Norco Optic 29" 2017

En esta entrada voy a analizar a la nueva Norco Optic Carbon 2017, un modelo con 110mm de recorrido, ruedas de 29" y un sistema de suspensión tipo FSR. Norco también ha presentado una versión de la Optic con ruedas de 27.5" y 120mm de recorrido, pero en esta entrada voy a centrarme en el modelo de 29" porque creo que va a ser la opción mas popular... 

Como podéis ver en la tabla de excel y en las gráficas anteriores el sistema de la nueva Norco Optic tiene una Eficacia de Pedaleo algo baja y en teoría no se termina de adaptar demasiado bien ni a una transmisión tipo 1x11 ni a una 2x11 moderna con unos desarrollos de 36T-26T. Lo ideal en este caso creo que sería utilizar un 2x11 con platos un poco mas pequeños o un 3x11 Compact con un 22T-30T-40T, en cualquier caso el sistema siempre va a depender un poco del bloqueo del amortiguador. El Pedal-kickback (10º) suele ser proporcional al porcentaje de Anti-squat y como es lógico en este caso se mantiene en un nivel bastante bajo, al igual que el Brake-squat (37%), algo que también es muy previsible en un sistema de este tipo.

En la gráfica del Leverage Ratio vemos como el sistema es del tipo Progresivo (2.3~2.0), es una progresividad bastante suave, pero que funciona a la perfección en un modelo con 110-120mm de recorrido. En cuanto al amortiguador la mayoría de los montajes vienen equipados con un Fox Float DPS de 190x51mm, con una cámara positiva tipo SV y una cámara negativa tipo EVOL y en mi opinión está muy bien escogido, es un amortiguador bastante grande por lo que el LRM es bastante bajo y la elección de las cámaras también es impecable, consiguiendo una buena sensibilidad inicial y una buena progresividad en la parte final del recorrido. El resto de modelos vienen equipados con un RS Monarch Debonair que también se adapta muy bien al funcionamiento del sistema.

Un saludo.

11 comentarios:

brianvonlehe dijo...

It's more active than I expected; a significant departure from the Sight and Range.

Josep Barberà. dijo...

Bandazo por parte de Norco. Las anteriores pasadisimas de AS... y estas justisimas.
Que se aclaren.

Bien por lo del LR medio, una de mis obsesiones.

Saludos.

Antonio Osuna dijo...

El modelo de XC que presentaron hace poco también era muy activo. Ahora mismo Norco tiene una gama partida en dos desde el punto de vista de la cinemática y cada vez que anuncian un nuevo modelo lo espero con muchisimo interes porque no tengo ni idea de como va a ser. Con cualquier otra marca te haces una idea de como puede ser incluso antes de que digan nada, pero con Norco es un autentico misterio. Dentro de poco toca renovación en las Range y en las Sight, y la evolución de la geometría está cantada, pero la evolución del sistema es una incognita.

Un saludo.

Gus dijo...

Hola Antonio, como segunda bici para ocasiones especiales tengo u a Niner Rip de 120mm atrás, y he tratado de ver si tenía semejanzas con esta en cuanto a cinemática. E principio sí veo muchas cosas comunes en AS, AR o PK, siendo una bici impecable en subidas complicadas y optimizada para platos pequeños. Cuando pasó al apartado del LR comienzan a divertir, la Niner tiene una media más alta pero una progresividad triple a la Norco. Y entonces es cuando no comprendo del todo el tráfico de fuerzas, la tremenda diferencia entre modelos cuando la RIP tiene incluso un exceso de progresividad. En definitiva, esta diferencia tan patente es por el empleo de un amorto con menos posibilidades que el EVOL? Como siempre, muchas gracias por tu labor magnífica.

Unknown dijo...

The Optic despite being very different to recent Norco trail bikes does introduce several design innovations that make it worthy of attention. First, it uses lower leverage ratios than have previously been seen on Norco bikes - lower than the comparison bikes in the review and probably amongst the lowest available for this sort of bike - with good escalation over the relatively limited travel range. At the very least, that is an interesting combination.

Second, the AR curve of the Optic seems very well considered - it is almost identical to the Smuggler AR curve and should ensure good braking traction.

