Crewkerz Jealousy 26 vs carbon bikes

[Jere_h]

After searching for current new bike options for weeks now, out of the last 3 I keep coming back to Crewkerz even though I've kind of started to hate the looks of it, probably due to everyone riding one. A custom paint job would help with that though, and I think the new 2022 (or 2012?) graphics are lame too (my personal opinion).

But the main issue is that I might want to try something shorter than most new bikes this time (coming from mk6+ echo) and the geo of the S-M size Crewkers seems like spot on, not only because of the WB but the nice and low ish BB height too. If I calculated right it should feel almost like my mk5 echo which I really like, just a bit more stack height.
I've noticed that every time I switch bikes to a longer/more radical geo, my general riding goes downhill and only backwheel control turn outs to be easier. That's not ideal really, as most of the time I'm having more issues to lift a long bike up in tight places/downward slopes/for pedalups etc, rather than keeping it on the backwheel.
Also jumping small-medium stuff on a long bike usually means jumping from further away and need to actually work more for the same move. I'm 30 now and started trials 5 years ago, my confidence and flexibility is what it is.
Honestly I don't know why there should be that extra 1.5cm of wheelbase for my riding, as I feel like I could do big enough stuff with a small bike too. Then there is the Joacim Nymann guy who makes me feel even more confident that a smaller bike is going to be enough for everything, but also more fun.

The Jealousy frame is expensive for aluminum to be honest, like two times of the Clean x2.. Also it has the most expensive features that raises it almost to the carbon level in the final price. The Jealousy would cost me almost the same as Xox Carbon bike (both custom built).
Would you say the bike is worth the hype? Is it stiffer than other alloy frames or maybe too stiff? How it compares to ride quality of carbon? (I have no idea how a carbon trials bike feels like, but on MTB it feels awesome).

I think the Crewkerz would be the most bombproof on the market at least? Wouldn't be necessarily a bad thing as lack of availability of everything is getting a bit scary these times. At the same time I'd be a bit concerned about the lifespan of a carbon trials bike, does it get soft or do they tend to snap earlier?

Are there any known issues with the Crewkerz AS30? Better go with the Clean crankset/freewheel instead? I've heard Carthy's bike creaking like crazy in some of the videos but no idea if that's just lack of maintenance.
Thinking about the mechanics, at least I can't see anything that should cause trouble there.

Overall my thoughts, 1000€ for a frame with 2015 or something design is a bit rough, but then maybe the bike just works so well.

 

[Target]

For me, the most crucial thing for riding is geometry. And other things like stiffness, weight or frame material don't affect riding that much. So if you're into short bikes, and don't like how the long bikes feel, I'd say that S-M Crewkerz is your only option since all existing carbon bikes (Maestro, Xox, Clean) are long.

Regarding the stiffness, Crewkerz feels much stiffer than the Echo MK6. And it's a good thing, because the bike feels more controllable.

As far as I know, Crewkerz is one of the most bombproof aluminium frames on the market. A lot of people are using them, but I've heard about only 3 or 4 broken frames.

[Swoofty]

The AS30 cranks WILL creak. They are my least favorite part of my Crewkerz. I have a set of Cleans on order, but they don't come in 175 (not such a big deal). Hopefully the Cleans are better.

[La Bourde]

4 hours ago, Swoofty said:

The AS30 cranks WILL creak. They are my least favorite part of my Crewkerz. I have a set of Cleans on order, but they don't come in 175 (not such a big deal). Hopefully the Cleans are better.

Good luck ...

 

My AS30 crank from Crewkerz don't creak at all.

I don't understand why people think pressfit cranks shall creak. That is such bullsh*t. It is like saying all headsets shall creak because they are also pressfit. The issue is not inherent to pressfit but to poor build quality, which is unfortunately common in the bike industry. From a mechanical point of view, pressfit is even better than thread BBs - the thread implies a slight non-concentricity.

 

Clean is maybe less expensive, but is the quality the same? If it is the case, then Crewkerz is maybe too expensive right.

 

Regarding carbon, this is a good material, if done correctly. If you take advantage of it, you can really reduce the weight and optimize the stiffness of the frame better than with other material (specific stiffness is higher than aluminium, steel and titanium). So the result can be excellent.

But it has also drawbacks: developing is really expensive, and I doubt a lot of iterations with prototypes are done in trials (due to the small market and costs involved). Recycling is really bad (basically there is nothing done by the brands currently, they just ignore the problem) and often you cannot see the damages until it suddenly fails. Unfortunately injuries with carbon are really bad (sharp edges and splits of carbon can be difficult to remove). The build quality is also really important, having a void in the frame will basically drop significantly the local stiffness of it (factor 5 to 10). And I still doubt the quality of the current MTB carbon frames is really good (you can see a lot of production video where workers do not wear gloves, mask or a hat to prevent contamination). I don't know how trial frames are done though, maybe from some specialists.

 

[Jere_h]

Compared to regular press fit like Echo, AS30 has those relatively thin cups that makes it more like a pressfit inside pressfit. That looks like a difficult design to be honest, in a trials bike at least. As far as I've seen similar thing used in MTB headsets, the alloy is somewhat on the softer/cheaper side and probably starts to live it's own life in there after a couple of rides.
That said, I've never had a creaking headset in any of my pressfit mtb frames.

