Review: The Digit Datum & Its Integrated 'Analog' Suspension
I get excited about passion projects. Anytime I see someone create something totally new and different from the bike designs we've come to take for granted, it's hard not to be pulled in. So, naturally, when we noticed the sleek and unique Digit Datum, I didn't want to pass up the opportunity to ride it.
Digit is a small operation run by Tim Lane of Irvine, California. Tim has roots in several corners of the bike industry, but most recently has created his very own so-called Analog suspension design, which uses a strut housed in the top tube in place of a more traditional system.
Digit is a small operation run by Tim Lane of Irvine, California. Tim has roots in several corners of the bike industry, but most recently has created his very own so-called Analog suspension design, which uses a strut housed in the top tube in place of a more traditional system.
Digit Datum Details
• Wheel size: 29" / 27.5" mixed
• Aluminum frame
• Travel: 140 mm / 150 mm or 160 mm fork
• 65-degree head angle
• 435 mm chainstays
• Sizes: S, M, L (tested), XL
• Weight: 28.6 lb / 13.0 kg
• Price: $3,500 - $3,700 USD
• digitbikes.com
• Wheel size: 29" / 27.5" mixed
• Aluminum frame
• Travel: 140 mm / 150 mm or 160 mm fork
• 65-degree head angle
• 435 mm chainstays
• Sizes: S, M, L (tested), XL
• Weight: 28.6 lb / 13.0 kg
• Price: $3,500 - $3,700 USD
• digitbikes.com
While the shock looks miniature at first glance, there's actually much more to it than meets the eye. It extends about halfway up inside the top tube, with the air valve, compression switch, and rebound adjuster poking out of the middle of the top tube.
At the moment, the Datum is available only as a frameset for $3,500 USD or in custom anodized colors for $3,700. There's a good chance that Digit will offer complete builds in the future, but supply chain issues at the moment mean that complete bikes would have very long lead times. My build came with a SRAM GX AXS drivetrain, Spinergy MXX 30 wheels, and a Manitou Mezzer fork, putting the complete build weight at 28.6 lb / 13.0 kg.
The Datum is available now for order online, and Tim is just beginning to send out the first production models.
 | This bike is very, very light for its category, and I find it impressive that it manages to provide traction and damping similar to a design with many more moving parts. |
Frame Details
I've been riding a pre-production frame from Digit's pilot run, so my comments may not be fully applicable to the production run. Still, the frame I received has space and bosses for two water bottle cages (extra space in the front triangle being one of the biggest advantages of this design) inside the front triangle plus one below, rubber frame protection on the chainstay, and rubber internal routing ports.
The 12"-long strut provides not only suspension but also structural support. It extends up into the frame and has large oil and air volumes in order to provide consistent damping throughout the full travel range.
Thorough, user-friendly frame details like water bottle bosses, chainstay protection, and internal routing.
The bike has an emphasis on longevity and serviceability, with a suspension design that can be fully maintained by a competent home mechanic, requiring no special tools. Digit will also offer mail-in services, and each frame will come with a voucher for its first mail-in shock service.
Other details include a SRAM universal derailleur hanger and a Cane Creek press-fit bottom bracket, which comes with the frame.
In terms of sustainability, Digit points out that the most environmentally friendly parts are the ones not manufactured, purchased, and used, so the minimalist design has some roots in sustainability, too. For those parts that do come into existence, Digit uses aluminum and build its frames in California, where a significant portion of the state's electricity comes from renewable sources.
The rear triangle uses an interesting asymmetric design.
Geometry & Sizing
The Digit Datum is available in sizes S, M, L, and XL. The L frame I tested has a 1239 mm wheelbase, 480 mm reach, and 649 mm top tube. The head tube angle is 65° on the M, L, and XL sizes and 64.5° on the S, and all the sizes share a 75° seat tube angle and 435 mm chainstays.
Note that the relatively slack seat tube angle creates more space at the front of the bike than an average 480 mm reach bike these days - the top tube length of 649 mm is approaching lengths found typically on XL frames.
Digit recommends the M frame for riders 5'5" to 5'9" and the L frame for riders 5'9" to 6'1". At my 5'10" height, I fit neatly into the size chart for the L frame, but after spending some time on it, I recommend that anyone in doubt size down. Update: Digit has revised their sizing recommendations - the current suggested sizes can be viewed here.
