Leaperkim Lynx 2700wh: 151V, 20" tire, suspension, 89lb

[stizl]

On 11/16/2023 at 8:30 AM, stizl said:

Clearly the new Lynx springs in the (2nd below) screenshot are not constant/linear rate. 

Marty confirmed in his Lynx thread that the Lynx springs are new and indeed progressive!  I’m sold. 

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by stizl

[bpong]

the lynx is an attractive package.  with the thoughtful upgrade on the springs,  quality build on the battery packs... it will be interesting to see what other review videos from established riders will point out...

[cegli]

13 hours ago, Uras said:

Is that a new survey finding? It isn't so with mtb I know. The misbelief is the ability to run lower pressures but many don't realise that's only if the tire is heavier, so many riders bend their rims. Tubeless can be easier to repair if it's a hole 5mm or less. And you can run sealant - which can work for most holes up to 5mm. That's been my experience on motorcycle as well - still get punctures of course.

As far as I know, the whole enthusiast mountain bike scene has changed to tubeless.  I mountain bike a lot and I don't know a single person who rides with tubes.  One time I got back from a ride and noticed 10(!) slits/punctures in my tire where I would have flatted, and the sealant sealed every single one without me even noticing.  Never had to do a repair or pump up the tire the whole ride.

Maxxis doesn't even make non-tubeless ready tires anymore for mountain bikes in the most popular gravity tire (Minion DHF).  It weighs about 1kg for a 29" tire.  You can 100% run much lower tire pressure with tubeless.  Most people on the north shore ride tubeless with ~19psi in their front tire for max grip (depends on the tire width a bit).  Pros and big senders often run tire inserts like cushcore to protect against rim dings, but it's not usually a problem unless you're sending drops bigger than 10ft.

Here's the weight penalty for the Maxxis DHR II (popular rear tire) in a 24".  They don't make non-tubeless read in any sizes bigger than that:

An extra 74 grams, but you get EXO protection (more flat protection) on top of that, which is definitely worth the 74 grams.  Plus you save about 200g on a tube.

The only real downside of tubeless is that it that you have to maintain your sealant.  Mountain bike sealant dries out about every 6 months, so it becomes a maintenance item.  Usually you unscrew the valve core and inject more in every 6 months, and you're good to go.  The main hold-out on tubeless is super casuals.  If you ride your bike twice a year, it's probably a bad idea, because you'll need new sealant every time you ride :).

Latest pinkbike survey on tube use:

For aggressive EUC riding (stairs, jumps, drops) a tubeless + cushcore style setup would be a dream.  No more flats, ability to run low PSI off-road, no more rim damage!

For frequent road riders, tubeless with no cushcore would be ideal.

Casual rides (a few times a year), tubes makes sense.

Edited November 17, 2023 by cegli

[CrabChampion]

3 minutes ago, cegli said:

As far as I know, the whole enthusiast mountain bike scene has changed to tubeless.  I mountain bike a lot and I don't know a single person who rides with tubes.

I too prefer tubeless for the reliability and performance. Being able to ride on a leak somewhat and not have the tire blowout is a big one for me. I was riding my RS at 25mph when the tube blew out and I was instantly dumped by the wheel. A tubeless tire would maybe slow leak enough for me to fix the issue instead of holding air fine and then dumping me mid ride

I think most tubeless tires that can fit our EUCs are street tires borrowed from motorcycles and mopeds. I havent seen a knobby tubeless that works well with our EUC frames/rims just yet. Ontop of that, all our EUC rims are just not designed for tubeless tires. The bead of the tire is shallow and doesnt inspire confidence getting a nice and tight seal on the bead of the tire. Its rideable, but a proper tubeless rim would be nice

[cegli]

3 minutes ago, Cobaltsaber said:

I think most tubeless tires that can fit our EUCs are street tires borrowed from motorcycles and mopeds. I havent seen a knobby tubeless that works well with our EUC frames/rims just yet. Ontop of that, all our EUC rims are just not designed for tubeless tires. The bead of the tire is shallow and doesnt inspire confidence getting a nice and tight seal on the bead of the tire. Its rideable, but a proper tubeless rim would be nice

Agreed, the state of tubeless rims/tires in the EUC world feels like the mountain bike scene in 2012.  It might work, but the rim probably wasn't made for it.

