Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 1645
  1. #101
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,309
    Finally, I have to say that a couple other things have happened to make this bike perfectly timed:

    1. PIKE. Amazingly best fork ever. I love it every time I ride. It converted me from rigid the way George Costanza converts hetero women into lesbians.

    2. DHF tires.

    The package is amazing, and the thought that I can use a CCDB on the Box, lose nearly an inch of wheelbase, keep my BB where I like it has the wheels spinning.

    Sorry Keith from Banshee. We can agree to disagree that longish stays are a good idea on 29" bikes.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  2. #102
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by mxer View Post
    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.
    My medium production frame has a 45.5" wheelbase, 16.72" stays, and 29.5" standover.

    I've run 2.5" Dissents on MTX33's as well as 2.5" Minion DHF's on P35's and Derby rims. Plenty of clearance for both.

    I have zero interest in running Knard's or Dirt Wizard's on this bike--you'd never be able to keep air in them, and I tend to like riding more than fixing flats.

  3. #103
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Enel View Post
    Finally, I have to say that a couple other things have happened to make this bike perfectly timed:

    1. PIKE. Amazingly best fork ever. I love it every time I ride. It converted me from rigid the way George Costanza converts hetero women into lesbians.

    2. DHF tires.

    The package is amazing, and the thought that I can use a CCDB on the Box, lose nearly an inch of wheelbase, keep my BB where I like it has the wheels spinning.

    Sorry Keith from Banshee. We can agree to disagree that longish stays are a good idea on 29" bikes.

    I'm thinking that a certain well-loved Prime frame is going to be for sale in a few weeks...

  4. #104
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,309
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    I'm thinking that a certain well-loved Prime frame is going to be for sale in a few weeks...

    It has at least one more trip in it. I love the bike, but I think it can be improved.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  5. #105
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Enel View Post
    It has at least one more trip in it. I love the bike, but I think it can be improved.
    I meant Monday after that trip.

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    506
    Thanks Mikesee I appreciate the info!

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Enel View Post
    It has at least one more trip in it. I love the bike, but I think it can be improved.
    I was wondering when you'd chime in here

    There isn't anything the Prime does that this doesn't do better. The rear end on the 'Box is stiffer as well. I'm not hatin' on the Prime, just sayin'.

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    283
    Quote Originally Posted by mxer View Post
    lenz is gonna do the behemoth with the short stays also.Just emailed for the geo chart for the new lunchbox.
    Now that is intriguing. The LB looks awesome, but overkill for my local riding. A punkass Behemoth on the other hand...tempting, very tempting.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    177
    ^^ Interesting indeed. Curious to see the weight spread from Mammoth -> Punk Behemoth -> Punk LB frames.

    I have this Pike fork sitting in my garage along with some other sweet bits and they just need to go on SOMEthing...and the decision keeps getting harder (it's a good problem to have!)

  10. #110
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by B. Rock View Post
    ^^ Interesting indeed. Curious to see the weight spread from Mammoth -> Punk Behemoth -> Punk LB frames.

    I have this Pike fork sitting in my garage along with some other sweet bits and they just need to go on SOMEthing...and the decision keeps getting harder (it's a good problem to have!)
    Life is good, You can take a good bike & remove the fork & then you are left with a bike that needs a new Fork & a Fork that needs a new bike.

    I used to not have enough wheel sets for my bikes & now I don't have enough bikes for my wheel sets.
    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Thats my problem, I have enough parts lying around for 2 or 3 bikes so I keep wanting to hang the parts on new frames

  12. #112
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Thats my problem, I have enough parts lying around for 2 or 3 bikes so I keep wanting to hang the parts on new frames
    Parts are so much easier to find when you bolt them to a frame.

    Then you get to order more spares.
    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  13. #113
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Enel View Post
    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.
    We're saying the same thing.

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: highrustler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by Enel View Post
    6'1" here, and I disliked the large LB. The Medium was just right.
    Enel,

    I owned a MED Lunch Box (which was stolen after 4 rides) and at 5'11" my knees would hit the controls on tight turns with a 70mm stem. How could you ride a MED at your height? My inseam is an average 32". The new LB has me tempted, but logic says I shouldn't be on a large, with riders taller than me riding the same size. Confused.

  15. #115
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,309
    Quote Originally Posted by highrustler View Post
    Enel,

    I owned a MED Lunch Box (which was stolen after 4 rides) and at 5'11" my knees would hit the controls on tight turns with a 70mm stem. How could you ride a MED at your height? My inseam is an average 32". The new LB has me tempted, but logic says I shouldn't be on a large, with riders taller than me riding the same size. Confused.
    Dunno. My legs are longer and therefore my torso is shorter. I size for torso and let my legs deal with it. 60mm stem on mine. Ran the bars pretty low as well.

