Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678
Results 351 to 386 of 386
  1. #351
    mtbr member
    Reputation: carpio77b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    167
    Scott,

    Was looking at the Anti Squat and Leverage Ratio curves and noticed that the Thumper wheel travel on the x-axis goes to 120mm. There is some conflicting info. on the web as to the rear travel of the Thumper between 120 and 130mm so I was hoping you could clear that up. If the shock stroke is 50mm and the beginning leverage ratio is 2.5, would that make the Thumper a 125mm rear travel? Or, is it the average ratio between 2.5 to 2.18, which would lead to 117mm travel. Also, it would be cool if you could describe how the varying anti squat and leverage ratio affects ride quality throughout the travel usage on this bike from the designer's perspective. I imagine that the rising rate leverage ratio speeds up the shock as it goes through it's travel, making the oil harder to pass through the orifice increasing bottom out resistance deeper into the travel. Something I don't quite understand. Please explain the anti squat ratio too. It's interesting that two Horst link suspensions can vary in performance characteristics between the Stumpy and the Thumper. Maybe this discussion is better taken up in a suspension design forum.
    Last edited by carpio77b; 02-26-2015 at 07:28 AM.

  2. #352
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Switchback Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    714
    It does have 130mm travel. Sorry to say, I'm not a suspension schematics guy so don't have any input for you on those questions. I am a ride by feel kinda guy

  3. #353
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noosa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Switchback Bikes View Post
    I am a ride by feel kinda guy
    Me too. I have tried a bunch of different suspension designs and for the type of riding I do (technical climbs and chunky downs) the Thumper has the best feel of any of them.

  4. #354
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Switchback Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by noosa2 View Post
    Me too. I have tried a bunch of different suspension designs and for the type of riding I do (technical climbs and chunky downs) the Thumper has the best feel of any of them.
    Sounds like our trails are very similar....my feeling about the Thumper/Unveil9 suspension is just like yours and was why I ended up choosing that frame for the first HH/SB frame model. I freakin love the way it rides

  5. #355
    mtbr member
    Reputation: carpio77b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    167
    Just checked and found that Caribou Ibex 29 is shown as 120mm rear travel on Caribou's website. I've read elsewhere on the web that the Thumper is the Caribou Ibex. So, who is correct here - Scott, the distributor, or Caribou, the manufacturer. Suppose I could let the air out of the shock, stick a pencil in the the axle with the frame supported and measure the length of the arc drawn by the pencil. Any volunteers?

  6. #356
    melon farmer
    Reputation: marcus_dukakis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    565

    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?

    Does the 10mm matter to you?

  7. #357
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    239
    I think he's just trying to figure out where the discrepancy in the numbers is coming from.

  8. #358
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Switchback Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    714

    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?

    Quote Originally Posted by carpio77b View Post
    Just checked and found that Caribou Ibex 29 is shown as 120mm rear travel on Caribou's website. I've read elsewhere on the web that the Thumper is the Caribou Ibex. So, who is correct here - Scott, the distributor, or Caribou, the manufacturer. Suppose I could let the air out of the shock, stick a pencil in the the axle with the frame supported and measure the length of the arc drawn by the pencil. Any volunteers?
    According to the engineers at Caribou, Stefan Stark (who designed the frame), Kona with their Satori (same frame as the Thumper/Unveil9/Ibex29 with a single-pivot rear....the frames have 130mm of travel.

    The pencil test hasn't been done....the 130mm published # for the rear travel of the frame has been based on the information received above.

    If we've all been duped, that is unfortunate....but IMO it still doesn't change the fact of how well the frames ride and how proficient they are in the chunky/technical stuff.

    Cheers
    Last edited by Switchback Bikes; 03-02-2015 at 03:21 PM.

  9. #359
    mtbr member
    Reputation: carpio77b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by marcus_dukakis View Post
    Does the 10mm matter to you?
    Yes. It's a matter of life and death...

    In all seriousness, I just want to know and think all Thumper riders would want to know seeing how the bike companies and bike media/reviewers tout the geo. numbers down to the nearest mm as the reasons that one bike is better than another.

    I will measure the travel this weekend and post my results.

