[Closed] If this is slack, then I like it (Warning: Rocket content)

That's been photoshopped, there is some blue sky in that second pic. Not been any of that for weeks.

What is a "dunt"?

Andrewh: hehe, it certainly feels that way. I think we are paying for that glorious March.

RD: a dunt is a good old Scottish word which in this context means a relatively minor perturbation applied from a different direction from that travelling, i.e. From hitting a rock or something.

Thinking about this a bit more it was an old school moont ridden on a very new school mount.

Hi Metalheart, said hello in the shop yesterday 8)

Good write up, bikes are still ace even for us slightly older gentlemen.

I was very sceptical of a steel FS, thinking it would be just too heavy - but it does look very good indeed. Any ideas on the build weight?

Maybe I need to get a demo on one, especially now we're moving up to 'rockier' country and a FS would seem a better idea than my Ti HT.

Messiah: yeah, us, er, older gentleman need our coveniences. Good to bump into you again after all these years!

B r: the shop claimed it weighed ~29 lbs sans pedals. And that's with relatively bog standard kit: mostly XT, some slx, bonty stem and bars, fox floats, hope hoops with flows. All in all pretty decent for a 150mm bike! It didn't 'feel' heavy and I did most of the first climb in the middle ring too, okay a 36 rear certainly helps!

For me the biggest disappointment was the state of the single track finish (onwards from the third last photo) as it was like riding down a stream most of the way. Apart from the muddy bits... I was really looking forward to this bit as last time I rode it it was pretty much bone dry and sooooo much fun. Not the bikes fault though.

Oh I did get a bit of pedal strike but hardly surprising really as its pretty low bb and I think I probably had a bit too much sag in the rear shock.

Whoops, that reminds me forgot to thank Cycle World Stonehaven (especially Joe) for making this happen. And also to Cotic, obviously. 😳

metalheart
B r: the shop claimed it weighed ~29 lbs sans pedals.

Sounds a bit optimistic.

Jimjam: agreed. Not having scales myself to verify, but I'd personally add a couple of pounds to that from the two handed lift test... Should have put quotes around the claimed. You know how excitable the boys in bike shops get

Hi
I had a demo last weekend at The Dales Centre and got to do a 2 hour ride around Reeth.
Really liked it and would buy one if I were in the market for such a frame.
The large I was on was 30lb without pedals-that was on a digital scale so should be reasonably accurate.
Cheers
Steve

Glad you liked the bike. Looks like a good demo loop.

The weight is about right BTW. That's one of our medium demo bikes and we weighed the other medium with TALAS (the black one there has Float FIT) forks and slightly heavier seatpost at 29.7lbs sans pedals. The black one's gone tubeless on the back wheel too since then so a little over 29 without pedals would chime with what we're seeing.

It's a great demo loop. A bit of everything really and long enough to get the measure of a bike. Oh and nice and local to me too.

Any time you fancy trying it Cy, give me a shout 😉

What is a "dunt"?

Scots word meaning. Knock, blow etc.

Are we needing subtitles for the southerners?

[i]Are we needing subtitles for the southerners?[/i]

Only if you'd need them to tell the difference between a twitten and a trug 😉

A steel full sus, I wonder why that hasn't been done before...

skywalker - Member

A steel full sus, I wonder why that hasn't been done before...

A - It has been numerous times.
B - The topic has been done to death for this particular bike.

A - There have been a few, all flops for good reason.

B - I don't give a shit.

[i]B - I don't give a shit. [/i]

and that's why you bothered to post in the first place?

[img] [/img]

*yawns*

I pinched the orange medium a week or so back - with my M647 pedals and my (none too light) tyres on, it came out at crack on 31lb.

For comparison my Bfe is 30.25lb and my other half's quite blingy Hemlock with light wheels and tyres is 29lb dead. (both on the same scales)

There have been a few, all flops for good reason

you're right, this thing was hopeless.

[img] [/img]

Yeah really took off they did, sold how many?

And obviously the sales numbers of a product which goes against the grain is an excellent way of determining how good it is because all consumers are so open-minded, like skywalker... You never hear anyone make prejudiced decisions saying things like "all 29er bikes are xxxx" or "steel feels like xxxx" etc etc.

Measuring the success of a product by volume sold, how stupid of me to think thats logical.