So it will be probably up to build quality or installation method to begin with. Those cups can be hammered to tacos pretty easily so there is that too, in case if a proper tool has not been used.

Clean and Crewkerz cranksets costs both the same for me, but they really look very similar technically so I don't know.. I hate why they have to put that red anodizing on everything, and WAW has at least less of it! 

I think I've seen the bearings and cup assembly being sold separately somewhere, without the cranks, so that might be an easy try if the current set is creaking badly.

 

[aliao]

I've ridden both materials. The weight of carbon bikes is awesome, but they kind of have a "wooden" feel to them. When I went back to a Jealousy from my first gen K1, it was a pleasant surprise to me how lively the aluminum felt (which is funny, because that's what people would say about steel vs aluminum back in the day).

Carbon frames can last a long time when done right (Maestro for example), or almost certainly break within the year (Clean K1 lol). I don't think the XOX has been around long enough for anyone to really know how long it will last.

I wouldn't trust any of the manufacturer's posted geometry measurements (for example, all of the Jealousy frames were different over the years). You need to get someone that actually owns the bike to do the measurements for you. Even though the Jealousy is shorter and has a lower BB, it also (presumably) has a steeper head angle than the XOX. That's going to make a pretty big difference in how the bike will feel at the end of the day.

Regarding AS30, I had problems with the cranks creaking back in like 2016 when they first came out, I don't have issues anymore with the newer stuff. I'm not sure if the tolerances have been tightened since then or what, but I'm also now pretty meticulous when I put it together (retaining compound on the cups + lots of grease on the cranks themselves). My favorite cranks are the newer generation Crewkerz ones (the spindle on these definitely fit much tighter on the bearings, also the 2022 ones are ALL BLACK since you hate red). I inherently don't like the Clean cranks because they are 3 piece, but I've also seen more than a couple two piece AS30 cranks break when ridden by left foot forward riders.

Edited June 28, 2022 by aliao

[Jere_h]

That was pretty helpful. I've always had the impression that carbon is a bit more calm feeling material and there's the thing why I might like it more. I used to have sharp pain in my finger joints every year when starting a new riding season, but after switching to WAW carbon bars all the pain is gone. The bars geometry is one reason of course but I feel like the material has a huge effect as well, because it doesn't spring back so aggressively during impact. The pain was always related to rear wheel gaps and I could feel the alloy bars knocking my fingers every time I land, now it's gone. First thing I noticed with carbon bars was the somewhat soft, supportive but not harsh feeling which I really like. Wooden is a good word, and wood is a great feeling material.

Obviously the WAW bars are a result of great engineering and testing during the years, so it's a mature product like WAW forks. As said with the Xox, I'm not so confident at the moment. It seems like extremely burly frame even for a carbon one, but at the same time it's trying to be the lightest at 1000g in specs, so that's a bit alarming "goal" to have in my opinion. Also their so called advertising with broken english seems a bit misleading to me. Like the internal mold thing used for this frame was something completely new in bike industry, which definitely isn't as far as I know. Most likely this thing is just manufactured very cost effectively in some of the huge carbon labs like everything else these days, with very minimal prototype batches. This is just speculation and I might be wrong though.

I don't want to bash the manufacturer at the early stages, but it just seems a bit too shady atm. Also the fact that Trial-bikes (the EU retailer) was holding on weeks and over several messages to be finally able to tell me the price of the frameset, and now completely ignoring my email when I kindly asked for a discount for the forks that end up costing practically the same as WAW or Clean forks... Guess which forks I'd like to buy more as a customer sending my face towards different kinds of solid obstacles with full force.
Even though I'd love to try that nice looking carbon bike, basically I'd be a prototype tester at my own expense, not really keen.

At least with Crewkerz I can't go wrong that's for sure and the bike should last basically forever as I'm not a street TGS basher. Also pretty sure that the carbon forks do compensate a bit on the ride feel compared to 100% aluminum bike, so that might be a bit of an upgrade too together with the high end aluminum frame.
I'm a left foot forward but as long as Carthy is getting along with the same setup I'm going to be ok with that mentally. Would be interesting to know how the left side has failed and if it has been due to overtightened bolts or so.



 

Edited June 28, 2022 by Jere_h

[Canardweb]

One think you have to keep in mind is that Crewkerz frames are made from tubes that are unique to the brand and that make the frame come back in its original shape faster than any other frame. It's what gives the frame their behaviour. There is no other brand today that gives so much work into the conception of their frame in term of behaviour. Also you can't miss the latest one as the tubes thickness have been updated to make them even more reliable. Also Crewkerz after sale service is second to none. You should have no doubt at all.

[Mark W]

1 hour ago, Jere_h said:

...and now completely ignoring my email when I kindly asked for a discount for the forks...

