Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 157 of 157
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    Well, I went and did it, just submitted an order for a blue sz large GX Ripmo, expected mid to late April.

    Price and build were right, love Ibis and love DW, will probably do some tweaking including 165mm cranks and some DT 350/Duroc 40 wheels.

    Bummer I gotta wait, but I got bikes to play on until it arrives.

    Wrench Science in San Fran, never dealt with them before, but they were super easy to work with. "Taylor" expedited my order, 50% down, used PayPal.

    Me love a new ride!

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Well, I went and did it, just submitted an order for a blue sz large GX Ripmo, expected mid to late April.

    Price and build were right, love Ibis and love DW, will probably do some tweaking including 165mm cranks and some DT 350/Duroc 40 wheels.

    Bummer I gotta wait, but I got bikes to play on until it arrives.

    Wrench Science in San Fran, never dealt with them before, but they were super easy to work with. "Taylor" expedited my order, 50% down, used PayPal.

    Me love a new ride!
    Boom! I was a casual follower of this thread until now. Very interested in the Ripmo.

  3. #103
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5,440
    Very nice Ben. Look forward to seeing it out on the trail. I have heard good things about WrenchScience through JCWages and BKXC. Seems like they are a premiere fit/finish shop.

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    So I've been looking at Pole, very unique, never seen one in person. The Machine looks good but is too much bike for my needs. The Evolink is more what I need.

    But the chainstays on both bikes are 455; it says "effective chainstay length".

    So are they actually shorter due to the unique geo? How does that bike manual compared to a more typical short chainstay bike like the Riot?
    They say effective chainstay length because that is the most common way to measure chainstays. So it is 455mm. The bike manuals like any other bike regardless of chainstay lenght, but I bet it takes a bit more muscle to get it to manual, but it is probably just something you get used to. I don't know, I can't manual. But I see ppl manual the evolink on youtube and facebook, so it is probably no big deal if you know how to do it on other bikes.

  5. #105
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    8,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Well, I went and did it, just submitted an order for a blue sz large GX Ripmo, expected mid to late April.

    Price and build were right, love Ibis and love DW, will probably do some tweaking including 165mm cranks and some DT 350/Duroc 40 wheels.

    Bummer I gotta wait, but I got bikes to play on until it arrives.

    Wrench Science in San Fran, never dealt with them before, but they were super easy to work with. "Taylor" expedited my order, 50% down, used PayPal.

    Me love a new ride!
    Congratulations on pulling the trigger! From everything you've said she'll be a dream machine for sure. Lickin' forehead to photos & hearing more once the eagle lands and knobs have shredded terra firma.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    602
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Well, I went and did it, just submitted an order for a blue sz large GX Ripmo, expected mid to late April.

    Price and build were right, love Ibis and love DW, will probably do some tweaking including 165mm cranks and some DT 350/Duroc 40 wheels.

    Bummer I gotta wait, but I got bikes to play on until it arrives.

    Wrench Science in San Fran, never dealt with them before, but they were super easy to work with. "Taylor" expedited my order, 50% down, used PayPal.

    Me love a new ride!
    Read your first post and see this. New and shiny bling got you good! This coming from a Mojo 3 owner. :-) I can't wait to test ride the Ripmo, maybe it will change my mind about 29er on my 5'5" stature.

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,640
    Quote Originally Posted by smoothmoose View Post
    Read your first post and see this. New and shiny bling got you good! This coming from a Mojo 3 owner. :-) I can't wait to test ride the Ripmo, maybe it will change my mind about 29er on my 5'5" stature.
    I'm 5'6" not many bikes over 140mm will actually fit right. The Ibis Geo does look good.

  8. #108
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5,440
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    I'm 5'6" not many bikes over 140mm will actually fit right. The Ibis Geo does look good.
    According to one of the articles (think it was pinkbike) the designer is 5'1" and rides a XS and loves it. But you can never trust those types of reviews.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    Yeah, it's good timing, just gotta wait a month, but I'm stoked, this is the bike I wanted, just didn't exist for me until I heard about it the other day. Thanks to everyone that pitched in, this is gonna be sweet!

    Apologies to GG, I almost pulled the trigger over there, but availability of demos makes it hard to try something new, but Ibis and DW are a known quantity for me.

