Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 38
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craigstr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,302

    New Titus Carbon Rockstar's on the way!

    New Titus Carbon Rockstar's on the way!-frtirockc_p1.jpgName:  IMG_0086.jpg.scaled.500-470x352.jpg
Views: 2009
Size:  46.8 KBNew Titus Carbon Rockstar's on the way!-44975_10151380978644042_826403998_n.jpg
    Titus Rockstar Carbon 29er Frame And Monarch RT3 Shock

    Cant beat the pre-order price of $1499!
    Last edited by craigstr; 02-08-2013 at 06:16 AM. Reason: typo

  2. #2
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,208
    Nice... can't wait for the reviews... Hoping to be able to convince the boss that I "need" a 29er FS next year!!
    On-One Inbred 29er (Purple People Eater)
    Kona Jake
    Bikes for Boobs F*ck Cancer! One too many, 6/24/13. Miss ya ma'.

  3. #3
    I'd rather be riding
    Reputation: zippinveedub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    638
    That's a nice looking frame.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 2x9x29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    31
    Very nice. Any idea what a large frame weighs? Where is it manufactured?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craigstr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,302
    I've been told the large weighs about 6 lbs ( I will know soon enough). They are made in Taiwan by the same company that makes a very popular brand's carbon frames. (thats all I know)

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AngelsAndBombs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    23
    Not a FS fan, but damn thats a nice frame.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flucod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    396
    The Rockstar has suffered from too much flex in the last couple of years. Find it strange they still go with a QR rear (not a 142) and a IS mount, not a post mount.

    The frame does look sexy though.

  8. #8
    Team Livemedium
    Reputation: bamwa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    630
    Titus is tits without u!
    Keep trying to do the awesomest thing you've ever done.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by Flucod View Post
    The Rockstar has suffered from too much flex in the last couple of years. Find it strange they still go with a QR rear (not a 142) and a IS mount, not a post mount.

    The frame does look sexy though.

    i don't think the 142 firms thing all that much. going to a larger QR on the front does.

  10. #10
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,276

    New Titus Carbon Rockstar's on the way!

    Quote Originally Posted by Flucod View Post
    The Rockstar has suffered from too much flex in the last couple of years. Find it strange they still go with a QR rear (not a 142) and a IS mount, not a post mount.

    The frame does look sexy though.
    Every RStar review I have read that complained of flex also had Crank Brothers wheels on the bike. Replace the wheels with anything else and the flex goes away.

    I rode the Al RS and noticed no significant flex. Moved all the parts to the preproduction carbon frame and I could feel increased torsional stiffness in the main triangle. No other flex.
    QR wheels, straight steerer fork.

    My only complaint with the frames is the low BB.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    11
    That's a sick frame!

  12. #12
    PHS
    PHS is offline
    Rider
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    81
    Yes, the older RS frames had complaints from having some flex, but this frame definitely looks like it is built more robust. I think it looks great.
    Last edited by PHS; 02-13-2013 at 05:58 PM. Reason: non carbon

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flucod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    396
    Quote Originally Posted by ascarlarkinyar View Post
    i don't think the 142 firms thing all that much. going to a larger QR on the front does.
    It comes down to facts. Large diameter equals stiffer. You cannot says it make a difference in the front and not the back. Nothing to do with emotion or opinions, it just is. Same reason most mfg's went to a post mount, less flex from braking. An IS mount has give under braking.

    Not a deal breaker by any means, just was pointing it out.

    Shiggy, would running a 120mm fork give enough BB clearence? Think this would a sweet trail bike or 100 mile all day bike. And agree that the wheels add more flex then the frame.

  14. #14
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,073
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    Every RStar review I have read that complained of flex also had Crank Brothers wheels on the bike. Replace the wheels with anything else and the flex goes away.

    I rode the Al RS and noticed no significant flex. Moved all the parts to the preproduction carbon frame and I could feel increased torsional stiffness in the main triangle. No other flex.
    QR wheels, straight steerer fork.

