# 2011 Prototype Kona Operator



## Iggz (Nov 22, 2006)

Just scoped this on Sicklines











Kona has been busy creating a new downhill bike. Their previous offerings like the Stab clearly had some influence over this new design. It's nice to see Kona trying new things for 2011.

* 83mm bb shell
* ISCG-05 tabs
* 150mm rear end - includes an alloy axle
* 9.5 x 3″ shock
* 200mm of travel

" This bike represents a whole new platform for us, and there are a lot of neat little details to discuss. The bike is a 4-bar. Tried and true, refined, rather than a "regurgitation with facelift" like many of the "new" designs currently hitting the market."

"The main pivot and rocker pivot use the same bearing, an 6903-2RS1 with 17mm inner diameter, 40mm outer diameter and a width of 12mm. The chain stay to seat stay and seat stay to rocker pivots use 66200-2RS1 which has a 10mm inner diameter, 30mm outer and 9mm width. You'll notice that the pivot bolts for chain stay and rocker pivots are in double shear."

1.5 Zero Stack tapered headtube- "The 1-1/8 upper and 1.5 lower bearings are both angular contact bearings. Should it ever come time to replace them it is as simple as removing the fork and catching the bearing as falls from the frame."


----------



## 62kona (Mar 25, 2008)

Wow, looks sic! Its nice to see them do something a little different. I like smooth swoopy look of this one.


----------



## eleven-yo (Dec 6, 2005)

Tried and true said:


> Isn't that saying the same thing but with a little "marketing twist"?
> 
> not to mention the fact that the commonly used term for this suspension design is "faux bar" as it is a single pivot with a linkage to drive the shock....


----------



## csermonet (Feb 2, 2009)

looks like the new faith front triangle with the stab rear. anyways, looks great. good to see kona finally come out with a completely new dh bike. i like!


----------



## gurp (Jan 20, 2004)

It's a four bar, there is no such thing as a faux bar. A four bar suspension has no requirements for a variable axle path. That was a myth that arose thanks to Specialized's FSR marketing - which worked incredibly effectively.


----------



## elake (Jun 24, 2006)

gurp said:


> It's a four bar, there is no such thing as a faux bar. A four bar suspension has no requirements for a variable axle path. That was a myth that arose thanks to Specialized's FSR marketing - which worked incredibly effectively.


Absolutely correct, in terms of general definitions. See Mechanical Engineering Handbook.

In terms of bicycles, faux bar has a meaning. The word may have been created by Spec, but people in the industry know what your are talking about when you use the term..


----------



## myarmisonfire (Mar 28, 2005)

gurp said:


> It's a four bar, there is no such thing as a faux bar. A four bar suspension has no requirements for a variable axle path. That was a myth that arose thanks to Specialized's FSR marketing - which worked incredibly effectively.


Maybe so but anyone who has ridden a Horst link 4 bar back to back with a faux bar can tell the difference. 4 bar, faux bar, tried and true, regurgitated or whatever I still would not buy a Kona.


----------



## Secace (Sep 8, 2004)

With the addition of a floater (which I bet the production bike will have), the faux/four bar argument goes out the door. I think it looks great. I've never owned a Kona but I have nothing against them. They get the job done, just like just about every other DH frame out there.


----------



## gurp (Jan 20, 2004)

myarmisonfire said:


> Maybe so but anyone who has ridden a Horst link 4 bar back to back with a faux bar can tell the difference. 4 bar, faux bar, tried and true, regurgitated or whatever I still would not buy a Kona.


I've owned multiple FSRs, as well as traditional four bars, single pivots, single pivots with shock linkages and a Maestro. The only one that had bothersome rear braking characteristics was my Yeti AS-X. The FSRs pedaled better then anything else standing in granny gear, but that doesn't really matter on DH bikes.


----------



## Quarashi (Aug 23, 2006)

I think this bike would have looked SICK with straighter tubes on the front triangle. That down tube doesn't look like it needed to be bent that much to clear the piggy back. And personally I think the bad-ass-ness of a bike is more important than it's stand over height clearance!( If you find yourself hitting the place on the top tube where they actually measure stand over height I think you're doing something wrong.)


