Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 101
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270

    My Moots 29er Rocketship

    Picked up this bad boy a couple of weeks ago .... super fast / super agile. Very happy with the bike.

    2012 Moots MootoX RSL frame
    2012 Fox 32 FIT RLC 100mm Fork
    Enve Cockpit
    Enve 29er XC wheelset from Wheelbuilder
    XO Group Set
    Nobby Nic Tires

    Has about 6 rides in on it and already a couple of battle scars but wanted to post a few pics before heading out in an hour for my traditional Thanksgiving ride.










  2. #2
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,201
    WOW! that is all, just WOW!

  3. #3
    U sayin' Bolt ?
    Reputation: knutso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,090
    Looks like about as nice bike as there is !
    Is the bending of the downtube designed to increase BB stiffness ? Does it work well ?

  4. #4
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,484
    put shimano on it and I would JIMP

    damn nice bike, I have always had a soft spot for Moots

  5. #5
    mtb enthusiast
    Reputation: torreyaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    329
    *drool*

  6. #6
    Flight Junkie
    Reputation: IBIKEAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    835
    Very nice! Needs a Moots Post and Stem! Just Kidding. I'm in the process of getting a 2012 Mooto-X YBB single speed right now! I had one before and sold it then later decided it was my favorite bike ever (live and learn and spend!)
    ROTOR HEAD

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by knutso View Post
    Looks like about as nice bike as there is !
    Is the bending of the downtube designed to increase BB stiffness ? Does it work well ?
    Top bend is for fork crown clearance. The bottom bend supposedly adds stiffness but after speaking with Moots it became clear that the botttom bend was done more for asthetics than anything else. Big change for '12 was to modify the overall geometry to
    use 100mm of fork travel. Previously it was designed for 80mm.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    175
    That is a lot of bling you got there!!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,469
    Looks expensive.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    406
    That's a really nice bike... but why so much setback of the saddle and such a long stem? - Frame to short?

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    278
    Awesome. With that level of money spent, is there a reason you didn't go with XX over X0?

  12. #12
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    109
    Hey look! Someone with just as long of femurs as mine.

    I'm right on the cusp of only fitting custom frames, but a layback post and the saddle all the way back seems to be alright as long as the seat tube is 73* or less.

    VERY nice ride. I'm saving my pennies for some ENVE/CK wheels.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ottoreni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,044

    Sweet Jesus!

    Hell of a build there. From frame to parts you picked ... super sweet!!!

    One question,

    What is the actual height of the bottom bracket?
    You cannot go against nature, because when you do, its part of nature too.

  14. #14
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    109
    It's nice to be able to buy the equivalent of a Formula 1 car for less than $10K.

  15. #15
    Tokyo Joe's Racer
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    29
    That's sweet!!

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Shalom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    2,006
    WOW....
    Very nice.

  17. #17
    the air is thin up here..
    Reputation: noot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    695
    Looks fancy What's it weigh?
    2016 Honzo Ti
    2015 Kona Paddy Wagon
    www.mngnt.com

  18. #18
    Expert Crasher
    Reputation: GreenLightGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,355
    Nice. Like to see the use of matchmakers, really clean up the cockpit!
    Happiness depends more on the inward disposition of mind than on outward circumstances. Benjamin Franklin

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Drea View Post
    That's a really nice bike... but why so much setback of the saddle and such a long stem? - Frame to short?
    Frame was professionally fit to me and the stem length is 110mm which from my perspective is pretty average ... certainly not long ( stem lengths typically range between 90mm - 140mm). Moots 29er frames are designed for layback posts and I also wanted as small a frame as possible that I could be comfortably fitted to. Finally, as another poster astutely noted I have long legs and a short torso and this frame size suited me best.

    Quote Originally Posted by kardy View Post
    Awesome. With that level of money spent, is there a reason you didn't go with XX over X0?
    Went with X0 given the weight savings compared to XX are minimal and X0 is supposedly more durable. Given my intention to race the bike but also use it for normal riding as well I opted for X0 / grater durability.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ottoreni View Post
    Hell of a build there. From frame to parts you picked ... super sweet!!!

    One question,

    What is the actual height of the bottom bracket?
    Per Moots website BB height is 11.875"

    Quote Originally Posted by noot View Post
    Looks fancy What's it weigh?
    Weighs ~ 22.5lbs which is not uber light but it has a pretty heavy set of tires on it right now with lots of Stans. Will drop easily 1lb when switched over to race tire set up.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 1-bar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,462
    nice build, I'm loving the enve and king parts mated to that sweet moots frame.
    C-DALE FLASH 29 Carbon 2 (19.6 lbs)
    C-DALE BB1

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    88

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bunyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    521
    Sweet ride bro! I happened to stop by the shop when Rob was putting your bike together. The pics don't do it justice. Besides the obvious money frame, I love the wheels you went with. Enjoy the ride!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ottoreni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,044

    True BB Height

    It might be 11.875" on Moots website, but I was curious what was your actual height.

    Don't know if it is the camera angle, but it just looks higher than the 11.875" on the website. Just curious as to what was the real world height.

    Regardless, super looking build.
    You cannot go against nature, because when you do, its part of nature too.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BacDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    613
    Moots with total Enve cockpit is my dream bike! Love the curvy downtube - IMO the best 29er I've seen on this forum.

