Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 561
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Billy Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    44

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    I'm starting a new thread on the Carbon Atlas. These are just shipping and I just built mine up, so offering up some more info on this bike. Everyone feel free to add your Atlas Carbon info and questions.

    I ordered the frame and had it built with what I like by the awesome guys at OYL in Louisville. I haven't gotten to ride it as the trails here in the midwest aren't rideable just yet. For reference on frame size etc I am 5'11" 165 lbs. Ride most XC with a few trips to pisgah and an endurance race or two each year.

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_0175.jpg

    My build is mid weight durable stuff:

    Atlas Carbon Medium has 24" virtual top tube
    Reba RLT / Lockout Maxle 100mm
    X9 build with X0 twist shift
    Thompson/Enve cockpit 90mm stem length
    I9/Arch Racing Ralph and Rocket Ron 2.25 SS

    Frame weight for medium frame with shock/pivots, rear axle, seat collar and headset = 6 lbs 1 ounce which is a competitive weight for this class bike IMO

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_0165.jpg

    Total build weight with pedals = 26 lbs 6 ounces

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_0172.jpg

    A few other details

    Cable routing looks very well thought out

    BB92 Carbon bottom bracket looks huge, this is my first carbon mtb so not used to that

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_0183.jpg

    Plenty of clearance for 2.35s if you want to run em, these are 2.25s

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_0180.jpg

    Maxle rear axle is a nice touch

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_0181.jpg

    Cockpit

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_0177.jpg

    Also digging the graphics

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_0184.jpg

    Next pics and info will be with some dirt on it. Looking forward to having full suspension as my other two bikes are rigid Jabber single speed 23 lbs and hard tail Scott Scale AL 25 lbs.

    If you have one or have questions post em up in this thread...
    Last edited by Billy Davis; 03-07-2013 at 10:11 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,384
    Beautiful rig. Looking forward to your report.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,138
    lovely!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Noclutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    792
    Nice! Especially the coral snake top tube- "red meets yellow..." Hope not!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Billy Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    44

    Shake down ride report

    Trails firmed up a bit and took her for a shake down run.

    This was an eye opening ride for me. The bike felt very different from my Scott Scale. I guess it was in a good way as I had a big smile on my face for most of the ride. With that said I was surprised how different it felt. We have a very fast roller filled trail section at Waverly Park and the bike felt much more nimble here. The front wheel manuals up so much more easily its ridiculous. Also the way the rear wheel comes around on berms and hips is really fun.

    My overall initial impression is the bike road a lot more like a 26er from a maneuverability standpoint. You can really steer more with your hips. I've been on 29ers for a long time so this will take some adjustment time I think. Bike felt very fast through the higher speed sections. Don't have enough time to speak to stiffness and overall ride manners but I will say I'm impressed with the Split Pivot ability to pedal very firm with extremely good small bump compliance.


    A few other notes:

    I raised the rear shock pressure from 150 to 170 and it felt really good and was getting full travel. The Reba was ultra smooth and was getting full travel. The cockpit feels a tad compact to me so may try a 100mm stem and change the Reba to 120mm.

    Not enough time to make any conclusions but looking forward to getting to know the Devinici this Spring.

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_2693.jpg

  6. #6
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    Mine arrived last week and I promptly built it up with an existing XTR group.
    I used a 140mm Loop, ENVE AM wheels, Hans Dampf and Nobby Nic tires.
    Fox Doss post and Syntace cockpit.
    Complete it is 28 3/4 lb, which is a little on the heavy side, but it feels SUPER meaty with this setup. I know it could be lighter...

    I rode it at Pueblo Reservoir last weekend and had a blast. Super efficient pedaling and very invisable suspension action.
    I was thinking I'd lower my fork to 120mm, but after riding it on XC trails for a day, I think I'll leave it full-length since I often ride more enduro-style trails.Devinci Atlas Carbon-2013-03-01-19.53.19.jpgDevinci Atlas Carbon-2013-03-01-19.47.08.jpgDevinci Atlas Carbon-2013-03-01-19.46.55.jpgDevinci Atlas Carbon-2013-02-27-07.36.37-copy.jpgDevinci Atlas Carbon-2013-02-27-07.36.33-copy.jpg
    Last edited by vwvoodoo; 03-11-2013 at 08:51 AM. Reason: photo attachments screwed up
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  7. #7
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    It's neat to see the variety of setup - I wanted this thing to be rugged and still XC fast, but it can easily be built into a light fast race-only rig as well.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Devinci Atlas Carbon-2013-03-02-12.38.22-copy.jpg  

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-2013-03-02-12.38.37.jpg  

    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Billy Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    44
    We are both from Louisville!......KY and CO though


    Nice rig, is your fork adjustable on the fly?

  9. #9
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    Nope... Lowers have to come off and a stop pin moved (White Brothers has a good video on their site). It's doable, but I have a Magura 120mm fork that I'll try on it before lowering the 140 White Bros. To be honest, if the 120 feels good, I'll leave the Magura on it and save the weight. But I kinda like it tall and slack, so it probably won't happen.
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    726
    Check your PMs voodoo

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4
    Thx 4 posting, have my eye on the Atlas.

    Per DEVINCI , they claim a weight of 2.07 kg / 4.56 lbs.

    That seems light, no doubt yours is accurate, wonder why the big difference?

    tia



    Quote Originally Posted by Billy Davis View Post
    I'm starting a new thread on the Carbon Atlas.

    Frame weight for medium frame with shock/pivots, rear axle, seat collar and headset = 6 lbs 1 ounce which is a competitive weight for this class bike IMO

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0165.jpg 
Views:	2491 
Size:	176.3 KB 
ID:	778357

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    Quote Originally Posted by vwvoodoo View Post
    Mine arrived last week and I promptly built it up with an existing XTR group.
    I used a 140mm Loop, ENVE AM wheels, Hans Dampf and Nobby Nic tires.
    Fox Doss post and Syntace cockpit.
    Complete it is 28 3/4 lb, which is a little on the heavy side, but it feels SUPER meaty with this setup. I know it could be lighter...

    I rode it at Pueblo Reservoir last weekend and had a blast. Super efficient pedaling and very invisable suspension action.
    I was thinking I'd lower my fork to 120mm, but after riding it on XC trails for a day, I think I'll leave it full-length since I often ride more enduro-style trails.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2013-03-01 19.53.19.jpg 
Views:	942 
Size:	158.3 KB 
ID:	779832Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2013-03-01 19.47.08.jpg 
Views:	2270 
Size:	124.4 KB 
ID:	779833Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2013-03-01 19.46.55.jpg 
Views:	837 
Size:	62.7 KB 
ID:	779834Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2013-02-27 07.36.37 - Copy.jpg 
Views:	702 
Size:	98.0 KB 
ID:	779835Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2013-02-27 07.36.33 - Copy.jpg 
Views:	1670 
Size:	104.2 KB 
ID:	779836
    I'm getting my frame in about 2 weeks and need to buy some tires. For the rear, is there enough room for a Hans Dampf 2.35, or is NN 2.25 the max it can take? I'll probably go for 2.25 Ardent, but guessing a 2.4 won't fit....? Any ideas?