----------



## nhrider44 (Feb 12, 2010)

I think it's a pretty clean looking frame, comparing it to the pre-2011 demos which just looked freaking heavy. They're certainly not doing anything groundbreaking, it just looks like the front triangle of an sx trail with the typical back end of a stinky. Certainly not ugly by any means, it's an attractive design that we've seen from practically every manufacturer at some point in time. I feel though, the bike in that picture will loose much worth once they slap a big colorful kona logo on it.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

gurp said:


> It's a four bar, there is no such thing as a faux bar. A four bar suspension has no requirements for a variable axle path. That was a myth that arose thanks to Specialized's FSR marketing - which worked incredibly effectively.


Yep. Kona is one of the primary reasons that Specialized made up the term "faux bar", but make no mistake, they made that up for marketing purposes. It was a brilliant move on their part and has worked for the most part.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

myarmisonfire said:


> Maybe so but anyone who has ridden a Horst link 4 bar back to back with a faux bar can tell the difference. 4 bar, faux bar, tried and true, regurgitated or whatever I still would not buy a Kona.


I call BS on this statement, ESPECIALLY with a bike that is intended to have a single chainring. It's fairly easy to optimize the pivot point for a single-chainring bike, because it doesn't have to shift front gears, which gives a different chainline and suspension characteristics. The difference between a horst-link and single-pivot in this case (assuming both are linkage-controlled) is about nil. Braking is a wash because horst links are not "fully active" and may even cause the rear end to rise up (although they are usually "more active" than single pivots). On a single pivot like the Kona, the rear end will squat some when braking, but that can actually be beneficial for handling in corners. I'm not sure why you think a horst link would somehow be magically better, but that would not come into my decision to buy the Kona. My single-pivot highline pedals better than my horst-link bike on steep stuff, just due to how much the horst link "squats" during acceleration/steep hills. Horst link isn't bad, but for a downhill bike there isn't any real advantage. Horst link is a little better for the multiple-chainring bikes because in the granny gear you get less squat during the steep uphills and somewhat better pedaling performance (as opposed to middle ring) during those uphills.


----------



## Prettym1k3 (Oct 11, 2005)

Looks great, but it is an exact culmination of all things 7point and all things new Giant Faith.

Except with a super short seattube, which I hate.


----------



## tnickols (May 24, 2008)

this bike looks like it has a super long wheel base


----------



## his dudeness (May 9, 2007)

Prettym1k3 said:


> Looks great, but it is an exact culmination of all things 7point and all things new Giant Faith.
> 
> Except with a super short seattube, which I hate.


I doesn't have a dw/maestro linkage thingy. Still just a single pivot at this point if you look closely. But that could change


----------



## b-kul (Sep 20, 2009)

his dudeness said:


> I doesn't have a dw/maestro linkage thingy. Still just a single pivot at this point if you look closely. But that could change


i think he meant in terms of frame design, not suspension design.


----------



## tacubaya (Jan 27, 2006)

If they reduce the beer belly on that frame it would look much better.

I like it... I hated the Stab-look.


----------



## schneidie (Aug 30, 2008)

I'd like to see a little more refinement near the main pivot and a different lower shock mount, but I'd ride one. 
Looks sweet in raw, hoping the production version will be available in that finish (but probably not knowing kona).


----------



## MqtRider (Mar 22, 2004)

*Stills needs ABP or DW's Split Pivot rear pivot*

Whatever you want to call it, it functions as a single pivot bike...and the Sessions 88 would too if it didn't have the rear pivot pivoting around the axle. A key with all NON-VPP/DW/Maestro is to eliminate brake jack. Kona used to do it with the DOPE, but unless it buy's a license for a axle pivot (like ABP, thought Trek won't license it) so DW's Split Pivot is the answer....it will have braking inputs placed on the rear suspension.


----------



## his dudeness (May 9, 2007)

MqtRider said:


> Whatever you want to call it, it functions as a single pivot bike...and the Sessions 88 would too if it didn't have the rear pivot pivoting around the axle. A key with all NON-VPP/DW/Maestro is to eliminate brake jack. Kona used to do it with the DOPE, but unless it buy's a license for a axle pivot (like ABP, thought Trek won't license it) so DW's Split Pivot is the answer....it will have braking inputs placed on the rear suspension.


Meh, brake jack is all relative dude. It takes but a few rides to get used to braking in a slightly different way. Not a bad price to pay for a good feeling single pivot.