For mountain bikes, the rim/tire combos are completely worked out now.  It's so easy to get the tire to seat with just a floor pump, and it'll hold without any sealant.  I have to deflate the tire and stomp the bead against the ground to even get the tire to come when fully deflated!  So much safer for flats.  EUC rims and tires really need to standardize around a tubeless compatible design, so we can get that same safety and ease of use.

[InfiniteWheelie]

I agree that e-wheels should go tubeless. I believe for motorcycles the profile for tube and tubeless rims are different, so we should have rims designed for tubeless.

Edited November 18, 2023 by InfiniteWheelie

[fbhb]

On 11/18/2023 at 12:32 PM, Cobaltsaber said:

I think most tubeless tires that can fit our EUCs are street tires borrowed from motorcycles and mopeds.

This is true, as ONLY street tyres for either motorcycles or scooters will come in a Tubeless variant, also in a sizing appropriate to fit our EUCs.

There are NO knobbies available in Tubeless, due to the fact that the sidewall on knobby tyres need to be flexible by design to allow low pressures to be run (if needed off road), so a Tube will always be necessary!

On 11/18/2023 at 12:32 PM, Cobaltsaber said:

Ontop of that, all our EUC rims are just not designed for tubeless tires. The bead of the tire is shallow and doesnt inspire confidence getting a nice and tight seal on the bead of the tire. Its rideable, but a proper tubeless rim would be nice

Over recent years, many of the EUCs available have actually already been fitted with Tubeless compatible rims, incorporating a proper bead for Tubeless tyres to correctly seal against, the Ninebot Z10 and Mten3 being the first. Only now are we beginning to see the manufacturers start to look into supplying Tubeless tyres stock, due to cost and brand supply constraints (mainly a cost issue IMHO).

Leaperkim themselves have been supplying a Tubeless rim since the V2/V3 60mm wide rim on the OG Sherman/Sherman Max, so there should be NO issue with their Newer offerings, including the Lynx following this compatibility trend.

A Tubeless install will ONLY require an angled tubeless valve in 8.3mm diameter to be fitted to the rim, before mounting a Tubeless tyre from a reputable manufacturer such as Michelin, Continental, Pirelli, Avon etc.

A good seal will usually be able to be achieved even without any need for sealant, although it is ALWAYS a good safeguard against flats to add some for peace of mind!

The King Song S22 also has a Tubeless compatible rim, as shown in this photo below:

 Note: Not my photo.

The photo below is mine and shows the Sherman V3 60mm wide rim I have waiting to install a Michelin Pilot Moto GP tyre:

The beads/landing area clearly shows the lip necessary for a good reliable seal, that the Tubeless tyre needs to "pop" up and over!

This is the angled tubeless valve I installed to my OG Sherman V3 60mm wide rim.

NOTE: I did have to carefully remove the centre ridge around the hole for the valve to sit flush!

Edited November 19, 2023 by fbhb

[cegli]

1 hour ago, fbhb said:

There are NO knobbies available in Tubeless, due to the fact that the sidewall on knobby tyres need to be flexible by design to allow low pressures to be run (if needed off road), so a Tube will always be necessary!

I think this is more of a demand issue, than a technology problem.  Most full size knobby mountain bike tires are tubeless ready, it's just that almost all mountain bikes run 26" -> 29" wheels.  There's basically no demand for a 20" high performance mountain bike tire, so no one makes them.  The only mountain bikes with 20" wheels are made for little kids.

Edited November 18, 2023 by cegli

[Planemo]

4 hours ago, fbhb said:

This is the angled tubeless valve I installed to my OG Sherman V3 60mm wide rim.

NOTE: I did have to carefully remove the centre ridge around the hole for the valve to sit flush!

