Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 147
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686

    Broken Niner RIP9

    I don't huck or catch mutch air, but I am a farily large gentlemen. Riding along the trail today on my 6 month old RIP and ride over a good sized rock. As soon as the rear tire hits it, CRACK, seat tube shears in half. When I bought it, I had a hard time finding any RIP's that had broken, just wondering if this is a common failure or I'm just a MF'er on equipment.


  2. #2
    bt
    bt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,421
    stuff happens.

    niner will back it up I would assume.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Breaking Down's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    52
    Looks like a stress riser due to the welding of the shock bracket and derailleur hanger. Design flaw...maybe. Probably should go with a WFO for the next go around.

  4. #4
    Closekids.com
    Reputation: BoomingSooner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    891
    been on the same bike for 3 years and active on mtbr.... first i've ever seen like this.
    Me to my riding buddy, "Want to ride this afternoon?"
    Him, "I can't. I have to chop this guys foot off at 2".

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    74
    I'm 215, at least, huckng mine around in SW Va and never seen anything like this or felt any flex that would give me any hint of something like that. What's with the top tube? Was it damaged in a crash as a result of the seat tube giving up or stressed by the failure? Looks like a sideways bend to me. I've thrashed the hell out of mine for 2 years. No problems. If it blows up, I will very likely get another RIP9.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Top tube must have buckled after seat tube sheared.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: five5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    462
    Wow! Never have seen anything like that ever! Sorry dude!

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    51
    Looks pretty dangerous to have bike frames break on you like that.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tripp88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    287
    Oh boy I'd be quite upset.. Hope your alright!! Mentally and physically
    Current Ride:2012 BAMF Full Nelson

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: eurospek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Hopefully Niner takes care of you.
    konahonzo

  11. #11
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,089
    Bad luck mate, sounds like you came off unscaved which is the only good thing. Hopefully niner comes to the party in a way yous are both happy.
    Evil Following
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    FM190 Fatty
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CYCLEJCE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    660
    Bash guard looks like its been doing its job. How big a boy(gentleman) are ya? Just curious... I hover around 225, and ride a Niner I bought second hand. Something like that wouls F my day up good. I hope you come to a resolution soon.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ghettocop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,399
    That sucks man. Hope it works out in your favor!

  14. #14
    Underskilled
    Reputation: CaveGiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,118
    That happened a lot on the early RIP9s, but this is the first hydroformed one I have seen go.

    If you are a big guy it might be worth grapping the WFO as a replacement. The geo is almost the same (the diff on paper is due to different length forks). It is also less than 1lb heavier.

    That lb gives you more stiffness and large flexibility on what shock you mount.

    Swapping my custom tuned RP23 to a Manitou ISX was a HUGE change, the DB air also looks interesting.

    Since swapping my rip (with same issue) to the WFO I have been very happy.
    Why would I care about 150g of bike weight, I just ate 400g of cookies while reading this?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    12
    Ouch!

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    I'm 6'4" and 325 lbs. I fear I may have to upgrade to a WFO for strength's sake. I don't really want that much bike though. I'm going to talk to Niner and see if they have any advice on how to approach it.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    38
    that's just a fluke. Replacement frame from Niner should be coming your way. make sure you call or email them to see what can be done. Warranty on Aluminum is 2yrs.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    So what do you guys think? What are the disadvantages of the WFO vs the RIP? Do you think the RIP will pedal better?
    -

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    I guess another thing to consider is the fork. I only have a 120mm fork and I'm not buying a new one. I guess the WFO would just turn into RIP geometry with a 120mm fork?

  20. #20
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    So what do you guys think? What are the disadvantages of the WFO vs the RIP? Do you think the RIP will pedal better?
    -
    Based on your dimensions and screen name, you my friend are a perfect candidate for a WooF-O. The RIP will be a bit lighter, but the WFO is a great pedalling bike. I actually prefer the WFO to my tallboyC for rocky technical climbing. I'm 6'4" and 205 and ride a L WFO FWIW....it's a lot of bike and will pretty much mow down anything in it's path.

  21. #21
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,154
    325 lbs. and you need "that much bike," whether you want it or not.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  22. #22
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Breaking Down View Post
    Looks like a stress riser due to the welding of the shock bracket and derailleur hanger. Design flaw...maybe.
    Yeah, that welded derailleur hanger is a doosie.

    Why say anything if you're going to just pull something out of your ass?
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  23. #23
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,511
    325lb. That's Ventana semi custom territory with heavy gauge tubes.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    325 lbs. and you need "that much bike," whether you want it or not.
    The major question I have is if the WFO seat tube is really any stronger. From pics I don't see any further gusseting, and the seat tube seems to be the same wall thickness. No reason to get a bigger bike if its not any stronger. I need to confirm with Niner that the WFO is stronger in the places that I need it to be stronger.

  25. #25
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    the seat tube seems to be the same wall thickness.
    Based on what?
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    I need to confirm with Niner that the WFO is stronger in the places that I need it to be stronger.
    Good call
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    290
    I've seen a few similar breaks on the older RIP's before they went to hydro forming. Usually on larger frames with larger riders... Niner replaced the frames no questions asked... These same guys also broke seat posts and wheels. I use them as testers - if it holds up for them there is no way I could break it (5'6", 140 lbs)...

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    Based on what?
    Seatpost diameter and seatpost clamp size are the same between the two. Unless the tube gets thicker as it goes down, they are the same size.

  28. #28
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    21,814
    Not a Niner fanboi to say the least however, have to ask..were you sitting when you went over this "good sized" rock and how big is a good sized rock to you? I refrained on commenting, up until I read "325lbs"!

    You weigh 325lbs and you're a mechanical engineer, do the math.

