You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Not always approproate to cross-link, but this seemed worthy of some discussion on here... Even some of the Pinkbike comments are semi-intelligent for this one !
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ministrys-glued-together-psalm-150-is-nearly-ready.html
Impressive stuff. Expensive way of doing it mind.
They might sell an unbonded one to Damien Hirst.
I feel it would be more fitting if they were held together with hopes and prayers.
Nice bit of self awareness in the comments.
The whole religious theme in the company and naming, I can't help thinking it implies you need a bit of faith (in epoxy) to ride the thing...
Looks lovely. Bonding is mega strong and used in all sorts of critical stuff. I'd have no qualms about riding a glued together bike.
However,
fabrication method that can scale while still allowing for customization, flexibility, and agility,
Available sizes: 1.
The lotus Elise had a production run of well over 20yrs with a bonded aluminium chassis.
I appreciate a bike is a little different but that sort of bonding is common in aerospace too.
There's already a thread running for that.
https://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/the-ugliest-mountainbikes-of-all-time/
Not got much of an engineering mind but damn it’s beautiful! Wasn’t the pole one (stamina?) bolted as well as glued? Almost can’t see the sense I’m not having some bolts as well
Looks nice. I'd ride it, I track a glued together car and don't see this being any different.
Yeah, Stamina is, but didn't mention that because of *that* Pinkbike incident...
No need for bolts, why add weight when it's unnecessary.
Almost can’t see the sense I’m not having some bolts as well
I think that drilling and tapping bolt holes would actually cause stress risers and make it more likely to fail. The benefit of a machined frame, as I understand it, is that it can be made extremely precisely out of alloys that are difficult to weld and heat-treat. As long as it's well designed and the bonding is done properly, it should be very strong. Welding or bolting would probably result in a weaker or less durable frame.
The fact they seek out expensive methods knowing they can pass that expense on to mugs who will pay that ridiculous amount is very telling. You can trust epoxy to a certain age, but long term stuff like that can go wrong, we've all seen plastic, rubber and elastomers sort of melt or disintegrate after long periods so theres no guarantee it'll stay bonded forever, but by that time it'll be obsolete and totally wrong geometry.
The fact they seek out expensive methods knowing they can pass that expense on to mugs who will pay that ridiculous amount is very telling.
Does that make companies like Atherton the same ? how about carbon layup frames ?
You can get carbon frames for a fraction of 5 grand, but Athertons might be extracting the urine a tad with their prices and relying on their name, Robot bikes didn't exactly do great.
The lotus Elise had a production run of well over 20yrs with a bonded aluminium chassis
Many of the bonds on the Lotus chassis were rivetted as well.
funny how it looks great in the renderings, and in the detail close ups, but then you build it onto an OE fork and prop it up on a stick in the woods and its suddenly gopping
I like the looks - I wouldn't buy one, but I appreciate the principal of the engineering, development etc.
Many of the bonds on the Lotus chassis were rivetted as well.
Pretty sure those are non structural rivets. The glue does the work.
Pretty sure those are non structural rivets. The glue does the work
Yeah, of course car companies waste time and money adding non-structural rivets!
The rivets are to quickly hold things in alignment whilst the glue cures.
Yeah, of course car companies waste time and money adding non-structural rivets!
Epoxy takes a while to cure, it's good to hold the parts together while it sets...
I think my problem with this as a product is it's just a why?
I mean I know lots of people still like to rail against Carbon for being wasteful and environmentally damaging but nibbing half a frame at a time out of a billet doesn't feel like an efficient use of materials Vs boring old welding. (Discuss)
And While I get the whole "you can do custom geometry" idea, well yet again you can do that with welded tubes in a far more cost effective way.
I think in much the same way that "every problem looks like a nail to a man with a hammer" this is a case of everything is just G-code to a man with a CNC mill.
$5000 USD for an aluminium frame held together with Epoxy?
the inevitable question is always going to be, what's the warranty like on that?
For part alignment during bonding they might. I was trying to find a public reference to the function of the rivets as most of the info requires an account to read. Best I found was; "To protect the adhesive joints from peel failure in an impact, thread-forming rivets - the rivet equivalent of self-tapping screws - are used as a supplemental jointing method." ( http://sandsmuseum.com/cars/elise/information/press/magazine/magazine1999/aluise.html). That strongly points to the adhesive being the primary bond.