I felt right on the cusp of what felt comfortable for me. The reach is right in my ideal ballpark for modern bikes, but the 75° seat tube angle sat me back far enough that the front end of the bike felt too far away from me, making me hyperaware that the seat tube angle was slacker than what I prefer. That feeling of being stretched out toward the front of the bike was exacerbated by a low 623 mm stack and 110 mm head tube.
I asked Tim about the seat tube angle and he explained that the seat tube angle isn't steeper because to steepen it he'd either have to reposition the upper pivot, which would change the linkage behavior, or give up the uninterrupted seat tube, which is nice because it accepts long dropper posts.
All of that said, most of the geometry is spot-on, especially for rolling terrain rather than the ride-up-to-ride-down style that we tend to have in more gravity-oriented zones.
Suspension Design
The obvious talking point about this bike is the suspension design. Tim created the Analog suspension design - named because the strut is an analog of the rocker link typically found at the top of a standard four-bar design.
Essentially, the idea behind the design is that compared to a more conventional dual-link, four-bar design, the upper link assembly is replaced by a strut that's housed in the top tube, and the lower link is placed right behind the bottom bracket. The rear triangle is a single piece, and unlike in many traditional designs that see the upper shock link moving in an arc, the strut is designed so that the rear triangle moves in a straight line relative to the front triangle - a slider, rather than a pivot.
The idea is to keep the instant center from wandering too much, keeping the suspension feeling consistent throughout its travel.
The leverage ratio averages a low 2:1 - the shock moves a full 70 mm as the bike moves through its 140 mm of travel. Both anti-squat and anti-rise are moderate and seem aimed at doing just enough but not too much to quiet the bike down.
Test Bike Setup
To set up the Datum for my proportions and preferences, I slammed the seat forward as far as I could to account to reduce the influence of the relatively slack seat angle. Otherwise, everything else stayed pretty neutral.
I ran the strut with 155 psi and the rebound just a little bit out from the fastest setting. (There isn't a firm end point on the rebound adjuster so it's not realistic to specify clicks.) The strut is accessed where the air valve and adjuster dial poke out of the top tube, and there's a five-position low-speed compression switch and a rebound adjuster at the center of the compression switch that's movable using a 3 mm alley key. That's less adjustment than is available on many of the most popular high-end shocks these days, but Tim says the damping and the amount of adjustment provided by the compression lever can be custom-tuned, and he may offer that as a service to his customers. As set up right now, the compression adjustment is subtle enough that for the most part, I didn't touch the lever mid-ride.
Alicia Leggett
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 26
Height: 5'10" / 178cm
Inseam: 33" / 84cm
Weight: 148 lbs / 67 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @alicelego_
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 26
Height: 5'10" / 178cm
Inseam: 33" / 84cm
Weight: 148 lbs / 67 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @alicelego_
I spent time riding the bike first in Whistler, then in Bellingham, and most recently in Utah.
Climbing
As mentioned above, it took me a bit of tinkering to set up the Datum the way I wanted it, but once I moved the seat forward and sped up the rebound, the bike climbed nicely. Its behavior was very quiet while seated, and there was just a bit of bobbing when mashing on the pedals. On loose, even grades and on choppier trails, the bike held traction nicely, feeling sensitive without giving up too much efficiency.
I didn't love the slack seat tube angle, mainly because it moved my pedaling position far enough back (even with the saddle slammed forward) that the front of the bike felt a bit stretched out. At times, I struggled to feel like I had enough authority over both the front and back ends of the bike at once. I also ended up perched at the nose of the saddle quite a bit, which isn't my preferred position, and required me to be much more dynamic moving forward and backward over the bike than I would be on a bike with a more compact feel.
That said, despite the long top tube, the wheelbase isn't actually any longer than average for a size L bike with mixed wheel sizes, and the bike itself felt fine when maneuvering through twisty sections of trail and up stair steps - as long as I made sure I was in a position to put down power.
On more moderate terrain, especially once I moved down to the Utah desert for a few weeks, the stretched-out position was less noticeable than on some of my climb-steep-to-descend-steep rides in the Northwest. When in flatter, rolling terrain, which required dynamic movement over the bike all the time anyway, the pedaling position felt reasonable. I still found myself perched at the front of the saddle when climbing, but was out of the saddle enough that the forward and backward movement that I felt the bike required felt very natural. And, the slightly slacker seat tube angle meant that flat sections of trail didn't roll too much of my weight forward, which can sometimes contribute to arm, wrist, and hand discomfort on bikes with very steep seat tube angles.
