# Another unique flat



## nightofthefleming (Jun 14, 2009)

Saw these on a flickr for NAHBS, no info, but they seem very thin and look a little different. Sorry if it's already been posted


----------



## alex55 (Jul 29, 2007)

Those look pretty cool but I have a hard time imagining them standing up to much abuse do to the single bearing. The amount of torque about that part of the spindle is pretty high which is why almost every pedal has a spindle going all the way through the pedal body. I would think that under a severe enough impact (drops to flat, rock gardens, etc), that single bearing would deform its part of the pedal body and cause it to get loose and wobble until it finally breaks. Thats just I think would happen. I also originally thought that lefties wouldn't be able to support any sort of weight without the wheel breaking off. just shows how much I know. Other than that, those pedals look pretty sick. tons of grip and super low profile.


----------



## Kaizer (Jul 19, 2010)

Wow! This is cool! Looks nicer than the flypaper pedals too! Hope it's not propriety to cranksets like the flypaper does.


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

alex55 said:


> Those look pretty cool but I have a hard time imagining them standing up to much abuse do to the single bearing. The amount of torque about that part of the spindle is pretty high which is why almost every pedal has a spindle going all the way through the pedal body. I would think that under a severe enough impact (drops to flat, rock gardens, etc), that single bearing would deform its part of the pedal body and cause it to get loose and wobble until it finally breaks. Thats just I think would happen. I also originally thought that lefties wouldn't be able to support any sort of weight without the wheel breaking off. just shows how much I know. Other than that, those pedals look pretty sick. tons of grip and super low profile.


yep a lot of force held by one piece...maybe better for xc


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

Kaizer said:


> Wow! This is cool! Looks nicer than the flypaper pedals too! Hope it's not propriety to cranksets like the flypaper does.


no they are not proprietory


----------



## nightofthefleming (Jun 14, 2009)

alex55 said:


> Those look pretty cool but I have a hard time imagining them standing up to much abuse do to the single bearing. The amount of torque about that part of the spindle is pretty high which is why almost every pedal has a spindle going all the way through the pedal body. I would think that under a severe enough impact (drops to flat, rock gardens, etc), that single bearing would deform its part of the pedal body and cause it to get loose and wobble until it finally breaks. Thats just I think would happen. I also originally thought that lefties wouldn't be able to support any sort of weight without the wheel breaking off. just shows how much I know. Other than that, those pedals look pretty sick. tons of grip and super low profile.


Yeah, I'm not promoting them or saying anything about them really. Just something unique I saw, and everybody is always talking about the latest and greatest (and thinnest) pedals, so I thought I would share.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

*I hope these work!*



alex55 said:


> Those look pretty cool but I have a hard time imagining them standing up to much abuse do to the single bearing. The amount of torque about that part of the spindle is pretty high which is why almost every pedal has a spindle going all the way through the pedal body. I would think that under a severe enough impact (drops to flat, rock gardens, etc), that single bearing would deform its part of the pedal body and cause it to get loose and wobble until it finally breaks. Thats just I think would happen. I also originally thought that lefties wouldn't be able to support any sort of weight without the wheel breaking off. just shows how much I know. Other than that, those pedals look pretty sick. tons of grip and super low profile.


Hey Folks,

Its looks like they do use two bearings per pedal:

"Freerider is an ultra-thin pedal designed for off-road and trick riding. It features a forged body, large platform and an array of pins that allow you to customize the grip. Although it looks like it couldn't handle much abuse, let alone the forces associated with freeriding, VP says that it uses a proprietary axle and two bearings per pedal-one to handle radial loads, and one to handle thrust loads.
Pricing info has yet to be determined, but VP assures me it, "It won't be stupidly expensive." Visit www.vp-usa.com for more info."

Time will tell if they make the grade but I'm voting for them to succeed. I heard from a company rep that:
•	Pedal is thinner than the axle
•	Spring for durability testing on the design, then rider testing
•	They're hoping to introduce this as a new model for Interbike
•	You can follow their progress on FB or twitter to keep up to date

It looks like they may have cracked a pedal conundrum. That conundrum is how to manufacture a traditionally mounted pedal in which the thickness of the platform is well inside the diameter of the spindle. I've ridden the Flypaper pedals and currently have the Canfield Crampon pedals on 3 of my bikes so I'm aware of the benefits of this design. The Canfield pedal still positions your foot on top of the spindle and IMHO that where the Crampon is inferior to the Flypaper.

All that said I'm thankful for and appreciate the effort and innovation that Bike Doc with his Flypaper pedals, the Canfield Bros with the Crampons and these guys are all treating us to!

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## NWS (Jun 30, 2010)

I am intrigued, though I'm not sure if I'm willing to be the guinea pig...

Any idea what the price will be?


----------



## thrasher_s (Oct 5, 2009)

As an aggressive 200lb+ rider, I am always nervous about durability. This isn't the first pedal I thought I might replace my Crampons with when I kill them.

However, they refuse to die. Based on my record with cheaper pedals, they are worth it.

EDIT: I heard a rumor there is a Crampon 2.0 in the works. This could be old news though.


----------



## 317000 (Mar 2, 2007)

I love the "armchair engineers" who can look at a picture of a product and immediately delineate as to its quality, strength or durability. Truly a valuable ability. 

As if it needs to be said, tons of money goes into the R&D and general engineering of a product like this well before launch. That usually means plenty of FEA and months of field/lab testing. It is very unlikely that a company will spend the tens of thousands of dollars to launch a product that they are not fully confident in. 

Parts of this nature are nearly always designed to withstand double or triple the amount of stress that would ever be found in consumer use.


----------



## NWS (Jun 30, 2010)

dowst said:


> I love the "armchair engineers" who can look at a picture of a product and immediately delineate as to its quality, strength or durability. Truly a valuable ability.
> 
> As if it needs to be said, tons of money goes into the R&D and general engineering of a product like this well before launch. That usually means plenty of FEA and months of field/lab testing. It is very unlikely that a company will spend the tens of thousands of dollars to launch a product that they are not fully confident in.
> 
> Parts of this nature are nearly always designed to withstand double or triple the amount of stress that would ever be found in consumer use.