  25. #25
    One Gear
    Reputation: .40AET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,063
    That is absolutely perfect!! I wouldn't change a thing.

    Enjoy!

  26. #26
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: TunicaTrails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    It's a beautiful frame but the frame and stem position make it look like it might be too small for you.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Im touching myself... luckily for you and your bike, Im at the other side of the atlantic...

  28. #28
    Teen Wolf
    Reputation: cr45h's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    890
    Jesus

  29. #29
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,405
    Quote Originally Posted by No Agenda View Post
    It's nice to be able to buy the equivalent of a Formula 1 car for less than $10K.
    I agree that it is a very nice bike & I would be very proud to own it & for a HT I bet it rides nice.

    However it is some way off what would be a F1 type bike build, It would need to be a Carbon FS bike with top end gear like None cable type gear shifting & things like 1 piece bar & stem combo type things.

    That said it is for sure one of the nicest HT bikes I have ever seen & going for the carbon rims that will make speed & not getting hung up on needing to go to XX that is lighter but may not do much for speed over the X0 does show it is a very smart build & X0 looks better than XX as well..

    I would however like to see the XX rotors & the Ti rotor bolts on it.
    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: erol/frost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    490
    Awesome frame. Is that a tapered headtube?

    Also, cannot un-see that slammed saddle. Looks wrong, but hey, if that is what you like, ride on man
    WTB: Ritchey Plexus
    DiNotte 200 lights

    automobiliana.blogspot.se

  31. #31
    M_S
    M_S is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,410
    not expensive enough.
    - Simon

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Ottoreni View Post
    It might be 11.875" on Moots website, but I was curious what was your actual height.

    Don't know if it is the camera angle, but it just looks higher than the 11.875" on the website. Just curious as to what was the real world height.

    Regardless, super looking build.
    You are right ... just measured the BB height and it's ~ 12.5 " ... 5/8" higher than published on the Moots website although not sure if the Nobby Nicks contributed to the added height.

    Quote Originally Posted by erol/frost View Post
    Awesome frame. Is that a tapered headtube?

    Also, cannot un-see that slammed saddle. Looks wrong, but hey, if that is what you like, ride on man
    No ... not a tapered headtube although the fork has a tapered steerer tube hence the external lower bearing and inset upper bearing on the CK headset. Changes the geometry slightly although I could adjust the fork travel down to 90mm to compensate. To be honest I'm not sure I could tell the difference in the geometry triggered by the external lower bearing and I haven't gone to the trouble to determine the fork sag which might partially compensate for the external lower but given it rides great I'll probably leave it as is.

  33. #33
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by Cusco View Post
    You are right ... just measured the BB height and it's ~ 12.5 " ... 5/8" higher than published on the Moots website although not sure if the Nobby Nicks contributed to the added height.
    It'd be close if one considers fork sag.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by No Agenda View Post
    It'd be close if one considers fork sag.
    Good point ... I didn't consider fork sag ... thanks.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    468
    ( stem lengths typically range between 90mm - 140mm).

    vary nice bike, vary nice. methinks normal stem lengths range between 50-90mm for mountain bikes. 140 is unsane.

  36. #36
    bt
    bt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,416
    good luck with that seat not rotating backwards, nice bike though.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by cunningstunts View Post
    ( stem lengths typically range between 90mm - 140mm).

    vary nice bike, vary nice. methinks normal stem lengths range between 50-90mm for mountain bikes. 140 is unsane.
    I thought it would be pretty apparent from the pictures but this is a XC bike not AM nor DH ... XC = long and low. 90mm on a XC bike is short let alone 50mm???

    Quote Originally Posted by bt View Post
    good luck with that seat not rotating backwards, nice bike though.
    Given the rig already has 17+ hours on it and nothings moved I'm not too worried about it. Also .. I'm not exactly a fly weight at 185lbs

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dancruz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    507
    Thats powerball money......now what? Thats the bling of bling...I'm jealous
    Just ride and quit bit$hin.......Yeti SB5+..SIR9 SS...CD Synapse DA...

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veteran_youth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by Cusco View Post
    I thought it would be pretty apparent from the pictures but this is a XC bike not AM nor DH ... XC = long and low. 90mm on a XC bike is short let alone 50mm???
    50mm in 2011 = 110mm in 1992

    110mm in 2011 = 140mm in 1992

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    566
    Very nice. Enjoy your new bike.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 426h's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    155
    Sweet ride!
    What size is the frame?

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,194
    Very sweet! don't like the ENVE bars at all, you may keep them!

  43. #43
    ride more
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,623
    Really nice bike, although I do agree that the stem looks long, and the seat looks wrong. But since you like it that way, it doesn't really matter how it looks...

