|
Post by Andrew on Sept 8, 2009 17:07:43 GMT
If past form is anything to go by, new 5 will be out soon.
if new 575 is any different, will be out in eary 2010, i think the 2009 version finally hit the shops in Jan 09.
But thats just my thoughts.
Wait till interbike before deciding what to do, thats what I would say. If 575 is almost the same, buy now, if its a lot different, then I'd wait.
Its a pretty sorted bike already, any changes will be minor I guess.
Andrew
|
|
kinger
a true Yetifan!
Posts: 100
|
Post by kinger on Sept 8, 2009 17:23:11 GMT
new Asr5 should be over with us by the new year we reckon - samples should be here for the Cycle Show at the start of October... 575 remains the same, only change is the 2010 Fox shock with Boost valve.
Rear end of the Asr5 will come with standard q/r dropouts as well as the new 142mm 'standard'
Evo Stu
|
|
kinger
a true Yetifan!
Posts: 100
|
Post by kinger on Sept 8, 2009 19:56:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by raceyeti on Sept 10, 2009 3:13:01 GMT
I'm not sure if I like the new head badge...guess its always hard when things change. Otherwise I like the graphics!
|
|
rufus
Call me Mr YETI
Posts: 97
|
Post by rufus on Sept 10, 2009 4:58:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by stuartx on Sept 10, 2009 15:12:06 GMT
Looks good
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Sept 11, 2009 20:58:19 GMT
Until they do one with an Ali rear and not carbon I doubt I will buy another yeti
|
|
andrewk
Call me Mr YETI
'03 Kokopelli ASR, '11 Big Top.
Posts: 66
|
Post by andrewk on Sept 12, 2009 20:28:27 GMT
First time I've posted on this Forum, though I've been following this site for years. Great work Andrew. The 2010 Yeti look delicious, but I have a concern about the loss of the dropout area pivot, and it's relation to 'brakejack', stinkbugging, or whatever the term, the phenomena where the suspension stiffens under braking, unless there is a pivot in that area. I moved to my Kokopelli ASR from a Gary Fisher Sugar, which didn't have said pivot. The Yeti's suspension is noticable more active in comparison, night and day in fact, due I think to the pivot. Fisher inserted a pivot in his next design, and now there are a lot of bikes in the market cloning Yeti's setup, Merida's, Mongoose, Scott, Litespeed and probably others. I also suspect that the pivot also allows stresses to concentrate and dissipate in a focussed area. Without a pivot to 'bend', are these inluences not going to concentrate in other stress riser area's adding more load? Could this already be part of the reason for the 575 carbon chainstay problems commented on this site? I have seen a Litespeed rear end ( pivotless!) that also failed just behind the chain rings, though other aspects of the inferior litespeed design could have contributed ( poor chainstay clearance and very thin tubing walls ) I know the bolt pivot evolved to a leaf style joint in ti and then carbon, but seems to have now been done away with completely. What gives. In my limited experience, it seems to me to be a backward step, compromising the suspension performance. Unless, the layout of the dogbone swing link may have some influence on the travel of the seat stay? While I'm here, for my part, I am resistant to all this carbon fibre in the rear triangle chainstays. I think the extra expense and fragility is not worth it. I prefer metal to deal with the realities of flying rocks, chains and bicycles. I had a chain drop off my rings on a carbon road bike once and it made a real mess. Hopefully there will be an option of an alloy chainstay. I can't see myself very happy buying a carbon one, in spite of all the hype and marketing. I think The Doctor above is quite succinct. But what else is there?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 13, 2009 20:08:28 GMT
HI, Thanks for the post!
I can say that the brake jack/pivot placement thing is much talked about, and as far as a proven set up, the old Intense/FSR drop out pivot (between chainstay and Drop out) is the one that works to eliminate brake jack.
Bikes like Konas and the last turners with the pivot on the seat stay to drop out suffer more from brake jack than the above.
Bikes like the Yeti 575, the pivot is essentially the same place as a Kona, but as with all these bikes there is a whole load of other stuff going on, so to say the 575 with a flex point will be worse/better will be missing a load of other stuff. The Turner & Kona will both deal with it in slightly different ways due to the suspension links being at slightly different angles (Look up Ellsworth linkage patent- and combine with FSR pivot). There is so much other stuff to consider,
such as the RP23, depending on the compression tune from FOX (and Yeti work hand in hand with them) will affect this, among many things I am no where near clever enough to understand!
