Am I a moron?

[pechelman]

Im wanting a bike frame thats like a DP120 type ski.

The big rockered shovel for stability and destroying things in my way and railing turns on the way down and then the minimal tail sidecut for being able to manuever it around tight spots and flick it around.

Basically I think this bike would be a;

5/5" travel
67* Head angle
13.25-13.5 BB Height
16.75 Chainstay
44-44.25" Wheelbase

why doesnt anyone really make this?

Closest I can come is;

Cove Hustler XC = sold out for now, waiting on the new model
Spec Enduro SL = pricey, not as low and slack as Id like
Spec Enduro SX = supposedly squatty rear end and 4.2" of travel, have a line on a used 2007 for $1,000
Commencal Meta 4X = single pivot maybe questionable, although Im a big fan of ones done right, also potentially pricey, and 4" travel
SC Blur 4X = depending on who you ask, it climbs great or is a pig. also questionable durability on pivots etc. also low travel.

i guess "low travel" is all in the eye of the beholder and the stuff you're about to ride down
i prefer meadow skipping adventures that have lots of fast flowy buff stuff with some occasional techy bits and climbs. so 4-4.5 *should* be adequate.
im more of a finesse rider than anything else and i prefer to sit and spin whilst climbing
the fork Id put on those 4X bikes would be a130mm travel, 520mm A-C, with a climbing lockdown that puts it closer to 450-470mm (im guessing there)

ive had a stumpjumper reccomended to me, but again, im not sure its as slack as Id want (it is as low as Id want though)

thoughts from t3h collective?

[Beaver]

Am I a moron?

YES.

Rocky Mt Slayer. It pedals like an xc bike and descends like free ride bike.

[kidwoo]

Spec Enduro SL = pricey, not as low and slack as Id like

Other than a 17" chainstay and a whopping half inch more travel, the sl is EXACLTY the measurements you listed.. My bb is 13.7 and the headangle is 67.


That new trek remedy I think is every one of those measurements minus the 6" of travel.

Geo is more important than travel as I'm sure you know, so 6" shouldn't be a deal breaker.

[marshalolson]

also depends on what shock/linkage and how its valved. ie a longer travel bike with a plush shock = more sag vs. a shorter travel bike (ie a 4x bike) with a bit of low speed compression valving designed ride high in its travel = less sag

i personally don't care for SC bikes for reasons i don't need to get into here...

[Art Vandelay]

transition bottlerocket?

[pechelman]

YES.

Rocky Mt Slayer. It pedals like an xc bike and descends like free ride bike.

slightly steep than I want, longer CS's, and a shorter wheelbase.

Other than a 17" chainstay and a whopping half inch more travel, the sl is EXACLTY the measurements you listed.. My bb is 13.7 and the headangle is 67.


That new trek remedy I think is every one of those measurements minus the 6" of travel.

Geo is more important than travel as I'm sure you know, so 6" shouldn't be a deal breaker.

Yea I know about the SL. Im just being picky though and saying Id like it lower with the 67* HA. I do love the way it fits though, so that should be enough for me to get over that .5" of BB height I want. Right now its just the matter of finding one. I search ebay pretty often and nada. Would like to just get the frame at this point.

The remedy is interesting, but its got an even higher BB, slightly longer CS than Id like, and a longer WB than what I want.

I totally agree about the travel, which is why I mentioned I thought the 4-5" should be plenty for me. Im looking at geo numbers first and foremost.

transition bottlerocket?

Ive considered that too.
Its heavy and it doesnt quite have the numbers Id want with a lower front fork. Its close though.




my moron question wasnt complete
Am I a moron for wanting a bike like this? (ie since no one really makes them that I know of.)

[kidwoo]

You're not a moron for wanting a bike like that, most of us do I think.

You're a stubborn bastard for obsessing over minutia that even I don't even let get in the way of a good ride.

And keep in mind who this is coming from You can drop a half inch of bb height with tires by the way. I've got some big ones on mine. Our 'dirt' is much shittier than what's on the front range though. You could easily get away with some smaller balloons.

And yeah, those bottlerockets are nice but weigh about as much as a dh frame.

[pechelman]

And keep in mind who this is coming from You can drop a half inch of bb height with tires by the way. I've got some big ones on mine. Our 'dirt' is much shittier than what's on the front range though. You could easily get away with some smaller balloons.

what size ballons do you have on yours?

as it is im generally fine on 2.1s

and to continue this nerdiness
have you verified your HA with an inclinometer \ digital level \ etc?
i suppose though you can just feel it and go off reference from other bikes.

[shirk]

Run a reducer cup then a +.5 lower headset cups in a B-rocket to get the slack angle with the shorter fork.

[Rontele]

as i told you over email, you're not quite nerding out yet. That being said, you're not going to notice a degree HA difference or .2523423423423 higher or lower BB height.

But for the money a new bike costs, I'd think hard about it.

shirk, pechelman wouldn't like the Bottlerocket due to its intended uses and heavy weight.

[bagtagley]

Turner Forum, JONG!

[Dside11-11]

P- I'd say no SX for the same reason as no BottleRocket. Not as versatile as you think.

[fondigley]

i prefer meadow skipping adventures that have lots of fast flowy buff stuff with some occasional techy bits and climbs. so 4-4.5 *should* be adequate.

Why waste your money, just get a hardtail. Sounds like that is all you need for the trails you like.