  44. #44
    Now broadcasting from CO
    Reputation: PAmtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,224
    Wow... my bike is somehow inadequate now...
    Brought to you by rocks.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by cunningstunts View Post
    ( stem lengths typically range between 90mm - 140mm).

    vary nice bike, vary nice. methinks normal stem lengths range between 50-90mm for mountain bikes. 140 is unsane.
    Quote Originally Posted by veteran_youth View Post
    50mm in 2011 = 110mm in 1992

    110mm in 2011 = 140mm in 1992
    Quote Originally Posted by wyatt79m View Post
    Really nice bike, although I do agree that the stem looks long, and the seat looks wrong. But since you like it that way, it doesn't really matter how it looks...
    Guys - you might want to contact Lance, Levi, Todd Wells and Jeremiah Bishop and tell them they have their cockpits set up all wrong and there stems are too long Given their Pro status, deep pockets and big sponsors I'm sure they would welcome your input. Their set-ups are sooooo early 90's

    Todd Wells 29er rig that won Leadville this year - 105mm Syntace stem:



    Lance's 26er rig that won Leadville in 2009 - 120mm Bontrager XXX lite stem



    Jeremiah Bishop's Cannondale 29er - 120mm Cannodale Xc3 stem (he placed top 10 at Leadville this year)



    Levi Leipheimer's 26er rig that won Leadville in 2010 - 110MM Bontrager XXX lite stem with a slammed saddle.


  46. #46
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,484
    Quote Originally Posted by Cusco View Post
    Guys - you might want to contact Lance, Levi, Todd Wells and Jeremiah Bishop and tell them they have their cockpits set up all wrong and there stems are too long Given their Pro status, deep pockets and big sponsors I'm sure they would welcome your input. Their set-ups are sooooo early 90's
    I'll bet that everybody that thinks your stem looks long thinks you should pick a stem based on handling over fit.

  47. #47
    West Chester, PA
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,032
    Really sick bike. Doesn't need XX, X0 is just as nice and looks better.

    Sorry to harp on the seat thing, but don't you get a rhythmic bouncing when pedaling seated ? I did on my last bike with a long 27.2 thomson post. Don't know if the enve piece is stiff or flexy...

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by 92gli View Post
    Really sick bike. Doesn't need XX, X0 is just as nice and looks better.

    Sorry to harp on the seat thing, but don't you get a rhythmic bouncing when pedaling seated ? I did on my last bike with a long 27.2 thomson post. Don't know if the enve piece is stiff or flexy...
    Thanks ... I also like the look of the X0 in black vs. the XX. I don't have any problems with my pedal stroke in terms of bouncing and try to keep my cadence pretty high. The Enve post is stiff put provides good vibration damping. I have been using Edge / Enve components for a few years now and have nothing but good things to say in terms of quality and durability ... definately top notch componentry

    BTW - I'm 5'9" tall with disproportionately long lengs (33.5" inseam) and a short torso. The 110mm stem and setback post with a 23" effective TT length just seems to wok for me. Bike feels very comfortable and handles great.

  49. #49
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by customfab View Post
    I'll bet that everybody that thinks your stem looks long thinks you should pick a stem based on handling over fit.
    Personally, I'd choose both.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veteran_youth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by Cusco View Post
    Guys - you might want to contact Lance, Levi, Todd Wells and Jeremiah Bishop and tell them they have their cockpits set up all wrong and there stems are too long Given their Pro status, deep pockets and big sponsors I'm sure they would welcome your input. Their set-ups are sooooo early 90's
    Travis Brown's Leadville setup: undisputedly early 90's.

    Horses for courses! Honestly I do not think that a 110mm stem is abnormally long, and I don't want to come off as ragging on your bike. But to say that 140mm is a common contemporary stem size for mtbs now I think is a bit of a stretch. (no pun intended) I think 110 is currently the longest that most people run assuming they have a properly sized frame.

    Cheers,
    Andrew

  51. #51
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,484
    Quote Originally Posted by No Agenda View Post
    Personally, I'd choose both.
    Well so do I but you can't always have your cake and eat it too. In a perfect world everybody could ride a custom bike.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    [QUOTE=veteran_youth;8772006]Travis Brown's Leadville setup: undisputedly early 90's.

    Horses for courses! Honestly I do not think that a 110mm stem is abnormally long, and I don't want to come off as ragging on your bike. But to say that 140mm is a common contemporary stem size for mtbs now I think is a bit of a stretch. (no pun intended) I think 110 is currently the longest that most people run assuming they have a properly sized frame.

    Cheers,

    Not sure how your getting 110mm as the longest most people run? Both Lance's and Jeremiah's rigs are running 120mm and Levi's running a 110mm. The 1st winner on a 29er for Leadville ran a 105mm which is only ever so slightly shorter than what I'm running.

    Did you actuely look closely at Travis Brown's set up with the drop bars? I ride cyclocross as well and I guarantee you that other than steep climbs in Leadville he was riding on the hoods or in the drops when descending. I'm guessing that in the hoods the effective stem length vs a flat mtb bar is in the 130mm to 140mm range (look at the picture in the link you posted and estimate how far a stem would need to extend for a flat mtb bar to extend out to the brake hoods).

    These guys have the best sports phsyiologists in the world at their disposal and are riding stems 110mm to 130mm or longer in the example you provided. Not sure where you got the 90's vs today comparison but it's bs!

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veteran_youth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    769
    [QUOTE=Cusco;8772110]
    Quote Originally Posted by veteran_youth View Post
    Travis Brown's Leadville setup: undisputedly early 90's.

    Horses for courses! Honestly I do not think that a 110mm stem is abnormally long, and I don't want to come off as ragging on your bike. But to say that 140mm is a common contemporary stem size for mtbs now I think is a bit of a stretch. (no pun intended) I think 110 is currently the longest that most people run assuming they have a properly sized frame.

