Le roi (de rayons) est mort, vive le roi?
06/07/25 14:49 Filed in: Gear
For a good number of years now the ultimate spoke used in the ultimate wheel builds is the Sapim CX-Ray. The DT Swiss Aerolite is approximately the same spoke, and it seems like DT started making these to offer a DT alternative to the Sapim option. These spokes are expensive - but the price is probably worth it to achieve one of the lightest spokes you can get and also one of the strongest spokes you can buy - the extensive working of the steel wire to achieve the blade shape makes them really strong (and they use the best steel, but I don't actually know how this is any different from the steel in more mundane spokes; perhaps it is all down to the manipulations).
Back in 2011 I bought some carbon wheels for my hardtail that were built with Pillar bladed spokes. These spokes actually look a lot like the CX-Ray, but don't seem to have the "pedigree" that the Sapim spokes have (Pillar is Taiwanese, but lots of great bike components come out of Taiwan - compared to DT Swiss which is obviously Swiss and Sapim which is Belgian). Enter Pillar's new Wing spoke. These bladed spokes not only use the same Sandvik steel wire as the other two brands, but they have a new shape that makes them allegedly more aero, slightly more stiff and the breaking load is almost double that for the CX-Ray according to what I found online.
My ENVE wheels were built using CX-Ray spokes (28 per wheel) on Industry Nine Hydra hubs. If I was going to pick the weak spot in this trio of parts, I'd have picked the rear axle in the Hydra hub. But, as the bike is my single speed, it seems that not having a low gear nor having a gear right at the inside of the freehub body (where the bending load on the axle would be highest) and despite being heavier than your average cyclist - I've not experienced any axle issues to date. I have, however, broken at least 3 Sapim spokes to date.
The broken spokes are always in the same place - the non-drive side "pushing" spoke when I push on the pedal to deal with a technical terrain feature. This unloading of the spoke breaks it off at the start of the threads. I really hate this because it means disassembling the tubeless tyre system, removing the rim tape and coaxing the nipple out of the rim cavity. The section of spoke left in the nipple precludes getting the spoke out of the nipple - hence needing another nipple. The spokes are expensive (around $11 each), the nipples are expensive (ENVE nipples are $5 each), and I hate the down time on the bike. I think all replacement spokes in my wheel are actually Aerolites because no one seems to have the CX-Ray in my needed length in singles (they sell them in packs of 8 or more).
I've decided to rebuild the non-drive side of the wheel with Wing spokes. I ordered 14 spokes, 14 new nipples and a nipple tool so I can carefully re-do the off side when the parts arrive. I'll be taking the long road of replacing each spoke one at a time so as not to de-tension the wheel as a whole. Which will leave me with 13 spare spokes and nipples - I'm counting on not ever requiring them. The Wing spokes have a slightly thicker elbow section because this is where spokes break most often. That hasn't been the case for me - all have snapped off where they enter the nipple right at the start of the thread. But a stronger spoke with a thicker elbow - maybe it will deal with loads better overall? Fingers crossed.
I will also do an extensive destressing of the spokes after building as this is the most critical element of the wheelbuild for longevity. I have done this each time I replaced a spoke, so either 28 spokes is insufficient for my rear wheel or the CX-Ray is insufficient for my mass or the damage was done in the first few months of use prior to the initial spoke breakage.
Incidentally, these wheels came on a new bike. The bike brand told me to deal with ENVE. ENVE told me to deal with their importer in Australia. The importer told me they weren't interested because they didn't sell me the wheels. Great run-around there. Amusingly (not really!) the importer insisted I could purchase single CX-Ray spokes from my preferred bike shop, but the bike shop said the spoke importer's order desk offered them only large packets of the spokes. More run-around.
Back to my entry title - if the CX-Ray is no longer the king of spokes, is the new Wing the new King?
Back in 2011 I bought some carbon wheels for my hardtail that were built with Pillar bladed spokes. These spokes actually look a lot like the CX-Ray, but don't seem to have the "pedigree" that the Sapim spokes have (Pillar is Taiwanese, but lots of great bike components come out of Taiwan - compared to DT Swiss which is obviously Swiss and Sapim which is Belgian). Enter Pillar's new Wing spoke. These bladed spokes not only use the same Sandvik steel wire as the other two brands, but they have a new shape that makes them allegedly more aero, slightly more stiff and the breaking load is almost double that for the CX-Ray according to what I found online.