![photo]()
As mentioned above, it took me a bit of tinkering to set up the Datum the way I wanted it, but once I moved the seat forward and sped up the rebound, the bike climbed nicely. Its behavior was very quiet while seated, and there was just a bit of bobbing when mashing on the pedals. On loose, even grades and on choppier trails, the bike held traction nicely, feeling sensitive without giving up too much efficiency.
I didn't love the slack seat tube angle, mainly because it moved my pedaling position far enough back (even with the saddle slammed forward) that the front of the bike felt a bit stretched out. At times, I struggled to feel like I had enough authority over both the front and back ends of the bike at once. I also ended up perched at the nose of the saddle quite a bit, which isn't my preferred position, and required me to be much more dynamic moving forward and backward over the bike than I would be on a bike with a more compact feel.
That said, despite the long top tube, the wheelbase isn't actually any longer than average for a size L bike with mixed wheel sizes, and the bike itself felt fine when maneuvering through twisty sections of trail and up stair steps - as long as I made sure I was in a position to put down power.
On more moderate terrain, especially once I moved down to the Utah desert for a few weeks, the stretched-out position was less noticeable than on some of my climb-steep-to-descend-steep rides in the Northwest. When in flatter, rolling terrain, which required dynamic movement over the bike all the time anyway, the pedaling position felt reasonable. I still found myself perched at the front of the saddle when climbing, but was out of the saddle enough that the forward and backward movement that I felt the bike required felt very natural. And, the slightly slacker seat tube angle meant that flat sections of trail didn't roll too much of my weight forward, which can sometimes contribute to arm, wrist, and hand discomfort on bikes with very steep seat tube angles.
Descending
My experience descending on the Datum was pretty similar to my experience climbing: the suspension performance is quite good, and the geometry is more niche, working well for me in some places and less well in others. When pointed downhill, the Analog suspension does its job precisely, soaking up both small and large hits in a variety of terrain, staying extremely predictable and holding traction nicely.
When the trails got steep, I wished for a higher front end, as the stack is on the short side. That meant that despite the respectable 65-degree head tube angle, I still felt pulled forward over the front wheel in a way that made me feel slightly uneasy. That feeling disappeared, however, once I left the Northwest, and I loved the sporty feel of the bike and the descending position once I was hopping around on choppy, rocky desert trails. It shines on technical cross-country trails that require a very dynamic riding style, and it provided plenty of forgiveness on awkward drops to flat, natural rock doubles, and ledgy stair-steps, both up and down.
While the bike is, in many ways, a generalist - its 140 mm of rear travel, 160 mm fork, and light weight make it a reasonable choice for a variety of terrain, and it'll certainly work on steep all-mountain trails and flatter trail systems alike - I felt happiest on trails with more meandering ups and downs than on the "get up to get down" rides.
I need to mention the sizing caveat again, since I think the size L frame that I rode will feel most natural for riders with long torsos or those taller than me. Being at what I consider the bottom of the proper sizing for that frame (according to me, not the size chart, which puts me in the middle), I was more bothered by the extra space between the slack seat tube and the low front end than taller riders likely would be. For my part, I'd happily take the Datum down any trail bike trail, but I'd be inclined to install some higher rise bars, and possibly an even shorter stem to improve the fit. I have no doubt that those changes would give this bike a chargier feel when pointed downhill.
Digit Datum
Santa Cruz 5010
How Does It Compare?
The most similar bike to the Datum I've ridden recently is the new Santa Cruz 5010, which sports 130 mm of rear travel paired with a 140 mm fork on mullet wheels - so 10 mm smaller than the Datum in terms of rear travel, but with a similar ride feel. However, the Datum has a slightly longer reach and a significantly lower stack, making the riding position feel more strung out than the 5010's - which is compounded by the Datum's seat tube angle being slacker than that of the 5010. Suspension performance is similar on the two bikes, with the Datum giving a bit more sensitivity and the 5010 falling on the more efficient, firmer side of the spectrum. Ounces to ounces, the Datum beats the 5010's weight by 2.4 lbs (1.1 kg).
