# New BMW freeride bike...



## AfterThisNap (Jul 30, 2006)

It's like a compact version of their DH sleds. Word is that it's around 37lb as is. :skep: 








Chainrings are cocentric with the swingarm pivot, which is interesting. Anyone with experience on thier racelink?

Coffe Talk. Discuss amongs yourself. No big whoop


----------



## Ojai Bicyclist (Nov 4, 2005)

Heavy and overcomplicated for its intended use. 

The thing has XC tires, light wheels, and an air shock, it should be that light. I bet most would be in the 40# range, especially considering the market Brooklyn appeals too.


----------



## AfterThisNap (Jul 30, 2006)

Meh. It's a only lb meatier than the SX trail, and I think it could handle similar terrain with some chunkier tires.


----------



## fred.r (Sep 8, 2005)

Ojai Bicyclist said:


> Heavy and overcomplicated for its intended use.
> ...especially considering the market Brooklyn appeals too.


Can-o-worms. 
I think they are awesome bikes. Def. a sight to see in person and if you ever get the chance to throw a leg over one, you'd be a fool not to.
But, some like 'em, some don't.


----------



## daisycutter (Sep 18, 2005)

*thats frame is just to sweet*

I have to laugh about people saying it is to heavy. :nono: It is steel which means it will last forever. The design is proven as it has been only slightly in changed over the past 10 years. The bike is made to be riden hard and believe me there will be a huge waiting list for this bike.


----------



## Mongiafer (May 29, 2005)

mechanical brakes.....WTF?????????????


----------



## Andrewpalooza (Dec 7, 2004)

Mongiafer said:


> mechanical brakes.....WTF?????????????


Avid BB7 brakes are fantastic, and will put a number of hydros to shame. No issues running them on a freeride bike whatsoever. They are actually heavier than a lot of hydro setups, so they didn't bolt them on just to save weight.

That bike looks dope, I'd buy one in the second if I had the change. Brooklyn makes some awesome frames.


----------



## frogger (Nov 6, 2006)

Sorry, I think it's an over engineered piece of crap. I can't imagine the amount of mud and crap that would get stuck in all those pullies/linkages/bearings and the amount of time it would take to clean and maintain would just make it a nightmare to own. I prefer to ride my bikes, not clean and maintain them constantly. Someone needs to tell them about keeping it simple...


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

37 pounds...I rode with aguy on a DH rig that weighed in he 60 pound range....and that guy was an animal....could pedal uphill on it too :eekster:


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

frogger said:


> Sorry, I think it's an over engineered piece of crap. I can't imagine the amount of mud and crap that would get stuck in all those pullies/linkages/bearings and the amount of time it would take to clean and maintain would just make it a nightmare to own. I prefer to ride my bikes, not clean and maintain them constantly. Someone needs to tell them about keeping it simple...


You've gotta be kidding... how simple do you need it? Its a high forward single pivot with the chain idler running on the pivot bearings, so theres still only one set bearings and one pivot on the entire frame. The chain angle with the idler will get rid of the negative interaction of chain forces on a high-forward pivot, and the floating brake will make braking neutral. I think the design is far superior to the new Bullit unless you really like brake jack and pedal kickback.


----------



## Quarashi (Aug 23, 2006)

frogger said:


> Sorry, I think it's an over engineered piece of crap. I can't imagine the amount of mud and crap that would get stuck in all those pullies/linkages/bearings and the amount of time it would take to clean and maintain would just make it a nightmare to own. I prefer to ride my bikes, not clean and maintain them constantly. Someone needs to tell them about keeping it simple...


The upper pulley is the same place as the main pivot and the lower pulley would be the equivalent of a chain guide on any other bike.

Some people just love a fussy bike. It's a cool feeling when you go on a trail and everything works perfectly because I maintained so-and-so or personally fixed this thingamajig. For many of us taking care of the bike is half the sport! :thumbsup:


----------



## TacoMan (Apr 18, 2007)

Wouldn't the high brake link angle cause the suspension to jack up under braking? It looks like the swingarm angle has dictated the brake link angle since a horizontal link would interfere with the swingarm arc.


