Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 301 to 362 of 362
  1. #301
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    Don't miss quote me.
    Sorry, I wasn't really quoting you, just using your statement out of context to further my agenda #5.5livesmatter #5.5isabigboybiketoo #firstworldproblems

  2. #302
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by lycra View Post
    Sorry, I wasn't really quoting you, just using your statement out of context to further my agenda #5.5livesmatter #5.5isabigboybiketoo #firstworldproblems
    I actually laughed out loud! I understand how you feel. I tested the next Hightower. On a train that really pushes my Riots limits....I'll keep my Riot. But I'm still looking for a big bike to keep her company.

  3. #303
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,991
    Quote Originally Posted by lycra View Post
    they ship with identical total travel - 140+160 and 150+150).
    Sorry but this made me laugh. That's not how it works.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  4. #304
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    Sorry but this made me laugh. That's not how it works.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    Don't be daft, you know exactly what I'm saying. The suspension that the manufacturer puts on the bike works wonderfully as an indicator of what category the bike fits into.

    Leave the 5.5 out, idgiaf. But the shootout will be incomplete without it.

  5. #305
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,991
    Quote Originally Posted by lycra View Post
    Don't be daft, you know exactly what I'm saying. The suspension that the manufacturer puts on the bike works wonderfully as an indicator of what category the bike fits into.
    I put a 200mm fork on a hardtail. It has the "identical total travel" as my 100mm FS XC bike. Lol.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  6. #306
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    I put a 200mm fork on a hardtail. It has the "identical total travel" as my 100mm FS XC bike. Lol.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    You are picking out some semantics to enforce your opinion that rules are rules and 150 is 150. Clearly the point is that the 5.5 is nearly the same damn bike as the HTLT, geo and travel-wise.

    It would be a disservice to consumers of the pending long travel 29er shootout the leave off a hugely popular and supremely capable bike from said category. But keep telling yourself that the 5.5 isn't a long travel 29er.

  7. #307
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,991
    Quote Originally Posted by lycra View Post
    You are picking out some semantics to enforce your opinion that rules are rules and 150 is 150. Clearly the point is that the 5.5 is nearly the same damn bike as the HTLT, geo and travel-wise.

    It would be a disservice to consumers of the pending long travel 29er shootout the leave off a hugely popular and supremely capable bike from said category. But keep telling yourself that the 5.5 isn't a long travel 29er.
    That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

    Regardless, it's been discussed. The line has been drawn.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  8. #308
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

    Regardless, it's been discussed. The line has been drawn.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    Ok Jake! You're the keeper of rules and final arbiter so I'll submit to your judgement, and discard my experience over 5000 miles aboard the 5.5, wreckoning, and e29.

  9. #309
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by lycra View Post
    You are picking out some semantics to enforce your opinion that rules are rules and 150 is 150. Clearly the point is that the 5.5 is nearly the same damn bike as the HTLT, geo and travel-wise.

    It would be a disservice to consumers of the pending long travel 29er shootout the leave off a hugely popular and supremely capable bike from said category. But keep telling yourself that the 5.5 isn't a long travel 29er.
    I agree - the 5.5 should be included. I don't think anyone here would contest the statement that bikes are more than just numbers. Therefore, let intended purpose delineate entry into the shootout, not an arbitrary line drawn in the sand.

  10. #310
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    75
    Can't forget the rocky mountain instinct bc edition:
    Introducing the new Instinct and Instinct BC Edition | Rocky Mountain Bicycles

  11. #311
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    The problem with a long travel 29er shootout that doesn't include a Yeti 5.5 is that you will not know if you can are buying the best big brand player in this hot segment, or maybe just the 2nd best. I mean you are excluding the bike that many experienced riders would tell you is the top bike in the category.

    The Yeti 5.5, in spite of only having 140mm rear travel, would certainly finish top 5 in this review if not top 3. So it should be compared.

    I like to read the comparison reviews because I'm always thinking about my next bike purchase for the future. I can't replace my Y5.5 anytime soon but if something happened to it I'd love to know what I should buy to replace it right now, and in to the future. I'm certainly not married to the brand and really I prefer Santa Cruz.

    Anyways, there are so many good bikes these days, it can't be easy for these editors to put these reviews together but at least it's a super fun gig!

  12. #312
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nismomike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    97
    There, you got ur Yeti.
    https://m.pinkbike.com/news/ridden-a...vel-29ers.html

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

  13. #313
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Nismomike View Post
    There, you got ur Yeti.
    https://m.pinkbike.com/news/ridden-a...vel-29ers.html

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    Glad to see the Yeti and Sentinel on there, but there is definitely still space for a much more complete roundup. Lots of very interesting bikes left off, looks like they just compiled some of their previous reviews.

  14. #314
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,384
    I'm going to copy and paste my previous post again as we seem to keep going round and round on the same issue:

    I understand the desire to say "test this bike or that bike as it almost meets the criteria and it fits the same category." I would love to see the 5.5 run with these bikes. I've never ridden one but I just can't get it out of my head. If Yeti would add some reach...game on.

    However, once you add the 5.5 then you have Riot owners saying "but..." And once you start throwing in the 140mm bikes then you have Hightower and Switchblade owners saying "but..." And once you throw in the 135mm bikes you have Primer owners saying "but..." And so on and so forth.

    The more you water a test down the harder it is for the average rider to draw meaningful conclusions. This is especially true in our world today where there are very few "bad" bikes remaining.

    This test will measure performance on the top end of the rear travel spectrum of long travel 29er trail bikes at the testers defined limit of 150mm and above. This should be good!


    Additionally, 140mm is not long travel. I put that in the mid travel category. Both these statements are opinion. The persons responsible for this test are of the opinion that long travel constitutes 150mm and above. That is their perogative. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to conduct and post their own test. I will read that test as well with much enthusiasm.

    Lycra: I find your unique bike experience very interesting as I previously rode the original E29 and currently own a Wreckoning...and I love riding Moab. Do you have any additional posts where you detailed the comparison between those bikes and the 5.5? Like I said before, if Yeti would just add some reach to the 5.5, I would jump.

    An additional point to the discussion is user expectation. The 5.5 may very well be "faster" down a particular trail than the Wreckoning. My experience on the Riot (with a 150mm fork) was similar in that I could ride a familiar loop faster than the Wreckoning. However, 140mm is not 160mm and that extra travel provides the rider a greater margin for error when speeding into unfamiliar terrain. For this reason, I have always appreciated the extra travel on terrain such as Moab as I only get to go once a year. In my experience, longer rear travel has a meaningful difference.

  15. #315
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by Nismomike View Post
    There, you got ur Yeti.
    https://m.pinkbike.com/news/ridden-a...vel-29ers.html

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    And it was essentially picked as the winner, at least in the category just below flat out EWS racing at Whistler.

  16. #316
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by titusquasi View Post
    Lycra: I find your unique bike experience very interesting as I previously rode the original E29 and currently own a Wreckoning...and I love riding Moab. Do you have any additional posts where you detailed the comparison between those bikes and the 5.5? Like I said before, if Yeti would just add some reach to the 5.5, I would jump.
    I have not written any comparisons. I would love to still have the Wreck and be able to ride them back to back. It's tough to do any true comparison with same-day experience on one bike, but just recollection on how the other one rode. I loved my Wreckoning and would be happy to have it back - maybe I'll end up with another.

    I'd say it's a little more of a smasher, not necessarily due to the extra travel. I don't think the 5.5 gives up anything when charging into unknown chunk though - at least not with the x2 on it. The stock float X definitely gives it lesser chunk-chargeability than the Wreck. I don't know about the current dpx2. I agree the 5.5 isn't perfect. Maybe Yeti will adjust their geo and add some rear travel.

  17. #317
    I ride bikes
    Reputation: moefosho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,419
    https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/topic...-mountain-bike
    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ridden...vel-29ers.html
    There are plenty of long travel or enduro comparisons on the web. Let MTBR set the arbitrary >149mm criteria if they so choose.
    I just bought a 5.5 and am stoked to read these types of articles.

  18. #318
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by titusquasi View Post
    I'm going to copy and paste my previous post again as we seem to keep going round and round on the same issue:

    I understand the desire to say "test this bike or that bike as it almost meets the criteria and it fits the same category." I would love to see the 5.5 run with these bikes. I've never ridden one but I just can't get it out of my head. If Yeti would add some reach...game on.

    However, once you add the 5.5 then you have Riot owners saying "but..." And once you start throwing in the 140mm bikes then you have Hightower and Switchblade owners saying "but..." And once you throw in the 135mm bikes you have Primer owners saying "but..." And so on and so forth.

    The more you water a test down the harder it is for the average rider to draw meaningful conclusions. This is especially true in our world today where there are very few "bad" bikes remaining.

    This test will measure performance on the top end of the rear travel spectrum of long travel 29er trail bikes at the testers defined limit of 150mm and above. This should be good!


    Additionally, 140mm is not long travel. I put that in the mid travel category. Both these statements are opinion. The persons responsible for this test are of the opinion that long travel constitutes 150mm and above. That is their perogative. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to conduct and post their own test. I will read that test as well with much enthusiasm.

    Lycra: I find your unique bike experience very interesting as I previously rode the original E29 and currently own a Wreckoning...and I love riding Moab. Do you have any additional posts where you detailed the comparison between those bikes and the 5.5? Like I said before, if Yeti would just add some reach to the 5.5, I would jump.

    An additional point to the discussion is user expectation. The 5.5 may very well be "faster" down a particular trail than the Wreckoning. My experience on the Riot (with a 150mm fork) was similar in that I could ride a familiar loop faster than the Wreckoning. However, 140mm is not 160mm and that extra travel provides the rider a greater margin for error when speeding into unfamiliar terrain. For this reason, I have always appreciated the extra travel on terrain such as Moab as I only get to go once a year. In my experience, longer rear travel has a meaningful difference.
    Yep, this right here. If you wanna put the 5.5 in the same class as these other longer-travel bikes, then wouldn't the Switchblade be in the same class as the 5.5? And then so on, and so on...
    You can't buy happiness. But you can buy a bike. And that's pretty close.

  19. #319
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by BmanInTheD View Post
    Yep, this right here. If you wanna put the 5.5 in the same class as these other longer-travel bikes, then wouldn't the Switchblade be in the same class as the 5.5? And then so on, and so on...
    Yes, which is why you limit it to an enduro category test as that is basically what all these bikes are categorized as which is what I've said before. Then you don't have the trail bike overlap.

  20. #320
    Bipolar roller
    Reputation: singletrackmack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    931
    Recent review of some popular long travel 29ers:

    https://m.pinkbike.com/news/ridden-a...vel-29ers.html
    Get out of the gutter and onto the mountain top.

    "I only had like two winekills captain buzzcooler"

  21. #321
    Track Junkie
    Reputation: Octane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,205
    Quote Originally Posted by singletrackmack View Post
    Recent review of some popular long travel 29ers:

    https://m.pinkbike.com/news/ridden-a...vel-29ers.html
    Awesome! Thanks!
    I get paid to ride shotgun.

  22. #322
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noosa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,719
    Quote Originally Posted by singletrackmack View Post
    Recent review of some popular long travel 29ers:

    https://m.pinkbike.com/news/ridden-a...vel-29ers.html
    Yeah and I noticed that pinkbike is calling 140mm long travel...oh, and they included the yeti 5.5....

  23. #323
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,461
    Quote Originally Posted by BmanInTheD View Post
    Yep, this right here. If you wanna put the 5.5 in the same class as these other longer-travel bikes, then wouldn't the Switchblade be in the same class as the 5.5? And then so on, and so on...
    I rode the Hightower LT and the 5.5, and IMO, that is opinion only, I found the Hightower LT to be a better bike and I even felt that it pedaled just as well as the 5.5 climbing steep techy sections. I may have been expecting too much from the 5.5 because of all the hype, and I was expecting the HTLT to climb noticeably worse but it didn't. I know the HTLT on paper has a slacker STA but it was not noticeable at all. When it came to downhill rock garden sections, the difference was clear going to the HTLT.

    The new Fox DPX2 is a really nice shock as well for the HTLT. I found the 5.5 to be getting overwhelmed and unstable in the same downhill rock garden sections versus the HTLT. That is not to say the 5.5 is a bad bike, because it is not. I'm just comparing the two and really surprised the HTLT felt as good as it did. However, if you don't need 150mm of travel, the Yeti 5.5 is a great bike and not a bad choice at all as a do it all bike. But as the HTLT did as well as it did, I don't see why not get a 150mm bike.

  24. #324
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Rev. 14 View Post
    I rode the Hightower LT and the 5.5, and IMO, that is opinion only, I found the Hightower LT to be a better bike and I even felt that it pedaled just as well as the 5.5 climbing steep techy sections. I may have been expecting too much from the 5.5 because of all the hype, and I was expecting the HTLT to climb noticeably worse but it didn't. I know the HTLT on paper has a slacker STA but it was not noticeable at all. When it came to downhill rock garden sections, the difference was clear going to the HTLT.

    The new Fox DPX2 is a really nice shock as well for the HTLT. I found the 5.5 to be getting overwhelmed and unstable in the same downhill rock garden sections versus the HTLT. That is not to say the 5.5 is a bad bike, because it is not. I'm just comparing the two and really surprised the HTLT felt as good as it did. However, if you don't need 150mm of travel, the Yeti 5.5 is a great bike and not a bad choice at all as a do it all bike. But as the HTLT did as well as it did, I don't see why not get a 150mm bike.
    So I assume you rode a 5.5 with the Float X? '18 5.5 builds are coming with a DPX2.

  25. #325
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by linden44 View Post
    So I assume you rode a 5.5 with the Float X? '18 5.5 builds are coming with a DPX2.
    This right here is a key observation in any conversation involving stock builds on these bikes.

    Last year many came with the Float X or the Monarch Plus. This year you see a lot of DPX2 builds. There is a reason for this.

    The DPX2 puts the Float X to shame and is also better than a Monarch Plus. Any bike you rode last year with the Float X that didn't measure up when charging rough terrain, throw that memory out. The Float X was a joke at high speeds on chunky trails.

    If it comes with a DPX2 this year, it's a different bike.

  26. #326
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,005
    So, seems like PB has beaten MTBR to the punch and done a long travel 29er shootout, looks pretty interesting
    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ridden...vel-29ers.html
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  27. #327
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,965
    Not that many bikes included and a very brief description/review but the Yeti and Hightower sounded the best to me. The Hightower's low BB kills it for me personally.

    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    So, seems like PB has beaten MTBR to the punch and done a long travel 29er shootout, looks pretty interesting
    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ridden...vel-29ers.html

  28. #328
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,461
    Quote Originally Posted by linden44 View Post
    So I assume you rode a 5.5 with the Float X? '18 5.5 builds are coming with a DPX2.
    Yes, it had the float X. When I brought the 5.5 back I asked the guys at the Yeti demo booth if they felt there is huge difference in these rear shocks. I asked because I had rode the Hightower LT previously with the DPX2 and wanted to get an honest answer.

    I don't know if this was them attempting the sell it to me but they were so confident in the switch infinity suspension being that good that they said you will not notice that much a difference. They kept saying the suspension is so great that I would not see a noticeable difference in FloatX vs DPX2. I asked about the DHX2 and they did not recommend that on the 5.5.

    I surmised that the Yeti 5.5, as good as it was, would not be much different according to the guys at Yeti. Like I said though, I did find the HTLT to climb just as well as the 5.5 but descended much better and quickness was better than I expected. I did not get pedal strikes as I thought to a lower BB I am not used to.

  29. #329
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mark59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    356
    [QUOTE=Sid Duffman;13402887]https://youtu.be/JRwbBFrJGng

    Here is my unprofessional feed back of both the Slash and the Evil Wreckoning
    I have had my fare share on both bikes.
    The Slash felt like a big wheeled bike when I swung my leg over it. The more I rode it the less it felt like a 29er I rode the 2018 with the new shock on it. The new shock is the best rear shock I have ridden to date. It keeps the rear wheel planted and smooths out small pumps more then any other shock I have tried. I was in Oregon on a trail I have never cleared DH ( Heckle tooth) steep and rocky and tight switch backs I almost walked it on the Slash because I was afraid how I was going to bail or jump off the bike if I didn't make it I was super nervous about trying it on this big bike. Well I made it first time ever, and I tried many times on other smaller bikes, the bike grew on me the more I rode it. I never felt a strong connection on it at first but over time I really started to like it. It climbs well in the saddle and out of the saddle. I will sum it buy saying the strong point of the bike is it rolls super fast its a race machine if racing is your gig and you want to go fast this bike is for You.

    The Evil as soon as I set on the seat I felt at home and wanted to play. It does not feel like a 29er at all . You keep looking down at the front wheel to make sure its really a 29er . Very playful and nimble climbs well . Jumps well . It begs you to want to launch over everything . Mine had the stock Monarch Plus shock it was fine not as smooth as the rear on the Slash . The Evil never had any creeks or strange noises it was quiet and I thrashed it at Donnieville trying to see if I could break something on it. Its solid. It tracks well at high speed like any other 29er its strong suite is it is playful as hell . I called it the impersonator it thinks it is a smaller bike but its really a 29er.
    I could give you more details but I don't want to bore you.
    You should always try a bike for at least a week or 3 days before making a call the longer the better.
    It would be a hard call for me if I were racing I might lean with the Slash since I am not Its easy choice for me The Evil is so much fun I most likely will be buying the Evil .I have been riding allot of 29ers over the last year. I just don't see a disadvantage with the bigger wheels . Good Luck

  30. #330
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mark59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    356
    I am surprised that these shoot outs or reviews don't include the EVIL .

  31. #331
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slimphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    642
    The only disadvantage I see with the wreckoning is that it has no water bottle option in the front triangle or else I'd be all in.

  32. #332
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    255
    I test rode a wreckoning yesterday, coming from a 2013 rip9 with a -2* headset.
    My thoughts were: this think feels way too small with a 35mm stem, a 50mm slammed on the headtube with 10mm rise bars would probably be an ok fit but not roomy (XL).
    Rear suspension felt good climbing and descending, better than my niner. I did not spend much time dialing in the shock, but I like what it did, poppy when you wanted it but still absorbed bumps. Fork was a pike that felt a bit harsh, but I could likely tune that out.
    The seat angle felt fine to me, not too slack and the bike was nice and playful on a mellow trail (didn't have time for anything steep). Overall it is an upgrade from my rip, but not sure I liked it enough to upgrade, if the XL reach was 490-500 instead of 476 I would be much more interested. I wish evil had configuration options like guerilla gravity as well.
    Evil CS said there may be small updates next year but no geometry changes, I take that to mean build kit updates. I wanted to test ride now to see if I could get a used off season deal, but I think I will hold off to test ride some other bikes (sentinel, smash if I can find one, rallon if I can find one).

  33. #333
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,005
    Another interesting test, this time by Enduro MTB online mag. While it does test both 650B & 29" bikes, it seems to be a pretty relevant test as wheel size should be chosen depending on your riding style and the terrain/course. Me, I'll always ride a 29er, unless I'm riding a B+ or 29+, but nothing smaller, I don't race, I don't care about the clock, I am there to have fun, up and down.

    Let’s go Racing! – The 10 fastest enduro bikes in test | ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  34. #334
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by Duffman1976 View Post
    Seated fit is more of a reflection of top tube length. Which the 5.5 is actually long in. Reach is more of an out of the saddle measurement. So what you are describing doesn't make much sense. You must have a long torso and long arms for someone 5'11" as the Yeti effective top tube length is pretty long because of the seat angle. And again, because of the seat angle, this is why it has a shorter reach than some of the other bikes that have come out recently. Below is a good comparison of TT length vs Reach...

    http://www.transitionbikes.com/PDF/G...ETTvsReach.pdf
    Thank you for this info.

    I had the epiphany today that I can increase my reach by slamming my bars and running a riser bar. The potential excites me!

  35. #335
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Thank you for this info.

    I had the epiphany today that I can increase my reach by slamming my bars and running a riser bar. The potential excites me!
    If you slam you stem but put riser bars on, and your hands end up in the same position. Nothing changes. Longer or lower stem. Or less rise in the bar will increase reach. If your seat tube is slack. You might be able to move the seat forward and lower the stem.

  36. #336
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    If you slam you stemay but put riser bars on, and your hands end up in the same position. Nothing changes. Longer or lower stem. Or less rise in the bar will increase reach. If your seat tube is slack. You might be able to move the seat forward and lower the stem.
    I don't see it that way. The headtube is angled bringing the bars back to me. I currently have a solid 1" of spacer under my stem and the longest 35mm stem that Renthal makes at 60mm, and I still find reach a bit tight on this bike.

    If I drop my stem all the way down this moves my bars forward, what maybe 5-7mm (just guessing as I'm at work now) then I can raise my bars straight up with instead of my current 10mm riser bars I jump to 30 or even 40mm riser bars.

    That's the way I'm seeing it.

  37. #337
    Ride On
    Reputation: geraldooka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    739
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    If you slam you stemay but put riser bars on, and your hands end up in the same position. Nothing changes. Longer or lower stem. Or less rise in the bar will increase reach. If your seat tube is slack. You might be able to move the seat forward and lower the stem.
    Yup, assuming the rise matches the original bar location. The head angle remains constant.

    Besides changing stem length or moving ones seat, one could experiment with the sweep of your handlebar more sweep will effectively shorten reach and less we will effectively increase it.
    Michael

    Ride on!

  38. #338
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Yah, I'm still not in agreement.

    Because head tube angle is slanted back towards the rider, lowering the stem moves the bars further forward. When I add riser bars that is a vertical rise, it does not slant back the way moving a stem would as the stem is on an angle, the bar rise is not.

  39. #339
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,359
    Lowering your stem gives you 13mm reach raising the bars will reduce the reach. If your hand don't end up were they were, yes you're correct but you still reduces reach. I'd slam the stem, see how it feels. Probably will feel good more reach and lower COG. Seated may feel off. The 5.5 STA is 73.6 I cold personally move my seat 5mm past center and still not have too much weight on my hands, and this is a problem with me personally.

    No stack headset would help as well.