----------



## MqtRider (Mar 22, 2004)

I have to disagree, brake jack does negatively affect suspension...while a person can adapt to it, the effectiveness of the shock is negatively affected. By how much varies by design, but it is still affected to some degree. Only if you use brake therapy (aka DOPE) or a split pivot rear pivot can this be eliminated on a non-VP/DW/Maestro suspension. Brake Therapy isn't the answer because of the added weight, it's just a band-aid. In DH racing, every gram counts more or less.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

MqtRider said:


> Whatever you want to call it, it functions as a single pivot bike...and the Sessions 88 would too if it didn't have the rear pivot pivoting around the axle. A key with all NON-VPP/DW/Maestro is to eliminate brake jack. Kona used to do it with the DOPE, but unless it buy's a license for a axle pivot (like ABP, thought Trek won't license it) so DW's Split Pivot is the answer....it will have braking inputs placed on the rear suspension.


I don't think you even know what you are talking about. An active-braking system helps to eliminate brake SQUAT, not jack. Brake jack is usually not an issue, except for on some horst-link bikes that extend or rise-up a bit in the rear when you brake. Most bikes "squat", which is what "floating brakes" negate, but there is quite a debate on this as to the degree that is good/detrimental, and make no mistake, DW isn't free of braking influence, it's just tuned to a level that is managable. It's not good if your front end is diving due to braking forces and your rear end is completely "free" of squat. That is going to give you way too much forward bias, steepening your HT angle, etc.


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

Yes. The lack of floaters on: 

commencial
yeti
lapiarre (new)
evil
GT
Rocky Mountain
Moorewood
edit: oh, also all you old DHR riders out there

seem to REALLY be holding their riders back. 

I mean, who here has heard of Mick hannah, gee atherton, sam blenkinsop, aaron gwin, cameron cole, steve smith, and so forth? I bet they'd be WAY faster and better riders with floaters on their linkage driven single pivots. 

For all you internoobs b1tching about how it doesn't have a floater: guess what - they test their bikes with floaters, and when, after extensive testing, their riders make it down the hill faster without a floater then they do WITH a floater, they leave them off. If having a floater on their bike made hannah, atherton, smith, gwin, cole, or blenkinsop faster, you can bet your ass they'd be running a floater on their bike. They're paid by their sponsors to rep their company and to go out and win - well, if a sponsors bike sucks to much to win, you know what they do? they ***** about it to get it fixed, or they ride a different bike. 

But yah, I would NEVER buy a kona, that would make me uncool in the liftline, and we can't have that.


----------



## his dudeness (May 9, 2007)

MqtRider said:


> I have to disagree, brake jack does negatively affect suspension...while a person can adapt to it, the effectiveness of the shock is negatively affected. By how much varies by design, but it is still affected to some degree. Only if you use brake therapy (aka DOPE) or a split pivot rear pivot can this be eliminated on a non-VP/DW/Maestro suspension. Brake Therapy isn't the answer because of the added weight, it's just a band-aid. In DH racing, every gram counts more or less.


It only negatively affects suspension if you've been believing everything that bike companies tell you, or if you do all of your bike riding/comparing of other brands from the comfort of your computer chair or toilet as you read into hype. The fact remains that single pivots are still a very viable and effective design. No suspension design is faultless, they all have their quirks. But as long as you're smiling at the bottom of the hill who cares? If you're so concerned about your vpp, maestro, dw, split pivot, frappacino frame designs and consider them superior to everything out there then fine. But at the end of the day the bike isn't going to make you faster.


----------



## his dudeness (May 9, 2007)

Amen william


----------



## essenmeinstuff (Sep 4, 2007)

Jayem said:


> I don't think you even know what you are talking about. An active-braking system helps to eliminate brake SQUAT, not jack. Brake jack is usually not an issue, except for on some horst-link bikes that extend or rise-up a bit in the rear when you brake. Most bikes "squat", which is what "floating brakes" negate, but there is quite a debate on this as to the degree that is good/detrimental, and make no mistake, DW isn't free of braking influence, it's just tuned to a level that is managable. It's not good if your front end is diving due to braking forces and your rear end is completely "free" of squat. That is going to give you way too much forward bias, steepening your HT angle, etc.


There is too much truth in this post, tone it down next time.

Thanks.