Speaking as someone who used to work in a trials shop, the reason they probably haven't replied to your request for discount is because those kinds of emails are really annoying    

Dealing with new brands, especially "less established" brands like XOX (or whatever they're called) is almost always hassle and is probably why it's taken so long for them to get any kind of realistic pricing for you. Without naming names, a few 'new' brands tried getting TartyBikes to be their exclusive UK distros while I was there, and getting solid pricing information from them was almost impossible, especially if you're operating as a reputable shop (i.e. pay VAT to your government, properly declare imports, don't want to rely on someone flying into the country with the products you've ordered in a suitcase, etc.). It takes a long time because often their communication is insanely slow - with one brand I was trying to start stocking at TartyBikes, it took repeated emails over months just to get a mega basic price list sent over - and it seems that most of the newer brands are quite inconsistent for want of a better word. One week you think the price is X, then next it happens to be Y because there's been some arbitrary change. Most "established" trials brands have a lot to learn as it is, but these newer brands don't really have any kind of transparency or consistency so from a retailers perspective they're a nightmare to deal with. Admittedly that is part and parcel of being a shop, and part of the margin that shops make is to factor in that they have dealt with those stresses and saved the customer having to deal with them.

That said, Trial-Bikes will have gone through all of that, communicating with you about it and presumably answering questions you may have had, and then when things are potentially coming to a head you've asked for discount on a brand new product. From a shop's POV it is just frustrating to get that kind of thing, and no matter how "kindly" you word it it still comes across as a 'f**k you' whether you want it to or not. We had it a lot at TartyBikes where we'd spend ages talking a customer through their options, answering loads of questions, helping them make an informed choice, then when it'd come time to buy they'd ask for discount and if they didn't get it would go elsewhere. That was especially the case with so many brands selling direct as most of them seem to give customers a deal if they go to them and ask for anything, but naturally it's a lot easier for a brand to offer a customer money off when they're selling them direct compared to a shop selling a product they've already paid for.

All of that aside, I'd go Crewkerz every time. They're strong and the geo is reasonable. The proprietary aspects of the Jealousy suck, but that's the same for almost all of the bikes out there now. At least they use a more standard-y axle standard, whereas for the Clean you're stuck only ever using their hubs. I don't know what that XOX brand use so it may be less of an issue for them. The strength thing would be the biggest concern for me with them though. Making moulds for carbon stuff is pricey, so basically whatever their initial prototype was will be whatever is sold to the customer, just with more or less carbon laid up in it. The vast majority of trials brands do zero R&D, so you're rolling the dice with them. Although everyone seems to ride a Crewkerz these days, there are reasons for that, and them being a reliable choice is one of them. It's similar to Inspired in many ways. Again, while I was at TartyBikes we used to get customers who refused to buy an Inspired because they didn't want the bike that everyone else had, and ended up spending money on bikes that weren't as good just because they didn't say Inspired on the downtube. Most of them ultimately wound up getting an Inspired further down the line.

The Crewkerz isn't as exotic as whatever the latest carbon bike is that's everywhere on Instagram, but they're tried and tested and ride well which is what's really important.

[La Bourde]

I think while Crewkerz and all the other brands do their best for the customer (or waht they think it's the best), the trial sport is such a niche that it is difficult to push the technical boundaries. And most owners of those brands are riders themselves.

To me, I think already the current giants of the mountain bikes industry are still not taking real advantages of carbon. If you look at frames like the Last, Antidote or Unno, you will notice that they weight much less than the one from big brands. To build an Unno frame, the brand required between 20 and 50 hours (for the XC frame they said even more). It still done per hand (alternative like the Atherton bike with lugs required less time to assemble the bike, but you have to print the titanium lugs, which is crazy expensive and time consuming).

 

That is why I think the trials brand shall focus further on aluminium instead of carbon. It seems to me that the whole MTB industry is still not so far with the composite technology. How can a niche brand access to this technology? A solution will be to develop in house the technology, but as Mark said, the molds (and autoclaves) are really expensive.

And I am sure everyone will profit of use of standards instead of the proprietary stuff. But brand still don't understand that, like a lot of IT companies did not invest in open source software (but look how Microsofts opinion changed in this regard).

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by La Bourde

[Mark W]

47 minutes ago, La Bourde said:

And I am sure everyone will profit of use of standards instead of the proprietary stuff. But brand still don't understand that, like a lot of IT companies did not invest in open source software (but look how Microsofts opinion changed in this regard).

I think it's a little different with the lack of standards for trials because it basically locks in profit for the company further down the line. Looking at Jitsie, their Varial Race bike is a classic example of it. You have to use their fork because they've gone for a 1 1/4" lower not a 1.5" lower headset bearing. You have to use their front hub because they went for a non-standard hub spacing. It means that if you or anyone you sell the bike on to in future needs to replace anything on it (with those forks, you will), you're locked in to Jitsie's parts. It also worked out well for Jitsie because they didn't have to change the frame tubing at all, and didn't really have to change their hubs much either. Next to zero outlay to guarantee onward profitability is the dream for most companies, even though in this instance it comes at a cost for the end user.

Just on the weights of the more boutique carbon frames, I imagine a chunk of that will just be because the more mainstream brands are probably factoring in a larger reliability margin for their frames vs. the boutique brands? There's a much broader demographic who might be out there on a Canyon Spectral CF with a much broader range of possible levels of bike abuse, whereas someone buying an Unno is probably easier for them to define, and is less likely to be a bike abuser/destroyer. For the big brands it's probably worth having a slightly higher frame weight to not have to get as many back in warranty form, especially as the chunkier frame weight will be more or less obscured by the spec choice on the complete bike in any case.

