La Bourde

Another good video, with some nice tunes (Mars Red Sky ) "Who needs a new bike? I don't"

Yes, the pressure sounds for me too low too! Normaly I ride 1,8 bar (about 26 psi, not sure how precise is my pump too) and that is perfect with the Holyroller for my weight (65kg, ~145 pounds): enough support and a good enough snake byte protection. I don't ride like a pure street/trial rider, mixing BMX tricks to trial. I will say I love more the competition trial approach (i.e. going over ostacles), but I still love to manual and bunny with the bike. But I won't do a footjam tailwhip or something like that. One of my favorite riders is Rowan Johns (with Ali C, Chris Akrigg) With the insert and 1,8 bar, I had the impression the tyre doesn't deform anymore. I don't like to ride with a tyre too hard, it is much more complicated on some obstacles. I will try with a higher pressure (1,5? so about 22psi) than the one I had previously (1.3). Riding 1.3 bar felt amazing though! I agree with you, the Cushcore solution seems to have a better design. The tyre roll is still present with the Tannus for sure. But it is already a little better than a tyre with a 2-ply carcass. And yes, I think you are right, the foam brings a puncture protection by preventing direct contact between innertube and the edge. So it is definitely not the best solution in term of protection. A cushcore solution with tubeless will be better in this regards I think (but it is more expensive, more difficult to install and so on... everyone has his own preference). But I was also very suprised how good the puncture protection was on the hits while gapping too short without angle. It is much much better that with the Holyroller. As I wrote in the title, this is more an experiment for me. And for 20 bucks, that is fine and I am still happy with the results! Let's test further! (and if I get disappointed, I will put the innertube above the Tannus amour. Will be a cheap version of Cushcore then )

Today I had my first snake bite. I was trying to get up on a stone using a pedal kick and I did not reach the top completely. My tire hit the sharp edge with an angle with all my weight on it. So it is not perfect. Two good things though: I inspected the insert at home for damage or sign of compression and could not find one. I rode only 4 times with the insert,but I had already some really bad landings with. I was able to put the tyre back on the rim without tyre lever this time. Also I noticed a drawback using the insert. The tyre deformes during a manual in a turn. Somehow the tyre feels like it collapses. I will continue with the insert, as I am still very satisfied with.

So I rode yesterday and today with the insert in my rear tyre. I switched from a Maxxis Holy Roller 2.4 to a Schwalbe Table Top 2.25 + Tannus Amour (on a DT swiss EX560 rim, innerwidth 30mm). The installation was not too difficult. It is important to place the insert correctly so you have to take your time for that. I had to use some tyre levers (wil have to carry them in my bag), I think without it was not possible to put the tyre back on the rim. After the installation, I was really surprised how stiff the tyre was without any pressure at all. I had the impression I could almost ride like this! The insert + Table top weight more than the Holy Roller, but no big difference. I put 1,6 bars, the pressure I really like with the Holy Roller, but I directly noticed, that the tyre was much too stiff/hard. Like riding with 3 bars! So I reduced to about 1,3 bar. It still feels somehow stiff and "dead". My first impression is very positive. First of all, I had no puncture when I was too short on some tranfers - I expect I would have at least one puncture on one of the missed attempts with the previous setup.The bike felt really controlled, like riding with low pressure. One thing I noticed is also the lack of rebound on small hops, the bike did not feel so lively. It was not the case when using the edge of an obstacle though. I am not sure everyone will like this feeling, but for me it is fine. In addition, I gapped better that I do normaly. I think this is mostly due to my brain knowing I won't get a puncture :-) Maybe also the low pressure, giving more control. I will continue to test this setup but currently I really appreciate it.

I tried tubeless 2 or 3 times on my enduro or dh bike. I like sealant for the puncture protection it gives for sure. But I had once the problem that the tyre moved and released pressure. Later on I hit a stone so hard that the tubeless tyre was cut and could not be repaired. The sealant was spread on the trail. I know some kind of bio sealant is available, but still I prefer to have a tube. Using sealant, you will not change your tyre as you will using a tube. It is aso a little more complicated to install and your tyre get "dirty". In addition, you have to check regularly that the sealant did not dry out. You need some special tool in some cases, that you need to carry with you. Overall it might work better than a tube, but to me there are some drawbacks I do not want (more maintenance, can't swap tyres, etc.) Will see how long the Tannus hold before they get packed down.

In addition I think the Cushcores will better prevent the tyre to blurp. But they are expensive and I don't know how long they will last under a regular trials use. I don't want to go tubeless. I don't like sealant. That is why I ordered the Tannus (+ the low price). To save some weight, maybe I can combine them with Schwalbe Aerothan. Two friends told me they want to try them.