You are an optimist with a lot of faith. I've seen enough worthless products in my time to be extremely skeptical of the claims above. Those things do happen often, for sure, but not always. There are also plenty of half-baked ideas that make it all the way to retail, so the customers end up doing all of the product testing.

If a failed product just meant I had to rip-and-replace, it wouldn't be a big deal, but if a pedal fails at the wrong moment it will produce a trip to the hospital.


----------



## Dgtlbliss (Aug 21, 2008)

Keep in mind, freestyle fixie riders use these pedals too. Could be that these are not for the DH segment at all.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

*Another One!*



michaelsnead said:


> Hey Folks,
> 
> Its looks like they do use two bearings per pedal:
> 
> ...


Hi Folks,

Here is yet another thin pedal design that looks to have the thickness of the platform well inside the diameter of the spindle. There is even less info available on these pedals than the VP pedals as I couldn't even find the name of the manufacturer. That said here is what I found from Pinkbike:








"There isn't much info to be had on these neat looking pedals, but one has to wonder how long they would last with such a short axle. There is no arguing that they are thin! Total weight for a pair is 112 grams!"

Pinkbike post is here: http://www.pinkbike.com/news/taipei-cycle-show-random.html

Once again, I hope these guys make the grade as well. I say that because I believe if someone is successful bringing this design to market we'll all benefit. The key benefit we're missing from other traditionally mounted pedals is having the thickness of the platform well inside the diameter of the spindle. Certainly there are now a number of thin, light, large platform pedals but none, which I'm aware of, with this particular feature.

If anyone else can share some additional info on these pedals, or any other prototypes you're aware of, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## doesyourchainhanglow (Sep 27, 2010)

GOD those look unstable, i would annihilate those things...


----------



## supramk388 (Mar 6, 2007)

*Always imatated but NEVER duplicated...*



michaelsnead said:


> All that said I'm thankful for and appreciate the effort and innovation that Bike Doc with his Flypaper pedals, the Canfield Bros with the Crampons and these guys are all treating us to!
> 
> Michael:thumbsup:


Agreed Michael :thumbsup:

Just got in a new set of these:










Canfield FTW!!!!!!!


----------



## The Dude (Jan 19, 2004)

doesyourchainhanglow said:


> GOD those look unstable, i would annihilate those things...


end of thread/ 

i would try them


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

michaelsnead said:


> Hey Folks,
> 
> Its looks like they do use two bearings per pedal:
> 
> ...


Hey Folks,

Here's an updated photo of their latest version of this pedal that they're showing off at Sea Otter:

VP Components axle-less DH-1








It looks like they may be considering a name change which will probably happen several times again before they launch the product.

I have no idea if they can succeed regarding the durability issue but the look of this pedal is very exciting to me!

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## b-kul (Sep 20, 2009)

doesyourchainhanglow said:


> GOD those look unstable, i would annihilate those things...


you know the point of thin pedals is to be more stable than traditional pedals.


----------



## Scary (Jun 11, 2007)

Dammit.I just bought 2 sets of crampons.Stupid...innovation!


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

Scary said:


> Dammit.I just bought 2 sets of crampons.Stupid...innovation!


Hey Mr. Scary,

I feel your pain....I have 3 sets of Crampons! Oh Well this is a wonderful problem to have if they succeed in billing a durable product using this design. I have a feeling my jump bike and unicycle are going to be upgraded with a set of Crampons.

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## dirtydownhill (Aug 11, 2006)

I rode VPs way back when, Id give 'em a shot. Whats the worst that could happen? I mean they could shear off and I might lacerate my jewel pouch. Small price to pay for a thin pedal.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

michaelsnead said:


> Hey Folks,
> 
> Here's an updated photo of their latest version of this pedal that they're showing off at Sea Otter:
> 
> ...


Hi Folks,

While Mtbr.com is my first choice for news of the mountain bike world it looks like Pinkbike has shared a lot more info about this cool looking pedal. Here is what I found:

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/VP-Prototype-Pedals-Sea-Otter-Day-3.html

_"When it hits production, VP's DH-1 will be their premium platform pedal, as well as the thinnest at just 6mm (not including pins). VP can use such a drastically slim body on the DH-1's because of the novel short axle that does not run through the entire width of the body - each pedal axle is well under two inches long! The stubby, but very stout looking axles will ride on a paring of a very large sealed bearing and a loose ball system. If you are wondering why VP would use a loose ball bearing, it is because it allows them to use much larger and more resilient ball bearings because they do not need the extra room of the sealed bearing's inner and outer bearing races. While the bulge in the pedal body that houses both bearings looks quite large, it is actually in the same position is the wrench flats found on a more standard pedal. Expect to see a production version of the DH-1's that will have a more refined body shape and possibly different pin positions during our coverage of Interbike 2011."_

Suddenly September feels like a long way off for this excited consumer!

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## albeant (Feb 24, 2004)

*Ht Ae01*

Here's another one that belongs on this thread Looks pretty decent, if not revolutionary:


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

*Specialized Serves Up a Unique Thin Pedal!*

Hey Folks,

This horse race is getting hot! Now it looks like Specialized is in the game. I learned the following from Pinkbike: http://www.pinkbike.com/news/Specialized-prototype-pedals.html

"First off is the new Specialized flat pedal. The brainchild of FSR engineer Jason Chamberlain, the new pedal is a true 10mm thick at the spindle. Through the use of an ingenious, patented, bearing system at both ends, this slick new platform will be the absolute thinnest pedal on the market. Unlike other pedals that cheat and measure the outer edges, or have a huge lump your foot sits on, this one is concave, has a multitude of pin positions and undercut, adjustable custom pins. When hit, they will break off at the base and still be easily removed, unlike a set screw."








Man&#8230;am I looking forward to this year's Interbike where I believe we'll all learn who actually has one of these in production?

