You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Yeah, I read that article. I wondered two things:
1. Do they have subtitles for him when he turns up to a Cannondale meeting
2. How do they feel about the fact he takes one of their bikes and completely changes it all
2. I think they will just be so happy that he has joined them. It's generated alot of positive posts in the comments section. No doubt they will have some new bikes out at some stage.
Just makes me laugh that's he's gone against all of the marketing nonsense that the industry pumps out.
He's given street cred too Cannondale and made them look ghetto.
glad Cannondale have let him display it. ( that's if he got permission lol )
I always thought Cannondale would be like a big corporate co. Hopefully they just let him get on with it all.
Bet the warranty dept is going to love him when all the head tubes on bikes where folk have copied his start making their bids for freedom...
I'd imagine they have a cannondale rathabit in the pipeline.
Other than marketing the newer bike, I can't understand why he's not on a Jekyll given the changes.
Love the first Pinkbike comment...
I suggest they will have a ratbike ready to launch soon.
I think his angle will help cannondale sell lots of bikes. Affordable, functional and sturdy.. sure thats what everybody wants right!?
Its been a long time coming and if cannondale can deliver what Josh is hoping they can the other big manufacturers will have to compete.
Cant wait.
Other than marketing the newer bike, I can’t understand why he’s not on a Jekyll given the changes.
"Josh is currently only riding the Habit platform, but he has a Jekyll incoming and possibly something even more interesting on the way after that."
It's amazing how much information is in the text part of an article.
not carbon
not long
not low
not a 29er
What's the best head angle for smoking blunts in the woods?
Makes sense though doesn't it. A relatively tame bike setup more in line with DH and dirt jumping. Short reach, high bar, overforked/slackened and lowered by the wheel size, but not ridiculously so by running the flip chip in the high position!
Food for thought for you boys who want a more playful bike/bigger performance from older and lower models! I actively look out for bikes that are ripe for this treatment. The only rules I have are the frame must be a bit overbuilt/have a substantial head tube junction, the standover needs to be reasonably low to begin with, the seat tube angle needs to be as steep as possible (73 degrees as a bare minimum) to compensate for overforking. The seat tube angle can be somewhat compensated for (but lowering the BB, which may or may not be favorable) by a single offset bushing or a pair or flip chip.
Never understood the flat and low bar trend for MTB riding either! IME It can feel awful on really steep DH trails and a bit dodgy on jumps. You do get used to it though and then don't notice it so much!
Doubt the headtube would part company. Now-a-days it's almost ubiquitous for alu frames to have that top and down tube junction joined together, with a large weld area to the head tube. I'd bet in most cases it's a lot stronger than you think!
I actively look out for bikes that are ripe for this treatment. The only rules I have are the frame must be a bit overbuilt/have a substantial head tube junction, the standover needs to be reasonably low to begin with
a bike for a short fat clumsy bloke?
sorta the opposite of Josh.
cool!
Speak for yourself boy.
Yep, flat bars and low stack heights suck donkey balls.
It’s only his little bike for jibbing around on, I got to see it on Monday. It was cool.
“not carbon
not long
not low
not a 29er”
It is low. Even with the big fork and the flipchip adding some height the smaller wheels take more off, and the Habit is on the low side of what’s currently considered low.
It’s pretty slack too with the big fork and a lot of pressure in it. Running longer offset than normal because of the 27.5 wheels in a 29 fork.
But it is short and alloy (though with carbon wheels) and looks a lot of fun!
After years on Santa Cruz he is clearly used to riding bikes that are way too short
lol geex
Longer bikes may be better for ploughing straight through rock gardens, but they are worse for stylin down the hill, jibbing of roots and rocks and generally having fun. Which is pretty much what JB does.
It's funny how everyone is seduced by the long low and slack thing. It's a design which enables people with less skill to go faster than they could on a more agile bike, that's it.
When you actually look at the bikes people like Ratboy, Sam Hill and the like ride none of them 'size up' to get more reach they don't need to because they know how to ride fast. Some of them even size down!
Snapperdan you're absolutely right.