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12,029
    Enjoy the new ride. Ibis makes nice machines.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,640
    Quote Originally Posted by gregnash View Post
    According to one of the articles (think it was pinkbike) the designer is 5'1" and rides a XS and loves it. But you can never trust those types of reviews.
    I do know that one of the designers and I believe racer is a female around 5"

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,493
    Schweet. Now will get ONE unbiased review on the current "it" bike!

    Of course, if Turner unveils the new Sultan at Sea Otter, you might be forfeiting your Ripmo deposit.

    Speculation on that bike started in 2015, IIRC...........
    Whining is not a strategy.

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    Reviews are kinda funny, itís rare to read a bad one, but you can usually read between the lines.

    The problem I have with reviews/reviewers is they are not me, so how do I relate their preferences and experiences to mine?

    Even demos can be deceiving because set up, conditions, terrain really need to simulate what and where you ride.

    Then we got the dream of the holy grail of bikes, with the one bike quiver fantasy...

    My wife wisely inquired about what i would do if I didnít like the Ripmo. I said Iíd sell the frame and get a Smash 

    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Schweet. Now will get ONE unbiased review on the current "it" bike!

    Of course, if Turner unveils the new Sultan at Sea Otter, you might be forfeiting your Ripmo deposit.

    Speculation on that bike started in 2015, IIRC...........

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Reviews are kinda funny, itís rare to read a bad one, but you can usually read between the lines.

    The problem I have with reviews/reviewers is they are not me, so how do I relate their preferences and experiences to mine?

    Even demos can be deceiving because set up, conditions, terrain really need to simulate what and where you ride.

    Then we got the dream of the holy grail of bikes, with the one bike quiver fantasy...

    My wife wisely inquired about what i would do if I didnít like the Ripmo. I said Iíd sell the frame and get a Smash 
    Unfortunately, you have to remember how a brand of bikes feel, and if you liked it. I like how Ibis and Turner feel but don't like other DW like bikes I've tried. I like how Canfeild and Knolly feel as well. Mosrly because my pet peeves is hanging up on tech climbs, and downhills. At least with the smaller companies you get an idea what they are aiming for.

  15. #115
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5,440
    Yeah I will be stoked to see it when you get it Ben. Maybe I will have you lead on the downhill that day so I can watch the suspension action and bike characteristics.

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,356
    I'd rather read a review from someone that actually paid for their bike.

  17. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    Mine was $4800 😮

    Not that much in the greater scheme of things, I got the brakes and drivetrain I like, got Fox suspension without going too blingy, gonna swap cranks for 165mm (Descents or GX), already ordered wheels (Mike C specials, DT 350/Duroc 40/XR4 2.6).

    In the meantime Iím back on the Hendrix for a month, could be worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post
    I'd rather read a review from someone that actually paid for their bike.

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Well, I went and did it, just submitted an order for a blue sz large GX Ripmo, expected mid to late April.
    Awesome, Ben! I've been feeling the pain of your same choice/analysis, and the Ripmo is looking like my answer, too.

    I was able to find one at the local store to pedal around the neighborhood... luckily in Boulder was able to find a super-steep grassy hill. The Ripmo was quick and light and just billy-goated up that hill like a Ripley, but felt way, way better pointed down. True, not a 'real' demo (and I'll be waiting for one b4 I pull the trigger), but pretty good sign considering I was in dress shoes from work!

    Please let us know your ride experiences once it comes in!

  19. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,356
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Mine was $4800 😮

    Not that much in the greater scheme of things, I got the brakes and drivetrain I like, got Fox suspension without going too blingy, gonna swap cranks for 165mm (Descents or GX), already ordered wheels (Mike C specials, DT 350/Duroc 40/XR4 2.6).

    In the meantime Iím back on the Hendrix for a month, could be worse.
    Just getting tired of media reviews of bikes. "Climbs great...descends even better!!".

    Kinda hard to get some real world reviews these days.

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation: juan_speeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,397
    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post
    Just getting tired of media reviews of bikes. "Climbs great...descends even better!!".

    Kinda hard to get some real world reviews these days.
    It's also becoming hard to buy a bike that doesn't perform well.
    Scarlett Johansson loves my hummus.

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation: R_Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    973
    Quote Originally Posted by juan_speeder View Post
    It's also becoming hard to buy a bike that doesn't perform well.
    Truth!