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## CombatMutt (Jan 3, 2011)

When running DH, I'm wearing a full face helmet, body armor, knee pads, and 5Ten shoes, so I'm not overly concerned about a few ounces of shaved weight. I'm not racing, so its possible that this thin pedal craze isn't directed at me. Having smashed my pedals on rocks on several occasions, and being able to pedal away is excellent. Having them shatter, and stab me in the ankle, well that would suck pretty bad.
I'll keep my thick, bombproof pedals.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

CombatMutt said:


> When running DH, I'm wearing a full face helmet, body armor, knee pads, and 5Ten shoes, so I'm not overly concerned about a few ounces of shaved weight. I'm not racing, so its possible that this thin pedal craze isn't directed at me. Having smashed my pedals on rocks on several occasions, and being able to pedal away is excellent. Having them shatter, and stab me in the ankle, well that would suck pretty bad.
> I'll keep my thick, bombproof pedals.


Hey Mr. Mutt,

I agree with you regarding wearing full safety gear while riding DH and not being overly concerned about weight. I'm also not a racer and ride just for fun. However, weight savings would be at the bottom of the list when you tally up the advantages of thin pedals. There are many threads you can research that go into the subject. That said these are the two major advantages for me.

1) Thinner pedals equal fewer rock strikes in the first place. Avoiding impact goes a long way to saving pedals, crashes, etc.
2) The key benefit we're missing from other traditionally mounted pedals is having the thickness of the platform well inside the diameter of the spindle. Certainly there are now a number of thin, light, large platform pedals but none, which I'm aware of, with this particular feature. If you've ever had the opportunity to ride a set of Fly Paper pedals you'll know the incredible benefit this feature provides.

I currently have Canfield Crampons on three of my bikes and wouldn't go back to a thicker pedal. In my experience the degree of advantage to thin pedals is analogous to amount of advantage supplied by height adjustment seat posts.

Good Riding,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

CombatMutt said:


> When running DH, I'm wearing a full face helmet, body armor, knee pads, and 5Ten shoes, so I'm not overly concerned about a few ounces of shaved weight. I'm not racing, so its possible that this thin pedal craze isn't directed at me. Having smashed my pedals on rocks on several occasions, and being able to pedal away is excellent. Having them shatter, and stab me in the ankle, well that would suck pretty bad.
> I'll keep my thick, bombproof pedals.


Thin has nothing to do with weight... the major advantages are pedal clearance and moving your foot closer to the spindle. Maybe you should try before you make up your mind?


----------



## zburt (Jun 9, 2007)

I would love them for XC! I can't tell you how many times I ride with guys clipped in and they wreck and can't get out in time. I ride flats now and love the fact that I can put my foot down without hesitation. Looking forward to how the style of flats will lower the chance of pedal roll and strikes. But for XC I want them to be sub 200grams. Really like the Canfield's but to heavy. This is a great time for anyone that rides flats, huge benefits to be reaped from the new technology.


----------



## CombatMutt (Jan 3, 2011)

michaelsnead said:


> Hey Mr. Mutt,
> 
> I agree with you regarding wearing full safety gear while riding DH and not being overly concerned about weight. I'm also not a racer and ride just for fun. However, weight savings would be at the bottom of the list when you tally up the advantages of thin pedals. There are many threads you can research that go into the subject. That said these are the two major advantages for me.
> 
> ...


I have not had the opportunity to ride the Fly Paper pedals, so I am coming at this from the standpoint of not having a lot of trust in something so thin, for what I would need them for.
I have heard of the Canfield Crampons, and seen pics of them; are they as thin as the Fly Papers? They look to me, to be thicker. I certainly understand the benefits of having the thickness of the platform well inside the diameter of the spindle, and maybe one day I'll find a much thinner pedal than I'm running now, that I can have confidence in. But not with the added expense of replacing cranks.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

CombatMutt said:


> I have not had the opportunity to ride the Fly Paper pedals, so I am coming at this from the standpoint of not having a lot of trust in something so thin, for what I would need them for.
> I have heard of the Canfield Crampons, and seen pics of them; are they as thin as the Fly Papers? They look to me, to be thicker. I certainly understand the benefits of having the thickness of the platform well inside the diameter of the spindle, and maybe one day I'll find a much thinner pedal than I'm running now, that I can have confidence in. But not with the added expense of replacing cranks.


Hi Mr. Mutt,

The Crampons are dramatically thicker than the Fly Paper pedals as they're 6mm at the edge of the pedal and 17mm at the spindle. Therefore your foot sets on top of the spindle rather than inside the diameter of the spindle. If memory serves the Fly Paper is 3.9mm thick pretty much throughout the width of the pedal thereby putting your contact point well inside the diameter of the spindle. That said the Crampons are still a major advantage, IMHO, over other conventionally attached pedals due to how thin they are. So far they've also handled all the abuse I've been able to dish out.

I agree with you that it's unacceptable to have to replace bottom bracket and cranks in order to gain the advantage provided by the Fly Paper pedals. However, I believe they did engineer the Fly Paper pedal to be strong enough to withstand the rigors of the application.

All that brings us to this crop of new thin pedals that will debut at Interbike. If they can handle the durability issue then we'll have the best of all worlds with conventional mounting combined with contact point well inside the diameter of the spindle. Time will tell!

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## CombatMutt (Jan 3, 2011)

michaelsnead said:


> Hi Mr. Mutt,
> 
> The Crampons are dramatically thicker than the Fly Paper pedals as they're 6mm at the edge of the pedal and 17mm at the spindle. Therefore your foot sets on top of the spindle rather than inside the diameter of the spindle. If memory serves the Fly Paper is 3.9mm thick pretty much throughout the width of the pedal thereby putting your contact point well inside the diameter of the spindle. That said the Crampons are still a major advantage, IMHO, over other conventionally attached pedals due to how thin they are. So far they've also handled all the abuse I've been able to dish out.
> 
> ...


Well I'm certainly intrigued, especially since I'm running some Wellgo pedals from like four years ago, that are somewhere in the 28-30 mm range; possibly more. And yeah, Interbike should be pretty sweet.


----------



## DustyBones (Jun 23, 2010)

albeant said:


> Here's another one that belongs on this thread Looks pretty decent, if not revolutionary:


:skep: HT has some interesting looking pedals, but there is no U.S. availability & no direct order from HT (yet). The U. S. distributor listed on the HT website doesn't even show that item in their available product list, nor does it show on a search. Apparently HT is launching a direct order feature on its website, but no date yet.


----------



## Iceman2058 (Mar 1, 2007)

Somebody is going to have to prove that these new designs actually hold up to riding...every man and his dog is now launching a model it appears...