    How can you expect to ride a bike that is designed for riders of a normal size, Seriously? Just think about the logic of this and designing a bike frame that can handle that sort of weight range, what it would mean is that it's way over built for normal riders to accommodate you large riders and that plain just doesn't make sense. If you had to design purpose built stuff like this you'd cuss and not do it. You don't shop in the same clothing store as normal sized people, you can't sit on the same lightweight chair as they can, so why would you expect to be able to ride the same lightweight bicycle and parts they can???

    Now your quibbling about gaining 1-1.5lbs in frame weight, SERIOUSLY? You're twice my phucking weight and yet you are worried about a frame that's 1-1.5lbs heavier. Since you seem to turn your brain off once you leave the office and the engineer in you dies, let me do the math for you....You worried about a 0.5-0.75% increase in frame weight relative to your weight. For the frame it's a 12-15% weight gain, yet you outweigh the "avg" person this was design for by nearly 200%
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  29. #29
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,613
    Quote Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
    325lb. That's Ventana semi custom territory with heavy gauge tubes.
    That was my thought when I read he weighed 325. That's custom bike frame territory for sure. In fact, I think the Fox rear shock on the RIP targets 160-190 pound riders out of the box - so it would need some custom tuning for a rider at 325.

    I fear the WFO may end with the same result, but a custom bike from Ventana, with wheels and components all matched for that kind of riding weight would certainly be worth it for longevity and safety.

    BB

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Not a Niner fanboi to say the least however, have to ask..were you sitting when you went over this "good sized" rock and how big is a good sized rock to you? I refrained on commenting, up until I read "325lbs"!

    You weigh 325lbs and you're a mechanical engineer, do the math.

    How can you expect to ride a bike that is designed for riders of a normal size, Seriously? Just think about the logic of this and designing a bike frame that can handle that sort of weight range, what it would mean is that it's way over built for normal riders to accommodate you large riders and that plain just doesn't make sense. If you had to design purpose built stuff like this you'd cuss and not do it. You don't shop in the same clothing store as normal sized people, you can't sit on the same lightweight chair as they can, so why would you expect to be able to ride the same lightweight bicycle and parts they can???

    Now your quibbling about gaining 1-1.5lbs in frame weight, SERIOUSLY? You're twice my phucking weight and yet you are worried about a frame that's 1-1.5lbs heavier. Since you seem to turn your brain off once you leave the office and the engineer in you dies, let me do the math for you....You worried about a 0.5-0.75% increase in frame weight relative to your weight. For the frame it's a 12-15% weight gain, yet you outweigh the "avg" person this was design for by nearly 200%
    LyNxy LyNxy, I'm so happy that you could misconstrue my concerns into an angry email against fat stupid engineers. You have enlightened me to a level that I could have never reached without your extremely informative response. I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    I just talked to Niner. They assured me that there is thicker tubing and more reinforcement in that area of the frame and others. I could care less that its gonna be heavier, just concerned about pedaling efficiency and frame geometry running a 120mm fork. I've been happy with the RP23 on the RIP and how its handled my weight. The WFO comes with a Monarch RT3 which has a lower max design pressure than the RP23, so that may be another issue.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    536
    Hey Sasquatch, you have 90lbs on me and are 5 inches shorter, I have been running a WFO for the past 3 seasons. I've broken 10 frames in 8 years before the WFO and am pleased with how it has held up. You will learn that for a super clyde like yourself you will need FR/DH parts to be used as a trailbike. When you get a WFO get rid of the 120 fork you had on the RIP and replace it with a Fox 34 or Manitou dorado. I feel that anything less burly in the fork area will break under your weight causing you severe injury, most likely at speed. Also while you are Ebaying your fork, add the Monarch too and go with a coil if possible CCDB, Manitou etc, I have an Elka that has been really good as well on the WFO. It's just not worth risking these parts to fail on you, I mean you did see what you did to your RIP right?!

    As far as pedaling efficiency goes, the WFO is an excellent pedaler, especially the more technical the trail gets. It does have the same CVA susp as the RIP so expect the same efficiency with a little more plush feel from the inch more travel. Also I am not sure if you went with a Maxle out back but I would recoment that as well.

    Good luck on your WFO build, send us a pic when it's all built up.

    -Nolan

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    11
    Nasty break!

  34. #34
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Breaking Down View Post
    Looks like a stress riser due to the welding of the shock bracket and derailleur hanger. Design flaw...maybe. Probably should go with a WFO for the next go around.
    to anonymous neg repper who left this:
    "Sounds like you might not be that knowledgeable about materials and the effects of tempering due to the heat of welding. If you research the subject you might find the comment a bit more relative than you think. Just sayin'"

    Could you point me to the welded derailleur hanger in that photo?
    TIA

    Also, I actually am moderately knowledgeable in materials science, having studied materials in engineering school and TA'd materials lab, which is why "tempering due to the heat of welding" makes zero sense.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  35. #35
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,511
    Now that's settled, I will offer some unsolicited advice

    Wheels - ENVE AM, 32 hole, Alpine III spokes and Hadley or DT 440 hubs.

    Fox 34 fork with custom valving

    Your cranks look fine

    Geax TNT tubeless tires - Saguaros or Gatos or the Ardent LUST

    Thomson post

    I'll second posting your build. I've broken many frames because I run a long post, weigh anywhere from 220 to 250, utilizing poor technique and from having strong legs

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Thanks for the unsolicited advice, but the rest of the bike is burly. Thomson stem and post. DT 440 rear hub, 36 hole MTX 33 rims, alpine spokes out back. Kris Holm 36 hole XC rim, hope 20mm hub, and alpine up front. DH bars. Time pedals. WTB Dissent out back and 2.4 ardent up front. As pointed out, the only thing not DH is the Reba XX 20mm maxle fork up front. I'm experienced in breaking frames and "light" parts. I picked the RIP cause its a burly frame, just not burly enough apparently.