Compared to my current favorite 140 mm bike, the Propain Hugene, the Datum is a tad more maneuverable, feels slightly more sensitive in its travel, and positions the rider a bit lower over the bike. The Hugene rolls on dual 29" wheels and has a steeper seat tube angle, more stack height, and a marginally steeper head tube angle than the Datum, positioning the rider over rather than in the bike but keep the riding position centered in a way that makes both the front and back of the Hugene very easy to manage and creates a very composed feel. The Datum has a pretty similar riding position, but while the Hugene feels as if it skips in straight lines over the terrain, the Datum wants to be pumped through compressions and maneuvered through all the twists and turns on the trail, giving it a more engaging, rather than quiet feel. The 31.2 lb / 14.2 kg Hugene build that we tested weighs 2.6 lbs (1.2 kg) more than the Datum.
Technical Report
The Digit Datum will initially be sold as a frameset only, so these comments aren't necessarily relevant to buyers' decisions and discussion of parts-for-money value, but, like on any bike, the parts did influence my experience of the ride, so I'll still mention the highlights.
OneUp cockpit: I've been wanting to try the OneUp cockpit for quite a while, so I'm glad I had the opportunity to try the bar and stem on the Datum. The bar and stem combo are quite light, which of course help contribute to the bike's overall low weight, and they feel very comfortable to ride. While there are so many variables at the front of a bike and it's tough to exactly determine how a particular cockpit setup contributes to the overall feel of the ride, I have absolutely no complaints about how the carbon bar felt, and since the ride felt appropriately dampened and precise, I can only assume that the system did its job flawlessly.
SQlab 611 saddle: The SQlab saddle is one that I'm always excited to see on a bike, since it's my all-time favorite. Tim warned us when he sent the bike over that the shape may be polarizing, but maybe I was lucky in that it suits me. SQlab places heavy emphasis on designing products that are "physiologically correct" and work with, not against, the body's natural movement to support longevity on the bike, plus help prevent saddle contact zone and back pain. While I'm not a physiologist or someone who can really evaluate what SQlab claims to do, I can say for sure that SQlab products tend to be tried-and-true winners for me.
Integer strut: And then, of course, there's that strut. It took me a while to make up my mind about the Analog suspension design, mainly because it's up against some serious competition. Mountain bike shocks are so, so good today. What can a simpler, more eccentric newcomer do? The strut did its job, maintaining traction and cushioning the ride on par with some of the other light trail shocks out there. In terms of feel, there's a smaller range of adjustment than most high-end shocks out there, but Tim is open to custom-tuning for his customers. As is, there's quite a bit of compression making the shock feel a bit less plush than most of the competition, and I had to run the rebound quite fast to make it feel composed and responsive. There's a compression adjustment switch that is extremely subtle, but again, that's custom-tunable. In short, the strut with its base tune should work well for most riders who run average, middle-road settings, and the custom-tuning option is great to have, but the design doesn't offer quite the same range of adjustments we're used to seeing.
![photo]()
The Digit Datum will initially be sold as a frameset only, so these comments aren't necessarily relevant to buyers' decisions and discussion of parts-for-money value, but, like on any bike, the parts did influence my experience of the ride, so I'll still mention the highlights.
OneUp cockpit: I've been wanting to try the OneUp cockpit for quite a while, so I'm glad I had the opportunity to try the bar and stem on the Datum. The bar and stem combo are quite light, which of course help contribute to the bike's overall low weight, and they feel very comfortable to ride. While there are so many variables at the front of a bike and it's tough to exactly determine how a particular cockpit setup contributes to the overall feel of the ride, I have absolutely no complaints about how the carbon bar felt, and since the ride felt appropriately dampened and precise, I can only assume that the system did its job flawlessly.
SQlab 611 saddle: The SQlab saddle is one that I'm always excited to see on a bike, since it's my all-time favorite. Tim warned us when he sent the bike over that the shape may be polarizing, but maybe I was lucky in that it suits me. SQlab places heavy emphasis on designing products that are "physiologically correct" and work with, not against, the body's natural movement to support longevity on the bike, plus help prevent saddle contact zone and back pain. While I'm not a physiologist or someone who can really evaluate what SQlab claims to do, I can say for sure that SQlab products tend to be tried-and-true winners for me.
