Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 12 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 313
  1. #26
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788

    650B HD-160 ... very Heavy Duty!



    Today I rode the HD with a Fox Van-R, 8.5x2.5 inches, making 160mm travel, with the Lyrik coil u-turn fork wound up to itís maximum 160mm travel.

    Before fitting a coil I fixed it to the bike and compressed with all my weight to try to bottom travel.

    The attached picture shows there is only about 3 or 4 mm clearance. I put 3 layers of tape on the seat tube and am carrying shims, just in case it does rub. So far with limited but strong riding, the tire has not scraped the tape.

    With 650b wheels and 160mm travel, the top travel BB height measured 14 1/8 inches. This is 3/8 inch higher than the 13 3/4 inches measured when set up as 140mm travel. Sag lowers the BB height to just under 12 inches, ideal for good pedal clearance and low enough for stability.

    I rode the same familiar ďtestĒ ride area. 160mm travel is far too much for the Tamarancho trail, but it sure is fun!. 140mm with 650b wheels are also too much except for one rocky area for about ľ mile. It sure is sweet rolling rocky trail on 650b.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 650b Mojo HD ... Heavy Duty-hd-160-side.jpg  

    650b Mojo HD ... Heavy Duty-hd-160-clearance1.jpg  


  2. #27
    bikeboatbrewski
    Reputation: scottybinwv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,383
    OMG!

    Looks like your neo moto is a bit worn down. Helps with clearance.

  3. #28
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788
    Quote Originally Posted by scottybinwv View Post
    OMG!

    Looks like your neo moto is a bit worn down. Helps with clearance.
    Yes, although over the years of using these tires I've noticed the casing stretches and the tire "grows" in radius as much as the tread wears down.

    I'm mounting up some new Neo-Motos this week and will replace that clearance picture.

    Few trails in my area require great tire traction. So I try to get as much wear out of these expensive tires, and the Neo-Moto's do live long and perform very well until nearly this worn.

    Also pressing my weight to crush the bottom bumper isn't nearly as much force as landing a jump on an under sprung shock. I'll be looking for rub marks on the 3 layers of tape I put there for temporary protection. I do still expect it will rub when bottomed hard and will need a small bottom travel shock shim.

  4. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Brisco Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by derby View Post
    Yes, although over the years of using these tires I've noticed the casing stretches and the tire "grows" in radius as much as the tread wears down.

    I'm mounting up some new Neo-Motos this week and will replace that clearance picture.

    Few trails in my area require great tire traction. So I try to get as much wear out of these expensive tires, and the Neo-Moto's do live long and perform very well until nearly this worn.

    Also pressing my weight to crush the bottom bumper isn't nearly as much force as landing a jump on an under sprung shock. I'll be looking for rub marks on the 3 layers of tape I put there for temporary protection. I do still expect it will rub when bottomed hard and will need a small bottom travel shock shim.
    Update???

  5. #30
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788

    New Neo's will brush, if you can slam bottom out

    With coil removed from the shock and all my weight on the seat crushing the stock Van-R rubber bottom bumper, new Neo-Moto 2.3's just barely rubs my 2011 HD seat tube occasionally on irregularly taller knobs.. About as close as 32mm stanchion Fox fork with spring removed. Usable, but could scratch the finish when slamming a hash bottom out landing big drops when muddy.

    An earlier year HD than my 2011 version, without the concave seat tube giving 4mm added tire clearance, probably needs a 1/8 inch shock travel shim for no possibility of rubbing a 650b.

    Ibis is correct, to have more than 1/4 inch seat tube clearance, a 675mm diameter tire is the maximum tire diameter (particularly for the first HD production series). The Neo-moto 2.3 is 702mm.

    That said, I doubt if I will be able to bottom my 2011 HD tire to rub the seat tube without making a huge mistake, such as the rear suspension landing a 6 foot drop onto a sharp rock. I just tried on a 4 foot drop to transition landing, the biggest jump I'm familiar with (so far!), and no rub, not even the derailleur cable.