Hi, An old idea I had: making my own bashguard out of a plastic part. I like my current Inspired bashguard.I had to modify it so that it fits my XTR cranks too (XTR on a street trial bike, what a decadence) But it is definitively strong and looks great. Unfotunately it makes some mark or breaks some edges of the street furniture. Street/trial is already not well accepted, so I though I have to find a solution. I used a cutting board, that costed me 3€. I will give it a try today! Did you make your own bashguard? How does it looks like?

Hi everyone, Today Yohan Triboulat posted a vlog (in French, sorry) about the new setup of his Inspired Hex 2021. He said he uses a Tannus Armour for 3 months now and he is really happy now. That is why he did not want to try the tubeless setup delivered with the bike (He was surprised that the Hex was delivered with a tubeless kit, nice done Inspired!) I want to change my rear tire for several months now, but my favorite one, the Holy Roller 26*2,4 is so difficult to find currently... I have some nice Schwalbe Tabletop 2.25 on another bike. They are really light and have basically no sidewall protection. They are almost as wide as the Holyroller. So I ordered a kit of Tannus Amour this evening (it costs around 20€ for one wheel). It weights 300g per wheel, but the Holyroller weights around 900g and the Tabletop around 600g. I never wanted to try these kind of insert, because I tought it make more sens to have a 300g heavier tire than a 300g rim protection. But the Tabletop are cheap. Unfortunatly I noticed there are no longer Tabletop on the Schwalbe website.Maybe they were replaced by the Billy Bonkers in 2021. It will be a shame, the Billiy Bonker are so narrow! (2.1) I will let you know how it works for me (I repaired 20 tubes during the lockdown, hope I won't have to do it again) Did you try something similar? How is your feedback? There are so many alternatives on the MTB market now ... (huck norris, crush core, pro core, MarshGuard FCK, rimpack, etc.)

Really unusal build! Look forward to get your feedback. I built recently an Octane One Spark, with some BMX/trials parts on it. The Spark is closer to a street/trial frame, because it is design to ride park. The bottom bracket is higher, the head angle steeper. It is really nice on the front wheel and to spin. But it is quite heavy and short ... I put a longer stem (60mm instead of 50) and I am still a little disappointed with but it looks so sweet with the BMX cranks. The fork is really heavy, I would like to find an alloy one (Inspired or an Echo). The idea was to have a cheap bike that I can use in park, street/trials and on the pumptrack (but the plan did not go that well, I ended up buying a Hope Pro 4 hub ). Let me know how your Void ride!

I hoped they were made somewhere else ... :-( Is there any street/trial 26" steel frame using a decent tubing set?

A friend owns a Jitsie and the welds look good. Welding aluminium is no longer a problem as it might have been 15 years ago. Unfortunately Echo and other brands like Creewkerz use their own "standards" on some parts. You might have to take this into consideration,as your are bound to the brand for some components (e.g. splined freewheel). My 26" bike has a rear disc and too me this is currently the best solution, quite expensive though. You need good brake pads (Trailtech , trickstuff power) and a 4 pistons caliper. Unfortunatley, a 4 pistons caliper has less space between the pads and the rotor than a 2 pistons calipers and you may bend rotors regularly (mine is no longer perfectly straight, but that is fine for my level). Good rotors can be cheap, like the Shimano SH-RT66. Another drawback is the play between brake pads and the caliper, that allows the wheel to spin slightly. You won't have this kind of play with a rim brake. I have also a BB7 + Speeddial 7 on a bike, this configuration is cheaper but the feeling of the lever is not so good. I never liked the HS33, I prefer V-brakes.

A boost hub with 9mm axle? I think it will be difficult to find a good one.

I love the look of them too. Always wanted to buy a cheap one and to ride it brakeless (but I am too bad, so it doesn't make sense) Ever saw the vienna's finest? http://www.viennasfinest.bike/rahmen/#26zoll Looks pretty simple too.

Horizontal dropouts are OK, but how many bikes have a chain tension that varies during a full rotation? Maybe this is because I always hit my bashgard, I don't know, but I never had a tension that seemed to be constant. Also the tolerances in the bike industry are often so bad ... If you ever build a Shimano crankset on a Nicolai, Morewood or Last, then you know it is possible to have cranks that spin freely.

See your point there. Now with the new directmount chainrings (Shimano, SRAM, etc), I think the 22 teeth 64mm ring in the front will be more difficult to find. But we will see if the trial brands will release some specific rings that fit those new interfaces (20/15?).