    My only complaint with the frames is the low BB.
    Yup. Agreed on the wheel issue. I can not believe how flexy those Crank Brother wheels were. Without them, the Rockstar I tested was solid. A really fun bike. Although I did not see much, if any torsional flex in the front end of the aluminum one, the carbon sounds like it may be better, eh? That's good. Good looking rig too.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: HighTitan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    727
    ehh I like the Pivot 429c better
    I like to ride bikes fast.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craigstr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,302
    I had one of the demo bikes with the CB wheels most of last summer, I could take the wheel with my hand and flex it all the way and make it touch the chainstay and seatstay. I also always had black streaks of rubber in those spots and could hear the tire buzzing under hard cornering, definitely the wheel, not the stays. My build is going to have American Classic tubeless wheels with the 10mm thru axle quick release, I'm sure it will be plenty stiff.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flucod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    396
    Quote Originally Posted by craigstr View Post
    I had one of the demo bikes with the CB wheels most of last summer, I could take the wheel with my hand and flex it all the way and make it touch the chainstay and seatstay. I also always had black streaks of rubber in those spots and could hear the tire buzzing under hard cornering, definitely the wheel, not the stays. My build is going to have American Classic tubeless wheels with the 10mm thru axle quick release, I'm sure it will be plenty stiff.
    Not arguing that. BUT I do not get if you are company designing a new bike why would you still go with the QR rear? Just thinking out loud. I wish someone here would just offer that explanation. Does it save weight? Please quit responding about why it is not an issue but why Titus chose to go that direction. Not looking to argue, interested in the frame, just want to know the reasoning of that decision.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craigstr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,302
    I will send a link of this thread to Brant and get him to chime in on the rear end. I know they didnt go 12x142 on the new El Guapo because it would have raised the cost a couple hundred bucks.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craigstr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,302
    Here is what I got from Brant Richards, Titus/On One designer, when I asked him about the rear stays:
    Rear stays are the same model of carbon stay we have used for the last year or so. So it's a compatibility issue.
    We are happy with their performance and of course it's very simple for people to upgrade from their current 29er hardtail frame which will mostly have a qr rear too.

    --
    brant

  20. #20
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,276

    New Titus Carbon Rockstar's on the way!

    Quote Originally Posted by PHS View Post
    Yes, the older carbon RS frames had complaints from having some flex, but this frame definitely looks like it is built more robust. I think it looks great.
    Ummm... There are no older carbon RS frames. This is it.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  21. #21
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,276

    New Titus Carbon Rockstar's on the way!

    Quote Originally Posted by Flucod View Post

    Shiggy, would running a 120mm fork give enough BB clearence? Think this would a sweet trail bike or 100 mile all day bike. And agree that the wheels add more flex then the frame.
    For my preferences, no, not at all. The BB is about a inch lower than I like. The longer fork may raise the BB 5-6mm. I was bashing pedals regularly. Learned to ratchet pedal more than usual, but that does not work when full pedal strokes are required to keep moving or you are having the bash ring hanging up on logs and ledges.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    11
    Just a quick thought on rear axle- I used a 135x12 through axle with quick release...I believe it is from Azonic. Run a hope hub (135x12) and it works great. The 12mm axle is what sits in the drop outs and the qr skewer holds everything together. Haven't compared weights because I really don't do that, but can't imagine much heavier than other 142x12 qr systems.

  23. #23
    Stokeless Asshat
    Reputation: jeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,722
    Fugly.

    JMHOOC.
    Zip ties? Not on my bike!

    Want:
    650B rims 80's vintage 32 or 36
    Salsa or similar stem. 1" threadless. 120 with rise.

  24. #24
    Dickhouse
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    291
    Sweet looking bike! I'd like to hear a full review.. XC racer or more trail bike?

    One thing though, why is it already so heavily discounted? $700 off for a brand new release? Is this just a marketing tactic or are they worried about not getting rid of these?

  25. #25
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,276

    New Titus Carbon Rockstar's on the way!

    Quote Originally Posted by benny b View Post
    Just a quick thought on rear axle- I used a 135x12 through axle with quick release...I believe it is from Azonic. Run a hope hub (135x12) and it works great. The 12mm axle is what sits in the drop outs and the qr skewer holds everything together. Haven't compared weights because I really don't do that, but can't imagine much heavier than other 142x12 qr systems.
    Good luck getting a 12mm axle to fit in a 10mm dropout (as you have described it). In any case, the diameter of the axle is not the reason true through axle setups can be stiffer (and not all are).
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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