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,492
    Awesome looking bikes, getting great reviews at the moment too

  14. #14
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    I started off with a Nobby Nic 2.35 on Enve AM. When I rode XC on it, there was room, but I was dragging some gravel through the stays.
    A few days after, I rode it at the bike park, and noticed under hard compression and side load on the pump track, the rear tire was buzzing the chainstay very slightly.
    I'm 170lbs, and those wheels are pretty stiff, so I'd say for most riders the 2.35 Nobby Nic is too big.
    I switched to a 2.35 Hans Dampf and there is a TON of room around the tire. A 2.25 Ardent is puny compared to the HD, and a 2.4 is still a little smaller. I think you'd be fine with a 2.4 Ardent or 2.35 Hans. I'm also considering a 2.25 Nobby Nic, but I already had the HD in the house...
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  15. #15
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,560
    Great lines on this bike and I really like the color scheme. A couple of very different build philosophies here. Interesting.
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Billy Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    44
    Grid thanks for the props. I got 2 hours in yesterday on my local trail, and so far I can't believe how great the bike rides. Like VW said the rear suspension is so transparent, meaning it doesn't feel like much is going on in the rear but when you look down the shock is tracking like crazy. I'm not running pro-pedal at all and the traction and small bump is top shelf. Stiffness is very good with thru axles, I9 and huge bb. Another observation is how much better this bike bunny hops vs other full suspension. The wheelbase is an inch or two shorter than comparable rigs.

    Still have that new bike impression so take my observations with that in mind but I couldn't be happier so far!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    58
    any pedal strikes, or is that not a problem where you ride? this has come up in the couple reviews I have been able to find about the alloy version of this bike.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    726
    Quote Originally Posted by lordconqueror View Post
    any pedal strikes, or is that not a problem where you ride? this has come up in the couple reviews I have been able to find about the alloy version of this bike.
    There is only one review of the new carbon version:

    Devinci Atlas Carbon RC Frame Review - BikeRadar

    They now spec a 140mm fork on most models (2/5" taller BB plus it still has low/slack or tall/steep geo adjustment) instead of 100mm reserved for XC use and they use a different shock with better valving for all 2013 Atlas models.

    The original Al version has a large thread here:

    Devinci Atlas RC

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Billy Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by lordconqueror View Post
    any pedal strikes, or is that not a problem where you ride? this has come up in the couple reviews I have been able to find about the alloy version of this bike.
    I had two pedal strikes on a two hour ride, that is with the 100mm fork and in the low geo position.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    726

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    Nice review. Does anybody ride this bike (or the identical geometry aluminium version) with a 120mm fork?

    Most reviews point out that a 100mm travel fork positions this bike towards XC riding/racing and limits the descending potential of the rear travel. 140mm seems to create a chopper like feel and creates issues like too little pressure on the front wheel when climbing.

    120mm seems like a good sweet spot for a balanced bike which is why I am asking.

  22. #22
    formerly Giantxc
    Reputation: MrXC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    648

    Re: Devinci Atlas Carbon

    I have a 120mm Sid on my Atlas aluminum and have been very pleased with the combination. I find it works better on the steeper geometry setting with a 120mm fork. On the slack setting, I found the front end was a bit too light when climbing.

    Sent from my AT100 using Tapatalk 2

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by MrXC View Post
    I have a 120mm Sid on my Atlas aluminum and have been very pleased with the combination. I find it works better on the steeper geometry setting with a 120mm fork. On the slack setting, I found the front end was a bit too light when climbing.
    Thanks. May I ask, what size are you, what size Atlas do you have and what is your stem length?

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    16

    Good job!

    Quote Originally Posted by Billy Davis View Post
    I am 5'11" 165 lbs.


    Atlas Carbon Medium has 24" virtual top tube
    If you don't mind me asking, why did you choose a medium frame as Devinci recommends a size large for your height? 5"11" is at the very top end for a medium. For riders 5'10" and up they recommend a large.

    I am 5' 9.5" and I'm just under your weight. I ordered a large Carbon RC and just went to the LBS to take it for a spin. It feels huge to me. I feel as though I'm having to stretch to reach the handlebars, and that's with the seat adjusted forward and the seat post fairly low (moving it forward still), as well as the stock 90mm stem raised, which moves it rearward.

    There's less than a 1" difference in top tube length between a medium and large, and yet you noted that you felt cramped. If you go with a 100mm stem that should put you close to the same reach as the large I think.

    I'm debating on whether to exchange my large for a medium, but it sounds like you're going longer. Anyway, just wondering what factors led you to reach a decision of a medium vs. large
    Last edited by Shadow Wolf; 06-04-2013 at 02:10 AM.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,138
    I don't own an Atlas, but I thought I'd chime in with my 2 pesos. At 5'11" I would definitely want to be on a medium. Most manufacturers put people around 5'8-6' on a bike with a 23.5" effective top tube. New school geometry is pushing people towards longer top tubes and shorter stems. Most manufacturers put their larges at 24.5" and their XLs at 25 or 25.5". That means that the large devinci fits like an XL in other brands, and the medium fits like a large.

    For me, I'm most comfortable on a 23.5" top tube with a 90mm stem, but I've experimented with shorter and longer top tubes, with longer and shorter stems. I think I could get away with a low 24" top tube and a short stem, but we're talking like a 24.2" and 60mm stem. I've ridden bikes with longer top tubes (24.5") with longer stems, and they're downright dangerous for somebody who's too small. I would think the 24" ett on the atlas plus a 70 or 80mm stem would be a really great fit for an aggressive trail bike that still climbs fairly. Any shorter and you're sacrificing climbing by a lot.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    I am 5'11" and ordered a large Atlas. My calculations point out it will be the right size for me, with a 90mm stem. Another 2 cts:

    Basing size/fit on toptube measurement alone is tricky. That's why more and more manufacturers are putting stack & reach measurements in their geometry tables.

    The thing is; I'd like to keep my seat height / horizontal distance of seat behind the BB / bar-seat distance + height the same across all of my bikes. That keeps my knee extension angles and upper body position the same. In other words: The seat tube angle does not dictate where I put my seat, my desired riding position does that.

    The result of that approach is: I do not care about the portion of the top tube that is behind the BB. I care about reach. The Devinci has a pretty slack seat tube angle, which puts a significant part of the top tube behind the BB. Much more than f.e. a Rocky Mountain Element that has a steep 74 degree STA. If you put the saddle in the same place, the size Large Rocky would stretch the same rider out even more.

    So.. the Large Devinci is not as large as the toptube suggests. If you have trouble fitting it, you'd have trouble on many size large bikes that have shorter ETT's. To me, Devinci's fit advice is not wrong. It's just based on averages, like every fit advice based on rider height. If you are in between sizes, be very careful if you have short arms and/or torso and/or have a very upright riding position.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Billy Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Wolf View Post
    If you don't mind me asking, why did you choose a medium frame as Devinci recommends a size large for your height? 5"11" is at the very top end for a medium. For riders 5'10" and up they recommend a large.