----------



## rorydude (Nov 19, 2006)

me like, me like. i think its an awesome bike. ive been drooling over it since i saw it in another thread. only thing is, i have to pedal to get to my trails. anybody know how it would work riding up?


----------



## fred.r (Sep 8, 2005)

TacoMan said:


> Wouldn't the high brake link angle cause the suspension to jack up under braking? It looks like the swingarm angle has dictated the brake link angle since a horizontal link would interfere with the swingarm arc.


Floating brake.


----------



## dante (Jan 12, 2004)

frogger said:


> Someone needs to tell them about keeping it simple...


you're funny.


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

That bike is too frikken' hot! I'd ride it till the wheels fell off!

To the haters, it's no more complicated than any number of vpp linkage bikes. Single pivot, jackshaft through the pivot, swing link at the shock. You're done.


----------



## Err (Mar 21, 2005)

Sure is sexy in steel. Looks like the sus would funciton well with the idler system and the floating brake. The DHX-A is good to go as is the Talas 36. 

Those 5.1 rims are fairly strong and are laced up 36 spokes, depending on the hubs they should come in under 1900g helping the bike to pedal well. Those Advantage tires are a killer all around freeride tire. No, not for Whistler days, but for any time you have to pedal up hill first they strike a nice balance between light weight (850g) and durability. Maxxis spec's a 60a durometer rubber so they're not as slow at the 42 super tacky's but gripper than their XC 70 durometer. 

At first glance, I'd say you could have the bike at 35lbs if you wanted to without sacrificing strength or it could be 2 lbs heavier with DH tires for shuttle days.

I like it.


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

Err said:


> Sure is sexy in steel. Looks like the sus would funciton well with the idler system and the floating brake. The DHX-A is good to go as is the Talas 36.
> 
> Those 5.1 rims are fairly strong and are laced up 36 spokes, depending on the hubs they should come in under 1900g helping the bike to pedal well. Those Advantage tires are a killer all around freeride tire. No, not for Whistler days, but for any time you have to pedal up hill first they strike a nice balance between light weight (850g) and durability. Maxxis spec's a 60a durometer rubber so they're not as slow at the 42 super tacky's but gripper than their XC 70 durometer.
> 
> ...


Yeah, the Advantages are great tires, super high volume for a 2.4. IMO, Maxxis is missing out not having these in a thicker sidewall UST compatible version at around 1000-grams. They'd be the perfect all-around FR tires then.


----------



## Mongiafer (May 29, 2005)

Steel bikes are for hucking.....they are heavy but never crack....Air shocks are for saving weight not very appropiate for Hucking...... So this bike makes no sense for me....
But anyway looks super nice...and the craftmanship on the frame got me amazed...


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

Mongiafer said:


> Steel bikes are for hucking.....they are heavy but never crack....Air shocks are for saving weight not very appropiate for Hucking...... So this bike makes no sense for me....
> But anyway looks super nice...and the craftmanship on the frame got me amazed...


The frame material itself has nothing to do with it. How the material is used within the design is everything. Things will make more sense if you eductate yourself on the subject.


----------



## Err (Mar 21, 2005)

DWF said:


> Yeah, the Advantages are great tires, super high volume for a 2.4. IMO, Maxxis is missing out not having these in a thicker sidewall UST compatible version at around 1000-grams. They'd be the perfect all-around FR tires then.


I've had good luck converting the 2.4 Advantages to tubeless. And I'm with ya, its are to find a good tubless tire for all around freeride. The Maxxis 2.3 Highroller LUST's are around the same weight as the Advantages but don't offer the low 60 durometer, they're 70.

