Yes, that’s a photo of Mr. Lance Armstrong winning the Superfrog Triathalon in California while wearing (if not, as the kids say, “rocking”) a speedo and sporting a requested “7” race number. You’re welcome. Happy Monday.
Still have some of my “insights” from Interbike I need to post this week, but one of the best parts of this year’s show was running into engineers–some I knew, some I’d never met. It was pretty humbling terrifying to discover the caliber of those you who are out there tolerating this blog. Does no one watch TV any more?
Interest in Project Danzig was higher than I’d expected, too. Given that I’d expected interest to be “virtually non-existent,” that wasn’t a tough expectation to exceed, but still. Thanks to everybody who wished me well with the project.
I know it’s been a while since we’ve seen or heard anything about Danzig, so today seemed right as ever for a quick update. While I’ve been babbling about launching new e-comm sites and wheelsets and my job collection, Danzig has continued, albeit slowly. Initial prototype discussions suggested we’d have to make some room on Danzig’s driveside to accommodate a triple.
Sorting all of that out is largely why I’m working with a great company on the prototypes in the first place, but still, being me, I took it upon myself to figure out just how much clearance I could come up with there, how it would look, and how it would affect everything else.
So I’ve been building new mainframes and swingarms, focusing on a more extreme asymmetrical design that’ll offer enough room to run a triple, even though I hate triples, personally.
It’s been really interesting to experiment with different asymmetrical orientations for the chainstays and that part I’ve always referred to as the “crankcase” that houses the lower link. Turns out I can move that off pretty far to the non-drive side, which should really improve clearances in general.
That’s what I’m working on these days.
4 Responses to “Full Transparency”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Will you be adding the dreaded ISCG tabs too, for those of us that hate triples and their front-mech-wielding double ring brethren?
Boo! I say go the other direction and see just how much you can fit into that space (or how much you can shorten the chainstays) if you only make room for a 28/40 double, or ISCG tabs but no FD, or a 28-32t XX1 ring with no FD.
I feel like there might be a holy grail design out there that lets you make a 650b AM bike with the same or tighter geo as a 26″ at the same travel (or an AM 29er with <44cm chainstays) as long as you ditch the FD entirely.
I keep hoping for something better than an ISCG05 tab. Has always seemed like so much metal to accomplish the same task K-Edge manages to do with a tiny bracket, and–supposedly–SRAM can now do without even a chain guide (though I’d still use one).
Triple, double or mid-position single: I just needed to make even more room there in general. I don’t think eliminated compatibility with triples would get us that much more tire clearance or shorter stays, but there’s a big part of me that really wants to say “doubles and and singles only,” yep. Unfortunately, the me who’s had to talk to confused customers on the one hand and people helping pay the bills on the other suspects I won’t be able to escape the triple. Definitely dreaming about a world without triples, though. Have been for years.