CX-1: First Impression and Race

Crux with CX-1

A Crux with CX-1, Zipps, and Sammy Slicks

Another Crux is in with CX-1 and the updated Hydro. First impression: don’t know what you got ‘till it’s gone and the Hydro is def improved with less deadstroke at the lever before the pads hit the rotor. At the same time, there are less ting-ting sounds from the rotor while riding because the new pad spreader gives the pads a little more clearance. The CX-1 also improves what privateers had done themselves in Cross with hacked single chainrings and MTB derailleurs, by trimming all the fat and kludges from the equation. The X-Horizon’s non-slanting parallelogram design eliminates ghost shifts due to chain bounce while the X-Sync is the narrow-wide tooth profile on the chainring which, in conjunction with the roller clutch in the derailleur’s pulley cage, allows the CX-1 drivetrain to operate on a single chainring without the use of chain deflectors, guides, or guards. Rather than taking a modern, integrated drivetrain and then subtracting half, CX-1 is optimized for being more from less.

CX1

Non-slanting parallelogram

That’s a lot of X this and that from SRAM, as King Crimson would say, some Elephant talk

I’ll decode the X terminology to mean CX-1 is a one-by drivetrain for road/cross with a chain that doesn’t slap around or fall off. As long as you shift like you mean it, with a quick stab, it’s precise and tight too. As a big-ring roleur, I was skeptical when JP from SRAM told me to run a 40-tooth ring, but the setup was perfect for the Kermesse yesterday that featured a mile of rocky service roads and another of chipseal.

In that race, what I know is, I made the 1st-lap fast split, felt great, and then had breathing difficulties. Lost a lap to get the rescue inhaler, back in, and then a rock kicked up into my shin. With much cursing, I was another lap down. Rode it out at tempo, and finished, probably 3 down. Then I drank a Rainer beer with Mt. Rainer in sight.

Racing is often like algebra and fire…a complicated interplay of structures with starts and finishes, confusion; it’s unpredictable yet inevitable and often combustible.

What you do is prepare as best you can and put your bets down on the table. Considering neutral wheels are no longer available for this course (cause of all the flats) I ran Sammy Slicks at 45 PSI in the front and 43 for the back. That meant I bounced across some of the rocks, but also didn’t pinch flat and carried momentum into the paved section. As slicks, I kept the bike upright in the tight, gravel turns.

The Mashel Nisqually Kermesse kicked of the 14/15 Cross season for us. As the promoter, Prudog said

Kermesse are the only road-esque races where you get dropped and finishing still feels great. Beer helps.

For more on CX-1, see Mark’s review and for the Crux, this tag.



Element.ly in the Shop and Outside

Benotto Torino

Benotto Torino

Element.ly just launched and their Instagram feed includes a photo of a Benotto Torino spotted at Elliott Bay Bicycles, that’s in downtown Seattle where Davidsons are made. What is Element.ly about? Being outside and telling stories, like this tale of stone fruit

Truth be told, at this point, just about anything. But I settle on a giant bottle of water and a couple pieces of stone fruit. I think most people call them nectarines, but my grandma always referred to them as stone fruit, so I carry on the tradition.



Oregon Manifest Teams Respond

original or iterated

Original, iterated, or copied?

After asking the organizers of the Oregon Manifest a question about the project’s originality, received these responses. I thought and saw comments in social channels that the project’s bikes are similar to Vanmoof and Faraday.

First from Mark Prommel, Partner & Design Director, Pensa

As designers, we at Pensa and Horse Cycles take questions of originality very seriously so I wanted to respond.

We passed all of the ends of the top tube, seat tube and down tube past their expected termination points to create four open, functional access points to the inside of the frame. Visually I think this creates a unique and fresh gesture to the frame shape that we have not seen before, especially due to the large radius bends of the seat and down tubes and the lack of connection from the seat tube to the actual seat.

What we are doing here is very new. Everything is inside. We have a fully wired and lit, spring-loaded rear aluminum rack that is retractable and disappears into the frame with the touch of a button. An integrated bungee system is then built into the curved seat tube along with a retractable fender. In the front two ports we have USB charging and lighting. Our lighting glows through a custom laser cut pattern in our frame.

The concept of Merge is that at any moment it can be stripped down to a minimal urban ride with nothing attached. We believe this is a unique concept, both visually and functionally, that we haven’t seen executed before.

Here are a few shots of Merge that I believe illustrate the unique look and functions of the bike.

Merge

The rest of the shots are in a G+ gallery

Then Chris Harsacky, Partner, at HUGE wrote

I think these two designs are very far apart in overall form and function.