  37. #37
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    I guess another thing to consider is the fork. I only have a 120mm fork and I'm not buying a new one. I guess the WFO would just turn into RIP geometry with a 120mm fork?
    I'm not sure exactly what the geometry of the WFO with a 120mm fork would be, but I doubt it will suck. My guess would be similar HA to RIP, slightly lower bb.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Thats what I figure. The WFO geom with a 140mm fork has a 69 HTA. RIP with a 120mm is a 70.5 HTA. I doubt that going to 120 on the WFO will steepen by 1.5 degrees, probably less than a degree. So I'll be slacker than the RIP. Not sure how trail will compare though.

    Still waiting on Niners confirmation of warranty. Bike shop told me that XL WFO's are out of stock, so it might be a wait if I go that way. I'm glad I have a spare bike

  39. #39
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Now your quibbling about gaining 1-1.5lbs in frame weight, SERIOUSLY? You're twice my phucking weight and yet you are worried about a frame that's 1-1.5lbs heavier. Since you seem to turn your brain off once you leave the office and the engineer in you dies, let me do the math for you....You worried about a 0.5-0.75% increase in frame weight relative to your weight. For the frame it's a 12-15% weight gain, yet you outweigh the "avg" person this was design for by nearly 200%
    I think you may be a overselling this a bit. I thought his questions were pretty legit. He didn't seem too concerned about the weight of the WFO, just wanted to make sure it was stronger where he broke his last frame.

    BTW...Lynx, personally I love your flair for the dramatic, keep up the good work!

  40. #40
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    Thats what I figure. The WFO geom with a 140mm fork has a 69 HTA. RIP with a 120mm is a 70.5 HTA. I doubt that going to 120 on the WFO will steepen by 1.5 degrees, probably less than a degree. So I'll be slacker than the RIP. Not sure how trail will compare though.

    Still waiting on Niners confirmation of warranty. Bike shop told me that XL WFO's are out of stock, so it might be a wait if I go that way. I'm glad I have a spare bike
    I'm 6'4" and I am running a L with a 70mm stem FWIW. I don't know how you like to run your bikes though. I tend to run mine on the smaller side.

  41. #41
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by nolan17 View Post
    When you get a WFO get rid of the 120 fork you had on the RIP and replace it with a Fox 34. Also while you are Ebaying your fork, add the Monarch too and go with a coil if possible CCDB.
    These ideas don't suck, and I think you'll find swapping rear shocks may be helpful for someone of your size.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Got confirmation from Niner that they will be warranting frame. Should be here today. Almost three weeks from break to new frame, not bad I guess.

    Stuck with the RIP. WFO had too many unknowns and would require new components or upgrades. Focusing on getting smaller to eliminate the problem rather than band-aid it with a stronger bike.

  43. #43
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,693
    I've seen that happen to non-Niner bikes when a clyde runs their rear shock with back pain and/or comfort in mind, relatively soft (low pressure) for their weight with gear on, and hits something that bottoms out their shock, with their legs rather straight and weight back. Basically with the shock's travel fully spent and the rider's body not really soaking up any of the force, the weakest link ends up trying to absorb the force, which happens to be the seat tube in this case, due to the way the axle path and linkage works (pushing the pivot point on the seat tube forward during that part of the stroke).

    Considering the RIP 9 has a linear progressive leverage ratio curve with a very high bottom out point on the forces curve (has a very low leverage rate at its end stroke), I have to say I'm surprised by what clydes can break. Good on Niner for warrantying it, even though it would be reasonable for other brands to claim that it's abuse. CVA is a great design that I rank higher than Maestro, which is probably the most similar competing design, mainly because there's virtually no pedal kick back in the CVA design, which is a rare feat for a dual link system.

  44. #44
    small member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    610
    R.I.P. Rip9!

  45. #45
    Underskilled
    Reputation: CaveGiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,118
    Glad Niner sorted you out, think the WFO would have been better, it pedals amazinly (far better than the tallboy lt)
    Why would I care about 150g of bike weight, I just ate 400g of cookies while reading this?

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    536
    Hey Sasquatch,

    I think that you went the wrong way in getting the RIP again IMO. You will break the frame again, no doubt about it and you will be without a bike for another 3 weeks again. However I wonder if your fork will hold up longer than the new frame will? I hope it does because when that thing goes you will crash hard and could be injured. Even if you loose more weight lets say 50lbs, you will be in better shape and riding harder causing even more stress on the bike than before. Im just looking out for your safety in the long run. Plus getting a WFO with longer travel for will make it more fun on the DH without loosing climbing efficiency. A few guys that I know who upgraded to the WFO from the RIP thinks it climbs better especially in the tech.

    My .02

    -Nolan

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    914
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    to anonymous neg repper who left this:
    "Sounds like you might not be that knowledgeable about materials and the effects of tempering due to the heat of welding. If you research the subject you might find the comment a bit more relative than you think. Just sayin'"

    Could you point me to the welded derailleur hanger in that photo?
    TIA

    Also, I actually am moderately knowledgeable in materials science, having studied materials in engineering school and TA'd materials lab, which is why "tempering due to the heat of welding" makes zero sense.
    I always thought heat treatment was done to the frame after welding? Wouldn't that eliminate any "tempering due to the heat of welding"? Also its always a bad idea to weld a clamp on deralier to a frame.

  48. #48
    NMBP
    Reputation: gfs69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,158
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    Focusing on getting smaller to eliminate the problem rather than band-aid it with a stronger bike.
    That is a GREAT plan, good for you! Good luck!