Integer strut: And then, of course, there's that strut. It took me a while to make up my mind about the Analog suspension design, mainly because it's up against some serious competition. Mountain bike shocks are so, so good today. What can a simpler, more eccentric newcomer do? The strut did its job, maintaining traction and cushioning the ride on par with some of the other light trail shocks out there. In terms of feel, there's a smaller range of adjustment than most high-end shocks out there, but Tim is open to custom-tuning for his customers. As is, there's quite a bit of compression making the shock feel a bit less plush than most of the competition, and I had to run the rebound quite fast to make it feel composed and responsive. There's a compression adjustment switch that is extremely subtle, but again, that's custom-tunable. In short, the strut with its base tune should work well for most riders who run average, middle-road settings, and the custom-tuning option is great to have, but the design doesn't offer quite the same range of adjustments we're used to seeing.
Pros
+ Lightweight
+ Unique, effective design that distills common suspension concepts to a simple form
+ Balanced, trail bike-y feel
Cons
- Slack seat angle and low stack height creates a more stretched out riding position
- Small range of rear suspension adjustment options
Pinkbike's Take
| The Digit Datum is something totally different, and I'm glad that it exists. While the geometry is a smidge off from my ideal, the bike does a good job of taking all the essential suspension characteristics - springy, well damped, and predictable - and putting those in a very lightweight, streamlined package. Digit deserves serious kudos for accomplishing that without any major sacrifices, and trail bike riders whose preferences and bodies suit a slack STA, short stack, and long top tube may well find the Digit Datum to be right up their alley. |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
If I made an e-bike version it would be louder, so maybe I'd have to call it the Digit Acoustic, with Analog suspension.
Sorry, I sent you the wrong link about the bushings earlier. It should've been this: digitbikes.com/analog
For a small start-up this is the one shot at nailing a review and getting the most eyeballs on a review it's going to get...and it's the wrong size frame. Seems they should have gone the extra mile and got the tester the right size frame.
From a frame design standpoint it's going to suck to have your geometry dictated by that suspension upper pivot location. Already behind the norm on seat tube angle. How is it going to allow a 160mm travel frame if it can't change the seat tube angle to allow it to be steeper to account for sag and modern geometry.
It does sound like Alicia would have been better off with a smaller frame.
ST angles steeper than 75° really are not that great for everybody.
Another reason this platform would be amazing as a 120/130 bike where some of the sta slackening that happens on steep climbs is mitigated by the reduced travel.
Either way, awesome to see a design that's legitimately trying to do some things differently!
This all means that for taller riders, this STA is likely waaaay better than most production enduro bikes, who deliberately mislead people by only publishing ‘effective’ STA
It's a nice build but not quite in weight-weenie territory, the carbon bars, Next R cranks are quite light; 1750g wheels are light but not spectaularly so; the Mezzer fork, 210mm dropper, steel rail saddle, EXO+ tires, Code brakes are neither light nor heavy in my book. Looking at the PB reviews of the 5010 and Hugene I'd guess my build parts are heavier.
If you feel the stack of a given frame is too low and the reach is too long, you can run more spacers under the stem, and it will effectively shorten the reach and raise the cockpit.
I sent this bike based on a discussion of how it would fit Kaz, it was going to be included in a Field Test. It would've been interesting to see whether fit dominated the roundtable discussion of each riders’ experiences. Since the Mezzer hasn't been well received in PB reviews and because it takes more time to adjust and might be unfamiliar compared to RS/Fox forks, I offered to switch it out for the test, which would've left more uncut steerer, but they said that was unnecessary. I encouraged PB to treat the bike as if it were their own, to cut the handlebars or fit a different stem or contact points if they wanted and warned about the saddle being polarizing.
The Field Test schedule got pushed back a few months however, so the bike was reviewed by Alicia instead. She's actually the first female to ride the production geometry, I realize I probably need to reevaluate the fit suggestions with her experience in mind.
Aside from the fit aspect, this review feels like a win to me. The inventive part of the bike, the new suspension and frame construction, were so well received that they barely warrant special mention, and the shock tune allows it to be dialed in properly with just air pressure and the rebound adjuster. I was pleased to see that Alicia didn’t need to run rebound adjuster full-fast, as this shows that the adjustment range will work for riders who are lighter than 140lbs. I’m about 200lbs and have the adjuster close to the middle of the range, the slow end should work for riders approaching 300lbs. The damping range might be adequate beyond those limits but I didn’t design for that and I’ve not tested it yet, riders beyond these limits typically benefit from custom tuning, which is *relatively* straightforward on the Integer strut.
