No22 coupled system

[Hilltopperny]

I was able to stop by the shop the other day and see this new setup. It is awesome and really well thought out. From their blog. https://22bicycles.com/blogs/news/introducing-our-all-new-coupler-system?fbclid=IwAR2wcR2xyBePXGnge_wOSVKb23zMdpHeto zhh_PDVEIJte9JDj-L0GP0Z6c


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NHAero]

Looks slick! Thanks for posting. Any idea of added weight?
I really wonder if I will travel again on a plane with a bike.

[eddief]

and elegant. wondering about those sharp teeth and the chances those will be susceptible to break or bend? wonder if they will license?

[Velocipede]

Santana invented this I think like 5 or 6 years ago for their tandems. It's a really nice design.

[AngryScientist]

wow, that's really cool, and pretty innovative of them.

to be honest, i'm a little skeptical of the whole thing as it looks pretty complex, which is usually not the friend of the frequent traveller. it sounds good, but quick disconnects for hydraulic brakes, all this internal routed kit and a very intricate geometry at the interface is just a recipe for a LOT going on to deal with in a hotel room at 3AM before the big ride tomorrow.

i know that cost is a very subjective thing, but IMO, some things are just getting out of hand, especially for a travel bike. my opinion is, and always has been, that a travel bike will get beaten up, tossed around, dented, dinged and abused as part of the travel process.

this is a 1200 dollar upgrade to a standard Ti frame price from 22 - so it's a damned expensive bike to throw in a case and hope TSA is gentle with.

i'm not giving them a hard time, and i think it's awesome that they are re-thinking old tech, i'd like to hear some real world travel reports on these!

[Hilltopperny]

Looks slick! Thanks for posting. Any idea of added weight?
I really wonder if I will travel again on a plane with a bike.


I know it is significantly lighter that actual couplers. It does not look to have much added weight from what I could see!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eddief]

you throw it in the case?

[Hilltopperny]

wow, that's really cool, and pretty innovative of them.

to be honest, i'm a little skeptical of the whole thing as it looks pretty complex, which is usually not the friend of the frequent traveller. it sounds good, but quick disconnects for hydraulic brakes, all this internal routed kit and a very intricate geometry at the interface is just a recipe for a LOT going on to deal with in a hotel room at 3AM before the big ride tomorrow.

i know that cost is a very subjective thing, but IMO, some things are just getting out of hand, especially for a travel bike. my opinion is, and always has been, that a travel bike will get beaten up, tossed around, dented, dinged and abused as part of the travel process.

this is a 1200 dollar upgrade to a standard Ti frame price from 22 - so it's a damned expensive bike to throw in a case and hope TSA is gentle with.

i'm not giving them a hard time, and i think it's awesome that they are re-thinking old tech, i'd like to hear some real world travel reports on these!


From what I saw it is quite a simple process to assemble and disassemble this system. The internal coupler also looks to be an easier set up compared to the S&S of old. Pretty much plug and play from what I could see.

I think titanium is probably the best material for a travel bike given it’s durability and finish. When I crashed my Drifter last year the only damage was a broken spoke, out of true rear wheel and scuffed up hoods. The frame was surprisingly unaffected after being sent airborne at around 25-30mph and skidding down the road close to 50ft.

Price is always relative, but I thought it was priced competitively with what most companies charge for coupling a titanium frame? https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200907/e8f3d8fcd4ff1bd597ad209cd858009c.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200907/e240ea171c5b30b7ed8063b24a4d9680.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saab2000]

Santana invented this I think like 5 or 6 years ago for their tandems. It's a really nice design.

That’s correct I believe. I saw it at NAHBS and it looked slick. Better looking than the S&S couplers, which I have and work well.

[eddief]

than the fancy toothy one on the website. are the shark teeth for looks or structure. simple's better.

[Hilltopperny]

than the fancy toothy one on the website. are the shark teeth for looks or structure. simple's better.

May just have been the angle of the shots I took? The frame fits together like a puzzle piece would. I also got to see the bike from the video on a hook and once together it looks pretty seamless.

[SPOKE]

These coupler are somewhat similar to what Santana developed. Not quite the same but very similar in concept. Santana’s appear to be a good bit more robust but the No 22 design looks plenty strong enough for a single bike.
I hope they sell a bunch of these!!!

[muz]

I was really impressed by how slick the Santana system was, but they said it only came in tandem sized tubes.

[SPOKE]

The teeth act as wedges that help pull the frame ends together as the locking screw is tightened. Very clean design an if all machining is done well once the joint is tightened you can barely tell where the joint is..... than the fancy toothy one on the website. are the shark teeth for looks or structure. simple's better.

[laupsi]

Brilliant! The key to effective engineering is simplicity. Wonderfully thought out and implemented!

[CTracer]

Nice. I've had 2 bikes with S&S couplers and although they don't look that great, they were solid and really easy to assemble/disassemble. This design is a lot cleaner and if you want to run hydro discs, this is the way to go. Once most of the major airlines stopped charging extra for bikes, I sold my travel bike and just started bringing my "regular" bike on trips. I will say a travel case for a coupled bike is a lot easier to haul around then a full sized case.

[Velocipede]

That’s correct I believe. I saw it at NAHBS and it looked slick. Better looking than the S&S couplers, which I have and work well.

I saw it at Interbike in 2016. It looked slick back then. Always thought it would be perfect for a road frame.

[weisan]

I like the clean lines.

One of the selling points of the S&S coupling is that it's accessible to any framebuilder who is competent enough to install the coupling on a customer's bike, same with the Ritchey Breakaway.

Is the No.22 coupling system the same in terms of accessibility or does it require special tooling and fabrication?

[marciero]

I like the clean lines.

One of the selling points of the S&S coupling is that it's accessible to any framebuilder who is competent enough to install the coupling on a customer's bike, same with the Ritchey Breakaway.

Is the No.22 coupling system the same in terms of accessibility or does it require special tooling and fabrication?

My guess is no- the fitting is machined into the tubes on this one.

I'm wondering if this design will limit tube spec. Do they have to use the harder 6/4 ti? Does the tubing have to be thicker walled in that location? I suppose the Sand S limits things too. You would not want ultra thin wall tubing.

