Results 1 to 47 of 47
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    7

    RIP 9 RDO vs. Czar vs. Ripley

    I have a (wonderful) dilemma. Can't decide which high end boutique 29'er to buy and wondering if the more experienced here could help out.

    Background: I'm a relatively intermediate 44y/o rider in the relative flatlands of Fort Worth, although we do have some very nice, challenging, and rocky trails. Mostly XC riding but I do venture to the mountains of Colorado 1-2x/y. I have been riding and loving a 2010 RIP 9 alloy for the past few years but recently rode a Scalpel carbon 2 in Park City and had a blast. Unsure whether it was the significantly lighter weight, the carbon frame, or both, but it was fun and fast. I am looking to purchase one of the high end bikes above but no demos in my area. I did demo a Sultan but, other than the pedaling and better components, it seemed similar to my current RIP and just didn't fit as well. (I demoed a medium but would ride a large Czar given my 5'10" height.)

    Further complicating things, I got the suggestion of just upgrading my medium RIP, which fits me well and I love. It currently has old S-RAM 9 components with Stan's 355 rims.

    I know it is a lucky problem to have but I would appreciate any and all advice. I've read through numerous threads here and got some great pointers but not the clarity I am craving. Thanks for the feedback!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,538
    Well, if you're asking us to help you choose how to spend your money -- which is always fun! -- I would choose the Czar in large, with the XT package, and an upgrade to carbon wheels.

    That's how I equipped my XL Czar, and it is an absolute hot rod! Firm, not harsh, really stiff laterally, light, and quick handling without being nervous. Honestly, it is so much fun that when I hop back onto my trusty Sultan, it seems dull and a bit sluggish, unless I'm in the really tough chunk (which is seldom these days).
    Whining is not a strategy.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    170
    I have a rip 9 rdo with xt, flow rims, and a 29 talas 140. I like it. If I was ordering today, I would seriously consider the new alloy rip 9 with a pike fork.

    I also tested a scapel alloy version. It was a fast feeling bike.

    Good luck. Don't think you can make a bad choice here.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,462
    Quote Originally Posted by crit_boy View Post
    I have a rip 9 rdo with xt, flow rims, and a 29 talas 140. I like it. If I was ordering today, I would seriously consider the new alloy rip 9 with a pike fork.

    I also tested a scapel alloy version. It was a fast feeling bike.

    Good luck. Don't think you can make a bad choice here.
    +1 on the new alloy rip 9, quality stuff.

    However you can't really go wrong with your choices, there are all great!
    Last edited by Max24; 03-02-2015 at 07:08 PM.

  5. #5
    Meat Clever
    Reputation: DirtDummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    676
    I've ridden both the Ripley and the RIP - not the Czar. The RIP struggled in tight corners, both up and down, it was not fun. The Ripley handled tight corners without complaint. I have ordered a Ripley. The Czar is getting great reviews and appears to be a great bike, just depends on what your priorities are.
    Quote Originally Posted by VanillaEps View Post
    A little bit of pee just trickled out of my pipi when I saw that.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    Going off your description above I too would vote either Ripley or Czar. I've owned both the Rip9 RDO and Ripley and the Ripley accelerates faster and is geared more towards aggressive XC. The Rip9 RDO is a burly carbon trail bike. It is very stiff, very plush yet pedals well. It isn't an XC bike though. The carbon size large frame weighs in a 6.7 lbs.

    Of note, the size large Ripley is more like a size medium Rip9 RDO. I would make note of your stack/reach preferences when deciding. I felt just right on the size large Rip, but a tad cramped on the size large Ripley. I'm 5'11 and prefer longer top tubes and short stems however.

    Just to add to the confusion, you really need to consider the Yeti SB95c as well. Size large frame weighs 6 lbs, aggressive geometry yet pedals very well.

    Like you said, it is a great problem to have. The Czar is very desirable as well and if i leaned more towards XC/marathon rides I would love to have one.

  7. #7
    Long Live the Gorn!
    Reputation: bvader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    233
    Adding to the confusion ... seriously you need to get out and ride a medium Pivot 429c it's right in your wheelhouse...ride one if you can.. If its not right at least you will know if it is right then it's right

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    Another great suggestion. In other words, you've got some demo riding to do sir

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    7
    I have read about the Yeti and the Pivot both and they sound like very comprable, great bikes. But I am trying to get less options so I deleted them because.....I dunno. Alphabet? Color choices? Racism against Bigfoot and his brethren?