  49. #49
    Life Is Short
    Reputation: fatcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,540
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Not a Niner fanboi to say the least however, have to ask..were you sitting when you went over this "good sized" rock and how big is a good sized rock to you? I refrained on commenting, up until I read "325lbs"!

    You weigh 325lbs and you're a mechanical engineer, do the math.

    How can you expect to ride a bike that is designed for riders of a normal size, Seriously? Just think about the logic of this and designing a bike frame that can handle that sort of weight range, what it would mean is that it's way over built for normal riders to accommodate you large riders and that plain just doesn't make sense. If you had to design purpose built stuff like this you'd cuss and not do it. You don't shop in the same clothing store as normal sized people, you can't sit on the same lightweight chair as they can, so why would you expect to be able to ride the same lightweight bicycle and parts they can???

    Now your quibbling about gaining 1-1.5lbs in frame weight, SERIOUSLY? You're twice my phucking weight and yet you are worried about a frame that's 1-1.5lbs heavier. Since you seem to turn your brain off once you leave the office and the engineer in you dies, let me do the math for you....You worried about a 0.5-0.75% increase in frame weight relative to your weight. For the frame it's a 12-15% weight gain, yet you outweigh the "avg" person this was design for by nearly 200%
    wow kinda cruel. But with the 325lbs I'd recommend the Lenz Lunchbox or PBJ
    for a 29er (they are crazy strong, but somewhat $$$) Good luck, and to the OP's
    comment about "normal sized people" What's normal? Nothing's normal.
    Kim Kardashian's face is plastered on magazines. What is she known for?
    Acting, singing, stripping? Nothing! Is that normal? LOL

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    233
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    Focusing on getting smaller to eliminate the problem rather than band-aid it with a stronger bike.

    Love the attitude. Best of luck!

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: david8613's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,702
    Quote Originally Posted by nolan17 View Post
    Hey Sasquatch,

    I think that you went the wrong way in getting the RIP again IMO. You will break the frame again, no doubt about it and you will be without a bike for another 3 weeks again. However I wonder if your fork will hold up longer than the new frame will? I hope it does because when that thing goes you will crash hard and could be injured. Even if you loose more weight lets say 50lbs, you will be in better shape and riding harder causing even more stress on the bike than before. Im just looking out for your safety in the long run. Plus getting a WFO with longer travel for will make it more fun on the DH without loosing climbing efficiency. A few guys that I know who upgraded to the WFO from the RIP thinks it climbs better especially in the tech.

    My .02

    -Nolan
    wow! never saw a break like that on a rip, looks a little like the jet 9 recall years ago...listen to Nolan he is absolutely right your a big dude, WFO9, coil shock and manitou dorado is what you need BRO... I made the the same mistake years ago when I got the jet 9, loved the bike but I was around 225lbs with out gear, wrong bike, I had problems loud creaking right were your bike broke, I skipped the rip9 and went straight to a WFO9, lovin it....ps I'm heavier now at 250lbs I don't ever think about my wfo9 handling my weight, I just ride...pss stop huckin bro your a wee bit big for that stuff I think, unless you do custom everything!

  52. #52
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,693
    Out of curiosity, how much air pressure were you running in your shock when it broke?

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,088
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Out of curiosity, how much air pressure were you running in your shock when it broke?
    Doesn't the RP23 have a 250 pound weight limit as well?

  54. #54
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
    Now that's settled, I will offer some unsolicited advice

    Wheels - ENVE AM, 32 hole, Alpine III spokes and Hadley or DT 440 hubs.

    Fox 34 fork with custom valving

    Your cranks look fine

    Geax TNT tubeless tires - Saguaros or Gatos or the Ardent LUST

    Thomson post

    I'll second posting your build. I've broken many frames because I run a long post, weigh anywhere from 220 to 250, utilizing poor technique and from having strong legs
    You and I are on the same page... for build parts... although the Marzocchi Micro Ti I have is one stout fork, and I weigh 240.... been running a WFO and all I can say is that it's been tough as nails for me. I don't climb fast on it, but point it down hill and she's one plush, sweet ride for a trail bike with 140mm at both ends.

    Hubs, as Don mentioned, are super important at your size and weight, don't scrimp or cut corners on them. Big guys wreck the light hubs with reckless abandon, pony up for the strong, good stuff that has material and mass where it matters.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10
    amazing - never saw a break like this... great that you did not get hurt...

    whats you spare bike? also 29"?

  56. #56
    Chilling out
    Reputation: bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    5,820
    Quote Originally Posted by GSJ1973 View Post
    Doesn't the RP23 have a 250 pound weight limit as well?
    300psi for required sag, doesn't care about rider weight as based upon the linkage leverage that just doesn't matter. A 200# guy could need more psi on one bike than a 300# guy on another.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    536

    Wfo

    Hey Sasquatch: This is my WFO, it's a trailbike for me although there are may DH/FR parts on her. If you break the new RIP I would think about going this route. Great climber and nothing touches it on the DH except for my Lunchbox. Good luck on your new RIP build.

    -Nolan
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Broken Niner RIP9-wfo-5.jpg  

    Broken Niner RIP9-wfo-6.jpg  

    Broken Niner RIP9-wfo-7.jpg  

    Broken Niner RIP9-wfo-8.jpg  


  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,299
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Not a Niner fanboi to say the least however, have to ask..were you sitting when you went over this "good sized" rock and how big is a good sized rock to you? I refrained on commenting, up until I read "325lbs"!

    You weigh 325lbs and you're a mechanical engineer, do the math.