    I'm not worried about clearance with this '11 HD, having the added concave seat tube clearance. My coil is very light, 350# with 2 - 3 turns preload for about 32% sag under a 200+ lb rider, I can't go any lighter in coil without using too much preload. Most riders my weight would ride 400# to 450# I would guess by comparing how much firmer in coil weight they say they use in the same fork. For example, I'm using the Soft coil in my Lyrik 160 u-turn for 25% static sag (40mm, about 1.5 inches), most other riders near my body weight post up that they use the standard medium coil, or firm, even extra firm, I guess they all huck much larger than I ever will and prefer less than 25% fork sag (...or are much heavier than they say )

    Normally I swap the front Neo-moto to the rear when the rear wears too much for good handling and put the new tire on the front. To give a little more traction bias to the front tire, and easier rolling rear after the sharp edges are worn away while used as a front tire.. So that may give a little more clearance too.

    I've put tape on the seat tube, at least until I'm totally sure I won't be able to bottom hard and rub when riding much more difficult than my local rides. And am carrying a few hand made thin plastic split shims to slip onto the shock shaft to limit travel slighlty if I ever do rub the protective tape.

    I'm hoping to get to Northstar this weekend, and be better be able to tune the suspension on more frequent jumps and faster runs.

  6. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    327
    Quote Originally Posted by derby View Post
    An earlier year HD than my 2011 version, without the concave seat tube giving 4mm added tire clearance, probably needs a 1/8 inch shock travel shim for no possibility of rubbing a 650b.
    Had a fantastic Labor Day weekend riding the HD 650b at Mammoth Mountain for about 14 hours or so.

    1/8th of an inch is about right for my 2010 (?) HD. Less than that would cause a cringe-inducing buzz on the FD cable and seattube when landing hard. At its current setting, it wasn't an issue at all.

  7. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    112
    derby,

    That's fantastic news!! Please post some pics after Northstar. Looks like I can finally pull the trigger on a new HD. SWEET.

  8. #33
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788

    Northstar ... Slammed it, and rubbed the tape on the seat tube

    Quote Originally Posted by dustyman View Post
    derby,

    That's fantastic news!! Please post some pics after Northstar. Looks like I can finally pull the trigger on a new HD. SWEET.
    I got to Northstar yesterday.

    I was able to bottom travel at least once and could see that the new Neo-moto did lightly scrape the surface of the thee layers of tape I had put on the seat tube. So I added three very thin hand cut shims to the shock shaft under the coils rubber bumper, no more than 1.5mm thick in total. I'll put some fresh tape on and see if it rubs any more.

    The only suspension tuning for Northstar was softening rebound adjusters 1 click both front and rear for the fast and extremely chopped up trail in most places, and to take out a half turn preload, to sag the rear more for a better downhill balance.

    I'm still sore in a couple places. On my third run of the day, second on Flameout, just beginning to get up to speed, I washed the front tire in the middle of a slower speed very deep dusty nearly flat 90 degree turn about half way down Flameout, a single-black-diamond run, and my favorite run for a full suspension trail bike. I must have side-rolled a hidden loose rock trail-braking into the middle under the deep dusty turn. A few bloody scraps and bumps, nothing serious, it could have been much worse. Note to self - get forearm and lower leg pads and a full face helmet. Northstar is treacherous as usual, the rocks protrude more and the dust is deeper than ever this year with no real rain this summer.

    If the guy is reading this, I want to thank one full faced DH bike rider who was first to ride by and stop and questioned me twice if I was OK.

    After assessing my damages to be minor, and cleaning the scraps somewhat and re-aligning a brake lever, I road out to the bottom, where the mobile medic taped me up so I was able to continue riding. I made two more runs down Flameout connecting to Pho-Dog with out using the fireroad shortcut. But my left palm of my thumb was quite sore from the crash and hurt on every bump. So I quit a few runs before I would have liked. I was favoring my left hand and couldn't brake as hard as I wanted (I'm a left handed rear brake'r), and was afraid I'd make a mistake from favoring that hand. I was very sore last night, and didn't think I would ride today.