    I doubt I will be able to easily demo any of the above. The local dealers don't have these models on the floor and demo trucks don't make it this way very often it seems. At least not soon enough to quench my burning lust for a carbon FS 29'er.

    I have read very rare negative things about the RDO (doesn't do switchbacks as well as others, is the heaviest) and the Ripley (not as good on the descents) but not the Czar (although it has the least travel of the group and is probably the least "trail" oriented).

    What about just pimping out my current RIP? Anybody think I could make it significantly faster/livelier?

  10. #10
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,736
    Sizing is key. They are all good bikes. My Niner Jet 9 RDO in medium is too small at 5'11". I'm going to Outerbike and will try some bikes. I have to admit, I"m leaning towards a Czar just because I like Turner.

    The Niner Jet 9 RDO has funky cable routing.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    The Czar is lovely looking indeed. I've always wanted a Turner. It's one of "those bikes" for me.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    Quote Originally Posted by mobenw View Post
    I have read about the Yeti and the Pivot both and they sound like very comprable, great bikes. But I am trying to get less options so I deleted them because.....I dunno. Alphabet? Color choices? Racism against Bigfoot and his brethren?

    I doubt I will be able to easily demo any of the above. The local dealers don't have these models on the floor and demo trucks don't make it this way very often it seems. At least not soon enough to quench my burning lust for a carbon FS 29'er.

    I have read very rare negative things about the RDO (doesn't do switchbacks as well as others, is the heaviest) and the Ripley (not as good on the descents) but not the Czar (although it has the least travel of the group and is probably the least "trail" oriented).

    What about just pimping out my current RIP? Anybody think I could make it significantly faster/livelier?
    You're good enough, you're smart enough and doggone it you deserve a carbon bike. Once you ride a carbon trail bike its hard to go back to aluminum.

  13. #13
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,397
    Quote Originally Posted by mobenw View Post

    What about just pimping out my current RIP? Anybody think I could make it significantly faster/livelier?
    Short answer is no don't even try, I was in the same boat as you a couple of years ago.

    loved my Rip9 & just wished it was lighter & more alive when I wasn't in the ruff stuff.

    Many many bikes later I have what I wanted, Rip9 RDO.

    I have a 2012 Rip9 alloy in my shed at the moment with XX1 & carbon wheels & although it is a great bike it is not a patch on the Rip9 RDO.

    The CVA on the new Rip9 RDO & New Rip9 alloy is set up different to the old Rip9 & pedals very nice.

    If you Like your Rip9 but want a bike that is more alive, Start with a new Rip9.
    Raising money, my friend broke his neck Mtbing, Please Share link. http://givealittle.co.nz/cause/elliottkeys/donations

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    922
    I own both carbon Superfly and Jet9rdo. I followed a guy at Santos trail this past week and he was very fast on twisty turny XC...he was on Rip9rdo and me on Jet9rdo. He had the electric blue with matching fork and it looked so nice in person.
    I have no experience with the Ripley or Czar, but would like to try down the road.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    228
    Having ridden none of those bikes, the CZAR looks hawt!

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,240
    Since you said "I would appreciate any and all advice" here is my opinion, and thats all it is my opinion. First off, since you get to Colorado 1-2 times a year, any XC bike can handle that for the most part. Then if you most ride in D/Fort Worth area I think the Rip RDO is big beast for your common riding.

    Seems to me that the Rip 9 RDO is a different beast than the other two you have mentioned here, which are mostly XC. Sticking with Niner, I think you should consider the Jet 9 RDO instead, this bike would be closer to the Czar and Ripley. The new Jet 9 RDO does not have crazy cable routing as they have changed. The Rip is more agressive, heavier, and just different. Doesn't make it worse, its not in the category of the Czar or Ripley. Compare a Jet 9 RDO with a 120mm front fork and your there. I'd also throw in a Tallboy 2 with a 120mm fork.

    Seems you liked the feel of the Scalpel, which more like the Czar, Ripley, Jet 9 RDO, and Tallboy 2 in terms of travel. Check for demos in the area. You are embarking on spending a bit of cash so make sure you are happy with what you get or find a shop that will let you take one to the trails. In the D/FW area there should be shops willing to help. Also check on Niner or Santa Cruz sites for demos in your area. These companies are agressive in traveling around doing demos in many cities. Look for Ibis demos too. I think you would like a XC bike set up with 120mm and this would handle Colorado anytime, maybe not as smooth as a RIP 9 RDO (because its designed for burlier things), but very well and perfect for your area. Get back on the Scalpel again too, maybe that is the bike for you. I think you'll like the Jet 9 RDO, the Tallboy 2, both light, quick, and maneuverable. The Niner and SC maybe bit on the affordable side just a bit.