----------



## Prettym1k3 (Oct 11, 2005)

William... I love you.


----------



## VTSession (Aug 18, 2005)

Wow, it looks like every other DH bike Kona has made in the last 10 years.


----------



## TORO1968 (Oct 9, 2005)

William42 said:


> Yes. The lack of floaters on:
> 
> commencial
> yeti
> ...


Finally, someone speaks the TRUTH! :thumbsup:

Why all the Kona hate around here? I guarantee that if that the bike shown was a prototype from some other brand, we'd be seeing a lot of differences in the posts here. The bandwagon approach never ceases to amaze me...get over it. :madman:


----------



## dhbomber (Nov 7, 2006)

William42 said:


> But yah, I would NEVER buy a kona, *that would make me uncool in the liftline*, and we can't have that.


I can't believe it 

someone's a Trend Whore :thumbsup:


----------



## eleven-yo (Dec 6, 2005)

The only thing that makes this not look like every other Kona is that nobody painted everything garish colors and painted little cartoon anuses all over it.
and yeah, william42, mad props yo.
I think their whole "pushing the DOPE" actually made them less credible. Barel was running it opposite the production set-up. The dude from brake therapy is also certifiable. seriously.


----------



## Freerydejunky (Sep 21, 2006)

Looks like a sweet bike.


----------



## sambs827 (Dec 8, 2008)

I don't understand all the Konahate....I see so many pre-2005 Konas being ripped around, its unbelievable. The freeride/downhill bikes I see of that age from other companies always just seem like they would serve better as wind chimes than frame tubes....Kona obviously has good reasoning for keeping the frame and suspension design roughly the same for the past 10+ years.

Whereas other companies preach about their 'innovation' and charge you out the wazoo for it, Konas keep it simple and relatively affordable, providing a great opportunity for new folks to get into the sport. 

If I was on the market for a 2011 bike, I would be tempted by this new beast. Eff all the posers who worry about how their bike looks in the lift line. 

.........at least the first response to the OP wasn't "looks flexy." GAWD, I hate that....


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

#1 - If people are hating because they didn't make it "not look like a Kona" then they are on the right track. What an ignorant comment :lol:

#2 - Like Will said, the faux bar design has proven to be a very effective design.

#3 - I think that bike looks "DOPE". Yeah I'm not a comedian but I'm still tryin'.

#4 - They just fixed the one thing I don't like about Kona's - they have put nice big bearings all over the place.

Good job Dew, Bear, et al


----------



## cyrix (Jan 29, 2008)

dhbomber said:


> I can't believe it
> 
> someone's a Trend Whore :thumbsup:


I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic dude....


----------



## Archi-Magus (Feb 22, 2010)

William42 said:


> Yes. The lack of floaters on:
> 
> commencial
> yeti
> ...


Still learning the terminology, can you please tell me what you mean by "floater"? I'm sure it's not floating shock because the Evil Revolt has one. Please fill me in.


----------



## schneidie (Aug 30, 2008)

He means a floating brake. 
For me, it's just some extra weight that I don't want. Ridden a stinky with and without a floater, and I prefer it without.


----------



## Berkley (May 21, 2007)

Thank god they got rid of that monster rocker link


----------



## tacubaya (Jan 27, 2006)

I think people need a reminder of how much better the Operator looks compared to the Stab..


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

lets see...

new design for front triangle + same faux bar design just pivot in different place = same Kona suck suspension


----------



## Moosey (May 18, 2010)

Is that a 2011? ^^^


----------



## SamL3227 (May 30, 2004)

new one looks cleaner and lighter and simpler and faster.

its like they skipped a few years between 10/11


----------



## cyrix (Jan 29, 2008)

SHIVER ME TIMBERS said:


> lets see...
> 
> new design for front triangle + same faux bar design just pivot in different place = same Kona suck suspension


God forbid someone can't afford a higher end boutique bike and resorts to getting a Kona DH bike to help them get into the sport. And you're pretty much damned to hell if you get one if you have any experience in the sport.

Right?

They might not be the best bikes out there, but to completely **** on the company is retarded at best. Are there better frame designs out there? You bet your ass. But is it wise to dissuade all riders who are interested in DH away from them? No it's not. They are a good gateway bike for those interested in getting into the sport or those with a limited budget who are looking for a new bike.