  10. #360
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DeeZee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    6,016
    Quote Originally Posted by noosa2 View Post
    Me too. I have tried a bunch of different suspension designs and for the type of riding I do (technical climbs and chunky downs) the Thumper has the best feel of any of them.
    Yes it does! I have a SW Unveil and SC Tallboy. The TB is set up full XC and the Unveil as a trail bike with a 140mm Pike upfront. I haven't verified the 140mm travel on the Pike but I will take Rock Shox's word on it.........:-)

    The VPP on the TB works very well for XC and the 4 bar on the Unveil feels great in the chunk.

  11. #361
    mtbr member
    Reputation: carpio77b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    167
    Physical measurement test last night showed the rear travel at between 120 - 122mm depending on if measuring the complete length of the curve (approx. 122) or vertical displacement (approx. 120 mm). This was the longest, but probably most accurate measurement I took as the shock had to be forced to extend completely. Other measurements were 116, 112. The axle path did not move rearward significantly and the curve was rather "flat".

    Bike designers probably take their own liberties in claiming rear travel by arc length and then rounding up to the nearest 10mm. I think vertical displacement of the rear axle is more appropriate as it eliminates variances between axle paths, such as the s-curves of the Virtual Pivot Suspensions.

  12. #362
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,013
    Quote Originally Posted by carpio77b View Post
    Physical measurement test last night showed the rear travel at between 120 - 122mm depending on if measuring the complete length of the curve (approx. 122) or vertical displacement (approx. 120 mm). This was the longest, but probably most accurate measurement I took as the shock had to be forced to extend completely. Other measurements were 116, 112. The axle path did not move rearward significantly and the curve was rather "flat".

    Bike designers probably take their own liberties in claiming rear travel by arc length and then rounding up to the nearest 10mm. I think vertical displacement of the rear axle is more appropriate as it eliminates variances between axle paths, such as the s-curves of the Virtual Pivot Suspensions.
    Did you do this with a shock in place? Which shock?

    Fox air shocks have an o-ring bump stop at the bottom of their travel. That o-ring takes up approximately 1/8" of the shock stroke. I hardly ever push into that last 1/8" of travel with normal sag. It effectively shortens the stroke of Fox shocks by 1/8" shock stroke.

    If you were using a Fox shock that would pretty much account for what you measured compared to the claimed 130mm wheel travel.

    I'm not sure if this is the same with Rock Shox rear shocks.

  13. #363
    melon farmer
    Reputation: marcus_dukakis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    565
    You make a good point. Full travel is unlikely in normal riding conditions. My old RS Monarch had an o-ring style bottom out bumper too. Prob around 3mm or 1/8" from memory.

  14. #364
    mtbr member
    Reputation: carpio77b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    167
    Yes, took measurements with Fox shock in place for maximum usable travel.

  15. #365
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    239
    The last two Fox CTD shocks I've opened up to replace seals on didn't have any internal bumpers.

    I had come up with measurements close to carpio's-123mm. So, I was very curious to see what he found.

    Even at 123mm, it honestly feels like more then that on the trail and is a good deal on a good bike.

  16. #366
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by carpio77b View Post
    Yes, took measurements with Fox shock in place for maximum usable travel.
    Did you top link touch the cables on maximum shock compression?

  17. #367
    melon farmer
    Reputation: marcus_dukakis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    565
    So I got the Vorsprung Corset for the Float CTD on my Hammerhead. It took me a while to set up but I'm loving it now. The Hammerhead comes with a 0.4 volume spacer standard and I had to scavenge a 0.6 spacer to get the right balance of plush and end stroke ramp up. I weigh about 105 to 110kg ready to ride and had to increase shock pressure from 240 to around 270. Still experimenting but so far it feels more plush initially then a bit less soggy midstroke.

    Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by marcus_dukakis; 04-22-2015 at 07:04 PM.

  18. #368
    Live Free & Ride
    Reputation: NH Mtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    979
    How much rear tire clearance is there on the Thumper 29er? From viewing some pics it looks a bit tight even with a 2.25 inch tire. Any pics of this floating around as this is my biggest concern with this frame. Thnx!
    14 GT Zaskar 9r
    15 Moto Night Train
    08 BMC Trailfox
    06 Cannondale Rush
    99 GT XCR
    93 Raleigh MT 200

  19. #369
    The Fastest of Bananas
    Reputation: FastBanana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,488
    Easily enough for a 2.5.