It's not just Lotus, that's just an example. Bonding is widely used in Aerospace, and the Auto world. I seem to remember that anything on Aston's VH platform is bonded, for instance. And whilst they fail in many other ways, the chassis is usually ok 😀
This seems to be a expensive solution to a question that nobody is asking. With hydro forming you can get most shapes required forms for an ally FS MTB, or if not a carbon or steel FS frame all are good solutions if well built. I'm not quite sure what Psalm are trying to bring to the party apart from bringing a new manufacturing method to MTB.
Speaking as the owner of a glued together aluminium car, I have no issue with it being glued apart from the issue that if you bent the chassis then you have to bin it. (rivets are just for structural alignment as said above). Elise series 1 are now 25yrs old and they might have issues but the glue coming unstuck isnt one of them. Lots of cars have some from of bonding now too.
€6750. Without shock.
I was gonna say that the Actofive is gorgeous, while this Psalm is almost right - but just a bit wide of the mark.
Then I saw the floating brake arm thingy on the Actofive - WTF?
nibbing half a frame at a time out of a billet doesn’t feel like an efficient use of materials
Scrap aluminium is worth quite a bit for recycling. It won't go to waste.
Part of that rear swingarm reminds me of the milling on my RC100.... nothing new
@Cookeaa - in the PinkBike Podcast he was on they asked him about the name and it was more about the industrial metal band Ministry and their sons Psalm 69 rather than because of any ties to religion
it was more about the industrial metal band Ministry
Well, ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
I've got no issues with bonding. What I have issues with is how it looks - that's rather gopping.
Looks lovely. Bonding is mega strong and used in all sorts of critical stuff. I’d have no qualms about riding a glued together bike.
As long as it's done well, and not done by Pole
Acto fives aren’t bullet proof either, though hard to know how another frame would handle this…
helps with internal headset routing ?
Nukeproof originally did bonded hubs, alloy flanges to a carbon center.
They all fell apart 😆
Scrap aluminium is worth quite a bit for recycling. It won’t go to waste.
it won’t be chucked in the bin, but there is still the energy used to make the aluminum that was subsequently removed and the energy used to machine out the frame, then the energy used to recycle the swarf.
that said, i have no idea if that is less or more energy than would be used to make the bike from tubes.
as for the looks, it doesn’t appear to be any more or less ugly than a current santa cruz.
Interesting idea. Most of it would come down the the engineering. I work with structural adhesives and they get used in things like this all the time.
It has to be well designed. And you have to pay asuch attention to the adhesives as you do to the welding.
For a standard MMA by the time you get to about a 30mm overlap on a lap shear the metal fails before the bond. much harder for a complex shape with different stresses.
This stuff is used already so normal environmental conditions shouldn't be a concern.
by the time you get to about a 30mm overlap on a lap shear the metal fails before the bond.
Yes, you can see how the area behind the head tube has much more area for bonding. Same around the top tube-seat tube junction and around the BB area.
This is just making me sad thinking about the Elise I crashed and wrote off with a dented chassis 😥😯
There was a really good chat with the chap on the PinkBike Podcast a few months ago. Worth a listen.
Episode 145 - Chris Currie.
This bike makes me hate mountain bikers even more than I do normally.
This manufacturing method opens up a whole load of design options. Instead, we are presented with a double triangle.
The question is, why did they go with the double triangle. Is it because this is simply the best possible design? Numerous generative designs say it's probably not.
No, it's because they know that mountain bikers won't buy a bike that doesn't look like a bike.
At least roadies have the excuse that the UCI is literally trying to retard bike design and keep it strictly the way it was at the end of the steam age . What excuse to mountain bikers have?
What would be a better shape then ?
What would be a better shape then ?
Google 'generative design bike frame'.
Do you want me to make an innovative CNCd bike frame? Fine, I'll make an innovative CNCd bike frame.
Edit: for example:
https://twitter.com/MaxLobovsky/status/1481333443061497856?cxt=HHwWgICyueC64I4pAAAA
that has 2 triangles, wonky ones, but triangles
The question is, why did they go with the double triangle. Is it because this is simply the best possible design?
