HIFI or highBB/short chainstay bikes

[LanceT]

I wanted to ask around here to see if anyone could give me their thoughts based on impressions or experiences of riding specifically a HIFI, or a bike with similar highBB/short chainstay configuration.

I feel like the geometry is interesting and it is very easy to make the trials moves happen. I am actually thinking it is too easy though. It feels like the window of opportunity to get the moves right is very small. It's like either I get it perfect or the bike just loops out on taps and even sidehops. I have a bad old school habit of using too much upper body strength and pulling on the handlebars of this bike does not work. It seems like I need to just jump my body and the bike will follow with minimal input, but it doesn't feel natural. I am wondering if it's more me or the bike.

So does anyone else share this impression of the HIFI or bikes like the HIFI and would it be worth trying some less extreme geometry or continue getting used to this bike. The more riding experience you have, the better.

Thanks,
LT

[music_maj_34]

Well, I really like my Hifi. It stays on the back wheel really easy an I find many other moves pretty effortless. Please keep in mind though that I don't really have anything to compare it to.

I think you will find that most of the guys on here will tell you that they dislike the high BB, which is kinda weird cause when I originally came on here asking for advice on which bike to buy for my first trials bike, I was pointed in the direction of the Hifi. :dunno: But anyway...

When all is said and done, everyone has their own opinion, which they are entitled to.

For my next bike I may try something with a lower BB just to see what all the fuss is about.

[va_tick]

I think he was looking fro feedback from some pro-elite level riders who spent a few years on both types of geo's :dunno: .

[Ali C]

I would consider myself a pro/elite rider (3rd in the last round of the british champs, master cat)

I cant say I have ridden years with a high bb bike, but I citenly owned one (hifi) I have however 7 years of expirience of riding lower bb bikes

I feel if your just starting out, you can get used to a high bb bike very easily because you havnt learnt any habits or just dont know any different. I feel this is why I dont get on with them, after 7 years of riding low bb bikes, I am kinda set in my ways of how I ride a bike. I had a hifi, but I sold it again after 4 weeks as my riding just went downhill.

For one thing, I dont just have a hoppy hoppy style of riding, I like to flow, riding streety style on natural (imagine chris ackrigg, only not as good). I found the hifi horrible for that, the positioning on it was naff, felt like I was touching my toes and riding in a "superman" position when both wheels were on the floor. I didnt like the hifi for riding natural either, I thought my weight was now too high on the bike and would make me loose balence easily, not somthing you want to happen in comps.

I was good on the rearwheel though, but too good! it was so stable I found the bike was hard to control, it just wanted to hop backwards instead of forwards and if I put a pedal stroke in, it would want to loop out.

I also found I couldnt tap...AT ALL and gaps were harder....when you landed, the bike wouldnt level out, it would want to stay on the rear wheel and make you jump off the back.

I think high bb bikes can be good, but the high the bb goes, the longer the chainstays need to be to combat the rear wheel control.

I cant think of a single move that was easier to do on the hifi than my ashton, plus my ashton is a hell of a lot more fun.

[music_maj_34]

I think he was looking fro feedback from some pro-elite level riders who spent a few years on both types of geo's :dunno: .

No problem... just thought I would throw my 2 cents in. Heh heh

[Elan]

its hilarious how 2 years ago everyone was like why arent there bikes with highbbs other than the vinco, highbb4lyfe, and hte manufacturers, or manufacturer, actually listened, and now everyone is finding out how much they suck ass. im the same whay. and from what youve said lance, i was riding with graham the other day, and he pretty much said hte same thing as you, and i completely agree.


id say go back to a medium-low rise bike, like the control or xtp. the yare perfect imho

[va_tick]

Would the raven 6.0 be considered a high or medium BB bike?

[David Weyman]

BT Ravens are +45mm which is a bit much for some people unless you find the right stem. I think most do best on a +20mm BB bike.

[vince]

I've had a kot 1065 for two rides now. Coming from a caisso I find the only thing it does better is sidehop. But I will give it some more time. Probably should've gotten an echo control.

[flixlee]

I am currently running two stock bikes with different geometry. I've been riding the Monty since last fall and the Marc Vinco since late February. Before these two bikes it's been Monty, Norco and the venerable Rocky Mountain "bad" Experience. That should give you some idea of when I started!
1) MV Derangboy 1091mm w/b, +80 bb, 380 c/s
2) Monty 231 1074mm w/b, +15 bb, 390 c/s

I find the MV easier to balance and maneuver in many situations because of the roomy "cockpit". Most noteable is the unreal stability on the rear wheel, however, I find it more difficult to side hop because you must be more precise with your timing. Ups and gaps seem easier. The Monty definatly excels in natural terrain. It is easier to balance on two wheels and easier to flick around. Especially for someone of my height (5'9"). Overall, I prefer the Monty. If I were getting an Echo, I would definatly get the Control over the HiFi. Hope that helps a little.