    I bet a 27.5x2.8 would fit.

  20. #370
    Live Free & Ride
    Reputation: NH Mtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by FastBanana View Post
    Easily enough for a 2.5.

    I bet a 27.5x2.8 would fit.
    Thats what I wanted to hear...Yes for for a plus wheelset!

    This frame is the same also available now:
    Switchback Unveil 9 Frame (and Fork options - Bike Otago
    14 GT Zaskar 9r
    15 Moto Night Train
    08 BMC Trailfox
    06 Cannondale Rush
    99 GT XCR
    93 Raleigh MT 200

  21. #371
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Switchback Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    714
    It fits a 2.8 Trailblazer....might even clear a 3.0

    someone posted pics on another thread...

    I'll see if I can find them


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  22. #372
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,623
    Rear Chainstay is 75mm wide or 2.95 inches. It obviously narrows as you get closer to the yoke, so I'd say this favors a B+ conversion.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  23. #373
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noosa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Switchback Bikes View Post
    It fits a 2.8 Trailblazer....might even clear a 3.0

    someone posted pics on another thread...

    I'll see if I can find them


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Hey Scott,many luck finding the pics of the the switchback running a 2.8 trailblazer?

  24. #374
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,353
    Sorry to say but Scott ended up having to close his doors. Unfortunately, a whole bunch of items caused this but he was able to walk away without losing much in the endeavor. Part of it was that as things started to change in the industry his mfg was requiring more and more inventory purchasing from him, which he couldn't do. Bummed to see him go as the bike has been stellar. This happened just after the beginning of the year so I believe he is still responding to messages on here and emails. All information for the bike including schematic for parts and what not is in the Custom Builders thread.

  25. #375
    melon farmer
    Reputation: marcus_dukakis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by gregnash View Post
    Sorry to say but Scott ended up having to close his doors. Unfortunately, a whole bunch of items caused this but he was able to walk away without losing much in the endeavor. Part of it was that as things started to change in the industry his mfg was requiring more and more inventory purchasing from him, which he couldn't do. Bummed to see him go as the bike has been stellar. This happened just after the beginning of the year so I believe he is still responding to messages on here and emails. All information for the bike including schematic for parts and what not is in the Custom Builders thread.
    Sad news. Scott was great to deal with and the bike was rad.

    Sent from my HTC_0PJA10 using Tapatalk

  26. #376
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noosa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,510
    That is a bummer about Scott as he was great to work with...

    On a side note Please post up a pic of your Thumper/unveil with 2.8" or 3" tires.

  27. #377
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,353
    @noosa2
    Think that in the Hammerhead thread in Custom Builders Forum there was some pics of @Fastbanana doing it. Depending on how things play out for the season I may pick up a Magnum 27.5+ at the end. IF I do that then I will definitely be giving the 27.5+ tires a run on the Thumper frame.

    Found that I am slowly losing air in both the negative and positive chambers in my Dual Air Revy. Been wondering if going to a 34mm stanchion fork would make any big difference in the riding I do.

    Unfortunately, (or fortunately depending on how you look at it) there is a lot financially that is going on this year and I PROMISED the wife she would get a new paddleboard before I purchased anything major. Land Cruiser NEEDS a new exhaust so that is happening quickly, need my CCW completed plus my own carry, work done to the house, taxes, new tires for the 4Runner, etc. All these damn ADULT responsibilities and all I want to do is PLAY!!! Thanks god we don't have kids or we would be screwed! LOL

  28. #378
    mtb addict
    Reputation: AustinBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    45
    I used to frequent THE Hammerhead shop, some when Charles Coker ran it but more so at the last incarnation ran by Cody Barron. The Thumper is named for a hardcore trail known only to Austin locals, maintained by guys that think of a tree fall on the trail as a "new feature," which is not to say the trail wasn't maintained- it just wasn't paved like so many out there. This gives you an idea what the bikes are meant for. Some of the hardtail Hammerhead frames were handbuilt by a trio of locals, but yes I believe some of the full suss were rebranded Titus bikes.