    Fit is subjective.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  16. #116
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,192
    Quote Originally Posted by Enel View Post
    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.
    Agree. Would prefer the pedaling characteristics of the BMC or 9er, but the geometry is getting dialed. My 13.2" bottom bracket is great. With 29er wheels your approach angles change and you don't have as many problems as the tippy 26ers that would high-center easily. Been DH riding and racing and no problems there (with plenty of big roots to catch on and abrupt drop-offs to possibly hang up on). The other thing is that riding on 29er wheels, you want to feel "in" the bike and not way over the top and disconnected. Old long and high 29ers just feel crappy compared to a low dialed in 26er on a downhill or fast snappy trail. Newer 29ers like this Lenz completely change that (I'm riding similar geometry on my 29er). It's still a 29er, but it's finally a 29er that rips and allows the chassis to take advantage of the wheel size to the highest degree, rather than be held back by sub-optimal geometry.

    16.7-17.2 stays, 6" of travel, 67 HA, 13.2-13.6" BB, these numbers make for ripping bikes, especially with today's lighter carbon 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.

  17. #117
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    Took delivery of my frame today.

    Unboxed, built as far as I could get without getting the crown race set.

    This frame in Rawthic looks amazing - industrial & mean, ready to get filthy and stomp the s##t out of some gnarly trail. However, I'd imagine this finish isn't for everyone...it's.....for lack of a better term, RAW, living up to it's name. It ain't purty by any means, but I love it.

    Should have the build completed tomorrow...pics forthcoming!

    ...cannot wait to ride this beast.

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noosa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,620
    Quote Originally Posted by jbsocal View Post
    Colin,

    In

    Does the new frame take the same size shock (7.875 x 2.0, 200x51)?

    I hope they update the Lunchbox specs on their site...

    JB
    I'm interested in what size shock the new LB is running too.

  19. #119
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485

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

    The VA I'm running is 200x57

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    65
    Hey Guys, just wanted to let you know that we are also doing the new Behemoth with the super short chain-stays. It will have the new slick looking top tube, but the down-tube will stay the same as it is now to keep the frame lighter. So the Moth will be a lighter version of the box with 5" travel. So if you like the Box, but want something a bit more XC oriented, the behemoth is a good choice. Email us at sales@lenzsport.com if you want to see the geometry chart for either the Box or the Moth.

    Thanks,
    Nick@Lenz Sport


    The bike that started it all just got even better...-behemoth-2014-punkass-medium-drawing.jpg

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by highrustler View Post
    Enel,

    I owned a MED Lunch Box (which was stolen after 4 rides) and at 5'11" my knees would hit the controls on tight turns with a 70mm stem. How could you ride a MED at your height? My inseam is an average 32". The new LB has me tempted, but logic says I shouldn't be on a large, with riders taller than me riding the same size. Confused.
    Hi, Nick @ Lenz Sport here. I had a similar issue with the medium lunchbox. I'm just over 6', and with a 32" inseam. I go large for my frames. Medium Box rode great, but my knees got intimate with the controls from time to time. It depends a lot on riding style too. If this bike is your "freeride" trail bike, perhaps one size down is good so you can have a more compact bike for drops and such. You may just have to deal on the climbs and get used to it. If you want to use this bike for more longer rides with lots of climbing, I would go with the large. Also, remember that standover heights on the new LB and Moth are going to be lower, so at 5'11" and a 32" inseam, you should have no problems being comfy on a large frame.

    thanks,
    Nick@Lenz Sport
    sales@lenzsport.com (email me anytime)

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by B. Rock View Post
    Weight? And 1x only, yes?

    Like the way the Lenz's ride. Torn between this and Mammoth for a one bike quiver. The short CS's and burliness of the 'box are appealing, but the weight and possible efficiency increase of the mammoth make it tough to choose.

    Also curious to your thoughts on the monarch plus vs CCDBA (I think you had one on a Spider Comp?)
    and the new Behemoth will be right in between the box and the Mammoth. It will have the short chainstays like the box, so maybe that would be the choice for you. you can see my thread below with the line drawing of the new behemoth.

    Nick@Lenz Sport
    sales@lenzsport.com

  23. #123
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485

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

    Piggyback shock is not an option on the Behemoth, I believe. So if that's a factor in your decision...

  24. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    65
    that's correct. If you need the piggy back shock, the LB is the one. We can do 5 inch travel LB frames too. we just don't advertise that option.

    Nick@Lenz Sport

  25. #125
    oh crap...
    Reputation: farmerfrederico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    540
    jimithing...cannot wait to see your bike! I am about ready to add the LB Punckass to the stable along side the Milk Money. Rawthic is my color choice as well. Hopefully we'll be able to connect when you come out west for the next trip. I don't think I'll have mine put together until spring though...gonna put a deposit on frame and then start collecting parts so that my wife doesn't add up the total cost : ) Gotta connect with mikesee about a wheelset - will be my second from him.
    Grow some food for yourself.

  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by jimithng23 View Post
    Piggyback shock is not an option on the Behemoth, I believe. So if that's a factor in your decision...
    Quote Originally Posted by wigston View Post
    that's correct. If you need the piggy back shock, the LB is the one. We can do 5 inch travel LB frames too. we just don't advertise that option.

    Nick@Lenz Sport
    Not to derail the thread, but according to the measurement for the shock on the new Behemoth, a CCDBAcs would fit. Any reason not to run it?