    Cheers,

    Not sure how your getting 110mm as the longest most people run? Both Lance's and Jeremiah's rigs are running 120mm and Levi's running a 110mm. The 1st winner on a 29er for Leadville ran a 105mm which is only ever so slightly shorter than what I'm running.
    My point was that the Leadville can be ridden on what is essentially a road/CX bike, because it does not involve much techy singletrack, and even the Velonews article made the comparison to John Tomac's early 90's Yeti set up with a drop bar, and pro bikes set up for 100 miles of gravel road might not be running what is typical mtb geometry (though I have not done any research to see what these guys are normally running). Or, speaking generally, can you find any stock bike for 2011/12 stocked with a >110mm stem?

    I realized I already accelerated the thread derailment, apologies. I'll shut up and leave now.

  54. #54
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,484
    [QUOTE=Cusco;8772110]
    Quote Originally Posted by veteran_youth View Post
    Travis Brown's Leadville setup: undisputedly early 90's.

    Horses for courses! Honestly I do not think that a 110mm stem is abnormally long, and I don't want to come off as ragging on your bike. But to say that 140mm is a common contemporary stem size for mtbs now I think is a bit of a stretch. (no pun intended) I think 110 is currently the longest that most people run assuming they have a properly sized frame.

    Cheers,

    Not sure how your getting 110mm as the longest most people run? Both Lance's and Jeremiah's rigs are running 120mm and Levi's running a 110mm. The 1st winner on a 29er for Leadville ran a 105mm which is only ever so slightly shorter than what I'm running.

    Did you actuely look closely at Travis Brown's set up with the drop bars? I ride cyclocross as well and I guarantee you that other than steep climbs in Leadville he was riding on the hoods or in the drops when descending. I'm guessing that in the hoods the effective stem length vs a flat mtb bar is in the 130mm to 140mm range (look at the picture in the link you posted and estimate how far a stem would need to extend for a flat mtb bar to extend out to the brake hoods).

    These guys have the best sports phsyiologists in the world at their disposal and are riding stems 110mm to 130mm or longer in the example you provided. Not sure where you got the 90's vs today comparison but it's bs!
    The thing that your overlooking in your comparison to those guys is that production bikes are built around consumers not professional cyclists. Look at the road side of things where almost every bike in the pro peloton is running a 120-140 stem slammed on the head tube with a - 10 degree drop. Then look how many people even in the fast group rides in your area have positions that come close to that amount of bar drop on reach.

    Mountain bikes are much the same way. Pro's are routinely going to be running an extra cm or two than your average bike buying joe.

    Cusco you have obviously found something that works for you. Don't Let the bike fit E-tards tell you it doesn't work.

  55. #55
    bt
    bt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,416
    the seat setup is what sticks out to me and says "ETT too short"!

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    698
    [QUOTE=Cusco;8671748]Frame was professionally fit to me and the stem length is 110mm which from my perspective is pretty average ... certainly not long ( stem lengths typically range between 90mm - 140mm). Moots 29er frames are designed for layback posts and I also wanted as small a frame as possible that I could be comfortably fitted to. Finally, as another poster astutely noted I have long legs and a short torso and this frame size suited me best.

    I would have to agree with the other guy. If the bike was professionally fit, you should not have to run the saddle that far back on the rails. My guess, is that you will end up with a few bent seat rails.

    Other than that, sweet @ss bike.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by customfab View Post
    I'll bet that everybody that thinks your stem looks long thinks you should pick a stem based on handling over fit.
    I always thought you chose frame size based on fit so that you weren't stuck choosing "handling over fit" with your stem.

    I guess by "bike fit E-tards" you were referring to yourself.

  58. #58
    banned
    Reputation: Spinning Lizard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,435
    Quote Originally Posted by bt View Post
    the seat setup is what sticks out to me and says "ETT too short"!
    Top tube measurement has absolutely NOTHING to do with seat placement. The seat should be set up for the correct knee to pedal measurement. Top tube never comes into the equation for seat position.

    But I guess if you know nothing about bike fit and feel the top tube is too short you just move the seat back, LMAO.

  59. #59
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,484
    [QUOTE=Srive;8772299]
    Quote Originally Posted by Cusco View Post

    I would have to agree with the other guy. If the bike was professionally fit, you should not have to run the saddle that far back on the rails. My guess, is that you will end up with a few bent seat rails.

    Other than that, sweet @ss bike.
    Not really sure how looking at the bike you can tell weather or not it fits. It's a stock bike and some people have proportions that make the bike look odd to some but when you see them on it they look perfectly normal. Trying to make assumptions on how well a bike fits somebody based on a picture of there bike is ignorant.

    Quote Originally Posted by bt View Post
    the seat setup is what sticks out to me and says "ETT too short"!
    Funny because when somebody says something like that I think "this person knows nothing about bike fit"

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    I always thought you chose frame size based on fit so that you weren't stuck choosing "handling over fit" with your stem.

    I guess by "bike fit E-tards" you were referring to yourself.
    Back that truck up smokey joe! Stems, frames and seat posts should all be selected based on fit. The frame obviously should come first. But sometimes you are forced to compromise a stem length based on other aspects of your fit. I prefer to run bikes with a 100mm stem for example. Because I build my own frames I can make sure this happens. However if I was to ride a production frame I would have to choose between having a bike with almost zero stand over and the stem length I like or running a 110 or 120 and getting a little bit of stand over.

