# Pivotal as a standard?



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

I'm just curious how many of you would like to see the Pivotal technology become a standardized option on some new frames?

I'm hoping most of you know what the Pivotal interface is, so I don't have to explain...

Very similar to the new '08 Sunday Ian Schwartz signature model shown at interbike recently, and will hit around Christmas. 
I can't find a photo of it exactly, but here's another one that looks similar (even though it's a home-grown job done with JB weld and bondo so the aluminum post still exists and is extended down in the frame), but it gives you the idea I'm talking about. 
The new Sunday, and what this thread is referring to, would simply be a chunk of milled 4130 made to the pivotal standard, like a stump post top, and welded to the top of the frames' seat-tube, instead of leaving a 1" opening and a slot in the back for squeezing it. This eliminates the need for any seatpost at all, or any type of clamp, whether it's integrated or separate. Creates a light, strong, smooth, and SIMPLE frame and seat interface.










Of course, it would present some negatives, but also positives at the same time, as most new designs and standardizations do (such as the integrated headset).

You would no longer have the option of seat-post height, which may be the biggest argument against, but seriously, most people who are now dropping money on bikes as specific as those in the dj/street/park genre all want them as dedicated as possible.
And another main negative would be the fact that you could no longer run any seats with rails (but the pivotal selection has now become immense).

On the other hand, your frame would be much cleaner, and possibly stronger. 
Your overall build would end up being lighter than a traditional set-up too.
You would no longer have to spend money on buying a seatpost or seat clamp. 
You would not have to worry about bending any more railed seats.

and on and on... post up what you think, your arguments for or against...

and, if you've got any good photos of the Sunday '08 Schwartz frame please post them up, I'm too lazy to search atm.


----------



## XSL_WiLL (Nov 2, 2004)

Well... you've covered what I have to say about them.

I guess if you really don't like it, you can take a saw to it and cut off the pivotal end, find an appropriately sized seatpost or ream it out.


----------



## combatkimura (Jul 17, 2007)

Wow how did that happen?

DELETE these multiple posts please.


----------



## combatkimura (Jul 17, 2007)

Delete!


----------



## combatkimura (Jul 17, 2007)

Delete!


----------



## combatkimura (Jul 17, 2007)

Delete!


----------



## combatkimura (Jul 17, 2007)

I voted no, I like being able to jack up the seat and pedal sometimes. Looks very nice and clean though.


----------



## frisky_zissou (Jun 4, 2006)

Are you able to move the seat backwards like you would do on a seat with rails? At the moment I'm really liking my SDG Ibeam post & seat.


----------



## Epschoenly (Jan 25, 2006)

There is no fore and aft adjustment on a pivotal, but they are designed as a place to put a minimal seat which keep your seat tube out of your ass, not a place to sit and really pedal. 

I run one. And wouldn't mind if it was fixed.


----------



## ServeEm (Jun 15, 2005)

I'm torn btwn yes/no. I have a permanenet seat height pref. but it's higher than what I typically see riders at. Most slam or near slam their seats while I like it a couple inches higher. So when I imagine the industry height or what a manf would set it at would be too low for me. Some would say I could get used to riding at a lower setting but I wouldn't be able to pinch my seat. That's something I can't get used to and wouldn't want to change.

BTW: I voted no but I don't think it's a horrible idea. I think an alt would be for a frame mfr to offer a frame in their lineup.


----------



## Tracerboy (Oct 13, 2002)

ServeEm said:


> I'm torn btwn yes/no. I have a permanenet seat height pref. but it's higher than what I typically see riders at. Most slam or near slam their seats while I like it a couple inches higher. So when I imagine the industry height or what a manf would set it at would be too low for me. Some would say I could get used to riding at a lower setting but I wouldn't be able to pinch my seat. That's something I can't get used to and wouldn't want to change.
> 
> BTW: I voted no but I don't think it's a horrible idea. I think an alt would be for a frame mfr to offer a frame in their lineup.


I feel the same way Serve does. I'm between yes and no. it would honestly depend on what type of frame this was on...on my 20" i like my seat a bit higher then most trendy riders do so i can sit down and cruise for a bit or try to pedal if it's a long distance. pinching the seat is always a good option too. but, i'd still say yes to the concept even if it were lower then i like i think..

on 24/26" bikes i run my seat basically slammed so i would be all for it there. i think that companies should slowly try to put out more frames with this option. the new sunday frame is the first of its kind, but im sure many other companies will pick up on it especially if it sells well. i love simplicity.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

The idea is awesome I must say. But some people have to pedal a long way to spots, and I can't see that being a comfy ride with a pre-slammed seat that can't move.