And for those concerned about the use of steel and it's weight. Take a close look at the build on that bike. Considering that the complete build is 37lbs, I'd bet the frame with shock weighs under 10lbs which is very reasonable for a beefy freeride frame. The lighter wheels will make it pedal like it's lighter yet.

FWIW, I do not have any association with Brooklyn.


----------



## AfterThisNap (Jul 30, 2006)

DWF said:


> The frame material itself has nothing to do with it. How the material is used within the design is everything. Things will make more sense if you eductate yourself on the subject.


oooh, snap.


----------



## RickyD (Jan 28, 2004)

Ojai Bicyclist said:


> Heavy and overcomplicated for its intended use.
> 
> The thing has XC tires, light wheels, and an air shock, it should be that light. I bet most would be in the 40# range, especially considering the market Brooklyn appeals too.


Seriously?? Where is it complicated?

It's a linkage activated single pivot. Looks like it has fewer linkage parts then a Turner DHR. Certainly less complicated then any VPP or DW-link.

Is it the idler cog thats bothering you? It's actually very simple. Really no different then how a Canfield f1 drive works. The idler ELIMINATES pedal feedback and bob better then almost any other design with the exception of maybe a DW-link.

I own a Brooklyn Racelink which is more "complicated" then this bike and it is rock solid. The most trouble free bike I have ever owned. Never throws a chain, never creaks, nothing comes loose every part is built to be abused. Pedals amazingly, no BS, ZERO pedal induced bob anywhere in it's sag, while still being fully active. I mean you truly have to pedal one to believe it. To paraphrase Dave Weagle "I've ridden a couple of the RaceLinks and was VERY impressed, a really intriguing suspension design, that works incredibly well".

As far as weight. My Racelink with a HEAVY build was 47lbs. It went on a diet this year and should be in the 42-44lb range when it is finished and thats with still keeping my 2.8 Michelin up front.


----------



## Melt (May 24, 2004)

the pedal setup looks ridicilous


----------



## xKREDx (Aug 8, 2006)

looks sick.....


----------



## Vinny A (Oct 8, 2006)

That bike is hot, if I had the money I'd definitely buy one.


----------



## maden (Mar 14, 2007)

Mongiafer said:


> Steel bikes are for hucking.....they are heavy but never crack....Air shocks are for saving weight not very appropiate for Hucking...... So this bike makes no sense for me....
> But anyway looks super nice...and the craftmanship on the frame got me amazed...


FYI:
Steel is lighter than aluminium, if built to the same strenght!


----------



## JustMtnB44 (Nov 8, 2004)

maden said:


> FYI:
> Steel is lighter than aluminium, if built to the same strenght!


Umm, no. Steel is almost 3 times denser than aluminum yet barely twice as strong, so therefore steel bikes will be heavier for the same strength. If your statement were true than why aren't steel xc hardtails lighter than aluminum ones, since there would be no need to overbuild it?


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

maden said:


> FYI:
> Steel is lighter than aluminium, if built to the same strenght!


Thats way over-simplified


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

JustMtnB44 said:


> Umm, no. Steel is almost 3 times denser than aluminum yet barely twice as strong, so therefore steel bikes will be heavier for the same strength. If your statement were true than why aren't steel xc hardtails lighter than aluminum ones, since there would be no need to overbuild it?


You're getting into my territory now. Comparisons of material strengths always depends on the materials in question. 6061 to a T6 temper (most common MTB aluminum alloy) is good for about 60K tensile. True Temper Platinum Steel tubes are good to about 210K. Some of the other high end steels are higher than that and many heat treated steel tubesets are hitting 180K.

For your XC frame comparison, you can have steel frames lighter than aluminum, but it becomes far more complicated than that when it comes to manufacturability. Very strong and very thin steels are also very hard to work with. Here's a basic place to start for more info. There's more there if you're interested. Bottom line in the real world is that aluminum makes a lot more sense for building full suspension MTB's than steel due to it's ease of use in manufacturing, it's malleability, and it's low cost. When you want to build some compliance into the frame, then other materials can offer better attributes and make more sense.