    For those that have experience with the CCDBA, how hard was it to get setup without a base tune starting point from CC? I'm pretty close to ordering a Behemoth, but I want to run a better shock and must admit I'm a little intimidated by the CCDBA, but everything I read tends to suggest it's worth the trouble though.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  27. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    I think it is a frame clearance issue, not a shock measurement issue. This is the first production Lunchbox to fit a piggyback shock, another reason why I jumped all over it.

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    "Official" shock size is 200x51 for the Punk-Box.

  29. #129
    used to be RipRoar
    Reputation: TraxFactory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Posts
    2,039
    The new LB as me salivating over building up a new bike!, the thing looks awesome with the BB all tucked next to the wheel. Any chance of riding one in the Nor Cal area? or even the 650Box!

  30. #130
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    "Official" shock size is 200x51 for the Punk-Box.
    I stand corrected. ;-)

  31. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Notice that I said "Official" wink wink

  32. #132
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485

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

    Haha! We're on the same page...

    So my PunkAss is all built, ready to shred. Shakedown trail ride tomorrow morning.

    A few notes from my build:

    - PunkAss short and wide rear end creates a bit of a...process, I'll call it...with using standard spacing on the bottom bracket cups and crankset. Not much more to say than it's a trial and error process.

    - The medium frame looks small and compact. In fact, it's surprising looking at the bikes overall size knowing it's a 150/160mm travel 29er. Coming from the "old" large Lunchbox frame, the medium fits well. In just riding around my neighborhood the last coupla nights I can feel this size frame is quicker and more nimble. Really looking forward to how this translates to feel on the trail.

    - Something, somewhere (I can only think its in the drive train) is creaking/crunching/groaning. Only happens with medium and above pedal force in the smallest half of the 11-speed cassette. I dug up a thread here discussing this issue - the fix was either 1) remove the cassette and grease the body of the XD driver & cassette carrier. 2) remove the RD and grease the bolt/hanger interface. 3) remove the cap on the clutch mech and slather grease in there. 4) warranty the RD.

    I did the first 2, haven't been able to manage the removal of the bolt covering the clutch mechanism. The noise is still there, but not as prevalent as it was last night. Also removed the reverb post, cleaned and applied a thin layer of grease. Checked seat rails. BB cups are tight, crank bolt bottomed out, chainring bolts all tight. RD is brand new. XO1 group, except crank is RF SIXC and ring is RF 30t narrow/wide. Pissing me off....hoping its in the clutch mech.

    So...ya. Built, rolling, and ready to hit the trail but not without some bumps in the road.

    Hoping to put up some pics tomorrow.

    Anyone else care to share build tips/tricks, or other experiences?

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,500

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

    I had the same creak issue with my brand new X0/Wolf Tooth 1x10 setup. I tried everything but nothing seemed to work for the first few rides. As soon as I gave up, the creaks started to disappear til they were inexplicably gone. My best guess is that the drivetrain had to "settle in" - I'm sure all the grease and torqued to spec bolts helped. I didn't have this problem with an earlier XT build, FWIW.

    Edit: now that I think of it, my pedals were the last creaky holdout.

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    I had an X9 type 2 derailleur that was guilty of this. It was also stiff as sh*t to move the cage forward into the locked open position to change the wheel out.

  35. #135
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    Don't wanna derail this thread anymore than I have.

    Tore down the drivetrain again tonight, went through everything once more, gonna put nearly 25 miles of trail on it tomorrow.

    REALLY looking forward to it.

  36. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by wigston View Post
    Hey Guys, just wanted to let you know that we are also doing the new Behemoth with the super short chain-stays. It will have the new slick looking top tube, but the down-tube will stay the same as it is now to keep the frame lighter. So the Moth will be a lighter version of the box with 5" travel. So if you like the Box, but want something a bit more XC oriented, the behemoth is a good choice. Email us at sales@lenzsport.com if you want to see the geometry chart for either the Box or the Moth.

    Thanks,
    Nick@Lenz Sport


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Behemoth-2014-Punkass medium drawing.jpg 
Views:	1262 
Size:	72.6 KB 
ID:	841240
    Hi Nick,
    Thanks for the info. Do you have any picks of an XL Lunchbox with the new Punkass rear and swoopy toptube? Might have to dump my e29for a local bike made here in Colorado.

  37. #137
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    Shakedown ride = success.

    Creak = gone.

    Ride = amazing.

    ...I'd embellish more but I'm goin' riding again.

  38. #138
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by jimithng23 View Post
    Shakedown ride = success.

    Creak = gone.

    Ride = amazing.

    ...I'd embellish more but I'm goin' riding again.
    Pics--or it never happened.

  39. #139
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Pics--or it never happened.
    crappy iPhone shots:





    not your quality, Mikesee, but it's all I got right now. ;-)

  40. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    506
    I am drooling boys!Please keep the pics coming!How about some pics of the left side.LOL

  41. #141
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    another crappy iPhone shot with shaky hands...

    non-drive side, per request ;-)


  42. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    506
    Thnx jim23!Soon as i get my ducks in a row i am ordering one.