    Removing the Rip 9 RDO off your list and speaking in terms of the Scalpel, Tallboy 2, Jet 9 RDO, Czar, and Ibis, these are XC/trail speed machines, light, fast, quick! Just my opinion...

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    Agreed. The Rip9 RDO is more designed for Colorado riding with 1-2 trips to DFW/year

  18. #18
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,610
    Quote Originally Posted by mobenw View Post

    I have read very rare negative things about the RDO (doesn't do switchbacks as well as others, is the heaviest) and the Ripley (not as good on the descents) but not the Czar (although it has the least travel of the group and is probably the least "trail" oriented).
    I can only speak to the Czar but must say that the bike is far far better pointed downhill than the numbers would suggest. Stiff, predictable but an indescribably quick precise handling machine on the downhill is how it rides
    Locals' Guide to North Shore Rides http://mtbtrails.ca/

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,335
    Having been on a Tallboy for a year and now a Tallboy LTc, I wouldn't buy another 100mm travel bike unless I was racing. Modern longer travel 29ers pedal so well and are available in such light frames that for anyone but a racer, it just makes more sense to be in the 120+ travel range.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Agreed. The Rip9 RDO is more designed for Colorado riding with 1-2 trips to DFW/year
    Exactly...

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    112
    I agree with that last statement. The carbon Tallboy LTC is only 5.18 lbs. The Yeti carbon SB95 is 5.75 lbs. I'm selling my Pivot 429.

  22. #22
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,610
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Having been on a Tallboy for a year and now a Tallboy LTc, I wouldn't buy another 100mm travel bike unless I was racing. Modern longer travel 29ers pedal so well and are available in such light frames that for anyone but a racer, it just makes more sense to be in the 120+ travel range.
    The geos in the 120 range are different than the 100 range though and that does count for quite a bit of difference IMO. This from someone's who ridden a ton of 100, 120 and 130 bikes with 29 wheels
    Locals' Guide to North Shore Rides http://mtbtrails.ca/

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: YamaDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    192
    Welp,

    I'm LOVING the Czar. I did a build thread so you can check out how it builds up,

    Turner Czar Build Thread

    And I am doing some ride reports..

    RR: Turner Carbon Czar

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,776
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Having been on a Tallboy for a year and now a Tallboy LTc, I wouldn't buy another 100mm travel bike unless I was racing. Modern longer travel 29ers pedal so well and are available in such light frames that for anyone but a racer, it just makes more sense to be in the 120+ travel range.
    Sorry but I highly disagree, depends on where you ride. So you'd recommend long travel bikes to someone in FL just because? That's silly.
    Tantrum incoming
    Ibis Mojo 3
    Carver 420 TI

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    Sorry but I highly disagree, depends on where you ride. So you'd recommend long travel bikes to someone in FL just because? That's silly.
    Sorry I was talking about mountain biking.

    I'd recommend something in the 120 range, like a Ripley. There's a reason you see so many Tallboys and 429cs (and and now Czars) with 120 forks on them, and I think they'd be better trail bikes if they had the rear travel to match. I'm sure there are features in Florida where you can use 120 mm of travel. If I had any racing inclination or weight weenie tendencies, it would be a different story, but I'm coming from the weekend warrior perspective.

  26. #26
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,610
    Respecfully hillharman,

    Many people in tech terrain can use 100m travel bikes in very aggressive terrain in these parts without issues. I'd submit that you're short-changing the capability of "shorter-travel" bikes based on a standard that seems somewhat arbitrary
    Locals' Guide to North Shore Rides http://mtbtrails.ca/

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeL View Post
    Respecfully hillharman,

    Many people in tech terrain can use 100m travel bikes in very aggressive terrain in these parts without issues. I'd submit that you're short-changing the capability of "shorter-travel" bikes based on a standard that seems somewhat arbitrary
    I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying that for people like the OP, there's virtually no tradeoff in moving up beyond 100mm of rear travel. I myself have ridden a Tallboy in aggressive terrain for a while. I'm happier on my LTc on virtually every trail I ride. Fortunately, the OP has already identified bikes in the 5" range. I only brought it up because people were mentioning the Tallboy 2 and Jet9 RDO. I'd be willing to bet that if Santa Cruz had to start over from scratch on the Tallboy, they'd build it with rear travel to match the forks most people run on it. And I'd venture it would be every bit as precise and snappy. Basically the same experience that Ibis had building the Ripley.