My ENVE wheels were built using CX-Ray spokes (28 per wheel) on Industry Nine Hydra hubs. If I was going to pick the weak spot in this trio of parts, I'd have picked the rear axle in the Hydra hub. But, as the bike is my single speed, it seems that not having a low gear nor having a gear right at the inside of the freehub body (where the bending load on the axle would be highest) and despite being heavier than your average cyclist - I've not experienced any axle issues to date. I have, however, broken at least 3 Sapim spokes to date.
The broken spokes are always in the same place - the non-drive side "pushing" spoke when I push on the pedal to deal with a technical terrain feature. This unloading of the spoke breaks it off at the start of the threads. I really hate this because it means disassembling the tubeless tyre system, removing the rim tape and coaxing the nipple out of the rim cavity. The section of spoke left in the nipple precludes getting the spoke out of the nipple - hence needing another nipple. The spokes are expensive (around $11 each), the nipples are expensive (ENVE nipples are $5 each), and I hate the down time on the bike. I think all replacement spokes in my wheel are actually Aerolites because no one seems to have the CX-Ray in my needed length in singles (they sell them in packs of 8 or more).
I've decided to rebuild the non-drive side of the wheel with Wing spokes. I ordered 14 spokes, 14 new nipples and a nipple tool so I can carefully re-do the off side when the parts arrive. I'll be taking the long road of replacing each spoke one at a time so as not to de-tension the wheel as a whole. Which will leave me with 13 spare spokes and nipples - I'm counting on not ever requiring them. The Wing spokes have a slightly thicker elbow section because this is where spokes break most often. That hasn't been the case for me - all have snapped off where they enter the nipple right at the start of the thread. But a stronger spoke with a thicker elbow - maybe it will deal with loads better overall? Fingers crossed.
I will also do an extensive destressing of the spokes after building as this is the most critical element of the wheelbuild for longevity. I have done this each time I replaced a spoke, so either 28 spokes is insufficient for my rear wheel or the CX-Ray is insufficient for my mass or the damage was done in the first few months of use prior to the initial spoke breakage.
Incidentally, these wheels came on a new bike. The bike brand told me to deal with ENVE. ENVE told me to deal with their importer in Australia. The importer told me they weren't interested because they didn't sell me the wheels. Great run-around there. Amusingly (not really!) the importer insisted I could purchase single CX-Ray spokes from my preferred bike shop, but the bike shop said the spoke importer's order desk offered them only large packets of the spokes. More run-around.
Back to my entry title - if the CX-Ray is no longer the king of spokes, is the new Wing the new King?
My dream road bike
30/06/25 20:19 Filed in: Gear
I tried to get Llewellyn to build me this bike, but he wasn't interested in working with the electronics side of things and said if I conquered the digital side I should get back to him. So nothing yet. Probably ever!
What do I want? A traditional road bike with downtube shifters that are electronic. I was imaging doing it with Di2, in which case the push and the pull of the levers would have to enact different actions. But lately I think AXS is the way to do this, so the levers would have one direction of motion that mimics the click of the shift button on the AXS brake lever (left lever for higher gear, right lever for lower gear, both levers for chainring shift - all programmable from the AXS app). One would probably have to gut an AXS pod shifter for a MTB or the shift mechanism in the road levers to accomplish this easily - short of building the whole thing from the ground up (would have been pretty straightforward in the Di2 space as a Hall-effect sensor or even a magnetic reed switch connected to the shift lever would have sent the signal up the wire to the derailleur). To make this happen would require a nice set of downtube shift levers and a means of turning them into a nice feeling RTC motion (return to centre - every push springs back to the starting place) all while preserving the water-proof nature of AXS shifting. Hence why I haven't done this.
Then I'd need some brake levers that aren't shift levers. To look traditional it would have to be rim brakes, but I like discs and think a traditional metal frame with small round tubes and downtube shifters with hydraulic disc brakes would be nicer to ride. That's actually not too important to my vision as good rim brakes are good and any disc brakes I might come up with that have non-shifting levers for drop bars are also likely to not be the best of disc brakes.
I never had indexed downtube shifting. I went straight from 6 speed friction shifting with downtube shifters to 8 speed STI shifting on the brake levers. At this point I'd happily forego the whole digital shifting experience if I could get some nice 12 speed downtube indexed shifters in Record or Red flavours to go with the rest of the group. That'd be awesome and lovingly anachronistic.
Why?
Why not!