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

Iceman2058 said:


> Somebody is going to have to prove that these new designs actually hold up to riding...every man and his dog is now launching a model it appears...


Hey Mr. Iceman,

Very cool looking! Any other info? Manufacturer, release dates, how thick, wide, costs, etc? Of course I agree with you 100% about the durability concern!!!

Thanks for sharing,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## Iceman2058 (Mar 1, 2007)

Tioga make these, apparently. Here's what little info the internet offers up...:

http://www.bicycling.com/mountainbikecom/bikes-gear/tioga-zero-pedal


----------



## jimarin (Mar 19, 2005)

Iceman2058 said:


> Somebody is going to have to prove that these new designs actually hold up to riding...every man and his dog is now launching a model it appears...


Unless those pedals are made out of Adamantium, no way can those hold up. 
The material is just not thick enough to handle the force put on a dh pedal. I wouldnt ride those if you gave me a set for free.


----------



## Internal14 (Jan 21, 2004)

Tioga Zero Pedal
Flat pedals are getting thinner and thinner. The limiting factor, however, is the axle. So, Tioga eliminated the axle in its Zero pedal, which is still in development. Just 7mm at its thickest point, and a mere 4.5 at the thinnest, the Zero is fly-swatter thin. As you can imagine, the trickiest part is the bearing. Instead of having two bearings—one inboard and one outboard of the axle—the Zero uses just one, and doesn't have an axle at all. So every bit of force from a cased landing goes right into that single bearing. Still, Tioga says it's close to perfecting the design and the pedal should be available later this year. 



Pipe dreams....


----------



## CombatMutt (Jan 3, 2011)

I don't understand why you'd release a picture of a pedal that you haven't perfected yet.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

michaelsnead said:


> Hey Folks,
> 
> This horse race is getting hot! Now it looks like Specialized is in the game. I learned the following from Pinkbike: http://www.pinkbike.com/news/Specialized-prototype-pedals.html
> 
> ...


Hey Folks,

Here is the latest update on the Specialized effort in this horse race! It's starting to look very real!!

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/Specialized-Prototype-Pedals-Crankworx.html

Enjoy,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

*Tioga Releases Super Thin Concave Pedal*



Internal14 said:


> Tioga Zero Pedal....Pipe dreams....


Hey Folks,

It looks like they've released this pipe dream:

_Tioga Releases Super Thin Concave Pedal
Measuring a mere 7mm thin and 4mm at the thinnest, Tiogas MT-ZERO is the thinnest concave pedal on the market._

http://networkedblogs.com/lpdWt

_Here's the scoop from Tioga:

"The breakthrough is made possible by Tioga's ZEROaxle bearing system," said Kai Cheng, Tioga's global marketing manager. "With conventional pedals, the body must be tall enough to contain the axle and bearings that are within its body. The ZEROaxle system in the MT-ZERO removes this restriction by redirecting its axle and bearing away from the body, allowing for an incredibly thin profile."

The leading-edge concept starts with the ZEROaxle bolt assembly which houses an outboard sealed cartridge bearing, precision machine-pressed into the bolt, to facilitate the pedal's rotation. With the absence of the traditional axle or multiple bearings within the body of a ZEROaxle pedal, a special outboard bearing is equipped to handle the redirected load converging into a smaller area. Whereas typical pedal bearings are 13mm in diameter, ZEROaxle's cartridge bearing is more than twice the size and capable of handling over five times the dynamic load of typical bearings - ZEROaxle bolts have been thoroughly tested to meet the Japan Industrial Standards (JIS) for pedal bearings.

The result is a pedal system with an entirely new form factor made possible by the ZEROaxle bolt.

A thin pedal profile positively affects ground clearance, foot stability, and pedaling efficiency; the thinner the body, the more positive these effects.

With new design freedom provided by the ZEROaxle bearing system, the MT-ZERO's body is impressively thin at 7mm, and because the body platform is a dual concave design, which better adapts to the contours of the foot, it dips down to just 4mm in the center.

Although the MT-ZERO body is extremely thin and open, it's neither flimsy nor fragile. The MT-ZERO's body is a solid one-piece construction, investment-cast from chromoly steel, and tested to handle a wide spectrum of off-road applications from XC to all-mountain.

Fully Compatible with Standard Cranksets

The ZEROaxle MT-ZERO's 9/16" thread makes it fully compatible with standard cranksets.

Additionally, when designing the ZEROaxle pedal system, Tioga engineers were mindful not to disrupt the rider's biomechanics. Width of the ZEROaxle bolt is comparable to the axle bolt on conventional platform pedals that upgrading to the MT-ZERO will have little impact on the user's Q-factor, the distance between a rider's left and right foot, measured through the bottom bracket.

Maintenance Free, Modular Design

The ZEROaxle pedal system is modular and designed to be virtually maintenance free. Should the bearing wear down, simply replace the ZEROaxle bolt. The same applies to the body. Replacement ZEROaxle bolt and MT-ZERO body are available individually, in left or right configurations. Its modular design will also allow users to easily switch different body designs from any current and future ZEROaxle pedals.

Pricing and Availability

The ZEROaxle MT-ZERO will be available within the next 60 days through professional, independent bicycle dealers nationwide. The pedals will be available in black, white or silver, for a suggested retail price of US$99.

For more info, go to Tioga USA._

So we need someone to TOFTT and get back to us as soon as possible with ride / destruction report!

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## NWS (Jun 30, 2010)

> ZEROaxle bolts have been thoroughly tested to meet the Japan Industrial Standards (JIS) for pedal bearings.


The Japanese have an industrial standard for _pedal _bearings?

I would like to know more.


----------



## miqu (Jan 20, 2004)

I'll bet that soon some manufacturer will introduce crank arms with integrated pedal bearings... won't take long.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

miqu said:


> I'll bet that soon some manufacturer will introduce crank arms with integrated pedal bearings... won't take long.


Hi miqu,

I find your comment interesting since that was the design on the Fly Paper pedal. He machined out the crank arm and installed an inboard and outboard bearing. However it required a crank arm of a certain dimension to accommodate the installation of the bearings. Only one set of cranks was big enough and to use and it required you to replace the bottom bracket as well. Bottom line was changing your pedals cost approximately $600 and necessitated the install of a crank set and bottom bracket you didn't want.

