Page 2 of 32 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 1581
  1. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,312
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    It takes a big man to admit he was wrong.

    I recommend denial. Never happened...
    Here are the questions I have: with all of the different forks and shocks you tried on the frame, what do you think? Seems like a great arena to have developed some pretty sophisticated thoughts on them.

  2. #52
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    482

    The bike that started it all just got even better...

    In the nearly immediate wake of the what may as well be the non-official "official" release of the Lunchbox PunkAss6, I invite you to take a trip back in time to when our beloved long-travel 29er chunk-schralping machines were as rare as unobtanium:

    Lenz Sport Behemoth

    I would say you would have a difficult time arguing the Lenz Behemoth was the bike that started it all.

    That thread is full of win - well, except for the lycra. Haha! I kid.....I've ridden with plenty of dudes clad in lycra that could put me to shame on the trail.

    ...back on topic, seems as though the Pike/Monarch or VA is the preferred optimal suss setup. ...I'll be building mine up with the 150 Pike, 51mm offset and a VA. If the VA turns out to be too much for me, I'll swap for a Monarch Plus.

    Brown Santa comes down the chimney tonight. A cold beer and a pile of jerky awaits.

  3. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,312
    Quote Originally Posted by jimithng23 View Post
    In the nearly immediate wake of the what may as well be the non-official "official" release of the Lunchbox PunkAss6, I invite you to take a trip back in time to when our beloved long-travel 29er chunk-schralping machines were as rare as unobtanium:

    Lenz Sport Behemoth

    I would say you would have a difficult time arguing the Lenz Behemoth was the bike that started it all.

    That thread is full of win - well, except for the lycra. Haha! I kid.....I've ridden with plenty of dudes clad in lycra that could put me to shame on the trail.

    ...back on topic, seems as though the Pike/Monarch or VA is the preferred optimal suss setup. ...I'll be building mine up with the 150 Pike, 51mm offset and a VA. If the VA turns out to be too much for me, I'll swap for a Monarch Plus.

    Brown Santa comes down the chimney tonight. A cold beer and a pile of jerky awaits.
    Would love to hear your comparison of the VA and Monarch Plus if you get a chance. Not a lot of Vivid Airs on 29ers out there.

  4. #54
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    482

    The bike that started it all just got even better...

    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Would love to hear your comparison of the VA and Monarch Plus if you get a chance. Not a lot of Vivid Airs on 29ers out there.
    I arrived at the decision of the VA on Mikesee's advice - I've ridden neither at this point; had the Fox CTD on my previous Lunchbox. Blew it out after 2 months, had it warrantied, no problems thereafter but I was never really blown away by its performance; it just worked.

    I'll be sure to post up impressions as soon as I get a ride in.

    I wouldn't be surprised if Mikesee chimed in with his thoughts as well.

  5. #55
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,002
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Here are the questions I have: with all of the different forks and shocks you tried on the frame, what do you think? Seems like a great arena to have developed some pretty sophisticated thoughts on them.
    Happy to share my conclusions, but first you need to ask a more specific question. And please keep in mind that my answer is for me, where I live and ride, and that in no way am I suggesting that this bike (in any configuration) would be ideal for anyone else. Horses for courses and all that.

    Non-disclaimer answer:

    The bike that started it all just got even better...-sb13.jpg

    This is the way I've settled on riding it. I *liked* some of the other setups but not the way I *love* this one.

    Cheers,

    MC
    Last edited by mikesee; 03-04-2015 at 05:16 AM.

  6. #56
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,677
    Hawt!
    "Back off, man. I'm a scientist." - Dr. Peter Venkman

    Riding in Helena? Everything you need to know, right here.

  7. #57
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,002
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Nice looking bike. Is the lower BB the only option now or can you still get the 14" BB. I live in rocky/rooty terrain so I appreciate a higher BB.
    Colin's running a 150 fork with (relatively) small tires, and his BB is at 13.5". I've got a 160 fork with higher volume tires and mine sits at 13.8".

    The first proto had a ~14.15" BB, which is where I'd typically prefer it. I noticed, as did a few of the other testers, that with the tire tucked as tight to the BB as this one is, it was difficult to make pedal/ground contact in all of the 'usual spots'. We surmised that the shorter rear end allowed the rear tire to climb up/over the obstacle before your pedals or bash guard had a chance to get there. Clearly that won't/can't always be the case, but it was happening often enough that it felt right to drop the BB a titch to lower the CoG.

