Inside Ride Kickr E-Flex Trainer Motion System

Not sure, but I suggest and email to InsideRide to see if they have an idea.

Having a 2nd person near by can help in locating a noise like this.

1 Like

Long shot but worth a try. Had a similar creak. Turns out it was coming from the rear. I had the rock limit rail spacer(?) Too far forward and the kickr was pinging on the bottom. Also taped some cush wrap at contact pint jic.

Touching on this a bit again, try to eliminate which motion direction may be related here.

  1. Move the bike in the pure fore-aft direction and see (hear) what happens.
  2. Move the bike in the pure lean left-right and see (hear) what happens.

Depending on what you learn there, it can narrow down the direction to look. I will say that a constant point of potential noise for my setup is the tension o-rings squeaking. They can rub against the metal frame surfaces in spots and make quite a lot of noise for how small the relative motion is there.

Did you lube the o-ring/frame interface and did it help?

When I lock the steering knob and ride, the noise is reduced which tells me it is related to the left-right lean. I may just take the whole thing apart, grease everything, and put it back together. Ugh.

No, and I would avoid using any type of lube. I used Gorilla tape stuck to the frame as a layer between the metal and rubber.

1 Like

I just got an email from InsideRide with some very exciting news and pictures:

I am still reviewing the pictures, but this seems to be a new design of their front end unit that includes steering AND lean control. I don’t have much background info, but I am seeing two primary axes of rotation, and a connection between those two that is “flexible” if I am guessing right on the mechanics and joints. I may be able to get one for evaluation and will be sure to report any experience I have with it.

The timing is so funny, because I have been nearing the point that I have finished my 3.0 version of my lean modification to improve the performance and adjustment potential of my 1.0 to 2.0 improvement.

Overall, I am beyond thrilled to see another potential take on the steering & leaning connection because I think that is the future of these indoor cycling motion setups. Exciting times :smiley:


Yes. It looks like InsideRide has integrated steering and leaning. That is, you can only lean if the turn the handlebars, and if you turn the handlebars then you induce lean.

Even though I no longer have one, I still think InsideRide should make an accessory kit that would allow the user to connect the front and rear halves for alignment and position consistency.

1 Like

Yeah, I think they have at least partly decoupled their original connection that steering and leaning were 1:1 locked motion. It seems there is some disconnection, even if spring controlled, that will allow some amount of pure leverage lean control without the steering input.

That is HUGE to me because I love the separated but connected action I get from my leverage lean modification on placed under their original steering connection. I am curious to see how this feels in comparison to my design.

Totally agreed on the need for a bridge. I have made the one for mine and talked to one friend about making one. It is really beneficial in my use, to properly connect the two halves. I may try to do a cleaner version of my original concept and offer it to anyone to build for themselves. The challenge lies in having it handle the various spacing that exists as a result of different bike wheelbases. I have a concept on it, but not taken the time to make my 2.0 version of the concept.

My thought for handling the different distances between the front and rear halves was something like the way that curtain rods work: rods that slide over each other with some type of twistable “clamp” to fix the distance. I think once you fixed the alignment “walking” that happens, then that would fix a lot of the distance “walking”, so the “clamp” to fix distance wouldn’t need a large amount of clamping force, so the fore-aft could be pretty simple.

1 Like

Yup, I considered a telescoping tube with collet lock. There are a range of these available and might just be the ticket. I’d like each end to have a connection to the rectangle tubes on each end that also resists yaw twist. I think that and even a moderately rigid length connection would be a notable improvement in the overall performance.

1 Like

The kit could consist of:

  • Rear cross-brace (so all four sides of the front would have bracing( for the front part that would have tubes
  • A replacement for the front brace that would have tubes that slid into the ones that are part of the new rear brace for the front
  • Collet locks
1 Like

I don’t think it’s necessary to add the 4th tube to the front. I plan to simple reverse the ‘C’ shape so the open side is at the front of the unit, with one lateral tube is closer to the middle. This requires no extra tube. I planned on a “slip-over” connection between that tube between the two sections.

I hacked a quick sketch based upon how Ray installed his (which is “backwards” as to how InsideRide actually shows their, but there is no actual difference in use).

I was thinking of how InsideRide could create a kit that would be easy for the end-user to correctly install, and be pretty idiot proof. Hence the extra brace for the front that would have the front part of the for / aft distance tubes already connected to it.

1 Like

Sure, that could totally work. I was looking at it more from a “least material” option that is more of a slip on connection with straps and such. Plenty of ways to get there. IR has said they had no plans to make something like this in the past, but maybe they could change.

They said much of the same back when I talked about my 1.0 change and what I thought about adding leverage control to their original design. Sitting here years after that, I am happy to see they reconsidered and made an attempt at the idea.

Hopefully the “bridge” that we think would be useful gets a 2nd look now too :smiley:

1 Like

Hmm, never had an issue simply lifting up on the handlebars and wiggling the front assembly around until I was happy.

It may not be a problem for everyone (likely varies with rider / mounting surfaces among other things) but it’s an issue that some of us have experienced and wanted a better solution. I like a “set it and forget it” type of design, and one that doesn’t need fussing with over time. My bridged version is that for me now.

Fair enough, you like to tinker with stuff.

The email you received - was it a marketing email to customers? I don’t see an update on and the new front unit does indeed look interesting if it increases realism.

It was an email directly to me, not a broad announcement. I presume it’s because I have had discussions with them over time related to the unit, my testing and other feedback.

This is apparently still in a prototype stage, but they said I could share the pictures and minimal info I had. They are sending me a unit to test, and I will reply to them and this topic (as well as the FB group) once I get a ride or two on it.

A follow-up email mentions this is more about a tweak to the steering to lean input/output than the leverage based lean control like my design. I am curious to see how it feels in comparison to the original design, as well as my version.

I have no idea what their actual production and customer introduction plans are at this time.