  40. #340
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slimphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    642
    Quote Originally Posted by carlhulit View Post
    I test rode a wreckoning yesterday, coming from a 2013 rip9 with a -2* headset.
    My thoughts were: this think feels way too small with a 35mm stem, a 50mm slammed on the headtube with 10mm rise bars would probably be an ok fit but not roomy (XL).
    Rear suspension felt good climbing and descending, better than my niner. I did not spend much time dialing in the shock, but I like what it did, poppy when you wanted it but still absorbed bumps. Fork was a pike that felt a bit harsh, but I could likely tune that out.
    The seat angle felt fine to me, not too slack and the bike was nice and playful on a mellow trail (didn't have time for anything steep). Overall it is an upgrade from my rip, but not sure I liked it enough to upgrade, if the XL reach was 490-500 instead of 476 I would be much more interested. I wish evil had configuration options like guerilla gravity as well.
    Evil CS said there may be small updates next year but no geometry changes, I take that to mean build kit updates. I wanted to test ride now to see if I could get a used off season deal, but I think I will hold off to test ride some other bikes (sentinel, smash if I can find one, rallon if I can find one).
    How tall are you? inseam?

    I'm coming off a 2016 canfield balance with 476mm reach and a 35mm stem and while it could be a bit longer I think it's pretty good. I'm 6'4, 35" inseam

  41. #341
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nismomike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    97
    Reach vs effective top tube

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

  42. #342
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    255
    Quote Originally Posted by slimphatty View Post
    How tall are you? inseam?

    I'm coming off a 2016 canfield balance with 476mm reach and a 35mm stem and while it could be a bit longer I think it's pretty good. I'm 6'4, 35" inseam
    I am 6'3" but with long arms. Current bike is a 2013 RIP9, 440 reach with a 70mm stem and I wish it was longer, that is one of the primary attributes I want in a new bike. The wreckoning felt shorter than my RIP even after I slammed the stem. I think it would be ok with a 50mm stem, and the shorter fit may end up being the ticket for a more playful bike. I will find a time to demo a sentinel (500mm reach) at some point but it may not happen until spring as it looks like ski season is about to take off.

  43. #343
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Do you see in that diagram above as the stem is slid up the stem, in my case a full 26mm, that the bars move further back due to the steer tube angle (ignore handlebar height), and therefore the reach is decreased. I can raise the bars to my preferred height by using a taller rise. The rise goes straight up, it does not move the bars on a parallel plane.

    If I could remember my Trigonometry from 30 years ago I could calculate the exact amount, but eyeballing it, it looks like reach will increase about 9mm.

  44. #344
    Ride On
    Reputation: geraldooka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    739
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    Lowering your stem gives you 13mm reach raising the bars will reduce the reach. If your hand don't end up were they were, yes you're correct but you still reduces reach. I'd slam the stem, see how it feels. Probably will feel good more reach and lower COG. Seated may feel off. The 5.5 STA is 73.6 I cold personally move my seat 5mm past center and still not have too much weight on my hands, and this is a problem with me personally.

    No stack headset would help as well.
    This is true if you kept the same bar. If you dropped the stem and then put a riser on that matched the original height of the non riser bar and the bars share the same sweep then unless you tilt your riser forward the hands would be in the same spot. I'm not making this stuff up draw it up in cad it's unavoidable math I'm afraid.
    Michael

    Ride on!

  45. #345
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Actually found a trigonometry calculator online. Assuming I lower my stem exactly 23 mm and then using a higher rise bar to put my bars back at exactly the same height, my parallel distance from my bars to the center of my crank will be increased exactly 9.9mm.

    I used an angle finder on my phone to calculate the actual angle of the fork/ stem which came off about 1 degree different than what Yeti lists in their spec. If I use Yeti spec it's 9mm on the dot. Close enough for me!

    I'm excited enough that I already have some new 40mm riser bars coming.

  46. #346
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Actually found a trig calculator online. Assuming I lower my stem exactly 23 mm and then using a higher rise bar to put my bars back at exactly the same height, my parallel distance from my bars to the center of my crank will be increased exactly 9.9mm.

    I used an angle finder on my phone to calculate the actual angle of the fork/ stem which came off about 1 degree different than what Yeti lists in their spec. But even if I was off 1-2 degrees, that's close enough.

    I'm excited enough that I already have some new 40mm riser bars coming.
    You are correct, with the 66.5 HTA the stem moves down. And away giving 13mm reach if the bars move up and not in you should get 9ish mm reach.

  47. #347
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by geraldooka View Post
    This is true if you kept the same bar. If you dropped the stem and then put a riser on that matched the original height of the non riser bar and the bars share the same sweep then unless you tilt your riser forward the hands would be in the same spot. I'm not making this stuff up draw it up in cad it's unavoidable math I'm afraid.
    He's right the stem and bars move down and way. But with riser think of it as a V he loose the reach moving down, but keep the away if bars are kept the same ecept for rise.