  43. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,827
    Let's see some ride/trail pics worthy of all that bike!


  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,500
    Dang guys, let the man ride his bike in peace!

  45. #145
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by kragu View Post
    Dang guys, let the man ride his bike in peace!
    haha! thanks for that. ;-)

    hoping to go out today for some more interesting trail and action shots.

    first couple of rides I was more focused on shaking the build out and dialing in the suspension. the VA was packing up on me through high speed root gardens and such...quick adjustment and good to go.

    loving the Pike/VA combo. I had some reservations that the VA may have been overkill; those thoughts are gone.

    I'll be sure to post up more thoughts as I get more time on the bike.

    Sun's out, time to ride.

  46. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    702
    OP: Are you the same Colin+M that wrote this a few months ago? if you are - man, you go through a lot of amazing bikes! would love to hear some comparisons and wondering what your ride will be next month, but for meantime enjoy your new LB.

    "Well I've owned the LTc, SB95 and now the Ripley.

    The Ripley for me is my "one bike to rule them all" as I tend to keep the drops and jumps under 3ft and it pedals so damn well. Literally if you turn the crank, the bike is going forward whether it be uphill/downhill/flat ground. This is the best pedaling bike I've ever ridden, period. It is almost freaky how quick it is to be honest. I couldn't believe how fast I was on my "home trail" today and I don't think I gave up anything on the descents. The 120mm of travel feels like much more because it is so well executed. It is hardtail fast when you pedal, in or out of the saddle, and supple to the max on the downs.

    I liked the SB95 I had, but nothing about it really wowed me to be honest. It was heavy and very middle of the road. I do think that the sb95c however should really propel it to true "super bike " status.

    The LTc, although the Geo chart would mislead, really likes to be pointed downhill and was very easy to pop off jumps and felt very comfortable in the air. On the downside, it pedaled like it wanted to be pointed downhill

    So to sum it up...if you desire a trail bike, get the Ripley. It will take the drops and will grab some air if you desire it. I'm just not that type of rider, but Brian Lopes just rode one to a 9th place finish on the DH course at Sea Otter against numerous DH Bikes. Not too shabby for a 120mm 29er.

    The Ripley is the best bike I've owned and I wouldn't give it up to get the LTc or SB95 back. The DW link feels similar to the switch link on the Yeti, but is better executed IMO as the Yeti seemed to blow through travel and wasn't as supple on the rocks/roots. I think the carbon version will address the weight issue, but I still prefer the Ripley's DW link to the Yeti's switch."

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Yep. That was me You live, you love, you learn.

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,384
    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    OP: Are you the same Colin+M that wrote this a few months ago? if you are - man, you go through a lot of amazing bikes! would love to hear some comparisons and wondering what your ride will be next month, but for meantime enjoy your new LB.

    "Well I've owned the LTc, SB95 and now the Ripley.

    The Ripley for me is my "one bike to rule them all" as I tend to keep the drops and jumps under 3ft and it pedals so damn well. Literally if you turn the crank, the bike is going forward whether it be uphill/downhill/flat ground. This is the best pedaling bike I've ever ridden, period. It is almost freaky how quick it is to be honest. I couldn't believe how fast I was on my "home trail" today and I don't think I gave up anything on the descents. The 120mm of travel feels like much more because it is so well executed. It is hardtail fast when you pedal, in or out of the saddle, and supple to the max on the downs.

    I liked the SB95 I had, but nothing about it really wowed me to be honest. It was heavy and very middle of the road. I do think that the sb95c however should really propel it to true "super bike " status.

    The LTc, although the Geo chart would mislead, really likes to be pointed downhill and was very easy to pop off jumps and felt very comfortable in the air. On the downside, it pedaled like it wanted to be pointed downhill

    So to sum it up...if you desire a trail bike, get the Ripley. It will take the drops and will grab some air if you desire it. I'm just not that type of rider, but Brian Lopes just rode one to a 9th place finish on the DH course at Sea Otter against numerous DH Bikes. Not too shabby for a 120mm 29er.

    The Ripley is the best bike I've owned and I wouldn't give it up to get the LTc or SB95 back. The DW link feels similar to the switch link on the Yeti, but is better executed IMO as the Yeti seemed to blow through travel and wasn't as supple on the rocks/roots. I think the carbon version will address the weight issue, but I still prefer the Ripley's DW link to the Yeti's switch."
    Yeah and don't forget he got rid of his Ripley and bought an SB-95c after writing this. Me? I'm glad he's out there living the dream.

  49. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    The 2 things that drove me away from the Ripley eventually were the fact that I felt it was too small and that it was very twitchy. Now after realizing that the Fox 34 fork I was running on it was taller A-C than my 150mm Pike might play into those feelings

    I still think I would have been better off on an XL rather than L, but I'm sure the 160mm fork A-C didn't help the ill handling characteristics I was encountering as it would have shortened the reach and just screwed things up in general.

