Monday Musing (#43) – More Design History Is More Design Authenticity
I want to talk about the Priority Vanth. Yes, I know, the ultra-low-maintenance-focused commuter bike brand Priority already absolutely blanketed the biker-net last week as part of the launch of their first sag-wagon. Nope, I haven’t ridden* the machine or even seen it in person.
If you have managed to escape mention of this mixed-material {carbon & aluminum} Pinion gearbox & Gates belt-driven dually, well, then, I have to ask, how? Anywho, there are plenty of solid write-ups being pedaled, but I’ll drop a link to Cy’s excellent first hit over on Freehub Mag for no other reason than nepotism**.
*{Though if any of the myriad of reviewers out there wants to loan me their tester for a couple of weeks after they hit the 1000-1500km break-in point, I’d be keen!}
**{You know he drew the MEATengines logo, n’est-ce pas?}
{All Priority Vanth photos belong to: Priority Bicycles}
Yeah, so. Most of the interesting stuff about the gear-boxed Vanth has been covered in the aggregate. Longer travel models are coming, which makes sense. Integrated eeb-motor-and-gearbox versions are coming, which should make cents. Maybe dollars even.
By all accounts, the Pinion gearboxes pedal “better” after they’re broken in, and the same goes for the super-high-tensioners keeping the belt in place. Also, like Shimano’s stalwart and budget-friendly Alfine internal-gear hubs, different ratios result in variably noticeable differences in amounts of drag.
{Above photo: My Worst Component Failure Ever}
At the end of the day, even with the drivetrain, gearbox, and rider fully broken in and acclimatised, the gearbox Vanth is going to be more plod than punch for most of us on the climbs. But I can name-and-shame a ton of folks who can’t master the keep-their-chain-lubed game. And a pinch of people in that same pile can’t keep a derailleur straight for more than a couple of weeks.
Yeah, there are customers for these bikes for sure. And, for what all is going on here, the prices look pretty damn reasonable as well?
Not for nothing, a past version of myself, at least one complete cell-replacement cycle ago, was super gearbox curious, and if that Drew-Bob still existed, he would be suggesting that Priority’s 600HXT is a geometry tweak {a bit more Reach and a 1-2° slacker HTA} away from being one of the more interesting production hardtails on the market.
Add a blank so the bike can be run with the gearbox or as a belt-drive single speed. Yessir.
What changed? Meh. I’m a well-documented gatekeeper, elitist, and snob, and I don’t love the MTeeB aesthetic. I mean, the GB Vanth is a downtube storage door away from looking like a Velomix. Still, this bike is cool enough that I could park my prejudice.
And that concludes the fantastic sourdough base of this open-faced shit-sandwich!
No, no, I’m kidding. But I do feel that Priority has performed an unnecessary bit of Ninering here when there was an opportunity to tie their first entry into the full-suspension game to thirty-four years of mountain bike history.
What am I on about? In the same vein that Niner’s CVA four-bar bikes were, and are, so obviously the second coming of Balfa’s 2Step, the Priority Vanth is clearly inspired by the Mountain Cycle Shockwave. Yes, yes, minus the monocoque front end and plus the HP+Idler.
Sure, the linkage is flipped around to accommodate a seat tube, rather than a mast, and the shock is mounted vertically to make room for a water bottle inside the front triangle, and the lack of a massive chainring and the higher-pivot setup makes the idler mandatory, but it’s still undeniable {and awesome} right?
Heck, I’d hazard a guess that the Vanth is manufactured by Kinesis, who were a Mountain Cycle manufacturer and onetime brand owner, and own factories in Taiwan and Guangzhou, China, producing carbon and aluminum frames.
{Above photo: BikeRadar}
{Above photo: VitalMTB}
But whichever factory makes the Vanth, and forgetting the linkage-driven HP+I pivot process that’s going on, it would be unbelievable that Priority didn’t take some inspiration from the classic Mountain Cycle silhouette? Going all the way back to those 1991 San Andreas frames.
Wait, wait, say all the Foes fans. If we’re talking monocoque swingarm vibes, maybe the Priority team is down with the 1992 Long-Travel-System? Now look what you’ve done. Someone wants to talk about the 1993 Super-V 3000.
{Above photo: IconicMTB.com}
Whatever the inspiration, and I’m all in on the Mountain Cycle vibes, what I don’t understand is why bicycle companies only ever want to credit their own past for design ideas. No one owns this sh*t. There is no downside to saying that when it came time to package a unique box-and-belt-friendly suspension design, it was clear that a carbon fibre callback to one of the earliest full-suspension form factors was an awesome little aesthetic bonus.
If your design is authentically inspired by mountain bike design history, then how is it anything but a win to acknowledge it?!
Welcome to MEATengines, I hope you enjoyed this piece. If you did, please consider buying me a coffee. Any questions, concerns, or comments; feel encouraged to drop me an e-mail, or join us at r/MEATengines.