Now where did I put my 2005 Orange Patriot? It's time to size down.
Longer bikes may be better for ploughing straight through rock gardens, but they are worse for generally having fun doing skids and wheelies. Which is pretty much what riding a bike is all about
I totally agree.
I'm a complete slut but there's no way anything long is seducing me.
Does this mean my XS 26" mk2 BFe is cool again?
It’s funny how everyone is seduced by the long low and slack thing. It’s a design which enables people with less skill to go faster than they could on a more agile bike, that’s it.
I haven't gone really long, just a bit longer. But it is not just that (and I would say I have less skill). It makes riding certain types of challenging steep trail easier, nothing to do with speed, though obviously you are likely to go faster if you are not falling off/walking.
Does this mean my XS 26″ mk2 BFe is cool again?
Not at all, they're rubbish. I hated mine. Too short, too steep and too high. Tell yer what, I'll take it off yer 'aaaands for a pony, doin' yer' a favour, ain't I?
#wishI'dneversoldmine
Kayla. Those wee Bfe's ride (almost) as nice as an old giant STP. The STP has 16" stays and is more rear wheel happy but the rest of the geometry is pretty similar.
I happen to still have one STP left (I had 3 - all at the same time) and will be done with the frame when a suitable FS turns up S/H to port all the parts on to. Do you want it?
the giant STP - takes me back. I was going to get one but got a GT moto 4x bike instead. I still use it as it is so versatile and still makes a good trail and play bike. Like a low hardcore hardtail with 140mm bombers on it and a 69 degree headangle which I guess is a bit steep now. Didn't stop me riding down steep singletrack stuff in the alps though as well as the DH track there.
New bike term of 2019: jibbing
Down with the children.
New bike term of 2019: jibbing
Down with the children.
Sorry grandad https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jibbing
Is this what counts as a frankenbike now? But both wheels are the same size, it's all from the same year and it doesn't have a steerer extension or drop bars?
When you actually look at the bikes people like Ratboy, Sam Hill and the like ride none of them ‘size up’ to get more reach they don’t need to because they know how to ride fast. Some of them even size down!
Yeah, that Aaron Gwin bloke, at almost the same height as Sam Hill, riding an XL M29, what does he know. Same for that Greg Minnaar guy, on an XXL. Clueless, the pair of them.
sirromj
Member
New bike term of 2019: jibbing
Down with the children.
Sorry grandad https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jibbing/blockquote >
I'm a fairly old git and that word has been part of the local dialect around here for as long as I can remember, but with a completely different meaning. Round here it kind of means to back out of something. As in: "Are we having another round?" "No, I'm jibbing" or "Are you gonna ride that drop or are you jibbing?"
what does he know
he doesn't *know how to take an inside line as well as Hill or Fearon
Fearon rides a L operator (460mm reach) and is taller than gwin
You can't generalise on bike size from rider height. it's simply a preference.
*no one does
Ps. minnaar still won more WCs on shorter bikes than the longer ones he now rides.
a lot of the tracks back then did suit them better though
I’m a fairly old git and that word has been part of the local dialect around here for as long as I can remember, but with a completely different meaning. Round here it kind of means to back out of something. As in: “Are we having another round?” “No, I’m jibbing” or “Are you gonna ride that drop or are you jibbing?”
Same as around here - has been for as long as I can remember.
jibbing means riding a mtb like a big bmx. So maybe some street riding and sessioning jumps and bits of freeride stuff.
There was even an MTB movie called Jib back in 2002:
Yeah, that Aaron Gwin bloke, at almost the same height as Sam Hill, riding an XL M29, what does he know.
Horses for courses, Gwin said he preferred the 450mm reach Large frame for everything bar full on WC courses.
Gwin says he likes almost everything about the smaller size large (which he has traditionally chosen for competition). "It pedals better, I can pump off of everything, and it corners better," says Gwin. "But when I am pushing hard down the steeper sections, I feel like I am pushed forward on the large. The XL feels a little long, but it's going to be better on the World Cups."
Horses for courses, Gwin said he preferred the 450mm reach Large frame for everything bar full on WC courses.
