Thread: URT sucks?
View Single Post
  #5  
Old June 25th 03, 08:03 PM
Dave Stocker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default URT sucks?

"P e t e F a g e r l i n" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
|- Only active if rider remains seated (rider stands on swing arm when

out
of
|saddle) bad?

Not necceessarily.


Actually true.


Actually false. The Ibis Bow Ti is active when you are out of the
saddle. Less active than when you are seated, but active nonetheless.


Holy Cow! That monstrosity is a URT? I have never seen this thing in real
life, but I found this picture. http://www.soresaddle.com/ibisbowbi.jpeg



OK, lets define URT before we go any further. If you defined it as variable
BB-saddle distance, then yes, it would be a URT. But titanium monstrosities
are not comparable to pivot based bikes made with relatively inflexible
materials. From the fact that it is ti and a look at the layout, I think I
get the basic principal of how it works*. Calling this bike a URT would be
like cutting the seatstay out of a Scalpel or Unicoi (or most hardtails for
that matter) and redefining them as URT bikes. I would define unified rear
triangle as a pivot based bike with the BB on the rear triangle. In this
definition of URT, when you get out of the saddle, you are standing on the
rear triangle and holding on to (in a roundabout way) the front triangle.



*It appears to be a big leaf spring. When you sit on it, you add a
considerable preload and thus it is not very active. When you stand, you
are unloading that preload. It looks clever. Has anyone here ever ridden
one? Nevertheless, IMHO, it is inappropriate to label this thing URT.

-Dave


Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home