And what happens if you bend the interface at the frame?


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

double post again, ugh.


----------



## opjones (Apr 11, 2007)

Love the idea and clean look, along with weight savings. I don't give two shits about raising my seat to ride around, as you stated, if you're dropping the coin for a specific dj/park bike you're not really concerned about that. The only neg. I can see for myself is I like to have the seat at a certin height for the knee pinching. I could probably get around that and grow used to whatever height it ended up being. But overall I love the idea. The seat is there for tail bone/ass saver, not really for riding around on, unless you enjoy kneeing yourself in the chin as you ride around, lol.


----------



## Ryan! (Sep 19, 2007)

Well sometimes I ride nearly 15km to a track or spot where my mates will be riding that day.

So I would say no! I like being able to lift my seat. Because I have to ride places, I dont have a car to take my bike in!


----------



## Ryan! (Sep 19, 2007)

But then again, god gave us the angle grinder, and if we dont like it we can chop it off and put in a seat poast!


----------



## opjones (Apr 11, 2007)

What bike do you have Ryan? I'd like to know what kinda bike you have if you're saying no, it'll better complete the survey.


----------



## buckoW (Feb 7, 2007)

I love it!


----------



## Ryan! (Sep 19, 2007)

opjones said:


> What bike do you have Ryan? I'd like to know what kinda bike you have if you're saying no, it'll better complete the survey.


a chucker 1.0 frame


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

Edit 2 sides to the argument both have valid points at least from the frame builders side of things.

For production This is a good idea but logistically , from the builder point of view it's impossible to try to guess what seat height your customers are going to want.

For custom or purpose built bikes: I'm not totally against this sort of thing for "purpose built bikes" or a custom bike were the riders already knows what set height they want , you could essentially use a double butted tube that is thick at the bottom and gets thicker from the seat-stays up .
This type of setup would save allot of weight .


----------



## ServeEm (Jun 15, 2005)

opjones said:


> I can see for myself is I like to have the seat at a certin height for the knee pinching. I could probably get around that and grow used to whatever height it ended up being.


That's my only hang up. I don't raise and drop my seat trekking from place to place. My issue is being able to pinch and I'm so damn bow-legged that I can't pinch the seat at my shins. I can put my heals together and you could almost throw a football thru my legs. I've tried a slammed seat and no bueno.


----------



## *B* (Mar 17, 2007)

Only cool if you drive to your dj's or park....which some do. I think you could get used to it more than you think, enough to cruise to close spots. Pedal then sit and coast would probably work ok. My biggest concern would be damaging the post, what then? Awesome idea for purpose built bikes.


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

its awesome for people like me who never move the seat.


sucks for anyone who does.


----------



## NoBrakes! (Jun 15, 2007)

hold on
i run my seat almost slammed and have lanned on my seat like twice.
do people land hard on their seats more than i realize?


----------



## bbrz4 (Jun 12, 2007)

well i dont give 2 shits what they do as long as it works..... and looks cool :thumbsup:


----------



## paintballeerXC (Jun 9, 2005)

i think it would be sweet for smaller bikes. but in general nope. ppl like to personlize and adjust there bikes.

but i do want an SDG i beam seat


----------



## boyfromthelak (Feb 16, 2004)

great for bmx i think. not the greatest mtb. i can


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

great points everyone. Good to hear opinions float around before things go down.

The thing about "standardizing" and "grouping" people's opinion on what the best height would be is really the hardest thing I think. (not as hard in BMX, but seat-tube lengths vary SO much within big wheel street/dj, like the new eastern26's that can't even be slammed, etc.)
You're all right, not everyone rides with their seats completely slammed, or at the same height. If it came out with a few inches of post, I'm sure some would even complain that it isn't "slammed" enough and they want it shorter. 
And one possibility to that problem could be to use spacers and a longer pivotal bolt to raise the seat, but then again, negating from the original idea of simplicity.


One thing I think I should have mentioned is that I did not intend to relate this to any type of "do-it-all" mtb type bikes that may just happen to see some occasional dj's or street. Those would obviously not see the high points of the possible new standard.
I'm talking about only 100% dedicated bikes, and those riders that are 100% dedicated to one set-up.
And I should have emphasized the point about it only being an "option" or available on just 1 model in the line-up, like was mentioned by a few others here. Not completely standardizing all frames on the market.

Brad, that's a sick idea about the tapered seat-tube. There could be some funky new designs with the seat-tube on a frame when it's not being used to support another inner tubes' stresses.

carry on.


----------