  22. #122
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    8,883
    Quote Originally Posted by juan_speeder View Post
    It's also becoming hard to buy a bike that doesn't perform well.
    Truth! Itís a good time to be a mountain biker.

    Back to bike reviews. Yeah, we have to read between the lines when it comes to what professionals / media people say because those guys donít want to offend their advertisers / suppliers / friends / sponsors / whatnot. OTOH the problem with reviews by people who pay for their equipment is there may be a tendency for people to love their new new bike, period. After all, they just paid mega-thousands for it ó they gotta love it, right? Factor in the possibility that they may not have ridden many other bikes for comparison and even trusting an ďobjectiveĒ review might become challenging, too.

    But thatís hardly worth mentioning in this case. Iím sure Nurse Ben will be objective plus heís got plenty of experience with other equipment. Canít wait to hear what he has to say about the Ripmo.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  23. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,866
    It looks like Ventana will be updating the El Capitan. This was posted in the Ventana forum. Check out the chain stay length. Apparently it is to be released in June.

    Picking a long travel all mountain 29er-1191691d1523115846-el-cap-99c35037-3b2f-48e8-a090-78fd7e6f1b80.jpg
    I only ride bikes to fill the time when I'm not skiing.

  24. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    It's good to see Sherwood updating his geo, but that's for a 27.5, I want 29.

    I'm super stoked to see where bikes are going, the Ripmo will be amazing!

    Quote Originally Posted by OldHouseMan View Post
    It looks like Ventana will be updating the El Capitan. This was posted in the Ventana forum. Check out the chain stay length. Apparently it is to be released in June.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1191691d1523115846-el-cap-99c35037-3b2f-48e8-a090-78fd7e6f1b80.jpg 
Views:	81 
Size:	95.9 KB 
ID:	1191851

  25. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,866
    Oops, I missed that bold 27.5 x 3.0 across the top. Sometimes my reading comprehension sucks. I do wonder how different a 29Ē wheeled version will be, if not the same.

  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    It's good to see Sherwood updating his geo, but that's for a 27.5, I want 29.

    I'm super stoked to see where bikes are going, the Ripmo will be amazing!
    Confirmed by Ventana, this will be a 29Ē/27.5+ bike.
    I only ride bikes to fill the time when I'm not skiing.

  27. #127
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,068
    After all this it'll be interesting to see a review from Nurse Ben on the Ripmo.

    ...and after the humorous comments digging on Blantant, it'd be cool to hear his thoughts as well if he ever gets to demo a Ripmo.

    The Ripmo caught my eye along with the Genuis due to the lower weight of those bikes. The difference is, however, that the Genuis requires a spendy $4500+ investment to get a carbon frame, and it's half carbon at that (30lbs size medium complete). You can get a full-carbon NX level Ripmo for $4000. I think Ibis is claiming around 28lbs for most of their bikes in the Medium frame size, so it's an 2lbs loss (and $500 in the pocket) going with the Ripmo over the Genuis.

    The $3500 Jeffsy CF (SRAM Brake, RF cranks, XT drivetrain, and heavy but reliable E13 dropper) might beat them both at around 28/29lbs...with one niggle - they haven't gone Metric yet.

    The only downisde I see to the Ripmo is that low BB and lack of adjustment thereof.

    One thing I dig about the Smash is that it's got a high BB at 140mm fork, but overfork it to 160mm with the 275x2.6 tires and you should be about the same BB height as most enduro machines.

    Oh and it's made in Colorado but awesome people.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: beer_coffee_water's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    The only downisde I see to the Ripmo is that low BB and lack of adjustment thereof.

    One thing I dig about the Smash is that it's got a high BB at 140mm fork, but overfork it to 160mm with the 275x2.6 tires and you should be about the same BB height as most enduro machines.

    Oh and it's made in Colorado but awesome people.
    This statement isn't working for me. What is your threshold for a low BB height? The Ripmo is measured at 341mm and the 140mm Smash is at 345mm. When these two bikes are sagged I would bet the difference would still be the same ~4mm or less than 1/4".

  29. #129
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,068
    I didnt' realize they were so close. In that case, I suppose you could run 275x2.8s on the Ripmo if they fit.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    Yeah, the low bb issue is probably not as much of an issue as people make it out to be, this is the problem with cubicle reviews.

