Jump to content

Target

Members
  • Posts

    102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Target last won the day on February 10 2023

Target had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Target

  • Birthday 09/16/1987

Previous Fields

  • Bike Ridden
    24"
  • Quick Spec
    Triton 24"
  • Country
    Christmas Island

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Serbia

Recent Profile Visitors

2970 profile views

Target's Achievements

Trials Monkey

Trials Monkey (2/9)

86

Reputation

  1. Echo calipers are more compact than Magura, so the chances to get into situation when your cranks are rubbing the calipers are lower. Echo calipers are also a bit lighter. The only downside is a reliability. All Echo calipers I've used lasted for about a year or two. Then they either started to leak, or the cylinders were getting stuck and had troubles with returning to initial position. Personally, I prefer Echo calipers because of their compactness and weight. But I totally get why some people hate them, Magura calipers seem to last longer. Anyway, both calipers are fine, you will hardly notice any difference.
  2. Hi everyone! It looks like plastic washers on my caged pedals (the ones between the cage and the pedal body) got damaged, and they almost fall apart. I couldn't find any option to by some spare washers anywhere. I wonder if anybody had similar problem? Can I use metal washers instead of plastic ones? What will happen if I install the cages without any washers?
  3. Doesn't look compatible with the 4-bolt mount
  4. Have you contacted the manufacturer first? Maybe they'll be willing to get you a replacement.
  5. Definitely, at some point when I get used to the new geo and do something worth filming
  6. I'm not a big fan of the look of the Extention fork too. Purely from aesthetic point of view, I'd prefer the Crewkerz one with straight thinner legs. But functionally, I'm 100% satisfied with the Extention fork. Those bulky forms make it really stiff. And it does the job of shortening the wheelbase. So I just accept the look as it is. Partially, it's a matter of getting used to. BMX racing carbon forks or 90's Monty's forks also look controversial, if you got used to the look of today's trials bikes. I haven't tried the Crewkerz fork. The wheelbase should be about 1072 mm if I install it (12 mm more than now), which is noticeably longer and a little bit too much, based on my experience with other forks and headsets. But it would be interesting to compare these two forks in terms of stiffness and flex, I'm curious if one can tell a difference between them.
  7. Idea I wanted to try a front disc brake on my Gu 24", so I installed a Crewkerz 26" disc fork. But I've faced an unexpected issue. The Gu is long for a 24" bike, and I always thought it would be way cooler if it was shorter. But it turned out that it's even longer with the new fork: the wheelbase I measured was a massive 1081 mm. That's more than some 26" bikes have, and that was way too much for my dream bike. So I started thinking of ways to shorten the wheelbase. Fork with small offset One way to shorten the wheelbase could be to get a fork with less offset. I found out that the offset of the Extention carbon fork is only 20 mm (compared to 35 mm for Crewkerz), so I ordered it. The only downside was the height of the fork - 415 mm, which is 10-15 mm more than usual, and this extra height actually makes the wheelbase longer than it would be with the same offset and standard height. Angled headset There's also a thing that's widely used on mountain bikes to play with the geometry and make the head angle slightly slacker - the angled headset. I've only found one compatible with the integrated tapered headset found on Gu - 9point8 Slack-R 1.6°. I planned to install it backwards to make the head angle steeper (74.6° instead of 73°), therefore making the wheelbase shorter. There was also a similar drawback as with the fork - extra height has the opposite effect on the wheelbase. Front end height The taller fork and angled headset add a total of about 40 mm to the distance from the stem to the front axle. I've compensated for this using a lower stem and rotating the bar forwards (downwards actually compared to my previous setup). After a few experiments with different bar positions, it now feels exactly the same as on my previous Gu (one with a normal fork and headset) relative to BB and rear axle, only the front axle position feels different. Wheelbase with upgrades: expectations and reality According to my calculations, installation of the angled headset would shorten the wheelbase by 8 mm, and the Extention fork would shorten the WB by 12 mm (compared to the Crewkerz fork). So in total the wheelbase should be 20 mm shorter. In reality: the wheelbase of the complete bike turned out to be 1060 mm, which is 21 mm shorter than with a standard headset and the Crewkerz fork. So the reality matched the expectations. I'm really happy with the result! Now the bike feels exactly as I wanted it to. But it's a shame that most trial frames don't come in different wheelbases. The BB rise is +85 mm (10 mm higher than in a standard setup because of the extra height of a fork and a lower headset cup). Disc brakes I really like