    But recovered much better than I expected. So took a 4.5 hour non-stop XC ride today, about 25 miles and more than 3500 vertical feet climbing and downhill, ending with the Missing Link and Western States trails. My thumb hurt on the downhills, but otherwise a strong ride, very rocky and dusty but not so bad as Northstar, finishing just before the thunder showers really came down for a good soak in Squaw Valley.

  9. #34
    bikeboatbrewski
    Reputation: scottybinwv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,383
    Very encouraging news! Thanks for all your beta. Hope your hand heals ups fast.

    Now if I can only sell my Cdale moto I could get a Mojo frame started.

  10. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,938

    BB height change from 140 to 160 swap

    So, I'm wondering whether swapping the rear end from 140 to 160 produces a change in BB height? I've read conflicting info. Some riders say they like the lower bb in the 140 setup, but Scot & gang say that the 140 limbo chips position the 200mm shock so that the starting position of the rear wheel is the same as in 160 mode, with extra seat tube clearance at bottom out... that sounds to me like the unweighted bb height would be the same in either mode if the fork is unchanged..... Can anybody comment? Derby, do you think that the bb height difference you've measured is purely from the change in fork? or does the limbo/shock swap alone also affect BB height?

  11. #36
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    So, I'm wondering whether swapping the rear end from 140 to 160 produces a change in BB height? I've read conflicting info. Some riders say they like the lower bb in the 140 setup, but Scot & gang say that the 140 limbo chips position the 200mm shock so that the starting position of the rear wheel is the same as in 160 mode, with extra seat tube clearance at bottom out... that sounds to me like the unweighted bb height would be the same in either mode if the fork is unchanged..... Can anybody comment? Derby, do you think that the bb height difference you've measured is purely from the change in fork? or does the limbo/shock swap alone also affect BB height?
    The 8.5 x 2.5 inch shock positions the swingarm mount slightly more rearward at topout, less than 1/8 inch closer to the seat tube. I'd estimate from the rear alone, the topped out suspension BB height is less than 5/16th inch, ~8mm higher. Most of the BB height increase is from the 20mm taller fork if using the same adjustable travel fork like I had. (Consider my Lyrik u-turn at 140mm travel is 10mm greater a2c than a 140mm Revelation or 140/32 Vanilla RLC. Going from a 140/32 to a 160/35 or 160/36 fork is 30mm greater a2c).

    Using the same Lyrik u-turn fork raised 20mm, with 650b wheels and 160mm travel "limbo chips" and longer shock, the top travel BB height measured 14 1/8 inches. This is 3/8 inch higher than the 13 3/4 inches measured when set up as 140mm with Lyrik at 140mm travel. Sag lowers the BB height to just under 12 inches, ideal for good pedal clearance and low enough for stability.

    I just swapped back to 140mm travel. And it feels lower, the seat tube is steeper and the seat nearly as high as the slacker angle at 160mm travel while sagged and riding. The overall feel is lower center of weight, firmer, quicker handling and less wallow, climbing feels easier, descending not as forgiving.

    In 160mm rear travel I had lowered my fork to 150mm travel for tight trail riding locally. The 140mm set up seem much firmer front and rear, with more weight shifted forward, but does tight trail better, and seems quicker accelerating.

    The Lyrik u-turn is so useful for fine tuning handling when experimenting with 650b conversion on these 140mm to 160mm travel bikes.