    How can you expect to ride a bike that is designed for riders of a normal size, Seriously? Just think about the logic of this and designing a bike frame that can handle that sort of weight range, what it would mean is that it's way over built for normal riders to accommodate you large riders and that plain just doesn't make sense. If you had to design purpose built stuff like this you'd cuss and not do it. You don't shop in the same clothing store as normal sized people, you can't sit on the same lightweight chair as they can, so why would you expect to be able to ride the same lightweight bicycle and parts they can???

    Now your quibbling about gaining 1-1.5lbs in frame weight, SERIOUSLY? You're twice my phucking weight and yet you are worried about a frame that's 1-1.5lbs heavier. Since you seem to turn your brain off once you leave the office and the engineer in you dies, let me do the math for you....You worried about a 0.5-0.75% increase in frame weight relative to your weight. For the frame it's a 12-15% weight gain, yet you outweigh the "avg" person this was design for by nearly 200%
    I have to agree w/ the line of thought. Cycling industry is built on your "average" sized rider. Seem like 250lb is the absolute top end of the weight range and even less for suspension tuning options. I ride w/ a fellow that is probably 340lb. & his XC bike could pass for a DH bike. I have witnessed first hand the failure of components under his shear mass - hubs, chains, bearings, spokes, tubes are a common failure. He wouldn't even consider a frame like the RIP 9 even for XC trail use. Maybe you got off easy on the frame break no bodily injury but personally I would be on a burlier ride. My buddy has had various steel framed FS bikes as well as a Banshee Chaperral, SC Bullit, Heckler all for trail riding.

  59. #59
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    251
    Going from the responses it seems like this is the first of the new hydro formed RIP9's to break and it sounds like it was subjected to fairly extreme conditions.
    This thread has completely assured my confidence in my RIP9 and Niners dedication to back their product.
    Well done to all.
    I would have definately gone the WFO myself regardless of the component changes. You got lucky this time and your pushing it now. I'm 220 lbs so no lightweight either but I use my RIP for XC duties.
    Good luck with the exercise plans.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    301
    Keen nailed it! I'm 6'2 250 (well 240 now) and have been riding since 01 or so. I break bikes more often than I change underwear. Only bike to hold me was my Kona Stinky, and it had a 180mm downhill fork on it, weighed 40 lbs too. Everyone would always make fun of me for riding the XC trails on it, but realistically it's the only thing that I could trust. I've been looking at the WFO and the Yeti sb95 recently. Hoping either are clyde friendly.
    2013 Ibis Mojo HD Special Blend with dropper post, hope/stans wheelset and hope x2/m4 brakes

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Out of curiosity, how much air pressure were you running in your shock when it broke?
    Around 280-290

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by oritkis View Post
    amazing - never saw a break like this... great that you did not get hurt...

    whats you spare bike? also 29"?
    Bikes direct Gravity 29 SS, Kona P2 rigid fork, new bars and seat post, rest is stock.

  63. #63
    ~Reformed Mechanic~
    Reputation: Ace5high's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    Got confirmation from Niner that they will be warranting frame. Should be here today. Almost three weeks from break to new frame, not bad I guess.

    Stuck with the RIP. WFO had too many unknowns and would require new components or upgrades. Focusing on getting smaller to eliminate the problem rather than band-aid it with a stronger bike.
    Thats all well and good positive thinking... BUT I would suggest you do this... Take your new RIP 9 Frame and sell it brand new on ebay! Take that money and upgrade to the WFO! For safety reasons I would think this would be top priority for you Cant Imagine how bad this could have been if it happened "at the wrong time"...

    Even at 280-290lbs a stronger frame should be priority over a 1lb gain on the bike... Just don't want to see you to get hurt out there!
    I do all my own stunts, but never intentionally...

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    58
    Can't wait until the carbon version comes out and this won't happen as with micro thin aluminum.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: millertm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    461

    Got me thinking now as well.

    Well, I too am 6' 4" and weigh about the same at 331, I just got the Carve expert. I am in the stage of getting thinner and will be using it for street commuting. I am on a 2010 Hardrock and I am killing the suntour fork (at least it is a 32mm), my LBS is upgrading my spring on the carve to "Fat Guy" and it is a 23" or XXL. Since I am not flying down trail's will my bike last?

    Mark
    2012 XXL Carve Expert

  66. #66
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    251
    How weird.
    I think I need to take my own advice here in my post above from 3 weeks ago!
    I took my bike in for a service today due to various transmission and brake issues.
    The mechanic had a quick glance at my bike and asked whether I really wanted to perform a major service on a broken bike.
    I have 2 cracks near the weld for the rear pivot bracket with one on each side.
    Like the OP here I'm about 100kgs but don't huck or anything.
    The crack discovery was incidental.
    Unfortunately the frame is 9 months out of warranty. It appears like the cracks have been there for a while.
    I have emailed Niner to see if they can help in any way.
    If they can I will certainly take my own advice here and get a WFO even if I only do XC.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Broken Niner RIP9-p1100267.jpg  


  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Man that sucks, I know Niner offers a crash replacement at a lower price but still gonna be spendy. I'm now more concerned that mine wasn't a fluke. Oh well, if it makes it to the end of the 2 year warranty period, I will be inspecting mine with an electron microscope before the warranties up

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    301
    I know that a lot of people will argue, but cracks to me on the weld on an alum frame scream faulty heat treating. I bet niner will take care of you though.
    2013 Ibis Mojo HD Special Blend with dropper post, hope/stans wheelset and hope x2/m4 brakes

  69. #69
    Trail Junkie
    Reputation: dubdryver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,177
    Quote Originally Posted by nolan17 View Post
    Hey Sasquatch, you have 90lbs on me and are 5 inches shorter, I have been running a WFO for the past 3 seasons. I've broken 10 frames in 8 years before the WFO and am pleased with how it has held up. You will learn that for a super clyde like yourself you will need FR/DH parts to be used as a trailbike. When you get a WFO get rid of the 120 fork you had on the RIP and replace it with a Fox 34 or Manitou dorado. I feel that anything less burly in the fork area will break under your weight causing you severe injury, most likely at speed. Also while you are Ebaying your fork, add the Monarch too and go with a coil if possible CCDB, Manitou etc, I have an Elka that has been really good as well on the WFO. It's just not worth risking these parts to fail on you, I mean you did see what you did to your RIP right?!