I do agree with you in general though, nobody has really made the most out of the properties of carbon in the trials world IMO. If trials brands are as blasé about standards as they appear to be then you could go even further with the design of them, similar-ish to how Hope initially decided to create new standards on their own carbon bike.

The street trials world is even more noticeable for the lack of real innovation with carbon frames. The frames are more or less inspired by the Santa Cruz frame for Danny, and that itself was fundamentally flawed - as they've openly acknowledged. There's a lot more that could be done if you went at it with a blank canvas (and real world knowledge of the forces put through a trials frame, unlike Santa Cruz). The clearly unsuitable parts that Canyon have specced on their complete bike don't fill me with confidence about their understanding of trials either.

[Jere_h]

Mark, I totally get what you mean with "those kinds of emails", but this wasn't exactly one of "those" and I should have probably described the case better as a whole.

The thing is that they already offered a 5% discount off from the frame and forks during our conversation, without me even asking. Before this I honestly didn't even realize that there could be a chance to negotiate with a trials shop. So I saw that they're clearly open for a bit of conversation about the price.
Also I was making it pretty clear that I'm really interested and not just asking.

There has not been an official release of the frame on their site yet, so that added to the weird delay in price information gave me a signal that they haven't decided yet what the final price is going to be, and might very well try to take a slight advantage of the current bad stock situation of any competing product.
I came to that conclusion, because they're simply asking a top tier price for a yet no-name Chinese brand forks with zero feedback available, when the Crewkerz or Clean forks can be pre-ordered already.
I love Trial-bikes as a shop and been a long time customer, but I know that they're also making business and these times suck. Which means a customer needs to be a bit careful too.

The answered reasoning behind their price was that everything is going to up at least 20% in price when the new models (Clean, Crewkerz etc.) are available again.
The logic behind this is totally reasonable knowing the situation, but I couldn't see such a price increase yet in forks or frames, that can be either pre-ordered or are still in stock. That simply makes the Xox a not so great deal for a customer really no matter how to look at it.
I don't know for sure if the shop tried to bluff in this or not, but I've seen many manufacturers/shops in other areas clearly grabbing the opportunity and increasing prices prematurely just to make some extra profit.

..So I decided to give a honest feedback by asking if they can make the price to the level that I (or anyone) would actually want to purchase those Xox forks instead of the world's best carbon forks.. With the latter you get warranty and everything...
At that point I also said that I'm good with the frame price and would like to proceed on that part, but seems like this was too much.

Dealing with small shops in my country I've never felt like as a customer I should be extra careful to ask questions regarding anything about an expensive product that I'm genuinely buying, generally they are very open minded. But that doesn't mean it's all good to spontaneously go and ask a stupid cheap discount for a well priced product.
In the Xox case, there is a mismatch in price. And I'm typically a customer who forgets the price and goes for what feels like an interesting product.

Whatever, pulled a trigger and preordered the Crewkerz. Less stress in so many ways for the next few years, a right minded manufacturer which I like to support and the lovely geometry before anything else.


 

Edited June 28, 2022 by Jere_h

[La Bourde]

1 hour ago, Mark W said:

I think it's a little different with the lack of standards for trials because it basically locks in profit for the company further down the line. Looking at Jitsie, their Varial Race bike is a classic example of it. You have to use their fork because they've gone for a 1 1/4" lower not a 1.5" lower headset bearing. You have to use their front hub because they went for a non-standard hub spacing. It means that if you or anyone you sell the bike on to in future needs to replace anything on it (with those forks, you will), you're locked in to Jitsie's parts. It also worked out well for Jitsie because they didn't have to change the frame tubing at all, and didn't really have to change their hubs much either. Next to zero outlay to guarantee onward profitability is the dream for most companies, even though in this instance it comes at a cost for the end user.

And at the end, because they did not change the tubing that much, the user has no advantage of it in term of stiffness, only the drawbacks to have proprietary stuff. But you can read "tapered" in the specs.

 

1 hour ago, Mark W said:

Just on the weights of the more boutique carbon frames, I imagine a chunk of that will just be because the more mainstream brands are probably factoring in a larger reliability margin for their frames vs. the boutique brands? There's a much broader demographic who might be out there on a Canyon Spectral CF with a much broader range of possible levels of bike abuse, whereas someone buying an Unno is probably easier for them to define, and is less likely to be a bike abuser/destroyer. For the big brands it's probably worth having a slightly higher frame weight to not have to get as many back in warranty form, especially as the chunkier frame weight will be more or less obscured by the spec choice on the complete bike in any case.

Your point is valid I think. I am not sure how a boutique frame layup is taylored to fit the customer needs or whishes though. As far as I know, there was only one size available for the first Unno frame. The Atherton bikes seems to use the same tubing, only their length and the lugs differ.

Do not forget that a chunkier frame bad dimensioned will also fail ... maybe somewhere else though. But I agree with you, I think big brands try to play safe here.

To me the main problem is scalability. Being a manual process, laying up the carbon fiber into a mold cannot scale up properly without quality issues, or the cost will be enormous.

Another problem is that a composite faulty frame cannot be recycled or down-cycled. It just goes to trash. So if you establish an adequate quality control, the faulty parts cannot be reused and cost you even more money (trash). This is not the case with aluminium frames, that can be down-cycled (and I think it happens really in the industry). It is not easy to check against voids and even less to judge whether they will really be a problem or not.

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by La Bourde

[Jere_h]

Just saying, out of the bigger brands, Santa Cruz being particularly interesting because all of their bikes are generally mocked by being a bit on the heavy side, even the higher end CC carbon models. But they are purposely putting reliability over weight weening as the brand imago is always going to be more or less a trasher's all-terrain machine style of thing.
I've owned two different generations of alloy 5010s and now a CC carbon Tallboy, and can confirm that they are like overbuilt tanks, especially the 2019 alloy 5010. Super stiff bike and a bit harsh to ride too, but bombproof and feels like absolute quality.

That said, one guy on instagram broke the rear end of his alloy 5010 by doing fairly beginner trials stuff (I think). Got replaced under warranty of course, but it really happens.

As a trials sidenote, it's kind of funny by the way, how a Crewkerz is considered as boring bike even though that thing has probably the most exotic frame tubing/welding/design ever and all these carbon bikes are basically just typical carbon and nothing too special under the hood.

[Mark W]

2 hours ago, Jere_h said:

There has not been an official release of the frame on their site yet, so that added to the weird delay in price information gave me a signal that they haven't decided yet what the final price is going to be, and might very well try to take a slight advantage of the current bad stock situation of any competing product.
I came to that conclusion, because they're simply asking a top tier price for a yet no-name Chinese brand forks with zero feedback available, when the Crewkerz or Clean forks can be pre-ordered already.
I love Trial-bikes as a shop and been a long time customer, but I know that they're also making business and these times suck. Which means a customer needs to be a bit careful too.

The answered reasoning behind their price was that everything is going to up at least 20% in price when the new models (Clean, Crewkerz etc.) are available again.
The logic behind this is totally reasonable knowing the situation, but I couldn't see such a price increase yet in forks or frames, that can be either pre-ordered or are still in stock. That simply makes the Xox a not so great deal for a customer really no matter how to look at it.
I don't know for sure if the shop tried to bluff in this or not, but I've seen many manufacturers/shops in other areas clearly grabbing the opportunity and increasing prices prematurely just to make some extra profit.

..So I decided to give a honest feedback by asking if they can make the price to the level that I (or anyone) would actually want to purchase those Xox forks instead of the world's best carbon forks.. With the latter you get warranty and everything...

That makes a little more sense in terms of asking for discount  
Do you know if they've received the frame kits yet, but just haven't put them on the site? Or are they still waiting to receive them? If they're still waiting, it's possible they're waiting for the customs invoice so they know how much they have to factor in from that. From memory, there's a huge anti-dumping tax that companies in the EU have to pay for importing goods from China - it was 50% when we used to pay for orders from Echo, which as you can imagine adds a significant cost increase to a shop placing an order. That was on top of the VAT and the normal customs duties. A lot of brands we dealt with in China aren't exactly great at entering customs information correctly, so you never really know what you're going to get in that regard. Most Chinese brands will also want to be paid in USD, so the timing of that payment for retailers located in countries that don't use USD can impact the price of things too once the exchange rate is factored in.
On that note, some of the brands we made contact with but ended up not working with charge much more than you'd expect for products. They don't appear to factor in the shipping costs, customs duties/import taxes or VAT/TVA, so often set some super unrealistic retail prices compared to their trade prices. They will simply add X% to the trade price and assume that that means the retailer will make that as a margin on the product, but that isn't how business actually works if you operate legally. This has the result that a brand with no reputation can wind up costing - at retail - similar to a brand with an established reputation once a shop adds a more realistic margin. By that I don't mean price gouging - that really doesn't happen in the trials world at the retailer end - but just making it so you're more than just barely breaking even.

Not saying that that's exactly what's happening with Xox and Trial-Bikes here, but it wouldn't surprise me if some of that is at play.

In terms of retailers/manufacturers raising prices to take advantage of customers, I think on the whole that's not really possible in the cycling industry in general. Most brands are at the mercy of their factories and OE partners when it comes to pricing, so while there might be some price gouging from material suppliers and/or factories (who are suddenly finding themselves turning down work they're so busy), there's more competition among brands to not inflate prices much, and to absorb varying degrees of the increased production costs everyone is facing. For some brands who have more direct links or ties to their production they can manage that more easily, but for most trials brands they'll be getting a factory to make stuff for them and will just have to pay whatever they want them to pay. OE costs have also jumped up massively, so brands are getting hit by that as well. The huge increase in shipping costs is also well documented but will be at play as well. Overall, I just don't think there's the scope for many brands to really be doing people over that much. We'll see how things shake out over the next 6-12 months though...

1 hour ago, La Bourde said:

Your point is valid I think. I am not sure how a boutique frame layup is taylored to fit the customer needs or whishes though. As far as I know, there was only one size available for the first Unno frame. The Atherton bikes seems to use the same tubing, only their length and the lugs differ.

Do not forget that a chunkier frame bad dimensioned will also fail ... maybe somewhere else though. But I agree with you, I think big brands try to play safe here.

I didn't mean tailoring the specific frame to a customer's needs, just knowing that most of their customers may not be as harsh on their bikes as the more mainstream manufacturers might have to factor in. Just to use a basic example, if you lab test your carbon frame and it passes all the relevant tests you set, you may add a % more carbon to certain areas to give yourself a little extra margin. If you know your customers are likely to be experienced riders who are investing a lot in a really niche frame to suit their specific riding, you probably won't need to add much. If you're a mainstream brand and you have to factor in both those experienced riders but also riders who are less experienced/have less mechanical sympathy/are total bashers, you might want to add an extra % of carbon in key areas to increase that safety margin.

As noted below, Santa Cruz have a reputation for strong frames and offer a long warranty. For them, it'll make sense to make sure that there's a good safety margin because it saves them a lot of hassle in the long run (although that said, a friend of mine is now on his tenth warranty replacement frame from Santa Cruz).

15 minutes ago, Jere_h said:

That said, one guy on instagram broke the rear end of his alloy 5010 by doing fairly beginner trials stuff (I think). Got replaced under warranty of course, but it really happens.

As a trials sidenote, it's kind of funny by the way, how a Crewkerz is considered as boring bike even though that thing has probably the most exotic frame tubing/welding/design ever and all these carbon bikes are basically just typical carbon and nothing too special under the hood.

Trials puts way more stress on the seat stays and disc mounts than people expect, even basic moves. MTB frames are designed around the idea of the brake mount essentially pushing down into the frame when under heavy braking, whereas even basic trials moves will put a good amount of force in the total opposite direction to that. As before, SC thought that they could get away with really skinny seat stays on Danny's bike, but they snapped on the very first ride.

Just on the Crewkerz, I think it's not as 'exotic' just because some elements of the frame are surprisingly basic. Things like the downtube are nicely shaped, but the BB shell just looks like a really basic bit of pipe, and the way it's designed to be so hugely offset just makes the frame look a little odd from certain angles. That mix of some nicely formed parts and some 'basic' parts means that as a whole it's not as cohesive, whereas the shapes of a carbon frame can often look a little more sculpted (for want of a better word). The silhouette of the frame has barely changed in about 6 years or more too so I think it's seen as boring just because it's so familiar now. That's the price of making a good product in a way though, if there's no need to update it because it all works fine, you don't want to make a dramatic update just to make it look 'new' but risk it failing. You can look again at Inspired and some of their frames! The Arcade is basically the same as it's been for 7-8 years now, and the silhouette is near identical to the prototype I first had 10 years ago, but it just works so there's no sense in trying to reinvent the wheel.

[Mark W]

1 hour ago, La Bourde said:

And at the end, because they did not change the tubing that much, the user has no advantage of it in term of stiffness, only the drawbacks to have proprietary stuff. But you can read "tapered" in the specs.

I forgot to say, but that's all it is. They can claim the frame is 'updated', even though it's the same tubeset as it was when it was released 7-8 years ago. It's a pity Jitsie haven't spent the same amount of time designing their products as they have designing endless colourways for their rider outfits. They have a lot of resources at their disposal to really move things forward, but make the most basic bike you'll see at a World Cup.

[Jere_h]

36 minutes ago, Mark W said:

Do you know if they've received the frame kits yet, but just haven't put them on the site? Or are they still waiting to receive them? If they're still waiting, it's possible they're waiting for the customs invoice so they know how much they have to factor in from that. From memory, there's a huge anti-dumping tax that companies in the EU have to pay for importing goods from China - it was 50% when we used to pay for orders from Echo, which as you can imagine adds a significant cost increase to a shop placing an order.

Yes they already had the frames, but apparently it takes quite a bit of time to put them on the site. Still not there, and the only way to see any sort of linkage between the shop and the brand is through a few social media posts, with a bunch of guys asking for geo numbers and other basics in the comments because of poor advertising.
Seems like those bikes aren't that big deal for Trial-bikes really, let's see how many rider will actually have one in Europe if it continues like this. Kind of like Maestro, seems impossible to find nowadays.

If I was a trials shop, I'd hurry up during the most crucial time of the season when guys like me are still switching their bikes before the summer is over. But I'm not a trials shop, luckily.

[La Bourde]

Maybe due to COVID and its consequence, there is still enough demand and small production batches, so that they don't care that much about customer.

See how difficult it is to find some Inspired, Crewkerz or Waw products currently.

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by La Bourde

[La Bourde]

1 hour ago, Mark W said:

Just on the Crewkerz, I think it's not as 'exotic' just because some elements of the frame are surprisingly basic. Things like the downtube are nicely shaped, but the BB shell just looks like a really basic bit of pipe, and the way it's designed to be so hugely offset just makes the frame look a little odd from certain angles. That mix of some nicely formed parts and some 'basic' parts means that as a whole it's not as cohesive, whereas the shapes of a carbon frame can often look a little more sculpted (for want of a better word). The silhouette of the frame has barely changed in about 6 years or more too so I think it's seen as boring just because it's so familiar now. That's the price of making a good product in a way though, if there's no need to update it because it all works fine, you don't want to make a dramatic update just to make it look 'new' but risk it failing. You can look again at Inspired and some of their frames! The Arcade is basically the same as it's been for 7-8 years now, and the silhouette is near identical to the prototype I first had 10 years ago, but it just works so there's no sense in trying to reinvent the wheel.