    Make sense?

  8. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,312
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Happy to share my conclusions, but first you need to ask a more specific question. And please keep in mind that my answer is for me, where I live and ride, and that in no way am I suggesting that this bike (in any configuration) would be ideal for anyone else. Horses for courses and all that.

    Non-disclaimer answer:

    <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/EAKO9rYenSOTbawaOjYiqB7b25IpCDnuFfoBy9dgzwc?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-M_LysKmOxPQ/UmVSpfx9rjI/AAAAAAAAlSg/rs7SZgxPT7E/s800/sb13.JPG" height="474" width="800" /></a>

    This is the way I've settled on riding it. I *liked* some of the other setups but not the way I *love* this one.

    Cheers,

    MC
    That helps as a starting point. I'm assuming the Monarch Plus has a weight advantage with slight performance disadvantages relative to the Vivid Air or Coil? Am I totally wrong? I'm assuming the performance of the heavier shocks wasn't enough to offset the weight penalty? Did you ever try a CCDB(A) on it? Why go with the Pike over the modded Fox 36? Was it the out of the box compatibility, weight, awesome black stanchions, or is the Pike just a better fork altogether?

  9. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Now we've got a party!

    Mine is a large, I've ridden medium Lenz's before enough to know that I personally wanted a large. That being said, I don't have the chunk/steeps that Mike does so I like a little longer top tube. Plus he's pretty short I'm like a whole 2 1/4 inches taller, at least.

    I have mine set up with the 150mm Pike and M+ at the moment, although I might try the CCDBair again since I already have one. The M+ seems to be a good fit and match for the Pike.

  10. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,312
    So I'm definitely not getting one of these, but if I did, how long would I have to wait for it?

  11. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Mike could probably answer that more accurately, but I can guarantee you that it is worth the wait. I'm fairly confident in saying that there isn't another bike out there right now like this one since I've owned most of them (except the E29).

  12. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,312
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Mike could probably answer that more accurately, but I can guarantee you that it is worth the wait. I'm fairly confident in saying that there isn't another bike out there right now like this one since I've owned most of them (except the E29).
    I have that funny feeling... a feeling you probably get about 6 times a year... that feeling when you see a bike and you realize it's inevitable. Maybe I should just wait until you are ready to sell yours :P

  13. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,312
    Just another comment on the bike: this is the first Lenz I've seen that I didn't think was fugly. In fact, it looks great. That raw finish does wonders. Was never a fan of the 1980s roller rink graphics.

  14. #64
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,002
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    That helps as a starting point. I'm assuming the Monarch Plus has a weight advantage with slight performance disadvantages relative to the Vivid Air or Coil? Am I totally wrong? I'm assuming the performance of the heavier shocks wasn't enough to offset the weight penalty? Did you ever try a CCDB(A) on it? Why go with the Pike over the modded Fox 36? Was it the out of the box compatibility, weight, awesome black stanchions, or is the Pike just a better fork altogether?
    Can't say that I ever weighed the shocks, but when you factor in all around performance the M+ was/is the clear winner. If I was a shuttle monkey I might feel differently, likewise if this was a park-only bike, but for the all-day/everywhere way that I ride it, I greatly preferred the M+ over all the others mentioned. I ran both H and M tune M+'s, and could make either work. I prefer the H tune because (assuming similar/identical pressures) I sit a bit higher in the travel at any given point. No change in bottom out resistance or small bump sensitivity that I could feel.

    Pike feels worlds better than either air or coil 36's on small stuff, every bit as good on medium and large, is lighter, and has a rational and creak-free wheel removal system.

  15. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    I'm with you on the raw finish. It definitely shoots it into badassery. Me sell a bike? NEVER!

    I always say it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission

    Before Mike sent me that infamous teaser email back in the summer, I had resigned to the fact that I was gonna end up getting an Enduro29 even though I've never longed for a Specialized and really didn't want one. I wanted sub-17 inch stays, piggyback shock capabilities and long travel. Thankfully the "Shortbox" came along and saved me.

    I'd much rather hand over my $$$ to Devin than the Evil Empire and get a bike made in the States with a 150mm rearend. Plus it is nice having a bike that not everyone else has.

  16. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,312
    Here's another question: What is the 150mm wide, XX1 compatible rear hub of choice? Why not 157?

  17. #67
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,002
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Here's another question: What is the 150mm wide, XX1 compatible rear hub of choice? Why not 157?
    I've got DT 350's, 240's, and 440's laced in 150. Didn't see much (any?) added benefit to the 157's personally, so I stuck with 150. But Devin did ask/offer to do 157, so I'm sure it's on the table if you've got your heart set on it.

    Hope EVO's are currently available in 150 or 157 w/XX1 as well.

  18. #68
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    482

    The bike that started it all just got even better...

    Not implying it's the "hub of choice" but I run the Pro II EVO laced to a Salsa Gordo Mikesee built up for my previous Lunchbox.

    Has been great so far, no complaints, stiff and strong.

  19. #69
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Frame weight was right around 7.6 lbs w/o shock, bike as pictured above with pedals, sealant etc etc is 29.5 lbs. Not an XC bike, but more than capable for anything you want to throw at it.

    I had a Mammoth, and with the 5 inch rockers on the Lunchbox, I can't tell much in the way of difference in pedaling efficiency. The frame weight difference is about 1.5 lbs between the frames.

    I'm curious if Devin is planning on a Mammoth with 16.75 inch stays in the future, that would be a delight as well.

    For me, not being a suspension tuning guru, I appreciate the simplicity of the Monarch plus. I'm sure the DBair would be sublime if I took the time to try and set it up properly.

    Not speaking for Devin, but I very much doubt the geo or numbers on the Mammoth will be changing. Very different bikes with very different design intent.

    My med frame with seat collar, shock hardware, but no shock is 6.8#.

    One more pic from the early days of sussing out this chassis:

    The bike that started it all just got even better...-4a4b9926.jpg
    Last edited by mikesee; 03-04-2015 at 05:11 AM.

  20. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    484
    I am digging this USA made bike!What is the wheelbase and standover on the medium size frame?How wide can we go on the tire size out back?Would be nice to have an optional rear with a little longer stays to fit the surly knard/dirt wizard tires.I am looking for a one bike quiver.

  21. #71
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Now we've got a party!

    Mine is a large, I've ridden medium Lenz's before enough to know that I personally wanted a large. That being said, I don't have the chunk/steeps that Mike does so I like a little longer top tube. Plus he's pretty short I'm like a whole 2 1/4 inches taller, at least.

    I have mine set up with the 150mm Pike and M+ at the moment, although I might try the CCDBair again since I already have one. The M+ seems to be a good fit and match for the Pike.
    not pretending I know how tall MC is... so you're what, 6'1"-ish?

    most of the riding I'll be doing won't be the crazy steep/chunk like out west, but I have plenty of trails and places to go to get silly.

  22. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    I'm 6ft ish.

  23. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flip D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Colin's running a 150 fork with (relatively) small tires, and his BB is at 13.5". I've got a 160 fork with higher volume tires and mine sits at 13.8".

    The first proto had a ~14.15" BB, which is where I'd typically prefer it. I noticed, as did a few of the other testers, that with the tire tucked as tight to the BB as this one is, it was difficult to make pedal/ground contact in all of the 'usual spots'. We surmised that the shorter rear end allowed the rear tire to climb up/over the obstacle before your pedals or bash guard had a chance to get there. Clearly that won't/can't always be the case, but it was happening often enough that it felt right to drop the BB a titch to lower the CoG.

    Make sense?
    I'm glad you put that in writing. When we see this in the Specialized literature next year as one of their "innovations" we'll know who the original author is. Too bad they have probably been in McLaren's wind tunnel testing their new Enduro seat post clamp to sell next years model.

    Back on topic

    Any downsides to chainstays this short for this type of bike? Skittish on the downs? Completely different bike for completely different terrain, but my Atlas made everything easier and much more fun compared to my Rip9 with none of the downside people say about short CS.

    Been looking for a bike for my Snowshoe, WV and WNC trips. Initially, I can't think of a box this bike doesn't check.