  48. #348
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11,654
    Quote Originally Posted by slimphatty View Post
    The only disadvantage I see with the wreckoning is that it has no water bottle option in the front triangle or else I'd be all in.
    They are putting bottle mounts on Wrecks on new production runs. Once the old stock works its way through the system they'll all have them for now it's available in specific sizes. Evil can give you up to date info.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  49. #349
    Ride On
    Reputation: geraldooka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    739
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    He's right the stem and bars move down and way. But with riser think of it as a V he loose the reach moving down, but keep the away if bars are kept the same ecept for rise.
    No it's not right, unless one runs the riser bars vertical but that would be true regardless of the stem height on the steerer tube...

    Michael

    Ride on!

  50. #350
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by geraldooka View Post
    No it's not right, unless one runs the riser bars vertical but that would be true regardless of the stem height on the steerer tube...

    I really would not know how else to explain it to you. However I will be enjoying my additional 10 mm of reach in about 2 weeks.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

  51. #351
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11,654
    You are both sort of right.

    If you take a riser bar and rotate it forwards and backwards you'll get more or less reach to the bars. So it's clear that rotating the bar matters for reach.

    If you take the same shape bar and sweep in one with 20mm more rise and place it 20mm lower on the steerer tube with the same stem length, but don't change the orientation compared to the low rise bar you'll get extra reach depending on your bars are rotated.

    I ride my risers bars pretty much vertical so if I did this ^^ I would get the extra reach Suns_PSD is talking about.

    If you run your bars tilted backwards at the same angle as the fork's steerer tube and the rise of the bar is the same as the amount you lowered the stem than your grips will be in the same spot as shown in Geraldooka's diagram.

    If you are riding a 66 deg HTA bike you'd have to rotate your bars backwards 24 degs to negate the extra reach potential of the idea Suns_PSD has. If your bars are somewhere between 0 - 23.99 deg from vertical you'll get some extra reach.

    Edit: just to clarify when I say "reach" above I mean distance to grips. Reach as in the bike geo measurement doesn't change no matter what you do to the stem/bars since it's measured between the BB and headtube.
    Last edited by vikb; 11-11-2017 at 12:28 PM.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  52. #352
    Bipolar roller
    Reputation: singletrackmack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    So, seems like PB has beaten MTBR to the punch and done a long travel 29er shootout, looks pretty interesting
    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ridden...vel-29ers.html
    Post #320 and this thread was started before the PB article came out. Matbe PB saw the thread and then made the article?
    Get out of the gutter and onto the mountain top.

    "I only had like two winekills captain buzzcooler"

  53. #353
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,632
    Quote Originally Posted by carlhulit View Post
    I am 6'3" but with long arms. Current bike is a 2013 RIP9, 440 reach with a 70mm stem and I wish it was longer, that is one of the primary attributes I want in a new bike. The wreckoning felt shorter than my RIP even after I slammed the stem. I think it would be ok with a 50mm stem, and the shorter fit may end up being the ticket for a more playful bike. I will find a time to demo a sentinel (500mm reach) at some point but it may not happen until spring as it looks like ski season is about to take off.
    5mm ain't much but it might help.

    Reach Adjust Headsets
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  54. #354
    Bipolar roller
    Reputation: singletrackmack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Another interesting test, this time by Enduro MTB online mag. While it does test both 650B & 29" bikes, it seems to be a pretty relevant test as wheel size should be chosen depending on your riding style and the terrain/course. Me, I'll always ride a 29er, unless I'm riding a B+ or 29+, but nothing smaller, I don't race, I don't care about the clock, I am there to have fun, up and down.

    Let’s go Racing! – The 10 fastest enduro bikes in test | ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine
    Great article! Thanks for sharing. And it shows if you do care about the clock, looks like 29ers would be the way to go anyway.

    "All three testers rode their fastest times with 29″ bikes and the slowest on 27.5″ bikes."

    Here is another recent test between two similar long travel bikes, one 27.5 and the other 29er. Pretty interesting with some great insight from the riders.

    If looking for a long travel bike and not sure between 27.5 and 29er, its sure looking like 29ers are the way to go.

    Testing 27.5 vs 29 With Vanderham and Gauvin - Video:
    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/which-...vin-video.html
    Get out of the gutter and onto the mountain top.

    "I only had like two winekills captain buzzcooler"

  55. #355
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    You are both sort of right.

    If you take a riser bar and rotate it forwards and backwards you'll get more or less reach to the bars. So it's clear that rotating the bar matters for reach.

    If you take the same shape bar and sweep in one with 20mm more rise and place it 20mm lower on the steerer tube with the same stem length, but don't change the orientation compared to the low rise bar you'll get extra reach depending on your bars are rotated.

    I ride my risers bars pretty much vertical so if I did this ^^ I would get the extra reach Suns_PSD is talking about.