I figure that even if all the information is correct and complete going in (which it never is), there's always a chance with any new idea that things will be misunderstood or incorrect assumtions will get made. So it's best for to help get the story straight with the most interested commenters/readers/infulencers before it starts to spread.
But I'm certain that the trails I ride day-in and day-out are as steep as most people will ever consistently ride. Right on the edge of climbable for even the strongest and most fit riders.
I just had a custom bike built 2 months ago. Largely mirrors the dims of this Digit. 75* STA is what I spec'ed, because that is the best overall compromise.
Geometry is tough to talk about since all of the numbers are so tightly coupled.
Some road and XC pros run aggressive setback seatposts just to get their fit right.
As someone with really average proportions (5’9”, 32” inseam, zero ape index) I’d say a couple degrees steeper than 75 is ideal.
Also, it’s easier to get a setback post than a forward facing one-at least if you’re looking for a dropper.
If someone has longer legs and a higher saddle, the difference between effective at frame and effective at saddle increases...
A more accurate method for describing seat tube position would be actual angle and perpendicular offset from BB axis, however I think for a lot of people that would be more confusing.
I noticed that this year in the Alps: the steeps I was able to ride easily on my trusty 2015 bike just two years ago suddenly were not manageable anymore and I had to push… just because the bike mags said a slack STA is impossible these days. These editors are able to use some strange voodoo magic spells to suddenly make all last-year‘s bikes useless!
9point8
The BB shell is thick walled, machined aluminum, which is perfectly suited to press fit, they've been silent and trouble free in testing since 2018.
I figured it might make sense given all this microscopic attention to seat angle, without context of the differences between STA and effective STA. But a bit of adjustibikity may help with future reviews...?
I sent this bike based on a discussion of how it would fit Kaz, the intent was to include it in the Field Test which is on the front page now, but there was a schedule conflict (my guess is the Yeti embargo). Instead, Alicia got the bike to test and her 2" shorter torso wasn't as great a match (though again, she told me that she was able to put herself where she wanted to be over the bike). I would've loved to hear how it stacks up against the mainstream players in the Field Test, and it would have been interesting to see whether fit dominated the discussion of each riders’ experiences. Anyway, where I'm going with this is that I don't imagine this could happen with future reviews, most other sites have only a few testers on staff and I deal with them personally just as I do with my customers. How's your bike working, Trevor*? *I'm 98% sure you're Trevor the Digit Datum owner.
It's a meee!
Yes so, we just finished getting the frame wrapped, and most of my cockpit finally arrived. Speaking of 9point8 their components are glorious! I'll finally be able to take it out, but sadly it's just in time for my area of Oregon to have 6" of snow.
Soooo almost. I've almost had a chance to ride it. But it looks so good I might just frame it and mount it on the wall instead! JK I'm going to ride the hell out of it
I'm just a bit worried that mullets are going out of style and the lightweight construction of this bike will be wasted on most riders who want this style of bike. I feel like the XC crowd is a bit more forgiving of special shock setups and the slacker STA.
I don't think of mullet as being a style thing, I think it's related to size, at 6'0" (taller than average) I find the smaller rear wheel allows me to maneuver the bike on steeps, this isn't an issue for my taller friends, and it's gotta be worse for shorter riders. Both taller and (most) shorter riders appreciate the larger front wheel. It can be difficult to fit a 29" front wheel under the shortest riders, I might offer a 27.5" front wheel if there's demand for a smaller size.
Well usually here that's called "set it and forget it". When someone specs an inexpensive fork or shock with few adjustments, it's good, simple, "easy to set up*". But when someone tries something new, and the tune isn't _yet_ exactly what you want, it's a "con"?
*(or really really hard to set up/get dialed, depending on perspective)
155lbs and 5'10 - probably not what they were thinking for size large - plus taller women have longer legs to torso ratios.
Basically, this isn't a terribly female friendly frame. With a bit more weight, the stiction would also have been less of an issue.
The bike isn't just "the wrong shape for Alicia". It's geometry is a bit out of whack for most people. They stuck with the 2015 STA (according to Tim it's because of pivot placement) but still wanted 2022 reach and ended up with too long ETT in every size. Looking at the chart there is no size that would fit me properly both standing and sitting: I'd have to prioritize one. And my dimensions/proportions are perfectly average.