    So much of pedal strike is situational, compounded by the suspension function while pedaling.

    A good review involves a trail ride.

    My "premonition" is that bike designers will ultimately realize that lowering COG by reducing BB height can be done effectively without reducing pedal clearance by:

    SHORTENING THE DAMN CRANKS!

    I'm 6', 32" inseam, 200#, strong rider, aggressive, love to climb, ride tech, very "active" rider utilizing terrain features as much as possible, and I run 165mm cranks on all my bikes. Shorter cranks have not reduced my efficiency or climbing potential, if anything they have improved both AND shorter cranks have certainly reduced pedal strike.

    But hey, you don't have to believe me, I don't care if other people get pissed off about pedal strike issues as long as I don't have pedal strike issues
    Last edited by Nurse Ben; 04-12-2018 at 03:25 PM.

  31. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,042
    Conversely I am 5'11" with 32" inseam and have 165 cranks on my DH bike and they feel like baby cranks. I rode it up a good 30 minute trail climb before and hated the dinky little things.

  32. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    You can tell the difference in a 5mm shorter crank? Uh huh.

    Quote Originally Posted by Preston67 View Post
    Conversely I am 5'11" with 32" inseam and have 165 cranks on my DH bike and they feel like baby cranks. I rode it up a good 30 minute trail climb before and hated the dinky little things.

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,042
    I normally ride 175 - so that's 10mm smart ass !

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: evo233's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Yeah, the low bb issue is probably not as much of an issue as people make it out to be, this is the problem with cubicle reviews.

    So much of pedal strike is situational, compounded by the suspension function while pedaling.
    Somehow just stumbled upon this thread and thought I'd chime in.

    Had a fuel EX for a goo amount of last year and that was definitely took a little adjustment after buying it, but after a few rides or so you get used to it and learn to mover your pedals accordingly. In other words not too big a deal, and yes can drop down to a 170 crank without probably noticing much of anything and gain a little bit of clearance if need be.

    Also as an aside rode a ripmo down in santa cruz for the release and did end up buying one (with my own money, yes I get a deal but that probably about makes up for the difference income between myself and probably a lot of people who comment on these forums). Also did a one ride review here: https://tinyurl.com/ycrz9bpt - is it biased and based off not a lot of ride time? Probably a bit, but no one writing anything doesn't have some bias about something, and have been riding long enough and have moved through enough bikes of pretty much every style that I think I can get a pretty good sense of how they'll be as long as the terrain is varied enough.

    With regards to BB height specifically - the bike had 2.5 maxxis tires and it definitely didn't feel as low as a fuel ex with 29er wheels in the low setting (at least with the stock fork on the fuel). Probably have gotten used to being conscious of pedal strikes and I didn't ride any super technical rock garden up hills - will have to save the lakes basin test till I get my frame - but there were a few root sections as well as some other on trail obstacles (and a bridge with uphill stairs) and didn't pedal strike or feel like I really had to worry about it either.

    Think the suspension bit is also pretty true - Have ridden a few treks at this point and while I get their design philosophy and the work they put into the rear shocks, I've never really been happy with them feel wise compared to DW bikes - how the shock is reacting (no pun intended) and moving the rear triangle as your pedaling (or descending) can definitely make a difference in this regard.
    Last edited by evo233; 04-14-2018 at 05:54 PM.

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    I acknowledge my smart assiness

    Take a gander at this quote grab from a recent MTBR bike fitting featurette:

    Mtbr: Is crank arm length a bigger deal than we think in MTB?
    Todd Schoeni: Crank arm length is a big can of worms in the fitting world, and Iím not sure I want to open it but here goes. My short answer is, no. The studies we have seen do not show a significant change in power output over time when you change crank arm length. The long answer is, somewhat yes. Crank arm length comes down to bike fit, comfort, feel, and preference. For mountain bikes, I would say bike fit and comfort are the two main factors in crank arm choice. Preference would also be relevant since maybe you want to run a shorter crank arm to avoid pedal strikes on rocks and things of that nature. There are even manufacturers running shorter crank arms on larger size bikes for this exact reason.