  12. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,938
    Hi Derby. Thanks, great info. I was starting to wonder why one would even bother dropping to 140mm for a 650 conversion if the bb height is unchanged, but now I know that's not the case. Who knows when it will happen, but HD140 650b is still in my sites. Your description sounds like just the ticket. Our trails are rough and steep enough to use 160, but so tight and with lots of punchy technical climbs that you pay a price for it. In the meantime, the SL w/ 650b f & r is working better than it ever has. Thanks for the PM, btw....you're right, I need to post a review on the current setup.... it's MONEY.

  13. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by red bank rider View Post
    So I'd like to introduce you to my HD140 with 650B Front and rear.

    First,the important 650B compatibility stuff:
    Rear Wheel is Stans Flow with 28mm rim width and Stans3.3 HD hub
    Rear tire showing is the Pacenti Neo Moto 2.3 width
    Do you know the weight of your wheelset? Very interested to know how it compares to the 26" version of these stans wheels.

  14. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: red bank rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    134
    Sorry - I did not weigh them. My front is a Blunt which I believe is 450g and my rear is a flow which I read is 500g. The 2.3 NeoMotos weigh 750g.
    HTH

  15. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by red bank rider View Post
    Sorry - I did not weigh them. My front is a Blunt which I believe is 450g and my rear is a flow which I read is 500g. The 2.3 NeoMotos weigh 750g.
    HTH
    cool, thanks. stans wheel building site is incomplete, but it appears the weight penalty for the rims and spokes is not that large.

  16. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    235
    Such a great idea! Makes me want a Mojo so badly. Out of curiousity, how do you like the pedalling with a coil shock? standing and seated? My thought is that a dw link is perfect for a coil and wonder why I don't see more bikes with this linkage with coil shocks.

  17. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: red bank rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by daves4mtb View Post
    Might be a great bike. However, at 30 lbs it weighs 3 pounds more than my aluminum Ventana. So, if you spend thousands on newer, lighter parts and carbon bits, it might weigh 27 or 28? I thought the weight was a big selling factor for these?
    I think there are too many component variables between your build or my build when it comes to parts, wheels, tires, etc.

    The proper comparison is to compare frame weights with shock:
    Mojo HD140 w/ RP23 shock: 6.4 lbs
    Ventana El Bastardo w/RP23 shock: 6.4 lbs <-- I assume the bastardo since it's 650b with 5" of travel. Link Reference

    So my components on the Ventana frame would equal 30 lbs, or your components on the carbon HD140 frame would equal 27lbs.
    The weight is a BIG selling factor for the mojo SL. For the Mojo HD, it's about strength per unit weight. Realize that the HD can be built for trail or downhill, where a majority of owners are building it for downhill use. To build an aluminum equivalent (strength wise), you would have to use a much larger/heavier frame like the El Terremoto.

    So you can look at my Mojo HD140-650 as a heavy duty trail/AM bike where my primary goal was 650B wheels, slacker HA and the DW-link with carbon as the added bonus!
    Last edited by red bank rider; 10-24-2011 at 11:29 AM.

  18. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tim-H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by daves4mtb View Post
    I thought the weight was a big selling factor for these?
    The HD selling point is more about high strength and rigidity at a normal weight than a lightweight selling point. The SL and SLR are more aimed at light weight.

    And the two frames are actually the same price.

  19. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by red bank rider View Post
    I think there are too many component variables between your build or my build when it comes to parts, wheels, tires, etc.

    The proper comparison is to compare frame weights with shock:
    Mojo HD140 w/ RP23 shock: 6.4 lbs
    Ventana El Bastardo w/RP23 shock: 6.4 lbs <-- I assume the bastardo since it's 650b with 5" of travel. Link Reference

    So my components on the Ventana frame would equal 30 lbs, or your components on the carbon HD140 frame would equal 27lbs.
    The weight is a BIG selling factor for the mojo SL. For the Mojo HD, it's about strength per unit weight. Realize that the HD can be built for trail or downhill, where a majority of owners are building it for downhill use. To build an aluminum equivalent (strength wise), you would have to use a much larger/heavier frame like the El Terremoto.