I got to ride them and IMHO the pedal was superior to anything on the market now but the cost and additional required parts caused me not to buy them. However his design was more than strong enough for the application.

We'll have to see if this latest generation of pedals thinner than the diameter of the spindle is strong enough for the application. Time will tell!

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

michaelsnead said:


> Hey Folks,
> 
> Here is the latest update on the Specialized effort in this horse race! It's starting to look very real!!
> 
> ...


Dem shitz look very sweet...but very expensive. If speshy has abandoned the Flypaper design for the Canfield...and their DH racers are using it, it sort of vindicates the extreme approach of the Flypaper. I am guessing that none of the axle-less designs on this thread will stand up to real world abuse.


----------



## NWS (Jun 30, 2010)

Vindicates?


----------



## morandi (Jun 20, 2008)

Super thin Single bearing pedal designs will not hold up. I have spent a lot of time on one of them, and as great as the pedals feel and as grippy as they are, I am back to my good old fashioned Kona Wah Wahs.
The bearings on these just don't hold up, play develops, tons of drag is created. I felt like I had a power boost when I slapped the smooth dual bearing Kona's back on, thats how bad the drag was.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

morandi said:


> Super thin Single bearing pedal designs will not hold up. I have spent a lot of time on one of them, and as great as the pedals feel and as grippy as they are, I am back to my good old fashioned Kona Wah Wahs.
> The bearings on these just don't hold up, play develops, tons of drag is created. I felt like I had a power boost when I slapped the smooth dual bearing Kona's back on, thats how bad the drag was.


Hi Mr. morandi,

Do you care to share which "Super thin Single bearing pedal" you had this experience with? And was it a production model or a prototype?

Thanks,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

NWS said:


> Vindicates?


Yes, vindicates.


----------



## arkon11 (Jul 26, 2009)

Seriously guys, I'm all for a good set of pedals... but really. Is it really nessecary to have a pedal as thing as the OP posted? Is there a point? Or is it just something for you guys to talk about?


----------



## morandi (Jun 20, 2008)

With the thinner pedals I have there is definitely a more locked in/controlled feeling. Great in the corners and more lift when bunnyhopping stuff/jumping. I notice a difference (not dramatic) between a 17mm pedals and the thin 11mm I have. It could also be a result of pedal shape/pin placement.
Now, somebody needs to come out with a thin pedal whos bearings feel as smooth as my Kona Wah Wahs.


----------



## NWS (Jun 30, 2010)

buddhak said:


> Yes, vindicates.


Inconceivable.


----------



## David C (May 25, 2011)

They should make shoes with integrated spindle that directly fit into the crank arm pedal thread, so no need of pedals 

David


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

NWS said:


> Inconceivable.


I don't think that word means what you think it means


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

Hi Folks,

I was disappointed at the lack of information that came out of Interbike on the latest generation of flat pedals. If anyone else found data they'd like to share I'd appreciate hearing about it.

However I was able to find out the latest on this offering. They've been renamed the "PILOT" and you can learn more about them at the 3:09 mark on this promotional video:

SF Bike Expo Title sponsor VP Components at Interbike 2011 on Vimeo

Their product manager was kind enough to share the following timeline with me:

"production in January... will be available springs 2012..."

I hope the durability issue is solved because this version of the product looks very nice!

I wonder what is happening with the Specialized uber thin pedal????

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:



michaelsnead said:


> Hi Folks,
> 
> While Mtbr.com is my first choice for news of the mountain bike world it looks like Pinkbike has shared a lot more info about this cool looking pedal. Here is what I found:
> 
> ...


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

NWS said:


> Vindicates?


You know I just re-read my post and NWS was right. VIndicates is not the right word. I know everyone here has moved on, but just to set the record straight... I honestly can't recall WTF I was trying to express up there regarding Spec, Canfiled, and Flypaper. If anything, Spec's pedal design suggests that the single bearing design (a la Flypaper, Tioga, VP) is NOT the way to go. Opposite of vindicates.

Looks like I gave up on drugs a little too late.


----------



## Iceman2058 (Mar 1, 2007)

That was fun.


----------



## NWS (Jun 30, 2010)

Vindication! Better late than never.


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

I like my Spank Spikes. So far, so good. I'm 200+gear, so they will get a work out. So far an improvement over my Wahwahs...

They are 12mm thin, so not quite super thin, but probably the best option right now.


----------



## CombatMutt (Jan 3, 2011)

I think that some of the trepidation with uber thin pedals, comes from a pedal that is so thin, has to be huge in order to handle the (usually) greater weight of the average DH rider. I'm not one who habitually smashes my pedals on everything, but part of that I believe is because my old pedals, while thicker, didn't stick out from my shoes. From the pics in this thread, the super thin pedals look giant. And I'll certainly allow that I'm bringing up a non-issue from other people's perspective.


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

NWS said:


> Vindication! Better late than never.


Oh stop it with your gloating :madmax:


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

CombatMutt said:


> I think that some of the trepidation with uber thin pedals, comes from a pedal that is so thin, has to be huge in order to handle the (usually) greater weight of the average DH rider. I'm not one who habitually smashes my pedals on everything, but part of that I believe is because my old pedals, while thicker, didn't stick out from my shoes. From the pics in this thread, the super thin pedals look giant. And I'll certainly allow that I'm bringing up a non-issue from other people's perspective.


It's kind of an optical illusion... the Spikes are within 1/4" of my Wahwahs and actually have a smaller platform area because of the tapered ends.

My Wahwahs are 17mm, the Spikes are 12mm thick, and it is a noticeable difference, both in clearance and stability.

I can also see why the single bearing pedals wouldn't be strong enough... the Flypapers needed a modified crank for a good reason.


----------



## frorider (Apr 2, 2005)

CombatMutt said:


> I think that some of the trepidation with uber thin pedals, comes from a pedal that is so thin, has to be huge in order to handle the (usually) greater weight of the average DH rider. .


Your speculation is incorrect. There are thick pedals with big platform area, thick pedals with small platform area, thin pedals with small platform area, etc etc.

No correlation between thickness and platform area. Also note that increasing platform area does not 'spread' the rider weight out in any useful way. All the force will be concentrated in the spindle interface, regardless of platform size.