Not every shape of bike fits every shape of person; just like not every shape of helmet or shoe does. There's little point in building tribal conflicts over whether wide shoes are wrong, or oval helmets, or chamois or flat pedals; just find something that works for you and use that.
I experienced similar resistance when I launched DirtBaggies, people who would never consider wearing any chamois being terribly offended that I'd presented a new kind of underwear for people who wanted better chamois'. If you don't like it, you don't have to wear it, and you'll likely never see it.
I'm sure I read somewhere that am initial prototype used the internals from a fork? Am I making that up? I could see that some people might be reassured if that was still the case, although I accept it gives you less control and makes you reliant on others...
The only other question I would have is whether you see any wear similar to a clevis mount? I imagine that the longer shock mitigates most of this, but just interested in whether there is much difference in lifespan that you have noticed?
Cheers for the response and congrats on an awesome bike!
TLDR, the clevis problems aren’t present with Analog because there’s no yoke or trunnion, and the bushings to keep everything working well.
Something worth considering: If the same wheel sizes were used on both ends, the STA would be steeper by a degree (76), of course so would the HTA.; add an angleset and call it even.
There's a hole in the front of the head tube through which the shock is installed/removed. The cross section (and thus hoop strength) of the top/front of the head tube is much greater when using the drop-in IS system.
Alicia (148lbs) was close to (but not maxxing out) the fast end of the rebound adjust range; I'm about 200lbs close to the middle of the range; you'll need to add a few clicks to make things a bit slower from where I have it.
The potential ability to run 2 bottles and have a straight downtube that doesn’t catch on big ledge up moves would be really nice.
It’s a lot easier to add setback than trying to jam a seat way forward if you’re sizing to a bell curve of “average” riders.
Tim Lane: I made the bike you want.
Commenters: No, not like that...
Fewer parts alone does not make for less flex. The forces still ne to go somewhere. It's a tradeoff between distributing forces though many pivots and bearings versus concentrating the forces on far fewer pivots and bearings. There is also a need to make sure the frame members in between those few pivots can handle _all_ the forces that would have been distributed throughout the rear end if there were more pivots. It's not even close to as simple as "less pivots means less flex".
Fewer bearings result in less lash through the system. Wide spaced bearings handle loads better. Short structural members (e.g. links) flex less under a given load (non-existent links effectively have zero length), closed frame triangles are structurally efficient. I elaborated a little more on this here: digitbikes.com/analog
"Up front, I ran the Manitou Mezzer fork with 75 psi in the top chamber, 45 psi in the lower chamber, 4 clicks of rebound, 2 clicks of high-speed compression, and 6 speeds of low-speed compression."
If you had a custom tune surely you'd need less adjusments, or none at all if the tune were "perfect".
Also - @Alicialeggett - seems like this was the Mezzer pro? I think the expert only airs in the bottom of the lowers vs. top & bottom...
I'll be making a service video/manual, the quickest service for people not wanting to open their shocks will be talking their local mechanic through the process, second line of defense will be mailing in for service. I could send out loaners if turnaround time is looking slow. Extra shocks are available to frame buyers (I'm guessing there might be fettlers who want to do A-B testing on different shim stacks, etc...).
It's owner was 5'10" and test rode the Large Datum, we fitted it with a 32mm stem and moved the seat forward. He ordered the Medium.
Not that interesting: pretty much every VPP design with the high shock mount used an asymmetrical rear triangle.
Internal routing IS NOT user-friendly. In any form. Not. At all.
The only concern I can think of is perhaps if you’re on a trip/race and need to replace something in a hurry. In that case just tape or zip tie the cables/hoses to outside of the frame. They’ll look no worse than on external guides, and you can put them back in the frame at a later time.
The ugliness is totally subjective: being able to physically see how easy it is to work on something is quite beautiful to me. External brake hoses look, to my eye, a thousand percent prettier than, say, a brake hose that dives into a chainstay for less than half the routed length (see recent Atherton bikes). I do appreciate that you make the brake hose actually run internal for the entire length of each tube, but my brain automatically sees the ugliness of doing maintenance on any internal hoses. I currently own a frame with full end-to-end sleeved internal routing, literally the best possible case (totally silent with no more than one entry and one exit for each cable/hose), and it's still not prettier to my eye than a smartly routed external brake hose.