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    How short are the chainstays again? How about "so short that my 28T chainring overlaps the tire" short.The bike that started it all just got even better...-img_20131027_135336.jpg

  51. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Yeah and don't forget he got rid of his Ripley and bought an SB-95c after writing this. Me? I'm glad he's out there living the dream.
    To be fair, I was referring to the SB95 alloy version. I hadn't yet gotten the SB95c, which I liked better than the Ripley overall.

  52. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    The 2 things that drove me away from the Ripley eventually were the fact that I felt it was too small and that it was very twitchy. Now after realizing that the Fox 34 fork I was running on it was taller A-C than my 150mm Pike might play into those feelings

    I still think I would have been better off on an XL rather than L, but I'm sure the 160mm fork A-C didn't help the ill handling characteristics I was encountering as it would have shortened the reach and just screwed things up in general.
    For what it's worth, I had similar feelings about the L Ripley I demoed with a 120mm fork on it.

  53. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Yeah, I think Ripley version 2.0 will hopefully address a lot of the issues folks are having. Cable routing, tire clearance, geometry tweaks, more travel perhaps? Not bad for a first try, but I think there are definitely better bikes in that category.

  54. #154
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Yeah and don't forget he got rid of his Ripley and bought an SB-95c after writing this. Me? I'm glad he's out there living the dream.
    Yes & then got rid of that & went back to a Rip9 RDO.
    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  55. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    33
    So could people explain to me the pros and cons of the short chain stays I have been looking at another 29er with short chain stays with 4.5 inches travel as I don't need a 6 inch travel bike and I also am kinda partial to carbon. Thanks

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Well you don't "have" to go big on travel.

    As pictured set up with 5 inches rear travel and 140mm up front. Pedals like a dream. I dare you to make this bike lose traction in a climb.

    The short stays help with...well, everything. I honestly can't think of a downside other than it took this long to get a bike like this

    As you see it here it weighs 28.8 lbs. I could lose probably another 1-1.5 lbs easy by changing out the tires to a Rocket Ron rear/Ikon 2.35 front, putting my XTR brakes on instead of the boat anchor Hope M4 with stainless hoses and putting my XO crank on.

    I might just do that to see how light it gets.

    The bike that started it all just got even better...-img_20131030_103137.jpgThe bike that started it all just got even better...-img_20131030_103925.jpg

  57. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Well you don't "have" to go big on travel.

    As pictured set up with 5 inches rear travel and 140mm up front. Pedals like a dream. I dare you to make this bike lose traction in a climb.

    The short stays help with...well, everything. I honestly can't think of a downside other than it took this long to get a bike like this

    As you see it here it weighs 28.8 lbs. I could lose probably another 1-1.5 lbs easy by changing out the tires to a Rocket Ron rear/Ikon 2.35 front, putting my XTR brakes on instead of the boat anchor Hope M4 with stainless hoses and putting my XO crank on.

    I might just do that to see how light it gets.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_20131030_103137.jpg 
Views:	165 
Size:	273.2 KB 
ID:	842969Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_20131030_103925.jpg 
Views:	167 
Size:	256.8 KB 
ID:	842970
    You are insane! In the best way, of course. I hope that if you ever put a Rocket Ron on the front of this bike that someone steals it, though.

  58. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Touche` sir! I really like the Minion upfront, it is worth the weight penalty.

  59. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Touche` sir! I really like the Minion upfront, it is worth the weight penalty.
    Just went DHF front DHR II rear on my TBLTc. Blown away.

  60. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Thats a DHR on the front of mine. I have a DHF 2.3 that I haven't yet installed.

  61. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    33
    I am not all that well versed in all the techy bike stuff but I do enjoy it though but the post in the beginning said 150mm travel which would be 6 inch travel when I got the geo chart from lenz for the 5 inch bike the mammoth and behometh it seems the bottom brackets are kinda high which I know I don't like.thanks again for the response

  62. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Allow me to clarify. I have both the 5 inch (127mm) and 6 inch (150mm) travel rocker arms, so I have had it set up both ways. Also the BB height/geo numbers aren't current on the website. My BB height with the 150mm fork was 13.5 inches, a titch lower with the 140mm fork of course.

    I don't like high BB bikes either, that's why I love this new version of the Lunchbox.

  63. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by JIMSLICK View Post
    I am not all that well versed in all the techy bike stuff but I do enjoy it though but the post in the beginning said 150mm travel which would be 6 inch travel when I got the geo chart from lenz for the 5 inch bike the mammoth and behometh it seems the bottom brackets are kinda high which I know I don't like.thanks again for the response
    I do believe that bb height is for the older models.The newer bikes like the ones here are lower.

    Sorry guys.I didn't realize colin responded to this.

  64. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    65
    the Behemoth is sticking with a little higher of a BB since it's more of an XC bike. the lower BBs end up with too many pedal strikes. The Lunchbox will have the lower BB since it's leaning towards the freeride end of the spectrum. It should also be noted that our bikes corner really well even with a little higher BB. The short chainstays make a big difference in cornering. So don't be too afraid of the BB height because with the short chainstays, you'll notice better cornering than other bikes you are used to, and you won't be hitting your pedals.