[scrublover]

All that to me says a burly hardtail, or a Heckler with whatever fork and shock tweaking required to get the angles you want.

Been loving a Pike (140mm) on the front of my hardtail for the last few years, and have dabbled with taller travel (160mm) on it recently. Very fun, but not as good as an all rounder that way. Beefy, great tire clearance, ride it how you want it.

For less than the cost of most decent fully frames, you could have a spanking nice beefy hardtail frame custom built to juuuuust what you want.

[bagtagley]

fonz-digley read my mind...

[pechelman]

Why waste your money, just get a hardtail. Sounds like that is all you need for the trails you like.

Because i suck and i dont like the way they climb or descend because i suck.
and because i like full suspension.
and because i want one.
and because i suck.

hows that?

what happened to your post bags
about marketing, and static angles are telling, and having an inch more sag and .25" of bb height not being important?

[bagtagley]

Because i suck and i dont like the way they climb or descend because i suck.
and because i like full suspension.
and because i want one.
and because i suck.

hows that?

what happened to your post bags
about marketing, and static angles are telling, and having an inch more sag and .25" of bb height not being important?

I don't know, I didn't like the way it read. And, I saw fondig's post and it made sense. And, I'm sick of being the resident SC fanboi. Lame, I know...


I think you run into a problem of marketing. The 5" range of bikes is typically more oriented to the XC side of All-Mountain (this "segment" is getting fucking tedious), and the 6" range of bikes, the aggressive side. So, you have to shoot for the longer travel bikes for that slack HA, but then your forced into a higher BB and longer chainstays, generally speaking, by nature of the additional travel. The only other option for short travel and slack angles is a 4X or slopestyle bike, but most of those are too slack and/or too heavy for general use. The Blur 4X is a bit of an exception, which is why it's still an appealing bike to me, but not everybody digs SC.

I really hate getting into the sagged vs. static argument, because there's no doubt that, with all the numbers at your disposal, the static numbers are very telling. However, I think that .25" in additional BB height is negligible when your travel has increased by a full inch. I've never obsessed about chainstay length, especially on a trail bike (unless they're just crazy long), so I got no advice there.

I'll just add that the Blur 4X isn't a heavy frame, so it's only going to be as beefy as your build (or maybe I'm misunderstanding the meaning of "pig"). Also, if you search around, you'll see that the pivots are basically a non-issue with some preventative maintenance. I think the biggest what-if is whether or not you like SC's VPP, which not everybody does. Fortunately, where you live, it's possible to demo just about every bike on the market.

[davep]

You could get an Enduro Elite... same frame as the rest of the enduros, but with a 130mm fork and a 1/4 inch shorter I2I/stroke shock. Shorter suspension makes the bike lower...

13.0" BB height, all other specs exactly what you listed. Or just stick shorter suspension on any enduro frame.

Also, what about cannondale prophet?

[fondigley]

Because i suck and i don't like the way they climb or descend because i suck.
and because i suck.

hows that?

Lame but agreed.

[marshalolson]

preston FR @ 549 a2c:

HT: 67.5
CS: 16.85
BB: 13.3
WB: 43.5

5" of travel, ~8.5# w/ rp23

sounds perfect to me...

[pechelman]

thats always been in the back of my mind but Id need a new fork and im happy with what ive got, although I wouldnt mind snagging a spesh e150 fork on ebay.

also I cringe everytime i look at that shock load path
it makes baby enginerd jesus cry

(and yes, i realize that makes about as much difference as a .01" difference in BB height)

im reconsidering it though
you have one at the shop for a demo spin around the parkinglot?

[scrublover]

preston FR @ 549 a2c:

HT: 67.5
CS: 16.85
BB: 13.3
WB: 43.5

5" of travel, ~8.5# w/ rp23

sounds perfect to me...

i'm pretty damn happy with my preston, even though i'm running it with 66-68 headangle depending on how my fork is dialed. mine sits right around 35# though you could build it lighter/heaver depending on your needs.

[kidwoo]

what size ballons do you have on yours?

as it is im generally fine on 2.1s

and to continue this nerdiness
have you verified your HA with an inclinometer \ digital level \ etc?
i suppose though you can just feel it and go off reference from other bikes.

2.4s on mine.

So there ya go!

That preston looks pretty sweet. But I agree on the funky linkage. I'd take one for a spin if I were you.

[rideit]

I have boinged around on Scrubby's transition...it 'felt' light while riding, but was damp as fuck/brick shitthouse. I was pretty impressed...but that is a light build for it, too.
Scrub, you get any photos of that ride?

[scrublover]

I have boinged around on Scrubby's transition...it 'felt' light while riding, but was damp as fuck/brick shitthouse. I was pretty impressed...but that is a light build for it, too.
Scrub, you get any photos of that ride?

not really anything that turned out decent.

playing more with the fork/shock since then, i'm learning to like more sag. being such a hardtail loving kinda guy, it feels really weird. been running the fork about 160mm vs. the 180mm full up. feels good that way for general riding, and the rest is there for when i want it. i'm a very happy camper with this do it all bike. this and the hardtail treat me right, and i still ride the hardtail more. about a 2:1 ratio.

that pic doesn't have the blackspire stinger chainguide on, and the steer tube has been trimmed back just a touch. 1/2' less rise bar on there now as well. feels pretty dialed.