Fully agree. I like those brands that just do small incremental changes. 

 

1 hour ago, Mark W said:

I didn't mean tailoring the specific frame to a customer's needs, just knowing that most of their customers may not be as harsh on their bikes as the more mainstream manufacturers might have to factor in. Just to use a basic example, if you lab test your carbon frame and it passes all the relevant tests you set, you may add a % more carbon to certain areas to give yourself a little extra margin. If you know your customers are likely to be experienced riders who are investing a lot in a really niche frame to suit their specific riding, you probably won't need to add much. If you're a mainstream brand and you have to factor in both those experienced riders but also riders who are less experienced/have less mechanical sympathy/are total bashers, you might want to add an extra % of carbon in key areas to increase that safety margin.

I got you right and I agreed with you, but I was thinking further. If a boutique brand really wants to get the most out of composites, then it could change the layups and geometry of the frame, like a steel frame builder will change the tubeset to fits his customer. That might be a real improvement, because between a 60kg and 110kg trial riders, the stiffness of the frame is not perceived the same way. To me, this could be really a decisive argument.

As you said, I think most brands currently use a margin, because the level/weight difference between riders can be huge and also if they have a recall, it is much more expensive and difficult to execute than for a boutique brand (imagine if Apple as to recall its last IPhone ...). But in other industries (let's take the smartphone example further), I have the impression they test and control their production instead of dimension everything with a huge safety margin - maybe cause the market is much more competitive.

 

There is also one aspect I would like to tackle.

I think the current production of comp trials frames can be split in two categories only: the entry level (that is reduced to its minimum) and the competition like frames. I think the market lacks of a BT raven descendant. Something with a high bottom bracket (>+60), long stem/bar combo, long wheelbase (around 1080), but a little stronger (and heavier).  Neither a street trial bike nor a comp bike. More a TGS bike. Crewkerz had the Desire, which is was more for the beginners, but was it stronger?

I have an old Crewkerz Cleep 2 (that I really love), but I think I would have buy something a litte heavier and stronger, cause I don't compete and I am not such a good rider (more an advanced rider I guess). For me reliability is more important and I want a bike to try lines and push me out of my confort zone. As much as I love my Crewkerz, I sometimes avoid to try a new line to not damage the frame.

 

 

Thanks for the inside Mark and Jere_h, this is really informative!

[Jere_h]

On 6/28/2022 at 6:10 AM, aliao said:

My favorite cranks are the newer generation Crewkerz ones (the spindle on these definitely fit much tighter on the bearings, also the 2022 ones are ALL BLACK since you hate red).

Does the new generation mean 2018 and up? Because the 2018 crankset was the only one available and I already ordered it, but now I'm afraid that there would have been a new set coming with the new frames soon.. But as long as it's technically the same I'm not going to return the 2018 set due to a red bashring that can be easily sanded.

I don't hate the red color itself, only the fact that I'm always tied to those red accents and need to match my custom paint color ideas to that. Also because I've seen that colored anodizing thing too much in the motocross world already before moving to trials lol. It was super cool when it became a thing and everyone wanted to pay huge cash for candy colored billet parts, but now it's kind of getting old when stylish is more like clean and simplistic rather than blingy.

[Target]

1 hour ago, Jere_h said:

I don't hate the red color itself, only the fact that I'm always tied to those red accents and need to match my custom paint color ideas to that. Also because I've seen that colored anodizing thing too much in the motocross world already before moving to trials lol. It was super cool when it became a thing and everyone wanted to pay huge cash for candy colored billet parts, but now it's kind of getting old when stylish is more like clean and simplistic rather than blingy.

Keep in mind that you can always remove anodizing, or paint over, or even re-anodize to black. The best option is re-anodizing if you can find someone who can do that for you.
I'm not a big fan of those red accents everywhere too, so I've tried each of the options.

[Jere_h]

Yeah I've tried too and it's just so much extra work. Removing is usually a pain, painting will not last in most parts, and re anodizing hasn't been a realistic option so far.

Luckily my bikes have been silver or black so far, and with the purple Czar I just gave up the idea of good looks together with the red echo parts 

Looks like the only red thing with the Crewkerz is going to be easily fixed.

[La Bourde]

Removing anodization is easy. You don't need to sand the part.

Just put the parts in drain cleaner for 2 minutes and you are done.

For a perfect finish, you can polish the part.

[Mark W]

19 hours ago, La Bourde said:

Maybe due to COVID and its consequence, there is still enough demand and small production batches, so that they don't care that much about customer.

See how difficult it is to find some Inspired, Crewkerz or Waw products currently.