    Adam Myerson: Traditionally, people have just accepted that longer is better in MTB because you need the leverage at slow speeds and quickly changing torque requirements. But I think itís reasonable to question that and consider how crank length impacts bike fit as much as power production. If you ride long cranks and a low saddle position, that is compounded at the top of the pedal stroke and how high you need to lift your knees. And if you ride somewhere really rocky and technical, pedal clearance with the ground is something to keep in mind.

  36. #136
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    8,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    I acknowledge my smart assiness

    Take a gander at this quote grab from a recent MTBR bike fitting featurette:

    Mtbr: Is crank arm length a bigger deal than we think in MTB?
    Todd Schoeni: Crank arm length is a big can of worms in the fitting world, and Iím not sure I want to open it but here goes. My short answer is, no. The studies we have seen do not show a significant change in power output over time when you change crank arm length. The long answer is, somewhat yes. Crank arm length comes down to bike fit, comfort, feel, and preference. For mountain bikes, I would say bike fit and comfort are the two main factors in crank arm choice. Preference would also be relevant since maybe you want to run a shorter crank arm to avoid pedal strikes on rocks and things of that nature. There are even manufacturers running shorter crank arms on larger size bikes for this exact reason.

    Adam Myerson: Traditionally, people have just accepted that longer is better in MTB because you need the leverage at slow speeds and quickly changing torque requirements. But I think itís reasonable to question that and consider how crank length impacts bike fit as much as power production. If you ride long cranks and a low saddle position, that is compounded at the top of the pedal stroke and how high you need to lift your knees. And if you ride somewhere really rocky and technical, pedal clearance with the ground is something to keep in mind.
    Me: 6í2Ē, 36Ē inseam, riding 185mm-200mm cranks since Ď94. Couple decades ago I was shouting from the rooftops (okay, mountain tops) the benefits of long cranks. By now Iíve come to believe very firmly that itís all just a matter of personal preference. Period. Run whatever you like best.

    Problem is those of us who do feel most comfortable on longer cranks are having a hard time finding bikes with adequately high BBs these days. Guess everybody gotta lose sometime.

    Interesting point in one of the quotes above. When we run longer cranks, we lower the seat. For some reason many riders I talk with about crank length assume the seat has to be raised or that COG is higher when employing long cranks. Nope. Not if resting pedal height is the same between two bikes with different length cranks. Whatís different is BB height and since we run our cranks horizontal when descending, this is when COG might be affected. I say ďmightĒ because personally I donít have any challenge bending my knees another few mmís. But for those that do, there are lower BBs and shorter cranks.

    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    729
    One aspect of longer crank lengths is that it creates more knee and hip angulation and polar movement vertically. In other words, the longer the crank, the more acute femur/hip angle must be at TDC (top dead center) and BDC (bottom dead center); likewise, the longer the crank the sharper the knee angles must be at TDC and BDC. The tighter these angles are the more power is required at this points to push the crank over center. What difference does any of this make? Not much until you factor in a lifetime of rotating movement causing joints to wear out a little bit faster.

    I am tall, 6'6" with long femurs with along inseam (39") and 54 years old. I have always run 180mm cranks until a friend of mine who studied bio mechanical athletic science gave me a copy of a PhD research paper he wrote on this very subject. I am now running 175mm cranks and considering 170's on future changes/upgrades/bikes.

    Nevertheless, long travel 29ers are THE way to go in my opinion. There are a whole slew of them out there. Seems like everybody is making some great bikes these days. More or less, it comes down to who you have the best relationship with at your LBS!

    Now get out there and ride!

  38. #138
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    8,883
    Quote Originally Posted by beastmaster View Post
    One aspect of longer crank lengths is that it creates more knee and hip angulation and polar movement vertically. In other words, the longer the crank, the more acute femur/hip angle must be at TDC (top dead center) and BDC (bottom dead center); likewise, the longer the crank the sharper the knee angles must be at TDC and BDC. The tighter these angles are the more power is required at this points to push the crank over center. What difference does any of this make? Not much until you factor in a lifetime of rotating movement causing joints to wear out a little bit faster.

    I am tall, 6'6" with long femurs with along inseam (39") and 54 years old. I have always run 180mm cranks until a friend of mine who studied bio mechanical athletic science gave me a copy of a PhD research paper he wrote on this very subject. I am now running 175mm cranks and considering 170's on future changes/upgrades/bikes.
    This is good to know. Because Iíve ridden nothing but 185-200mm cranks throughout the past 20-some years, I may not know what Iím missing. For many years I was absolutely convinced that long cranks were superior... Iím no longer so sure. A decade of my time on long cranks was spent exclusively singlespeeding. Hmmm... if cranks were free Iíd throw on a set of 170s or 175s to give shorter cranks a try.