how controllable, quiet and powerful good disc brakes feel on a trials bike. The only major drawback for me is the spoke/rotor flex - the main reason why 26" comp bikes don't use disc brakes. In this build I've tried to reduce the flex as much as possible. I've deliberately used the straight-pull spokes instead of butted spokes. The front hub has large flanges (both left and right) to perform well under torsional loads. The front wheel has 32 spokes instead of the usual (on comp bikes) 28 spokes. I believe that trials brake rotors should have arms in both directions in order to handle forward and reverse loads, so I've chosen the symmetric Hope TZ V2 rotors. The dropouts on my frame were not parallel to each other, that's probably the reason why even after facing the rear brake mount (using the Hope for IS mounts) the pads were not parallel to the rotor. Since a dedicated tool for facing failed in my case, I decided to use a file, and spent 7 evenings trying to face the mount manually. The result turned out to be really good, the rear brake feels very solid and controllable, noticeably better than on a previous non-faced frame. Brake levers The Trialtech lever blades are specifically designed for single finger use, and they feel really great! I suspect my brakes now feel more powerful with these blades not only because they are slightly longer, but also because they are really ergonomic. I was tired of reaching out for the allen key every time I wanted to adjust the lever, so I designed and ordered some custom made adjusters so I can adjust the brake without tools. Front 15 mm through-axle This is something standard on modern mountain bikes, but very unusual on trials comp bikes (Clean bikes have 12 mm front through-axles, and Crewkerz have 9 mm front through-axles). The obvious advantages are increased stiffness and easier wheel installation (no rotor rubbing when you reinstall the wheel because the placement with the through-axle is more precise). The only disadvantage is the weight, the axle alone weighs 72 g. Stem The attempts to commit front wheel moves with the modern technique usually left bruises on my chest from the stem bolts, so I tried to find something more chest-friendly for a new bike. This clamp found on the Clean Pro stem is much better. The only drawback is that it doesn't hold the handlebar tight enough, and I had issues with the bar rotating forward under load. This was only solved by adding some texture to the contact surface of the stem and the handlebar with hundreds of dots of superglue (completely dry before assembly). The standard bolts on the clamp were a bit too long, and they were steel, so I ordered black titanium bolts for the stem, saving 13 g in total. The headset cap bolt is aluminium. Pedals and cranks Racing Line titanium pedal cages feel grippier than aluminium ones, and shouldn't wear down, bend and lose grip as fast as aluminium cages. Removed black anodizing from the BB spacers to match the cranks! Weight: 8.00 kg To be honest, I'm a little bit surprised about the weight. On the one hand, I built a temporary version of a full disc 24" Gu with alu fork some time ago, and its weight was 7.65. For the current build, with a carbon fork, lightweight rims and tyres, some fancy titanium parts I was expecting something around 7.5 kg. On the other hand, my aim was to make a stiffer bike than before. And an angled headset, 15 mm front axle and straight spokes definitely add some weight. Riding impressions It turned out to be the most fun bike to ride I've built in a long time (even though it's the heaviest one)! The front end feels really stiff (thanks to the massive carbon fork legs and crown, tapered steerer tube and 15 mm axle). The shorter wheelbase makes the bike more playful and helps with the switches. Two disc brakes allow me to try more different things and tricks, making riding more interesting. Spec: Frame and Fork - Frame: Gu 24" - Fork: Extention Carbon disc, 15 mm through-axle Front wheel - Rim: Neon Single 35 mm - Tyre: Schwalbe Rocket Ron 2.1 - Hub: Progress Endurance 15 mm 32h Rear wheel - Rim: Neon Single 47 mm - Tyre: Schwalbe Fat Albert Rear 2.4 - Hub: Jitsie Race Disc 135 - Nipples (front + rear): Sapim Alu - Spokes (front + rear): Sapim Leader 2.0 Brakes - Front and rear: Hope Trial Zone, 180 mm Hope V2 rotors, Jitsie pads, Trialtech lever blades, custom adjustment screws Drivetrain - Cranks: Rockman 160 mm - Freewheel: Jitsie 108.9 - Chain: KMC Z1EHX - Rear sprocket: Jitsie alu 14T - Pedals: Trialtech Carthy with Racing Line titanium cages - Bottom bracket: Echo Urban Ti Steering - Stem: Clean Pro 125 mm x 24° with ti bolts - Handlebar: Clean Carbon K1.2 690 mm (107 mm rise) - Headset: Echo tapered & 9point8 Slack-R 1.6° angled headset Geo: Wheelbase: 1060 mm BB rise: +85 Chainstay length: 368 mm Headset angle (taking the angled headset in account): 74.5° Weight: 8.00 kg Some photos of the building process Chainstay protector glued to the frame Fork choice Painting the Neon Single rims matte black Some custom parts: - An adapter to fit a sloped stem onto the Extention fork - Washers for the rear Jitsie hub to use it without snailcams - Adjustment screws for Hope TZ levers Preventing the bashring from spinning