  24. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Mike can chime in as well, but I've found that the front end stays planted better on this one than other bikes I've ridden with over an inch longer stays. You have traction galore, planted front, etc. The only limiting factor is me.

    The only people claiming short stays aren't important are the people not riding 'em.

    I haven't found a downside at all thus far, except I don't have enough time to ride it.

    Downhill stability is improved due to the lower BB and the fact that your front/center is longer with your butt over the rear wheel. The WB is long enough to be stable, but the rear is so short it keeps it lively and maneuverable for everything else.

    It really does tick all the boxes. I'm very picky about ,well everything, and I can't think of one thing that I would want that this one doesn't have.
    Last edited by Colin+M; 10-22-2013 at 05:49 AM. Reason: proofreading fail

  25. #75
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by Flip D View Post
    ...I can't think of a box this bike doesn't check.
    exactly what I said about 2 months and a few dollars ago.

    ;-)

  26. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    I'm curious if Devin is planning on a Mammoth with 16.75 inch stays in the future, that would be a delight as well.
    That would be an intriguing bike, especially as a "Quiver Killer" like the Niner ad that is flashing on my screen as I type this (interestingly the RDO didn't quite fulfill that for you, eh?).

    I'd actually prefer the travel & rear spacing of this beast, but for some strange reason still like the option of using a bottle. Presumably a Punkass Mammoth would offer that, but at the expense of running a piggy back shock?
    ''It seems like a bit of a trend, everyone trying to make things longer over the last couple of years" Sam Hill

  27. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Quote Originally Posted by jimithng23 View Post
    exactly what I said about 2 months and a few dollars ago.

    ;-)
    Ditto.

  28. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Quote Originally Posted by miles e View Post
    That would be an intriguing bike, especially as a "Quiver Killer" like the Niner ad that is flashing on my screen as I type this (interestingly the RDO didn't quite fulfill that for you, eh?).

    I'd actually prefer the travel & rear spacing of this beast, but for some strange reason still like the option of using a bottle. Presumably a Punkass Mammoth would offer that, but at the expense of running a piggy back shock?
    I still have the RDO, as I wasn't sure how versatile a 150mm travel, 16.75 inch CS, 150mm Rear spaced bike would be but I have to say that I have been pleasantly surprised and I had extremely high expectations.

    The Niner does have a water bottle mount though

  29. #79
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    482
    Speaking of 150 rear spacing...how would you compare the rear of the RDO vs the PunkAss Lunchbox?

    Every bike I've been on since owning a 150 rear 'Box, I can feel the rear flex when pushing in corners, maneuvering through rocky chunk, or slamming through a root garden.

    Up until that point, it was something I never really noticed. In fact, I thought it was simply an inherent trait of riding a bike through rough terrain.

    Fool me once...

  30. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    I hate to say it's night and day, but it's night and day. Seriously.

    For example, you can take the rear wheel out on the Lenz and "try" to push the dropouts towards each other and it won't budge, seriously it won't. Now imagine that stiffness plus a 150mm wheel and it is holy effin shizz stiff. Steamroller Stiff. Confidence inspiring stiff. I'm gonna get myself in some trouble stiff.

  31. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flip D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post

    The Niner does have a water bottle mount though
    I was going to put down that it didn't have water bottle mounts for the lunch rides. I have a feeling that if you have this bike, it gets picked 99% of the time.

    My A-ha moment with chainstays came when I bought a Tracer 2. Rode it 26er, then converted with a tiny rear tire and finally with the longer .5" 650b dropouts. It was harder to loft the front end and hopping off ledges and boulders( out west ya'll probably call them rocks.) It lost it's mojo and I lost my confidence. I know from my MX days, bad things always follow so I sold it and never looked back.

    I see that MC is rockin' Derby rims also.
    Last edited by Flip D; 10-21-2013 at 07:25 PM. Reason: spelling

  32. #82
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    482
    Ha!

    I know exactly what you're talking about WRT to "pushing" the dropouts in...they won't budge.

    Kinda makes a person snicker when you see the ad copy "142 rear end for maximum stiffness!"

  33. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Quote Originally Posted by Flip D View Post
    I was going to put down that it didn't have water bottle mounts for the lunch rides. I have a feeling that if you have this bike, it gets picked 99% of the time.

