High Pivot vs non High Pivot eMtb

[Hoverp]

Leo's bikes certainly are optimized for the taller rider. The bang on fr:rc in K3 proves it. He doesn't do shorter chainstays (well for the voima he didn't) for smaller bikes and the longer chainstay on K1 was sub optimal for me. I didnt like the 80° sta either. It made for a good pedal position on super steep climbs but too far forward on regular grades. 78° is a better angle i reckon. The suspension platform was good and stable at speed, but it was too long in the back for me, to wollowy and slow in the tight. But I was grinning on high speed straight line chunk.

indeed , it really excels there, the ability to hammer extremely rough high speed chunk when racing is a boon.

 

[Plummet]

I had a large claymore 29", and a large claymore mx.
If you were on a medium mx, that does explain a lot, the medium is around a 1.83 f/r ratio static, which is likely close to optimal at sag. A nice improvement vs the large frame.
A spindrift is right at 1.82 in medium.
A dreadnought v2 is 1.8 in medium, and has the same 445mm length chainstay as the spindrift. It could go longer or shorter by 10mm with the dropouts if you'd like. I agree that the drivetrain drag is a bummer with the high pivots, but as far as a pedalling platform goes, the d2 is better than the spindrift. On the 29" carbon I tried anyways. Both were better for drag and platform than the claymore. Claymore was better than both at taking the edge off of square edged chop though.
The spindrift and the d2 are actually pretty similar bikes in medium.

Summary: size specific chainstays for the win.

Cheers for that. Yep, I run a medium claymore and medium crestline S180 and M/L Trek Session.
445 chainstay in non high pivot and 460 reach is my optimal numbers. Spindrift has that. I'm pretty close on to placing an order.

 

[ntm95]

Leo's bikes certainly are optimized for the taller rider. The bang on fr:rc in K3 proves it. He doesn't do shorter chainstays (well for the voima he didn't) for smaller bikes and the longer chainstay on K1 was sub optimal for me. I didnt like the 80° sta either. It made for a good pedal position on super steep climbs but too far forward on regular grades. 78° is a better angle i reckon. The suspension platform was good and stable at speed, but it was too long in the back for me, to wollowy and slow in the tight. But I was grinning on high speed straight line chunk.

The k3 f/r ratio sucks. The k2 is less crappy, but still not great.
Unless I am missing something here ?

 

[ntm95]

Cheers for that. Yep, I run a medium claymore and medium crestline S180 and M/L Trek Session.
445 chainstay in non high pivot and 460 reach is my optimal numbers. Spindrift has that. I'm pretty close on to placing an order.

The one I tried had that dark red paint that changed in the light/viewing angle. Gorgeous bike.

 

[ntm95]

I do like the conversation, I appreciate your reply as well. It certainly good to discuss ! That being said, I do think the added weight of an eBike down low changes the ride significantly , benefit in some areas and a detractor in others. Like anything everything is a compromise . Where do you think the TeeWing Flux large will land in your ratio.

1.84 in 29" trim, large size. Which is okay given that it's going to grow a bit at sag.
Sadly their geo chart lists 10mm shorter chainstays for the mx version, which is unfortunate. Geo is similar to the size large claymore mx that I was disparaging earlier in this thread.
So the 29" version looks great, the mx not so much.

 

[Hoverp]

1.84 in 29" trim, large size. Which is okay given that it's going to grow a bit at sag.
Sadly their geo chart lists 10mm shorter chainstays for the mx version, which is unfortunate. Geo is similar to the size large claymore mx that I was disparaging earlier in this thread.
So the 29" version looks great, the mx not so much.

Isn't that controlled by the flip chip on the chain stay?

 

[slickrock]

Isn't that controlled by the flip chip on the chain stay?

Yes. You can always run 29er mode with MX rear wheel. I feel the Flux is pushing its luck with 180mm rear, distorting the geo compared to say a Crestline at 180mm (albeit non-HP) or a Rogue at 170mm.

 

[Hoverp]

Yes. You can always run 29er mode with MX rear wheel. I feel the Flux is pushing its luck with 180mm rear, distorting the geo compared to say a Crestline at 180mm (albeit non-HP) or a Rogue at 170mm.

why do you say pushing its luck, what do you mean

 

[slickrock]

why do you say pushing its luck, what do you mean

The F/R ratio gets pretty high because the CS drops below what would be considered long enough for 180mm travel bikes. Add to that, it appears that the Flux has a fixed size CS for the entire size range, so and even shorter CS for an XL you now have a 2.0 F/R ratio. Finally, we have not seen official kinematic graphs from Teewing, not to mention at different CS lengths. That said, there is a 3rd party video that attempts to draw some kinematics, but it's not clear what cs length is being used for analysis.

 

[bmwpowere36m3]

Been on the hunt to replace my current 160 mm bike and a lot of bikes in the category are mainly MX... I've only been on 29ers. I don't necessarily want a high or mid-pivot, but the Norco Sight is checking a lot of boxes for what I want in an eMTB. Plus it be fun to try both (MX and mid-pivot).

I don't want to lose maneuverability (too much reach and wheelbase), as a lot of our riding is janky and tight, but we do have steeps, steep rolls, drops, etc... and mostly punchy up/down. So average speeds are on the lower end.

Current bike has a vpp platform, 29ers and 1230 wheelbase... I'm wondering whether a slightly shorter WB mid-pivot mullet would behave roughly similar to my current bike. Maybe with the added benefit of taking the edge off square hits?