----------



## Bike Doc (Oct 2, 2007)

*WTF is the problem???*



michaelsnead said:


> .
> 
> I agree with you that it's unacceptable to have to replace bottom bracket and cranks in order to gain the advantage provided by the Fly Paper pedals. However, I believe they did engineer the Fly Paper pedal to be strong enough to withstand the rigors of the application.
> 
> ...


All of you people who snivel and whine about having to replace your crappy 9/16" threaded cranks in order to get the full advantage of running a super thin pedal just totally blow my mind. I just wonder if you same people whined and sniveled about having the get a new frame to enjoy the benefits of rear suspension, ("Why can't someone come out with a decent rear suspension that just bolts onto my existing hardtail frame?"), or about having to replace that first full suspension frame AND their fork AND both hubs, in order to enjoy the benefits of disc brakes.

The only thing that I can possibly imagine is that all of the Luddite whiners must be plants from bigger companies that have a vested interest in keeping all of the rest of you from switching to a superior technology that they would have to liscense, since they don't hold the patent on it.

As for durability of the pedal body, bearing shaft and bearings, FlyPaper Pedals have proven over the past 4 1/2 years to be superior to all other designs, with not a single bent or broken pedal EVER, and with only a handful of people, all of them daily riders, who have been able to wear out a set of bearings, which are standard items that Quality Bicycle Parts, Bicycle Technologies International and many other distributors carry, and which are easily replaced, in 20 minutes or so.

Looking at the Tiogas, and knowing what I know about material strength and design, those things scare me. I wouldn't ride them. In fact, if you check out the article about them on Bike Magazine's web site, Interbike: Vernon Tioga warns against using them for downhill or freeride:

"So, will it hold up? Yeah, that's the real question. Tioga is clear on this point: the ZEROaxle is not meant to be a DH or freeride pedal-this is supposed to be a trail/All Mountain model. We'll see&#8230;."

Which means that they are probably fine for sidewalk use, as long as you're not Danny Macaskill or weighing over 150 pounds...

FlyPaper Pedals? NO wieght limit & No riding restrictions. They are Rampage worthy and Josh Benderproof. (I know that might sound like some far fetched claims to some of you, but I used to sponsor Josh Bender out of my shop for three years, and I am the one who discovered the first site of the Red Bull Rampage that they used in 2001, '02, '03 & '04, and I have spent hundreds of hours on that terrain, working with numerous film crews and countless top free riders, filming extreme mountain bike videos, and have attended every one of the Rampages.)


----------



## drastic. (Nov 22, 2010)

^^flypaper pedal designer, or just a strong advocate? what's the weight of the crankset used?


i myself want to jump on the super thin pedal bandwagon, but its too early for me to try...ill wait till more seat-time is had on various model ~11mm thick pedals.


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

Bike Doc said:


> All of you people who snivel and whine about having to replace your crappy 9/16" threaded cranks in order to get the full advantage of running a super thin pedal just totally blow my mind. I just wonder if you same people whined and sniveled about having the get a new frame to enjoy the benefits of rear suspension, ("Why can't someone come out with a decent rear suspension that just bolts onto my existing hardtail frame?"), or about having to replace that first full suspension frame AND their fork AND both hubs, in order to enjoy the benefits of disc brakes.
> 
> The only thing that I can possibly imagine is that all of the Luddite whiners must be plants from bigger companies that have a vested interest in keeping all of the rest of you from switching to a superior technology that they would have to liscense, since they don't hold the patent on it.
> 
> ...


Hi Dean,

Thanks for joining our humble discussion of unique, flat pedals!

Everyone....this is the guy who thought up and created the FlyPaper pedal.

Although you might not be able to tell it from his post I believe his pedal is the best one currently in the market...._if you didn't have to replace your cranks and bottom bracket in order to use them._ All that aside Dean's pedals are wonderful and at only 3.9mm thick they offer a completely different connection to the bike than I've ever experienced on any other flat pedal. I say that even though I use the Canfield Crampons on three of my bikes. The Crampons offer an advantage over what I was previously using but they're not as nice as Dean's FlyPaper pedal. The difference in "roll over" between the two pedals is dramatic with the FlyPaper being the clear winner.

Unfortunately, I believe Dean is in the position of a lot of other innovative, clever inventors. He proved the concept and illustrated the value of the innovation but his specific solution has an aspect the market doesn't embrace. To wit...his solution requires the replacement of your cranks and bottom bracket in order to reap the benefit of the uber thin pedal.

I share his concern over the design and execution of the Tioga ZEROaxle pedal. Indeed the disclaimer put out by Tioga tells me they didn't design it to be as strong as Dean's pedals. Personally, I'm pinning my hopes on the VP Components PILOT pedal but only time and experience will tell if they can pull off an uber thin pedal using conventional 9/16" threaded cranks.

Best case to me would be if Dean were to re-design his pedals to work conventionally so that the guy who came up with the original idea would receive the benefit. And I would finally get a uber thin pedal like Dean's that would work on my XT cranks!

Thanks,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

michaelsnead said:


> Personally, I'm pinning my hopes on the VP Components PILOT pedal but only time and experience will tell if they can pull off an uber thin pedal using conventional 9/16" threaded cranks.
> 
> Michael:thumbsup:


I bet they can't.

I definitely would buy into the flypaper pedal/crank system, but for myself and I'm sure many others it would be difficult financially. DH bikes cost enough just in tire and brake wear... add in broken/worn out parts and it gets even worse. If I had the cash I'd do it though, it would be a pretty significant upgrade IMO. I had the opportunity to check them out in person at a CO resort and they are sweet, nothing else comes even close.


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

Bike Doc said:


> As for durability of the pedal body, bearing shaft and bearings, FlyPaper Pedals have proven over the past 4 1/2 years to be superior to all other designs


No pedal will come close to the Fly Papers when it comes to durability, thinness, and purity of purpose. Dean didn't compromise on his design the way VP and Tioga have. Kudoz to him. But painting yourself into a corner with proprietary cranks and BBs?...it's all been said before. Folks aren't sniveling and whining. To sign up to Fly Papers one has to essentially walk away from BB and crankset innovations and marry yourself to the cranks that came with your uber-durable Fly Papers. What's illegitimate about that concern?