    The OP could be another example. He is on a stock frame. A custom frame could have used an extra degree of seat tube angle and a top tube that was 1 or 2 cm longer depending on desired stem length. But because he chose a stock geometry he did what he needed to with his seat post offset, saddle set back and stem length to get his contact points where he needed them.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by customfab View Post
    Back that truck up smokey joe! Stems, frames and seat posts should all be selected based on fit. The frame obviously should come first.
    I know, and you're welcome. Now, about that handling vs fit issue...

    Quote Originally Posted by customfab View Post
    But sometimes you are forced to compromise a stem length based on other aspects of your fit.
    Yes, but standard bicycle sizing varies moderately between sizes making these compromises modest except to "bike fit E-tards" who have to blow things out of proportion.

    Quote Originally Posted by customfab View Post
    The OP could be another example. He is on a stock frame. A custom frame could have used an extra degree of seat tube angle and a top tube that was 1 or 2 cm longer depending on desired stem length. But because he chose a stock geometry he did what he needed to with his seat post offset, saddle set back and stem length to get his contact points where he needed them.
    You sure know a lot about a bike fit process of which you were not involved. Funny how you embody things about internet bike fitters that you ridicule.

    If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck. The bike seems small because bikes that are too small end up looking like this. There are many things about the fit we can't possibly know here and that includes you, customfab. If you are annoyed by people pretending to know more than they do, perhaps you should refrain from that yourself.

  61. #61
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,742

    The sore spot is....

    [QUOTE=Cusco;8772110]
    Quote Originally Posted by veteran_youth View Post
    Travis Brown's Leadville setup: undisputedly early 90's.

    Horses for courses! Honestly I do not think that a 110mm stem is abnormally long, and I don't want to come off as ragging on your bike. But to say that 140mm is a common contemporary stem size for mtbs now I think is a bit of a stretch. (no pun intended) I think 110 is currently the longest that most people run assuming they have a properly sized frame.

    Cheers,

    Not sure how your getting 110mm as the longest most people run? Both Lance's and Jeremiah's rigs are running 120mm and Levi's running a 110mm. The 1st winner on a 29er for Leadville ran a 105mm which is only ever so slightly shorter than what I'm running.

    Did you actuely look closely at Travis Brown's set up with the drop bars? I ride cyclocross as well and I guarantee you that other than steep climbs in Leadville he was riding on the hoods or in the drops when descending. I'm guessing that in the hoods the effective stem length vs a flat mtb bar is in the 130mm to 140mm range (look at the picture in the link you posted and estimate how far a stem would need to extend for a flat mtb bar to extend out to the brake hoods).

    These guys have the best sports phsyiologists in the world at their disposal and are riding stems 110mm to 130mm or longer in the example you provided. Not sure where you got the 90's vs today comparison but it's bs!
    Is that Travis Brown and Lance Armstrong were on, gulp, 26" bikes. The madness of it!!!

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    I know, and you're welcome. Now, about that handling vs fit issue...


    Yes, but standard bicycle sizing varies moderately between sizes making these compromises modest except to "bike fit E-tards" who have to blow things out of proportion.


    You sure know a lot about a bike fit process of which you were not involved. Funny how you embody things about internet bike fitters that you ridicule.

    If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck. The bike seems small because bikes that are too small end up looking like this. There are many things about the fit we can't possibly know here and that includes you, customfab. If you are annoyed by people pretending to know more than they do, perhaps you should refrain from that yourself.
    Don't want to continue to stoke the fire here but for I''m pretty much aligned with Customfabs observations. A few points to consider:

    - You have never seem me on the bike so you really have no idea about my position on the bike.
    - When I took delivery of the bike the stem had 40mm of spacers underneath it and the saddle was set back to keep my saddle to bar reach position similar to the 26er XC race rig I have. By raising the stack height by 40mm the stem length was effectively shortened due to the head tube angle causing them to move the saddle back further. The LBS knew that it was very unlikely that I would ride with 40mm of spacers under my stem but did not want to cut my steerer to short and asked that I ride and adjust the spacers to dial in my fit (a reasonable request given once a steerer tube is cut there is no going back). I quickly found that running no spacers under the stem was right for me but that effectively lengthened my stem which should have triggerd a shift forward of the saddle but I just liked the more strecthed out feel.
    - Pro riders tend to ride longer stems for a simple reason based on physics. Longer stems provide greater leverage / better power position when out of the saddle during steeper climbs & sprints and the leverage can be further accentuated by using wider bars (also provides a more aero position as well). Having the abilitiy to get more of your upper body out over the front wheel via a longer stem provides a significant advantage when climbing / powering out of the saddle. The downside is that too long a stem can trigger significant discomfort when riding for long periods of times so there is a trade off. Think of a defensive lineman in football. Are they standing verticle ... no ... they are angled steeply forward because of the power / leverage this position provides. Running a short stem for XC racing makes no sense for this reason. If anything I would say 110mm is on the shorter side and as mentioned previously both Lance and Jeremiah are running 120mm and I believe Jeremiah is running either flat or negative stem rise making the effective length even longer.
    - If you look closely at my current saddle position you can see there is an additional 10mm of flat rail left so if I wanted I could slide the saddle back even further. There is no chance of rails bending in its current position... pure nonsense.
    - For XC racing why in the world would you ride a bigger frame then needed???? Bigger frame = more weight / less agile. Obviously the frame has to fit within reason but this tendency to ride bigger frames / longer effective TT is just dumb.
    - Please explain to me why Levi is running too small a frame size (see prior page) ... 110mm stem and an even more "slammed" saddle. He obviously doesn't know what he is doing ... maybe you guys can help

