Tideace 2022 New Enduro Mold FS838 Being Production

[FullCarbonAlchemist]

It actually looks more like the Deviate highlander

I’d have to disagree; the Highlander is a solid swingarm with a reverser link whereas this is a four bar linkage with a reverser link as one of the bars, and has a prominent downward extension where the chainstays and reverser link meet (the Highlander’s is more neatly tucked behind the BB). The rear triangle is almost identical to the Range, except for the dropouts.

I do see a little bit of the visual similarity to the Highlander (and noticeable differences from the Range) in the front triangle though, maybe that’s what caught your eye.

[CasualRider]

I think you might be right or I might be remembering their older or original design, I could have sworn it wasn't solid.

[FullCarbonAlchemist]

There seem to be two different designs. Pics 2 - 4 show a link between chain stay and rear axle, the 3D renders and the one from Linkage X3 see the rear wheel directly attached to the chain stay. Pretty sure the latter is the correct version, since that's the same as the Range and the other one gives horrible results in the X3 analysis.

So I used the screenshot from Linkage X3 to look at the leverage ratio. Not quite as progressive as one might want, definitely not coil shock compatible since it's completely flat towards the end. Leaves room to hope that this screenshot is not the final design.

One thing I noticed in the renders is that there seems to be an extra piece between the reverser link and the shock, a shock extension from what I can tell. It’s highlighted blue-green in the 3D renders. Maybe that alters the kinematics somewhat? Was it included in the Linkage X3 calculations?

[Julian]

One thing I noticed in the renders is that there seems to be an extra piece between the reverser link and the shock, a shock extension from what I can tell. It’s highlighted blue-green in the 3D renders. Maybe that alters the kinematics somewhat? Was it included in the Linkage X3 calculations?

You're right, it's a common shock yoke. The eye to eye without this part would be about 260mm, the yoke reduces that to 205mm. It has no effect on the kinematics though since there is no additional link (which wouldn't work anyway, it would just collapse in on itself).

The one effect it has is that there is no movement in the rear shock eye, meaning that the rotation is done by the bearing in the yoke instead of the bushing of the shock. So with the trunnion design, both ends run on bearings.

[graved1gger]

So I used the screenshot from Linkage X3 to look at the leverage ratio. Not quite as progressive as one might want, definitely not coil shock compatible since it's completely flat towards the end. Leaves room to hope that this screenshot is not the final design.

This is kinda odd, since norco specifically states that new range is something like coil shock specific. Had Haideli screwed up kinematics?

[Julian]

This is kinda odd, since norco specifically states that new range is something like coil shock specific. Had Haideli screwed up kinematics?

Well, if the screenshot named "test.jpg" is based on the final design, then yes. But as I said, I'm hoping that it isn't.

The leverage ratio could be easily made more progressive simply by moving the shock yoke mount.

Right now, the progression from SAG to full travel is at 6,5%. Changing the position of the shock yoke mount by just 10mm would make it 24%. The Norco Range has about 22%.

[Denys]

Any News Here? Geo Charts? When the frame should be ready? Price?

[Jotegr]

From our experience with the 831 and the solution to the rear end flex as "spend more money", I'll be holding off on this one for the first round or two of production.

I'm curious what the BB interface will look like. In the Range, it's an alloy sleeve inside the carbon to allow for max shock clearance. Same thing here?

Plus I totally had a 2021/22 Range from July to October last year and it actually wasn't my favourite. Having said that, this would be on my radar as a "spouse bike", hah. And regarding previous comments on the need for a bash plate in the lower link area? big time. Even with the Norco bash plate that area looked like shit after my half season of riding.

Eddy, I'd highly recommend at a minimum offering a premium high quality hardware kit for this bike. It's a complicated design with lots of bolts and bearings in different places than many other bikes. Every other "chinertown" bike I've had experience with has had hardware of low to acceptable quality. Usually this works OK for most designs, but the way this is meant to be ridden is going to be very demanding on hardware. Perhaps you could differentiate yourself from other resellers by offering premium hardware and bearing kits. I know I'd be willing to pay a considerable additional fee if I know a bike like this is going to be offered with top quality bearings from a manufacturer I can trust like SKF/FAG and strong, top quality bolts & nuts rather than the normal grade. Especially with the high pivot!

Being able to fit a coil shock would also make this frame quite appealing, and also ensuring the fork crown will not hit the downtube of the frame.

It had better be designed to fit a coil, if the leverage curve looks anything like the bike's its inspired from. Apparently the Aurum HSP and successor Range ride like shit with air shocks. Fox Canada really didn't want to sell me an X2 for my Aurum HSP when I asked!

[Eddy-haideli]

Any News Here? Geo Charts? When the frame should be ready? Price?

The sample is being production, then tested, thanks for your interesting.

We would updated, thanks.

[HDTVdevil]

The sample is being production, then tested, thanks for your interesting.

We would updated, thanks.

Any updates on this?

Filip

[casual_build]

if this does hit the market, I want to point out that the Norco frame is slacker, and has different chainstay lengths for different sizes.

This chainstay length is a bit long for large and a bit short for XL. Too long for small/medium frames.

[FullCarbonAlchemist]

The Norco version also has some pretty unique replaceable dropouts which this design lacks. I have to assume there was a good reason Norco used them, though I haven’t been able to figure out what it is.

This design needs tight tolerances, particularly at the main pivot and the idler. It wouldn’t take much of a loose tolerance in the right place to turn this into a self destructing wet noodle.

Most significantly, idlers need to be replaced regularly. Will this be standardized on the 838 so third party replacements fit, or would we need to get them from Tideace?

All significant considerations. Personally right now I’m looking at the FM1003 instead because it’s a much simpler design that doesn’t need extensive rider testing before I’d trust it (and has already been on the trails all summer under one member here, with a second build underway).

[Jotegr]

The Norco version also has some pretty unique replaceable dropouts which this design lacks. I have to assume there was a good reason Norco used them, though I haven’t been able to figure out what it is.

Very simple answer - they spent a shitload of money developing their frame, using the unique replaceable dropouts allows them to use the same rear triangle tooling to have size specific chainstays in all sizes without making new carbon molds. Unfortunately they come loose fairly frequently for heavy/fast riders and need to be checked every few rides.

[FullCarbonAlchemist]

Makes sense. I seem to recall being told there was a reason other than chainstay length customizing for the various sizes, but don’t remember what it was.

[HDTVdevil]

This chainstay length is a bit long for large and a bit short for XL. Too long for small/medium frames.

Why too short for XL?  XL is would be my size