Our main aesthetic goal was to achieve a symmetrical frame to balance the front and rear connection areas. I think its pretty unique in shape, function, and construction method. Here’s actually some of the early sketches that inspired the final direction.

sketch

Design sketches made during the project

MERGE with charging pocket and USB

As Patrick wrote yesterday, “They said, ‘ultimate,’ remember?”

Perhaps an approach in the next episode of their show would consider iterating ideas? Like a Project Runway challenge, a Tim Gunn-type would take a team of agency designers to QBP’s warehouse with a budget, and a shopping cart. Then out the other side, their task is to bring an affordable, desirable utility bike to market, and not another unworkable, impractical design.

Vanmoof

A potato-gun top tube is a distinctive Vanmoof design

Taco from Vanmoof also responded.

At VANMOOF we set ourselves the goal to design the perfect urban commuter bike, exactly the designs challenge of the Bike Design Project. We thinks it’s great to see some similarities with VANMOOF in all the five models. We see most of the five design teams focusing on the integration of parts and accessories, just like we did with the lights, lock, carriers and electronics. We are happy to see that these American design teams see the same needs for urban commuter bike as we did, it confirms our thought that the demand for VANMOOF bikes will further increase in the USA.



Syntace FlatForce Stem

Syntace FlatForce Stem

A couple of years ago, Germany’s Syntace introduced their FlatForce low-profile stem; I wrote about it then .

Since the mid-1990s, rider preference for handlebar height has been creeping higher, but the larger wheel standards and ever taller suspension forks often exclude the possibility of running a lower handlebar height whatever an individual might choose. This is especially true for shorter XC riders. Even with a steep stem turned upside-down, the generally short length of stems on today’s mountainbike geometry limits how much vertical change can be affected. Syntace’s FlatForce stem lowers the handlebar more than other stems because 1) it has a -17deg angle from the steerer tube 2) the bar clamp is vertically offset so that the bar center sits below the the median of the extension and 3) the steerer clamp is a remarkably short 27mm stack (most stems are at least 40mm stack). All these features are combined in a lightweight, sleek design that would not bring shame to the aesthetics of even the best high end frames.

The FlatForce stem weighs a respectable 138gr (77mm length), while its stout clamps and broad extension make the FlatForce resolutely stiff. Another unusual characteristic, the FlatForce stem uses M6 titanium bolts tightened by a 5mm Allen wrench, when most comparable quality stems have gone to M5 bolts, often with the fashionable Torx-25 heads. I suspect many riders and mechanics will appreciate the conveniently sized bolts on the Syntace. The FlatForce is available for around $110-140 and in lengths 44-111mm.

I installed the FlatForce on my 2014 Giant XTC Advanced 27.5, from Woodinville Bicycle. It has been a long time since I last had a real mtb, but my handlebar height is about the same even though I have gone from 26” to 27.5” (650B) wheels with almost twice the suspension fork travel (63mm to 100mm).

In next month’s volume of our downloadable magazine, you can read about my leaping into 100mile mtb race with a pocketful of pancakes and no training.

Syntace FlatForce Stem

Syntace FlatForce Stem

Syntace FlatForce Stem

Syntace FlatForce Stem



Oregon Manifests Nothingness

OM Bike

The manifested, Kickstarted Faraday in production as seen at Sea Otter

By Patrick Brady, the chief judge for the North American Handmade Bicycle show, a Bike Hugger magazine contributor, and the publisher of Red Kite Prayer.

Ed note: when the press release for the latest batch of Oregon Manifest’s (a heavily-promoted design contest) bikes arrived in my inbox, I was troubled by the visual echoes of previous winners and the Vanmoof. Discussed it quite a bit with industry insiders, saw commenters mention it, exchanged email with the organizers and designers, and Patrick recalled his time judging NAHBs… Here’s his take.

Our world is changing. The economy of our parents, where people worked for a company for 40 years, got a gold watch and then lived well on a pension is effectively history. The nature of the jobs we do and how we do them is evolving faster than some of us can manage. Five years ago no one was talking about social media and now every corporation on earth has a social media director. Go figure.

How we get from place to place is changing as well. Witness the rise of services like Uber. Even the car itself is changing, for good reason. Fossil fuels are going to go extinct the way the source of those fossil fuels (dinosaurs) did. At some point in the future, we are going to be without our beloved, gas-sucking cars. We are likely to have electric cars, but from our current vantage, it’s hard to know how the automotive landscape will appear in 20 years. It may be that many of us who currently own cars won’t.

To many of us, the bicycle is an obvious answer to many of our needs. It is the single most efficient mode of transportation man had devised. It uses no fossil fuels (unless you count your own imminent mortality), takes up little space when in motion or at rest and can be accessorized to carry a load, say a bag of groceries, or two.