    My A-ha moment with chainstays came when I bought a Tracer 2. Rode it 26er, then converted with a tiny rear tire and finally with the longer .5" 650b dropouts. It was harder to loft the front end and hopping off ledges and boulders( out west ya'll probably call them rocks.) It lost it's mojo and I lost my confidence. I know from my MX days, bad things always follow so I sold it and never looked back.

    I see that MC is rockin' Derby rims also.
    Yeah, it's hard to go back once you've had a spin on shorter stays, especially when it climbs and descends so well with no perceivable downsides.

  34. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Quote Originally Posted by jimithng23 View Post
    Ha!

    I know exactly what you're talking about WRT to "pushing" the dropouts in...they won't budge.

    Kinda makes a person snicker when you see the ad copy "142 rear end for maximum stiffness!"
    Yeah there definitely is a difference between marketing mumbo jumbo and reality. I'm ok not seeing my bike in full page ads or flashing at me while I peruse MTBR because I already know I have the baddest Betty on the block sitting in the garage.

  35. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,428
    So I'm on the Lenzsport website and I see old geo numbers, graphics, and no Rawthic option. Am I looking in the wrong place?

  36. #86
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by scvkurt03 View Post
    So I'm on the Lenzsport website and I see old geo numbers, graphics, and no Rawthic option. Am I looking in the wrong place?
    Nope. The site hasn't been updated yet.

  37. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    The one thing you can learn from the website is that Devin is really really great at designing and building...bikes

    Geo wise the only things that are different are the chainstays, WB and BB height. With 150mm Fork~13.5, 160mm Fork~13.8 (varies slightly with tire choices of course).

    Mike could probably provide whatever numbers you're after however.

  38. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,428
    A lot of the important numbers have already been hashed out. This type of bike is going to be my next one, for sure, but I'd love it if I could hold out long enough for you, Colin, to have purchased and ridden an Enduro, WFO, TrailFox, and the 'Box.

    Get right on that, will ya?

    I'm on a new alloy RIP right now. Would you say the Lenz climbs anywhere near as well as your RDO?

  39. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Quote Originally Posted by scvkurt03 View Post
    A lot of the important numbers have already been hashed out. This type of bike is going to be my next one, for sure, but I'd love it if I could hold out long enough for you, Colin, to have purchased and ridden an Enduro, WFO, TrailFox, and the 'Box.

    Get right on that, will ya?
    Yessir, right away! Although I can tell you that I have no interest in the Enduro or the TrailFox so i wouldn't hold my breath. Also the only WFO I would be interested in would be a carbon version RDO as I really do like my Rip RDO.

  40. #90
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Flip D View Post
    Any downsides to chainstays this short for this type of bike?
    In ~2 months of riding I haven't really been able to find one. If I *really* pick nits, I'd say it's a bit unstable at *really* high speeds--think bike park flow trails, pinned when chasing buddies and overshooting trannies. That was yet another vote cast to lower the BB a titch.

  41. #91
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    The only people claiming short stays are unimportant are the people not riding 'em.
    Fixed.

    Agreed on the rest.

  42. #92
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,015
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post


    By late 2006 we'd realized the need for shorter chainstays and a titch more travel, so Devin debuted the LunchBox with 17.2" stays and 6" of squish.
    You keep saying that, and I know it helps you tell your story, but the Lenz site has listed 17.375 for the last few years, so 17.2 vs. 17.4, who is correct, you or Lenz?

    Like I said before, I'm glad to see options. I've been waiting years for these bikes.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  43. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    41
    After riding the loaner from mikesee, one of the most telling things is that for two full days of riding I never once took the rear shock out of the "full open" position. I didn't realize this until just a few minutes ago, but it didn't matter whether I was going thru the chunk on a descent or standing and (trying to) stomp up a punchy techy climb. I never craved more platform....
    www.bicyclestudiogj.com
    Custom 29er builds and bike fit news
    Building bikes that I'd want to ride...since 2007

  44. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,905
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Fixed.

    Agreed on the rest.
    Oops. Thanks

  45. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    45
    I will have to keep an eye on this and other similar threads... I love my Leviathan (Thanks again for that Mikesee, 3 seasons with a few drivetrain revisions and still going strong), but with all the DH friendly trail opening around the Upper Midwest it might finally be time to look into a second FS bike. Sounds like it might be a lot like my Yelli Screamy, but with suspension.