And, this is also subjective, zipties around a whole tube is way worse looking than external guides. External guides are intentional and functional, that's a beautiful thing to some. The hack of zipties around the whole thing is ugly AF. Plus to put them back in later, you have to do _another_ bleed, and that's an ugly thought as well!
The bike looks amazing, seems to perform as intended, and is full of great ideas. But internal routing, and especially calling that routing user-friendly... well, that's not one of the great ideas. Subjectively.
If that's your only objection, ask nicely and I might weld cable guides on for you (for a charge).
Here's some more info: youtube.com/watch?v=K9gkEhr22qI&t=215s and youtube.com/watch?v=_hCL0W2V9N8.
Can we approach this logically?
Bikes are awesome, ergo building bikes is awesome, ergo you are awesome.
Proofed.
Keep up the awesome.
Cool bike regardless
Regular shocks don't have bushings to adequately resist the side loading/misalignment which they're often subject to, so ball joints are sometimes employed to allow some deflection/misalignment. Yokes and trunnions tend to worsen the misalignment issue which is why ball-joints have been of interest recently. Trunnions however limit you to using single ball joints, these aren't ideal though they sometimes help. Double ball joints work much better, but they don't seem suited to this mechanism. I could use a ball joint on the end of the strut, but I don't think it would achieve much. I fear it might be heavier, bulkier, and less reliable.
Also, any merit to the idea of a vertical linkage off the top tube like a Nomad where the upper pivot is to just provide additional lateral support to the strut's movement? Help with side forces on the bushings inside, keeping things aligned better, and just giving extra rigidity to any side movements? You done any modelling or analysis on this? Or any benefit would be nominal? Seems like the weight addition would be minimal, and I guess a couple more bearings.
1) a line can be defined by two points.
b: my aluminum, domestic manfacturing set up is well suited to small runs
I'll be ordering when the 29/29 version is released!
But: seat tube too slack, chainstays on XL too short and pressfit BB.
I'll keep an eye out for V 2.0, keep going Tim!
I see the geometry as a personal preference thing, not everyone likes the same shoes or helmet, unfortunately you can't please everyone.
The press fit BB allows the concentric lower link pivot to be incredibly simple. Here's how it fits together digitbikes.com/concentric-bb
The BB shell is thick walled, machined aluminum, which is perfectly suited to press fit, they've been silent and trouble free in testing since 2018.
Does anybody have news about the Insolent DH bike that used a fox 40 stanchion?
Nice looking bike though and the weight figures etc are impressive!
Seriously though, the BB shell is thick walled, machined aluminum, which is perfectly suited to press fit, they've been silent and trouble free (in testing since 201
I'll be making a video soon to show how the 30mm or 24mm axles install.
For 24mm spindle cranks (Shimano), a tube is used as the BB pivot / suspension axle, it has a 24mm ID which the crank spindle rides inside.
www.balfa.wooyek.pl/Images/background.gif
www.mtbr.com/attachments/starship-ti-jpg.13441
I once had a bike with a Ti front and steel rear, it wasn’t as light as full Ti. At one point the steel dropout broke in a huge (maybe 50’) fall, but it was repairable.
www.mtbr.com/threads/2001-boulder-starship-lt.20086
@deeeight Perhaps you didn't see the pivot and link positioned between the front triangle and rear wheel axle (behind the bottom bracket you can see it in images #7 and #9 in the review). Analog is a multi-link mechanism, whereas the Boulder used a simple single-pivot.
www.mbr.co.uk/news/bike_news/resistance-insolent-368791
But actually @deeeight is correct, the old Sessions during the era of the Liquid, before ABP, were faux-bar bikes like Konas.
And thats not a kona.
For me the graphs are a development tool - if they don't work out, don't continue with development! I knew I had to show them at launch because the Tantrum guy got raked over the coals for not doing so. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the eating (i.e. the suspension performance) has been good enough, almost unrematkably so, that I don't think people care whether it was baked at gas mark 5 for 40 minutes, or gas mark 4 for 50.
The BB shell is thick walled, machined aluminum, which is perfectly suited to press fit, they've been silent and trouble free in testing since 2018.
Besides: Mullet-only is a non-starter anyways.
Weight-weenieism wasn't a goal so much as a side-effect, I explain this a little more here: digitbikes.com/analog