# Thread: R.I.P/Sultan BB height question

1. ## R.I.P/Sultan BB height question

The Turner site shows 13.3" bb height for the Sultan.

Does anyone have a measurement for the RIP? I can't seem to find any using search.

Thanks.

2. Originally Posted by 29Colossus
The Turner site shows 13.3" bb height for the Sultan.

Does anyone have a measurement for the RIP? I can't seem to find any using search.

Thanks.
Specs on the Niner sit have the BB drop.

tire radius - BB drop = BB height

3. ## Its less

Originally Posted by 29Colossus
The Turner site shows 13.3" bb height for the Sultan.

Does anyone have a measurement for the RIP? I can't seem to find any using search.

Thanks.
I just measured my M RIP. ~12.5" to center of BB...that would explain all the pedal strikes I had today....

..though, I must say the lower BB keeps the bike from feeling too tall. I'm very happy with my RIP...it justs gets better every day. Although that JET 9 has got me dreamin....

4. Originally Posted by shiggy
Specs on the Niner sit have the BB drop.

tire radius - BB drop = BB height
Thanks Shiggy. That would put the RIP in at 13.1. I do remember reading that in a thread at one point. If my math was correct, how do we explain the 12.5 that Lothar reported?

Thanks again.

5. Originally Posted by Lothar Othp
I just measured my M RIP. ~12.5" to center of BB...that would explain all the pedal strikes I had today....

..though, I must say the lower BB keeps the bike from feeling too tall. I'm very happy with my RIP...it justs gets better every day. Although that JET 9 has got me dreamin....
12.5.... that would be low for me. I don't want it to be, but it just is.

6. Originally Posted by 29Colossus
Thanks Shiggy. That would put the RIP in at 13.1. I do remember reading that in a thread at one point. If my math was correct, how do we explain the 12.5 that Lothar reported?

Thanks again.
Fork length, tires, lower headset stack height...

7. ## Mine is..........

...... 13 inches even.

That's with a Reba at 4 inches, Chris King Headset, and Spec. Resolution 2.3 inch tires.

8. ## Rechecked

Originally Posted by Lothar Othp
I just measured my M RIP. ~12.5" to center of BB...that would explain all the pedal strikes I had today....

..though, I must say the lower BB keeps the bike from feeling too tall. I'm very happy with my RIP...it justs gets better every day. Although that JET 9 has got me dreamin....
I lied...its 12.59375". M RIP, Reba Race at 100mm, King headset, Schwalbe Little Albert rear, Bonty ACX front...not even close to 13". Its pretty close to my Santa Cruz Superlight and the SC website lists BB heights 12.3-12.8" for the SL's and Blur XCs so I guess ~12.6" isn't that low in comparison. So I'm not sure why I've had more pedal strikes, I could be running more sag and softer tires. Or maybe the gobs of traction I have on the RIP allows me to acheive obscene lean angles in the corners, leading to more pedal strikes as I hammer thru corners. Or, hammering thru the rough stuff, the shock compresses, lowering the BB even more, and I strike a pedal. Really, not a fault of the bike...I just ride it hard. I think people have the opinion the RIP has a low bottom bracket because they see that suspension linkage hanging off the bottom (which really doesn't have anything to do with BB height), and that's protect by the crankset anyway. (unless you're running a 22t single ring with no bash guard )....

9. ## It was the Schwalbe tire

I just swapped the Schwalbe Little Albert for a Bonty Dry X in the rear. BB is now ~13". The Little Albert is closer to a 28" tire (1/2 less in radius) so there's the difference. Damn all this time riding & racing the Little Albert & I never realized I was that close to riding a 650B setup.

10. Mav Duc32, King headset, Rampage front, Ignitor rear results in a 13.0" bb height. Another .5" would help reduce hits but the bike just works so well that I don't really care. I'll probably try an F135 or similar next year to get a little more bb height and slacker headangle.

11. ## too low

I had a Rip and had WAY too many pedal strikes - it drove me crazy. Got rid of the Rip and got a Sultan and rarely have a pedal strike. Around here we have lots of rooty trails with many low (1"- 2") roots which is where the Rip's low BB causes the problems. If you put a WB 135 on Rip it would help . . . but frankly it seems like an unfortunate design choice to me.

12. just some more data along these lines:
measured two bikes recently, both running WB 110 forks (same a-c as Reba 100), flow rims and crossmark tires, both the same size frame basically (23.9 and 24" TTs)

Evolve:13 1/4
ElRey: 13 5/8"

13. RIP9 - Panaracer Rampage 2.3 on Stans ZTR 355 - Front and Rear
WB Fluid 135 with Ventana 7mm crown race riser and Chris King Headset

13 3/8"

I like this bike more everytime I raise the front end. Better clearance, balance, angle of attack through rough, and quicker steering. I am looking forward to installing the WB Fluid 150 soon.