I do think it looks clean but the machining is very complex-they even use that word to describe it. The S and S is much simpler in both installation and function-non-standard tool notwithstanding. I have them on a 15 year-old tandem and those threads spin as smooth as new. The joint is so solid you could probably get away with hand tight.

I disagree that the Sand S are unsightly, but part of that is perspective-If you think of the couplers as part of the bike they look cool in my mind. Any attempt to hide couplers is bound to fall short. With the No. 22 you can still see the seam. Plus, having a single screw holds it together seems a little odd. But since I dont know exactly how the wedge action they describe works I'll assume it's structurally okay.


Not to go all negative- I think its an interesting design and likely a viable option.

[oldpotatoe]

wow, that's really cool, and pretty innovative of them.

to be honest, i'm a little skeptical of the whole thing as it looks pretty complex, which is usually not the friend of the frequent traveller. it sounds good, but quick disconnects for hydraulic brakes, all this internal routed kit and a very intricate geometry at the interface is just a recipe for a LOT going on to deal with in a hotel room at 3AM before the big ride tomorrow.

i know that cost is a very subjective thing, but IMO, some things are just getting out of hand, especially for a travel bike. my opinion is, and always has been, that a travel bike will get beaten up, tossed around, dented, dinged and abused as part of the travel process.

this is a 1200 dollar upgrade to a standard Ti frame price from 22 - so it's a damned expensive bike to throw in a case and hope TSA is gentle with.

i'm not giving them a hard time, and i think it's awesome that they are re-thinking old tech, i'd like to hear some real world travel reports on these!

Agree....Travel bike which means probably not your main ride, just something to smash around on for a few days..I think something like a Ritchey(less $ for a whole frame/fork) or S&S, which includes the suitcase, is a 'better' idea. BUT very elegant design..Altho the QR hydro things 'probably' work well..if they DON'T, you are pretty stuck..ain't gonna bleed the brakes in your hotel room..

IF I were to travel with a bike, I'd opt for a Ritchey cross, canti bike..slam it around, ride anywhere..simple, cheaper.

IMHO

[fa63]

Cycling Tips said it adds 140g.

Looks slick! Thanks for posting. Any idea of added weight?

[bicycletricycle]

that is Santana's coupling system. Been available to builders for many years, glad somebody starting using it.

[R3awak3n]

I think its very neat. S&S couplers are ugly and heavy, this almost looks like a normal bike and imo a better design than ritchey. However I still think S&S looks sturdier and as Angry mention seems to be easier to put together. I bet they will make something to protect the frame while its in transit otherwise I could see the intricate system bending a bit and not fitting together.

As far as money goes, yes I would not spend this kind of cash on a travel bike but I also probably would not buy a NO22 brand new because its just out of my price range, if someone already dropping big coin on a bike, $1200, although a lot its not crazy if they are going to travel a lot (and this is the ultimate 1 bike so instead of having 1700 hundress bikes, they could just have 1 reallllly nice bike and travel with it, ti is a good material for travel but I would still be nervous... TSA sucks and things break and go missing).

The hydro system is awesome though, I have travelled with hydro discs and even though it was fine, it woulda been REALLY nice to split the line and I am into this. Apparently something already existed in the moto world but nice to see it coming to the bike side. And here is probably the first good thing about internal routing, can fit those big hydro splitters inside the DT.

[tuscanyswe]

and elegant. wondering about those sharp teeth and the chances those will be susceptible to break or bend? wonder if they will license?

This was my first thought as well but if thats not an issue than it wonderfull looking :)

Im bit worried bout creaks to, thats an advantage with threaded solution. Or so i would think.

[colker]

I was able to stop by the shop the other day and see this new setup. It is awesome and really well thought out. From their blog. https://22bicycles.com/blogs/news/introducing-our-all-new-coupler-system?fbclid=IwAR2wcR2xyBePXGnge_wOSVKb23zMdpHeto zhh_PDVEIJte9JDj-L0GP0Z6c


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. Awesome.

[AngryScientist]

personally speaking, i think S&S couplers look great. sort of an industrial functionality type look. i love them.

[pbarry]

Santana's couplers:
https://santanatandem.com/couplers/

[vincenz]

Very cool and elegant. While a traditional coupler works too, it doesn’t go with their frames at all. This is a perfect solution and seems extremely well executed.

[YesNdeed]

I love the tech and the clean look, but with anything new, time will tell how it holds up. As mentioned, the traveling abuse is one thing, but what about the riding? It looks like they stand the chance of bending and coming apart a bit just from a year or two worth of good days in the saddle. The S&S couplers are burly and seem to able to stand up to the abuse.

Definitely rooting for No. 22 and the design as I love their frames.

[NewDFWrider]

Can anyone hazard a guess about how they make the couplers? Is that a tube that has been shaped with CNC?

I've always hesitated about getting a bike with S&S couplers, as it reminded me too much of an earthworm.

[Velocipede]

Can anyone hazard a guess about how they make the couplers? Is that a tube that has been shaped with CNC?

I've always hesitated about getting a bike with S&S couplers, as it reminded me too much of an earthworm.

Most likely a wire EDM

[zap]

While Santana has built quality frames and has done a lot for the tandem community, in the past their parts selection raised eyebrows and many times just did not last.

Note that Santana's ever more complicated coupler is currently at rev. 3.........

S & S couplers are simple and robust.

I agree with other posters that travel bikes should be kept as simple as possible.

So says Zap who plans on simplifying (and reducing assembly time) his travel tandem just a bit more.

[m_sasso]

Simply not going to be structural as strong as S & S couplers and the hydraulic coupling has been around for years in the auto industry, nothing new.
Thumbs down, just another attempted hype/standard to justify a jump in dollars!

[R3awak3n]

Simply not going to be structural as strong as S & S couplers and the hydraulic coupling has been around for years in the auto industry, nothing new.
Thumbs down, just another attempted hype/standard to justify a jump in dollars!

yep... lets just not do anything else and just use what we have. As if NO22 is swimming in money, or any other custom bike company for that matter.