I'm not convinced that the Sherman V3 is designed to run tubeless for the very fact that you had to modify the valve area by grinding it flat. In addition, the internal bead doesn't by default denote a tubeless rim either -it's the shape and accurate internal size of the outer bead that important. But the main thing for me believing that it's not tubeless is the fact that when I test fitted a Michelin Pilot to mine the tyre was able to be moved concentric to the rim a fair bit (often termed 'centering' the tyre'). This doesn't and shouldn't be able to happen with a proper tubeless rim/tyre setup.

Of course not saying you can't make it tubeless as you have done

For the same (centering/sloppy fit) reason, I personally wouldn't convert any non-tubeless rim to tubeless. I would rather stick with just using slime in a tube as I do with my EX30. My MTB's, yes. Those beads are TIGHT on the rims though - no concentric movement possible whatsoever and yes they can be a bitch to break free sometimes once left for a while after sealing!

[Paul g]

42 minutes ago, Planemo said:

I'm not convinced that the Sherman V3 is designed to run tubeless for the very fact that you had to modify the valve area by grinding it flat. In addition, the internal bead doesn't by default denote a tubeless rim either -it's the shape and accurate internal size of the outer bead that important. But the main thing for me believing that it's not tubeless is the fact that when I test fitted a Michelin Pilot to mine the tyre was able to be moved concentric to the rim a fair bit (often termed 'centering' the tyre'). This doesn't and shouldn't be able to happen with a proper tubeless rim/tyre setup.

Of course not saying you can't make it tubeless as you have done

For the same (centering/sloppy fit) reason, I personally wouldn't convert any non-tubeless rim to tubeless. I would rather stick with just using slime in a tube as I do with my EX30. My MTB's, yes. Those beads are TIGHT on the rims though - no concentric movement possible whatsoever and yes they can be a bitch to break free sometimes once left for a while after sealing!

        I don’t think they make the rims not properly fit for tubeless intentionally, I think it’s just their incompetent attempt of building a tubeless design. I mean it is not the only domain, they do the same thing with the suspension.

[Planemo]

6 minutes ago, Paul g said:

 I think it’s just their incompetent attempt of building a tubeless design.

Oh for sure theres that too! But either way, if I'm going tubeless it needs to be 100% right. Any design which allows even a small amount of concentric movement of the tyre or an iffy bead face is a no-no for me.

[UPONIT]

Can we split this tube/tubeless discussion into its own thread? Not because I'm complaining about on or off topic, but because I am really learning a lot from all you guys' comments. And this issue is important.

Not having ever been a MTB-er, my instincts always told me that tube was safer because, I don't know... it's 2 layers instead of one that a puncture has to go through? Or even better: if there's a tube, the tire constrains it from exploding in the event of a super hard landing. But in a tubeless, a super hard landing would blow the tire off the rim or at least allow it to fart out enough air to go flat?

Clearly, I'm wrong about this.

So I welcome this discussion going on for a LOT longer, since flats are something I dread when riding. The streets here are paved with rusty nails and metal scrap.

[Planemo]

Yes sorry I shouldn't have gone off topic. And sure, happy to split and discuss

 

[Paul g]

           It is better to stay in this thread, since it is a very important one and it should make Leaperkim aware of the issue, but not only. As the Lynx seems to be the next hit (and V14 apparently not so much), maybe this is the right place to stay.

[BULL]

Seguimos hablando de la Lynx???🙌🏻

Gracias!!😅😓😘

[techyiam]

10 hours ago, Planemo said:

Those beads are TIGHT on the rims though - no concentric movement possible whatsoever and yes they can be a bitch to break free sometimes once left for a while after sealing!

The Veteran Abrams comes with a tubeless tire, right from the factory. However, I can't say the tire is on that tight on the rim. Leaper Kim uses an adhesive to glue the tire bead to the rim. And that bead comes off relatively easily.

In any case, I remove and mount my own car tires on rims. Ditto for my motorcycles. These tires are much, much tighter on the rim than what I have experienced with my Abrams.