    If you run your bars tilted backwards at the same angle as the fork's steerer tube and the rise of the bar is the same as the amount you lowered the stem than your grips will be in the same spot as shown in Geraldooka's diagram.

    If you are riding a 66 deg HTA bike you'd have to rotate your bars backwards 24 degs to negate the extra reach potential of the idea Suns_PSD has. If your bars are somewhere between 0 - 23.99 deg from vertical you'll get some extra reach.

    Edit: just to clarify when I say "reach" above I mean distance to grips. Reach as in the bike geo measurement doesn't change no matter what you do to the stem/bars since it's measured between the BB and headtube.
    It never occurred to me that anyone would tilt their bars back; especially when the obvious goal is to increase reach.

    The curvature of bars is meant to be straight up and down to be comfortable but frankly I think his confusion on this issue goes beyond a miscommunication on handlebar angle.

    I've been looking at lots of photos of pros' bikes and they all just about increase reach in the same way I'm proposing, slammed stem with a taller bar ( going straight up, obviously). For some reason us normal guys had not put 2 and 2 together and copied this common sense set up tip.

    Also the pros rarely have stems as short as what is trendy these days. Another set up tip to increase effective reach.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

  56. #356
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11,654
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    It never occurred to me that anyone would tilt their bars back; especially when the obvious goal is to increase reach.
    When you rotate bars forwards and back you are also changing the angle of the grips relative to your natural hand position so you can't necessarily set the bars at a specific angle just because you want more distance to the grips or less. If I move my bars forward or back much from the position I prefer they become uncomfortable and my wrists hurt.

    What angle you prefer is an ergonomic issue based on your particular body.

    As you note you can always use a longer or shorter stem, but that will also change how fast the bike steers.

    One thing I have noticed in pro EWS bike checks is a trend away from crazy wide bars back to something in more moderate in width. Not only does a narrower bar make the bike feel "shorter", but folks tend to prefer shorter stems with wider bars and vice versa to keep the steering feel similar.
    Last edited by vikb; 11-12-2017 at 09:27 AM.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  57. #357
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,612
    2 months, 4 pages... is there actually a 'shootout' in the works? Or just a forum for people to virtually argue the merits of a SB5.5 vs the 'long travel' bikes? (likely without having ridden the bikes they're arguing about)
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  58. #358
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    When you rotate bars forwards and back you are also changing the angle of the grips relative to your natural hand position so you can't necessarily set the bars at a specific angle just because you want more distance to the grips or less. If I move my bars forward or back much from the position I prefer they become uncomfortable and my wrists hurt.

    What angle you prefer is an ergonomic issue based on your particular body.

    As you note you can always use a longer or shorter stem, but that will also change you fast the bike steers.

    One I have noticed in pro EWS bike checks is a trend away from crazy wide bars back to something in more moderate in width. Not only does a narrower bar make the bike feel "shorter", but folks tend to prefer shorter stems with wider bars and vice versa to keep the steering feel similar.
    Agreed on all accounts.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

  59. #359
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    2 months, 4 pages... is there actually a 'shootout' in the works? Or just a forum for people to virtually argue the merits of a SB5.5 vs the 'long travel' bikes? (likely without having ridden the bikes they're arguing about)
    What's with the thread jack? This thread has nothing to do with a LT 29er shootout and is all about increasing the reach on my 5.5.

    Just kidding...

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

  60. #360
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    8
    https://youtu.be/tWJEb0jYsjU
    Mtb yum yum gets in on the long travel 29er Wreckoning review

  61. #361
    nel
    nel is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    90
    Ongoing test of 12 long travel 29ers:

    http://dirtmountainbike.com/bike-rev...bike-test.html

  62. #362
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,461
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    2 months, 4 pages... is there actually a 'shootout' in the works? Or just a forum for people to virtually argue the merits of a SB5.5 vs the 'long travel' bikes? (likely without having ridden the bikes they're arguing about)
    LOL!!!

    These guys should check out the Hightower LT thread and see the reviews of the previous 5.5 owners and how much they like the HTLT over the 5.5. Nice review below, sorry no 5.5 in the review.

    Let’s go Racing! – The 10 fastest enduro bikes in test | ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine

    Back to the regularly scheduled programming of the Yeti 5.5, eh hem.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-03-2014, 05:25 PM
  2. Replies: 44
    Last Post: 01-19-2013, 11:23 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-28-2012, 12:15 PM
  4. Massively Long (Mostly) Carbon Frame shootout!
    By meph2 in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-05-2012, 03:49 PM
  5. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-05-2012, 08:57 AM

Members who have read this thread: 122

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.