    I, too, am 5"11" and I'm just under your weight. I ordered a large Carbon RC and just went to the LBS to take it for a spin. It feels huge to me. I feel as though I'm having to stretch to reach the handlebars, and that's with the seat adjusted forward and the seat post fairly low (moving it forward still), as well as the stock 90mm stem raised, which moves it rearward.

    There's less than a 1" difference in top tube length between a medium and large, and yet you noted that you felt cramped. If you go with a 100mm stem that should put you close to the same reach as the large I think.

    I'm debating on whether to exchange my large for a medium, but it sounds like you're going longer. Anyway, just wondering what factors led you to reach a decision of a medium vs. large
    My local BS did all the measurements on my current Scott Scale which is a large. And as you indicated we are tweeners. The measurements showed I could just make the medium Atlas work. I went with the medium due to the shorter wheelbase.

    I did a 4 hour ride last weekend with a few more tweeks and still on the 90mm stem and 100mm fork. I have really become comfortable on it and the measurements show I am within 5mm on reach of my Scott Scale setup and very close relative to BB pedaling position. My personal opinion would be that you try with a shorter stem to see how that feels. Upside of our height is you can make either size work pretty well.

    The more time I get on it the more I'm loving it. AMAZING being on a carbon wonder bike after riding a AL hard tail for long! The bike is so maneuverable in the tight sections and very plush through the rough rooty sections. Very good tracking with the I9 wheels and traction sitting or standing is excellent. Also pedal strikes have not been an issue at all for me at 170lbs in the rear shock on the low geo setting.

    There are plenty of amazing bikes out there but the Atlas has to be right up there considering the Split-Pivot suspension, short wheelbase and price.
    Last edited by Billy Davis; 03-28-2013 at 07:54 AM.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,138
    I guess I don't put a lot of value on reach and stack because they are so dependent on fork A2C and even headtube length. They're also far more relevant to bikes where you stand most of the time. Since you'll hopefully be sitting a majority of the time, the top tube length is essential to the comfort of the fit, with the seat angle affecting the body's position over the BB. I for one hate slack seat angles, but they can be accommodated for if the seat tube length is long so that the dramatic increase in top tube isn't as noticeable. If you plan on standing more than sitting, or are looking at frames with dramatic, 59* seat angles, then yes, reach can be more important, but I'd much rather know that my bike is going to be about X long from my butt to my arms, than any relation from my hips to my hands when standing on my trail bike.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    I guess I have not been able to make my method clear to you. I do not let the seat tube angle of the frame determine where my seat is. It's where I want to put my seat in relation to the BB that requires a certain position in the seat post clamp and might even require extra setback in the seatpost.

    Seat tube angle is just a frame dimension. It determines what seat post extension, seat post setback and position of the saddle in the clamp I need to get my butt to where it needs to be in relation to the pedals. In other words: I do not care about which components are between my saddle and my BB, as long as they can be adjusted to where I want to sit.

    Is your concept of 'reach' correct? I do not recognise what you are saying about stack & reach at all... Especially the bit about standing up. I just use reach to determine what size frame would fit me and it's very useful, because ETT measurements are clouded by STA. Here's some extra information about the concepts and the limitations of using top tube lenght for fitting. Bike Geometry, Sizing and Fit - Cervélo

    (Yes, it's a roadbike brand, but the same goes for MTB)

    Offcourse it's OK if you have another fit method. For my method, stack and reach are the best determinators of frame size fit.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,138
    No, we're on the same page.


    If the top of the headtube moves up due to a longer fork, reach and stack changes. If the top of the headtube moves down due to a shorter stack height via a zero stack headset or shorter headtube, it moves down. Unless I am mistaken...

    So, while they are important measurements, they also don't necessarily define fit alone, and I feel they are difficult to compare, brand to brand, unless you know specifically the axle to top of headtube measurements for both brands.

    Therefore...I still feel that top tube is a better measurement to size by, even though it's not the only thing that matters. Seat tube angle plays a role in that, but for me, I discredit any frame with a slack seat tube as one that is for all intents and purposes unrideable, so I don't need to bother sizing those. Also, if you can get your saddle where it needs to be, then seat angle is largely irrelevant....but that's a big IF with manufacturers sometimes.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    16
    I had a lengthy phone conversation today with the fine folks at Devinci. The topic was the improper fit of the size large Atlas Carbon RC that I ordered, namely the super long reach. Standing 5'11" with an arm length proportional to height, on paper I'm a prime candidate for a size large, but on the saddle it's another story. I feel like I have T-Rex arms.

    What's the Devinci rep's take on this? It's a known issue. The build kits ship with 100mm stems. According to the rep, a stem of that length on a large frame is suitable for individuals standing 6'2" to 6'4". Well no wonder it's such a poor fit for me!

    The solution that was offered was to replace the 100mm stem with one having a recommended length of between 50mm to 70mm. It was also suggested to use the positive rise side of the stem (it was configured that way) and to replace the flat bars with wide riser bars to further improve reach and to increase steering responsiveness. 730mm bars were recommended. Yikes! The stock 700mm bars seemed wide to me as it was, especially after previoulsy riding 670mm.

    I readily admit that my knowledge of geometry and the cause and effect of changes in geometry is rather limited. I'm hoping that those wiser than me in this area can offer some thoughts on how reducing the stem length from 100mm down to between 50 - 70mm (a 30 to 50% reduction in length) will effect the steering performance characteristics. Also, can I expect snappier steering with a riser bar, and is there anything more to be gained from going wider other than stability? (as well as a ton of tree strikes!)

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    We are on the same page. I guess we just approach size choice differently.

    Devinci does a good job providing different reach measurements for their different front travel setups and hi/lo suspension setting. Great stuff.

    You scared me a little by pointing out the ETT, just after I made the payment for my size large . It indeed is huge!

    I am confident I made the right choice, by looking at the reach measurement of the L in the 'Lo' setting, which I know I am going to use. It is exactly the same as the reach of a Trek Superfly 19", which I know I fit well.

    The 17,5" Superfly has a larger reach measurement than the medium Atlas (41.2 vs 40.3). I had a 17,5 Superfly and it was too small for me, so the medium Atlas would definitly be too small. Also, I am going to run a 120mm fork, which will shorten the reach a tiny bit further.

    Like I said, if you approach size choice like I do, you have to belong to the school of riders that position their saddle relative to the BB, regardless of what is in between. If your method is to let STA determine where the seat will be, better look at ETT.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Wolf View Post
    I readily admit that my knowledge of geometry and the cause and effect of changes in geometry is rather limited. I'm hoping that those wiser than me in this area can offer some thoughts on how reducing the stem length from 100mm down to between 50 - 70mm (a 30 to 50% reduction in length) will effect the steering performance characteristics. Also, can I expect snappier steering with a riser bar, and is there anything more to be gained from going wider other than stability? (as well as a ton of tree strikes!)
    Here's my experience.

    Riser vs. non-riser - very limited change, only in feel and comfort due to cockpit height.