  8. I've faced some issues with the Clean Pro stem not holding the handlebar tight enough. Using the same torque as I do for other stems, even with the carbon adhesive paste the handlebar kept rotating forward under load. I think I've even seen a video of Matt Pengelly supergluing(!) the bar to the Clean Pro stem, so I suspect I'm not the only one having such issues. My solution was to add some texture to contacting surfaces of the stem and of the handlebar. I grabbed superglue and put hundreds of very small dots on the stem and the bar, let them dry out completely, and then assembled with a large amount of carbon assembly paste. The solution seems to be working, no issues during a test ride.
  9. Because of the unparallel dropouts, I had to re-face the rear brake disc mount. It has been faced before (using Hope tool for IS mounts), but apparently due to unparallel dropouts the brake pads weren't parallel to the rotor (really badly). Since a dedicated tool for facing failed in my case, I decided to use a file. It took me 7 evenings to make everything square. I'm satisfied with the result, but wouldn't recommend this to anyone, it's a nightmare to do the facing manually. I went with a method allowing me to reduce a number of variables: with only one bolt and one pad in place, I install a caliper, a wheel with a rotor, check the gap between the pad and the rotor from different points, and figure out where to file. Then I remove the caliper and the wheel, and do a really small amount of filing. Then put the wheel back. Eventually, after a lot of iterations like this, the pads become more and more parallel to the rotor. The key is not to file too much in one iteration, and be really patient.
  10. I had similar clunking noise when I first installed a rear Hope TZ with new Jitsie pads. I red on the forum that this sound will go away eventually. I kept riding and waiting, but the sound didn't go away, and it was really annoying! At some point, I kind of got used to the sound and stopped noticing it. Also the pad backings finally bed in, and the clunking stopped. I think it took about 2-3 months until the sound completely disappeared. So my point is, the easiest way to fix the issue could be just to ride more and wait for backings to bed in. It may take longer than you expect though.
  11. Appreciate all the advices, but I decided to go with tubes for now. Making a reliable tubeless setup with Neon single wall rims is too much effort. In the meantime, here's my Jitsie Race 135 mm rear hub with custom washers. These washers are beefier than Jitsie ones and have more contact area against the dropout, and they are 3 mm longer since I won't be using snailcams. It turned out that the inner surfaces of the left and right dropouts on my new frame are not parallel. It's so bad that you can barely rotate the hub by hands when both hub bolts are tightened! I had to file the washers of the hub at angle to compensate that.
  12. Speaking of bolts, there are some titanium M15 bolts that due to minimalistic design are actually lighter than aluminium Echo ones. They are short and have 10 mm hex socket. Have been using them for seven years with Echo ti BB.
  13. I've tried to setup front tubeless tyre, and it didn't go well. I've had previous experience with a tubeless setup on Hashtagg rims, and it went really smooth, haven't encountered any serious issues with it. But now I'm trying a similar setup with different rims (Neon single), and the area between the tyre and the rim leaks as crazy and just doesn't hold any air. It looks like I didn't take into account that the profile of Neon rims is completely different from the profile of Hashtagg rims. The bead area of Hashtagg rims features "shoulders" on the bead shelf, very similar to ones found on some tubeless rims. That certainly helps the tyre to hold tight, and make the seal between the tyre and the rim easy to achieve. The profile of Neon rims is conventional with round shelfs, and I think this is just the reason why I cannot make them work with tubeless setup. I guess I have two options now: 1. Trying to improve Neon rims profile using some Gorilla tape. But that doesn't look easy since bead shelfs area is pretty small. 2. Forget about tubeless with Neon rims, use tubes for now, and eventually buy tubeless-friendly Light Bicycle carbon rims
  14. Some tubeless stuff is getting ready. Tubeless rim tape. Seals all the holes in the rim. Made of a TPE resistance band. Before, I had issues with leaking air in the area between the valve and the rim tape, so this time the valve hole is made more carefully Tubeless inserts (made of backer rods) Tubeless valves. Normal tubeless valves are designed for double-wall rims, so it takes a certain amount of effort to make them compatible with a single-wall rim.
  15. Cut off the buster from the frame. Initially, I had an idea to remove the hs-33 mounts with the buster completely. But it would be difficult to make the area on the seat stays look good after cutting the mounts, since I was planning to keep the frame in the original red anodized color. So I decided that just the booster would be good enough. Angled headset installed! I'll try to use a slightly unusual chainstay protector. Made of some kind of rubber, it's here mostly to eliminate chain slap noise.
×
×
  • Create New...