  63. #63
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,484
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    I know, and you're welcome. Now, about that handling vs fit issue....
    I didn't thank you for a damn thing, not sure why your saying welcome

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    , but standard bicycle sizing varies moderately between sizes making these compromises modest except to "bike fit E-tards" who have to blow things out of proportion..
    A centimeter of stem length can make the difference in cramps and pain free riding for some. If you think there is only modest differences why don't you try going up or down a size

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    sure know a lot about a bike fit process of which you were not involved. Funny how you embody things about internet bike fitters that you ridicule.
    Where have I commented on his fit? I haven't because I have never seen Cusco much less seen him on his bike. To speculate on his bike fit would be ignorant. However what I did say is that if he had gone with a custom frame his bike would look a little more normal. But at the end of the day as long as the three contact points are all in the right spot that's all that matters.

    If your going to use "bike fit E-tards" against me this is how I define it: Somebody that offers fit advice without having seen the rider on their bike. There are some exceptions to this however.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    698
    [QUOTE=customfab;8773642]
    Quote Originally Posted by S:Drive View Post

    Not really sure how looking at the bike you can tell weather or not it fits. It's a stock bike and some people have proportions that make the bike look odd to some but when you see them on it they look perfectly normal. Trying to make assumptions on how well a bike fits somebody based on a picture of there bike is ignorant.



    Funny because when somebody says something like that I think "this person knows nothing about bike fit"



    Back that truck up smokey joe! Stems, frames and seat posts should all be selected based on fit. The frame obviously should come first. But sometimes you are forced to compromise a stem length based on other aspects of your fit. I prefer to run bikes with a 100mm stem for example. Because I build my own frames I can make sure this happens. However if I was to ride a production frame I would have to choose between having a bike with almost zero stand over and the stem length I like or running a 110 or 120 and getting a little bit of stand over.

    The OP could be another example. He is on a stock frame. A custom frame could have used an extra degree of seat tube angle and a top tube that was 1 or 2 cm longer depending on desired stem length. But because he chose a stock geometry he did what he needed to with his seat post offset, saddle set back and stem length to get his contact points where he needed them.
    Never made an assumption on how it fits him, just how he has to run his saddle.

    All saddles have a range in were they should be mounted. If you have to run an extreme forward or rear position on the saddle, something is off.

    When you spending that kind of money on a new frame, you should not have to run the saddle like that. That is what I am trying to say, no more no less.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    175
    What is the problem? Cusco is stoked with his new ride and that is all that matters in my eyes. Ride on and enjoy your bike.

  66. #66
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: TunicaTrails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    Didn't mean to start this dispute, enjoy your ride however it feels best. I've tried a lot of different stem/seatpost settings before. You've got a beautiful bike and I hope you enjoy it.

    A couple of comments on the examples, for my own entertainment if nothing else. Lance and Leipheimer are probably setting up their bikes to what feels comfortable as roadies. They are both pretty good mountain bikers though, I'll admit. Todd Wells is a long-limbed 6'2" so keep that in mind, also notice his wide bars and bar drop. Not sure what Bishop's deal is but he's another ultra-endurance guy. They ride what is most comfortable and efficient over 100 miles, not what handles best in a fast XC race.

    I think if you were interested in experimenting later, I'd suggest trying a 700mm bar combined with a 90mm stem, keeping the bar 1-4 inches below the saddle, either with spacers, stem rise, or riser bars.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by TunicaTrails View Post
    Didn't mean to start this dispute, enjoy your ride however it feels best. I've tried a lot of different stem/seatpost settings before. You've got a beautiful bike and I hope you enjoy it.

    A couple of comments on the examples, for my own entertainment if nothing else. Lance and Leipheimer are probably setting up their bikes to what feels comfortable as roadies. They are both pretty good mountain bikers though, I'll admit. Todd Wells is a long-limbed 6'2" so keep that in mind, also notice his wide bars and bar drop. Not sure what Bishop's deal is but he's another ultra-endurance guy. They ride what is most comfortable and efficient over 100 miles, not what handles best in a fast XC race.

    I think if you were interested in experimenting later, I'd suggest trying a 700mm bar combined with a 90mm stem, keeping the bar 1-4 inches below the saddle, either with spacers, stem rise, or riser bars.
    Lynn,

    Thanks for the bar length / stem length suggestion .... I appreciate the constructive advise / suggestions. Believe it or not I have already ordered a new bar for the bike. The shop owner who built up the bike recommended running the bar at somewhere between 680mm and 660mm which according to him was the sweet spot. I started at 660mm because some of the trails I ride are very tight in sections with trees / saplings etc. and I was concerned about catching the bar and crashing. I really liked the bar at 660mm but decided to go down to 640mm thinking it would make the bar just a bit shorter and not make much of a difference. That unfortunately has not turned out to be the case and to my surprise the change was very noiticable. I had planned on starting off the new bar at 680mm but given your suggestion perhaps I'll give 700mm a try ... should definately provide some benefit for out of the saddle leverage. Fortunately my younger brother is an avid racer and wants the old bar for his 26er so the overall snafu won't cost me much. Not sure I would drop down to a 90mm stem and would lean more towards a 100mm and maybe move the saddle foward a bit?? I hate to admit it but one of the reasons I have not experimented with the saddle is that I have only used Thomson 2 bolt type seat post clamp systems in the past (easy to adjust) and I have been somewhat reluctant to mess with the 1 bolt Enve system which I hear can be a little more difficult.