What do I want? A traditional road bike with downtube shifters that are electronic. I was imaging doing it with Di2, in which case the push and the pull of the levers would have to enact different actions. But lately I think AXS is the way to do this, so the levers would have one direction of motion that mimics the click of the shift button on the AXS brake lever (left lever for higher gear, right lever for lower gear, both levers for chainring shift - all programmable from the AXS app). One would probably have to gut an AXS pod shifter for a MTB or the shift mechanism in the road levers to accomplish this easily - short of building the whole thing from the ground up (would have been pretty straightforward in the Di2 space as a Hall-effect sensor or even a magnetic reed switch connected to the shift lever would have sent the signal up the wire to the derailleur). To make this happen would require a nice set of downtube shift levers and a means of turning them into a nice feeling RTC motion (return to centre - every push springs back to the starting place) all while preserving the water-proof nature of AXS shifting. Hence why I haven't done this.
Then I'd need some brake levers that aren't shift levers. To look traditional it would have to be rim brakes, but I like discs and think a traditional metal frame with small round tubes and downtube shifters with hydraulic disc brakes would be nicer to ride. That's actually not too important to my vision as good rim brakes are good and any disc brakes I might come up with that have non-shifting levers for drop bars are also likely to not be the best of disc brakes.
I never had indexed downtube shifting. I went straight from 6 speed friction shifting with downtube shifters to 8 speed STI shifting on the brake levers. At this point I'd happily forego the whole digital shifting experience if I could get some nice 12 speed downtube indexed shifters in Record or Red flavours to go with the rest of the group. That'd be awesome and lovingly anachronistic.
Why?
Why not!
What's going on at Campagnolo?
09/06/25 15:17 Filed in: Gear
I've loved Campag bike parts since I was a little kid. My uncle who got me into riding bikes (and repairing them!) rode Nuovo Record on his race bike - ah those were the days.
Actually I wouldn't want to go back to friction downtube shifting and 5/6/7 speed freewheels, but I would like to apply all of modern know-how to a lasts-forever and looks nice shiny aluminium mechanical group that shifts over an 8 or 9 speed cassette - but I digress.
Somewhere around 9 or 10 spd, I thought Record specifically and Campagnolo in general had lost their way. But the 11 and 12 speed gear is brilliant. EPS never really did it for me (the same as Di2 didn't) - I guess I didn't like the flimsy wires running around on a bike that doesn't treat flimsy well. Both my road bikes had Record 12 on until my replacement commuting frame couldn't accept the front derailleur - and I went Red AXS (and it's brilliant, of course). My race bike still has Record 12 on it. I often mis-shift because I now have 3 bikes (2 outdoor bikes and 1 indoor bike) with 3 different shifting systems (AXS, Record mechanical and Dual-tap). Every day I ride AXS and when I jump on another road bike I flick the left lever to get an easier gear but instead drop onto the small chainring (if not there already). Only have to do that once per ride to remember where I am.
I am reading that Record is no longer going to be offered by Campag. Super Record wireless. Super Record S wireless. Super Record mechanical. Chorus mechanical. No Record. I've long through the Chorus/Record/Super Record trio were too close together in real terms, even if they were quite far apart in price. Chorus always offered 90% of Super Record for about 1/2 the price.
Maybe Record isn't "super" enough? When SR first hit the shops, it was Ti axles, Ti bolts, a few extra holes drilled - all to save a few grams. I broke my SR rear hub axle in a few weeks because even the steel axle was insufficiently strong in freewheel design (drive side bearing is basically in the middle of the hub and the looong unsupported piece of axle just snapped off). But with more modern SR, there have been some fundamental design differences to distinguish. I had SR cranks for a while and they use a Ti bolt to join the left and right crank - but left-hand threaded to ensure you can't use it on Record cranks. SR bearings are a little bit better than Record ones - a higher level of ceramic (CULT rather than USB in Campagnolo's terms).
I would have thought around 40 years of "Record" as a pinnacle group would ensure it remains in the lineup. I guess it has to be more super. And if you take the long view, I started this passage talking about my uncle's NR group. There have been several Record variations: Nuovo, Super, C- are the 3 I can think of.
I'll probably never have another mechanical road group - the AXS stuff is so good I can't be bothered with the hassles of Bowden cables (of course I have a large legacy collection of cables and tools for cables, even coloured cable "donuts") - so going out with Record will be OK with me. It's incredibly good.
And since I wrote this I've seen SR 13-spd is announced. Does that mean SR-S will remain 12-spd while SR goes to 13? Where will it end? 14? 15? 16?