    And we could always make a Behemoth or Mammoth with Lower bb height for a reasonable custom charge.

    Nick @ Lenz Sport
    sales@lenzsport.com
    Last edited by wigston; 10-30-2013 at 03:38 PM. Reason: typo

  65. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Allow me to clarify. I have both the 5 inch (127mm) and 6 inch (150mm) travel rocker arms, so I have had it set up both ways. Also the BB height/geo numbers aren't current on the website. My BB height with the 150mm fork was 13.5 inches, a titch lower with the 140mm fork of course.

    I don't like high BB bikes either, that's why I love this new version of the Lunchbox.
    Why would you have both, out of curiosity? Also, is it just as simple as a couple bolts to swap them out?

  66. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,310
    Quote Originally Posted by wigston View Post
    the Behemoth is sticking with a little higher of a BB since it's more of an XC bike. the lower BBs end up with too many pedal strikes. The Lunchbox will have the lower BB since it's leaning towards the freeride end of the spectrum. It should also be noted that our bikes corner really well even with a little higher BB. The short chainstays make a big difference in cornering. So don't be too afraid of the BB height because with the short chainstays, you'll notice better cornering than other bikes you are used to, and you won't be hitting your pedals.

    And we could always make a Behemoth or Mammoth with Lower bb height for a reasonable custom charge.

    Nick @ Lenz Sport
    sales@lenzsport.com
    Good to know. Thanks for the info. I'm one of those people who prefers higher BBs because I have to pedal through roots and rocks on every ride. I get enough pedal strikes with my 14" BB FS bike currently I'm loathe to go lower, but it seems the new crop of 6" bikes have mostly gone that way.

    Nice to have a higher option.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  67. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,044
    This thing looks really cool, I like the super short rear end with the 150 .
    I really want to ride this new one.

    I ride here in AZ with a girl " Kathleen " that has an older moth and box, but this one really has all the numbers I always wanted .

    I can't wait to ride one!!

  68. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,525
    Quote Originally Posted by kelstr View Post
    This thing looks really cool, I like the super short rear end with the 150 .
    I really want to ride this new one.

    I ride here in AZ with a girl " Kathleen " that has an older moth and box, but this one really has all the numbers I always wanted .

    I can't wait to ride one!!
    kelstr don't you dare, next thing we know Geek will see this thread then where does that leave me?! 😄

  69. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Haha. We can't help it Just J, it's a geometry chart's wet dream.

  70. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by B. Rock View Post
    Why would you have both, out of curiosity? Also, is it just as simple as a couple bolts to swap them out?
    Why not?

    It is just that simple actually.

    The 5 inch rockers cost extra, but I wanted to have them just to experiment with.

  71. #171
    AOK
    AOK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AOK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,903

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

    Quote Originally Posted by B. Rock View Post
    Why would you have both, out of curiosity? Also, is it just as simple as a couple bolts to swap them out?
    You're asking this of the guy who has bought a gazillion high end bikes this year? Of course he has multiple sets of rockers!

  72. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Exactly. Of course now I only have one. The Lenz is so much more versatile than I imagined that I was able to let go of the Rip9 RDO. I was expecting to hold onto the Niner just because I figured I wouldn't want to pedal around a 6 inch bike all the time, but it really surprised me and with the 5 inch rockers it is like 2 bikes in one anyway.

  73. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Just J View Post
    kelstr don't you dare, next thing we know Geek will see this thread then where does that leave me?! 
    I really love my SB95 ,I just go so fast on the dam thing, but I do really like the idea of this really short wide rear end ,I was thinking if I could fit on the large Box ( which I doubt ) the thing would be like a BMX bike for me on the hacky nasty Az trails .

  74. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Why not?

    It is just that simple actually.

    The 5 inch rockers cost extra, but I wanted to have them just to experiment with.
    Thats how I would get the bike also , its so cool to be able to test and really see what is what.

    Colin , How different does the suspension perform from 5 to 6" rockers ?

  75. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,525

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Haha. We can't help it Just J, it's a geometry chart's wet dream.
    I can definitely see the attract and I'll let you into a little secret that I have been talking a little with Nick myself lately!

    It's definitely a bike that I could (almost) justify (to my wife!) having as well as my SB95c but here's a question that I don't think has been asked as yet...

    Mud clearance, massively important to me in these winter months. Will a Hans Dampf fit in there with plenty of room to spare? Surely with these ultra short chain stays something has to give somewhere?

    I was considering buying a Trek Stache 9 with mid size wheels but this could be a long travel alternative for me.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  76. #176
    memento mori
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    374
    Could a mammoth be had with lunch box length chainstays ? I'm a fast-tech-xc guy that stays relatively close to the ground and that short,stiff rear end has my wallet hand twitching

  77. #177
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by DAVID J View Post
    Could a Behemoth be had with lunch box length chainstays ?
    Yes, it's what I'm considering.

    The bike that started it all just got even better...-capture.jpg
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  78. #178
    memento mori
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    374
    Caught me before my edit

  79. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by kelstr View Post
    Thats how I would get the bike also , its so cool to be able to test and really see what is what.