In other words then, it's good to have the choice...
(Although I struggle to understand the Geometron sized bikes).
Watch Chris Porter ride and you might get it
#saynotolovingbackwheel
The longer designs will have advantages for expert riders like Gwinn in certain circumstances (although it sounds like he rides a pretty average reach the rest of the time), but the main reason long bikes are being marketed so heavily is that they enable riders with less skill (most customers) to go faster. Sorry if that hurts anyone's feelings!
Even Cotic of 'Longshot geometry' fame admit as much. I'm sure I read one of Cy's blogs were he talks about how much more confidence he had at Revs on a much longer bike - if you feel stable/confident you'll brake less and go faster..
The other thing to bear in mind is that World Cup DH cups these days prioritise raw speed rather than technique. When they were faced with a UK style techy wood section at Fort Bill a couple of years ago they all fell off!!!
If you ride Leogang every weekend then it's natural to want a long stable bike, but I'm assuming most people here ride trail centres or natural single track where agility and technique need to be balanced with raw pace. Maybe that's why Santa Cruz frames are so popular - they're one of the few companies that seem to have the geometry balance about right (for me at least).
I'd be interested to see what reach EWS riders are riding...
435mm (Hill)
no one else matters
The longer designs will have advantages for expert riders like Gwinn in certain circumstances (although it sounds like he rides a pretty average reach the rest of the time), but the main reason long bikes are being marketed so heavily is that they enable riders with less skill (most customers) to go faster. Sorry if that hurts anyone’s feelings!
I don't think you're hurting anyones feelings, I think you're stating the obvious to be honest...
I have an average sized bike (460mm reach) & a longer bike (500mm reach), but then I am considerably taller than Sam Hill. The shorter one is faster on tight, twisty, flatter stuff. The bigger one is faster on faster, steeper, rougher stuff.
The above was not a surprise to me 🙂
Snapperdan,
What you say about longer bikes making things easier is true, at least in my personal case. But can't the same be said about better suspension or brakes? I know stronger brakes are not as much of a compromise as more extreme geometry, but one can draw a comparison.
As a personal note, I prefer a longer bike on rougher natural trails. On smooth flow trails I can't feel the benefits
I agree Zezaskar but MTB journos don't have the same level of obsession with suspension and brakes as they do with long, low and slack geometry!
It seems like any bike that doesn't follow that trend is immediately discounted - even in this thread you've got someone saying Santa Cruz bikes are too short. Have they even ridden one or are they just on trend with MBR et al?
Geometry makes more difference to how a bike rides than suspension or brakes too. You can put some nice forks and a shock on a crap frame and it'll still handle like a pig. I reckon my 5010 would still ride great with basic air sprung suspension.
I suppose my point in all this is that there's different frames for different folk and no one should be surprised when they see riders at the top of their game riding shorter frames. The fact they are just shows how powerful the marketing BS in the bike industry is...I fall for it all the time too!!!
How can you call something that looks sooo right a frankenbike!
Dunno Alex, that saddle looks a bit chunky for my tastes.
Does look pretty sweet though, for a Cannondale.
MTB journos don’t have the same level of obsession with suspension and brakes as they do with long, low and slack geometry!
It seems like any bike that doesn’t follow that trend is immediately discounted
I think you've got things a bit confused pal. Perhaps you have one person in your mind, but bike journos are generally quite tolerant of conservative geometry - proibably 'cos they know which side their ad manager's bread is buttered.
Internet commenters can be very dismissive of short and steep new bikes though, me included. Is that a problem? Really?
Chakaping - Why are you dismissive of short and steep bikes pal?
I've had literally dozens of them and longer bikes just work much better for me - as I'm not blessed with the skills of Sam Hill, Josh Bryceland or Geex.
But just to clarify, I'm mainly dismissive when when a company claims its new bike is LL&S when it's clearly not.
Different frames for different folks! All bikes and all people having fun - hopefully!
These longer bikes have also been a bit of a revelation for people over 6' 4'' who were previously perched on tiny bikes!
Horses for courses though.