Sketchy

HUGE sketch

However, most bicycles sold today are meant for pleasure riding, not service. Chances are, if the bicycle is to augment our transportation needs in the future it will need to offer levels of convenience and utility that recall a car, though we may have to forego the windshield wiper and iPod jack. They will need to accommodate loads beyond ourselves. We will not stop needing groceries and if the human race is to survive, we will need to keep making babies. So at minimum, any bike we expect to augment or replace a car will need to some capacity to carry groceries and kids. I can hear it now—“Don’t make me pull this bike over.”

Clearly, we need fresh ideas about what a bike is, what a bike can be. Enter the Oregon Manifest.

The Oregon Manifest started out with a clear mission: It was “a design/build competition to create the ultimate modern utility bike.” That’s a laudable endeavor, full stop. That’s exactly what we need.

The Manifest served multiple functions. First, it gave a bunch of very creative frame builders license to go pursue some wild ideas. It posed the question: What is your idea of the ultimate utility bike? Utility is not a constant. When I was 20, the most important thing I might move by bike was beer. I’m a parent now; I like to move my kids by bike.

The next thing the Manifest did was to create a megaphone for these builders to show that they were capable of making more than racing-oriented road and mountain bikes. It gave them a way to show they were capable of fresh ideas, and it did so in a relatively low-risk setting. The Manifest, in bringing together a bunch of builders, created a forum to talk about custom bike making and utility. It was a marketing bonanza for a bunch of people much better at the torch than the keyboard.

And so it went for a couple of years. In 2011, I was serving as one of the judges for the North American Handmade Bicycle Show in Sacramento. Many of the bikes from that year’s Manifest made their way into the City/Utility bike category. I was unaware at the time that the bikes had been built for the Manifest, not NAHBS, and I struggled to fathom the wealth of entries. It proved to be one of the toughest categories to judge.

From Tony Pereira’s electric-assist city bike to Curtis Inglis’ kid-carrying cargo bike, the 2011 Manifest was full of creative builds using widely available materials.

There was just one problem. Those bikes were all custom, one-off creations. And while they were fantastic bikes that would easily become family heirlooms for the purchaser, they were effectively only prototypes that were wildly unaffordable for most of the population. They were perfect for NAHBS, but they weren’t going to solve any of the world’s problems.

If we are to address the needs of the many, that massive population spread from Maine to Mojave, then at some point, new bike ideas will need to collide with reality. By that I mean making frames in a mass-production environment, banging out dozens of frames per day in a factory setting so that the production costs can be more easily managed. Sorry folks, but making the donuts ain’t sexy.

At some point I’d hoped the Manifest would do more to encourage practicality over cool. Don’t get me wrong, I’d maim, if not kill, to have Inglis’ Retrotec he showed at the ’11 Manifest, but unless we find a way to produce 100,000 of those per year, we really haven’t done anything but engage in a self-congratulatory build-off.

And so when I saw a post on Facebook about this year’s entrants in the Oregon Manifest, I realized that whoever is now running the show there must be more interested in partnerships and synergies than really addressing a transportation problem.

They’re hooked in with Levi’s and Fast Company. Fine. But all those one-man bike builders that made the 2011 edition an overdose of amazing? That’s been overthrown in favor of what was a small feature of the ’11 Manifest: design teams paired with a single builder. Now it’s five teams each representing a different city—Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Seattle and, yes, Portland. Why just five teams? And why does what city they are in matter? They claimed they were “bike heavy cities.” Do tell, how is Chicago a more bike-heavy city than, say, Los Angeles or Philadelphia?

Nevermind.

It’s easy to conclude from the fact that the designers outnumber the builders by more than five to one that this competition is long on style and short on substance.

There are ways to address this. Hosting a contest in which design teams who have never worked in the bike industry before design bikes is the wrong way to go. Why couldn’t they have approached design teams at actual bike companies? I’m sorry, but dressing like a hipster and posing for a black and white photo and listing Google as a previous client does nothing to establish your bona fides within the bike world.

Problems I saw with the entries were numerous. Some used difficult-to-replicate curved tubing. The Pensa/Horse Cycles entry employed a size-limiting seat mast. The HUGE/4130 Cycle Works bike had a 90-degree seat tube angle, which meant the bike would fit a narrow range of people—same problem as the Pensa/Horse Cycles bike. The Minimal/Method Bicycle entry had some fillet brazing, which is arguably the slowest possible means of building a bicycle frame—now there’s a way to run up production costs.