    I did meet a guy who had a 650b Lunchbox when I was in Spearfish, SD for the Dakota 5-0 and that was what really piqued my interest in looking for something with longer legs.

  46. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    484
    lenz is gonna do the behemoth with the short stays also.Just emailed for the geo chart for the new lunchbox.

  47. #97
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Attachment 840329

    The new and improved Lenz Lunchbox.

    Short chainstays? Check. 16.75 inches measured the honest way, from the center of the rear axle to the center of the BB.

    Travel? Check. 150mm.

    Stealth Dropper post routing? Check.

    Clean-ass cable routing? Check. Rear derailleur cable runs down the downtube, inside the rear chainstay and pops out right at the derailleur. Nice.

    Piggyback shocks? Check. Pick your favorite, it fits.

    150mm rear hub spacing? Check. Props to Banshee for doing this as well. It matters much more than the 15mm vs 20mm fork argument.

    Stiff as shizzzzzzz? Check. With the rear wheel removed, you can't budge the rear triangle. I've never had a bike that even comes close to this one in this regard.

    More pics to come. I've been too busy grinning and riding to take pics.

    Props to Devin Lenz on making a masterpiece, literally. He made it, with his hands, in his shop, in Colorado and it's a functional work of art.

    Forgot to add, BB height is 13.5 inches with the 150mm Pike. This improvement was huge for me as I always felt the previous model's BB height was a tad tall for east coast carving. Now it slays corners. I don't have the chunk and chunder like out west, so the additional height was a hinderance to getting that "in the bike" feel. Problem solved.
    150 Check
    I can use my CCDBa Check
    Short stays Check.

    That BB height has me interested. Perfect IMO. Even for Chunk. NOt sure how he did it because the pre-pro I saw from Mikesee was something like 14.25" HIgh BB's feel hobby horse to me at slow speeds. They have their advantages, but I don't like the feel.

    I have been off Lenz frames for a few years, but this one has me interested.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  48. #98
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305
    Quote Originally Posted by jimithng23 View Post
    I know the bike in johndubs photos is a medium. Can't speak to Colin's.

    On a good day I'm 6'1"... Coming off a 2012 large Lunchbox. Loved the bike immensely but with the revisions Devin had made with the new version, I had to get my grubby paws on one.

    That said, after much debate and conversation with a few peeps in the know, I opted for a medium. I felt the large was a bit long in the TT, mostly in the chunk. Looking for the medium to be a bit quicker and more playful.

    The Lunchbox just begs to get rowdy no matter what trail you're on.
    6'1" here, and I disliked the large LB. The Medium was just right.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  49. #99
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Colin's running a 150 fork with (relatively) small tires, and his BB is at 13.5". I've got a 160 fork with higher volume tires and mine sits at 13.8".

    The first proto had a ~14.15" BB, which is where I'd typically prefer it. I noticed, as did a few of the other testers, that with the tire tucked as tight to the BB as this one is, it was difficult to make pedal/ground contact in all of the 'usual spots'. We surmised that the shorter rear end allowed the rear tire to climb up/over the obstacle before your pedals or bash guard had a chance to get there. Clearly that won't/can't always be the case, but it was happening often enough that it felt right to drop the BB a titch to lower the CoG.

    Make sense?
    I found in hardtail testing that a short rear allows you to have a very low BB and still get away without hanging too much on ledges because the rear wheel hits the rock sooner. Get it?

    At least I think that is what you are saying. Best of both worlds IMO.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  50. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    233
    This bike is relevant to my interests.

Page 2 of 32 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What bike got you started????
    By eddievettelt1 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 12-20-2013, 02:46 AM
  2. If you started riding a bike to lose weight...
    By muddytire in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 01-01-2013, 12:04 PM
  3. Getting Started....Buy the bike...What to buy?
    By mrbmeisen in forum Bikepacking and Bike Expedition
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-11-2012, 06:30 PM
  4. Getting started. What should I do with my bike?
    By ncologerojr in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-04-2012, 04:15 PM
  5. Good bike for getting started?
    By bgowland in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-29-2011, 08:01 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
  •