    Thanks again.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: grouan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    257
    Awesome bike regardless of all the noise going here.

    Is the down tube new for 2012?

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by grouan View Post
    Awesome bike regardless of all the noise going here.

    Thanks

    Is the down tube new for 2012?
    Yes - 2011 down tube has a single bend at the top of the down tube and in 2012 a second bend was addded at the bottom of the downtube.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    146


    Like the OP, I have a lot of seat tube and long stem, but this gives me a great deal of comfort.

    I am used to riding a road bike, have good flexibility, long legs/femur so this feels like the best set u for me.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    390
    How can you say stem is too long? Especially if you have not seen the rider on the bike I have a 120mm on mine and it is a custom geo RSL with a longer toptube. The bike rides great. If I were to run a 90mm stem the toptube would have to be over an inch longer!
    As others have mentioned- look at pro guys. Kulhavy runs a 130mm in a -17 with flat bars on his 29er.
    Toptube on an Epic is shorter than on my custoom RSL- when I build the Epic I will likely need a 130 stem.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    206
    Stock frame geometry is not set up to accomodate the 1.5" external headset cup. This will effect bb height and hta.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    146
    He could always fractionally decrease the travel on the fork to compensate.

    Given suspension forks sag anyway and are constantly changing length when in use while on the trail this is probably a bit of a moot point!

    Lynskey will suggest either an internal or external headset and do not consider the small change to have a significant impact on handling - though I am not sure of Moots' opinion on this matter.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 2002maniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    375
    Bottom line: That's a very nice bike!

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by dancing james View Post
    He could always fractionally decrease the travel on the fork to compensate.

    Given suspension forks sag anyway and are constantly changing length when in use while on the trail this is probably a bit of a moot point!

    Lynskey will suggest either an internal or external headset and do not consider the small change to have a significant impact on handling - though I am not sure of Moots' opinion on this matter.
    Moots said pretty much the same thing. Given the amount of fork sag you run you could already be compensating to a degree and the added height may not have a perceptable impact on bike handling. They metnioned if there was any difference it would likely be more noticable when riding the fork in its' locked out position. The other alternative they mentioned was to reduce the travel down to 90mm.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    124

    enve riser?

    are those riser bars? i couldnt really tell from the pic...

    btw, i'm having a custom 29er built using a 120mm enve stem

    not really sure what all the fuss about your stem length is about...

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by wlhighlight View Post
    are those riser bars? i couldnt really tell from the pic...

    btw, i'm having a custom 29er built using a 120mm enve stem

    not really sure what all the fuss about your stem length is about...
    No - Its' the Enve flat bar with 9 deg. of sweep. Don't know what all the fuss was about either .... I would have never thought that a 110mm stem would be characterized as long (or 120mm for that matter). I am still of the opinion that short stems are disadvantaged in terms of leverage,

    Good luck with your build ... you'll love the Enve components .... great stuff.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    146
    that makes 3 of us

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by dancing james View Post
    that makes 3 of us
    actually pretty funny since roadies make fun of shorter stems!

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BacDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    613
    Had to post one more time on this awesome bike. That frame with the Enve/King components is a dream build for sure! I personally like the look of a 110-120 stem especially one as slick as that Enve.

    Can't understand all th fuss about your seat position,as this is a personal fit issue and that's why the seat manufacturers make the rails - for personal adjustment! In the dry season around here, the trails get that soft sandy condition and I will run my saddle back on the rails to float thru the soft stuff without washing out the front wheel.

    You have Da Kine ride bro and I think some people are a little jealous and criticize to rationalize their "Enve" pun intended!

    Your bike is awesome- post some more pics please!

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    897
    Other than bike fit, a long stem helps get some weight over the front wheel. A lot depends on the terrain the the bike is riden on and the amount the rider likes to move around on his bike. I think most frame manufactures today design their geo around a minimum of a 100mm stem, at least everyone I've talked to. I know, because I've struggled going from a 80mm (stk frame) to a 100mm for a custom Moots, but hey, thats what the experts recommend for their frames.

    Mojo

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    146
    lynskey include a 100mm stem as standard for their MTB finishing kits

  83. #83
    All That is Man
    Reputation: Zero Signal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    334
    Well, if the stem was any shorter, the ENVE logo wouldn't fit, now would it?

    Still, I can see where this fit comes from. I also run a slammed-back seat because I have weird legs and I also like to have my weight further back, but I have a short torso and I'm not actually that tall, so I gotta do a short stem. 110mm stem isn't crazy long anyway ... it looks like a typical xc race setup to me.
    John

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    198
    Very Nice!

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: infanterene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    129
    Obviously there's something seriously wrong with your bike. Please send me your bike and I'll deal with the hassle. I'll even pay shipping.