----------



## JustMtnB44 (Nov 8, 2004)

DWF said:


> You're getting into my territory now.  Comparisons of material strengths always depends on the materials in question. 6061 to a T6 temper (most common MTB aluminum alloy) is good for about 60K tensile. True Temper Platinum Steel tubes are good to about 210K. Some of the other high end steels are higher than that and many heat treated steel tubesets are hitting 180K.
> 
> For your XC frame comparison, you can have steel frames lighter than aluminum, but it becomes far more complicated than that when it comes to manufacturability. Very strong and very thin steels are also very hard to work with. Here's a basic place to start for more info. There's more there if you're interested. Bottom line in the real world is that aluminum makes a lot more sense for building full suspension MTB's than steel due to it's ease of use in manufacturing, it's malleability, and it's low cost. When you want to build some compliance into the frame, then other materials can offer better attributes and make more sense.


I have a Master's Degree in Mechanical Engineering, so I'm fully aware of material strengths and uses. I was just keeping my reply simple and generalized since the original statement was so also extremely vague and simple and sounded like misinformation to me. Thats why I didn't bring specific materials into it since there is such a wide range of alloys and strengths available for both steel and aluminum.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

frogger said:


> Sorry, I think it's an over engineered piece of crap. I can't imagine the amount of mud and crap that would get stuck in all those pullies/linkages/bearings and the amount of time it would take to clean and maintain would just make it a nightmare to own. I prefer to ride my bikes, not clean and maintain them constantly. Someone needs to tell them about keeping it simple...


Did anyone ever tell you this:

High performance = high maintenance?

I dig the bike.


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

JustMtnB44 said:


> I have a Master's Degree in Mechanical Engineering, so I'm fully aware of material strengths and uses. I was just keeping my reply simple and generalized since the original statement was so also extremely vague and simple and sounded like misinformation to me. Thats why I didn't bring specific materials into it since there is such a wide range of alloys and strengths available for both steel and aluminum.


I don't have a problem with keeping it simple, and I intend no offense, but your initial response was misleading at best and plain wrong at worst and IMO, that furthers the problem. There are hundreds of reason to use aluminum for constructing for dual suspension MTB's; in my mind, in today's marketplace and its demands, it's the only logical choice for reasons I stated above.

But, that Brooklyn and the RaceLink is hot, hot, hot and I give those guys my total respect because they make their own stuff the hard way in a market that has little tolerance for anything that doesn't follow the routine "forumula."


----------



## Ged the Head (Jun 25, 2007)

Here's a couple more pics of the new BMW SR6 or Slope Ranger....

This is still a prototype version, a run of production frames is under way and due to be ready real soon.


----------



## xKREDx (Aug 8, 2006)

I like the orange with the bits of blue.


----------



## Ged the Head (Jun 25, 2007)

Jim Davage's (UK sponsored Brooklyn rider) SR6....

waiting on a few parts to finish her off, white Profiles, 33 tooth ring, carbon shrouds, Marz. 55's

first batch are all sold, next batch is underway.


----------



## Quarashi (Aug 23, 2006)

The orange one is quite a beauty, I'd hit that! 

The only disatvantage I see with this design is that you can only use one ring in front.

I'm Guessing it has 6" of travel?

Look at the size of the bearing at the main pivot!


----------



## Ged the Head (Jun 25, 2007)

6" travel 'slope style' bike

68 degree head tube 
16.25” - 16.75” chain stay 
22.5” top tube actual 24” effective, 
14.375 BB height.


----------



## CrustyOne (Oct 29, 2007)

TacoMan said:


> Wouldn't the high brake link angle cause the suspension to jack up under braking? It looks like the swingarm angle has dictated the brake link angle since a horizontal link would interfere with the swingarm arc.


what on earth are trying to say?..high angle??...wtf is that?