    Colin , How different does the suspension perform from 5 to 6" rockers ?
    With the 5 inch rockers it is more firm in the initial travel and feels very similar to the SB95c we all know and love. With the 6's, the pedaling performance suffers a tad, as expected, but more plush on the chunk. I don't have a ton of time on either just yet, but that is my initial impression.

  80. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Just J View Post
    I can definitely see the attract and I'll let you into a little secret that I have been talking a little with Nick myself lately!

    It's definitely a bike that I could (almost) justify (to my wife!) having as well as my SB95c but here's a question that I don't think has been asked as yet...

    Mud clearance, massively important to me in these winter months. Will a Hans Dampf fit in there with plenty of room to spare? Surely with these ultra short chain stays something has to give somewhere?

    I was considering buying a Trek Stache 9 with mid size wheels but this could be a long travel alternative for me.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Haven't tried a Hans Dampf on the rear, but a Minion DHR fits fine with room. I think Mikesee has ran some large rubber on his so maybe he'll chime in.

    There is more room than on the SB95c, I can tell you that much.

  81. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    With the 5 inch rockers it is more firm in the initial travel and feels very similar to the SB95c we all know and love. With the 6's, the pedaling performance suffers a tad, as expected, but more plush on the chunk. I don't have a ton of time on either just yet, but that is my initial impression.
    Sounds like by changing rockers you're also changing the leverage ratio? I wonder if the 5" rockers match the behemoth rockers, which do share the mammoth leverage ratio which does favor pedaling a little more. This would mean you could have your trail bike for the easier or longer days in the saddle with something like a M+, and keep the 6" rockers with a VA or something for when it gets big. Hmmmm.

  82. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by B. Rock View Post
    Sounds like by changing rockers you're also changing the leverage ratio? I wonder if the 5" rockers match the behemoth rockers, which do share the mammoth leverage ratio which does favor pedaling a little more. This would mean you could have your trail bike for the easier or longer days in the saddle with something like a M+, and keep the 6" rockers with a VA or something for when it gets big. Hmmmm.
    You've pretty much hit the nail on the head. One bike fits all.

  83. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    177
    Very interesting. I know it's subjective, but do you feel the double can shocks outperform the single cans by a large margin in regular trail riding?

  84. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    In short, no. Now if you are doing long runs, a reservoir shock can help for sure but for "regular" trail riding I haven't found much of an advantage.

  85. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    177
    10-4. I've never ridden a piggyback, but with getting a 'bigger' bike the thought has crossed my mind enough to pause between the 'box and behemoth frames solely for that option.

  86. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    I went for the Lunchbox mainly because of the various shock options and I like a 150mm rear hub spacing. This is the first "production" Lunchbox that has had room for piggyback shocks.

  87. #187
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Just J View Post
    I can definitely see the attract and I'll let you into a little secret that I have been talking a little with Nick myself lately!

    It's definitely a bike that I could (almost) justify (to my wife!) having as well as my SB95c but here's a question that I don't think has been asked as yet...

    Mud clearance, massively important to me in these winter months. Will a Hans Dampf fit in there with plenty of room to spare? Surely with these ultra short chain stays something has to give somewhere?

    I was considering buying a Trek Stache 9 with mid size wheels but this could be a long travel alternative for me.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It depends on your definition of "mud" and "massive". Where I live mud clearance is unimportant, in that if it's wet enough to be muddy, you simply can't ride--the bike (ANY bike) packs up within 10' of leaving pavement, and you're done.

    That said, I'm running Minion DHF 2.5's on 35mm wide Derby rims. At least 6mm clearance at any given point, more in some places. Hans Dampf's are substantially smaller volume-wise, so I'd guess you'd have 8-9mm of clearance, minimum.

  88. #188
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    I've been able to get 5 solid rides in on this bike in the last ~10 days.Not as much as I'd like, but it beats a sharp stick in the eye.As anyone might expect when looking at a geo chart for this chassis, it is *sporty* when descending, and rewards a rear-wheel-heavy riding style.By that I mean if you can sit back and manual, or at least unweight and loft the front when things get chunky, you will be richly rewarded.But that's not, to me, the real beauty of this sled.What the overall package does when pointed up is truly groundbreaking, at least where I live and ride.Pulling the rear wheel that little bit more under your CoG makes a tremendous difference in traction.In short, if you can maintain good left/right balance *and* keep the pedals turning, you've got a fighting chance at making it up stuff you probably never have before.And then, of course, once you're up there you get to come ripping back down…I finished a ~6 hour ride last week with a sore throat--from making moto noises all day long…
    Last edited by mikesee; 03-04-2015 at 06:20 AM.

  89. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,525
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    It depends on your definition of "mud" and "massive". Where I live mud clearance is unimportant, in that if it's wet enough to be muddy, you simply can't ride--the bike (ANY bike) packs up within 10' of leaving pavement, and you're done.