[m_sasso]

yep... lets just not do anything else and just use what we have. As if NO22 is swimming in money, or any other custom bike company for that matter.

Sorry, appearances don't make my bike go, brings nothing else to the party, so yes, why not use what is currently available!

[fiamme red]

I don't know if this link has been posted yet.

https://cyclingtips.com/2020/09/no-22s-new-travel-bike-couplers-lighter-and-more-seamless-than-the-rest/

[lucieli]

It looks like a scarf joint. This method has been used to join structural timbers for hundreds of years. Beautiful, functional joinery

Not sure how it will hold up in this type of application but I love the idea. If a consumer can appreciate beautiful welds, why not this?

[mistermo]

I'm puzzled by the nay-sayer's responses here. This seems like a righteous step forward in most directions.

Economics: At $1200, these aren't any more expensive than ti S&S couplers, and less expensive than buying even a steel Ritchey Breakaway as a spare travel bike.

Aesthetics: Count me among those who appreciate a bike's aesthetics. While appearance won't make me ride any faster, it does add to my ownership experience. This system is far more stealthy than S&S and more than Breakaway too.

Durability: I've had about EVERY Ritchey breakaway bike they've made. When Ritchey came out with their carbon frames, there were many, many comments that a carbon bike would be too fragile too. I've traveled lots with my carbon Road and carbon Outback and never once had anything resembling an issue. Yes, TSA gets inside, looks around and does a crap job of repacking. Even so, I've not heard tales of destroyed Ritchey carbon bikes. Titanium is arguably more durable still. If you pack clothes in your bike case, then it becomes even more unlikely still, that rough baggage handlers will create damage. Theft is a bigger concern than damage, IMO.

Braking: For the disc braked Outback, I tried hard to find a solution that would allow hydraulic brake cable disconnection. Nothing existed. No22s system is definitely new to bicycles.

Ease of use: While the S&S system is easy, it requires a special tool. The Breakaway system isn't hard, but sometimes it's a bugger to get the downtube pieces to align so that the clamp can get around. And if you lose the clamp, as I have done, there's no riding. This system needs only a 6mm wrench to make it work. Easy!

Experience: Most would rather ride their "A" bike, if given a choice. Seems to me, this makes your A bike available for travel now.

I found that I'm more likely to take a bike along if it's a bike I like, and is simple to assemble/disassemble.

Provided the system works, I think this is the new travel bike standard to beat aesthetically, functionally and economically. If you want hydro discs, there's nothing else available.

[happycampyer]

I'm puzzled by the nay-sayer's responses here. This seems like a righteous step forward in most directions.

Economics: At $1200, these aren't any more expensive than ti S&S couplers, and less expensive than buying even a steel Ritchey Breakaway as a spare travel bike.

Aesthetics: Count me among those who appreciate a bike's aesthetics. While appearance won't make me ride any faster, it does add to my ownership experience. This system is far more stealthy than S&S and more than Breakaway too.

Durability: I've had about EVERY Ritchey breakaway bike they've made. When Ritchey came out with their carbon frames, there were many, many comments that a carbon bike would be too fragile too. I've traveled lots with my carbon Road and carbon Outback and never once had anything resembling an issue. Yes, TSA gets inside, looks around and does a crap job of repacking. Even so, I've not heard tales of destroyed Ritchey carbon bikes. Titanium is arguably more durable still. If you pack clothes in your bike case, then it becomes even more unlikely still, that rough baggage handlers will create damage. Theft is a bigger concern than damage, IMO.

Braking: For the disc braked Outback, I tried hard to find a solution that would allow hydraulic brake cable disconnection. Nothing existed. No22s system is definitely new to bicycles.

Ease of use: While the S&S system is easy, it requires a special tool. The Breakaway system isn't hard, but sometimes it's a bugger to get the downtube pieces to align so that the clamp can get around. And if you lose the clamp, as I have done, there's no riding. This system needs only a 6mm wrench to make it work. Easy!

Experience: Most would rather ride their "A" bike, if given a choice. Seems to me, this makes your A bike available for travel now.

I found that I'm more likely to take a bike along if it's a bike I like, and is simple to assemble/disassemble.

Provided the system works, I think this is the new travel bike standard to beat aesthetically, functionally and economically. If you want hydro discs, there's nothing else available.
^ I couldn’t agree more with all of this. I saw an early version of the couplers a year or so ago, and have been thinking about them ever since. High-precision work. As others have noted, the design is not new, and Santana has proven it to work on their tandems.

My conundrum is that I already have a ti travel bike, and a ti disc road bike (which the No. 22 would effectively duplicate). The bike I have always wanted to put couplers on is the ti Strada Bianca, with mid-reach brakes. I’m still on the fence if I want to deal with removing and reinstalling discs, jamming disc wheels into a travel case, etc. No. 22’s solution is so elegant, though.

[lucieli]

It looks like a scarf joint. This method has been used to join structural timbers for hundreds of years. Beautiful, functional joinery

Not sure how it will hold up in this type of application but I love the idea. If a consumer can appreciate beautiful welds, why not this?

[charliedid]

^ I couldn’t agree more with all of this. I saw an early version of the couplers a year or so ago, and have been thinking about them ever since. High-precision work. As others have noted, the design is not new, and Santana has proven it to work on their tandems.

My conundrum is that I already have a ti travel bike, and a ti disc road bike (which the No. 22 would effectively duplicate). The bike I have always wanted to put couplers on is the ti Strada Bianca, with mid-reach brakes. I’m still on the fence if I want to deal with removing and reinstalling discs, jamming disc wheels into a travel case, etc. No. 22’s solution is so elegant, though.

Total agreement with you both.

Though I don't even have or really want a travel bike this one seems to be the most appealing to me. Can't see the worry about it not being durable enough...

Strong stuff.

[Pegoready]

this is a 1200 dollar upgrade to a standard Ti frame price from 22 - so it's a damned expensive bike to throw in a case and hope TSA is gentle with.



$1200 is cheaper than most Ti builders charge for genuine S&S couplers, so in relative terms it's a great deal.

As others have noted $1200 is less than having a coupled B bike. Why have a B bike when your A bike can always be with you for only $1200? That's the math for most people in the market for a bike like this.

