Leo Kokkonen, founder and CEO of Pole has posted photos of a new prototype bike that has 190mm of travel front and rear.
The bike is an example of the next development of Pole’s suspension design and uses the same linkage as the
upcoming eMTB that we saw on social media in February.
Leo is currently testing the suspension concept in Madeira and was able to give us a number of details of the bike ahead of its launch later this year. The four bar linkage uses hollow bonded links and is apparently the culmination of two years’ worth of development. It is able to be used with eMTBs, regular drivetrains and, interestingly, gearbox bikes, something Pole hasn’t previously explored.
Leo has also been posting plenty of photos of the new eMTB that uses the same linkage design
The philosophy behind this bike was apparently “more is more” and that is the reasoning behind its 190mm travel, making it one of, if not the, longest travel non-downhill bikes going.
Also sizeable is the headtube that comes with the 1.8” standard. This is a standard we first saw at Eurobike in 2019 and,
while we were originally told it was implemented for aesthetic reasons on eMTBs, Leo actually sees a number of performance advantages to the standard too, he said:
| Head tube is 1.8" with ZS 66. With adaptor the bike can be ridden with 1.5", and also dual crown. My take on the 1.8" is that stiffness is near the dual crown without the turning radius limitation. |
Photos: Leo Kokkonen
Leo couldn’t give us a full geometry run down at this time but some key figures include an 80° seat tube and a high bb. The bike can also apparently be run with 29”/29”, 27.5”/27.5” or mullet wheel sizes. Both bikes will be available later this year.
Watch
Leo's walkaround of the bike on Instagram TV here.
www.pinkbike.com/forum/listcomments/?threadid=129057&pagenum=7088
Custom built for Goldmember, the Austin powers villain
Pole Bicycles: Hold my beer...
When I'm in the saddle I care more about the function than the form.
The curved down tube a Big saggy pregnant beer belly and the linkage upon linkage the meth teeth.
EDIT- Comical gotcha attempt? I don't know.
Lets get some perspective people... we all look like total idiots to the general public in our enduro fox tld evoc gear and silly bouncy bikes. .. don't for second think we look slightly cool to anyone but the "bros", so don't get so caught up on perceived looks. We all look like jokers to start with.
I kinda like it.. limited chain slap. loads of clearance for any size front chain ring, opened up BB area so smidgen easier to clean. Deffo some advantages to this design. Different is good in a lazy industry which has lost some of the old school experimentation that was fun and drove change, and where a new model = 1deg slacker and a new paint job. Let's see how it rides from the reviews.
When new standards are backwards compatible, they're fine.
But I still think anything over 160mm should be dual crown due to creaking issues.
Specialized Enduro team messed up by not running DH38 fork for their races.
FCs are so long now that knee contact on upper stanchion shouldn't be an issue.
Really want to mount a DH38 m.1 or Nero R to my G16 29er to see how it is. Really not digging the 36 170mm up front now
I have loved all the Pole bikes to have come out (inc. the machine) but this one is hideous.
Sarcasm...
Good
I wonder if Leo can ride?
And if he can I wonder if he is a good test rider... or if he could be overcome by the smell of his own farts?
How objective he is when his own creations are concerned might be another matter, though.
1. Good looking bike, average performance
2. Terrible looking bike, +10 horsepower, wins races because of its technology/geo/specs
Which one would you choose?
I think Id still choose #1 haha
You wanna ride that?
Truth is your going to need a bike that looks good AND functions good to make it viable.
For reference, let's play a game and start with a list of design criteria:
-Top-notch suspension kinematics and behavior (yet to be verified in this case, though).
-Competitive geometry.
-Clerance for a meaty rear 29" tire.
-Leaving the BB area free of pivots for mounting a motor or putting an "acoustic drivetrain" in there.
-Room or two bottles inside the front triangle. Personally, I can't care less about this, but seems to be an important factor for a lot of people.
-Should not weigh a metric ton.
Please submit your sketches, or even better rideable bikes. There seems to be no lack of volunteers to provide critique based on just a couple of photos.
And I honestly don’t see why the design from Pole should be better than any of those in any of the aspects you mentioned.