  28. #28
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,610
    Can appreciate what you're saying especially from the weight perspective - your example about the TBc and the TB LT C is a good example. My point though is that the TBc's slightly steeper head tube angle and slight geo tweaks predispose it ever so slightly towards climbing while the TB LTC's geo predisposes it ever so slightly to descending. Which is where I believe (this said without picking apart all numbers) is where there's a difference between the 100 and 120mm travel bikes.

    The OP has to figure out a preference and work from that.
    Locals' Guide to North Shore Rides http://mtbtrails.ca/

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeL View Post
    Can appreciate what you're saying especially from the weight perspective - your example about the TBc and the TB LT C is a good example. My point though is that the TBc's slightly steeper head tube angle and slight geo tweaks predispose it ever so slightly towards climbing while the TB LTC's geo predisposes it ever so slightly to descending. Which is where I believe (this said without picking apart all numbers) is where there's a difference between the 100 and 120mm travel bikes.

    The OP has to figure out a preference and work from that.
    I should have mentioned that I totally agree on the geo issue. I'm not one of those people who thinks every bike needs an angleset before even riding it, and the steeper-than-most-long-travel-29ers head angle of the LTc is a feature to me, not a bug.

  30. #30
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,610
    A MTBR thread where two people politely agree with each other's points is a momentous occasion! Cheers to you and hope this discussion helps the OP decide. Lots of nice bikes to pick from
    Locals' Guide to North Shore Rides http://mtbtrails.ca/

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,538
    Lee makes some good points about how much a 100 mm bike is capable of handling. Until recently, I completely subscribed to that theory, and think I made it work. Heck, years ago, I rode Thrill Me/Kill Me/Comfortably Numb on a 100 mm bike, and had a blast.

    Today, I slapped a 120 mm fork on my Czar, and I have to say, I don't think I'll ever go back to 100. Maybe if I were treating the bike as a pure race whip, but for my purposes of really long trail rides and endurance racing, I have to agree with Hillarman in most cases there is virtually no tradeoff in moving up to a 120 fork. In fact, so far, I would say the tradeoff is about 80+% positive, and FWIW, I kind of went into this thinking I would be reinstalling the 100 immediately.

    Thank you, YamaDan, for the encouragement to make the switch to the 120!

    In the rear, I'm not so sure about more travel. I really like everything about the current Czar's back end, and don't think I would want to "mess with success".
    Whining is not a strategy.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,776
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Lee makes some good points about how much a 100 mm bike is capable of handling. Until recently, I completely subscribed to that theory, and think I made it work. Heck, years ago, I rode Thrill Me/Kill Me/Comfortably Numb on a 100 mm bike, and had a blast.

    Today, I slapped a 120 mm fork on my Czar, and I have to say, I don't think I'll ever go back to 100. Maybe if I were treating the bike as a pure race whip, but for my purposes of really long trail rides and endurance racing, I have to agree with Hillarman in most cases there is virtually no tradeoff in moving up to a 120 fork. In fact, so far, I would say the tradeoff is about 80+% positive, and FWIW, I kind of went into this thinking I would be reinstalling the 100 immediately.

    Thank you, YamaDan, for the encouragement to make the switch to the 120!

    In the rear, I'm not so sure about more travel. I really like everything about the current Czar's back end, and don't think I would want to "mess with success".
    I think you missed the point, Hillarman wasn't talking about just the fork, he was saying in general no reason to get a 100mm rear travel bike unless your racing.

    Hillarman-"I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying that for people like the OP, there's virtually no tradeoff in moving up beyond 100mm of rear travel."
    Tantrum incoming
    Ibis Mojo 3
    Carver 420 TI

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,538
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    I think you missed the point, Hillarman wasn't talking about just the fork, he was saying in general no reason to get a 100mm rear travel bike unless your racing.

    Hillarman-"I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying that for people like the OP, there's virtually no tradeoff in moving up beyond 100mm of rear travel."
    Nope, didn't miss anything. Just expanding a bit on his point, and pointing out that I think it might be more true up front than out back.