    The shop is now out of business, as all involved in the shop enjoyed riding and valued friendship more than business. Haven't found as good a shop since, and I don't expect to.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  29. #379
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Switchback Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    714

    Hey guys!

    Quote Originally Posted by gregnash View Post
    Sorry to say but Scott ended up having to close his doors. Unfortunately, a whole bunch of items caused this but he was able to walk away without losing much in the endeavor. Part of it was that as things started to change in the industry his mfg was requiring more and more inventory purchasing from him, which he couldn't do. Bummed to see him go as the bike has been stellar. This happened just after the beginning of the year so I believe he is still responding to messages on here and emails. All information for the bike including schematic for parts and what not is in the Custom Builders thread.
    Hey guys....I just got on the 29er forum for the 1st time in like forever Noticed the thread....really appreciate people chiming in w/ positive thoughts.

    Yep, @gregnash you pretty much nailed it.....the MOQs went up drastically forcing a six-figure investment to get another production run going....it was a tough decision, but no regrets and had a blast while HH/SB was alive

    As for fitting a 27.5+ tire in the rear of the Thumper/Unveil9...a 2.8 definitely fits, for the life of me I can't find pics though. I am actually riding a Hammerhead Carbon Prototype frame still and I have it set up 29 x 2.4 front 27.5 x 3.0 rear....really enjoying it....probably has to do w/ growing up twisting throttles

    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-hhc-2.jpg
    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-hhc-1.jpg
    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-hhc-3.jpg

    It makes me feel like this guy in the turns
    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-p5pb10883974.jpg
    And is wicked good on technical climbs, traction for days.

    I am thinking of building my Unveil9 frame back up and going with the same set up or Plus front and rear....If I do, will see if the 3.0 in the rear works and upload pics

  30. #380
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,353
    Ah SWEET!!! Was hoping you will still rummaging around on the boards Scott!!

    Goma up front is a SWEET tire, let me tell you.

    So couple questions for you and you can answer via PM if you want...
    The 29er carbon proto
    - Still same geos and everything?
    - With 27.5+ on back does it drop BB at all?
    - Any negative affects from the mid-fat?
    - What length fork are you running?


    If I can throw out what I have been contemplating..... Go with a Boost 27.5+ fork up front and run the 2.8s all around. My old Revy is starting to leak air so new fork will be in order after this season probably. Want to go with bigger stanchion fork, specifically want a 29er Manitou Mattoc but that aint happening. So next best thing is the 27.5+ Manitou Magnum+ which will allow me to still run standard 29er tires AND 27.5+. So if your community has a say in it... go with 27.5+ all around on the Thumpeveil!

  31. #381
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Switchback Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by gregnash View Post
    Ah SWEET!!! Was hoping you will still rummaging around on the boards Scott!!

    Goma up front is a SWEET tire, let me tell you.

    So couple questions for you and you can answer via PM if you want...
    The 29er carbon proto
    - Still same geos and everything?
    - With 27.5+ on back does it drop BB at all?
    - Any negative affects from the mid-fat?
    - What length fork are you running?


    If I can throw out what I have been contemplating..... Go with a Boost 27.5+ fork up front and run the 2.8s all around. My old Revy is starting to leak air so new fork will be in order after this season probably. Want to go with bigger stanchion fork, specifically want a 29er Manitou Mattoc but that aint happening. So next best thing is the 27.5+ Manitou Magnum+ which will allow me to still run standard 29er tires AND 27.5+. So if your community has a say in it... go with 27.5+ all around on the Thumpeveil!


    Yeah it is...I remember you were one of the first people I saw posting info about it....I had a huge stack of Maxxis OE tires and finally went through them...your Goma feedback always stuck in my head so went for it when I ran out of the Maxxis OE tires...it's an awesome tire

    29er Carbon Proto
    - a little steeper HTA than the Thumper....70 degrees w/ a 120mm fork...120mm rear....it's more XC/Trailbike versus Trailbike/Enduro. I have a 130mm Pike on it right now, so kicks the HTA back a little bit...Kinda like a Rocky Mountain Instinct or Thunderbolt (there's a 130mm travel 27.5 version as well.)
    - haven't measured the BB, but haven't had any pedal strike issues
    - that rear tire is really heavy, so if you have a lot of long smooth climbs you might not like it very much....but everywhere else, especially when it's technical, it's awesome....IMO
    - 130mm fork

    I think 27.5 x 2.8 front and rear on the Thumpeveil (dig that word by the way ) would be great....I might have to do that to my Thumpveil frame! I am getting the rear shock back from PUSH soon, so building will commence....just need to get a front wheel/tire.