As a side note, I put the WB135 on my Nomad for a while, the super slack head angle really steered quick. It was a really nimble bike. If the advantages from the 29 inch rear wheel were not so great, I might just run like that. But, alas, I cannot argue with the 29s. They are that good. Bye-bye Nomad : )

14. Originally Posted by Stroganof
I had a Rip and had WAY too many pedal strikes - it drove me crazy. Got rid of the Rip and got a Sultan and rarely have a pedal strike. Around here we have lots of rooty trails with many low (1"- 2") roots which is where the Rip's low BB causes the problems. If you put a WB 135 on Rip it would help . . . but frankly it seems like an unfortunate design choice to me.
The RIP is 13.1" vs. 13.3" for the Sultan... that's 0.2" or 5mm... I sure didn't notice a difference between the two! Many others who rode it at super rocky Bootleg Canyon during Interbike said it's better than almost everything else they rode - 26 or 29. Bootleg is much more prone to pedal strikes than your 1-2" roots and the insignificant bottom bracket height didn't bother them.

Check it out........

http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?...35&postcount=3

Originally Posted by tscheezy
This was one of my favorite bikes last year, and again this year. It just
does absolutely everything superbly, and just rips every type of trail
surface at Bootleg. It compared very closely to the Sultan, but the RIP9 was
just a hair plusher. It was like we could feel and take advantage of the
extra 1/2" of rear wheel travel vs the Sultan. The Niner just railed
everything and screamed through rock gardens with hardly a hint of losing
momentum where other bikes got jackhammered to a standstill. Both the RIP9
and Sultan are extremely fast feeling bikes with very similar geometries,
handling characteristics, and suspension qualities. They both maintained
speed over all trail surfaces and landed modest drops with smooth and
confident ability. The curvey and highly manipulated tubes of the Niner
offered a pretty different but quite pleasing aesthetic. Both the Niner and
Sultan were among the smoothest and most stable and well mannered of ANY of
the bikes we rode at the demo. Between the two 29ers, would have to give the
advantage to the RIP9 though for it's more impressive fork and slightly
plusher ride since all other characteristics were too close to call for me.
A great all-round bike and very highly recommended from a ride performance
standpoint.

Interbike reviews-comparison to my Ciclon

Originally Posted by dawgcatching
This bike was outfitted with the Minute 29er fork at
120mm of travel, and with the longer 4.5" travel in the rear end, it gave
for a more big-feeling bike that was more balanced than the Turner. Still,
it pedaled almost as well as the Turner, but was a much more capable
descender. The Minute 29er isn't a bad fork, and felt not too dissimiliar to
the Reba. Not as nice as a Lyrik, though. The RIP9 got ridden on both climbs
and down the rocky descent of Skyline. On this bike, I was able to attack
the rocky sections like I had on the RFX, yet it kept speed up when the RFX
would get slowed down, and it pedaled much better on the rolling terrain. I
had to stay on the brakes more than I wanted, as I was taking the trail so
fast that it exceeded my comfort zone. This bike just powered through the
rockiest terrain I should give it. And, on technical rock chutes, the bike
was very stable, with no feeling of being dangerously stuck on the front
end. It was almost impossible to make a mistake on this bike. When climbing,
it far exceeded all but the short travel 26" bikes. Once up to speed, it
just motored up the trail. If there was one drawback, it was a lack of
flickability that a smaller-wheel bike has, but this also refers to a 29er
wheels inherent stability that makes it so good for high-speed, rough
riding. I felt that the RIP9 would compare in technical ability to any 6"
bike, but climbed like a 4" bike. Maybe not the best choice for really slow,
stop and go technical riding, but for our typically fast Western trails,
they are a great choice. The RIP9 didn't feel quite as laterally stiff as
the Turner, but was more than adequate. Tire spec was the Nevegal 2.2, which
was grippy and hooked up very well. Overall, this was my favorite bike of
the whole show, and a great example of what a longer-travel 29er is capable
of. I would also like to ride a Ventana El Rey, and I hear that the El Rey
feels a bit more XC-like, with a little better pedaling, and snappier
handling, while the RIP9 has a bit more aggressive feel to it. The RIP9 is
simply an outstanding bike. I didn't ride the JET9, but that would be the
ticket for those of us who are looking for a lighter-weight trail bike with
the equivalent of 4" of 26" wheel travel, and something that could do very
well in a 24-hour race. Not that the RIP9 didn't pedal well, but it
definitely felt on the bigger-bike side of things.

Disclaimer: I'm a satisfied Niner owner.

15. ## not quite . . .

Originally Posted by aosty
The RIP is 13.1" vs. 13.3" for the Sultan... that's 0.2" or 5mm... I sure didn't notice a difference between the two! Many others who rode it at super rocky Bootleg Canyon during Interbike said it's better than almost everything else they rode - 26 or 29. Bootleg is much more prone to pedal strikes than your 1-2" roots and the insignificant bottom bracket height didn't bother them.