I still haven't gotten a new DH bike since mine got stolen which was quite a while ago. But I would absolutely consider one of these as a replacement if the price was right, which given their history is pretty likely.

I know I'll get a lot of heat for saying that, but honestly I stand by it. I don't assume they're the best, but I can recognize the fact that they are a decent bike.


----------



## essenmeinstuff (Sep 4, 2007)

Come on man, that post was text book SMT. lol 

I'm actually surprised it too that long


----------



## dhbomber (Nov 7, 2006)

cyrix said:


> I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic dude....


I'm being sarcastic!


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

Archi-Magus said:


> Still learning the terminology, can you please tell me what you mean by "floater"? I'm sure it's not floating shock because the Evil Revolt has one. Please fill me in.


looks like somebody else already responded, but yah, what he said. I was being lazy. There are two "floaters" commonly referred to on bikes, and I'm sure many more that could be implemented.

There are floating shock mounts, such as the evil revolt, trek line, and many others, in which the shock compresses (or at least moves) at both ends. This is for the purpose of manipulating shock rate to give the bike better x characteristics, where x are the desired traits that a bike *should* have according to a given manufacturer.

There are also floating brakes, which have the purpose of minimizing brake squat. Basically, with most suspension designs, when you brake, it pushes up on the rear wheel and compresses the rear suspension. How much depends on a given suspension design - specialized believes brake forces should be minimal, and so they advertise/make their bikes such. Canfield brothers think the bike rides better with a bit more squat, and so they make their bikes accordingly. Kona has traditionally been lambasted by marketing (mostly specialized) because their bikes exhibit more brake squat. So they put a floater on the bike, built it in, so that they could have a little less brake squat. That wasn't good enough for the internoobs, who bought heavily into specialized marketing, and geo, weight (actually a very reasonable weight) were made fun of.

Finally, kona is making a new bike, and hopefully, saying "fyck you" to all the internoobs, and we'll be seeing fast people shredding them at resorts soon. The end.


----------



## yakmastermax (Jan 11, 2009)

The frame looks good and is a definite upgrade on looks compared to stab or stinky from previous years.

in reality, the suspension could only stay the same, or get better, as compared to the stab.

bottom line: you won't be buying a bad bike.


----------



## masterofnone (Jun 21, 2009)

The pros don't really need floaters because they fly over what us boobs drag our brakes on. My downhill bike has a horst link, I love it in the gnar. My freeride and cross country bike have a single pivot and "faux bar" respectively, I don't consider the small deterioration in suspension during braking in those applications to be that big a deal. It sounds like in this forum there are a lot of people brainwashed by marketing hype, a lot like the "Niner or nuthin!" boobs in the 29er forum.


----------



## Jim311 (Feb 7, 2006)

It may not be the flavor of the week but I bet it rides damn good like just about everything else Kona has produced. There may be a few exceptions but there's no BS about four bar setups, they ride good. Any suspension style has it's drawbacks.


----------



## [dB]Will (Jan 25, 2007)

From a completely uneducated point-of-view, the bike looks very long. Almost as if it was stretched out. Not quite a fan of the look, but who am I to judge.


----------



## Archi-Magus (Feb 22, 2010)

William42 said:


> looks like somebody else already responded, but yah, what he said. I was being lazy. There are two "floaters" commonly referred to on bikes, and I'm sure many more that could be implemented.
> 
> There are floating shock mounts, such as the evil revolt, trek line, and many others, in which the shock compresses (or at least moves) at both ends. This is for the purpose of manipulating shock rate to give the bike better x characteristics, where x are the desired traits that a bike *should* have according to a given manufacturer.
> 
> ...


Awesome, thanks for the detailed response! It was obvious there was a story there, I was just unaware of it. Now I'm going to have to look up how the floating brake is achieved.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

Kona is the official 15 year old kid downhill bike company. Just like the P.2 is the official 12 year old DJ bike.


----------



## his dudeness (May 9, 2007)

William42 said:


> . Kona has traditionally been lambasted by marketing (mostly specialized) because their bikes exhibit more brake squat. So they put a floater on the bike, built it in, so that they could have a little less brake squat. That wasn't good enough for the internoobs, who bought heavily into specialized marketing, and geo, weight (actually a very reasonable weight) were made fun of.
> 
> .