Or you can compromise and pick up a pair of 11-17 mm pedals, which you can move from *****in' crankset to *****in' crankset.

Whatever, I ride 16 year old Deore cranks anyway. But Dean's bitter attitude is an albatross around his product's neck.


----------



## Bikemag (Oct 15, 2011)

Josh Benderproof. A good point.


----------



## NWS (Jun 30, 2010)

Cost to try most pedals = cost of the pedals themselves.

Cost to try flypaper pedals = cost of the pedals + cost of cranks + cost of bottom bracket.

Peoples' resulting behavior = perfectly predictable.

Inventor accusing those people of sniveling and whining = *priceless.*

Seriously, how did you not see that coming? I'm sure it's a nice system but did you seriously _expect _hordes of people to replace their cranks and bottom brackets just to try your pedals? Did you expect that nobody would think or talk about the additional cost of trying your pedals?


----------



## Bike Doc (Oct 2, 2007)

*There's a lot more to the story...*



Seriously said:


> expect [/I]hordes of people to replace their cranks and bottom brackets just to try your pedals? Did you expect that nobody would think or talk about the additional cost of trying your pedals?


First of all, I expected a bigger company like SRAM to liscense the design from me and produce the pedals and cranks with bearing cups forged into the ends in such huge volumes, that the cost would be comparable, or most likely, SLIGHTLY LOWER than the cost of producing an old school set of cranks and pedals. Actually, producing a crank set with bearing cups forged into the end, rather than machining pedal threads, or inserting a threaded steel insert, should be a bit cheaper; and if someone were to forge the FlyPaper Pedal bodies, rather than machining them, they would be far cheaper to produce than most old school spindle type pedals.

Unfortunately, the up front, start-up costs of making forging dies is well beyond my means, with the cost per die being $5000 - $ 8000 each, and left & right crank arms requiring different dies. Also, it may well require more than one die to go form a raw block of aluminum to a finished crank arm or finished pedal. That, and the fact that riders prefer to have a choice of two or three different lengths of cranks, and that my next pedal design will have right and left specific pedal bodies, means at least 8, and maybe as many as 16 different forging dies would be needed, and that doesn't even include the cost of having a forge to use the dies in, or making extrusion dies and the subsequent extrusions to get the blank blocks to forge into pedal bodies from, or the cost of a CNC mill and a CNC lathe to do the finishing operations on the pedal bodies and cranks. If I only had half to three quarters of a million in money up front for these things and a few other minor things, I could be selling you a set of cranks and pedals for somewhere between $275 - $399 retail, after going through a distributor and a bike shop, rather than $579 with no room for any middle men.

If you or anyone else reading this has any connections to people with this equipment, or access to the necessary investment capital, or any other ideas on how I can produce the FlyPaper Pedals in a more cost effective manner, I would love to hear from you.

As for riders, I am quite surprised at how many people have let the cost of the FlyPaper Pedals, and/or the issue of replacing cranks, deter them from replacing their old school, spindle type pedals. Maybe it's just because I know how much better the FlyPapers work, and how much better they feel, so I see them as being worth what they cost and then some; meanwhile, someone who has never had the opportunity to try them, or better yet, to ride them long enough to figure out how to get the maximum benefit out of them, would have a hard time conceiving in their mind what a superthin pedal would feel like, or even understanding what the benefits might be.

To me, the only advancement in mountain bikes that clearly is superior to my pedal design is suspension. Disc brakes are perhaps, in some situations, more important than to me than my pedals, but when I look at how much of the time I spend pedaling versus braking, (I ride all mountain and trail.), and how many situations where disc brakes actually have any real improvement on my riding performance over V-brakes, I would have to say that my pedals are responsible for more improvement in my riding performance and enjoyment than any other advancement in mountain biking besides my suspension. So, from that perspective, and from the experience of riding the FlyPapers for the last 4 1/2 years, it is hard for me to fathom how much resistance there has been to the crank arm issue, or even the cost.

The final thing I should mention, is that I tend to put a high value on durability, and am not overly concerned with the weight of my bike. My up, down, all around, everyday, everywhere bike currently weighs 45 1/2 pounds and has a 2.8" front tire and a 2.7 on the rear. About five years ago, my bike weighed 48 1/4 pounds. I have been known to go to Flagstaff and climb for hours on that bike. I have also ridden it UP (From the bathrooms at the bottom of the mountain, to the starting box at the top.) the mountain at Boulder City on more than one occassion. So, for me, a few ounces of additional crank weight is no big deal, and is more than offset by the strength and durability of the FSA Gravity GAP Crankset and the super durable double row bearings that they use in their bottom bracket. While I somewhat understand the position taken by the weight weenies, I was still surprised that they would resist the extra weight of the cranks, especially since I know from personal experience that the extra power produced by a super thin pedal,let alone all of the other benefits, more than makes up for the small amount of additional weight. Running a wide, knobby tire adds quite a bit of weight over running a 23mm wide road slick, but I doubt many of you would want to run the road slicks on your mountain bike...


----------



## hazardousmtb (Sep 26, 2011)

i didnt realize how many mtbrs still ride flats lol certainly very few where i ride  but then again i dont ride downhill yet haha


----------



## illnotsick (Mar 28, 2011)

First you say:
"replacing their old school, spindle type pedals"
Then you say:
"how many situations where disc brakes actually have any real improvement on my riding performance over V-brakes"

I say:
"LOL"

You're claiming every pedal every rider today has on their bike (spindle) is old school, and your "innovation" is the new best thing. How is a spindle pedal old school when it is what every rider uses and every company sells. How many people are riding your pedals? Your design means the customer has to forfeit every advancement that can be made in cranks in order to save 9/16" on the pedal body. Now what I would call the new best thing. 
Then you talk about disc brakes hardly being an advantage over v-brakes. Really? I have never noticed a bigger improvement in my riding than when I switched to disc brakes. I have a hard time believing that there is a crank-forfeiting improvement in thinner pedals from someone who doesn't even notice the advantage of discs over v-brakes. 

FlyPaper pedals are a product you're trying to make stick in a market that doesn't want them. Pun Intended.