    Wider bar vs. narrower. There is a sweet spot for each rider, and you have to figure out what it is for you. In my experience, wider bars, to a point, are more comfortable and offer more direct control (more leverage). They also offer a benefit of more leverage for climbing, quite similar to bar ends. You may, therefore, add 30mm of bar and drop bar ends, and get a similar advantage on climbing, in my experience. That being said, I think there is a point of diminishing returns, where you start punching trees and any benefits to opening up your chest for easier breathing and adding leverage drop off rapidly. Right now, I'm riding 725mm raceface atlas AM bars, and I'm back and forth between believing they are just right and too wide. I live on the east coast, however, so my trails are far tighter and twistier than wide open, and descents are short and technical vs. fast and continuous.

    Top tube and stem length - This is a hard one. It's been my experience that extending the top tube and shortening the stem, while keeping the overall length of the cockpit the same, creates a plus minus effect on the bike's handling. On the plus side, it corners better. You feel more planted in between the wheels and steering feels natural, with direct response from your hands on the bars to the wheel in front of you. Steering slows a bit, so at speed you can carve up turns without feeling like the bar is going to rip out of your hands. The minus side is that the steering has a more twitchy feel at slow speed. As you crawl over rocks you may have to concentrate more on putting the bike where it's supposed to go. Climbing suffers, and this is a big one for me. You will likely have to get out of the saddle more often on technical climbs, as your weight has effectively been shifted back an inch. You're more likely to loop out or get wheel flop as you climb super steep grades. You'll have to concentrate on keeping the bar straight and getting your weight in the right position to climb well.

    To qualify, I typically ride a 23.5" top tube, but was offered a 24.4" bike in trade for a frame I hated. I decided to try it, and rode the bike with a 90mm and 55mm stem. The 90 was too long for my body, but the 55 was very comfortable. I felt like my climbing suffered immensely, and I was shopping for a 70mm stem when I decided to go back to an FS bike and gave up on the project. FWIW, I ran the bike with 730 and 670mm bars on the 23.5" TT, but only 670 on the 55mm top tube. I felt like I would have been most comfortable with a 65 or 70mm stem and 700mm bars.

    I hope that helps. Longer TTs and shorter stems are definitely more aggressive, but it's a trade off that you have to decide whether it's right for you. I think the negatives can potentially be mitigated, but for me, I'm quite happy back on a 23.5" tt bike with a 90mm stem. It lets me stay aggressive in the short steep climbs out here, but I'm still comfortable pointed downwards and carving up trail. Nothing is so fast out here that I give up much due to the length of my stem. Still, if I came across another scott scale in size large, I would give it a shot, as that bike was quite a handler.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: savo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    780
    Can someone tell me what the shock's factory tune is for the 2013 Atlas?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    @vwvoodoo, what front mech are you using? Do you have enough clearance between the front mech cage and the tire when on the little ring?

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    I'm starting to build mine next week, and are using a 60mm stem with 740mm riserbars. Bars has 12dgr backsweep. My frame is a Large and I'm 5,11. Building as a trail/AM bike with fox 34 talas. Very excited to how its gonna look and ride! Pics will be posted ones it is done.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by Nilsern View Post
    Pics will be posted ones it is done.
    Same here.

    I am between 5'11 and 6' and also expecting a Large. Will mount 710 Easton Haven bars an stem length is to be decided. It's going to have a 125mm travel Reverb.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    Quote Originally Posted by JeroenK View Post
    @vwvoodoo, what front mech are you using? Do you have enough clearance between the front mech cage and the tire when on the little ring?
    Same question here. I'm considering one of these but have a little concern about comments regarding tire clearance. Can anyone post up info or pictures of tire/frame/derailleur clearance? I don't have the need or expectation of putting a 2.4 Ardent in there, but something like a 2.3 Ikon or Highroller on a wider rim would be nice. Any chance of that happening with room for frame/rim flex? I'd be willing to go 1x if necessary.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    20

    Good job! My new ride.......

    OK boys, here's my two cents based on my maiden ride last night and my longer ride today on my Atlas SL.

    First off, don't use a 100mm fork unless you want a cross country ride, and if you do, don't even think of using the Lo setting. I want a cross country ride, but my first time out last night I was having my doubts. 100mm SID, Lo setting, and 30% sag all conspired to have me hitting my pedals constantly. ARGGGGH!

    Today, different story. Flipped the chip, 20% sag, no pedal strikes, and it's a love story. The bike feels like home. The first time I pointed it downhill on singletrack, then rocky, rutted double track just blew me away. The suspension eats it all up, feels like 5 inches travel and with a 105 17degree stem, the bike handles like my Intense 5.5 26" bike, but lighter and more stable. I was so happy, I didn't want to come home. I love steep head angles, especially on a 29er, I was able to whip the front wheel around switchbacks like it was a 26er.

    BTW, I'm 6'1, long legs, short torso, the frame fits me like it's a custom build. I only wish they'd make the head tube longer so I wouldn't need so many spacers. I don't know what builders are thinking, it's a lot easier to put flat/reverse rise stems on in order to have your bars low than it is to get your bars higher.

    Sorry re the white fork, got a killer deal on MTBR classifieds, wanted black, couldn't pass this up for $400.00!

    Here's my build:
    Atlas SL large frame
    Stans Race Gold Wheels, Maxxis Ignitor EXO 29x2.1
    Sid RCT3 dual air
    XT shifters and deraileurs 11/36 cassette
    XO AM carbon cranks 24/38
    XTR Race Brakes
    Easton EA70 carbon riser bars 20mm rise, 635 wide
    Easton EA70 seatpost
    Ritchey WCS stem 110 17degree
    Cutter carbon rail seat (165 grams)
    haven't weighed yet, rides very light, guessing 24.5 or so.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Devinci Atlas Carbon-atlas.jpg  

    Last edited by muzicman; 04-02-2013 at 06:21 PM.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: savo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    780
    Bump!
    Quote Originally Posted by savo View Post
    Can someone tell me what the shock's factory tune is for the 2013 Atlas?

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    Quote Originally Posted by savo View Post
    Bump!
    Looks like HL.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Devinci Atlas Carbon-imageuploadedbytapatalk1364973390.562711.jpg  


  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    My frame and fork. Waiting for wheels and cranks before buildingDevinci Atlas Carbon-imageuploadedbytapatalk1364973463.563536.jpg
    Last edited by Nilsern; 04-03-2013 at 01:53 AM.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: savo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    780
    Quote Originally Posted by Nilsern View Post
    Looks like HL.
    Thanks!

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    Any chance I could beg some of you guys to take pics/measurements of chainstay and derailleur clearance along with tire width? It would be greatly appreciated

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    263
    I am currently riding a Turner Sultan and love it, but it is a very heavy frame and extra long chainstays... Wondering if anyone out there has ridden the Atlas and also the Sultan? I have been demo-ing the new Niner RIP9 carbon RDO and it is very solid bike and has fairly short chainstays. I can definitely tell the difference, but I am having tons of pedal strikes and feel like it does not climb quite as well as the Sultan. Only two short rides so far.... but this Atlas has really caught my attention, but a little worried that it will not be as "point and shoot" as my Sultan. I will probably never be able to try an Atlas before buying, so I am trying to find out as much as I can before buying. I want to have a solid feeling bike, not one of these fragile feeling carbon bikes. I will be building it up with a Talas 34 140mm for a solid trail - leaning towards all mountain and want to find out if this bike will be capable.

    btw - can some post what size seatpost this frame takes? and does the rear comfortably accomodate the Nobby Nic 2.35 ?

    Thanks
    Last edited by shutterbug67; 04-04-2013 at 04:47 AM.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by sandwich View Post

    I hope that helps. Longer TTs and shorter stems are definitely more aggressive, but it's a trade off that you have to decide whether it's right for you.
    Your reply was very helpful, Sandwich. Thanks very much!

    I'm uncomfortable making blind decisions for something of this cost. It would be so much simpler if the dealer stocked these bikes, but it is what it is.

    Anyway, if I'm understanding you correctly, a shorter TT with a 90 - 100mm stem would offer a more balanced compromise between slow speed/climbing and faster speed handling than would a longer TT with shorter stem. The shorter TT + longer stem would be a competent steerer overall, but it may be more bias toward slower speed/climbing handling.

    Is my interpretation correct?

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    16
    Is anyone seeing cosmetic blemishes on their carbon frames? The Atlas that's on hold for me has blemishes on the frame that look like water spots, but its actually in the material. I had Devinci take a look at it and they say its normal. Since when are flaws that are prevalent in the finish "normal"?

    The flaws appear to be cosmetic only, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the idea of dropping this many Benjamin's on something that arrived with defects straight from the manufacturer. To me it's akin to buying a new car with paint flaws with assurances from the dealer that it's normal.

    If its true that the spotting is normal then some of you guys should see signs of it on your frames. Anyone?

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Wolf View Post
    Anyway, if I'm understanding you correctly, a shorter TT with a 90 - 100mm stem would offer a more balanced compromise between slow speed/climbing and faster speed handling than would a longer TT with shorter stem. The shorter TT + longer stem would be a competent steerer overall, but it may be more bias toward slower speed/climbing handling.

    Is my interpretation correct?
    That is my personal opinion. From my experience, after swapping around bikes with differing top tube lengths and stem lengths, but keeping the overall cockpit length virtually identical, was that with the shorter stem setup, I could carve turns and lean comfortably, getting fairly aggressive with cornering and feeling very natural the whole time. The downside was that seated climbing in particular became extremely difficult. I've honed my ability to find the sweet spot on the saddle and crawl up steep, technical climbs through the years, but that spot was gone, now an inch or so forward of the saddle, which meant standing climbing for those spots where I used to be able to sit and spin. Also, relaxed, prolonged climbing suffered as your weight is now further back and the front end gets wandery. You now have to remain focused on climbing where previously you could simply sit upright and spin.

    Could I have figured out a better solution? Probably eventually. If I were riding trails where it was a slow grind to the top followed by two hours of downhilling, I'd probably go for the short setup regardless. For a balanced ride though, one that I think can handle the ~5% time you actually spend carving aggressive turns, as well as the 75% time spent climbing (trying to be realistic), I think a slightly shorter TT and average length stem (80-100) is good.

    LeeLikesBikes has some good info on the topic: Lee Likes Bikes . He keeps saying "braaap" which is great if you primarily DH, but if you attack climbs as much as descents, I think you need balance, and "adjusting my form" for 75% ups vs. the bonus you get on 25% downs, doesn't seem right. I really like a short stem on my DH bike, and I think the handling improves dramatically in that case, but on a bike that goes up more than it does down, you really have to make a decision.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Caveat...my comments are based on 2012 Aluminum, not carbon version. But from geo/tire clearance perspective, almost identical to carbon version. I have been on the bike since August. It is a size L, with Fox 120, wieghs 27.5lbs.

    First off I absolutely love the way this bike handles. The geo (HTA 69.5 with 120)short chainstays and split pivot make for a really fun ride. Compared to my former FS, an El Rey, this bike beats it in every way...except long seated climbs.

    As far as fit goes....I would say for me good, not great. I am 6'1 1/2" about 200 lbs., 34in inseam. I am using a 90m stem. In order for me to get to best pedaling position/height, seat is too far behind the BB. So I am riding the seat a little lower than normal. This is awesome when going down (in fact preferred), but less than optimal for seated climbs. Could get a dropper post I guess.

    As far as tire clearance, I have not figured it out yet. I have run 2.25 Nobby Nics and 2.3 Ground Control on rear and visibly should be OK. But 1-2 times on every ride I do get a tire buzz. Usually when loading up to hop something, or on a less than clean landing from a jump (no more than 3ft). I have a king/flow wheel, so wheel flex is not the issue. I was thinking it was rubbing the chainstay, but am now thinking it might be the front derailuer "collar" that attaches to the seat tube. This new info has me thinking to try a 1x set-up to eliminate. The Carbon version has a direct mount FD, so may not be a concern.

    For me, even with less than perfect fit and tire rub issues, I will say that hands down the most fun FS bike I have owned. Not sure it will ever replalce my SS, but the transition between the two is much easier now and it is getting more use than any other FS bike I have owned. .

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    As far as tire clearance, I have not figured it out yet. I have run 2.25 Nobby Nics and 2.3 Ground Control on rear and visibly should be OK. But 1-2 times on every ride I do get a tire buzz. Usually when loading up to hop something, or on a less than clean landing from a jump (no more than 3ft). I have a king/flow wheel, so wheel flex is not the issue. I was thinking it was rubbing the chainstay, but am now thinking it might be the front derailuer "collar" that attaches to the seat tube. This new info has me thinking to try a 1x set-up to eliminate. The Carbon version has a direct mount FD, so may not be a concern.
    Have you tried deflating the shock and cycling the suspension through full compression?

    Anyone else have feedback on tire clearance? Inability to run a generous 2.25 is a deal breaker for me

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    Have you tried deflating the shock and cycling the suspension through full compression?

    Anyone else have feedback on tire clearance? Inability to run a generous 2.25 is a deal breaker for me
    Great suggestion, tried it last night....bingo! That was the culprit. I added a Volume Reducer to the shock to see if this might help me from blowing through the travel and getting this rub. Will shake it out this weekend.

    Regardless, dont think a 2.35 will fit, but tires I referenced above (nobby nic 2.25/ground control 2.3) do have sufficient chainstay clearance

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    Regardless, dont think a 2.35 will fit, but tires I referenced above (nobby nic 2.25/ground control 2.3) do have sufficient chainstay clearance
    Hmmmmm.... I'm not sure if that makes me feel better or worse. A nobby nic 2.25 or Purg 2.3 is all I'm looking to run, but if it's line-to-line with the seat post then that's a "doesn't fit" in my book.

    Thanks for taking the time to check. I greatly appreciate it. Hope your air can mod works for ya.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    @NJ YetiMan, can you report on which frame rocker setting (hi/lo) the rubbing occured at? Seems the "hi" position pushes the rear axle away from the seat tube a bit.

    I guess this all will not be a real issue for me, as I'd rather pressure my shock to not bottom out in the first place, but it would be nice to know this risk exists at hi or lo setting or both.