Not to be a jerk face here, but can you show us all of the marketing hype that Specialized has against Kona? I want to see the proof of the "lambasting" that Specialized is doing specifically against Kona and not just manufacturers of single pivot or "faux bar" bikes. I think you're pouring on the Specialized hate a little thick and using no evidence to back it up.

Different companies have different design philosphies and a different take on how a bike should ride. Specialized might be all about the horst link and they might talk about it's benefits as best they can, but they should be. Honestly what company won't do that about their respective bikes? Why would a bike company not praise it's suspension designs? Why wouldn't they try to say they're system is better than others? They're in it for the bottom line, money. Before you try to blame one specific company look at Intense, Santa Cruz, Iron Horse (when it existed), Giant, Trek, Turner, Evil, and literally just about every other brand who claims their bikes are the best in the universe. No company is going to say that other designs are as good or better, they're going to say theirs is the best. Sorry for ranting here man, I generally agree with you on a lot of stuff. I just think that saying one company alone is the blame for all the bad hype against single pivots is a little wrong.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

his dudeness said:


> Not to be a jerk face here, but can you show us all of the marketing hype that Specialized has against Kona? I want to see the proof of the "lambasting" that Specialized is doing specifically against Kona and not just manufacturers of single pivot or "faux bar" bikes. I think you're pouring on the Specialized hate a little thick and using no evidence to back it up.


When did you start mountain biking? Did you see the adds that specialized had back in the 1990s and early 2000s? Specialized even claimed that they had a "vertical" wheelpath (complete BS). Back in these days, Specialized was mainly comparing against the Kona system, since Kona was (correctly) calling their bikes "4-bars".

Yes, Specialized seemed to be heavily trying to single out Kona, but you're forgetting that half of those bikes that you mentioned were straight single-pivots with no linkages, some of them extremely high pivots. Specialized wanted to lump all of them together, even though they had widly different characteristics. I do think less of manufacturers that go out of their way to put down other manufacturers, like Chumba, etc. Specialized was guilty of this when they coined the term "faux bar". Sure, most manufacturers push their own design, but the extent to which they diss the other designs is what really tells the story IMO.


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

Oh I got no problem with specialized - they make great bikes, and they were merely pumping their brand up (better then the opposition).

But like jayem said, they put out lots and lots of adds saying how single pivots sucked because (main complaint, among many) was that they exhibited a lot of brake squat and that you couldn't possibly ride one because of it. They were just pumping up their brand, and I don't blame em for it in the slightest - I've owned specialized bikes in the past, and they were great, and I'll probably own them in the future. They just did such a good job that the internoobs began to think that anything single pivot couldn't possibly be good, when thats far from the case


----------



## StinkyFTW (Jun 29, 2008)

Demo-9 said:


> Kona is the official 15 year old kid downhill bike company. Just like the P.2 is the official 12 year old DJ bike.


And specialized is the trend whore, elitist bike company.


----------



## his dudeness (May 9, 2007)

Jayem said:


> When did you start mountain biking? Did you see the adds that specialized had back in the 1990s and early 2000s? Specialized even claimed that they had a "vertical" wheelpath (complete BS). Back in these days, Specialized was mainly comparing against the Kona system, since Kona was (correctly) calling their bikes "4-bars".
> 
> Yes, Specialized seemed to be heavily trying to single out Kona, but you're forgetting that half of those bikes that you mentioned were straight single-pivots with no linkages, some of them extremely high pivots. Specialized wanted to lump all of them together, even though they had widly different characteristics. I do think less of manufacturers that go out of their way to put down other manufacturers, like Chumba, etc. Specialized was guilty of this when they coined the term "faux bar". Sure, most manufacturers push their own design, but the extent to which they diss the other designs is what really tells the story IMO.


I've never really seen it as one company belligerently against another. They're all out there to try to take your money regardless of who appears to be the good guy bro down bike company. And each company will have their own approach to do it. Look at GT's campaign of last year, advertisements of riders on their bikes tackling riders on other very easily identifiable brands. Or how about the Trek/Evil marketing dispute over the abp/split pivot and whose is best even though they're essentially the same. Better yet is the Maestro/DW debacle... Of course each company slams another design even though the differences between the two are hardly recognizeable. Even component manufacturers like sram, shimano, fox, easton, wtb, maxxis do it, but does that stop you from riding their product? If you hate brands that have marketing campaigns that praise their product over the competition then how can you go to sleep at night with whatever is sitting in your garage? Every part has been suggestively sold to you to make everything else out there seem not quite as good, maybe inferior and a little uncool compared to what you spent your money on. So please, don't act like there's one company in cycling that is evil and out to get you and destroy the opposition. Don't ride a bike because of the brand, ride the bike that puts a smile on your face. Since they all generally do what's the problem.