    BTW, I just threw the rear wheel in my Unveil9 frame. Light Bicycle 38mm (external) wide w/ the WTB Bridger 27.5 x 3.0 (it's a fat 3.0) and it doesn't fit.
    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-unveil-1.jpg
    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-unveil-2.jpg
    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-unveil-4.jpg

    I know for sure the WTB Trailblazer 27.5 x 2.8 fits w/ no issues, so as long as you have a 2.8 wide tire along the same dimensions (wide) it should work w/o any issues
    And definitely go w/ a fatter stanchion fork than the Rev....when I went from Rev to F34 and then Pike it was a HUGE difference...you will love it!

    Cheers!

  32. #382
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noosa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,510
    Thanks for posting the pics Scott. Love to see how much room the 2.8 trailblazer leaves.

  33. #383
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,353
    Yeah I think if I actually planned to run anything wider than the 2.8 then I would probably go with a dedicated mid-fat bike so that I could properly run the 3.0+ tires. The suspension characteristics would change enough that it would benefit from it.

    Now just to figure out the fork thing. REALLY REALLY wish Manitou would release a 34mm TRAIL/AM fork for 29ers but highly doubt that happens. And I honestly don't want to give my money to anyone else so that leaves me with going with a 32mm stanchioned MINUTE PRO in 140mm or go with the Magnum+ in the 27.5+ in 140mm. Decisions, decisions.

  34. #384
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,623
    So when my bearing failed, it took the outer bearing seal/washer with it.

    The good washer on the side where the bearing was fine:
    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-img_1584%5B1%5D.jpg

    The bad washer, where the bearing failed:
    HammerHead Thumper, thoughts?-img_1586%5B1%5D.jpg

    Luckily it seems like I'll be able to temporarily ride the bike even without the washer, but I'll need to source new washers from Scott or someone else before too long.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  35. #385
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,623
    BTW:

    The chainstay weld to chainstay weld width of the Unveil9 and Thumper is 75mm, which is where a 275x2.8 sidewall/casing is.

    The Unveil7 is 73mm from chainstay weld to weld, and unfortunately that is right where the tread is.

    I've had some pretty substantial rub when my Stans EX wheel with Breakout 2.5 (same casing as Trailblazer) went out of true. I probably only about 3-4mm on either side of the casing.

    From what I hear, the Trailblazer is at it's narrowest (on 23mm internal rim width) a 64mm wide tire, and its widest (35+ rim width), a 69mm wide tire.

    The Nobby Nic 2.8 is of similar dimensions to the Trailblazer, so it's next on my list to try.

    Ironically my Unveil7 can fit a 29x2.3, but it can't fit a 275x3.0
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  36. #386
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noosa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,510
    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    BTW:

    The chainstay weld to chainstay weld width of the Unveil9 and Thumper is 75mm, which is where a 275x2.8 sidewall/casing is.

    The Unveil7 is 73mm from chainstay weld to weld, and unfortunately that is right where the tread is.

    I've had some pretty substantial rub when my Stans EX wheel with Breakout 2.5 (same casing as Trailblazer) went out of true. I probably only about 3-4mm on either side of the casing.

    From what I hear, the Trailblazer is at it's narrowest (on 23mm internal rim width) a 64mm wide tire, and its widest (35+ rim width), a 69mm wide tire.

    The Nobby Nic 2.8 is of similar dimensions to the Trailblazer, so it's next on my list to try.

    Ironically my Unveil7 can fit a 29x2.3, but it can't fit a 275x3.0
    If you end up running Nobby Nics on your Thumper/Unveil 9 please post up picks of the chain and seat stay clearance.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678

Posting Permissions

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