    @car_nut, like he said, please note his is the alu version. No way of telling (yet) they have kept clearance the same on the carbon version.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    I'm actually just squatting in this thread. The alloy version is the one I was actually interested in.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    16

    Atlas Carbon Frame Blemishes

    Below are examples of some of the blemishes that are prevalent on my Atlas frame. Does anyone else have similar flaws on their frames?

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-image.jpgDevinci Atlas Carbon-image.jpg

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    My Gary Fisher Superfly has stuff like that showing through the clear coat all over the place. It's a carbon layup... not cosmetically uniform in all places and it does not have to be. As long as there are no cracks or air pockets, I'd say you are fine structurally.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by JeroenK View Post
    @NJ YetiMan, can you report on which frame rocker setting (hi/lo) the rubbing occured at? Seems the "hi" position pushes the rear axle away from the seat tube a bit.

    I guess this all will not be a real issue for me, as I'd rather pressure my shock to not bottom out in the first place, but it would be nice to know this risk exists at hi or lo setting or both.

    @car_nut, like he said, please note his is the alu version. No way of telling (yet) they have kept clearance the same on the carbon version.
    I have only ridden it in the lo mode. I like a lower BB...but sounds like I should try the hi to maybe eliminate this issue. I must say that I have never felt the shock "bottom out". The only way I know I am going all the way through the travel is that the "sag ring" on the shock is pushed to the bottom. When I played with the pressure to eliminate that entirely, the shock was too firm and lost its small bump compliance. To be clear...when adjusting the rear shock at no time did the fact that it could be the culprit (of the tire rub) come into my mind. Hoping the Volume reducer helps on both fronts. Keeping the shock pressure in the initial stroke soft and ramping up at the end to eliminate the rub. I will also try the Hi setting at some point this weekend.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    I have only ridden it in the lo mode. I like a lower BB...but sounds like I should try the hi to maybe eliminate this issue. I must say that I have never felt the shock "bottom out". The only way I know I am going all the way through the travel is that the "sag ring" on the shock is pushed to the bottom. When I played with the pressure to eliminate that entirely, the shock was too firm and lost its small bump compliance. To be clear...when adjusting the rear shock at no time did the fact that it could be the culprit (of the tire rub) come into my mind. Hoping the Volume reducer helps on both fronts. Keeping the shock pressure in the initial stroke soft and ramping up at the end to eliminate the rub. I will also try the Hi setting at some point this weekend.
    The volume reducer did help...but did not totally eliminate the rub. I actually liked the progressive ramp of the shock with the spacer...it feels snappy and almost shoots you out of a corner. So thats a keeper IMO. Did not try the switch to "hi mode", as I really dont want to raise the BB at all.

    I bought this frame from Speedgaot, who is now out of business, so I called Devinci direct this morning for some insight. They indicated that with the complete bikes they sell, they actually cut off the little tab on the derailuer that is rubbing (see pics). Before I start cutting...does anyone have any experience/insight on this? It seems straight forward, but I am hesitant to start hacking. Devinci Atlas Carbon-atlas-v5.jpgDevinci Atlas Carbon-atlas-9.jpg

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    726
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    They indicated that with the complete bikes they sell, they actually cut off the little tab on the derailuer that is rubbing (see pics). Before I start cutting...does anyone have any experience/insight on this? It seems straight forward, but I am hesitant to start hacking.
    Are you running 2 or 3 front rings? The 2 ring specific Shimano FDs have more clearance w/a shorter arm.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
    Are you running 2 or 3 front rings? The 2 ring specific Shimano FDs have more clearance w/a shorter arm.
    I am running 2x....and I think the FD is 2x specific. It is the 785 series.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    726
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    I am running 2x....and I think the FD is 2x specific. It is the 785 series.
    Its probably this modification:

    http://www.turnerbikes.com/turner-pd...h_frdermod.pdf

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    Yeah, go for it. Canfield recommends the same treatment for my Yelli frame.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
    That looks like it.....thanks. Have you done this yourself?

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    726
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    That looks like it.....thanks. Have you done this yourself?
    Yes, my 5spot 2x SLX FD is modified.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    Yeah, go for it. Canfield recommends the same treatment for my Yelli frame.
    With this mod, I am sure the 2.25 tire requirement you had will be fine. I must tell you...this bike is an absolute blast. Of all the FS I have owned/ridden (patron, el rey, rip9, tallboy, epic), this is far and away the best fit for my riding terrain/style. I just wish I figured this derailuer issue out sooner.

    Thanks to Car_nut and Sydasti for the assist!!!

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
    Yes, my 5spot 2x SLX FD is modified.
    Breakin' out the hacksaw! Thanks

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    726
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    Breakin' out the hacksaw! Thanks
    No problem in a month or two I hope to have at Atlas Carbon for Hartshorne (and elsewhere) too.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
    No problem in a month or two I hope to have at Atlas Carbon for Hartshorne (and elsewhere) too.
    Good eye! While the bike is definately overkill for hartshorne (I generally ride my SS there), the Atlas is the only FS bike I have had that is fun to ride there. I find myself looking for stuff to ride over/jump off. But I will tell you this bike is perfect for up north (Ringwood, Ramapo, Blue etc.). The short wheelbase really makes those slow, tight, techy sections more manageable. While I have not tried a 100 or 140 fork (the 2 stock options for the bike), I cant imagine either one being as good all around as the 120.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
    No problem in a month or two I hope to have at Atlas Carbon for Hartshorne (and elsewhere) too.
    Thats awesome. Hope to see you in the woods. I have yet to see anothyer Devinci on the trails. Great bikes...loust marketing

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    726
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    Thats awesome. Hope to see you in the woods. I have yet to see anothyer Devinci on the trails. Great bikes...loust marketing
    They are still building their dealer network in the US. I took an interest in them about ten years ago or so and saw their booth at Interbike 2002.

    You could always hit the drop right next to the water tower near the upper lot but I don't think its the right bike for that. Geometry reminds me of my 08 SCB BLT2.

    My favorite trails are in the Carbondale/Scranton area (Fell, Prompton, Moosic). Blue Mountain in Peekskill is pretty good as are the various trails in N NJ...

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ YetiMan View Post
    With this mod, I am sure the 2.25 tire requirement you had will be fine. I must tell you...this bike is an absolute blast.
    No doubt. It had everything I wanted on paper, but I decided it was too risky for me. I had some concerns about sizing along with tire clearance and finding a place to actually buy one. I went with my second choice and ordered a Satori frame.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    No doubt. It had everything I wanted on paper, but I decided it was too risky for me. I had some concerns about sizing along with tire clearance and finding a place to actually buy one. I went with my second choice and ordered a Satori frame.
    Nice! Good luck with your build.

  73. #73
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by shutterbug67 View Post
    I am currently riding a Turner Sultan and love it, but it is a very heavy frame and extra long chainstays... Wondering if anyone out there has ridden the Atlas and also the Sultan? I have been demo-ing the new Niner RIP9 carbon RDO and it is very solid bike and has fairly short chainstays. I can definitely tell the difference, but I am having tons of pedal strikes and feel like it does not climb quite as well as the Sultan. Only two short rides so far.... but this Atlas has really caught my attention, but a little worried that it will not be as "point and shoot" as my Sultan. I will probably never be able to try an Atlas before buying, so I am trying to find out as much as I can before buying. I want to have a solid feeling bike, not one of these fragile feeling carbon bikes. I will be building it up with a Talas 34 140mm for a solid trail - leaning towards all mountain and want to find out if this bike will be capable.

    btw - can some post what size seatpost this frame takes? and does the rear comfortably accomodate the Nobby Nic 2.35 ?