Check it out........

http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?...35&postcount=3

Interbike reviews-comparison to my Ciclon

Disclaimer: I'm a satisfied Niner owner.
W

Well, it is clear from the posts that BB height is critical. It seems that, other things being equal, that the Rip is at least .5" - .7" lower than the Sutlan. That difference is critical, at least where I ride. When I dumped the Rip for the Sultan all the parts transferred - and the pedal strikes all but disappeared. Perhaps the issue is made worse by our trails, some of which cross big root patches where there numerous small (1" - 2" diameter) roots you cross over in a short stretch interspersed with larger roots. Their is no way to not pedal through the patch and no realistic way to not pedal into a root - there are just too many of them. The bottom line is that extra .5" (or whatever it is) makes a huge difference in our terrain - the Rip hits, the Sultan doesn't.

16. Originally Posted by Stroganof
W

Well, it is clear from the posts that BB height is critical. It seems that, other things being equal, that the Rip is at least .5" - .7" lower than the Sutlan. That difference is critical, at least where I ride. When I dumped the Rip for the Sultan all the parts transferred - and the pedal strikes all but disappeared. Perhaps the issue is made worse by our trails, some of which cross big root patches where there numerous small (1" - 2" diameter) roots you cross over in a short stretch interspersed with larger roots. Their is no way to not pedal through the patch and no realistic way to not pedal into a root - there are just too many of them. The bottom line is that extra .5" (or whatever it is) makes a huge difference in our terrain - the Rip hits, the Sultan doesn't.
Per the published geometry from each company, the RIP has 5mm more BB drop than the Sultan. How this relates to the final, built BB height depends on the fork and tires used. Then how prone the bike will be to pedal strikes will vary with suspension setup: sag, spring rates, damping.

Personally I think they are both way too low. I like to have 12.5-13.5" BBs on my rigid/hardtail bikes.

17. ## sag . .

Originally Posted by shiggy
Per the published geometry from each company, the RIP has 5mm more BB drop than the Sultan. How this relates to the final, built BB height depends on the fork and tires used. Then how prone the bike will be to pedal strikes will vary with suspension setup: sag, spring rates, damping.

Personally I think they are both way too low. I like to have 12.5-13.5" BBs on my rigid/hardtail bikes.
But since the Rip has longer stroke shock setting the same percentage sag will result in a further lowering of the bb . . .

18. Originally Posted by Stroganof
But since the Rip has longer stroke shock setting the same percentage sag will result in a further lowering of the bb . . .
mmmm...not really. Sag is still a percentage of the total travel. The RIP has 1/2" more (stated) travel. Just 1/8"/3mm more at 25% sag. But that also fits into my setup disclaimer.

19. Not sure that this info helps at all, but on my Sultan with a WB 135, Ignitor rear, Rampage front, I measure 13.5".

20. ## really . . .

Originally Posted by shiggy
mmmm...not really. Sag is still a percentage of the total travel. The RIP has 1/2" more (stated) travel. Just 1/8"/3mm more at 25% sag. But that also fits into my setup disclaimer.
Agreed that the disclaimer covers it, but 5mm+ (or more like .5") of design here, 3mm+ of sag there . . . adds up to, or in this case drops the bb further into, being in the strike zone. The bottom line, for me, is that the Rip needs the 135 to ride right and Sultan doesn't - but both ride better with the 135 forks even though, oddly, they are both specced for 100mm. Go figure.

21. Originally Posted by Stroganof
Agreed that the disclaimer covers it, but 5mm+ (or more like .5") of design here, 3mm+ of sag there . . . adds up to, or in this case drops the bb further into, being in the strike zone. The bottom line, for me, is that the Rip needs the 135 to ride right and Sultan doesn't - but both ride better with the 135 forks even though, oddly, they are both specced for 100mm. Go figure.
My "not really" is in response to your claim that the increase in shock stroke increases the actual amount of sag. That is not true. It is is the amount of wheel travel that matters here. Suspension designs can (and do) have different leverage ratios.

Two bike with 5" of wheel travel: One with a 2.5 inch stroke shock and a 2:1 leverage ratio, the other with a 3:1 ratio and a 1.67" stroke shock.

Both will have the same amount of BB height change with the same percentage of sag.

The difference in BB height change because of sag on the Rip and Sultan is because of the total wheel travel, not the amount of shock stroke.

22. ## good point

Originally Posted by shiggy
My "not really" is in response to your claim that the increase in shock stroke increases the actual amount of sag. That is not true. It is is the amount of wheel travel that matters here. Suspension designs can (and do) have different leverage ratios.

Two bike with 5" of wheel travel: One with a 2.5 inch stroke shock and a 2:1 leverage ratio, the other with a 3:1 ratio and a 1.67" stroke shock.

Both will have the same amount of BB height change with the same percentage of sag.

The difference in BB height change because of sag on the Rip and Sultan is because of the total wheel travel, not the amount of shock stroke.
Good point, I had that wrong, but was focusing on the fact that the BB was lower anyway . . .

#### Posting Permissions

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