Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7
Results 151 to 171 of 171
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Down In A Hole, Up in the Sky
    Posts
    24,983
    I used to do that with my dpx2, now I just swap shocks between coil and air for park days.
    StokePimpin' ain't easy

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Los Angeles/Mammoth
    Posts
    716
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    I used to do that with my dpx2, now I just swap shocks between coil and air for park days.
    Thats a great idea too, dont think im there yet though haha. When you did adjust the DPX2, how much pressure did you change it by? Seems like 10-20psi would do the trick.
    Unofficial Fact: Skiing was 69% more rad in the 1980's.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    583
    I run more air in the park due to the significantly higher speeds.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Down In A Hole, Up in the Sky
    Posts
    24,983
    Norton is on to something, Targhee has some slower tech-gnar that I like more sag on, and fast flow with jumps that I like a firmer platform on. Answer:
    It depends
    StokePimpin' ain't easy

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    479
    Pull 2. Was running my 170 with 0, 160 with 1 at the same weight. Add a bit of pressure when you do this. I can post full settings if you care.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    305
    I'm getting ready to change my 36 Grip2 from a 160 to 150. Fox calls for 20wt gold on the air side lower and 5wt teflon on the damper side lower. I'd rather not buy a quart of each, considering I'd only need 10cc and 40cc respectively. Wondering if anyone in the SLC area some some extra to spare in exchange for a six pack? I have some motorex and maxima that I might use as a substitute for the for 20wt gold, but I'm thinking it's best to stay with the 5wt teflon for the damper side, since there's some transfer into/out of the damper.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Land of Brine Shrimp and Magic Underwear
    Posts
    5,908
    Iíve got both of those oils. Hit me up.
    There's nothing better than sliding down snow... flying through the air.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    479
    I think Push recommends using 10wt in both. https://www.pushindustries.com/colle...nt=43569962190

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    3,350
    Iím 5í8Ē and demoed a large Sentinel at Kingdom Trails (I should probably be on a medium but they were out). In spite of the huge 475 mm reach, I really liked the bike. Seated, the top tube length felt spot-on, and I didnít have issues driving the bike through corners. I didnít get into anything steep or janky, though.

    How are people sizing these? Am I crazy to think the large would be better than the medium for me at my height?

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hell Track
    Posts
    8,499
    Quote Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
    Iím 5í8Ē and demoed a large Sentinel at Kingdom Trails (I should probably be on a medium but they were out). In spite of the huge 475 mm reach, I really liked the bike. Seated, the top tube length felt spot-on, and I didnít have issues driving the bike through corners. I didnít get into anything steep or janky, though.

    How are people sizing these? Am I crazy to think the large would be better than the medium for me at my height?
    I'm 5'9", and if I were getting one, I'd go with a large. I think you could go either way. The big bike will take getting used to, especially in tight stuff, and it'll definitely feel a bit less playful. But you gain a lot of straight line stability.

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    479
    I'm 5'8" on a medium. If all you do is flowy trails, a large would be fine. I notice the long wheelbase on really tight corners already, so would not recommend sizing up if that's what you usually ride (unless you have really, really good body/bike control).

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    6,345
    I'm 5'9" and very happy with the medium.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    4,879
    I find it hilarious that inherently longer, slacker, and lower bikes designed around 30 mm stems, bigger wheel diameters, and wider tires that result in an ever more stable, planted ride leads to sizing up instead of sizing down.
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    the situation strikes me as WAY too much drama at this point

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Land of Brine Shrimp and Magic Underwear
    Posts
    5,908
    Quote Originally Posted by reckless toboggan View Post
    I find it hilarious that inherently longer, slacker, and lower bikes designed around 30 mm stems, bigger wheel diameters, and wider tires that result in an ever more stable, planted ride leads to sizing up instead of sizing down.
    I don't ride a transition but like to follow this thread because I like their bikes.

    So... I'm 5'7" and have always ridden mediums. However I bought a Pivot Firebird 29 in small, per their recommendations. Small goes to 5'9" and medium starts at 5'8". It's a hudge bike, made sense. Actually felt a bit cramped on the bike in steeper stuff. Demoed a Medium and knew I'd made a mistake. Bought one and sold the small. Feels much better even though it is more to handle climbing. Just took a bit of getting used to and now it feels so right.