    Also, adding my first-hand experience in the matter.
    Whining is not a strategy.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Nope, didn't miss anything. Just expanding a bit on his point, and pointing out that I think it might be more true up front than out back.

    Also, adding my first-hand experience in the matter.
    Yeah, a part of my argument is just how often you see people "over-forking" 100mm travel bikes. I did it myself on the Tallboy. I can't help but think you might like a Dave Turner designed, carbon 29er trail shredder even better. Hopefully we'll see one before too long. I think the Ripley may have nailed this segment, although I haven't ridden one yet.

  35. #35
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,397
    Having owned The same bike as the OP & having owned a lot of bikes in the range we are talking about, I think you are quite close to the mark.

    The 2010 Rip9 is a very fun bike that pedals well & eats up the chunk very easy, It does suffer from being a bit heavy & feeling a bit dull on easy tracks ( My guess is that is why the OP is looking )

    The thing is that although the 2010 Rip9 may not feel that fast & alive on easyer trails, It is quite fast ( I did back to back tests with my Rip9 alloy & Jet9 Alloy )

    So 1st up the 2010 is quite quick in the ruff & if the OP went back to a 100mm travel bike he would loose quite a bit of that.

    Being under biked can be a lot of fun & a very good 100mm travel bike can handle a lot more than most people would think.

    My Jet9 RDO would eat my 09/10 Rip9 alloy on all the trails I ride & was so much more alive that the old alloy Rip9.

    That said I have brought a Rip9 RDO (125mm travel rear & 140 front ) & it really doesn't miss out on much over the Jet9 RDO on the smooth trails & on climbs & the Rip9 RDO feels alive on the smooth trails as well, So much more than the old Rip9 alloy with only 114mm of rear travel.

    So with a modern Light weight 120mm (approx trail ) bike with a good pedal platform
    Is so much more capable of footing it with the 100mm race type bike on the smooth trails, But when it gets ruff the bigger travel bike just eats it up.

    I have done a lot of back to back with these bikes & the gap/speed that people think there is between the 100mm & 125mm+ bikes is a lot closer than people think.

    I still get people on there 28lb HT bikes tell me when they look at my 26lb Rip9 RDO, I won't buy a FS bike they are just to heavy.

    Today we are heading out for a ride with someone looking to buy a bike in either the 100mm or 120mm range, So it will be interesting to see what he thinks.

    We are taking 2x 2012 Rip9 Alloys, A friend is bringing a new 2014 Rip9 Alloy, 2x Jet9 RDO's & 2 Rip9 RDO's

    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Yeah, a part of my argument is just how often you see people "over-forking" 100mm travel bikes. I did it myself on the Tallboy. I can't help but think you might like a Dave Turner designed, carbon 29er trail shredder even better. Hopefully we'll see one before too long. I think the Ripley may have nailed this segment, although I haven't ridden one yet.
    Raising money, my friend broke his neck Mtbing, Please Share link. http://givealittle.co.nz/cause/elliottkeys/donations

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    7
    I would be VERY interested to see what the RIP alloy and the RIP RDO's feel, side by side. Mine is a lot older with older geometry, but I imagine it would still be illuminating.

    I really, really appreciate all the advice. Even when the conversation detours to matters which exceed my knowledge (easily done!), I still learn things. If I get the Turner, I may outfit it with a 120mm fork to start. Lots of other threads mention that and seems to be preferred by some.

    I found some places in Boulder that will let me try both the Turner and the RDO, although a true demo is not in the offering. I might be leaning toward the Czar at this point but that could change. I imagine the Czar is more what I need (want) and is a lighter, faster bike. My only hesitancy is that some of my current speed (slow in general, but fast to me) comes from the confidence I have in my current RIP. Would I be giving that up getting a less burly bike with different geometry? I dunno.

    The good news is I probably can't make a bad choice - they both seem to be great bikes as a whole, just different. Also, I am thankful for having such knowledgable posters willing to help out this relative neophyte.

  37. #37
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,397
    Quote Originally Posted by mobenw View Post
    My only hesitancy is that some of my current speed (slow in general, but fast to me) comes from the confidence I have in my current RIP. Would I be giving that up getting a less burly bike with different geometry? I dunno.

    The good news is I probably can't make a bad choice - they both seem to be great bikes as a whole, just different. Also, I am thankful for having such knowledgable posters willing to help out this relative neophyte.
    Yes you will loose more of that than you might think.