[mikeschiavone]

Damn Lance, I was just about to post the same question!

I can tell you that I am no where near as consistent on the Hifi as I was on the BT 4.0. I don't think that anything is in fact easier on the Hifi. I just don't like how hard it seems to balance on both wheels. Additionally, I too have the same problem of not keeping my weight foward on gaps, and end up falling backwards.

Basically, I'm ready to try something else.

[Elan]

ive ridden like 3 hifis, they all felt like shit. i was psyched to build my 6.0, but never got a chance, and have yet to ride one. i rode joels adamant, felt like a hifi. control or xtp are probably the only bikes id buy.

[lucky13]

We were on a "big" group ride Monday and I got to spend some more time on a Control when off of my AdamantA2 and they both ride great, but I hear you on the muscle memory theory. The Control just feels like what I'm looking for next rig.

I'm not saying that the A2 sucks, not at all! I love riding that thing. But it's the first dedicated trials frame/fork/stem setup I've owned in 10 years of riding and I'm not about to defend it's geometry charicteristics based on "new is better"

In the past all I had were hodgepodge wannabe Leech/Lenosky/Trappe type rigs.

I'd stay away from Koxx as they are overpriced imho...

Get a Zhi, Aorta, or Echo with lower than 40mm rise? BT6's felt cool too.

If I was going custom,.. in my mind a 1080wb, +20bb, 380cs would be about right.

[stocktrials]

i have been riding "normal" bb trials frames for years. adam has a Vinco derangboy whatever and it doesnt feel too bad, he rides it pretty damn well. I may be wrong but i think this is because the wheelbase and chainstays are the right length.

When you put a high bb on anything shorter than an avg of 1095(ish) it doesn't feel nice anymore

[Hooha]

I got a Hifi about 2 months ago after riding a 1100 level boss for a year and a mod for around 7 years before that. Whilst awkward and strange initially I have started to find my range so to speak and now find almost everything easier mostly due to the fact it feels more mod like.

[LanceT]

Nice guys, thanks.

Based on a lot of the comments, I would say that the HIFI may be the most tempermental frame available. The combination of the short chainstay and high BB make it super eay to pul up the front, which means less upper body and more legs are needed for the technique, I think.

Evidently, the more experience one has with older style/lower bikes, the harder it will be to get used to. So better is not the case.

The balance on 2 wheels is definitely worse and I think my initial impression of having to be "on" to ride it well still holds. Some days I will go into work and be hitting things well and others I am just too slow for the bike. To really get any snap out of the moves, the timing has to be spot on. It is a bit much.

I noticed Vince's bike has a higher BB, but it is also really long and the chainstays aren't that short. That seems better, but it could just be him.

But it does seem that there are a number of really young riders who are making big moves look really easy. I think if you learn on a high bb bike and develop the technique based on that geometry, it is better. If you learned on a XC frame, it may take a while.

I think the chainstays and top tube are a bit too short on the HIFI too. Just have to move more quickly then I guess.

It's funny, I measured head tube to BB on the HIFI and then a Zebdi and they were the same, or very close. That wasn't what I expected or what I was looking for. :dunno: Oh well.

[tybikes]

Lance, I have thought for a long time that horizontal and vertical measurements for bb to head tube are important. A properly fit ROAD bike is measured by two dimensions, height from bb to hbar height and horizontal distance from hbar to bb. These two measurements really dictate how a rider is positioned on the bike. I think the same applies to trials bikes, but the bb rise also plays a role, along with chainstay length and so on. For the little time I've spent on "real" trials bikes, I noticed a couple things that may help. First, higher BBs raise your hips and roll them forward to compensate. To counter this, riders started using high rise bars/stems to put you more upright. This puts your center of gravity much higher, making you unstable when your wheels are flat. The chainstays on said bike are also more vertical when on the rear wheel, making it easier to loop out. When on the rear wheel, you are centered over the rear wheel, which is why it "sits" like that. Since your weight isn't in front of the rear axle, you can't use your power to drive forward or up. Think of it this way: A unicyclist can only move forward quickly by leaning forward (weight in front of the axle). If you were perfectly centered over the axle and tried to accelerate forward quickly, you would just fall backwards on to your back. Make sense or am I just babbling?!?


