trek Y-33 - New(ish) member

Well the only bike I've ever owned that broke (edit: while I owned it!) was a Kona (much beloved on this site) that had multiple pivots!

Here's hoping my Trek now proves worthy of my defence!
 
BG":3ndtwkh4 said:
Well the only bike I've ever owned that broke was a Kona (much beloved on this site) that had multiple pivots!

Here's hoping my Trek now proves worthy of my defence!

I was just about to say the same thing - its no worse than running a multi pivot frame which needs more maintenance and bolt watching.

Single Pivot = simplicity and stiffness and lighter weight.

Just not *trusting* something is different to actually having ridden one for a decent length of time and knowing how they work.

Trek wouldn't have offered a lifetime warranty for nothing - you don't see that often nowadays - certainly my Commencal only has 2 year warranty...
 
IMHO one thing I think Trek could have improved on was the design of the rear end - I've suffered chainsuck on and off on many of the bikes I've owned and really would like to own an elevated chainstay rear end to counter this - Cannondale (on some) and Marin made e-stay rear ends on their full-sus bikes single pivot bikes and the Santa Cruz Heckler also springs to mind... not sure it would have looked as nice, but....
 
BG":2ospnb7v said:
IMHO one thing I think Trek could have improved on was the design of the rear end - I've suffered chainsuck on and off on many of the bikes I've owned and really would like to own an elevated chainstay rear end to counter this - Cannondale (on some) and Marin made e-stay rear ends on their full-sus bikes single pivot bikes and the Santa Cruz Heckler also springs to mind... not sure it would have looked as nice, but....

I'll agree on that one - the earlier OCLV hardtails and aluminium frames had additional aluminium chainsuck protection plates bonded on.

The Y bikes didn't for some reason - but careful spacing on the chainset and front mech helps - I suffered much less with Hollowtech II BB's and chainsets.
 
I had a steel Trek 970 that had mount points for a plate similar to the one Ringle and Tektro makes/made. Didn't really find it worked though as it was a pain to adjust correctly - too close to the rings and it rubbed as the frame and BB flexed, move it so it didn't rub and the darn chain got caught up in it worse than not having it there.
 
Jamis Diablo":38x0t30e said:
I never trusted those one pivot monocoque frames...

Well the only bike I've ever owned that broke was a Kona (much beloved on this site) that had multiple pivots!
Here's hoping my Trek now proves worthy of my defence!

This was ment to be sarcastic, just click on my bike "Jamis Diablo" and you wil see... ;)
Love the bike!
 
Nice bike,I used to have a Fisher Joshua XO and always thought that rode really well,it had a lockout for out the saddle riding which was very useful.One thing,its either flat bar and bar ends or riser with none,bar ends and riser bars is just plain wrong!
 
Jamis Diablo":vz2fmrel said:
Jamis Diablo":vz2fmrel said:
I never trusted those one pivot monocoque frames...

Well the only bike I've ever owned that broke was a Kona (much beloved on this site) that had multiple pivots!
Here's hoping my Trek now proves worthy of my defence!

This was ment to be sarcastic, just click on my bike "Jamis Diablo" and you wil see... ;)
Love the bike!

Fair enough ;)

Have a drool over this:
504774146_74622f7744.jpg
- my one :)
 
Suss

The problem I always found with SP bikes was both Bob, pedal feedback and Brake Jack, Multi pivot four bar rides vastly better, but then all that extra weight and maintainance :evil: I know PP cans improve things a bit, but then dial in enough to matter and you lose all the plushness. For Trail and XC I still feel HT is the way to go. FR and DH Four bar.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top