    That said, I'm running Minion DHF 2.5's on 35mm wide Derby rims. At least 6mm clearance at any given point, more in some places. Hans Dampf's are substantially smaller volume-wise, so I'd guess you'd have 8-9mm of clearance, minimum.
    Well we're talking clay clagged chainstays and an extra 10lbs + of weight added to the bit on an average winter ride. Clearance is massively important.

  90. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,827
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/rQg7ko8D91Q56I2MlmHPn5BwdAAQH5ysi3U6JKwTWgQ?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-jvs61fZPLV0/UnM4p5EBi8I/AAAAAAAAlrA/tqvHNPt4PMI/s800/PA060574.jpg" height="454" width="800" /></a>
    Hmmmm...Prenup? Impressive...


  91. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wobbem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    573
    And slowly the myth that short chain stayed bikes can't climb loses credibility.

  92. #192
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter View Post
    Hmmmm...Prenup? Impressive...
    Mack Ridge coming up from Troybuilt. New favorite climb in the valley.

  93. #193
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    Incredible shots and amazing riding, Mike.

    After a loooooong week of work, I'm really really REALLY needing a ride on this rig!

  94. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,384
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Mack Ridge coming up from Troybuilt. New favorite climb in the valley.
    Looking forward to your next film showing you motoring up that insanity. If I didn't know better, I'd say you staged those photos. Incredible stuff.

  95. #195
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Looking forward to your next film showing you motoring up that insanity. If I didn't know better, I'd say you staged those photos. Incredible stuff.
    What I would give to have the motor I had 10 years ago with this bike, now.

    <sighs>

  96. #196
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    ...With the 6's, the pedaling performance suffers a tad, as expected, but more plush on the chunk...
    Would I be correct in assuming that when you swap to the 6's you must also install a longer stroke shock?

    I may be interested in this as well as the 160 air sleeve for my Pike - the idea of having "2 different bikes in one" appeals to me........

  97. #197
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by jimithng23 View Post
    Would I be correct in assuming that when you swap to the 6's you must also install a longer stroke shock?

    I may be interested in this as well as the 160 air sleeve for my Pike - the idea of having "2 different bikes in one" appeals to me........
    Here's how it breaks down:

    LunchBox = 200 x 51mm stroke shock w/6" levers.
    Behemoth = 200 x 51mm stroke w/5" levers.

    Geometry and intent of each bike aside, the main difference is the levers giving a different total travel. So you can swap the levers to get 5 or 6" depending, with no need to change the shock or stroke.

    In an effort to dot every i and cross every t, I experimented this spring with a few 200 x 57mm shocks using 5" levers. That combo gives a *very* firm top end, with good mid stroke support and a beautiful ramp to bottom. Makes this chassis feel very efficient, and more or less begs for a stand-and-deliver climbing style. Peeps coming from shorter travel bikes or living in less chunky regions might really like this setup. Living where I do, I disliked the loss of small bump sensitivity relative to the 'normal' (200 x 51 w/6" levers) LunchBox setup.

    But I love that if the mood strikes or if I'm roadtripping to someplace very different from my normal environs, a lever or shock swap can completely morph the demeanor of the bike.

  98. #198
    Pick a wheel size...
    Reputation: jimithng23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    ...But I love that if the mood strikes or if I'm roadtripping to someplace very different from my normal environs, a lever or shock swap can completely morph the demeanor of the bike.
    Exactly.

    So no need for different shock if I swap to 6" levers...perfect.

    Yes, I'm in love with the efficiency of this chassis with the 5" levers. Kept up with the "fast group" on the local XC loop with no problems - in fact, I found myself rolling them up when the trail would point down...pretty damn fun.

    So, when my compass points W next fall, I'm hoping to have the 6" levers and a 160 air sleeve in the toolbox. ;-)

  99. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Here's how it breaks down:

    LunchBox = 200 x 51mm stroke shock w/6" levers.
    Behemoth = 200 x 51mm stroke w/5" levers.

    Geometry and intent of each bike aside, the main difference is the levers giving a different total travel. So you can swap the levers to get 5 or 6" depending, with no need to change the shock or stroke.

    In an effort to dot every i and cross every t, I experimented this spring with a few 200 x 57mm shocks using 5" levers. That combo gives a *very* firm top end, with good mid stroke support and a beautiful ramp to bottom.

    --snippage--
    Very cool!

    So, this combo of 5" rockers plus 57mm shock gives 6" of travel, but with a different leverage curve than the 'standard' 6" set-up? Or is the travel still 5"?

    My new 'box is on order. This thing sounds perfect for the mess o' wet chunk hereabouts.

  100. #200
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,332
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoWheelMan View Post
    So, this combo of 5" rockers plus 57mm shock gives 6" of travel, but with a different leverage curve than the 'standard' 6" set-up? Or is the travel still 5"?
    I think that combo gives more like 142 or so millimeters. Can't tell the difference in total travel, but the character of the bike sure changes.

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What bike got you started????
    By eddievettelt1 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 12-20-2013, 03:46 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, 01:04 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, 05:15 PM
  5. Good bike for getting started?
    By bgowland in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-29-2011, 08:01 AM

Members who have read this thread: 130

Posting Permissions

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