Even though I currently have a Demo doesn't mean I don't respect other brands and have ridden other bikes. My first dh bike was a Balfa bb7 (a high drive single pivot) and it rode incredibly well, better than most designs that are out today imo. I've had gt's, cannondale's, rocky mountain's, banshee's, transition's. I'm not a grom or a fan boy, and I certainly don't give a rats behind about needing to have the bike that a specific WC rider is on this year. I've been riding since '94, how about you?


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Can anyone explain why some bikes still have really slack seattube angles? Do some people like their seat to move WAY forward when they lower it? Is there ANYONE who likes to be hanging over the rear wheel when they raise their seat for a climb? It just makes no sense and some bikes like the Santacruz Driver seem to have figured this out.


----------



## Sov (Nov 4, 2005)

^^^It's to increase clearance between a low saddle and the back wheel at bottom out.


----------



## SamL3227 (May 30, 2004)

when its in "pedal" position its right where it needs to be if you have the right size. 

when its down, then the seat is tucked forward so the bike can move around more without the seat in the way, unless you like leaning on it while cornerning i guesss.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

his dudeness said:


> Even though I currently have a Demo doesn't mean I don't respect other brands and have ridden other bikes. My first dh bike was a Balfa bb7 (a high drive single pivot) and it rode incredibly well, better than most designs that are out today imo. I've had gt's, cannondale's, rocky mountain's, banshee's, transition's. I'm not a grom or a fan boy, and I certainly don't give a rats behind about needing to have the bike that a specific WC rider is on this year. I've been riding since '94, how about you?


The Balfa wasn't really a high pivot as a far as the chainline is concerned. It was as far as the axle path, but due to the "idler/roller" it didn't have the piss-poor traits of SP like the Super 8 and other early single pivots.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Lelandjt said:


> Can anyone explain why some bikes still have really slack seattube angles? Do some people like their seat to move WAY forward when they lower it? Is there ANYONE who likes to be hanging over the rear wheel when they raise their seat for a climb? It just makes no sense and some bikes like the Santacruz Driver seem to have figured this out.


I believe the bikes you are referring to are DH bikes, set up for optimal DH position. FR bikes have the more vertical STs, better for pedaling around, not as good for DH attack position.


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

Also, bikes with short seat tubes that typically start a little further forward tend to be very very slack - take the old dhr (and it looks like the new one too), the session, and the operator by the looks of it, and plenty of others. It puts the seat in the right place when its low and slammed, but if you want to make it a pedal bike, its the wrong bike for the job. They're DH bikes, not FR bikes. 

At this point, I hope to see kona sponsoring a professional racer on the bike. Nobody cares about FR, and while its cool to see lacondeguy throw giant flips at crankworx, he doesn't drive nearly as many sales as the big names in racing, like peat, minnaar, hill, blenkinsop, etc. Kona needs to buy a big name racer. Hopefully they have the budget to make that happen, and we start seeing kona on top of the podium next year like were seeing rocky mountain right now (cam cole).


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

I wonder how many more Stab's they sold when that Fabien guy wore their jersey. If big name DH racers really drove DH frame sales, 90% of riders would be on V10's.


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

NS-NV said:


> I wonder how many more Stab's they sold when that Fabien guy wore their jersey. If big name DH racers really drove DH frame sales, 90% of riders would be on V10's.


fabian never had any star power. Notice how the demo went from a huck bike to a race bike with sam hill, despite being basically the same bike? I dont know where you ride, but where I ride, the most popular bikes on the hill are demo's and v10's. You see more of those two bikes then anything else, with the possible exception of the new glory, which the mountain rents.