I like it, but I didn't know it was a Santana system that has already had a few revisions. The knowledge and fixes lie with an unpredictable bike company that might try and outcompete its clients. The S&S system has been unchanged since the beginning AFAIK.

[SPOKE]

I have a 2019 model Santana with their “Z” couplers. It works very well. I really thought that I’d hear a lot of creaking/squeaking since this bike has 4 couplers holding things together. But so far I haven’t heard a bit of noise. Bike has traveled a couple times in its Big A** travel case. The couplers work very well and it’s pretty easy to get the bike taken apart and put back together. One helpful bit that I think is great for traveling is the fact that the rear disc brake is cable actuated. This eliminates the hydraulic lines. Now just need to upgrade the fork (wasn’t available when the bike was purchased) to the disc brake fork. I’ll try to do this next year....maybe.

[m_sasso]

Braking: For the disc braked Outback, I tried hard to find a solution that would allow hydraulic brake cable disconnection. Nothing existed. No22s system is definitely new to bicycles.



Couldn't have looked very effectively/hard every body from Earl's to Alibaba sells dry break couplings. Maybe you were looking for "hydraulic brake cable" when they are actually "lines" or "hose".

[mistermo]

The bike I have always wanted to put couplers on is the ti Strada Bianca, with mid-reach brakes. I’m still on the fence if I want to deal with removing and reinstalling discs, jamming disc wheels into a travel case, etc. No. 22’s solution is so elegant, though.

You nailed it! Disc wheels are a pain to pack in the case, and/or to remove rotors. A mid reach braked bike, or a cantilever braked bike, is far easier, for those wishing to run bigger tires. And with canti's, one needn't remove the brake. The bars come off simply by unhooking the straddle cable. With eTap or 1x, only the rear brake requires a cable disconnect.

[okayku]

So clean! Great to see such innovation coming from a fairly small company

[jpw]

For how long has 22 been testing this design in real world riding conditions?

I still have a hard time looking at their seat stay bridge design. So brutal.

[mistermo]

Couldn't have looked very effectively/hard every body from Earl's to Alibaba sells dry break couplings. Maybe you were looking for "hydraulic brake cable" when they are actually "lines" or "hose".

Put up or shut up. Link me to a solution akin to this No22 device that allows quick and repeated connection/disconnection of hydraulic bicycle brake lines midway between lever and brake.

[slowpoke]

The new coupling system is nice and seamless. And I love the idea of only needing a 6mm allen key, but "unsightly" externally routed cables would be better for ease of maintenance and reliability.

[Hilltopperny]

The new coupling system is nice and seamless. And I love the idea of only needing a 6mm allen key, but "unsightly" externally routed cables would be better for ease of maintenance and reliability.


The only cables are hydraulic as these are all set up with E-tap. Not sure if they plan on making a non electronic version?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[m_sasso]

Put up or shut up. Link me to a solution akin to this No22 device that allows quick and repeated connection/disconnection of hydraulic bicycle brake lines midway between lever and brake.

Here you are! Titanium to boot!

Yes, 22's marketing mumbo jumbo for development means they screwed a pre existing coupling to the brake line, nothing new or innovative.


https://www.b-gdirect.com/Aeroflow-Titanium-Quick-Release-Dry-Break


https://www.b-gdirect.com//image/cache/catalog/Products/Aeroflow/Fittings%20and%20Adaptors/AFQR102%20Open-500x500.jpg

You want inexpensive? $49.00

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32874549444.html

https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/Hc3b1781210ff4a74942a0e9210e8e89bo.jpg

[prototoast]

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32874549444.html

Here you are! Titanium to boot!


https://www.b-gdirect.com/Aeroflow-Titanium-Quick-Release-Dry-Break


You want inexpensive? $49.00

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32874549444.html




Have you connected those to a Shimano hydraulic line? It's not immediately clear to me whether those products are the right size, or what other parts I would need to make it work.

[Velocipede]

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32874549444.html

Here you are! Titanium to boot!

Yes, 22's marketing mumbo jumbo for development means they screwed a pre existing coupling to the brake line, nothing new or innovative.


https://www.b-gdirect.com/Aeroflow-Titanium-Quick-Release-Dry-Break


https://www.b-gdirect.com//image/cache/catalog/Products/Aeroflow/Fittings%20and%20Adaptors/AFQR102%20Open-500x500.jpg

You want inexpensive? $49.00

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32874549444.html

https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/Hc3b1781210ff4a74942a0e9210e8e89bo.jpg


Thanks for posting those. I never went into a deep dive for something like that. I'm not a fan of the SRAM one cause it lets air in. I'll have to get some of these to try.

[Nags&Ducs]

Agree....Travel bike which means probably not your main ride, just something to smash around on for a few days..I think something like a Ritchey(less $ for a whole frame/fork) or S&S, which includes the suitcase, is a 'better' idea. BUT very elegant design..Altho the QR hydro things 'probably' work well..if they DON'T, you are pretty stuck..ain't gonna bleed the brakes in your hotel room..

IF I were to travel with a bike, I'd opt for a Ritchey cross, canti bike..slam it around, ride anywhere..simple, cheaper.

IMHO

I’ve always thought the Ritchey design was the better compared to the S&S- this coming from having a Ti CX and roadie with S&S. I haven’t looked in awhile (years TBH:)) but had Ritchey made a full Ti road or CX Break-Away when I was in the market, I would likely have bought it.

[22Mike]

Thanks for all the comments and interest in this, everyone. And maybe let's all just exhale and take a step back.

Yes, the "Brake Break" exists for other hydraulic hose applications. Allegations of our "marketing mumbo jumbo" aside, in our own website we describe it as "borrowing its construction from motorcycle motorsports brake hose quick-disconnects". We took something that was proven in other hydraulic brake applications and had it sized to work with bicycle brake hoses. We're not messing around with AliExpress parts in brake lines, and I don't know that there's such a coupler that will easily work with bicycle brake fittings, but if there are other solutions to the rear brake coupling problem that you want to use that's great.

