worst designed bike ever?

[Jussa]

Re:

Sorry someone say URT's, well having owned a few now, and using my Orange X1 in Mountain Mayhem, I personally found it handled really well and was a joy to ride. I agree not everyones cup of tea, and I know the X1 has often been reffered to as the Marmite bike (You either Love it or Hate it). And personally I think it is a really smart looking bike

 

[munkey_bwy]

Re:

I've got to agree with everyone's comments regarding the Dirt article. If you read it all, that person really doesn't have a clue or they were writing what their boss told them to write to sell magazines.

 

[Adruzzz]

If you've never seen a URT then you must be blind, are you perchance typing with a braille keyboard :shock:

Admittedly you mainly see them as BSO's today but that makes them the single most common suspension bike design there is !

I haven't got a clue what URT is to be honest... thought it was a type of milk, but having googled it I did see this:

 

[Bats]

"Unified rear triangle". Basically the bottom bracket is part of the swingarm, meaning that as soon as you start pedaling the bike becomes a pogo stick as your weight shifts from being on the saddle and suspended, to on the swingarm and unsuspended. Stand up and pedal and it stops working entirely.

Naturally the suspension of choice for ninety quid tat from halfords.

 

[Adruzzz]

Re:

Sounds like a brilliant idea :facepalm:

 

[Thias]

Problem is: That is not true. This is what people think those bikes would handle. I thought that, too. Before I actually tried a few.
So I am talking about Mantra and Szszbo.

As you start pedalling, not much happens to the height of the saddle. As long as your rebound dampening is well adjusted and working correctly. Standing up stiffens the suspension. But it is definitely still working. The difference here, between standing and sitting, depends on the position of the pivot. So you can't just say "all URTs stop working when blahblah.."

In fact if you use a good dampener, that stiffening up will help you very rough terrain to avoid bottoming out the rear. Or in different words: You can have the suspension in a very soft setting for going up (witch is good for my back...) while not loosing any pedalling force to the suspension. Going down, the suspension is much stiffer when standing so it does not bottom out. And it is still working.


On the other side I tried a Giant 4Banger (4link suspension) on the same trails. The Dampener was not correctly adjusted and it was a mess, as long as I was going upwards. Pogo stick when pedalling, catapult when breaking hard. But to be fair: Those rocks and roots in the rougher parts of the trail seemed to disappear into the ground compared to my other bikes. But those rough parts are usually worth 2% of my biking time, so...

Conclusion for me: A good dampener, set up correctly for your weight and riding style is of much importance. The frame design very much depends on the style of riding. You cant just say one is shit and the other is not. One is better for downhill, one is better for CC and the other is for freeride...

 

[al]

If you've never seen a URT then you must be blind, are you perchance typing with a braille keyboard :shock:

Admittedly you mainly see them as BSO's today but that makes them the single most common suspension bike design there is !

I haven't got a clue what URT is to be honest... thought it was a type of milk, but having googled it I did see this:

I'd like to try that.

The reason URT gets so much bad press these days is the way bikes are now used! It seems to me a bike is now designed to plough through the terrain rather than be guided in and around it. A URT makes perfect sense when you use it for it's intended purpose... Gone are the days we had different machines for different applications more's the pity. Also while I'm on my high horse, how the f*ck do people think we got here without small companies and designers taking risks and playing with designs? ''Those Wright Brothers aye, have you seen the state of that aircraft they built'' ''They should have built a Eurofighter, they are far better'' bloody idiots, go and complain about sh*t bikes somewhere else... I like sh*t bikes, because they are blessed with something most of these new stamped out 'me too' far eastern tat aren't, the whiff of human endeavour and faith in risk taking.

There... I've said my bit, let me hear no more about it.

And no you can't have your bloody ball back!!


al.

 

[catf]

Re:

in theory a sweet spot urt designs like the mantis or szazbo should still work out of the saddle to a certain extent. pretty sure i read somewhere that the mantis was originally conceived to have rigid forks.

i think in context urt designs were mainly a response to the amp rear end frames, original ground controls and manitus, etc which had serious pedal bob and/or lateral rigidity issues, but the marketing departments had to have full sus models in teh range no matter what, so urt was born as the way to get with the fashion without scaring ppl about sloppy rear ends.

the later fsr, and other 4 bar linkage designs sorted that so urt shouldnt really have lasted past 97/98. imo most designs are no more effective than a suspension seat post.

speaking of pedal bob and rigidity issues, i vote for the trek 9000 suspension design. you can almost hear the engineer saying "that'll do"

 

[Adruzzz]

Re:

So it seems they get a bad reputation due to how they're set up? sounds like I need to try one myself before saying anything else about them

 

[catf]

Re:

if we are talking bikes in general and not just mtb, i give you the giant revive semi recumbent abomination. cool wheels though