    So you can look at my Mojo HD140-650 as a heavy duty trail/AM bike where my primary goal was 650B wheels, slacker HA and the DW-link with carbon as the added bonus!
    Great explanation. When I saw the weight of 2 Mojo HD's over 30lbs I thought to myself that's to much weight for so pricey a frame...but now it makes a bit more sense and I see you could build one up under 30lbs if you want. Nice to know.

    Another question....Do any of the different Mojo frames have more 650B clearance than the other. Some of those pics don't give me a very warm fuzzy feeling they are soooo close.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  20. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    500

    Pros and cons - what am I missing?

    So, I'm 650b curious, and have been thinking seriously about taking the plunge with my new mojo HD. But I need to choose - can't buy two wheelsets of the quality I'd like just at the moment. My buddies are laughing at me for thinking about this, so I wanted to try and lay out what I'm thinking. I've read a lot about this over the years, but never really tried to synthesize it all in one place. Here is an attempt, and I would appreciate comments.

    Pro:
    - smoother ride, easier rolling over rough
    - increased cornering stickyness (for me this is the biggest appeal, the ability to lay it over farther and faster in the corners would be worth a lot to me)
    - much of the big-wheel advantages without big-wheel downsides of tricky geometry, big weight gain, slower acceleration, sluggish handling, etc.
    - Is there any actual efficiency gain?
    - ability to get some big wheel goodness at my height (5'7")
    - bigger wheels for mtb makes intuitive sense to me, but not sold on 29ers for my riding style
    - the tires available are well-regarded (but limited, see below)

    Con:
    - on HD, limited to 2.3 inch tires by clearance which are said to be small for their stated volume (I like to run a bit higher volume, say 2.35-2.4's)
    - limited tire choices (even though the Pacenti's are well regarded, this could be a big negative!)
    - weight gain of, say, 2-300 g rotating mass for equivalent wheels and equivalent volume tires over 26" ?
    - poor clearance for muddy riding
    - might not be really necessary, given the sweetness of the HD suspension.
    - Where the 'travel increasing' effects of the larger wheelsize would be most desirable (e.g. shuttling and lift-served riding), the smaller volume tires would kind of hurt.
    - increased BB height (would have to see how this felt in real life, but my own bias is to worry less about pedal strikes in favor of the lower center of gravity).
    - Frame not designed around wheelsize, so maybe some other compromises here in terms of geometry (?)
    - need to fiddle with the shock to limit travel

    Unanswered questions:
    - how does 650b wheelsize affect things like handling quickness, manualing and wheelieing, etc. on the HD? I like to throw the bike around and ride playfully and aggressively. Not that I'm particularly aggro, but I have the most fun when working the trail.

    I was pretty much sold on the concept but making this list makes me think the size might not be for me until they design a similar bike around it. I would appreciate any thoughts on how I've laid this out. What have I forgotten, assumed falsely, emphasized poorly, etc? I'll edit this list in response, and would really appreciate any input.

  21. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: red bank rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    Another question....Do any of the different Mojo frames have more 650B clearance than the other. Some of those pics don't give me a very warm fuzzy feeling they are soooo close.
    I'll take a stab at this. In order of most 650B clearance:
    Ripley!
    Mojo HD140 (rear doesn't use full 160mm of travel, so no bottoming)
    Mojo HD
    Mojo SL
    Mojo SL-R (nearly impossible)

  22. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,209
    Quote Originally Posted by mikemikemike View Post
    So, I'm 650b curious, and have been thinking seriously about taking the plunge with my new mojo HD. But I need to choose - can't buy two wheelsets of the quality I'd like just at the moment. My buddies are laughing at me for thinking about this, so I wanted to try and lay out what I'm thinking. I've read a lot about this over the years, but never really tried to synthesize it all in one place. Here is an attempt, and I would appreciate comments.