Our intent with this coupler option was to deliver the most refined coupler solution available, and I think we've nailed it. It's strong, quiet, easy to use without special tools and opens up the option of running hydraulic discs where that option didn't really exist before. In the end, we get to make what I think is a better coupler bike in every way, and the rider of that bike benefits from those improvements.

This is a key refinement in several areas that we're very proud of, but that's all it is.

[m_sasso]

Hello Mike thanks for stopping in with the comments on your new product.

I haven't been to your web site, took the "marketing mumbo jumbo" from this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=25&v=E00tnWg_nHE&feature=emb_logo

"One of the exciting things we were able to develop is a hydraulic brake line coupler, so in the down tube there is a devise in there....."

No reference to aerospace or motorsports and no mention of the actual device name "dry break coupler" which I believe was invented by Emco Wheaton in the 1950s.

Like they say, its how you use what you are given that counts, confident the big guys will be on your tail shortly if you are selling them and making money.

I am a stay at home, cable brake guy, that once raced cars, so likely won't be shopping for travel bikes however hope you sell lots of bikes and couplers to people looking for them.

[Hilltopperny]

Hello Mike thanks for stopping in with the comments on your new product.

I haven't been to your web site, took the "marketing mumbo jumbo" from this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=25&v=E00tnWg_nHE&feature=emb_logo

"One of the exciting things we were able to develop is a hydraulic brake line coupler, so in the down tube there is a devise in there....."

No reference to aerospace or motorsports and no mention of the actual device name "dry break coupler" which applied for world wide patent in 1973.

Like they say, its how you use what you are given that counts.

I am a stay at home, cable brake guy, that once raced autos, so likely won't be shopping for travel bikes however hope you sell lots of bikes and couplers to people looking for them.


This is from the link above.

“Borrowing its construction from motorcycle motorsports brake hose quick-disconnects, the Brake Break allows instant, tools-free connecting and disconnecting of the bike’s hydraulic brake hose”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[crankles]

I remember seeing Formula showing their speedlock at Interbike almost a decade ago but it seemed to die on the vine and was meant to couple at the caliper. This mid-line adaptation is a big improvement....
and of course, Formula also "borrowed" the idea.

[charliedid]

Thanks for all the comments and interest in this, everyone. And maybe let's all just exhale and take a step back.

Yes, the "Brake Break" exists for other hydraulic hose applications. Allegations of our "marketing mumbo jumbo" aside, in our own website we describe it as "borrowing its construction from motorcycle motorsports brake hose quick-disconnects". We took something that was proven in other hydraulic brake applications and had it sized to work with bicycle brake hoses. We're not messing around with AliExpress parts in brake lines, and I don't know that there's such a coupler that will easily work with bicycle brake fittings, but if there are other solutions to the rear brake coupling problem that you want to use that's great.

Our intent with this coupler option was to deliver the most refined coupler solution available, and I think we've nailed it. It's strong, quiet, easy to use without special tools and opens up the option of running hydraulic discs where that option didn't really exist before. In the end, we get to make what I think is a better coupler bike in every way, and the rider of that bike benefits from those improvements.

This is a key refinement in several areas that we're very proud of, but that's all it is.

Hey Mike

At first glance it would appear that this is a No22 design (no mention otherwise) but as many pointed out it seems to be the same as (or extremely similar) to the Santana coupler. What's the connection?

[Bryce22]

Hey Mike

At first glance it would appear that this is a No22 design (no mention otherwise) but as many pointed out it seems to be the same as (or extremely similar) to the Santana coupler. What's the connection?

We attempted to work with Santana to utilize their design, unfortunately as it was designed to support tandem tube lengths/spans, it was overbuilt for our application and did not allow passage of the Brake Break. It's obviously a similar design - an interlocking coupler (nothing novel), but with a scarf-style design to interlock in across the vertical and horizontal axis.

[charliedid]

We attempted to work with Santana to utilize their design, unfortunately as it was designed to support tandem tube lengths/spans, it was overbuilt for our application and did not allow passage of the Brake Break. It's obviously a similar design - an interlocking coupler (nothing novel), but with a scarf-style design to interlock in across the vertical and horizontal axis.

Thanks Bryce

Best of luck with it all. Looks amazing.

[Wattvagen]

i'd be curious how well these will sell, it seems, based on casual observation that the latest trend is to travel with a full sized bike in a case rather than a dedicated travel bike. with more and more bikes going to hydro disc, this certainly seems to make sense, coupled (haha) with a few of the major airlines dropping oversized bag fees for sports equipment, including bicycles.

[muz]

... with a few of the major airlines dropping oversized bag fees for sports equipment, including bicycles.

I think an often overlooked advantage of the coupled system is that the luggage is compact and easy to travel with. I rode PBP the last two times, first with a regular bike in a full case, then with an S&S bike. The first time, I had to pick a hotel near the start, used a shuttle bus to and from, and just did day trips into Paris. The second time, I was able to use the subway from the airport, picked areas of the city to stay before and after the ride, and had little problem moving around using public transport with a backpack and the S&S case. No way you could do this with a full size case.

I have also brought my bike along on business trips, then add a few days on either end for a cycling vacation. Again, no way I could do this with a full sized case, no matter the flight fees.

[GregL]

I think an often overlooked advantage of the coupled system is that the luggage is compact and easy to travel with. I rode PBP the last two times, first with a regular bike in a full case, then with an S&S bike. The first time, I had to pick a hotel near the start, used a shuttle bus to and from, and just did day trips into Paris. The second time, I was able to use the subway from the airport, picked areas of the city to stay before and after the ride, and had little problem moving around using public transport with a backpack and the S&S case. No way you could do this with a full size case.

I have also brought my bike along on business trips, then add a few days on either end for a cycling vacation. Again, no way I could do this with a full sized case, no matter the flight fees.
^^^This^^^ I've brought a full-size bike along on business and personal trips on many occasions. I've either shipped the bike ahead to my destination or checked it as oversize baggage on the airlines. Either way, it was a PIA. I had to worry if the case would fit in a shuttle, taxi/uber, or rental car. It was a hassle hauling it through airports. If I were still traveling for work a great deal, I would definitely have a coupled bike.

