Prototype Norco Aurum

[heavyp]

Love this shit, heading back to the late 90's technology.

Norco Aurum prototype which looks pretty close to production and its made of carbon.

Max Commencal did it last year with the DHV4 by heading back to some of his designs in the late 90's and especially Nico's bike in 00 the VProcess NV00, Norco tested out a idler pully all season and maybe they didn't get the results they wanted they obviously saw something there.





http://www.pinkbike.com/news/norco-prototype-dh-bike-first-look.html

 

[jarrod839]

Saw blinky was testing one at the start of last season then by the end he was back on there Factory frame.
Apparently the idler was cracking the carbon but looks like now they have beefed it up.
Really hope this doesn't become the next FAD on new frames as not much benefit to us weekend warriors over world cup riders.

 

[shmity]

Saw blinky was testing one at the start of last season then by the end he was back on there Factory frame.
Apparently the idler was cracking the carbon but looks like now they have beefed it up.
Really hope this doesn't become the next FAD on new frames as not much benefit to us weekend warriors over world cup riders.

High pivots are a fad?

 

[Dozer]

I know the intention is for it to work better but it's so ugly. I'm on my 37265363 Norco and the gravity frames over the last few years (Aurum, Range, Sight) have easily been the best looking frames out there. This bucks that trend, hopefully they polish it a fair bit before it becomes available to weekend punters who think they know why "the chain looks funny".

 

[Shredden]

I don't care until it has a gearbox

My 1981 KX80 cost me $350 and shifts perfectly every time.

It's kinda apples and oranges but cmon, you've had 35 years to work on it. Derailleurs are better in the past few years but still only a half ass solution IMO.

 

[Dozer]

I don't care until it has a gearbox

My 1981 KX80 cost me $350 and shifts perfectly every time.

It's kinda apples and oranges but cmon, you've had 35 years to work on it. Derailleurs are better in the past few years but still only a half ass solution IMO.

Bike companies make heaps of cash by selling derailleurs, doing away with it would hurt their income. But yes, I agree, a gearbox would be brilliant on any bike.

 

[Boom King]

Bike companies make heaps of cash by selling derailleurs, doing away with it would hurt their income. But yes, I agree, a gearbox would be brilliant on any bike.

Here's a quote from Keith Scott, Banshee bikes designer, on why he hasn't incorporated gearboxes into his designs as yet.

I keep an eye on gearboxes... but they are not there yet in terms of price or weight in my opinion (hopefully they will get there soon), and they also have a fair bit more drag than current drivetrains. Trust me I am keen to see the death of the low hanging derailleur, but nobody has designed a truely viable option yet in my opinion all things considered.

The other factor, which is a fairly significant one, is the fact that a tensioner would still be required to work with our bikes (and any bike with good suspension kinematics). I personally favour an internally geared hub that hits the mark in terms of price, weight, friction and reliability for this reason.

 

[Shredden]

Bike companies make heaps of cash by selling derailleurs, doing away with it would hurt their income. But yes, I agree, a gearbox would be brilliant on any bike.

Component manufacturers I'm sure, but actual bike/frame companies? I guess a lot of them are in bed, maybe that affects it.

Interesting comments from the Banshee guy - I'm sure racers are a different story but I would certainly be willing to take a slight (couple of % more than derailleur/chainguide) increase in drag to do away with derailleurs, I'm too unfit to pedal for anything other than a couple of seconds anyway. As for the having to use a tensioner thing - I guess that's fair but wouldn't it be offset to an extent by the benefits of lower unsprung weight compared to an internally geared hub? I wonder if it's possible to have an inboard-mounted tensioner, maybe even on a rail or something like Yeti does/did. Or a floater like the rear brakes on old Kona Stabs. Maybe I'm dreaming.

I can't wait to see how the new Zerode AM bike with a Pinion gearbox turns out. Would LOVE a test ride at least to give me a taste of what they might work like on a DH bike.

 

[shmity]

Component manufacturers I'm sure, but actual bike/frame companies? I guess a lot of them are in bed, maybe that affects it.

Interesting comments from the Banshee guy - I'm sure racers are a different story but I would certainly be willing to take a slight (couple of % more than derailleur/chainguide) increase in drag to do away with derailleurs, I'm too unfit to pedal for anything other than a couple of seconds anyway. As for the having to use a tensioner thing - I guess that's fair but wouldn't it be offset to an extent by the benefits of lower unsprung weight compared to an internally geared hub? I wonder if it's possible to have an inboard-mounted tensioner, maybe even on a rail or something like Yeti does/did. Or a floater like the rear brakes on old Kona Stabs. Maybe I'm dreaming.

I can't wait to see how the new Zerode AM bike with a Pinion gearbox turns out. Would LOVE a test ride at least to give me a taste of what they might work like on a DH bike.