Can anyone explain the benefits of a steel am full susser? I actually like the look of them, I just don't see the point (other than trying to be niche)

how stupid of me to think thats logical

now you're getting it. 😉

Yes, Cy can:

http://www.cotic.co.uk/geek/steel-full-suspension

Many great products have failed to sell well - that makes them financial failures but it doesn't mean that the same product could be financially successful with different marketing etc etc. You may have heard of the Rover V8 - which was a comparative failure in the USA as the Buick V8 because it was made of the 'wrong' metal (aluminium alloy rather than cast iron). In the UK it was used for over 40 years in numerous iconic cars.

The Rocket is of comparable weight to al alloy full sussers designed for similar use, whilst being stronger and stiffer where it counts. Explained at length elsewhere on here...

Read it. Fixes stiffness and strength whilst not sacrificing weight too much. So basically it fixes nothing? Or are alu bikes now flexy and weak?

It isn't about the material, it's what you do with it. Therefore some al alloy bikes are strong, some are weak, some are stiff, some are flexy, some are heavy, some are light. The best for your needs has the right balance of strength, stiffness and weight (and geometry). Who cares what it's made of if it rides like you want (and isn't an aesthetic failure)?

The Rocket is of comparable weight to al alloy full sussers designed for similar use, whilst being stronger and stiffer where it counts. Explained at length elsewhere on here...

How much does it weigh?

Jeez, you go away for a couple of hours and look what happens... 🙄

First, this thread was about slack, you know that's what the thread title was for.

Second, the fact that its a steel front triangle was not really particularly apparent during the demo (other than how it looks). To me it rides well, just like my (other) Cotic's. But I'd like to try a similar bike for comparison (hopefully getting a Labyrinth Agile to demo). Thats aluminium, I hope that'll be sufficiently balanced?

It's a pretty reasonable weight for a 150mm trail bike so being steel hasn't hampered it.

If that bothers you, well, it doesn't bother me. Hey ho...

Cotic only shift approx 1,000 frames/annum total. I guess they will measure success by their own parameters. Profit, not turnover.

How much does it weigh?

Well perhaps if you actually read some of the posts above you might just be able to work that out for yourself.

Time to go back under the bridge methinks....

The Rocket is of comparable weight to al alloy full sussers designed for similar use, whilst being stronger and stiffer where it counts. Explained at length elsewhere on here...

Weight - 7.6lbs for the 16", who you kidding? That's a pound heavier than a 16" Five and I doubt its much stronger either.

So like someone else said, a pointless niche.

That's a pound heavier than a 16" Five and I doubt its much stronger either.

Better looking, superior suspension design and less common though 😉

[i]I doubt its much stronger[/i]

Can I suggest you come back when you know for sure?

You'll at least be arguing from a position of knowledge rather than ignorance and assumption then.

Can I suggest you come back when you know for sure?

No.

Well, if you're comfortable looking like a plank I guess you should carry on regardless, then.

Weight - 7.6lbs for the 16", who you kidding? That's a pound heavier than a 16" Five and I doubt its much stronger either.

But you only ride through the medium of other peoples videos. Therefore I doubt the weight really matters much at all.

jeebus...

Seriously guys, chill out, who'd have thought the material someone else's (cos I assume you won't be buying one if you hate it so much) bike is made out of could make you so grumpy!

There is sound engineering behind it, if you don't like it fine, if you don't agree with it on scientific and engineering grounds then also fine, you're more than welcome to start up a bike company and sell us your undoubtedly better design...

It may or may not have 'fixed' anything, but it is a perfectly valid alternative approach using a material the designer has chosen for it's specific properties applied to the task at hand. Surely that's exactly what you want a bike designer to do?

The OP was trying to give us an idea of how the bike *rides*, which surely is more important...

But you only ride through the medium of other peoples videos

Yawn.

Metalheart - ignore the pointless arguments, thanks for posting up a helpful and thoughtful note of your actual experience. Interesting post.

Obviously a 6.5lb Orange 5 made of 6061 al alloy is going to be as strong as a 7.6lb Rocket made of 853 - I mean, you only have to consider that the yield strength of 6061 is 325MPa whilst that of 853 is 1400MPa...

ah goodo, now the real keyboard engineers are onboard.

lets quote some material constants eh?

perhaps we could define shear modulus to show how stiff it will be too eh?

where's the facepalm smiley?

skywalker - Member

The Rocket is of comparable weight to al alloy full sussers designed for similar use, whilst being stronger and stiffer where it counts. Explained at length elsewhere on here...
Weight - 7.6lbs for the 16", who you kidding? That's a pound heavier than a 16" Five and I doubt its much stronger either.