Greg

[Clancy]

Thanks for all the comments and interest in this, everyone. And maybe let's all just exhale and take a step back.

Yes, the "Brake Break" exists for other hydraulic hose applications. Allegations of our "marketing mumbo jumbo" aside, in our own website we describe it as "borrowing its construction from motorcycle motorsports brake hose quick-disconnects". We took something that was proven in other hydraulic brake applications and had it sized to work with bicycle brake hoses. We're not messing around with AliExpress parts in brake lines, and I don't know that there's such a coupler that will easily work with bicycle brake fittings, but if there are other solutions to the rear brake coupling problem that you want to use that's great.

Our intent with this coupler option was to deliver the most refined coupler solution available, and I think we've nailed it. It's strong, quiet, easy to use without special tools and opens up the option of running hydraulic discs where that option didn't really exist before. In the end, we get to make what I think is a better coupler bike in every way, and the rider of that bike benefits from those improvements.

This is a key refinement in several areas that we're very proud of, but that's all it is.

I believe it’s brilliant, shows a lot of R&D, and I really appreciate your posting this comment as well as your other explanation. I must admit, I want one.

[nickl]

Agree....Travel bike which means probably not your main ride, just something to smash around on for a few days..I think something like a Ritchey(less $ for a whole frame/fork) or S&S, which includes the suitcase, is a 'better' idea. BUT very elegant design..Altho the QR hydro things 'probably' work well..if they DON'T, you are pretty stuck..ain't gonna bleed the brakes in your hotel room..

IF I were to travel with a bike, I'd opt for a Ritchey cross, canti bike..slam it around, ride anywhere..simple, cheaper.

IMHO

100% agree, but I’m not sure if the Breakaway canti is still available, not new from Ritchey these days.

[mistermo]

I think an often overlooked advantage of the coupled system is that the luggage is compact and easy to travel with. I rode PBP the last two times, first with a regular bike in a full case, then with an S&S bike. The first time, I had to pick a hotel near the start, used a shuttle bus to and from, and just did day trips into Paris. The second time, I was able to use the subway from the airport, picked areas of the city to stay before and after the ride, and had little problem moving around using public transport with a backpack and the S&S case. No way you could do this with a full size case.

I have also brought my bike along on business trips, then add a few days on either end for a cycling vacation. Again, no way I could do this with a full sized case, no matter the flight fees.

^^this, again^^ I commuted to SF from Indianapolis, often taking my Breakaway. There were times the Breakaway case had difficulty fitting in the back end of a small Uber. If traveling with a full size bike in a box, it wouldn't have fit. I expect the same is even more true in Europe where cars are smaller still. If I packed intelligently, I could pack a weeks worth of clothes inside the Ritchey case, adding more protection and eliminating another bag.

I'm moving towards downsizing and drawing closer to the idea of n=1. For those who travel, this No22 coupler system, combined with an all-road bike, n=1 becomes even more achievable.

[lucieli]

Appreciate the thoughtful responses from Mike and Bryce. Keep doing what you're doing.

[Bryce22]

Appreciate the thoughtful responses from Mike and Bryce. Keep doing what you're doing.

You're quite welcome. Thanks to all for the questions and interest on this one.

[radsmd]

Sold the Ritchey breakaway Ti after realizing that i can travel with any of my 54cm bikes with the Orucase ninja and have the same benefits as a “coupled”bike.

Recently purchased a POST bag and expect the same ease of traveling, if not more, compared to the Orucase.

[Clancy]

Sold the Ritchey breakaway Ti after realizing that i can travel with any of my 54cm bikes with the Orucase ninja and have the same benefits as a “coupled”bike.

Recently purchased a POST bag and expect the same ease of traveling, if not more, compared to the Orucase.

If anyone is interested in a Orucase I have a new one that unfortunately I’ll probably not be able to use. Will sell at a healthy discount compared to a new one. PM if interested.

[NewDFWrider]

I hope that this isn't bringing up a dead thread, but I saw on instagram that Paragon Machine Works is now offering the Santana Z Coupler (through a license with Santana). For those who are as fascinated by licensing as I am, Paragon notes that Santana reserves exclusive right to use the Z Coupler for tandem bike applications.

https://www.paragonmachineworks.com/zc0006-z-coupler-1-3-8-tubing.html

Now I really want to know whether this system will be superior to the Ritchey breakaway versus the S&S Coupler systems. As in, will it be easier to manage ride quality? Is it as robust as the S&S system? Etc.

[jpw]

I hope that this isn't bringing up a dead thread, but I saw on instagram that Paragon Machine Works is now offering the Santana Z Coupler (through a license with Santana). For those who are as fascinated by licensing as I am, Paragon notes that Santana reserves exclusive right to use the Z Coupler for tandem bike applications.

https://www.paragonmachineworks.com/zc0006-z-coupler-1-3-8-tubing.html

Now I really want to know whether this system will be superior to the Ritchey breakaway versus the S&S Coupler systems. As in, will it be easier to manage ride quality? Is it as robust as the S&S system? Etc.

Does the top and down tubing also have to be 6/4 titanium?

[prototoast]

Does the top and down tubing also have to be 6/4 titanium?

They also make stainless couplers for steel frames.

[echappist]

I hope that this isn't bringing up a dead thread, but I saw on instagram that Paragon Machine Works is now offering the Santana Z Coupler (through a license with Santana). For those who are as fascinated by licensing as I am, Paragon notes that Santana reserves exclusive right to use the Z Coupler for tandem bike applications.

https://www.paragonmachineworks.com/zc0006-z-coupler-1-3-8-tubing.html

Now I really want to know whether this system will be superior to the Ritchey breakaway versus the S&S Coupler systems. As in, will it be easier to manage ride quality? Is it as robust as the S&S system? Etc.

Out of curiosity, do you have a link to the Santana patent?

[prototoast]

Out of curiosity, do you have a link to the Santana patent?

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/c9/1b/58/19eee87868f327/USD703031.pdf

[echappist]

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/c9/1b/58/19eee87868f327/USD703031.pdf

Thanks for the link. I hadn't realized that it's a design patent.

And the design on the No. 22 certain do appear quite similar, at least to my less than phosita eyes.

[jpw]

They also make stainless couplers for steel frames.

Is stainless steel as strong as 6/4 titanium? I assume it's strong enough for the design application.

[Velocipede]

Is stainless steel as strong as 6/4 titanium? I assume it's strong enough for the design application.

No, technically it's not as strong as 6/4. But for this application, it's fine. These will get turned down at the ends and brazed onto the tubing. It's lower heat and less stress/fatigue. They will be plenty strong. The ti ones will be turned down and welded on.

[happycampyer]

Does the top and down tubing also have to be 6/4 titanium?The coupler itself is made of 6/4 ti, but the tubes that the coupler are welded into don't need to be—and I expect that most will be 3/2.5 ti.

It's interesting to look at the different interfaces between the Santana coupler and the No. 22 coupler. The ports are much larger in the No.22 coupler. It doesn't look like the "Brake-Brake" would fit through the port in the Santana coupler.

If Santana has a design patent on the "z-coupler," does No. 22 need to license the patent from Santana? Can't recall whether that was mentioned upthread or not.

[jpw]

The coupler itself is made of 6/4 ti, but the tubes that the coupler are welded into don't need to be—and I expect that most will be 3/2.5 ti.

It's interesting to look at the different interfaces between the Santana coupler and the No. 22 coupler. The ports are much larger in the No.22 coupler. It doesn't look like the "Brake-Brake" would fit through the port in the Santana coupler.

If Santana has a design patent on the "z-coupler," does No. 22 need to license the patent from Santana? Can't recall whether that was mentioned upthread or not.

Paragon - "this coupler is being made available to all single bike framebuilders." So it seems to be 'open' to anyone not making tandems. I don't know if builders have paperwork to sign. More bureaucracy that would create friction.

[echappist]

Paragon - "this coupler is being made available to all single bike framebuilders." So it seems to be 'open' to anyone not making tandems. I don't know if builders have paperwork to sign. More bureaucracy that would create friction.

Intellectual property is all about creating friction for competitors of the rights holder. It is literally state-sanctioned monopoly.

The"made available" part has nothing to do with the IP rights being made open or dedicated to the public. After all, what good does a monopoly do, if one can't market and sell things?

Rather, "made available to single bike framebuilders" means that single bike framebuilders may buy the IP-protected product either from Santana or one of its authorized licensees. No different from you or I buying a phone having a curved corner shape from Apple (which has a design patent associated therewith) or one of its authorized retailers. This is a sale being made.

What single bike framebuilders cannot do is make or sell their own unauthorized copies of the IP-protected design. That would be infringement.

[jpw]

Intellectual property is all about creating friction for competitors of the rights holder. It is literally state-sanctioned monopoly.

The"made available" part has nothing to do with the IP rights being made open or dedicated to the public. After all, what good does a monopoly do, if one can't market and sell things?

Rather, "made available to single bike framebuilders" means that single bike framebuilders may buy the IP-protected product either from Santana or one of its authorized licensees. No different from you or I buying a phone having a curved corner shape from Apple (which has a design patent associated therewith) or one of its authorized retailers. This is a sale being made.

What single bike framebuilders cannot do is make or sell their own unauthorized copies of the IP-protected design. That would be infringement.


You think there's a price per frame royalty payment scheme here?

[prototoast]

You think there's a price per frame royalty payment scheme here?

Most likely Paragon pays Santana for each coupler sold, and builds it in to the price for the end user.

[NewDFWrider]

Yes, probably it's a per unit royalty. I guess that it's possible that as part of the deal, Paragon makes the same couplers for Santana for free. (I guess it depends on the per unit costs, etc.) As I think more about it, if I were Santana, I would definitely want Paragon to just provide me all necessary couplers for free.

What I found interesting, besides the fact that Santana doesn't want anyone making tandems is the fact that it's being offered only to single bike framebuilders. I guess that means that companies like Seven, IF, and Moots are out of luck. But what about someone like Bingham, who builds his own frame and does (or has done) contract work for others?

Finally, there is, of course, the issue of enforcing the patent. I think it would be hard for either Paragon or Santana to really enforce the patent against a foreign knockoff--the money just isn't there to justify it. My guess is that both Paragon and Santana are going to rely on the honor system--the universe of bike builders seems to be pretty small, and pretty close-knit.

[prototoast]

What I found interesting, besides the fact that Santana doesn't want anyone making tandems is the fact that it's being offered only to single bike framebuilders. I guess that means that companies like Seven, IF, and Moots are out of luck. But what about someone like Bingham, who builds his own frame and does (or has done) contract work for others?


I read "single" as "not tandem" rather than "sole proprietor business." So Seven, IF, Moots could all use them, as long as they're not built into tandems.


Finally, there is, of course, the issue of enforcing the patent. I think it would be hard for either Paragon or Santana to really enforce the patent against a foreign knockoff--the money just isn't there to justify it. My guess is that both Paragon and Santana are going to rely on the honor system--the universe of bike builders seems to be pretty small, and pretty close-knit.

The number of commercial tandem builders in the U.S. is pretty small, and I would expect most would want to stay in PMW's good graces (the thread of being cut off from Paragon's supply of parts could be a bigger threat than a lawsuit to some). I doubt they'd enforce it against a hobby builder making a tandem for him/herself, and I'm sure it's cost prohibitive to try to go after a foreign builder selling directly into the U.S. (but again, even many foreign builders rely on PMW's various small parts, and wouldn't want to be cut off).

[echappist]

Yes, probably it's a per unit royalty. I guess that it's possible that as part of the deal, Paragon makes the same couplers for Santana for free. (I guess it depends on the per unit costs, etc.) As I think more about it, if I were Santana, I would definitely want Paragon to just provide me all necessary couplers for free.

What I found interesting, besides the fact that Santana doesn't want anyone making tandems is the fact that it's being offered only to single bike framebuilders. I guess that means that companies like Seven, IF, and Moots are out of luck. But what about someone like Bingham, who builds his own frame and does (or has done) contract work for others?