There is nothing "innovative" about this bike. Genuine innovation should do at least one of these:
- solve an existing problem
- introduce a new functionality
- perform an existing functionality noticeably better
- simplify the design
- make the bike lighter
- make the bike stronger
- make the bike cheaper or easier to produce
Being different for the sake of being different is not innovation. This bike uses a decades-old suspension system, most likely geometry that you can get on a lot of other bikes, nothing indicates it should be lighter, it sure won't be cheaper, their chosen production method has been proven incompatible with their quality control (frames splitting in half) and nothing on this frame is simplified compared to the competition.
Where is the innovation again?
And yes, it is uber ugly, which does matter for consumers. You're kidding yourself if you think it doesn't. People didn't want the R3ACT bikes despite genuinely superior performance and an actually innovative suspension system (which the Pole doesn't have). People still laugh at the Multipla even though for the intended use that car was fantastically practical.
TL;DR: imagine I'm in the market for a long travel "climbable DH bike" like this and you're a Pole sales guy. Give me a single good reason not to buy a Canfield One.
- introduce a new functionality -> The kinematics can turn out to be something very interesting.
- perform an existing functionality noticeably better -> Same as above.
- simplify the design –> Yes, in a certain way.
- make the bike cheaper or easier to produce -> Very likely.
Decades-old suspension system? Where did that come from? Could you point one example that is even closely similar?
When it comes to R3ACT suspension, as far as I've understood opinions on its performance were and are still somewhat polarizing.
One thing though, I don’t think it needs 2 Pole logos’s on each side, in the same way VW transporters do not need massive VW badges on the rear panels and the word transporter down the sills.
80* seat angles are ok
Me, I hate people - rocks are ok…
i dont know, but i got vaccinated today and there were people fighting about whos first - i am pretty sure i like rocks more than people.
www.bicyclebluebook.com/marketplace/buy-now/2000-trek-vrx-400-17479
I find it odd they are still in business after the poor quality of product and the even worse customer service. Do yourself a favour and avoid Pole like the pandemic.
Flexy, breaky...
If you are to come up with a solution, that differs from the ones that are out there already, and a lot of which work really well, than you need a reason, especially at the price point at which Pole are selling their aluminum frames.
In the past, the different manufacturing process and the look that went with it were enough for some customers. Or the radical geometry figures.
But I doubt many people are going to buy this for it’s look, and Pole’s geometry isn’t as unusual anymore, there are other ultra long options out there. And even if someone is convinced by the 1.5” head tube approach, that will not justify buying a frame. At this point I think this will be a hard sell.
"Put a paper bag on its head"
Rape, no
Kinda the definition. When you're describing a woman as 'it', it's most definitely objectification that reduces a woman to sexual pleasure and no more.
Quite frankly, I couldn't give a shit if people don't like me saying it. It's a problem and it's rearing its ugly head here. It's repulsive and I know it wouldn't make me feel welcome and safe if I was a woman.
Or alternately me describing a bike as an "it" has you one triggered little SJW
Using social justice warrior as an insult is interesting (bullshit). Trying for a world where people treat each other nicer is a bad thing? Alternatively, not working towards that is people being selfish.
You’re not really coming across all that well yourself perched all the way up there on that high horse
I bet it rips tho! I bet the swing arm design helps mitigate chain slap though.
That 1.8" thing is not even a standard and it already has bored me enough.
ep1.pinkbike.org/p5pb6479874/p5pb6479874.jpg
Biig cheeeers Leo!!!! This is the way!!!
No, you wouldn't. As another commenter said, if that's the case why are you not on one of those R3ACT bikes from Marin or Polygon? By all accounts they literally outperformed everything else available. But they were damn ugly so no one bought them.
It's all fine saying on the Internet how we all put performance before looks, but when it comes to actually spending money, the truth is we consider both at least equally. And there's nothing wrong with that either. We do it with cars, home appliances etc. so why not bikes?
Or egalises the motor the disadvantages?
Need some natives here.
Blarf
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Curie
canecreek.com/product/dbair-il
; )
In 3 years all the big manufacturers with big money will profit from what this bike here is profing. And it will look smooth, like a Speci SJ EVO or something.
What have you contributed?
Idler high pivot bikes are the way forward
This is just garbage.