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

illnotsick said:


> Your design means the customer has to forfeit every advancement that can be made in cranks in order to save 9/16" on the pedal body. Now what I would call the new best thing.
> 
> FlyPaper pedals are a product you're trying to make stick in a market that doesn't want them. Pun Intended.


WTF are you talking about? That makes NO SENSE at all. His idea WOULD BE AN ADVANCEMENT!

And a market that doesn't want them? Ridiculous bullshite... if you haven't noticed, the trend in pedals is to make them thinner. The only issue is the way pedals are attached to the cranks require a pedal with an axle down the middle to be strong enough, keeping the pedal from being as thin as it could. So a new standard that doesn't require that a pedal have an axle is bad? More ridiculous bullshite... if SRAM or Shimano picked up the idea I'm SURE you'd be singing a different tune.


----------



## illnotsick (Mar 28, 2011)

davec113 said:


> WTF are you talking about? That makes NO SENSE at all. His idea WOULD BE AN ADVANCEMENT!
> 
> And a market that doesn't want them? Ridiculous bullshite... if you haven't noticed, the trend in pedals is to make them thinner. The only issue is the way pedals are attached to the cranks require a pedal with an axle down the middle to be strong enough, keeping the pedal from being as thin as it could. So a new standard that doesn't require that a pedal have an axle is bad? More ridiculous bullshite... if SRAM or Shimano picked up the idea I'm SURE you'd be singing a different tune.


I'm singing the same tune as everyone else who rides "old school" 9/16" spindle pedals (which would be everyone.)

I'm saying giving up mainstream cranks and pedals for a 9/16" decrease in pedal clearance at the expense of a clunky homemade cranks set is not an improvement, it's stupid. I have pre-runners which are pretty thin, and I'm not about to give up my saints in order to get a little more clearance. 
SRAM and Shimano haven't picked up the idea because it's not plausible. The bearing is going to extend past the pedal body whether it's in the crank arm or on the outside edge of the pedal body. Pedal strikes are less expensive than crank arm strikes.


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

illnotsick said:


> I'm singing the same tune as everyone else who rides "old school" 9/16" spindle pedals (which would be everyone.)
> 
> I'm saying giving up mainstream cranks and pedals for a 9/16" decrease in pedal clearance at the expense of a clunky homemade cranks set is not an improvement, it's stupid. I have pre-runners which are pretty thin, and I'm not about to give up my saints in order to get a little more clearance.
> SRAM and Shimano haven't picked up the idea because it's not plausible. The bearing is going to extend past the pedal body whether it's in the crank arm or on the outside edge of the pedal body. Pedal strikes are less expensive than crank arm strikes.


Pedals are a much bigger target for rock strikes than crank arms, and I don't think the crank arms would have to be longer than they are now to incorporate a bearing instead of pedal threads. Thinner pedals obviously have more clearance over rocks... I noticed a huge difference going to 17mm Wahwahs, and now I have 12mm Spank Spikes and the extra 2.5mm clearance is very noticeable. The flypapers at under 4mm would be a huge improvement over any current pedal choices.

I agree the modified cranks weren't ideal and are a big issue, but if a major company picked up the idea we'd have similar crank choices than what we do now. I also don't think the idea isn't plausible because of engineering issues, it would just be a major change in standards which is the real issue. I'm surprised nobody has bought the idea yet...


----------



## illnotsick (Mar 28, 2011)

davec113 said:


> Pedals are a much bigger target for rock strikes than crank arms, and I don't think the crank arms would have to be longer than they are now to incorporate a bearing instead of pedal threads. *Thinner pedals obviously have more clearance over rocks...* I noticed a huge difference going to 17mm Wahwahs, and now I have 12mm Spank Spikes and the extra 2.5mm clearance is very noticeable. The flypapers at under 4mm would be a huge improvement over any current pedal choices.
> 
> I agree the modified cranks weren't ideal and are a big issue, but if a major company picked up the idea we'd have similar crank choices than what we do now. I also don't think the idea isn't plausible because of engineering issues, it would just be a major change in standards which is the real issue. I'm surprised nobody has bought the idea yet...


Thinner pedals do have more clearance over rocks, but the crank arm doesn't get shorter and will have to be large enough to incorporate a bearing. The crank arm will extend lower than the pedal body, unless the pedal body is larger than the bearing used to support it. I can draw a picture if you need help with this...


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

illnotsick said:


> Thinner pedals do have more clearance over rocks, but the crank arm doesn't get shorter and will have to be large enough to incorporate a bearing. The crank arm will extend lower than the pedal body, unless the pedal body is larger than the bearing used to support it. I can draw a picture if you need help with this...


I completely understand, but I don't think cranks would extend further down then they currently are, and the advantage of the thin pedal would still be a huge improvement. Go ahead and draw a pic tho, should be good...


----------



## SamL3227 (May 30, 2004)

mr flypaper. were you close to selling your idea to a large company that could produce the cranks/bb to go with it or was nobody really interested?


i do think that the next big innovation in pedals will be a new standard than allows the bearing/works to be "inside" the crank. and obviously people are going to complain for awhile. it just would be nice to see the design be standardized so that more than 1 company can make some BA thin pedals without having to pay out the arss for licensing.


----------



## illnotsick (Mar 28, 2011)

davec113 said:


> I completely understand, but I don't think cranks would extend further down then they currently are, and the advantage of the thin pedal would still be a huge improvement. Go ahead and draw a pic tho, should be good...


Why can't the flypaper pedal be incorporated into a normal crankset? My understanding is it's because there isn't enough room to house the bearing in a standard size crank arm. Or was he just going to build his own cranks for shits and giggles?


----------



## michaelsnead (Aug 31, 2005)

*Tioga MT-ZERO-Pedal-Tested*

Hi Folks,

This is the most comprehensive review of this pedal I've seen. While the benefits of the thin pedal innovation are confirmed this execution has some major issues::nono:

Tioga MT-ZERO Pedal - Tested - Pinkbike

I can only hope that Dean, of Fly Paper pedal fame, can save us by developing a thin pedal that doesn't require a special crank set.

Take care,

Michael:thumbsup:


----------



## saturnine (Mar 28, 2007)

more like fly paper pedal infamy


----------