Finally, there is, of course, the issue of enforcing the patent. I think it would be hard for either Paragon or Santana to really enforce the patent against a foreign knockoff--the money just isn't there to justify it. My guess is that both Paragon and Santana are going to rely on the honor system--the universe of bike builders seems to be pretty small, and pretty close-knit.

Patents are jurisdiction-dependent (and that's for utility patents as well). Furthermore, many jurisdictions don't recognize design patents. This is a design patent, not a utility patent. Lord knows why Santana didn't at least attempt to file an utility patent as well (cost, perhaps? though it could have certainly saved money by hiring an IP boutique as opposed to a big-law firm with a patent prosecution team). As things stand, there is no counterpart patent grants of which I'm aware, so as long as the manufacturing and selling of a mimic takes place entirely abroad, there is no infringement, as Santana can assert its rights only in the U.S. Now, if someone buys one of those foreign-made mimics and then bring it to the U.S., then there would be grounds to sue for infringement.

It's also interesting to note that Santana did file for an utility patent on a coupler design ~2003. No idea why it didn't pursue the patent further; the contents therein are now effectively in the public domain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I read "single" as "not tandem" rather than "sole proprietor business." So Seven, IF, Moots could all use them, as long as they're not built into tandems.

That's a more interesting scenario. I would have thought that any patent rights (of Santana) would have been exhausted by the first sale (of the couplers from Paragon to Seven, IF, what have you), and that the purchaser can do anything it wants with it, as long as said purchaser doesn't try to make copies of it. The patent itself makes no distinction re: location and use of the couplers. There may be a contract law angle here, but there does not appear to be an issue of patent law.

[happycampyer]

I read "single" as "not tandem" rather than "sole proprietor business." So Seven, IF, Moots could all use them, as long as they're not built into tandems.
That's how I read "single bike," too.

I wonder if a bike that currently has S&S couplers could have the couplers cut out and these installed? The steel S&S couplers aren't so bulky, but the ti S&S couplers are.

[prototoast]

That's a more interesting scenario. I would have thought that any patent rights (of Santana) would have been exhausted by the first sale (of the couplers from Paragon to Seven, IF, what have you), and that the purchaser can do anything it wants with it, as long as said purchaser doesn't try to make copies of it. The patent itself makes no distinction re: location and use of the couplers. There may be a contract law angle here, but there does not appear to be an issue of patent law.

I haven't done any patent work in a few years (I'm an economist, not a lawyer), but the only litigation I could imagine in this scenario would be between Santana and PMW, if, for example, PMW turned around and sold 1,000 of these couplers to Co-Motion or some company like that.

As long as PMW is somewhat diligent about who they sell to, and cut off sales to any company Santana thinks is using these couplers in tandems, the relationship will probably be fine.

[Velocipede]

'Single bike' as in not a tandem. So just one rider on it.

I had heard from someone at Dean/Merlin that they have the rights to the Santana Z-Coupler for singles. I know they have been using it for about a year now. Long before PMW offered it for sale. I can as John or Brent just to clarify but that's what I was told by Ari at Dean/Merlin.

Regarding the licensing, it's most likely a per piece agreement. And they are probably making the couplers at a seriously discounted cost for Santana.

[jpw]

Does the Z actually stand the test of time? Is reliable, durable, robust.....et.c.? Can it take beating, both on the trail and in and out of a case?

Aesthetically it trumps S&S.

[NewDFWrider]

Aha.. thanks everyone for clarifing what "single" means. So what if someone wanted to build a three person bike. :banana:

As to foreign infringement, what I meant was what if a factory in China or Taiwan made them?

As I think some have noted, implicitly, there is a big cost differential between filing and maintaining design patents versus utility patents. That cost difference, and any imitial objections from the PTO may have deterred them from pursuing the utility patent.

[prototoast]

As to foreign infringement, what I meant was what if a factory in China or Taiwan made them?



A factory in China or Taiwan can make whatever they want. Santana's patent is only relevant if said factory tried to sell into the U.S. (where the patent was granted). In practice, if it were a ti builder like Waltly selling one-offs, it probably wouldn't be worth the cost to try to enforce the patent--it would have to be something on the scale of Ritchey or BikesDirect to make it worth it.

[Velocipede]

Aha.. thanks everyone for clarifing what "single" means. So what if someone wanted to build a three person bike. :banana:

As to foreign infringement, what I meant was what if a factory in China or Taiwan made them?

As I think some have noted, implicitly, there is a big cost differential between filing and maintaining design patents versus utility patents. That cost difference, and any imitial objections from the PTO may have deterred them from pursuing the utility patent.

A factory in China or Taiwan can make whatever they want. Santana's patent is only relevant if said factory tried to sell into the U.S. (where the patent was granted). In practice, if it were a ti builder like Waltly selling one-offs, it probably wouldn't be worth the cost to try to enforce the patent--it would have to be something on the scale of Ritchey or BikesDirect to make it worth it.

The sale of the Z-Coupler to companies in other countries also depends on if Santana has filed for patents in other countries. Not just the selling of but the production of the product. I would be surprised if they haven't applied. They are pretty smart and would do that. China, Taiwan and the general EU patents would be wise. Given it took 3 years for the initial US one- 2011 to 2014 granted, 2014/2015 would most likely be the same timeframe for others. Now, having a patent in those countries, not as strong a protection as in the US. Hell, even in the US enforcement is tougher and tougher versus decades ago.

[clarendon]

Has anyone here tried this system yet? It looks very neat. Would love to hear of any experiences.

[unterhausen]

there is barely anything to patent. S&S mainly relied on the fact that their couplers resisted torque. I don't think a utility patent for a coupler would really stand a court test nowadays, but as always, you can get the patent even if there is no novelty and sometimes just having lawyers on call will keep people from copying your design.

[clarendon]

I see Alliance have today started offering a z coupler option also. Still interested in any real world experiences of a No22/Santana/z coupled bike - esp. compared to the Breakaway system. Thanks

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cc3DOadOhj-/?igshid=MDJmNzVkMjY=

[Nickt]

With all the current threads talking about travel bikes/bikes with couplers, I was wondering if any paceliners have had any real world experiences with these?

They look super slick (much better than traditional couplers IMO) but curious about user feedback if we have any here.