Triangles are extremely strong. Bridges, houses, etc. generally use triangles in the parts that are under stress.
that has 2 triangles, wonky ones, but triangles
You are correct.
In addition to those two triangles it has several other triangles and other shapes.
Triangles are extremely strong. Bridges, houses, etc. generally use triangles in the parts that are under stress.
Yes, that's why when the only option for building bike frames was to braze steel tubes together over an open hearth, the double triangle design was settled on.
We no longer braze steel tubes together over open hearths.
In addition to those two triangles it has several other triangles and other shapes.
Yes, but none are what i'd call particularly attractive, but maybe that just proves your point of bikers being narrow minded 😀
Yes, but none are what i’d call particularly attractive, but maybe that just proves your point of bikers being narrow minded 😀
Yup, mountain bikers like bike-shaped bikes 🙂
Do you want me to make an innovative CNCd bike frame? Fine, I’ll make an innovative CNCd bike frame.
The only innovation there is that it's not as strong as it would have been if it had just been made from two triangles.
This seems to be a expensive solution to a question that nobody is asking.
The question may be asked by the people behind the brand though - how does a small company make frames in the USA without the resources for trad welded production ie a potentially smaller, leaner company? How do they make frames without heavy investment in tooling for forged parts and instead keep flexibility for geometry and part fits? How do they offer something that goes up against carbon fibre but is recyclable and less resource-needy for production?
From a rider's pov none of that matters but if (IF / or when) cost and performance are competitive then changing the manufacturing process is one way to make a business work. Fair dues to anyone who actually makes their own stuff in-house or domestically, whatever the methods.
The only innovation there is that it’s not as strong as it would have been if it had just been made from two triangles.
Just to clarify, that's not me. Just an example.
And no, you're wrong. It's almost certainly stronger and lighter. That's the beauty of generative design.
Once you move away from the idea that you are making your bike frame out of tubes the possibilities are endless. I believe that the Psalm is made in two pieces but there is no reason not to have multiple layers that can be glued together (a sort of poor man's 3d printing) with epoxy mixed with high density filler used to create fillets to prevent stress risers.
We ended up with the double triangle design because that was the most cost effective design solution over 100 years ago. Once you move away from tubes to CNCing solid materials the only possible explanation that you ended up with a double triangle design is because you're going to be trying to sell your frame to mountain bikers.
Anyway, I'm going to fire up FreeCAD and see what I come up with.
Generative design suggests that design as an art form is something AI can't replace yet. Those generated shapes may be stiffer/lighter but I don't really want a frame that looks like something washed up smelling bad on a beach.
It's at the stage of letting the AI do the work and showing the results unfiltered, and they're interesting for sure. Generative design as a early round of design that's then brought into proportion and balance by someone with an eye for it may be the real step forward in industrial design.
Edit to add,
Once you move away from tubes to CNCing solid materials the only possible explanation that you ended up with a double triangle design is because you’re going to be trying to sell your frame to mountain bikers.
Perhaps the (sensible) brief was to make a high-performance, commercially viable and marketable MTB that used CNC for business structure reasons, rather than reinvent the visuals and construction of a frame completely. tbh $5000 doesn't look as viable as it could be to me but maybe.. Or maybe it'll come down in price like the Hope frame did.
Those generated shapes may be stiffer/lighter but I don’t really want a frame that looks like something washed up smelling bad on a beach
Yup, mountain bikers like bike-shaped bikes 🙂
No shit eh : ) People like products that say the right things to and about them. Not just bikes.
No shit eh : ) People like products that say the right things to and about them.
Mountain bike designer: We've thrown off the shackles of design limitations and created a mountain bike that outperforms everything else in the field by every measurable metric. Not only that but it costs less.
Mountain bike reviewer: It's all true. It's better in every way.
Mountain bikers: It looks weird. I think I'll just buy a Trek Session.
Mountain bike designer: Let's just make a Trek Session.
Ministry? Psalm? It will either succeed or suck eggs
(Obscure musical reference, just couldn't resist)
No, it’s because they know that mountain bikers won’t buy a bike that doesn’t look like a bike.
At least roadies have the excuse that the UCI is literally trying to retard bike design and keep it strictly the way it was at the end of the steam age . What excuse to mountain bikers have?
Approach this from the other end, what does a current twin triangle bike fail to do, or can be improved upon?
If you assume that geometry is roughly how we want it, and the basic concept of the upright bike remains
And that we are keeping with a telescopic fork and normal wheels - all made by 3rd parties
Is there a better way to do suspension rather than a rear end that moves in relation to the fixed front "triangle"
Is there a better way to acheive the results of a dropper post rather than by using a 3rd part telescoping tube pointed roughly down towards the BB.
You have a bottom bracket, a seat tube, a head tube, and rear dropouts. How you connect these is up to you. If you are going to use tubes then double triangle makes most sense.
If you are using a CNC machine then there are suddenly a lot more options. When you are designing a bike for out and out performance and you aren't using tubes the design you come up with is unlikely to be a double triangle. Just look at the Lotus bike Boardman used.
Didn't look like a bike-shaped bike so it was quickly banned. Mountain bikers self-ban non-bike-shaped bikes which is even more sad.
What Olly said - rendered frame pics look ace. Full bike build pic, awful. Like a lot of new bike related stuff though thats produced like this on a small scale, I just have to ask "why?". Customisation etc is easy using welded tubes so I don't get that argument...
Design homogenisation in mature markets is a real thing. New cars and brand logos as prime examples.
If you are using a CNC machine then there are suddenly a lot more options. When you are designing a bike for out and out performance and you aren’t using tubes the design you come up with is unlikely to be a double triangle.
Maybe the Slingshot, Trimble and Red Alp were right after all? : )
I'm with you on the bike industry often taking small steps and mainstream products getting dull but there's no shortage of smart engineers trying to do things differently for concept bikes or portfolio pieces. Yet bikes generally end up connecting points with tubular or beam-sections because strength to weight and stiffness to weight need to be optimised. No doubt an AI-designed MTB FS frame would look different and improve the ratios but it'll still have 4 familiar fixed, necessary points joined up.
CNC is not something I know a lot about but I'm not sure if it really gives as much freedom of form as you suggest because it's still Aluminium, a different (assumed stronger) alloy as you don't need to weld it, but still with same stiffness to weight and the concerns about denting if you go too thin wall etc. So if you don't want a heavy FS frame and are using CNC it's going to err towards a main triangle or large beam and a rear triangle or swingarm, triangles or beams as a starting point. I suppose you could CNC an AI type organic structure to a very limited extent but why would you, you'd print up a frame like that rather than sculpt it out.
CNC is not something I know a lot about but I’m not sure if it really gives as much freedom of form as you suggest because it’s still Aluminium, a different (assumed stronger) alloy as you don’t need to weld it, but still with same stiffness to weight and the concerns about denting if you go too thin wall etc.
Without going too specific, the downsides to CNC are the inability to do internal holes, and the implications in cost and time when your finished shape is more volume removed from the uncut billet.
Therefore if you want to any sort of "tube" ie any sort of closed section which are much better torsionally to form any of your structural members it needs to be in two halves and glued. Likewise for the headtube, there is no way to make that hole in one go.
And making a flat(ish) element - each frame half is about an inch thick i'd guess - is the way to go.
^ That's it, that's the sort of problem I was thinking of when saying you can't make an AI-type shape via CNC - there's some areas you just can't get at in CNC and the removal of material Vs addition of it in material use, time, general efficiency.
It's possible if you manage to get your head away from tube to tube construction.
Also, you have to get away from the idea that there is only one way to use a CNC machine and that the only way to do it is to cut two pieces and join them in the middle. All you have to do is create flat planes. The orientation doesn't matter providing you've got face to face contact and neither does the number of pieces (within limits, you obviously don't want to be trying to glue 300 individual pieces together).
Since the tubes are difficult to CNC, let's start with the headtube, BB, and seat tube and figure out how to connect them together using a series of CNCd parts layered together with fillets made from epoxy and high density filler (poor man's 3d printing).
Anyway, that's how I'd go about it. Not sure if my description is making sense the way I'm describing it.
You may just have to wait until I've done my CNCd frame 🙂
Have to say having now followed this guy/brand in the op on Instagram for a few days, I quite like the styling and design.