    Pro:
    - smoother ride, easier rolling over rough
    - increased cornering stickyness (for me this is the biggest appeal, the ability to lay it over farther and faster in the corners would be worth a lot to me)
    - much of the big-wheel advantages without big-wheel downsides of tricky geometry, big weight gain, slower acceleration, sluggish handling, etc.
    - Is there any actual efficiency gain?
    - ability to get some big wheel goodness at my height (5'7")
    - bigger wheels for mtb makes intuitive sense to me, but not sold on 29ers for my riding style
    - the tires available are well-regarded (but limited, see below)

    Con:
    - on HD, limited to 2.3 inch tires by clearance which are said to be small for their stated volume (I like to run a bit higher volume, say 2.35-2.4's)
    - limited tire choices (even though the Pacenti's are well regarded, this could be a big negative!)
    - weight gain of, say, 2-300 g rotating mass for equivalent wheels and equivalent volume tires over 26" ?
    - poor clearance for muddy riding
    - might not be really necessary, given the sweetness of the HD suspension.
    - Where the 'travel increasing' effects of the larger wheelsize would be most desirable (e.g. shuttling and lift-served riding), the smaller volume tires would kind of hurt.
    - increased BB height (would have to see how this felt in real life, but my own bias is to worry less about pedal strikes in favor of the lower center of gravity).
    - Frame not designed around wheelsize, so maybe some other compromises here in terms of geometry (?)
    - need to fiddle with the shock to limit travel

    Unanswered questions:
    - how does 650b wheelsize affect things like handling quickness, manualing and wheelieing, etc. on the HD? I like to throw the bike around and ride playfully and aggressively. Not that I'm particularly aggro, but I have the most fun when working the trail.

    I was pretty much sold on the concept but making this list makes me think the size might not be for me until they design a similar bike around it. I would appreciate any thoughts on how I've laid this out. What have I forgotten, assumed falsely, emphasized poorly, etc? I'll edit this list in response, and would really appreciate any input.
    I would always have 26" and 650B. I prefer the 650B at head angles of about 69 deg for singletrack work.Can be a bit sluggish at slacker angles but if you've got open fast trails 650b is great for carving corners. On my 67 degree bikes I prefer 26" on single track. I don't dislike the 650b but my 26" wheels are built light and it feels crisp. With a bike like a mojo that has the potential to be built light it would be a shame to loose that fresh flickability . Having the option of putting a 650b on the front tones it down but carving ability increases, nearly up there with a 29er. So you have the potential to have two bike styles in one . 29er and 26er.

    On AM stuff , 650b for both is great. Definately more stability in 650B and if you run 2.3 neo moto's, very good cornering traction. I've used all sorts of tires and you wont loose much against any 26" tire in cornering traction on a 2.3 Neo and much speed or any traction on the neo 2.1 against any 26 or 29er trail tire.

    On the back I've used both 26 and 650B. Personally I can't feel much difference, may be a slight lift in speed on the 650B on the way down. So I would build up a 26" set with an extra 650B front. I enjoy swapping between both. Just as I like to swap between 29er race bike and 26" trail/AM bike.
    Last edited by gvs_nz; 10-25-2011 at 12:48 AM.

  23. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by red bank rider View Post
    I'll take a stab at this. In order of most 650B clearance:
    Ripley!
    Mojo HD140 (rear doesn't use full 160mm of travel, so no bottoming)
    Mojo HD
    Mojo SL
    Mojo SL-R (nearly impossible)
    So to be totally clear....HD 140 has no issues and the HD (160mm) will rub at full bottom out without spacers.

    red bank rider...could you snap a pic of the tire/seat tube area on your HD140 at full bottom out at some point?

    I have no need for the 160mm travel and I have the same Stans Flows with the Neo Moto 2.3 tires. 150mm fork I'm thinking with a bit extra sag would be sweet.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  24. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: red bank rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    So to be totally clear....HD 140 has no issues and the HD (160mm) will rub at full bottom out without spacers.

    red bank rider...could you snap a pic of the tire/seat tube area on your HD140 at full bottom out at some point?

