Factually a morse taper isn't the same principle at all because it's not driven on the taper if you care to correctly apply the truth. Driving the tapered portion of this interface means that this is more like square taper than spline or morse taper. Yay! Let's hear it for square taper! Essentially what you have here is a larger OD square taper. The biggest difference is that the stress concentrations in splines aren't on the the interface surfaces. Of course an undersized spline could crack, but what would an undersized polygon do? Think about where the highest stress is here, and you'll see that it will changes the interface shape as you add stress, and cause wear as the stress is applied and removed. Also think about the material elasticity that allow your taper to fit, then apply uneven surface pressure (both because of the cantelevered drive and the taper). Arguing that undersized splines can fail is like arguing that an XC bike isn't strong enough for DH. Of course that can be true. A properly sized spline is the answer. Also-for the last few years these cranks have been steel splindle, aluminum arms and they have creaked like mofos.

I am an engineer and can tell you that this interface is crap and pure marketing BS. Keep in mind that due to the required manufacturing tolerances, it is impossible to have 100% equal surface contact area. Just plain old impossible. Then, take your two different materials (steel, aluminum), heat and cool them (-20 to +35 C) and tell me that the fit is going to stay exactly the same? Bull! This interface could be useful in constant load applications, but in a crankset it's on/off/on/off as you pedal. Splines are vastly superior in this application. All that's happening here is advertising and placebo affect.

It's hilarious how they would brag about their massive inventory, then talk about how important efficiency is. I can see why Intense bikes are so expensive, and it's not only due to being hand made in america, it's the poor efficiency in their processes. They could easily save a lot of money by learning how to manufacuter a lot more efficiently.

Are the tshirts the same as before? The material is good, but the fit is weird. The pinkbike shirts are too fat and short. Hey pinkbike-are you still using printing on the same shirts as a year ago? I'd love to order more tees, but not if they are cut to fit trolls (although pinkbike does seem to attract those).

Except that the automotive industry is large enough to ensure longer term support for old models than cycling, and even changes the models 5-10 times less frequently than the cycling industry. For example-I bet you can find wheel bearings for a 1992 subaru impreza, but try to find a set of bearings for my 1999 AC Cooler hub. And a freewheel mechanism while you're at it.

Way to go Giant! Now please explain the actual trade-offs for us. If it's a bigger steerer tube in the same size head tube, there has to be a trade-off somewhere. So headset bearings will be smaller, or stack height is taller?

Quote "The TRUAX is designed for those riders who are just as likely to pedal up to the trailhead as they are to take a shuttle or chairlift to the top of the mountain before they dive in and revel in their descent". Can someone please explain why this bike would have a single ring and guide if this statement is true?

Easy there internet gangster.

I'm glad you guys were able to scare up an angry mob of 4 to really drive your point home. The simple fact is that NWD 1 was earth-shattering, and Bourdo's contribution to that piece was invaluable. The series went downhill and his importance faded. Just as NWD 1 would have been much better with 5 minutes of top MTB footage replacing the lame mountain boarding, most of the recent issues of NWD would be much better with the 10 camera angle super slow motion shots replaced with more footage. There's a reason that The Collective left NWD in the dust, and it's because the NWD crew is stuck doing things the 2004 way with 2004 athletes. The flatspin section of NWD is symtomatic of the larger NWD trending problem. An irrelevant athlete trying something irrelevent for 10% of the running time of the movie. It took stones on his part to try, and it seems like he got beat pretty hard for his failed attempts. Look at it this way though: each NWD installment is essentially a time capsule showing what and who was happening the year it came out. A 45 minute year in review show if you will. This section took up probably about 10% of that film, and there is no way it is/was warranted. There were plenty of more important things happening in the world of MTB freeriding that year!

I also can't eat 40 hotdogs in 10 minutes, but I fail to see how that's a monumental task either. I don't even know if Bourdo could do that come to think of it...does that make him less of a man?

brule-your comments sum it up perfectly-"it was a huge feat for him, and something that he wanted to achieve". Good for him! But why should anyone else care? It's great that he's able to set arbitrary goals and achieve them, but really his goals are arbitrary. Also he is challenging himself in some ways, but also he's taking it really easy on himself in others. Why doesn't he dirt jump? Too hard for him! Why 'flat 360'? Because he can't learn a regular 360! If he decides he wants to walk up a mountain on his hands do we have to fawn over him for that, or can we just call it what it is-an arbitrary and unimportant goal set by a semi-focused eccentric person? Olskooljake-this wasn't even a 'moment' for MTB riding!