    As far as pedaling efficiency goes, the WFO is an excellent pedaler, especially the more technical the trail gets. It does have the same CVA susp as the RIP so expect the same efficiency with a little more plush feel from the inch more travel. Also I am not sure if you went with a Maxle out back but I would recoment that as well.

    Good luck on your WFO build, send us a pic when it's all built up.

    -Nolan
    Thats what I was going to mention.

    I think though you are a pretty big guy and on the heavy side, this is good advice and should work pretty good for you! With all the new forks out there, you shouldn't have a problem finding a 34mm in a 140 to go on the WFO, definitely upgrade to a coil though, you'll definitely see more reliability at your weight on one!
    Ibis Ripley LS
    Intense Spider 29 C
    Cervelo S2
    Trek Boone 5 Disc
    Spech Tricross Expert
    Raleigh RX 1.0

  70. #70
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by BloodyRoots View Post
    I know that a lot of people will argue, but cracks to me on the weld on an alum frame scream faulty heat treating. I bet niner will take care of you though.
    I think you're right on both counts.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    72
    This brought a tear to my eye! I'm a "light" 235lb rider and I've taken my rip9 through the hoops...rock waterfalls, 4 foot drops to flat, 6 foot drops to transition, and some dirt jumping...never seen anything like this with the models. Good luck!

  72. #72
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    42
    Was your RIP 9 made of Scandium?

  73. #73
    ~Reformed Mechanic~
    Reputation: Ace5high's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    Man that sucks, I know Niner offers a crash replacement at a lower price but still gonna be spendy. I'm now more concerned that mine wasn't a fluke. Oh well, if it makes it to the end of the 2 year warranty period, I will be inspecting mine with an electron microscope before the warranties up
    Just out of curiosity did you ever ask Niner if the RIP 9 has a rider weight limit? Ive never heard of one listed but that doesn't mean they might not have one... food for thought...
    I do all my own stunts, but never intentionally...

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by Ace5high View Post
    Just out of curiosity did you ever ask Niner if the RIP 9 has a rider weight limit? Ive never heard of one listed but that doesn't mean they might not have one... food for thought...
    Niner bikes don't have a weight limit. I'm not sure about their carbon bikes though.

    Been riding the snot out of the new RIP and am down about 20 lbs. Keeping a very close eye on the break point. While I understand a lot of the suggestions to switch to the WFO, I'm pretty sure that it will show a sign of impending failure before it fails catastrophically (hoping it won't). Keep a close eye out for cracks and I should be ok.

    Thanks to everyone who provided constructive input

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hangdogdaddy38's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    130
    I'm surprised that bike companies haven't began making weight requirements part of their warranty exclusions on their frames.
    Mongoose Summit Pro
    Gary Fisher Tassajara
    Motobecane Fantom Trail DS
    Trek 2011 X-Caliber

  76. #76
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    Niner bikes don't have a weight limit. I'm not sure about their carbon bikes though.
    I think he's more talking about that 300 psi limit on the shock. If you weigh enough that 300 psi isn't enough and bottom out the shock quite a bit...

    I guess you can switch to a new shock or go coil at that point.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    110
    Wow, I've never seen a frame break there! Hope you weren't to far from your car.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    13
    Ouch!!! That sucks, hope Niner is play nice and helping you out.

  79. #79
    SSolo, on your left!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,577
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    Yeah, that welded derailleur hanger is a doosie.

    Why say anything if you're going to just pull something out of your ass?
    Yes, exactly my thougts too.

    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    325 lbs. and you need "that much bike," whether you want it or not.
    Yup.

    Quote Originally Posted by mud0shark View Post
    Can't wait until the carbon version comes out and this won't happen as with micro thin aluminum.
    That all depends...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    Niner bikes don't have a weight limit. I'm not sure about their carbon bikes though.

    Been riding the snot out of the new RIP and am down about 20 lbs. Keeping a very close eye on the break point. While I understand a lot of the suggestions to switch to the WFO, I'm pretty sure that it will show a sign of impending failure before it fails catastrophically (hoping it won't). Keep a close eye out for cracks and I should be ok.

    Thanks to everyone who provided constructive input
    Good luck with it and congrats on losing weight and having fun riding!
    Last edited by Natedogz; 08-31-2012 at 10:22 AM.
    Get off the couch and ride!

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    50
    Sasquatch responded to my question in another thread with the carnage to his Rip9. Thought I would bring this to all of you wondering about the WFO. Did this to my WFO last week. Same break in the same place. About 1,000 miles on this frame, 99% of it on the road. About the worst I do to it is curbs and potholes (of course, this is Houston, so potholes here are pretty much like riding off-road), but I do stay in the saddle most of the time.

    All of this got me to think that maybe the bent seat tube coupled with the position of the weld for the upper swing arm was the weak spot. Not that it is definitive with only my brief sample of one Rip and my WFO, but it gets you wondering.