Any benefits are far outweighed by the negatives at this stage. Weight, kinematics, parts, durability, shifting mechanisms all are restricted or sacrificed for the sake of an internally geared hub. If there were huge real world benefits then we would have seen an expansion in a post-Honda world, but there hasn't been because realistically a gearbox solves very few problems and introduces its own issues.

 

[jarrod839]

Here's a quote from Keith Scott, Banshee bikes designer, on why he hasn't incorporated gearboxes into his designs as yet.

one of the many reasons i have become a fan of Banshee is there consideration towards the average rider and just make simple yet highly versatile and affordable bikes and not expensive piles of garbage.

 

[No Skid Marks]

This bike would be more advantageous to weekend warriors, high pivot sucks up more bumps making you faster and gives loads more confidence. Also sucks up casing things better.
As for the derailed gearbox comments.
Banshee dude has no idea obviously. Just covering his own sales by putting down another concept.
Gearboxes have negligable more drag and thats compared to a clean new mech, not the thrashed out old crap mot people put up with. then there's the fact you're in right gear way more often with a gearbox because you can shift ANY time, so you save way more energy by being in the MORE EFFICIENT gear. Anyone saying otherwise hasn't lived with a gearbox.
As for the tensioner, well. It's hardly a massive compromise, espeicially when comparing to a derailer that is actually just a much more complex and weaker tensioner. So to say you wouldn't run a gearbox because of a tensioner but run a mech is full ……ed. and rear internal hub comment just confirms his lack of mechanical aptitude as it would still need a tensioner on most designs, not to mention the added unsprung weight way out the back of the bike.
Pinion 6 speed box would be negligible weight gain to a mech and chain guide anyway.
Gearbox weight is centered and low, making bike more stable and predictable and weight is moved from suspension making it more responsive.
I'ne never heard of anyone that wanted to swap a gearbox for a mech once they'd owned a gearbox bike. That's from my 5+ years of experience selling gearbox bikes.
But off the train wreck.
This Norco looks cool as fcuk. Top tube junction looks a bit whack, but must've been the most structually advantageous to save weight but make it stiff and strong. Reminds me of the Trek that looked awesome but was too heavy.

 

[Flow-Rider]

This bike would be more advantageous to weekend warriors, high pivot sucks up more bumps making you faster and gives loads more confidence. Also sucks up casing things better.

Heaps of bikes already use a high pivot like Orange and GT, nothing wrong with that.

The rear gear boxes have been troublesome under high loads from what I've seen, the concept is good but maybe it still needs refinement.

 

[No Skid Marks]

double post.

 

[No Skid Marks]

Heaps of bikes already use a high pivot like Orange and GT, nothing wrong with that.

The rear gear boxes have been troublesome under high loads from what I've seen, the concept is good but maybe it still needs refinement.

Only Zerode, Commencal and some smaller brands are rocking high pivots now(oh and the AM GT), lots of brands starting to toy with them again.
Curious about what gearboxes have YOU seen failing? Everything for sale has issues that can be highlighted and blown out of perportion, but statisticly you are far far safer from failure with a gearbox. and that's with 5% of the maintanence. I've heard of one Alfine 8 having issues, maybe the early Alfine 11s, and some odd ruffles about Rohloffs but they are reported to do over 40000kms, can't imagine a mech doing a tenth of that.

 

[jarrod839]

Nealy all the major bike companys including banshee have experimented with high pivots(idler pulleys) and gear boxes and both aren't new technology but the advantages to social riders are pretty small.
You got to remember when people are looking at a new ride they choose look and function over just fuction and both idlers and gear boxes look stupid on a bike and even though there maybe some advantages people stick to what they know. I wouldn't spend thousands on a bike with a idler or gearbox unless i was able to spend solid time on one to see if any advantages.
And to say that keith from banshee doesn't know what his on about with technology is pure muppetry. I applaud keith in too not jumping on the carbon and other useless shit we can put on a bike bandwagon. And instead producing frames that work for today's social rider.

 

[Flow-Rider]

Only Zerode, Commencal and some smaller brands are rocking high pivots now(oh and the AM GT), lots of brands starting to toy with them again.
Curious about what gearboxes have YOU seen failing? Everything for sale has issues that can be highlighted and blown out of perportion, but statisticly you are far far safer from failure with a gearbox. and that's with 5% of the maintanence. I've heard of one Alfine 8 having issues, maybe the early Alfine 11s, and some odd ruffles about Rohloffs but they are reported to do over 40000kms, can't imagine a mech doing a tenth of that.

One was an Alfine on a commuter, something crunched inside. The other I don't know what brand it was but we done a 60km ride with a group and during the ride we rode up a very steep technical incline with rocks and logs, it would slip and let out a loud bang. I've never had many issues with a cassette and derailleur other dropping the chain and not stopping in time, letting the derailleur get damaged but that was early days.

All the 2017 Oranges and even the GT hellion which is XC orientated still have a high pivot.