So like someone else said, a pointless niche.

The Rocket is a longer travel bike than the Five - it's 150mm.

Better comparison would be the 150mm Transition Covert - Transition quote 7.74lbs for a medium frame with shock.

http://www.transitionbikes.com/Bikes_Covert.cfm

I definitely used to see the point in a full sus frame with a steel front end and alloy links, chain/seat stays, but that was back in the early days of DH where everything weighed a ton anyway and it all broke far too often and most manufacturers warranty dept didn't give a shit.
The only advantage to a steel front end I can see is it's ease of being repaired, but no one (bar maybe CynicAl) would ever bother having a frame re-welded, especially not the type of fashion/niche bandwaggon queue'ers that will buy this. and in these days of every single problem being posted online for all to see distributors/manufacturers are far happier to hand out replacements to keep their customers sweet.

If you read the marketing, Cy wasn't stupid and didn't actually make any claim of this being stiffer/stronger than a comparable weight Aluminium frame, just stiffer/more durable than his own previous abortion of a frame the Hemlock.

I happen to think 7.6lb is a decent weight for it's travel and geometry, but I don't really understand why anyone is bitching about full build weights, You could build a10lb DH frame into a full build weighing 30lb if you really wanted but you probably couldn't ride it to anywhere near it's potential safely without parts breaking. it's the same with Hardtails and shorter travel sussers, why anyone would want a BFe or Rocket with XC strength/stiffness rims, weak sidewalled tyres, weak/flexy cranks or a light flexy stem for example is beyond my comprehension.

The strength points are interesting, are many people busting am frames? Genuinely interested in experiences here as i'll probably be getting something quite enduro focused in the near future.

I would however say that these are direct competition for the 5 despite the 10mm difference in travel

Calm down dear. It's just what it's made out of.

It's steel because (important caveat alert) FOR THIS TYPE OF BIKE there was very little drawback and the stiffness was actually better in some places, so I was happier to make it from steel. Plenty of the 150mm frames out there are now in the 7.5lb range unless they're carbon, so it was in the game, so why not? I agree if the frame weight had come out at 9.5lbs then it would have been pretty silly to go ahead, but it didn't.

I wanted to see if it would work, to see if I could. It does and I did. The shorter travel versions we're working on will be aluminium because FOR THAT TYPE OF FRAME it's more appropriate and I can get the weight a durability combination better than I could do in steel FOR THAT TYPE OF FRAME.

Now look what you've done. You've made the most affable man in the bike industry SHOUT IN CAPITALS.

Shame on you all.

Can anyone explain the benefits of a steel am full susser? I actually like the look of them, I just don't see the point (other than trying to be niche)

+1, then the man himself answers, in capitals no less!

That's a shame for the riders who ride short travel framrs hard, why don't you do an Alu 150mm version for STW riders?

wow you guys are getting really pumped. does it really matter what its made from? i hear bamboo bikes are quite strong too......

any ways. i have just put the medium demo rocket back on the scales with no pedals. it comes in at 29.08lbs. your talking the same kind of weight as an orange five.

i took it for a spin yesterday and if you didnt know it was steel you wouldnt know. its stiff responsive and wads of fun. what more do you need.

good job cy and paul.

ps thanks for the tanks neill x

doesn't sound like it's for me sadly.

any chance someone can make a slack, alu or steel (if they like) FS with less travel and a slack HT?

sort of like a 4 inch travel blue pig would be ideal.

cheers.

I posted this because my curiosity was piqued by the slack HA and by Cy stating he saw no real point in reducing the travel. I thought maybe other people might also be interested.

The fact that I'm not a trail god, and ive already admitted to being a bit of a mincer, I thought it an interesting counter to GW's statement the other day that perhaps I'd (not me personally, mincers in general) hate the slack. Well I didn't. I liked it. It Made me ride faster than I have for a fair while over familiar ground and it all felt pretty damn stable.

Like Joe says ^^^ the material choice on the day actually was, well, immaterial...

Oh Joe, you are welcome. It was good to finally get out on the bikes!

But you only ride through the medium of other peoples videos
Yawn.

You are [i]him[/i] then?

tracknicko, the quoted numbers were merely to illustrate the folly of simplistic assumptions based on incomplete information. Anyway, this 'keyboard engineer' has to go and check if the latest work on the CNC machine has come out right...