 

The small batches is the problem really - bigger brands came in when the Covid/lockdown bubble started becoming apparent and either increased their production quantities, or waved enough cash around that factories would drop their pre-existing schedules to fit them in. Trials brand orders will most likely be nearer the 'minimum order quantity' side of things for most factories, so if a big cycling brand comes in wanting to expand their quantities it's a no brainer. Less time for the factory having to faff around with stopping production to set up jigs and so on means more money for them, so there's not much incentive for them to honour existing commitments. The smaller brands have no leverage so it's not like they can do much about it. Whatever the root cause, it's certainly not by design! I know when I was still at TB we were expecting Jealousy bikes around mid-to-late 2020, but that got pushed back into early 2021, which became mid-2021, which became late 2021, which became early 2022, which seemingly has been pushed back again until July some time (from Crewkerz social posts). The 2022 Inspired Arcade got launched a month or two ago when it should have been out around the same time as the other 2022 bikes (in late 2021). It's just hard getting things made these days. Even Canyon have suffered with Fabio's bike - they don't have the Tripod saddles available for them that the bike is shown with so are just fitting a basic Pivotal setup instead. In the larger MTB space I've seen a few brands mention they've really struggled to get hold of anything (in mid-2020, SRAM were quoting 400+ day lead times for things like rear mechs, up from 30-40 days). It's definitely not for the want of trying!

18 hours ago, La Bourde said:

I got you right and I agreed with you, but I was thinking further. If a boutique brand really wants to get the most out of composites, then it could change the layups and geometry of the frame, like a steel frame builder will change the tubeset to fits his customer. That might be a real improvement, because between a 60kg and 110kg trial riders, the stiffness of the frame is not perceived the same way. To me, this could be really a decisive argument.

As you said, I think most brands currently use a margin, because the level/weight difference between riders can be huge and also if they have a recall, it is much more expensive and difficult to execute than for a boutique brand (imagine if Apple as to recall its last IPhone ...). But in other industries (let's take the smartphone example further), I have the impression they test and control their production instead of dimension everything with a huge safety margin - maybe cause the market is much more competitive.

It's more competitive, but again I think the use cases are a bigger thing. The way a phone operates is fully constrained by the manufacturer, and you're not going to do much else with it. They tightly control which apps can be used on it, and there isn't much leeway for you to do much else with them. That's a little different to a bike brand which sells a bike that an end user might use for nothing more than riding a mile to their shops on a smooth tarmac road, while another end user might go and huck it off some huge drops at a bike park. Couple to that the unrealistic expectation that riders have for warranty replacement - if you drop your iPhone and smash the screen, you don't go to Apple expecting a free replacement. Riders smash their bikes into things and use them in an abusive manner, but then expect a free replacement if something does break.

On the thing about a more middle of the road/TGS style frame, I think there's definitely an opening in the market there but I'm not sure how much people would really embrace it. There's still a tendency for trials riders to buy parts that are, realistically, too light (sometimes meaning too weak) for what they really want them for, but weight is still such a driving factor that it's hard to really steer people in a different direction. I'd often get people asking me for advice on parts, I'd know their riding style so I'd suggest something suitable, but they'd wind up buying some light comp stuff because the allure of a light bike was too strong. I think most people want a cheap frame for TGS-y kind of stuff too, and that's just not really doable any more compared to what things were like back in the mid-2000's/early 2010's. Realistically, a frame that was suitable for the bulk of riders out there would wind up being "too heavy", and probably "too expensive".

I think it'd also just be a difficult one to spec, too. I imagine most customers for that type of frame would want something like 135mm spacing, but the options for 135mm hubs are really limited now unless you run a rear freehub (much more money, generally more weight). Even a standard non-disc 116 x 10 bolt-in style hub can be pretty hard to find these days, and the ones that are there are somewhat generic catalogue hubs with narrow flange spacing, so aren't necessarily what most riders would really be wanting or needing. BB wise most people would probably want a BSA BB (rather than Spanish, AS30 or whatever else people are using press-fit as the options for cranks are restrictive and expensive), but again there's diminishing options available for suitable parts for them.

The geometry would be difficult too as some riders want a comp-y setup with a high BB, whereas others want a more moderate geo with a mid-height BB (40-60mm). There's no real way of winning that, and whatever you do will immediately alienate a chunk of your already fairly small market.

It's a shame as I do think that a lot of riders would be better served by something like that, but I can see why no brands are really looking to take the plunge, especially with how hard it is to even get their normal product lines made these days.

EDIT: This "how would you spec _____" chat is one we'd quite often have about cheap, entry level bikes too. With Onza not really being as involved in the trials world any more there's a real gap in the market for a cheap, beginner bike to get people into trials, but with how expensive things are in general now you have to really cut corners on the spec to make something happen, and even then it winds up falling into the kind of territory where - if you can find one - a second hand bike will make it look really poor value and spec in comparison.

[aliao]

13 hours ago, Jere_h said:

Does the new generation mean 2018 and up? Because the 2018 crankset was the only one available and I already ordered it, but now I'm afraid that there would have been a new set coming with the new frames soon.. But as long as it's technically the same I'm not going to return the 2018 set due to a red bashring that can be easily sanded.

Yeah I just meant the 2018 version. The rounded edges are much better than the old blocky ones.