 

[shmity]

Nealy all the major bike companys including banshee have experimented with high pivots(idler pulleys) and gear boxes and both aren't new technology but the advantages to social riders are pretty small.
You got to remember when people are looking at a new ride they choose look and function over just fuction and both idlers and gear boxes look stupid on a bike and even though there maybe some advantages people stick to what they know. I wouldn't spend thousands on a bike with a idler or gearbox unless i was able to spend solid time on one to see if any advantages.
And to say that keith from banshee doesn't know what his on about with technology is pure muppetry. I applaud keith in too not jumping on the carbon and other useless shit we can put on a bike bandwagon. And instead producing frames that work for today's social rider.

The idler isn't present for shits and giggles, if you want a high pivot bike like the norco here or the commencal, you need an idler to keep chain growth under control, its something that is necessary for the bike to function as intended, its not there for any reason except function.

One was an Alfine on a commuter, something crunched inside. The other I don't know what brand it was but we done a 60km ride with a group and during the ride we rode up a very steep technical incline with rocks and logs, it would slip and let out a loud bang. I've never had many issues with a cassette and derailleur other dropping the chain and not stopping in time, letting the derailleur get damaged but that was early days.

All the 2017 Oranges and even the GT hellion which is XC orientated still have a high pivot.

Oranges have a mid height pivot at most. It falls mostly inline with the chain ring. True high pivots are much higher than that. The Hellion gets away with having a high pivot without an idler due to the way it links the drive train to the rear end.

 

[No Skid Marks]

Nealy all the major bike companys including banshee have experimented with high pivots(idler pulleys) and gear boxes and both aren't new technology but the advantages to social riders are pretty small."lots of brands starting to toy with them again". Gearboxes are about 100 years old in pushies. I think they predate mechs as we know them even. Don't quote me, I can't recall.
You got to remember when people are looking at a new ride they choose look and function over just fuction and both idlers and gear boxes look stupid on a bike and even though there maybe some advantages people stick to what they know. I wouldn't spend thousands on a bike with a idler or gearbox unless i was able to spend solid time on one to see if any advantages.Have you seen a bike with a Pinion gearbox? They're pretty tidy. Look on the Pinion site at any of the brands using them now. Tidier than two mechs or a mech and chain guide. Smaller chain ring too, so better ground clearance and nicer lines.
And to say that keith from banshee doesn't know what his on about with technology is pure muppetryIn context, what he was quoted was stupid and selff serving I would guess. I applaud keith in too not jumping on the carbon and other useless shit we can put on a bike bandwagonThe truth is probably can't justify the cost due to small numbers for carbon. So their bikes would be too expensive and not suit their market. Ecenomics, not nesacceirly due to a certain material belief. Carbon is better, it's just more expensive and can be fcuked up easier, especially going for light weight. And instead producing frames that work for today's social rider.

Yeah good on thm for making cheap bikes and getting them to the masses.

One was an Alfine on a commuter, something crunched inside.Guessing an 11 speed. The other I don't know what brand it was but we done a 60km ride with a group and during the ride we rode up a very steep technical incline with rocks and logProbably Alfine 11 again. True they're not really made for that sort of torque. and rider may have shifted under max torque. They are not all gearboxes though. Pinion and others use a totally different system, so pretty much only share the words gearbox and share the bennefits. I'm sure a 1970s Sturmey Archer(or the new Chineese made cheap ones)wouldn't handle it either., it would slip and let out a loud bang. I've never had many issues with a cassette and derailleur other dropping the chain and not stopping in time, letting the derailleur get damaged but that was early daysWell lucky for you. There are bennefits to a gearbox lots of people cannot comprehend because they only know derailers. Not having to find somewhere to pedal through a change. Shifting multiple gears at once without pedalling. Just being in the right gear when you start. I'd strongly advise staying open minded. They are coming.

All the 2017 Oranges and even the GT hellion which is XC orientated still have a high pivot.

Yeah the GT Helion is what I was referring too. The Oranges pivots are maybe 2cm higher than chain line/chainring. Not what I'd call a high pivot for the sake of argument. 80% of bikes would have a virtual or real pivot around the chain line. and without idler, pedal kick back may negate that hight pivot.

To each their own, stick with you feel comfortable with. I'll take my high pivot for DH where I want the suspension to suck up as much shit as it can and the wheelbase to get longer when the shits getting wilder. and my gearboxes for accessing the right gear whenever I want and having way less maintanence and a more balanced feeeling plusher bike that's as reliable as a singles speed.
I would imagine every second ride I've been on with a group I've tuned someones mech for them. Go figure.
Oh your chain, sprockets and cables all last several times longer with a gearbox also.
Everything is a balance of compromise, pick what's best for you. If your points guide you, then it's all good. Not saying you wouldn't have a better time though without a high pivot or gearbox. High pivots are faster, not nessacerily more fun though. GOOD gearboxes are way easier to live with though.