Where Norco goes wrong, in my jaundiced eyes, is in the gearing. What is the point of optimising pedalling for the 24T (or 22T) chainring today? The best thing that 3 By cranksets could do for mountain biking is die a quick death. Whereas, front derailleur free MTBs should not be specified with a chainring of less than 30T and pedalling performance should be optimised for 30T or 32T (in the most common cases). While there are 24/34T 2 By cranksets out there would riders feel aggrieved if that configuration simply faded away, and similarly the bikes that inexplicably need that combination for optimal pedalling performance? As things stand today, 26/36T is better and 28/38T might be best, although in the not too distant future 30/??T could be another option. Norco has produced an excellent bike that, unfortunately, is already obsolete. Bikes like the Smuggler or Fuel EX, which are optimised for the 28T, are more sensible choices despite the Optics' design strengths.

Un saludo
Chris

Antonio Osuna dijo...

Hola Gus, a ver te comento, tu bici es mucho mas progresiva que esta Norco pero tiene toda la progresividad concentrada en la primera mitad del recorrido, por lo que se puede decir que es mucho mas sensible, pero a la hora de hacer topes la diferencia es bastante pequeña... Como tu ya te has dado cuenta la mayor diferencia está en el amortiguador, porque los nuevos EVOL son mas sensibles y mas progresivos que los antiguos y ademas esta Norco lleva el modelo con la cámara pequeña, pero ten en cuenta que la diferencia en el LR no influye tanto como pensabas.

Chris, I still think it's nice to have options, do you want all the bikes to be exactly the same??? We can have a 10% of active trailbikes, another 10% of racy trailbikes and the main 80% having "textbook systems"... I think FD are not dead and Shimano is bringing Di2 to XT levels, so that's going to be interesting.

Best regards,
Tony.

Unknown dijo...

Hello Antonio,

I don't see things that way. Competent designers will always seek to optimise pedalling for one of the chainrings that ships with a mountain bike. That hasn't happened in this case and I don't get it. It seems to be a blunder to me. You could dismiss my comment about 3 By cranksets but my objection would not change.

It is possible that this bike was designed for a 3 By with pedalling optimised for the small chainring but NORCO lost confidence and dumped the 3 By without revising the suspension geometry to harmonize better with a 2 By. Who knows...

Un saludo
Chris

brianvonlehe dijo...

Chris, another way to look at it would be that simply by virtue of having less travel, the bike won't bob as much for a given AS percentage. And for rocky, rooty alpine riding, AS <100% is a big advantage after 4 or 5 hours in the saddle. This bike would be well suited to that kind of riding based on the geometry (excellent) and wheelsize, too. 40-50% AS like Kona, Rocky Mountain etc, is a bit low for my personal taste, but bikes like the Optic definitely have their place, especially in a short-travel platform.

Unknown dijo...

brianvonlehe,

Well okay but if these considerations were foremost for the design then the 3 By really would have been a sensible option. Remember, it isn't quite right to say that the 100% AS bike has a firmer ride because the shock damping tune will always be lighter in practice and the suspension when on smoother terrain or down hill, partly because of that damping and partly because of the use of gearing appropriate for the terrain, will not give rise to any complaints about the ride. Where the <100% AS bike has an advantage in terms of rider comfort, if you don't cancel the advantage with excessive damping to completely annul chassis movement, is on climbs. Anyway, I wouldn't discourage anyone from acquiring this bike despite what I have said earlier. But equally it is good to go in with your eyes open. Leaving aside any reservations about the long term viability of 3 By cranksets, the best drivetrain choice for this bike, as it stands, is a 3 By and such a configuration doesn't come standard with the bike so it will have to be fitted. But if you do have a 3 By fitted you will get a bike in many ways like a classical Specialized FSR but probably much much better because of the low leverage ratios and escalation referred to earlier.

Cheers
Chris

Antonio Osuna dijo...

Most of the time the product manager screw the decisions of the suspension engineer XD... That's how things works and there is nothing that they can do about it. Shocks for example are always different between the high end versions and the low end versions and I'm pretty sure that they don't custom tune all of them because "Ain't Nobody Got Time For That", less alone getting custom tunes based on sizes... Same thing can be said about gearing, if the bike is compatible with a FD it's impossible to know what drivetrain would be using.

Best regards,
Tony.

Unknown dijo...

I wondered would a bike like this benefit from a shock like the DPX2 where you could adjust the low and high speed compression seperatly to counteract some of the pedal bob? I have this bike, it rides like dream and the pedal efficiency is surprisingly good and worth the trade for the early travel sensitivity.

 

Google Translate

Buscador

Perfil Strava

Archivo

Etiquetas