    I agree about long travel 29ers! Long may they live!
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,493
    Also acknowledging my smart assiness:

    Long cranks no longer matter because kids these days don't care about climbing anymore!

    Enduro. Shuttle. Whatever.

    Get off my lawn!
    Whining is not a strategy.

  40. #140
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    8,883
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Enduro. Shuttle. Whatever.
    E-bike!
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  41. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    Ok, so I kinda changed my mind, just couldnít deal with the skinny tires, got to thinking and then the Full Stache drooped and I knew it had to be mine.

    Donít hate me

    Picking a long travel all mountain 29er-d8dc5f1a-bc0a-43d0-98f3-0abfb153f5eb.jpg

    and oh my, what a beast, like King Kong on roids, itís a monster bike!

  42. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,425
    Quote Originally Posted by beastmaster View Post
    One aspect of longer crank lengths is that it creates more knee and hip angulation and polar movement vertically. In other words, the longer the crank, the more acute femur/hip angle must be at TDC (top dead center) and BDC (bottom dead center); likewise, the longer the crank the sharper the knee angles must be at TDC and BDC. The tighter these angles are the more power is required at this points to push the crank over center. What difference does any of this make? Not much until you factor in a lifetime of rotating movement causing joints to wear out a little bit faster.
    This is SO overlooked by the bike industry... I keep waiting for then to WAKE UP about this! I see so many size small and medium bikes with 175 cranks and that's just all wrong. This BS about the longer crank having more leverage is a flat out joke when your LEG's leverage is better with shorter cranks so your knees aren't as high as you point out. SOMEDAY these bike manufacturers will figure this out. Until then I'll be swapping out for 170's (or even 165's with my 30" inseam). No one should be on a 175 unless you're on a size large or bigger IMHO!

    Have FUN!

    G
    "There's two shuttles, one to the top and one to the hospital" I LOVE this place!!!

  43. #143
    Oh, So Interesting!
    Reputation: davec113's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,612
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Ok, so I kinda changed my mind, just couldnít deal with the skinny tires, got to thinking and then the Full Stache drooped and I knew it had to be mine.

    Donít hate me

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	D8DC5F1A-BC0A-43D0-98F3-0ABFB153F5EB.jpg 
Views:	62 
Size:	174.7 KB 
ID:	1193152

    and oh my, what a beast, like King Kong on roids, itís a monster bike!
    Didn't realize you were 60+ y/o... carry on!

  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Ok, so I kinda changed my mind, just couldnít deal with the skinny tires, got to thinking and then the Full Stache drooped and I knew it had to be mine.

    Donít hate me

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	D8DC5F1A-BC0A-43D0-98F3-0ABFB153F5EB.jpg 
Views:	62 
Size:	174.7 KB 
ID:	1193152

    and oh my, what a beast, like King Kong on roids, itís a monster bike!
    Congrats on the new ride. That's a pretty significant change of direction from the Ripmo which fit the bill based on your OP.

    What changed your mind from the Ripmo and from your OP?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    602
    The Full Stache is definitely a unique ride and priced to sell as well. How does those 29 x 3" tires climb? That was your top priority. I woudn't consider the 2.5" tires on the Ripmo to be skinny.

  46. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Gman086 View Post
    This is SO overlooked by the bike industry... I keep waiting for then to WAKE UP about this! I see so many size small and medium bikes with 175 cranks and that's just all wrong. This BS about the longer crank having more leverage is a flat out joke when your LEG's leverage is better with shorter cranks so your knees aren't as high as you point out. SOMEDAY these bike manufacturers will figure this out. Until then I'll be swapping out for 170's (or even 165's with my 30" inseam). No one should be on a 175 unless you're on a size large or bigger IMHO!

    Have FUN!

    G
    I have a 29" inseam. On my local trails that are more peddly but chunky I prefer 165mm feels better and the clearance is better.
    But if I travel to were there is a lot of smoother climbs but your climbing most the day I'll switch to 170mm. A slightly better gearing and slower cadence helps with efficiency for me.