If you take a look at the Seven, it has a pivot. I think this is just down to how much travel there is, and how much movement there needs to be in that area per inch of travel.
The YETI (and other manufacturers) Carbon stays have had a few issues for sure, but I have ridden a 575 for 2 years now with no such rock/chain issues. Mine has a stainless plate over it, and then a proper chainstay cover too, I can't see the chain causing problems.
I think Carbon is here to stay in the MTB world, I never used to like it, but since having my carbon bars, and the 575 rear I've got used to it, and would happily spec a bike with these parts again.
Maybe there will be an Alu rear? maybe there won't? Can't answer that one.
Andrew
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Sept 14, 2009 10:18:15 GMT
It's a pity all this carbon, used more for fashion than for best material choice! I have an older Ali rear 575 and used to have a Ti dogbone ASr (stolen) I was going to replace with another yeti as you cannot beat the ride. However the carbon is a total show stopper and I will now look elsewhere to replace the ASr and eventually the 575, A sad day indeed when you are foced to other brands
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 14, 2009 13:32:29 GMT
I guess for every one person that wants a Full Alu rear, there is another one who wants Carbon on their bike, so unless they make the same bike out of 2 different materials, then they can't win!
You'll all be wanting Steel hardtails with flat bars next! LOL.
Maybe they will do a 575 with full Alu rear in the future? with the new bolt through rear end? That would be sweet.
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Sept 14, 2009 15:23:16 GMT
Well they used to offer the 575 with a choice of rear material ?!
The big problem with carbon is failure and crash damage. Whilst mountain biking you WILL crash, and how do you know if your carbon frame is damaged? With metal, it will visibly dent, bend or crack. With carbon it can crack but there may be structural damage you cannot see or detect.
Taking it back to a shop doesn't help unless they have it imaged or x-rayed etc so it's a guess whether it is safe or not. so when you're doing 30mph down a nice descent, do you want to be enjoying the ride or worrying that your last crash damaged your frame and it could fail at any moment ?
Oh and I do have a steel HT, it doesn't have flat bars though!
Agree though an ali bolt through rear end would be schweet and I really want to continue with Yeti, just not with the current materials line up!
|
|
dc01
New Questions.......
Posts: 4
|
Post by dc01 on Sept 14, 2009 15:47:33 GMT
I posted on a different thread not long ago about my doubts and concerns of a full carbon rear end. I really want a 575 and im lucky enough to be in a position to start bike shopping. Even with my prefered alloy/carbon rear end i still have my doubts. Been pondering what to do for getting on 3 months now. Loved the bike on a test ride but i have a doubt if the carbon would survive my aggressive riding style and my 14 1/2 stone over regular drops of up to 5-6ft on my regular routes. The carbon does look extremely narrow in front of the drop outs on the seat stays. A 7 is more bike than i need. If a full alloy version was availible i would have a 575 already.
|
|
simple
New Questions.......
Posts: 0
|
Post by simple on Sept 14, 2009 20:58:42 GMT
I would suggest that if you are an aggressive rider and regularly hit 5-6 foot drops then the 575 is not the correct bike for you. The 575 may have nearly 6" of travel but it sits firmly in the 5" travel catagory of bikes. The frame weighs in at sub 6lbs and it has a rear end designed with keeping weight to a minimum. You wouldn't or shouldn't treat a Specialized Stumpy FSR the same way, it's ment for more or less the same stuff.
Yeti for years now have lead the way in providing light efficient full sus bikes with more travel than their competitors directly comparable models. Their argument being if you can add an inch or so extra travel without compromising the weight or ride then why not. It doesn't mean the bike moves up to the next rung of intended use or abuse, just it can give the rider an extra performance boost when being used as origionally intended.
I think too many people are using the 575 for riding that they should really be looking at the 7 or a nomad/enduro style bike. This has a stout ali rear triangle, big bearings and can take the hits. If you make the choice to run a light trail bike and subject it to action beyond it's design then it probably will fail.
This isn't intended as a rant just there is a huge grey area where riders sometimes look at the travel of a bike and nothing more. Sometimes the frame weight, geometry, fork lengthand even max tyre and rotor size is a giveaway.
Anyway if anyone gets a chance give a 7 a test ride as you'll be quite amazed as to how similar it rides to the 575 and gives you all the extra capacity the 575 lacks.
|
|
|
Post by perttime on Sept 15, 2009 5:52:33 GMT
A while ago, the 575 was included in a German light freeride bike comparison.
Can you guess what they concluded?
It is not a freeride bike.
|
|