I think the measurements you made for headtube to bb on your bikes are similar because you may have done it in a straight line. The measurements for horizontal and vertical may come up quite different.

[literocola]

In the past all I had were hodgepodge wannabe Leech/Lenosky/Trappe type rigs.

Indeed; I was a sucker to think that I could "master the art of trials" by thinking I could use my DJ bike as a trials bike. Damn you Ryan Leech and your propaganda!
I like the Hi-Fi, it feels diffrent than anything I've ever been on; since the Hi-Fi is the only real trails bike I've actually ridden. But, I must admit all the practice I've done on my jump/assult bike, has indeed paid off when I do get on the HiFi, its like I've been riding that bike for years.

[LanceT]

I think I understand what is being said about the horizontal and vertical measurements. But it really seemd to me that the actual riding compartment/cockpit/space for your body to move is determined by the distance between the headtube and the bb in a direct, straight line. The higher the BB of a bike is, the shorter it feels, not taking into account wheelbase but actual space for your body to work in. And the steeper the head angle, the more room it will give you on that measurement.

I noticed on the Tibo/Alibongo and more on the HIFI after coming off the zebdi that the higher BB bikes felt way smaller than I thought they would based on the wheelbase measurements. So if I measure the top of the headtube to the bb it should give some indication of the size of the riding compartment, which is the same on the Zebdi as the HIFI and the Tibo too. They all measure 26". Which means the tibo and the HIFI are pretty short bikes. So if this is an incorrect measurement, someone let me know why. I understand that it will change based on the stem and the bikes will also not feel the same due to the differing geometries, but I still think it's relevant. Someone measure an XTP or a Coustellier and tell me it isn't longer.

The problem with geometry is it doesn't necessarily give the picture of how the bike will feel unless you take everything into account. If 2 bikes have the same wheelbase but one has a steeper head angle, that bike will actually be noticeably longer in the riding compartment, unless it also has longer chainstays....and so on.

So the HIFI is pretty short and really quick. That's what I take away from riding it. Stands on the backwheel like I am on rear pegs, but it's hard to put power into the moves.

Who knew there would be so much to talk about with bikes that have so few parts.

[va_tick]

this is some great insight....keep it coming!

[Trialsking]

this is some great insight....keep it coming!

Yes great feedback, I was consider a high BB, but after all the input, I am definately leaning toward a medium > +40mm bike.

[aka Mr Floyd]

Lance,

What stem are you running? I've found that as the bottom bracket comes up, you need to buy a correspondingly taller stem or risers or something. Running a stem or bars that are too low (because that's the height you were used to before) will make the bike stand up more vertical on the rear wheel and make it feel even more likely to loop out. (I'm not saying you're doing this, more threw it in as a tip to others).

I've been riding for about ten years, everything from old GT Zaskars, to short Echo Urbans, to long wheelbase low BB Echo Pure, to a ultra high Koxx Vinco 1115, to now a BT 1100 6.0. From this list all I can say is that the bikes are just a tool. Changing the geo will always make certain things better and certain things worse, you just have to find what best fits your riding style.

My 2 cents on the difficulty to gap a high BB bike, I think much of this stems from people riding shorter high BB bikes with super short chainstays (like the HIFI). When you go to dedicate yourself to a gap, you have to dedicate your weight out over the gap. The short chainstays (while making it more stable on the rear) make it harder to drop your weight out over the gap. I think of it as if doing a gap is actually trying to unstabilize the bike in the direction you want to go... if all the bike wants to do is sit on the rear, it is harder to throw it forward.

Now much of this can be kept seperate from the high BB by having slightly longer chainstays (my BT has longer stays than my Vinco and is easier to do gaps). The issue is that the high BB, allows for an effectively shorter chainstay because the BB is actually rotated up and slightly back as it rotates around the rear axle. For years everyone wanted the shortest chainstays possible, but possibly the high BB's have actually allowed us to make chainstays that are too short?

It's hard to describe all this on the computer and I haven't even gotten into the higher BB and corresponding higher handlebars making it easier to land gaps to front wheel.... I'll save that for another post.

Todd

[LanceT]

I have the Echo 145x15 or whatever the latest HIFI stem is that is longer than the first one. You can only go so long on the stem before it is rediculous. I have sufficiently explored that option, I am sure of it. And yes, a shorter, lower stem is worse.