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    I'm going to have a second wheelset with XR4 2.6 for long days.

    The 3" tires climb as you would expect, heavy

    But oh my gawd, what a beast on the downhill, reminds me of my Mutz ran as a mixer, but more agile and more capable.

    This bike not only gets me into trouble, it covers my arse on the way out.

    Killer bike.

    Quote Originally Posted by smoothmoose View Post
    The Full Stache is definitely a unique ride and priced to sell as well. How does those 29 x 3" tires climb? That was your top priority. I woudn't consider the 2.5" tires on the Ripmo to be skinny.

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    Whoa nelly, subtract ten years and we'll talk.

    Does this bike make my butt look old?

    Quote Originally Posted by davec113 View Post
    Didn't realize you were 60+ y/o... carry on!

  49. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,493
    Full Stache? Huh. Not the over-forked and shocked Fuel EX I mentioned briefly, but an FS Trek nevertheless.

    I'll be looking forward to my thank you beer, future time and location TBD!
    Whining is not a strategy.

  50. #150
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,068
    What twist in this story. Id be more interested in the Full Stache if it werent such a tank. 34lbs or so right?

  51. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    I weighed it on a bathroom scale; I know, but it's all I got. Stock with a set of Duroc 40/DT 350 wheels with XR4 3" tubeless and it was the same weight as my Hendrix built with the same wheels and fork but in a 27+ package.

    It's not as heavy as my Fatillac...

    I'll get a carbon frame if Trek pops for one.

    In the right hands, this is a very capable bike, but it's not in the same class as most of the bikes discussed in this thread, not better or worse, just different.

    In a balz to the walz downhill run, this is the bike I'd choose. It doesn't care what is downhill, nor does it seem to notice, think Fatillac but longer, lower, and taller wheels

    I'll
    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    What twist in this story. Id be more interested in the Full Stache if it werent such a tank. 34lbs or so right?

  52. #152
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5,440
    Seriously!

  53. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    Sure, why not, life is short

    You never saw my Fatillac, you'd understand if you'd seen it, I essentially replaced one beast with another.

    The Full Stache may be a holding place or it could become my thing. Biggest reason I swung laterally is I like to ride plus tires; 2.6 is not plus.

    If I end up needing more travel and I want plus, I'll have to look around a bit unless someone releases a 29+ LT.

    I'll say this about the Full Stache, once it's rolling, it's like a freight train.

    I'm gonna do some tweaking, short cranks of course, 175 dropper, shorten up the cockpit, and I'mlooking into reducing the offset with a different crown (46mm vs 51mm).

    Quote Originally Posted by gregnash View Post
    Seriously!

  54. #154
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5,440
    Do you really feel that the 51mm offset really rakes out the front end that much?!

  55. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sml-2727's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,625
    Niche bike...

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,848
    It's a pretty heavy feeling front end, improves with speed, but compared to my other 29+ rides, yeah, heavy.

    If I can swap crowns for a few hundred dollars, try it, and if I like it, then it's a worthy experiment.

    Transition and Ibis are doing it, I think Evil too, so a reduced offset fork on a big wheeled bike must have some benefit.

    @sml-2727:
    Niche bike. Aren't they all?

    With two wheelsets, the Full Stache is a lot less niche than some of the bikes discussed on this thread. Just saying ...

    All the goodness of long/low/slack/short CS, and it's rolling plus wagon wheels.

    Quote Originally Posted by gregnash View Post
    Do you really feel that the 51mm offset really rakes out the front end that much?!

  57. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,871
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    If I end up needing more travel and I want plus, I'll have to look around a bit unless someone releases a 29+ LT.
    Looks like the new Stumpjumper LT will offer 140mm of travel and fit up to a 3" 29er.

    EDIT: There is some speculation as to whether the 3" compatibility listed for the 29er frame is actually a 27+...


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Reduce travel on a long travel 29er?
    By jaks in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 01-03-2018, 08:31 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-03-2014, 05:25 PM
  3. Replies: 50
    Last Post: 09-18-2014, 09:50 PM
  4. Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05-13-2013, 05:09 PM
  5. change all mountain 26er to all mountain 29er
    By brunomu in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-23-2013, 09:00 PM

Members who have read this thread: 415

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.