----------



## jcin (Jan 15, 2008)

did you notice that they dropped the bb by a full inch from the 09 demo to the 10? are there any huck bikes that low? sam hill said if they dont put a magic link on the 2012 demo he is off the team


----------



## insanitylevel9 (Sep 23, 2009)

i like


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

William42 said:


> fabian never had any star power. Notice how the demo went from a huck bike to a race bike with sam hill, despite being basically the same bike? I dont know where you ride, but where I ride, the most popular bikes on the hill are demo's and v10's. You see more of those two bikes then anything else, with the possible exception of the new glory, which the mountain rents.


Where I ride, you see tons of Kona, Transition, Intense, and Norco. Baaaarrrreeeelllly anything else. Most of them are pushing their bike up for an 8 minute run down.


----------



## IrSc (Dec 11, 2008)

Demo-9 said:


> Kona is the official 15 year old kid downhill bike company. Just like the P.2 is the official 12 year old DJ bike.


Whats your reasoning? I am pretty sure I am a few years past 15 now, but I still ride and love Konas. How about this, Kona is the official bike for the rider who is not rich but wants a bike that still performs really well out of the box:thumbsup:


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

jcin said:


> did you notice that they dropped the bb by a full inch from the 09 demo to the 10? are there any huck bikes that low? sam hill said if they dont put a magic link on the 2012 demo he is off the team


 like the kona magic link? pure gold!


----------



## carbuncle (Dec 9, 2005)

sambs827 said:


> I don't understand all the Konahate....I see so many pre-2005 Konas being ripped around, its unbelievable. The freeride/downhill bikes I see of that age from other companies always just seem like they would serve better as wind chimes than frame tubes....Kona obviously has good reasoning for keeping the frame and suspension design roughly the same for the past 10+ years.
> 
> Whereas other companies preach about their 'innovation' and charge you out the wazoo for it, Konas keep it simple and relatively affordable, providing a great opportunity for new folks to get into the sport.
> 
> ...


Agreed on all points, I've owned a bunch of Konas and loved every one. I'm currently 3.5 years into an '06 Coiler Deluxe that I use as my AM rig and it hasn't let me down yet. This new bike looks like a nice design!


----------



## juan pablo (Jan 17, 2007)

Fort William was my first WC and I was really interested to see what a real DH course looked like and how the pros would tackle it. I was focussing so much on the riders positions and lines and watching the bikes working and moving that I nearly missed this rider who just came flying through. I got a glimpse of and orange bike that looked like a Stab. With the focus being on V10s, Demos, Glorys and Orange I was shocked that someone might be on a Kona. Unfortunately I think Kona disappeared from WC racing when Fabien and Tracey left but when I got home I went through the results to get the riders name, which I cant remember now. I can tell you the Stab looked great on Fort William and rider was fast and smooth. I saw him do multiple runs and I enjoyed every one of them.


----------



## weedkilla1 (Jan 1, 2009)

After watching the last model perform at the Australian nationals under various riders I started to look at them in a new light. It wasn't just a case of good riders making a poor bike look good as I was competing aswell and new exactly how my own bike was working in each section and genuinely comparing it to the others.
Stabs have been reliable, well developed, fast bikes. No more break than any other brand, their suspension is a different take on single pivot with linkage driven shock that is the current cool as thing, they are low enough without being stupid, slack enough, etc, etc. If more people who bought them invested in cane creek, push, bos shocks and fitted the rest of the bike out with the bling you see every other day on Intense and SC builds there would be no reason to choose an evil, commonfail, transition, morewood, etc. And I like the fact they have zero coolness factor - they match me well in that regard. The lack of a floater doesn't bother me as that was always the first thing to make a noise on the old ones. If this is sold in Oz as a bare frame it will be my new bike, otherwise it might just be a transition....


----------



## ebxtreme (Jan 6, 2004)

juan pablo said:


> ....but when I got home I went through the results to get the riders name, which I cant remember now. I can tell you the Stab looked great on Fort William and rider was fast and smooth. I saw him do multiple runs and I enjoyed every one of them.


Probably Joe Smith. He's supported by Kona UK and is getting better and better.

As you alluded, Kona's are pretty much non-existent at WC's (other than Joe) and at the US races these days.


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

myarmisonfire said:


> Maybe so but anyone who has ridden a Horst link 4 bar back to back with a faux bar can tell the difference.


Different does not mean it is better or worse. Kona's suspension works just fine. The rest is marketing drivel.


----------