    I sold my Rip9 ( same Geo as yours ) & brought a Tallboy Carbon , Was in the same boat as you.

    I rode it for 3 months & sold it, It was much slower in the ruff & just didn't pedal as good, There was stuff that I just couldn't do anymore, Even though I had not got them wrong in over a year.

    That's when I brought the Jet9 RDO & it was a much much better bike & truly did fill the need & stopped me wanting to buy another Rip9 alloy.

    The Jet9 RDO is a stand out IMO over most 100mm bikes when it comes to giving you the I can do anything feel.

    My Rip9 RDO is as fast as my Jet9 RDO & has all of the things you like about your Rip9, But is stiffer & more direct than any other bike I have ridden.

    It is the have your cake & eat it to kind of bike.

    The big question for me today is just how much the new Rip9 Alloy gives up to my Rip9 RDO.

    I will let you know.

    Edit; Don't do what I did & under estimate what you have already.

    I have a friend that has just upgraded his Trance X1 29er for the 2012 Rip9 & is very happy with the upgrade, That's the same bike as yours but with a little slacker head angle.
    Raising money, my friend broke his neck Mtbing, Please Share link. http://givealittle.co.nz/cause/elliottkeys/donations

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    7
    I think that is what it all comes down to:

    RIP9 RDO: I love the geometry, can roll over anything I feel capable, but is it that much faster, lighter, quicker than my current model for me to LOVE the upgrade and feel my money has been well spent?

    Turner Czar: No doubt lighter, probably faster, well loved maker of 29'ers but will I feel less confident and less fast given a new geometry and less travel?

    Of course, if I buy one and am not delighted, I bet I might many others on this forum who might appreciate it for a good price!

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by mobenw View Post
    I think that is what it all comes down to:

    RIP9 RDO: I love the geometry, can roll over anything I feel capable, but is it that much faster, lighter, quicker than my current model for me to LOVE the upgrade and feel my money has been well spent?

    Turner Czar: No doubt lighter, probably faster, well loved maker of 29'ers but will I feel less confident and less fast given a new geometry and less travel?

    Of course, if I buy one and am not delighted, I bet I might many others on this forum who might appreciate it for a good price!
    The Ripley seems to split the difference almost perfectly between these two bikes, and has been incredibly well reviewed so far. Why not go with it? It seems like a perfect "aggressive cross country" bike.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    7
    I crossed the Ripley off only because I was looking to pare down my options, there were NO demos I could find, and I read a few reviews speaking of some twitchiness nuring descending. I'm twitchy enough on my own.

    I really believe it is probably an awesome bike. It looks stunning, comes from a well respected lineage, and does "split the difference" in some respects. I can't believe everything I read, but it was from three different reviews and they all made the same point (although none of them seemed to see it as a large problem).

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by mobenw View Post
    I crossed the Ripley off only because I was looking to pare down my options, there were NO demos I could find, and I read a few reviews speaking of some twitchiness nuring descending. I'm twitchy enough on my own.

    I really believe it is probably an awesome bike. It looks stunning, comes from a well respected lineage, and does "split the difference" in some respects. I can't believe everything I read, but it was from three different reviews and they all made the same point (although none of them seemed to see it as a large problem).
    I would give that description basically zero weight. Twitchy is a relative term. For a guy coming off of a Mojo HD (likely true of many Ripley reviewers), the Ripley is going to be twitchier, but that's because it's not an All Mountain bike. Those same people would likely find the Czar twitchy as well.

    It also has to do with the marketing. The Czar is a short travel race bike that is "more capable" than most in that category. The Ripley is a "all-around trail bike," and for Ibis fans especially, that means it is bumping into, and judged against, considerably longer travel options.

    I get wanting to narrow it down, and if you are at peace, go for it. But sight unseen, if I had to pick a bike for you and stake my reputation on it, I'd pick the Ripley. (And it's fair because I think all three of these bikes are amazing, and I haven't ridden any of them!) I don't think any of these bikes would be a mistake, though. You'll grow to love whichever one you buy.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,335
    Just some more food for thought: you can run the new RS Pike on either the Ripley or the Rip9 RDO.

  43. #43
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,397
    Ok off for a ride, I will report back in 6 hour.