    Seriously, beautiful bike. Enjoy it !!!

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DonH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    155
    The bike looks great - I always wanted a Moots!
    What size is the frame?

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    I'll just chime in and make my usual comment that many of the posts in this thread talk about stem length as if it is somehow independent of bar width. It isn't. Many XC racers, esp w/ roadie backgrounds, have setups based on what many 'modern' riders would consider to be narrow bars...and not surprisingly, long stems work well with narrow bars. Even I would rock a gigantic 110 mm stem if someone forced me to run a 640 bar rather than my usual 700+ bar.

    whatever works for Cusco is the right answer. and his posts indicate he's quite open-minded about trying different cockpit setups to see what works for his build and terrain and riding style.
    Originally posted by bucksaw87
    I still fail to see how mustaches, fixies, and PBR are ironic.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by DonH View Post
    The bike looks great - I always wanted a Moots!
    What size is the frame?
    It's a 17" frame 23" ETT length (ctc).

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    23

    Sweet Ride

    I noticed the chainstay wrap and immediately thought it was built at Garrison's Cyclery. Then saw someone mention Rob, is that where you had it built?

    I also got my Mooto X RSL from Garrison's. 2011 with only the upper bend and a little heavier build. Still only about 24.5 lbs as shown.

    XTR, Stans Arch (wish I could've afforded ENVE rims) w/ DT 240s hubs.

    Gotta love Ti, especially from teh masters at Moots!!

    BTW - I've been told you add 20mm for the stem lengh on a 29 vs. a 26 to account for increased torque from the larger wheels and longer fork.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails My Moots 29er Rocketship-mootsb.jpg  

    My Moots 29er Rocketship-mootsa.jpg  

    My Moots 29er Rocketship-mootsc.jpg  

    My Moots 29er Rocketship-mootsd.jpg  

    My Moots 29er Rocketship-mootse.jpg  


  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    79
    Only thing I would change about Cusco's gorgeous bike is the seat post. The Ti Moots post that bmuller18 has on his bike is so perfect. Definitely one of the most beautiful HT bikes I've seen on these forums!

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,032
    I agree a 110mm stem is OK. That seatpost however...... PLEASE get something with more setback. You owe it that that awesome build.

  92. #92
    247
    247 is offline
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,333
    That's what I want my next build to look like!!

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by bmuller18 View Post
    I noticed the chainstay wrap and immediately thought it was built at Garrison's Cyclery. Then saw someone mention Rob, is that where you had it built? Yes - bought / had the bike built at Garrison's. Rob and his guys did a great job .... very pleasant to deal with.

    I also got my Mooto X RSL from Garrison's. 2011 with only the upper bend and a little heavier build. Still only about 24.5 lbs as shown.

    XTR, Stans Arch (wish I could've afforded ENVE rims) w/ DT 240s hubs.

    Gotta love Ti, especially from teh masters at Moots!!

    BTW - I've been told you add 20mm for the stem lengh on a 29 vs. a 26 to account for increased torque from the larger wheels and longer fork.
    I like your rig!!!

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    42
    Nice bike!

    I have to agree the frame is likely not the correct size for you if your saddle has to be setback so far....

  95. #95
    SpoK Werks Handmade Goods
    Reputation: 1 Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,160
    I have to say that I like the down tube bend. I have never been a fan of the typical "shock bend" and I really find the new bottom bracket bend to be an abomination to the bike. Therefore, the down tube on this frame achieves the same objectives but it looks great! Glad you put SRAM on it instead of Shi*tmano.... but that's just me.... the singlespeeder.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BacDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by bmuller18 View Post
    I noticed the chainstay wrap and immediately thought it was built at Garrison's Cyclery. Then saw someone mention Rob, is that where you had it built?

    I also got my Mooto X RSL from Garrison's. 2011 with only the upper bend and a little heavier build. Still only about 24.5 lbs as shown.

    XTR, Stans Arch (wish I could've afforded ENVE rims) w/ DT 240s hubs.

    Gotta love Ti, especially from teh masters at Moots!!

    BTW - I've been told you add 20mm for the stem lengh on a 29 vs. a 26 to account for increased torque from the larger wheels and longer fork.
    Another awesome Moots!
    One question for bmuller - Why didn't you go for the blue Hope hubs instead of the DT's?
    Would have gone perfect with the stem!

  97. #97
    ss 29er
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    45
    Super nice!

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    189
    awesome bike, I would call it done with that!

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    632
    Quote Originally Posted by veteran_youth View Post
    50mm in 2011 = 110mm in 1992

    110mm in 2011 = 140mm in 1992
    I'd have to totally agree with you on this.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Cusco View Post
    It's a 17" frame 23" ETT length (ctc).
    Cusco,

    I have an 18" Mooto-X YBB, and like you have longer legs in proportion to torso (5'10" with 32-33" inseem). I've always wondered if I should have gone with a 17". How tall are you? Inseem?

    Thanks. Beautiful bike.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. my new Moots 29er
    By signalMTB in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-17-2011, 06:14 AM
  2. Moots FS 29er
    By atx1127 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-04-2007, 07:26 PM
  3. My new Moots 29er
    By Talkeetna Wolf in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 05-26-2006, 08:50 PM

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

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