Incidentally, the tightest tire bead on a rim is a run-flat tire on a car, hands down. Without a hydraulic rig, it's no go. I did try once, and it wouldn't budge, no matter what.

Edited November 18, 2023 by techyiam

[Jason McNeil]

IDK, this doesn't look like 'progressive' compression.

 

Edited November 18, 2023 by Jason McNeil

[Rawnei]

25 minutes ago, Jason McNeil said:

IDK, this doesn't look like 'progressive' compression.

 

The plot thickens, @Marty Backe asked Linnea if the springs are progressive and she said yes.

[techyiam]

32 minutes ago, Jason McNeil said:

IDK, this doesn't look like 'progressive' compression.

Well, it's a dual rate spring, as we saw in the photo.

Where they placed the transition seems reasonable on paper. Once people provide feedback, we will know more.

Marty provided one positive data points. For his use case, he seemed to like it.

Edited November 18, 2023 by techyiam

[techyiam]

7 minutes ago, Rawnei said:

The plot thickens, @Marty Backe asked Linnea if the springs are progressive and she said yes.

Well, it isn't a single rate spring.

There is a second stage with a higher spring rate.

Some people call that a progressive spring.  

[stizl]

1 hour ago, techyiam said:

Well, it isn't a single rate spring.

There is a second stage with a higher spring rate.

Exactly, and by the spring photos and plots this is certain. 

I extrapolated the plots out below to illustrate the difference between dual rate vs single rate.  It looks like addition of the second, higher rate generally results in an end force equivalent to going up one spring rate on the single rate springs of the Patton/SS.  In other words, a 66lb spring will act like a 66lb spring for the first ~60% of its travel but have bottom-out resistance more like the 70lb single rate spring.  Eyeballing it, it looks like the 70lb spring finishes its stroke like a ~74lb spring. 

[Rollin-on-1]

10 minutes ago, stizl said:

Exactly, and by the spring photos and plots this is certain. 

I extrapolated the plots out below to illustrate the difference between dual rate vs single rate.  It looks like addition of the second, higher rate generally results in an end force equivalent to going up one spring rate on the single rate springs of the Patton/SS.  In other words, a 66lb spring will act like a 66lb spring for the first ~60% of its travel but have bottom-out resistance more like the 70lb single rate spring.  Eyeballing it, it looks like the 70lb spring finishes its stroke like a ~74lb spring. 

Hopefully 2-stage springs will be available for the Patton as well.

[litewave]

On 11/8/2023 at 11:48 AM, novazeus said:

this is the tire i want on my lynx. if u want a knobby on ur "trail" lynx, fine, but make one lynx a fast freewheeling road lynx with this tire and don't cheap out. i'll drop ship the tire to the factory so they can put it on. probably last longer than me or the wheel.

Michelin Pilot Street 2 Front/Rear Tire (Sold Each) 80/90-14 46S Reinf Tl 63992

 

I have this tire in size 90/90-14. I am debating whether to mount it or the Pirelli Angel 80/80-14 on my S22 next. Both are tubeless.

Recommendations, anyone?

[techyiam]

12 minutes ago, litewave said:

I have this tire in size 90/90-14. I am debating whether to mount it or the Pirelli Angel 80/80-14 on my S22 next. Both are tubeless.

 

If you mount the 90/90-14 on your S22, wouldn't have to delete the fender? The S22 has open sliders to start with, totally unsealed.

[Planemo]

13 hours ago, techyiam said:

Well, it isn't a single rate spring.

There is a second stage with a higher spring rate.

Some people call that a progressive spring.  

Technically you're right, but it does seem strange that they went for a 2-stage instead of progressive in the true sense of the word. But hey, still better than linear

The only time I have seen 2 stage is on lowered cars where you have a section of very closely spaced coil just to 'take up the slack' to stop the spring dislocating on full extension. Something like the Valt on MTB's is a bit more progressive in that each coil wind can be seen to 'expand'.