The HUGE/4130 Cycles Works bike featured a front rack mounted to the frame, rather than the fork; this is an old idea that every experienced builder has abandoned because it shares in common with Justin Bieber’s ego the fact that when loaded both are virtually unmanageable. Only one of the entries—the Denny—embraced electric-assist technology. Maybe these design teams haven’t seen the obesity stats for this place called America.

More insidious is how the HUGE/4130 Cycle Works entry looks rather like the Faraday created by Ideo/Rock Lobster that won the People’s Choice Award in ’11. It also recalls the Dutch city bike by Vanmoof, a point driven home in a recent post by the Bike Snob Aren’t design teams supposed to be overflowing with original ideas?  It suggests the Manifest is maybe nothing more than an echo chamber; at minimum they should give a shout out to their influences.

There are real problems to be solved if you hope to “create the ultimate modern utility bike.” I’ve been writing about cycling for more than 20 years and have worked for manufacturers in the past, so permit me to make a list of some of the priorities, based on my experience.

The rider’s needs:

  1. The bike needs to be practical. It needs to be able to carry loads appropriate to your life. For some, that’s groceries, for others that may include kids.
  2. The bike must be efficient. It needs to have sufficient gearing to allow you to arrive at a destination without looking like you just walked out of a gym. An electric assist isn’t a bad idea.
  3. The bike must fit. It needs to be comfortable to pedal around and your weight must be distributed adequately so that it handles well in turns.
  4. The bike must be relatively light. It needs to be light enough that you can ride it up a hill with a load.

So that’s one set of priorities. But to meet those and really solve some problems, there’s another set of priorities and needs that ought to be addressed.

The production needs:

  1. The bike must be easy to produce.
  2. It needs to be quick to weld together in a factory setting. To keep costs low, the frame design should require a minimum of new tooling for production. Wild curves and bends can be difficult to reproduce consistently and increase production costs, so most of the tubing should remain straight.
  3. The bike must be reliable. It needs parts that will last through daily usage, but that’s not all. The parts should be widely available so that if one breaks, you don’t have to wait two weeks for a new one to arrive.
  4. The bike must use no more tubing than is necessary. It needs to be light (see #4 under rider needs) so that it is easy to pedal. More tubing means more weight and more welds and more to align and more time spent in production, and more cost.
  5. The bike must be no more expensive than is necessary. Look, a great utility bike that can carry kids and groceries, and has gearing enough to get a rider home will never be cheap, but getting millions of people on utility bikes means making sure they are as affordable as possible, and right now that means overseas production, not some dude in an industrial space in Brooklyn.
  6. The bike must fit as many people as possible. While it’s possible that multiple family members might use a single bike, the greater reality is that the more one-size-fits-all a bike can be, the easier production is and the easier stock control and planning are for the retailer.

The economic pressures we face from the future are significant. Rising fuel costs and the impact of pumping more exhaust into our atmosphere will make producing goods overseas increasingly unattractive. We would do well to undertake an examination of how to mass-produce utility bikes here in the United States. Unfortunately, labor is the single biggest cost in producing a bike, and welding a frame and assembling a bike are considerably more difficult skills to impart than how to put toilet paper on the shelf at Wal-Mart.

If I haven’t been blunt enough, I apologize. I will rectify that now. These design teams wouldn’t have lasted a month at Apple. They would have been personally fired by Steve Jobs. When we think of great design, no one will argue that the iPhone is a rare achievement. It’s Brazilian-model attractive. It’s more versatile than a Swiss Army. No, the whole damn army, not just the knife. It’s more affordable than a college education and has taught an entire generation how to text and chew gum at the same time. Not one of these bikes approaches that level of utility and affordability. The ultimate utility bike should fit more people, handle better, carry more, be easier to produce and cost less than any of these bikes. And it should still be beautiful. They said, “ultimate,” remember?

What we need is a coalition within the bike industry to seriously take on the goal of producing several different models of utility bike domestically. Solving this problem will require people who have worked in production. By that, I mean people who have had to build things over and over on a daily basis, logistics people who have figured out how to source needs as locally as possible and purchase only enough to last for the next 60-90 days, and product managers who have spec’d bikes to simultaneously manage performance and price so that they can include a disc brake on a bike without causing the retail price to rise by $50. Finally, they will need to be backed by a sales team that knows the market, understands the principles of bicycle retailing and can work with retailers to make sure that once built, you can actually find the damn thing for an affordable price in a bike shop in your town.

Of course, without talented PR people behind such an effort, there’s no chance that Fast Company will report on it. That’s okay; if you solve a real problem, you don’t need a PR agency for the world to take note.



Page 5 of 1204 pages ‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 7 >  Last › | Archives

1 Comments

To comment

Or with us.





Advertise here

About this Entry

Find more recent content on our home page and archives.

About Bike Hugger