...no it wont jack its pretty close to parrellel with the swingarm..how far away from the swingarm it is has no relevence to its effect on the suspension (unless its flexing in a serious manner)


----------



## CountryBoy (Oct 24, 2006)

I am liking the raw finish.


----------



## Djponee (Dec 20, 2006)

sick bikes


----------



## Uncle Cliffy (Jul 7, 2006)

I'm not a big fan of high-forward pivot designs, but this bike is the $hit!! They told me in an e-mail that I could chrome plate one If I ordered it! BLINGGGG! :thumbsup: 

I just wish I could demo one first. :sad:


----------



## Madman133 (Apr 25, 2006)

I dont like how the topt tube goes all the way through the seat tube...looks weird...


----------



## Quarashi (Aug 23, 2006)

It does look GT in that sense.


----------



## HeavyRider (Mar 11, 2005)

mmm... nice fork.


----------



## Huck Banzai (May 8, 2005)

snaky69 said:


> Did anyone ever tell you this:
> 
> High performance = high maintenance?


Aha! There's hope yet!


----------



## manhattanprjkt83 (May 31, 2005)

this bike is cool but i dont get it...

it's a short travel dh bike...


----------



## DHidiot (Aug 5, 2004)

Why the hell would they put that extended chain and idler on their when their jackshaft system was working just fine (and probably better than this)? If they're going to do away with the jackshaft bit they need to bring that pivot down below the stratosphere so the wheelbase doesn't double in corners.


----------



## VTSession (Aug 18, 2005)

that bike is sick. BMW make amazing DH bikes. If you doubt that go to Plattekill, NY on a DH race weekend and see how many guys race and win on BMW bikes,


----------



## Djponee (Dec 20, 2006)

yep still sexy looking


----------



## boogenman (Sep 22, 2006)

I was tooling around on one of these bikes last month and it felt really quick and light while riding it. 

I would consider riding anything brooklyn makes.


----------



## xy9ine (Feb 2, 2005)

DHidiot said:


> Why the hell would they put that extended chain and idler on their when their jackshaft system was working just fine


 to eliminate the second chain & allow the use of 'standard' cranks - you're limited to using lhd profiles (or other similar bmx cranks) with the jackshaft system.


----------



## Ged the Head (Jun 25, 2007)

Here's my own SR6......


----------



## paintballeerXC (Jun 9, 2005)

Ged the Head said:


> Here's my own SR6......


looks dope, weight? action pics?


----------



## Err (Mar 21, 2005)

paintballeerXC said:


> looks dope, weight? action pics?


Ditto, more info!

Weight?
How does it ride?
What are you using it for?
How's the Rocco feel on there?


----------



## RaindogT (Oct 2, 2005)

Melt said:


> the pedal setup looks ridicilous


I couldn't agree more-- almost looks like they're attached to those funny 'arm' thingies on the bottom of the bike.....


----------



## bigmike00 (Sep 6, 2007)

BMW are beautiful works of art. I dont buy the Mechanical brake argument, they are great brakes but no where near hydros. Its like putting cheap axis wheels on a Z06.


----------



## Ged the Head (Jun 25, 2007)

Not had a chance to weigh her yet, my guess is around 37.5 lbs.

My Minilink XL weighs 40 lbs and it's defo WAY lighter than that!!!

I've only finished building it at the weekend, hence it's only had a bit of street action. Feels absolutely outta this world. Defo the best feeling bike i've EVER owned. Very easy to pick up and throw around, feels perfectly balanced front and rear. Running in the mid dropout, may switch to the short wheelbase sometime to try it out.

The Rocco shock seems awesome, i'm well impressed.

Gonna be using the bike as a general fun bike, short course DH bike, should be ideal for over here in the UK. Using the 66 ATA's 140-180mm travel, Probably only use the 180 when the track asks for it, may also swap the shock over to a Fox DHX coil for DH duties.

Frames are $2700 in the US.

Can't wait to get it full o mud!!!!


----------