91mm seems really wide but on the picture, I have the impression the whole bottom braket shell has an offset. What was so awful with the crankset? ZS44/28.6 and ZS56/40 is the right way to go for aluminuim frame, but proprietary "standard" not!

Thanks for this answer Mark. I like when someone has a different opinion, we are here to discuss!

You know you made the bike nerd inside me really happy? I read a while ago from the guy behind ACSE that the profiles of the pawls/ratchet are really important. He said basically than a freewheel/freehub with more engagement might feel slower(or less defined) than a another one with slightly less (e.g. a "bad" 72 clicks vs a good 60 clicks freewheel). I read too, that I9 industries used the flexibility of the axle to augment the contact path between the pawls and the ratchet on their hydra hubs. To me, it sounds like you thing you have a 0.52° engagement, but at then end it feels like having a 2° engagement under your feet. In addition, C. Gugliotta, the guy behind Crewkerz, prefers to have a chain tensioner to maintain the chain tension constant. He said without chain tensioner, you will either wear your bearing quickly or you lose more than a degree of engagement. I fully agree. According to me, having a high qualitiy 72 clicks freewheel is for street/trial sufficient (or a pro ss 4 hub). There is already some play one the rear wheel due to the disc brakepads moving For trial comp riders, I think more is better, cause the drag is almost irrelevant.

Thanks for the answer. As far as I know, there is two standards for screw-on freewheel: M35 (the most common) and M30 (still used on some cheap BMX, allow to have a 13T outer shell). Using a Shimano 24mm steel axle (best design by the way), it will let you 3mm on each side to fix the freewheel. And then you have plenty of room with a 16T or even 18T outer shell. But it will required some new production tools and a big investment. Another possibitily would be to use the ratchet system (of DT Swiss) with a much bigger diameter. Maybe it would make more sense on the front, because this part of the bike has to deal with a huge load (frame around the bottow bracket, crank axle, cranks). But both are not feasible, much to expensive for the trial manufacturers, sadly.

I had also some ACS back in the days on my Koxx Cheatcode! Always getting loose, noisy, skipping ... hell on earth. Yesterday I rode with a young guy, I never met before. He was riding DJ before. I was surprised how fast he learned some street/trials moves. Then I realized how easier it should be now: the geometries are dialed, the bike parts are strong enough and easier to get, there is tons of videos and a lot of tutorials on YT ... and the freewheel/freehub are safe

Love it! Any idea on the geometry?

One thing I did not appreciate with the 135-click freewheel I bought, was that there was a HUGE drag! Does it get better after "breaking in"? I sent it back. What kind of constraints? To me it the opposite. You can't increase the size of the outer shell of the freehub to a certain limit (wheel geomerty) and the size of the axle is fix.

I won't say so. A screw on or splined freewheel has a bigger diameter (the inner diameter ist bigger than 35mm). Thus the part designer has more freedom in his design. The surface in contact could be higher too. On the other side, having a bigger steel part means much more weight (and having more surface in contact can lead to more drag - but this is negligible). Another advantage to have a bigger diameter is that the relative backlash (play) is smaller. Using the same machining precision, the bigger the pawls, the smaller the undesired tilt of the pawl will be.(better engagement, may skip less) A second problem with a freehub is the hub axle itself. You will have a huge load on it and on the freehub bearings and here again the small amount of space available makes things harder to design. So it seems that having a front screw on or splined freewheel is better. But steel is not cheap (and you have to use steel or titanium due to the forces) and machining a large steel surface even less. So the build quality of a front freewheel is often not that good compared to the one of a freehub (which is per definition an expensive part). I think too, when embedding the freewheel mecanism in the hubshell, one can use its own strength. To me, the current design of hubs (including those with 12mm axle) could be improved for trial riding. This is not possible for other mountain bike discplines because one wants a wide gear range and a small chainring. This implies that a small sprocket is required (10t or 11t with current chain standard. Having less teeth will lead to the "polygon effect"). I think having both implementations available on the market means that none has a big drawback.

I agree with you if you use thin sprockets (and it will be even worse with an alloy body). But the scratches are wide (5-6mm) on this hub and it is a steel body, as I mentioned. I have another Pro 4s, that I use now for 2-3 years for trial and the scratches are not so bad. Before I had a pro II ss and the scratches weren't that bad too. Maybe this is due to the kinetic energy, that can be much important riding street. The chain/cogs on a dj/street bike are typically 1/8" wide.

Depends if the rider is riding some street ... I bought a pro 4s from a dj/street rider and even the steel freewheel body had some deep scratches, so that I had to file them to put a cog on. Guess when one is doing 180 halfcab with 30km/h (with a bitch crank) you have almost the same torque there.