    So I sized up, sorta, on a hudge bike, hahaha. They changed the sizing for the Firebird 29 because it is so long but they do say most people can potentially go up or down a size.

    This is just what bikes are now. And they're awesome!
    There's nothing better than sliding down snow... flying through the air.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hell Track
    Posts
    8,499
    Quote Originally Posted by reckless toboggan View Post
    I find it hilarious that inherently longer, slacker, and lower bikes designed around 30 mm stems, bigger wheel diameters, and wider tires that result in an ever more stable, planted ride leads to sizing up instead of sizing down.
    Steeper seat tubes lead to sizing up.

    I can ride a bigger bike on the way down, no problem. But if the top tube gets too long, my back hurts on long climbs. Steep seat tubes solve that.

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    3,350
    Quote Originally Posted by reckless toboggan View Post
    I find it hilarious that inherently longer, slacker, and lower bikes designed around 30 mm stems, bigger wheel diameters, and wider tires that result in an ever more stable, planted ride leads to sizing up instead of sizing down.
    I agree, itís a bit funny. There are definite benefits to the steep seat angle for keeping a slack front end under control on climbs, but then wheelbase starts growing. The sweet spot can vary, but maybe long reach with steep seat angle combined with short chainstays and a slightly steeper head tube angle is a good combination for a bike with modern fit that doesnít feel like a boat.

    I think the large Sentinel was a bit past where I want to be on wheelbase, but trying it out made me aware of a different perspective on sizing. Reach matters, but so does having a long enough top tube.

    The top tube on the large Sentinel is similar to that of my medium Norco Range 29, which I find quite comfortable.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Trouserville
    Posts
    14,419
    Quote Originally Posted by reckless toboggan View Post
    I find it hilarious that inherently longer, slacker, and lower bikes designed around 30 mm stems, bigger wheel diameters, and wider tires that result in an ever more stable, planted ride leads to sizing up instead of sizing down.

    Not in my house

    Preach it brother.

    One of these days people will remember a little thing called wheelbase when it comes to how a bike actually handles where it matters. And why professional dh racers still talk about it, but not the mtbr dwids.


    edit: ^D(C) knows
    Besides the comet that killed the dinosaurs nothing has destroyed a species faster than entitled white people.-ajp

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    6,345
    I should add to the above, I did not try a large Transition, only the medium, but I did try some other bikes with longer reach and it wasn't for me. I could ride them for sure, and they were very stable, but I lost a lot of playfulness and maneuverability that I wanted to retain.

    I don't think there's a right or wrong answer here, short seat tubes and long dropper posts mean that most people can choose between two or three sizes based on how they want the bike to feel. At 5'9" I could certainly physically fit on either the medium or large, probably even the small, but the medium felt right to me.
    Last edited by adrenalated; 09-02-2019 at 01:39 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    All ye punterz! Leave thine stupid heavy skis in the past, or at least in the resort category, for the age of lightweight pussy sticks is upon us! Behold! Keep up with the randocommandos on their carbon blades of shortness! Break thine tibias into spiral splinters with pintech extravagance!

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Trouserville
    Posts
    14,419
    I wish I had a bike that would extend or contract an inch in the toptube and downtube.

    I don't even need a button, I'd deal with a quick release option.
    Besides the comet that killed the dinosaurs nothing has destroyed a species faster than entitled white people.-ajp

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Taos Ski Valley or my truck
    Posts
    500

    New Transitions too slack?

    5í 10 1/4Ē Large carbon Smuggler. Not too slack.

    Edit to add*

    I havenít noticed the bike being more slack (compared to my 2016) while climbing. I notice the change in geometry big time once the seat is down and the bike is fully out in front. Which is quite nice.
    Last edited by the_flying_v; 09-03-2019 at 10:27 PM.

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    North Vancouver
    Posts
    6,185
    Current bike 62.5 ha and a 1275mm wb, bb 315mm, and 445mm chainstays

    Next bike 62 ha and a 1290 wb, bb 335, and 445mm chainstays. So more longer, more slacker, but less lower. Inch closer and closer to being a disciple of the church of Geometron.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •