You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Not sure I really want my hands to sit behind the steerer....
Certainly seems like a bit of a weapon
Who is the weapon?
That looks like one of those banging Sick thingumys
🤮🤮🤦♂️
There’s an old saying in cycling, “You’ve got to be a pretty fast muther****er to ride a pink bike.”
To be fair the bike looks interesting despite the breathless prose
Weapons grade bellend by the reads of it.
Can quite tell on phone but could you have a stem with carbon tubes glued in each side (Atherton style). And have the super short stem length.
I read it and understood none of it.
That's some grade A waffle-shit...
I think PVD is well (or, better) known across the pond. From what I hear, it seems he might have some good ideas, but they are being dragged down by his personality and unwillingness to compromise/accept the ideas of others
I knew this would be PVD! He does have some good ideas amongst everything else...
Yay PvD! He does in fact make weapon systems.
Well he's not lacking in self confidence is he?
I can tell right away that bike will likely be a bit shit to ride, having owned some notably long front/short rear geometry bikes myself in the past.
Mate, you ARE a weapons system.
Look at that seat tube clearance. Can talk bollocks all day but can't bend a seat tube.
Can someone translate the grade a tosh being spouted ?
Look at that seat tube clearance. Can talk bollocks all day but can’t bend a seat tube.
Looks fine to me. Oh and the seattube does have a bend in it.
Always interesting ideas nicely executed from PVD, just spoilt by the arrogance and polarised opinion.
In fairness he has arrived at the geometry by careful evolution over many frames. I've also ended up with short rear : longish front 29er geo over the last 9 years of mtb frame builds - if they rode "a bit shit" I wouldn't have carried on building them 🙂
Oh there is a whole explanation on how it is the perfect seat tube bend.....
I could pick holes in his rationale all day but it would be wasted breath.
http://www.peterverdone.com/the-right-way-to-build-and-spec-bent-seat-tubes/
I’ve also ended up with short rear : longish front 29er geo over the last 9 years of mtb frame builds – if they rode “a bit shit” I wouldn’t have carried on building them
What numbers have you ended up at, may I ask?
I found 460mm reach and 430mm chainstays was really good, but lengthening the chainstays to 450mm or a bit more was even better for me.
One bike had 460mm reach and about 420mm rear, and I found it quite alarming trying to ride it fast.
He's got an interesting blog and some interesting opinions. Some of the stuff he makes is incredible, although not all to my tastes.
His militant certainty and sometimes shoddy reasoning remind me a bit of Chris Porter.
You know what? I don't really understand what he's on about or have a clue about the kind of bike he's trying to build but I'm pleased that there are people like this guy out there making weird stuff and saying weird stuff.
That guy's a riot.
I read his blog frequently, sometimes for something genuinely interesting, often for his tirades on how he's only one o knows/does something right
Mondraker.
Very smart, very able guy.
Also a bit of a blinkered knobber.
Like CP, he'll likely have 100% correct opinions now, which he quietly contradicts a few years later with the benefit of actual experience. 😂
I like the colour
Cha****ng - not sure of exact reach number as the only drawings at home are for cutting tubes / setting up the jig. I'd need to check cad but I think somewhere around 475-480 reach (25% sagged 120 fork), 410 chainstays, 72 effective SA and 68 ish HA. That is my personal limit for reach and slackness. Designed for climbing, twisty stuff and steep downhill techy stuff. Not flat out wide open blasting.
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/C1VxgBw5/P1040098.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/C1VxgBw5/P1040098.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
The important thing is a geo and bike for a specific rider and purpose. P*Ds seat tube diatribe is the opposite viewpoint. It must be a specific diameter. It must be a specific drop. It must be a specific angle. All for cast in stone xyz reasons. Why? I'm a much lighter rider, riding different terrain, on a different continent, constant mud and grit, xc background so happy with just 25-50mm dropper. So the answer to the equation is different (only he never looks that far).
I really like PVD - he's done some awesome stuff, and I actually made use of one of his designs on my old bike (the Scott headset adapter cups).
He's a maverick like Chris Porter, who pushes the boundaries that we need pushing to find the limits, then with a bit of Yank brashness (which mostly seems to upset typically self effacing Brits more than anyone), he can appear arrogant. My view is that arrogance is only confidence you can't back up with ability, and he's got ability in spades. We need the bug personalities like PVD, CP, Musk etc to not GAF and do this year's "outrageous", which in turn settles into 2 years' time's "progressive"......
Little bit of knowledge goes a long way.
As for his post - an object lesson in how to to bore the shit out of people.
Is anyone interested?
here's my effort:
all fun and games. We're all wrong about geometry as soon as a rider with different CoG and physical dimensions gets on a bike.
Well I found it interesting enough, I didn't find it too hard to follow despite having no real bike building knowledge.
Oddly (or not) enough I was also going to compare to CP before I was beaten to it. Both have their theories and both have been extremely helpful in that regard, the Mojo spring calc was perfect for me back in the day and PvDs oil table of truth hasn't let me down.
Not sure I really want my hands to sit behind the steerer….
Puts you into the Dangerzone, apparently.
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/exploring-the-relationship-between-handlebar-vs-stem-length.html
TeamRobot was having a keyboard fight with him for a while. I like to think of that period as the golden age of the internet.