    Thanks
    I can respond all around - I rode a 2009 and 2011 Sultan for several years before moving onto the Atlas Carbon (from the first batch). I have found it to pedal as well as, and sometimes better than the Sultan. The chainstays are SO MUCH shorter on the Atlas, that standing climbing is far better, and though it doesn't seem to have as much anti-squat as the Sultan, it feels more direct in its pedaling.
    I would say it needs a little more finesse than the Sultan - it's less of a monster truck. Going from 18.5" stays to 16.9" stays makes for a much more playful bike, but at the same time, it is a little less forgiving when you mess up. I am finding myself riding my normal techy trails with much more tact and body english, relying less on the bike to power over everything in it's path. FWIW, I'm running a 140mm Loop, ENVE AM rims, dropper post, Hans Dampf tires, so it's definitely on the all-mountain end of the spectrum.

    I started off with a Nobby Nic 2.35, and riding XC it was fine, but when loaded up on hard corners (or the pump track) I got a little rub on the chainstay. This was on super wide AM rims - it may be less of an issue on narrower rims. I'd shoot for the HD or a 2.25 Nobby Nic.
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    176
    Can anyone compare to a Tallboy, and wheres a good place to buy a frame?

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by confused View Post
    Can anyone compare to a Tallboy, and wheres a good place to buy a frame?
    I have only ridden the TB for a day in Santa Cruz last year, and I absolutely loved that bike. It had a 100 up front, so definitely a little more XC, but a very neutral feeling bike that I adjusted to almost immediately. It was on my short list when I bought the atlas....but wanted aluminum and TB alum did not have a thru axle...a must have for a trail bike IMO.

    Relative to place to buy...good luck. I bought mine from Speedgoat, which is now out of business. Performance Bike is one on-line retailer I believe carry Devinci.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,384

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Larsey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    269
    Quote Originally Posted by confused View Post
    Can anyone compare to a Tallboy, and wheres a good place to buy a frame?
    Fanatik Bike is awesome. Jadyn will hook you up!

  78. #78
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    My 2.35 Nobby Nic (the biggest I've seen) on AM ENVE rims rubbed the side of the seatstays under hard load - I never had it touch the seat tube under bottom out. A 2.35 Hans Dampf fits easily. No need to worry about tire clearance unless you're looking at REALLY big 29 tires, which aren't really the type of tire this bike is built for anyway.
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  79. #79
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    To be honest - A LOT of carbon frames have that appearance when they don't have a cosmetic weave layer on top of the structural carbon. I wouldn't worry a bit about it.
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  80. #80
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    I spent a season riding a 100mm Tallboy, even doing my first 24hr solo on it. It was a great bike and felt really meaty for it's weight.
    That said, I'm having WAY more fun on my Atlas Carbon. The shorter stays and more direct drivetrain give very little pedal feedback and the braking control is better. The rear end feels tighter with the Split pivot compared to the multi-link, though my Tallboy was pre-142, so it may be better now.
    I do prefer the pressed headset of the Tallboy vs drop-in of the Atlas, though the drop-in is lighter.
    As far as where to buy - I can sell you one, or check the network of dealers. I know Colorado Cyclist has picked them up, but I can match their frame price. Most sizes are readily available now, so there isn't much of a wait (though it takes a while for them to ship out of Canada).
    If you're near Boulder, CO, you can ride my medium or my wife's alloy small...
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  81. #81
    11 is one louder than 10
    Reputation: Green Giant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,395
    Peformance is carrying these complete and have double points (20% back) this weekend.

    I was going to buy one a couple months back, then they pulled them and said they wouldn't be carrying them. So, i bought my pivot Mach 429 carbon (which so far I really dig), but the geometry on the Devinci is very appealing. Wouldn't be shocked if next year they have a full carbon model either.

    Would love to ride of of these to see how it rides. Dig the geometry specs.
    "The thing is, Bob, it's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care."

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    Just a teaser while I wait for my wheels. Devinci Atlas Carbon-imageuploadedbytapatalk1366038694.033989.jpg

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by Nilsern View Post
    Just a teaser while I wait for my wheels. Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1366038694.033989.jpg 
Views:	800 
Size:	168.5 KB 
ID:	790810
    Looks great Nilsern... mine will be very similar. Have the 34 Talas on my Sultan now, but once I ride it for a while and get a feel for the bike, I will prolly put a 120mm fixed length fork, so I can get a better performance. I dont like the talas at all on my Sultan in the 110mm position... even on super steep and long climbs. Wish I would have know before buying. My close friend says the same thing about his talas on the RIP9

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    170
    Just picked mine up this evening... Complete RX build.
    Not sure why they spec'd a 420x125 Reverb on a size small frame with an interrupted seat tube! Post is at max insertion as shown, and is set maybe a 1/2" lower than normal riding height...

    Devinci Atlas Carbon-img_2064.jpg

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    200
    I spent some time on a Large frame size demo yesterday. I am 5'10 with a long torso and short legs (30" inseam). The large was definitely too long for me. The bike was set up with a 70 mm Chromag ranger stem, and the saddle was all the way forward. On climbs I was having to lean really far forward to keep the front end down, sometimes resulting in rear tire spinouts. The bike absolutely slayed the descents. I'm going to pull the trigger on a medium here pretty quick.

    My riding buddy was demoing an aluminum version at the same time, but his was set up with a Fox 34 (140 mm) and that fork was so much plusher than the revelation that was on the carbon demo.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by jduffett View Post
    Not sure why they spec'd a 420x125 Reverb on a size small frame with an interrupted seat tube!
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_2064.jpg 
Views:	1855 
Size:	327.6 KB 
ID:	793244
    Have your shop switch it over. I mean, come on, that's a not properly working bike delivered to the customer.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by shutterbug67 View Post
    Looks great Nilsern... mine will be very similar. Have the 34 Talas on my Sultan now, but once I ride it for a while and get a feel for the bike, I will prolly put a 120mm fixed length fork, so I can get a better performance. I dont like the talas at all on my Sultan in the 110mm position... even on super steep and long climbs. Wish I would have know before buying. My close friend says the same thing about his talas on the RIP9
    The 120 fork will get you a well balanced bike.

    The 140/110, should be good for the Atlas though. As Fox 34 in 110 mode is pretty close to a fox 32 120mm when it comes to A2C. I wanted the 140 for all burlier riding I want to do.

    Got my 1st set of wheels today, EA70 XCt, I got a GREAT deal, so I'm setting them up with Schwalbe RR for light trailriding and boring workouts

    Still waiting for my AM wheels though. I can now tell that it is a set of Syntace W35, and are gonna use Maxxis Ardents in 2.25. Bet it's gonna be a Kickass bike !

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by Nilsern View Post
    The 120 fork will get you a well balanced bike.