    As a fair disclosure, Niner has been great to work with, and I think their products are awesome. This is actually the second frame I have broken, but the first one was the rear triangle that had a stress fracture which Niner said was a bad casting and they replaced it under warranty. The ride of the WFO is great, and I knew I was going to need a downhill/all-mountain solution for my weight. At this time, I haven't gotten the official word from Niner on whether they are going to warranty this one, but I have a feeling they will. As I said, they are a great company to work with. I'm just waiting on more info from them to see if there is a solution for this problem for us larger guys.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Broken Niner RIP9-photo-12-.jpg  


  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    686
    Well makes me wonder if the WFO is really any stronger in that area compared to the RIP. Very concerning that you mostly only ride paved trails with no hucking too. I rode my RIP solely on singletrack and while I don't jump much, trails here are pretty rocky and rough. Are you bigger than me?

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch1413 View Post
    Well makes me wonder if the WFO is really any stronger in that area compared to the RIP. Very concerning that you mostly only ride paved trails with no hucking too. I rode my RIP solely on singletrack and while I don't jump much, trails here are pretty rocky and rough. Are you bigger than me?

    I too am concerned that this happened with me really only riding on the street. I think given the way the frames are constructed that the difference in frame strength seems to be minimal between the two, but I'm just guessing. I would think the WFO would specifically be built a little tougher given what it is intended for, but only Niner can really answer that question. When we built this bike we consulted extensively with Niner about the set up for my weight, but most of our attention was put on the shock set up front and rear, with the assumption that the WFO frame was going to be plenty stout. It was the only frame they felt confident would hold me, and was really the only frame that could be set up with the coil-over I would need to suspend my weight.

    I'm 6'6", and my weight fluctuates between 300-330lbs depending on my weight training program and diet. I typically bulk up over winter and lean out over summer. I'm going to try and stay at 300 this winter though, in no small part due to wanting to be able to ride without breaking my stuff! Although that 10% fluctuation may not make a big difference in reality.

  83. #83
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,693
    Like I said in my previous post, I think it's just simply a case of that kind of suspension design + clyde.




    Video of how it happened:
    - don't mind the confidential tag and the dramatic stuff... it was meant to be a private video with the guy whose bike was busted, but I think his warranty claim has been completed and he has already sold the warranty replacement
    - also a video account of how my Chris King hub went kaput trying to climb something that was a bit beyond my limits. CK's CS is worthless.

    <iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/35545233?title=1&amp;byline=1&amp;portrait=1" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe> <p><a href="http://vimeo.com/35545233">Sycamore Canyon claims yet another</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/varaxis">Varaxis</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>

  84. #84
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by The Butcher View Post
    I'm 6'6", and my weight fluctuates between 300-330lbs depending on my weight training program and diet. I typically bulk up over winter and lean out over summer. I'm going to try and stay at 300 this winter though, in no small part due to wanting to be able to ride without breaking my stuff! Although that 10% fluctuation may not make a big difference in reality.
    The WFO is a strong frame no doubt. However, at your dimensions, I am wondering if you might be entering custom bike territory? A Ventana with thicker tubing, and more gussets might be in order? I am a pretty big kid and ride fairly aggressively. The WFO has been great for me from Whistler to Moab and I have never worried about it failing. Having said that, I am only about 2/3 your weight.

  85. #85
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by nolan17 View Post
    Hey Sasquatch, you have 90lbs on me and are 5 inches shorter, I have been running a WFO for the past 3 seasons. I've broken 10 frames in 8 years before the WFO and am pleased with how it has held up. You will learn that for a super clyde like yourself you will need FR/DH parts to be used as a trailbike. When you get a WFO get rid of the 120 fork you had on the RIP and replace it with a Fox 34 or Manitou dorado. I feel that anything less burly in the fork area will break under your weight causing you severe injury, most likely at speed. Also while you are Ebaying your fork, add the Monarch too and go with a coil if possible CCDB, Manitou etc, I have an Elka that has been really good as well on the WFO. It's just not worth risking these parts to fail on you, I mean you did see what you did to your RIP right?!

    As far as pedaling efficiency goes, the WFO is an excellent pedaler, especially the more technical the trail gets. It does have the same CVA susp as the RIP so expect the same efficiency with a little more plush feel from the inch more travel. Also I am not sure if you went with a Maxle out back but I would recoment that as well.

    Good luck on your WFO build, send us a pic when it's all built up.

    -Nolan
    There is no way he can get enough spring and preload on a CCDB on a WFO... I maxed mine out with a 700 pounds spring when my weight went up to 240 pounds on my WFO. the guy needs to stick to a 2 : 1 rocker ratio to keep the pressure in line for his 325 pounds of weight in an RP23. I'd be inclined to run a RIP rocker on a WFO and go with a 2.25 or 57mm stroke rp23 on his WFO, and watch the pressure in the shock.... that failure looks like running the air pressure too low and a failure when the shock bottoms all the way out, then something in the frame has to give.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post

    <iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/35545233?title=1&amp;byline=1&amp;portrait=1" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe> <p><a href="http://vimeo.com/35545233">Sycamore Canyon claims yet another</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/varaxis">Varaxis</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>
    That's a sad video!

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Like I said in my previous post, I think it's just simply a case of that kind of suspension design + clyde.
    I'm inclined to agree with you. I'm thinking a DW link style might be more tolerant to heavy weight.

  88. #88
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by The Butcher View Post
    I'm inclined to agree with you. I'm thinking a DW link style might be more tolerant to heavy weight.
    Over 250 pounds as a Clyde with a rocker arm assembly mounted on the seat tube on a full sus is inviting failure the moment you bottom out the suspension. The shock bottoms out, and the rear swing arm keeps driving forward, ripping the seat tube out and forward at the rocker point. To avoid failure with a Clyde that size, the maximum you should go with for leverage ratio on an RP23 would be 2:1, so that the 300 psi pressure range gives you a better safety margin from bottoming out.

