almost entirely rely on the axle strength as the arch will have almost no compressive strength in that plane.

It is made out of carbon fibre though, so it will have huge tensile strength and maybe that's what the engineering thinking is: the leg getting more upwards force will will 'pull' the other leg along through the arch. That will however put a sideways loading on the tops of both outers and that's never good for smooth sliding.
It is very, nice wonder if using Magura’s dual arch design would benefit a fork of this weight category. Not sure if there is a patent on the design as DT used it many years ago. I have fond memories of my Magura 32mm fork. Super stiff, 20mm axle.
 

shiny

Go-go-gadget-wrist-thingy

beeb

Dr. Beebenson, PhD HA, ST, Offset (hons)
New stem from Hope that looks much better than the old one and will be putting up free 3D print files for bleed blocks and other items - interesting.

Stiffer than the old one? The old one felt like it was less of a stem and more of a forged block of steel that happened to get a steerer and handlebars trapped inside it. o_O

Maybe they could pair this updated stem with a set of 35mm Raceface Atlas bars for the ultimate wrist-shattering experience...
 

link1896

Is not a gynaecologist but will look at your fork
Stiffer than the old one? The old one felt like it was less of a stem and more of a forged block of steel that happened to get a steerer and handlebars trapped inside it. o_O

Maybe they could pair this updated stem with a set of 35mm Raceface Atlas bars for the ultimate wrist-shattering experience...
My thoughts too. Like wtf, my hope stem is far from flexible.

I’m not keen on any stem where the bar clamp cap isn’t a single piece full width, these two piece clamps place too much pressure on carbon bars due to the reduced contact area.
 

beeb

Dr. Beebenson, PhD HA, ST, Offset (hons)
My thoughts too. Like wtf, my hope stem is far from flexible.

I’m not keen on any stem where the bar clamp cap isn’t a single piece full width, these two piece clamps place too much pressure on carbon bars due to the reduced contact area.
My Hope AM stem has good feel, neither flexy or jarring. But the ol’ DH stem. Feckin’ jeezus man!
 

Scotty675

Likes Bikes and Dirt
My thoughts too. Like wtf, my hope stem is far from flexible.

I’m not keen on any stem where the bar clamp cap isn’t a single piece full width, these two piece clamps place too much pressure on carbon bars due to the reduced contact area.
At first I was of the belief that a full face plate offered more contact area. I’ve found that nearly all stems actually have a smaller contact area on stem side, not face plate side. Out of the stems I own the title stem has greatest contact area, has full contact on stem and a wide 17mm contact on face plates. I’m no mechanic but have seen bikes with stem plates installed incorrectly, ie some stems should be torqued one side and surfaces touch the other
 

Ackland

Eats Squid
Can someone explain the reasoning behind this to me, last stem I purchased was a Funn Equaliser which had instructions like that printed on it but every other stem I've ever owned I've just tightened so they have equal gap.
You'll find that they are machined to be touching to produce the correct roundness
 

Scotty675

Likes Bikes and Dirt
I’ve found 3 main types
1-flat equal torque
391453

2- Stepped face plate, torque one side
391454

3- Angled face plates/stem
391455


stem and face plate need to be parallel to each other to achieve correct torque. I may be wrong but that’s my take on the idea
 
Top