Tracknicko - I have a 100mm travel version of the Rocket coming as a prototype which is basically exactly as you describe, but for obvious reasons will be pretty much the same frame weight as the 150mm travel Rocket. Definitely going to give it some riding and see what we think, but given how well the 150mm frame works I'm more sceptical than I was. Basics with a 140mm fork will be 67deg HA, 73.5SA, 13.1"BB. That said, as it's basically a shock mount change on the Rocket frame it wouldn't be that hard to do a small run for people who want this kind of thing mixed in with a batch of Rockets. We'll be keeping people posted on the prototypes on the website and newsletter if you're interested.

After a fast rocky descent yesterday I found myself considering a full-sus bike for the first time in ages, ended up doing some reading on the Rocket and came across a statement regarding the DropLink suspension design which rather counters the following quote:

If you read the marketing, Cy wasn't stupid and didn't actually make any claim of this being stiffer/stronger than a comparable weight Aluminium frame, just stiffer/more durable than his own previous abortion of a frame the Hemlock.

"It's incredibly stiff. When combined with the steel seat tube it's easily a match for the stiffest bikes available now."

Obviously a 6.5lb Orange 5 made of 6061 al alloy is going to be as strong as a 7.6lb Rocket made of 853 - I mean, you only have to consider that the yield strength of 6061 is 325MPa whilst that of 853 is 1400MPa...

obviously you are taking into account material density and tubing wall thickness - i mean you only have to consider that a simple oversight leads to misinformation.

If you read the marketing

don't be silly.

I'm starting to suspect that the material choice was at least partly Cy trolling- some of the responses on forums have been great.

To add actual light to the debate I had the same bike metalheart had for a couple of days and I really don't care if it was made of pig iron and tin; it's good and fun. Goes up well, especially on steep techy stuff where it has more traction than I have fitness, and goes down where you point it. It's certainly enough fun that I've put down a deposit for one.

Interesting thread. Well bits of it anyway 😉 For absolutely no reason other than 'I fancy a change', I'm going to test ride - and if I like it - buy a rocket from Cy.

Just to fan the flames of prejudice and fundamentalism, which seem to underpin far too much of this discussion, I rode a mate's new Orange 5 and thought it was absolutely brilliant at allowing you to go as fast as you dare on big, rocky terrain. And for that reason I don't want one.

My ST4 is nice and poppy and fun and weighs about 30lb anyway. So replace that with a bit more travel and some new bike shinyness? Sounds good to me.

Mr stru: it's pretty telling that those of us who actually have riden the Rocket couldn't tell (or in my case give a stuff about) what material the front triangle is made of when your riding it. It's actually (one of) the least interesting aspects about the bike out on the trail. The whole point of this thread was about the ride...

Alex, I'm neither fundamentalist nor prejudiced on the matter. I'm a Cotic fanboi for sure, but if you test rode the Rocket and decided it wasn't for you, you wouldn't find me castigating you for it. At the end of the day some folks like different stuff from others for a whole host of reasons. Hell, you can buy a five and it won't bother me. It's all bikes and it's all good.

Besides I've still to get a go on the Laby Agile yet... 🙂

(I still want one though...)

Metalheart - wasn't getting at you at all! You've ridden the thing, it was the rest of the thread that wandered off in a 'to me to you' direction that I was struggling with 😉 So your post was great and made me doubly want to test one.

Alex: no offence taken. If my posts have helped you down that particular path then it kinda vindicates me coming on and wittering about it in the first place...

I'd be interested in what you make of it though, good, bad or indifferent.

Whatever though I think you'll enjoy it 🙂

Another interesting weight comparison for the Rocket

Yeti's 150mm SB-66 - Sicklines quote 3136g for the bare frame with no shock or mounting hardware - that's 6.91 pounds. Add the RP23, ISCG Adapter, shock mounts and 12x142 axle, and it's 7.88lbs. And that's for a [u]small[/u] frame.

7.5lbs for the Rocket with shock is more than competitive there.

http://www.sicklines.com/reviews/2012-yeti-sb-66-aluminum-review/

any chance someone can make a slack, alu or steel (if they like) FS with less travel and a slack HT?

I'm starting to suspect that the material choice was at least partly Cy trolling- some of the responses on forums have been great.

Not surprised by the frame weight on the SB-66 at all, as they claim 7.5lb. I should not for the benefit of fairness that my frame weights aren't including the rear axle so it can be compared to QR back end frames. That said, the Syntace axle only weighs 39grms.