I am positive it is easier to gap to front wheel with the HIFI. I am pretty sure it is due to the fact that your weight is higher and therefor easier to get over the front wheel to apply weight when landing. I noticed when TRA was riding the Coustellier he had , (what seemed to me), a more difficult time gapping to front wheel than he did on the Vinco.

I also seem to recall that BT came out with a frame (the Ninja or something) that I don't think I have ever seen anyone ride that had a high BB and the shortest chainstays in the known world. i don't think I have ever seen anyone riding one of those and I have seen very few HIFi's too. This just leads me to wonder if what I am noticing is a standard experience for these types of bikes.

I also noticed that Vinco can't tap well at all on his bike and even Vince has had some trouble at times when trying to hit the same taps with Giacomo. But Giacomo seems to be noticeably behind in the sidehop category. It's hard to say, but for sure different geometries have strengths and weaknesses. I guess who can do what on what is the ultimate indicator.

All I know is some days during warmup I can tap 48" to back wheel with a one pedal runup and it feels perfect and others I am not even close and I just smash my balls on the stem. Other days I can pedal up that height with the same runup or I just can't. A lot of times it seems that the harder I try the worse results I get. It is annoying that I am so inconsistent and I am thinking a lower BB test is in order.

LT

[va_tick]

15 deg rise on that echo stem doesnt seem that much for that bike...before you get another frame you may want to just try getting a 25-35 deg rise stem, I think echo has a 25 deg(good luck getting it any time soon, and my buddy(muudyfox) rides an 1100 6.0 and just got BT's 35 deg stem and he loves it........just throwin it out there....good luck!!!!

[aka Mr Floyd]

Lance,

Like va tick said, I was talking more about vertical height rather than length. I'd be tempted to try a stem with more of a rise like the BT or try a set of riser bars or put 4 spacers or so under your stem to just try it out (if steer tube is long enough... probably not).

But, it's strange, I'm very consistent with 48" taps on my BT.... I consistently don't make it.

Todd

[tybikes]

Seems like really good insight all around, though I doubt we are the first ones to have approached the issue. I'm sure the Koxx masterminds have broken this down before; I wonder if anyone could get in touch with them. I also find it interesting that 3 guys with 3 different body types (Caisso, Vincent, and Vinco) ended up having 3 different style bikes.

Lance, your idea about the rider compartment makes more sense now. Headtube angle does has a lot to do with it, too.

I think maybe some side view still shots of people on their bikes would help. Like a pic of you balanced with wheels flat, and then a shot balanced on your rear wheel, etc. Not sure if anyone really wants to take it that far though.

[muddyfox]

15 deg rise on that echo stem doesnt seem that much for that bike...before you get another frame you may want to just try getting a 25-35 deg rise stem, I think echo has a 25 deg(good luck getting it any time soon, and my buddy(muudyfox) rides an 1100 6.0 and just got BT's 35 deg stem and he loves it........just throwin it out there....good luck!!!!

Yeah, I was running a 90mm x 17 degree rise stem with 10mm spacer under it and it was o.k. Then i decided to try bt's high rise stem, i think its 135 x 35,
but anyway it made a whole world or difference. Much easier to stop it looping out.

[starass]

Why suddenly the great change in the geometry of trial frames which actually causes so much confusion around. UCI style isn't like this in the past, isn't it?

[ONE EYE]

i have a bt 6.0 short, and i have zoo rise bars. i had a hifi stem on it(25x130) but i just switched it out for a monty stem (20x120) now i love the way the bike handles. its easier to gap nad go to the front wheel. i also have a shitty fork that is short(395- 400mm), that also makes the bike feel like it has a lower bb height when it is on both wheels, but when you are on the rear wheel it feels the same as it should.

[LanceT]

The more I examine my technique and what some of the top riders in the world are doing the more I see that it takes a very slight change to make a big difference in performance.

What I mean is, what looks the same to the naked eye is actually off just enough to make a difference in the end result. The newer bikes and the higher level that everyone is at when compared to when I was learning have made the equipment and riding progress enough that old school just isn't the same.

Basically what I am saying is that it isn't the bike, it is me. Todays cutting edge trials requires speed and flexibility that just weren't there 10 years ago when I was starting. I am trying to catch up and that is a hard game to play. But it is a great sport and I am in it for the journey, not the destination. If I weren't I would have quit a long time ago.

High BB/short chainstay is easier to ride than low BB and longer chainstay, yet demands a faster, more precise movement to make it work. But when ridden correctly, it is better for many things. Two wheel balance is not one of them.

Choose wisely and you won't be dissappointed.

LT