    The 140/110, should be good for the Atlas though. As Fox 34 in 110 mode is pretty close to a fox 32 120mm when it comes to A2C. I wanted the 140 for all burlier riding I want to do.

    Got my 1st set of wheels today, EA70 XCt, I got a GREAT deal, so I'm setting them up with Schwalbe RR for light trailriding and boring workouts

    Still waiting for my AM wheels though. I can now tell that it is a set of Syntace W35, and are gonna use Maxxis Ardents in 2.25. Bet it's gonna be a Kickass bike !
    been reading about the Syntace wheels for almost a year now, but have not been able to find them anywhere... Have you found a source or place to purchase them? any good deals on them out there?

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    Got my frame in! Looks really good. It'll get the parts of my old bike, a WB Loop 120mm fork, RS Reverb, a smattering of XTR, Easton Haven bars and wheels built with AM Classic 101 rims (love those!), a Notubes front hub and a Powertap rear hub.

    Now waiting for the 135 QR dropout/QR kit to reach this side of the ocean to finish it.

    Could anyone of you who are allready happily riding theirs give me some hints on the rear derailer cable routing?

    It seems to have to be a full length outer cable all the way, is that correct? There is a cable mount on the swingarm, just below of the main pivot. If I would attach the outer cable to that mount it'll have to make a real tight bend to the hole in the chainstay. Is that what it's supposed to do? Pics of the BB area behind the crankset are welcome.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    Just built mine, and yes, you need a full-length cable. You need to make the bend, but I did not feel that it redused shifting performance.

    Build-tip: finsh cabeling for the rearshifter befor mounting the cranckset.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by Nilsern View Post
    Just built mine, and yes, you need a full-length cable. You need to make the bend, but I did not feel that it redused shifting performance.

    Build-tip: finsh cabeling for the rearshifter befor mounting the cranckset.
    Thanks. Yeah, I figured that last one out ;-).

    <edit> And I thought I might just as well do the front mech mod while it's not on the bike yet .
    Last edited by JeroenK; 04-28-2013 at 11:32 AM.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by JeroenK View Post
    Have your shop switch it over. I mean, come on, that's a not properly working bike delivered to the customer.
    I would... But I'll probably end up ebaying the Reverb anyway, and I suspect the 420x125 is more popular than the 355x100.

  93. #93
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    Check the specs on the alloy vs carbon - they aren't the same size. Also check your fork settings - the 2013 Revelation should be at least as plush as a 34...
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  94. #94
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    The full-run housing works great and with nice smooth bends. That said, it is a LOT easier to get it through the chainstay before you have a BB and crank installed. I have a pic here on a customer's XX1 crank, but even on my XTR triple there is plenty of room and the cable bend is smooth.Devinci Atlas Carbon-2013-04-28-19.04.32.jpg
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by vwvoodoo View Post
    The full-run housing works great and with nice smooth bends.
    Thanks, so I see. I could not imagine a smooth bend from the cable guide to the chainstay, but apparently, the cable is allowed to continue to bend in the chainstay.

  96. #96
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by JeroenK View Post
    @vwvoodoo, what front mech are you using? Do you have enough clearance between the front mech cage and the tire when on the little ring?
    XT Direct High Mount Triple. It's a dual pull, so I removed the bottom pull segment. There are no clearance issues between cage and tire. It did hit the bottom pull cable guide...that's why I removed it (with a hack saw and file)
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    Here's my build for now. I'm missing w35 wheels and syntace stem, and due to my short legs, I need a 100mm Reverb. In shown condition it's 12,8kg with pedals. Amazingly fun and quick bike!!! Devinci Atlas Carbon-imageuploadedbytapatalk1367593073.321506.jpgDevinci Atlas Carbon-imageuploadedbytapatalk1367592975.724287.jpg

  98. #98
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    That is a nice looking build! I like the red TRS cranks - they match the red highlights of the frame...
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    113

    Devinci Atlas Carbon

    Thanks vwvoodoo! I really like the looks of the E13 cranks too. Pluss it's stiff and light

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    822

    Bike ready! Hidden Atlas Carbon - Giant Anthem X 29er comparison

    Got my 135 QR dropouts, finished the bike and did my first ride.

    What a great bike! My former frame is a Giant Anthem X 29er. Both frames are size large and I have simply switched my 120mm WB Loop to the Atlas.

    On paper, the difference is not that great and the reality is: The Anthem is really hard to beat as a do-it-all bike. It's as light as aluminium 29er FS frames get, plush, efficient, agile and a great climber. The Atlas has 10mm more rear travel and is marginally lighter. What I was after was an improvement of ride quality, a bike better suited to the kind of riding I do and I simply liked the appearance of the Atlas. Offcourse the lifetime warranty is nice too and that it's a bit more future proof by being 142 rear axle ready.

    It turns out the ride is great and that's with a minimum of suspension setup effort. I just put the damper on close to 30% sag and rebound 2 clicks from completely open. It handles noticably better than the Anthem in a lot of ways. It has a tighter turning circle and is easier to throw into corners and change direction mid-corner, which was what I was looking for.

    Both the Anthem and the Atlas seem to have 'bottomless' rear travel, but the small bump compliancy of the Atlas sets it apart. The rear suspension movement under pedaling of the Atlas seems to be equal or even less than the Anthem's, which was not what I expected, as short link 'vpp' bikes tend to be really good at that. The biggest difference was how much easier the front of the Atlas can be lifted. It just wants to manual and bunny hop. Not that surprising with chainstays more than 1 inch shorter, but it amazed me how much difference that inch makes (insert 'that's what she said' pun here ).

    With a 120mm fork, it feels really balanced. Low BB, but not that low that I get pedal strikes (chip is in the 'lo' position). I have not done any seated steep techy climbing yet, which in theory could be a tiny bit harder with the short chainstays.

    Then there is a bunch of stuff that I really liked about the Atlas when assembling it. Devinci delivers a complete package, with headset, seatpost clamp, shock pump (Devinci branded, which is a nice touch) and frame protection for the chainstay and the downtube. Sure, a complete package is what can be expected with this price tag, but a headset and frame specific protection is not that ordinary.

    The cable routing is very well thought out and the finish seems high quality all over. Little things like the headset cup tolerances are on the mark. Not allways the case with drop-in headsets... It's after I assembled the bike that I realized that not one bit of improvisation was needed. Apparently I got used to bike frames less well designed.

    I have one crappy Phone pic that I will not bother you guys with ;-). Better ones on the way after I made my way to the south of France to do justice to the bike by riding it on proper trails.

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Devinci Atlas RC
    By S:Drive in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 10-26-2014, 07:27 PM
  2. 2013 Devinci Atlas carbon 29er
    By jhardeman in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-18-2013, 12:03 PM
  3. Devinci Atlas
    By jenndy in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-19-2013, 11:45 PM
  4. Mach 429 vs. Devinci Atlas
    By irishpitbull in forum Pivot Cycles
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-14-2012, 09:27 AM
  5. Devinci Atlas
    By mtbmitch2 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-07-2012, 09:58 PM

Members who have read this thread: 108

Posting Permissions

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