    An even better idea would be a speshy stumpjumper type suspension with a fastener on the shocks designed to shear/fail when the shock load becomes too great or bottoms out.... carry spare fasteners in your Camelbak, R&R and continue on your ride.. saves both the front triangle and the rear triangle from failure.
    Last edited by Boyonabyke; 10-18-2012 at 12:21 PM.

  89. #89
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,089
    Regardless, unless manufacturers start specifying weight limits.... its a welding issue... warranty !!!
    Evil Following
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    FM190 Fatty
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    600
    Seriously? I do not see this a this design over that design issue. Look at all these guys, they all say that they are heavy and they are riding XL frames. So if your bike has a 2.5:1 leverage ratio and you weigh 300 lbs then you have 750LBS acting on that little pivot. Now add in the shock, which works to counter that force. You have a lot going on there. Its natural that a frame would break. In that video the annoying guy in the background(who does that?) says, "YOU BROKE ANOTHER ONE?". So i bet the company took care of him and it sounds like Niner is taking care of everyone.

    I dont know where that is going, just that I dont think 99% of people are big enough(read, not fat. Just big) to ever produce these results and even if you do then you will be taken care of. Its those 1%rs that should be aware of their size and the forces they can generate just by looking at the bike and plan accordingly.
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    If I told you I saw a unicorn ****ing a leprechaun trail side, you'd probably be suspicious.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    9
    it is a tragedy your bike is broken.I just wander what do you did...maybe it is not a rock, but a bomb..

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by RandyBoy View Post
    Over 250 pounds as a Clyde with a rocker arm assembly mounted on the seat tube on a full sus is inviting failure the moment you bottom out the suspension. The shock bottoms out, and the rear swing arm keeps driving forward, ripping the seat tube out and forward at the rocker point. To avoid failure with a Clyde that size, the maximum you should go with for leverage ratio on an RP23 would be 2:1, so that the 300 psi pressure range gives you a better safety margin from bottoming out.
    I doubt I've ever come close to bottoming out my suspension. I ride on the road 99% of the time, and if I remember correctly we ended up with a 900lb spring when we did the math for setting me up on the WFO. I think PeopleForScience has a good point about the forces being applied with the weight/shock tension/angle of force, but surely some suspension designs have a better chance of holding up to the weight better than others. I'm no engineer though, so I can't work out the math to see what set up would actually work best.

    And from what I can tell, all of these manufacturers seem to be taking care of everyone which is really nice.

  93. #93
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,693
    That's what was said when the Giant Reign broke in that vid. They didn't think it would come close to bottoming out, but the shock was run soft enough, with low enough pressure, to be more prone to it. It was a very tiny rock, which was more like a warm-up and me just checking out various camera angles, to practice editing. Never expected that to happen; it turned out to be some good footage.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    600
    I seriously doubt that it broke on that bump. It broke long before and failed in the vid for sure. And its not a tragedy, all things break its just a matter of time.
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    If I told you I saw a unicorn ****ing a leprechaun trail side, you'd probably be suspicious.

  95. #95
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by The Butcher View Post
    I doubt I've ever come close to bottoming out my suspension. I ride on the road 99% of the time, and if I remember correctly we ended up with a 900lb spring when we did the math for setting me up on the WFO.
    Since you ride on the road 99% of the time...why not just see if niner will warranty you with a nice hardtail frame. It seems like this would meet your needs and also solve the issue? My experiences with Niner have been top notch and I'm sure they will take care of you, particularly since you aren't ranting and raving like a psychopath.

    If you'd rather have a full susser, it seems pretty clear that you should be considering a bike with a lower leverage ratio. Particularly since you are running a 900 lb spring, yikes!

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,918
    7-day BC Bike Race?

    Another similar failure.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by mr. welcorn View Post
    Since you ride on the road 99% of the time...why not just see if niner will warranty you with a nice hardtail frame. It seems like this would meet your needs and also solve the issue? My experiences with Niner have been top notch and I'm sure they will take care of you, particularly since you aren't ranting and raving like a psychopath.

    If you'd rather have a full susser, it seems pretty clear that you should be considering a bike with a lower leverage ratio. Particularly since you are running a 900 lb spring, yikes!
    I've considered going to a hardtail just b/c of the frustration of broken frames, but having ridden full sus since 1996 it's pretty tough to go back to the non-cushy ride of a hardtail. While I am on the rode most of the time, I like the fact that I can stay in the seat when going over potholes, etc. I just love the feel of front and back suspension. I borrowed a Marin Nail Trail last year when my WFO first broke, and it wasn't a bad bike, but I couldn't wait to get back on my full suspension!

    As far as leverage ratios go, the WFO still seemed like the bike to use when considering leverage ratios. I consulted with Niner, Ellsworth, Pivot, Turner and even the guys at Push. When they did the math the WFO came out the winner. Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way, and need to go with a shorter travel XC bike instead of the longer travel bikes. Do XC bikes have lower leverage ratios?

    Sasquatch, sorry for hi-jacking your thread!

  98. #98
    Chilling out
    Reputation: bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    5,820
    Butcher: no, XC bikes do not necessarily have lower leverage, usually shorter and lighter shocks.

    They also tend to be tuned for air shocks.

    For you, a freeride bike IS and XC bike. Shrug.


    Sent from my brain using neurons fueled by glucose

  99. #99
    Climbs = necessary evil
    Reputation: rogerfromco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    657
    The guy in the video where the Giant frame broke going over that little rock looks like he weighs somewhere between 180 - 225 lbs, and not a huge guy by any means. I'm really shocked the frame broke under those conditions or any for that matter based on his apparent size - far from a super Clyde.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    5
    Good luck with your next bike......

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 4

Posting Permissions

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