    I have no need for the 160mm travel and I have the same Stans Flows with the Neo Moto 2.3 tires. 150mm fork I'm thinking with a bit extra sag would be sweet.
    trust me...you don't need a pic. Full bottom out RP23 shock of an HD140 with a 650B 2.3 NeoMoto tire has LOADs of clearance. You can fit your fist in the amount of room that is left.

  25. #50
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788

    Sometimes the whole is greater than the sum of the parts

    Quote Originally Posted by mikemikemike View Post
    So, I'm 650b curious, and have been thinking seriously about taking the plunge with my new mojo HD. But I need to choose - can't buy two wheelsets of the quality I'd like just at the moment. My buddies are laughing at me for thinking about this, so I wanted to try and lay out what I'm thinking. I've read a lot about this over the years, but never really tried to synthesize it all in one place. Here is an attempt, and I would appreciate comments.

    Pro:
    - smoother ride, easier rolling over rough
    - increased cornering stickyness (for me this is the biggest appeal, the ability to lay it over farther and faster in the corners would be worth a lot to me)
    - much of the big-wheel advantages without big-wheel downsides of tricky geometry, big weight gain, slower acceleration, sluggish handling, etc.
    - Is there any actual efficiency gain?
    - ability to get some big wheel goodness at my height (5'7")
    - bigger wheels for mtb makes intuitive sense to me, but not sold on 29ers for my riding style
    - the tires available are well-regarded (but limited, see below)

    Con:
    - on HD, limited to 2.3 inch tires by clearance which are said to be small for their stated volume (I like to run a bit higher volume, say 2.35-2.4's)
    - limited tire choices (even though the Pacenti's are well regarded, this could be a big negative!)
    - weight gain of, say, 2-300 g rotating mass for equivalent wheels and equivalent volume tires over 26" ?
    - poor clearance for muddy riding
    - might not be really necessary, given the sweetness of the HD suspension.
    - Where the 'travel increasing' effects of the larger wheelsize would be most desirable (e.g. shuttling and lift-served riding), the smaller volume tires would kind of hurt.
    - increased BB height (would have to see how this felt in real life, but my own bias is to worry less about pedal strikes in favor of the lower center of gravity).
    - Frame not designed around wheelsize, so maybe some other compromises here in terms of geometry (?)
    - need to fiddle with the shock to limit travel

    Unanswered questions:
    - how does 650b wheelsize affect things like handling quickness, manualing and wheelieing, etc. on the HD? I like to throw the bike around and ride playfully and aggressively. Not that I'm particularly aggro, but I have the most fun when working the trail.

    I was pretty much sold on the concept but making this list makes me think the size might not be for me until they design a similar bike around it. I would appreciate any thoughts on how I've laid this out. What have I forgotten, assumed falsely, emphasized poorly, etc? I'll edit this list in response, and would really appreciate any input.
    You have covered the "parts" very well.

    For me 650b is much greater than the parts or numbers would indicate. Using deep sag the Mojo HD 160 and 140 likes, I like the increased pedal clearance for the rocky trails I like most.

    There are 26" tires that will out corner the best 650b, using more sticky rubber and more aggressive knobs, Minions are a good example.

    If you are curious about 650b, you'd probably like the difference. The smoothness improvement is felt more in small bump terrain. For flowy trails. Rider technique is a much bigger factor when the bumps are big and gnarly.

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 12 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-20-2010, 12:58 PM
  2. lite duty fr/ heavy duty all mountain ride?
    By ecfiffer05 in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-13-2006, 04:37 PM
  3. heavy duty handlebar.........
    By jbordwine in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-15-2006, 05:00 PM
  4. Heavy dude's and heavy duty riders, need your opinion
    By I_8_It_up in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 04-12-2004, 09:03 AM

Posting Permissions

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