Actually I wouldn't want to go back to friction downtube shifting and 5/6/7 speed freewheels, but I would like to apply all of modern know-how to a lasts-forever and looks nice shiny aluminium mechanical group that shifts over an 8 or 9 speed cassette - but I digress.
Somewhere around 9 or 10 spd, I thought Record specifically and Campagnolo in general had lost their way. But the 11 and 12 speed gear is brilliant. EPS never really did it for me (the same as Di2 didn't) - I guess I didn't like the flimsy wires running around on a bike that doesn't treat flimsy well. Both my road bikes had Record 12 on until my replacement commuting frame couldn't accept the front derailleur - and I went Red AXS (and it's brilliant, of course). My race bike still has Record 12 on it. I often mis-shift because I now have 3 bikes (2 outdoor bikes and 1 indoor bike) with 3 different shifting systems (AXS, Record mechanical and Dual-tap). Every day I ride AXS and when I jump on another road bike I flick the left lever to get an easier gear but instead drop onto the small chainring (if not there already). Only have to do that once per ride to remember where I am.
I am reading that Record is no longer going to be offered by Campag. Super Record wireless. Super Record S wireless. Super Record mechanical. Chorus mechanical. No Record. I've long through the Chorus/Record/Super Record trio were too close together in real terms, even if they were quite far apart in price. Chorus always offered 90% of Super Record for about 1/2 the price.
Maybe Record isn't "super" enough? When SR first hit the shops, it was Ti axles, Ti bolts, a few extra holes drilled - all to save a few grams. I broke my SR rear hub axle in a few weeks because even the steel axle was insufficiently strong in freewheel design (drive side bearing is basically in the middle of the hub and the looong unsupported piece of axle just snapped off). But with more modern SR, there have been some fundamental design differences to distinguish. I had SR cranks for a while and they use a Ti bolt to join the left and right crank - but left-hand threaded to ensure you can't use it on Record cranks. SR bearings are a little bit better than Record ones - a higher level of ceramic (CULT rather than USB in Campagnolo's terms).
I would have thought around 40 years of "Record" as a pinnacle group would ensure it remains in the lineup. I guess it has to be more super. And if you take the long view, I started this passage talking about my uncle's NR group. There have been several Record variations: Nuovo, Super, C- are the 3 I can think of.
I'll probably never have another mechanical road group - the AXS stuff is so good I can't be bothered with the hassles of Bowden cables (of course I have a large legacy collection of cables and tools for cables, even coloured cable "donuts") - so going out with Record will be OK with me. It's incredibly good.
And since I wrote this I've seen SR 13-spd is announced. Does that mean SR-S will remain 12-spd while SR goes to 13? Where will it end? 14? 15? 16?
DOT fluid or mineral oil?
30/05/25 21:56 Filed in: Gear
Car brakes always use DOT fluid. Why? Exactly because it is hygroscopic. Water will get into car brake systems during use, in some level, and if water was immiscible with the brake fluid, it would pool at low points in the system (probably the calipers) and start causing corrosion. Because it is absorbed into the brake fluid, the worst that happens is a decline in boiling point with age. It really only takes a small percentage of water in the fluid to really ruin the heat resistance of the system. Racing brakes get bled regularly because the excessive heat they are exposed to (glowing brake discs) mean that new brake fluid is important far more often than in a car used for driving around town at low speed.
I remember buying a particular brake fluid for my race car because the boiling point was considerably higher than standard fluid, but this brand was also inexpensive compared with exotic fluids with, perhaps, a few degrees more heat resistance.
On bikes, however, the water absorption issue is less relevant. It almost seems like a liability in DOT fluid brakes. Mineral oil is immiscible with water. If you get water in your bike brake lines it will run down to the lowest point. But there is no steel that I know of in any bike disc brake so no rust will ensue. That water, if it ends up in the caliper, will boil at 100C and the brakes will fail (steam is a very poor brake fluid). Mineral oil is actually a pretty good choice because the boiling point can be about the same as for DOT fluid, it doesn't harm paint (DOT is bad for paint), and it is generally benign on the skin (DOT and skin don't mix).
Shimano has used the same pink fluid since day one in their disc brakes. Magura has used the same blue fluid as long as I'm aware (but I don't know if those early Gustav brakes used it and I can't be bothered searching for the answer). Campagnolo brakes are current Magura brakes re-purposed to road use, and the mineral oil is very very similar to the Magura stuff (though, typically Campy, not identical). Hayes and Avid both used DOT fluid from their respective starts. Hayes is now part of the Manitou/Answer/Ringle/Sun brand range, and still uses DOT fluid. Avid is part of SRAM now and the AVID brand name is mostly historical. The most recent 3 new brakes from SRAM run on mineral oil, but everything before that was DOT fluid.
All my SRAM brakes use DOT fluid. I know I should bleed them more often than I do, but even the DH bike (which gets ridden on longer and steeper terrain than any other bike I have) has no issues with boiling brakes after 4 seasons on the original bleed (I shortened the hoses and swapped lever sides out of the box). In general, I bleed the brakes when an issue pops up.
Mineral oil and DOT fluid require completely different seals. So never mix them up. Even the bleed equipment has to be quarantined across fluids as the wrong fluid will ruin the seals in the syringes.
While most of the bikes at home are now SRAM with DOT fluid, there are still a couple of sets of Shimano brakes around. And I bled one bike with these just the other day (they had a LOT of air in the system and didn't work). I got really good at the gravity bleeding using a Shimano cup on the lever and catch container at the caliper. But this seems too hard after lots of Bleeding Edge bleeds with the SRAM tools. I re-purposed a Reverb seatpost bleeding syringe to go on the caliper end and push fluid up into the cup. I'm much happier with this arrangement as it is quick and easy and because the hydraulic actuator for the Reverb uses mineral oil the syringe is quite happy with Shimano brake oil in it (whereas the vet supply syringe I was using to extract oil from the bottle suffers from a swollen plunger - it doesn't like the oil at all).
Pushing the fluid in from the caliper and out the lever end is in the direction the bubbles want to go. Gravity feeding the fluid does eventually work, but it can involve some fussing around to clear all the air. I used to bleed my car brakes by hand, from master cylinder to caliper, but now I understand most mechanics use a vacuum bleeding machine that does it all quickly and perfectly. There's so much volume in car brake hoses that a little air is rarely the problem - it is burnt fluid and water-absorbed fluid that cars need to get rid of regularly.
The one advantage of DOT fluid is any car place can sell you a bottle and it is quite cheap because there are so many cars around. Mineral oil is specific to the brake brand being used and as any proprietary product, can be quite expensive. Having said that, I still have around 600ml of Shimano fluid remaining after so many bleeds over 15 years of disc brakes in the original 1 litre bottle I bought way back when. The 500ml DOT fluid bottles never get emptied by me, because it requires so little volume to bleed a bike and like I wrote above, I don't do it that often. (Note to self, buy a new bottle and then bleed them ALL in one flurry of activity, so they are all fresh.)
Ultimately I don't think any real advantage or disadvantage stems from the fluid type used once it is in the brakes. But for safer handling and longer storage life, the mineral oil wins. SRAM must have agreed with their recent switch.
I remember buying a particular brake fluid for my race car because the boiling point was considerably higher than standard fluid, but this brand was also inexpensive compared with exotic fluids with, perhaps, a few degrees more heat resistance.
On bikes, however, the water absorption issue is less relevant. It almost seems like a liability in DOT fluid brakes. Mineral oil is immiscible with water. If you get water in your bike brake lines it will run down to the lowest point. But there is no steel that I know of in any bike disc brake so no rust will ensue. That water, if it ends up in the caliper, will boil at 100C and the brakes will fail (steam is a very poor brake fluid). Mineral oil is actually a pretty good choice because the boiling point can be about the same as for DOT fluid, it doesn't harm paint (DOT is bad for paint), and it is generally benign on the skin (DOT and skin don't mix).
Shimano has used the same pink fluid since day one in their disc brakes. Magura has used the same blue fluid as long as I'm aware (but I don't know if those early Gustav brakes used it and I can't be bothered searching for the answer). Campagnolo brakes are current Magura brakes re-purposed to road use, and the mineral oil is very very similar to the Magura stuff (though, typically Campy, not identical). Hayes and Avid both used DOT fluid from their respective starts. Hayes is now part of the Manitou/Answer/Ringle/Sun brand range, and still uses DOT fluid. Avid is part of SRAM now and the AVID brand name is mostly historical. The most recent 3 new brakes from SRAM run on mineral oil, but everything before that was DOT fluid.
All my SRAM brakes use DOT fluid. I know I should bleed them more often than I do, but even the DH bike (which gets ridden on longer and steeper terrain than any other bike I have) has no issues with boiling brakes after 4 seasons on the original bleed (I shortened the hoses and swapped lever sides out of the box). In general, I bleed the brakes when an issue pops up.
Mineral oil and DOT fluid require completely different seals. So never mix them up. Even the bleed equipment has to be quarantined across fluids as the wrong fluid will ruin the seals in the syringes.
While most of the bikes at home are now SRAM with DOT fluid, there are still a couple of sets of Shimano brakes around. And I bled one bike with these just the other day (they had a LOT of air in the system and didn't work). I got really good at the gravity bleeding using a Shimano cup on the lever and catch container at the caliper. But this seems too hard after lots of Bleeding Edge bleeds with the SRAM tools. I re-purposed a Reverb seatpost bleeding syringe to go on the caliper end and push fluid up into the cup. I'm much happier with this arrangement as it is quick and easy and because the hydraulic actuator for the Reverb uses mineral oil the syringe is quite happy with Shimano brake oil in it (whereas the vet supply syringe I was using to extract oil from the bottle suffers from a swollen plunger - it doesn't like the oil at all).
Pushing the fluid in from the caliper and out the lever end is in the direction the bubbles want to go. Gravity feeding the fluid does eventually work, but it can involve some fussing around to clear all the air. I used to bleed my car brakes by hand, from master cylinder to caliper, but now I understand most mechanics use a vacuum bleeding machine that does it all quickly and perfectly. There's so much volume in car brake hoses that a little air is rarely the problem - it is burnt fluid and water-absorbed fluid that cars need to get rid of regularly.
The one advantage of DOT fluid is any car place can sell you a bottle and it is quite cheap because there are so many cars around. Mineral oil is specific to the brake brand being used and as any proprietary product, can be quite expensive. Having said that, I still have around 600ml of Shimano fluid remaining after so many bleeds over 15 years of disc brakes in the original 1 litre bottle I bought way back when. The 500ml DOT fluid bottles never get emptied by me, because it requires so little volume to bleed a bike and like I wrote above, I don't do it that often. (Note to self, buy a new bottle and then bleed them ALL in one flurry of activity, so they are all fresh.)
Ultimately I don't think any real advantage or disadvantage stems from the fluid type used once it is in the brakes. But for safer handling and longer storage life, the mineral oil wins. SRAM must have agreed with their recent switch.
The lure of the new Reverb
10/05/25 21:59 Filed in: Gear
My Slash has a full AXS Flight Attendant group on it. Which includes the rather short-drop 170mm Reverb A1 version dropper (the longest they made in A1 version). In contrast, I have a 200mm drop Reverb C1 (latest version, hydraulic activation) on my Ripley, which is close to the longest drop I could fit in it and the seat is _so_ out of the way when dropped I am not sure more would be of any use in practice. Back to my wireless dropper. The new AXS Reverb drops up to 250mm. That's a whopper of a dropper.
I can definitely bump the seat at times on steeper or rougher trails. I'm very likely to "upgrade" to the new B1 AXS Reverb in around a 200mm drop. Might squeeze the 225mm drop into the bike, might not - have to measure before the posts come into stock and can be ordered. The "plan" at the moment is to head to Whistler in August and the Slash will be going, so a longer dropper would help out on some of the techy trails I'm liable to ride.
Integrating a new wireless post into the bike is simple - remove seat, remove post, insert post, install seat, re-pair all the components, ride.
The new Reverb is air-only. No hydraulic circuit. Apparently uses 600psi in the skinny posts (30.9 and 31.8) and a 'meagre' 450psi in the phat 34.9 post I need. I know I don't have a 450psi shock pump to refill that air chamber. I'm sure they'll be a thing once these posts go up for sale.
I can definitely bump the seat at times on steeper or rougher trails. I'm very likely to "upgrade" to the new B1 AXS Reverb in around a 200mm drop. Might squeeze the 225mm drop into the bike, might not - have to measure before the posts come into stock and can be ordered. The "plan" at the moment is to head to Whistler in August and the Slash will be going, so a longer dropper would help out on some of the techy trails I'm liable to ride.
Integrating a new wireless post into the bike is simple - remove seat, remove post, insert post, install seat, re-pair all the components, ride.
The new Reverb is air-only. No hydraulic circuit. Apparently uses 600psi in the skinny posts (30.9 and 31.8) and a 'meagre' 450psi in the phat 34.9 post I need. I know I don't have a 450psi shock pump to refill that air chamber. I'm sure they'll be a thing once these posts go up for sale.
July 2025
June 2025
May 2025
April 2025
March 2025
February 2025
January 2025
December 2024
November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
June 2025
May 2025
April 2025
March 2025
February 2025
January 2025
December 2024
November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022