    Quote Originally Posted by mobenw View Post
    I crossed the Ripley off only because I was looking to pare down my options, there were NO demos I could find, and I read a few reviews speaking of some twitchiness nuring descending. I'm twitchy enough on my own.

    I really believe it is probably an awesome bike. It looks stunning, comes from a well respected lineage, and does "split the difference" in some respects. I can't believe everything I read, but it was from three different reviews and they all made the same point (although none of them seemed to see it as a large problem).
    Raising money, my friend broke his neck Mtbing, Please Share link. http://givealittle.co.nz/cause/elliottkeys/donations

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    17
    Kosmo,


    What do you like about the 120 MM Czar fork over the 100 MM? I'm building my Czar and have a 100 MM SID sitting in my parts pile. Since I have time while waiting on the cranks, I could switch to a 120MM. I'm in FL where many of the trails are fast XC but we do have some trails with plenty of technical features. I was contemplating getting a trail FS like the Ripley or RIP9 sometime down the road to have a choice of bike to match the given terrain.
    I'm currently on a TBc with 120MM fork but have been persuaded by LeeL's ride reports of the "go anywhere" nature of the 100MM fork Czar.
    Curious just how much more of a trail bike the Czar becomes with the 120 which might eliminate need for 2nd bike.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    181
    mobenw, I have the same bike as you,'10 RIP. My next bike is going to a carbon 29er also. Read everything also. Haven't got to ride any of them. I'm liking the Ripley with the 140 Pike. Sounds like you would too. Are you in the Ft. Worth mountain bike club, FWMBA ? We ride at Sansom Park every Sunday evening. Sunday Funday. You'll be welcome. On the trail at 6. I get off work at 6 so usually ride by myself and stay and drink beer with everyone afterward. Come join us if you can. No drop ride. Fast and slow riders.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    The Ripley is an amazing bike, no doubt about it. I would advise you to be cautious in frame size selection as they do run small in terms of reach.

    The fact that they run small(and have short WB's) probably is the main reason most people find it to be twitchy. I know I felt that way on my size large. If I had it to do all over again I would like to try one in size XL to give it a fair assessment.

    As it is, I'm currently riding a SB95c and it is all that and a bag o' chips.

  47. #47
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,397
    We had a great ride last night, It was great to get some back to back riding in.

    I'm hoping the guy we were taking out to try bikes comes in here & adds what he found with the bikes.

    I think the biggest surprise to him was that a Rip9 with a Pike fork on it didn't feel like a big heavy Trail bike.

    He owns an Anthem I beleave & has done very limited ride on a friends Ripley ( that wasn't set up for him )

    The bikes were set up kind of close, With the 2 Rip9 RDO's (med & Lge ) both having I9 carbon wheels ( 1 set were Reynolds rims & the other was LB rims ) & a pike + xx1

    The 2014 Rip9 Alloy had I9 wheels with LB carbon rims, But his have much heavyer tyres, It also had a Pike on it.

    All had dropper seat posts.

    To be far he looked more like he was looking for a reason not to buy the Rip9 RDO rather than seeing if we could talk him into it.

    Right from the get go I think that he was sure that the bike & more so the pike was going to be over kill for him.

    The guy was over here on holiday from Ausy, so couldn't beleave he managed to get to ride some good bikes.

    Well he just loved the Rip9 RDO & couldn't find a reason not to buy it, He had a smile from ear to ear most of the ride.

    He also had a ride on the Jet9 RDO but at that point I think he had already fallen in love with the Rip9 RDO.

    I liked the new Rip9 Alloy although it wasn't setup as well for me as my bike, It did pedal very well & felt quite a bit better than the old Rip9 It didn't feel quite as stiff as the Rip9 RDO.

    If building a big dollar bike I would build the Rip9 RDO over the new alloy for sure, But if the budget wasn't as big I'm sure I would save on the frame & put the money into the wheels.

    I would really like to do some more miles on the new Alloy Rip9 with my wheels tyres to get a closer feel for how the bikes differ.
    Raising money, my friend broke his neck Mtbing, Please Share link. http://givealittle.co.nz/cause/elliottkeys/donations

Similar Threads

  1. Turner Czar??
    By scottryana in forum Turner
    Replies: 197
    Last Post: 08-01-2013, 10:31 AM
  2. Any blowouts on the Czar yet?
    By Jaybo in forum Turner
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-01-2013, 05:01 PM
  3. My Weekend with the Czar
    By 2TurnersNotEnough in forum Turner
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 05-20-2013, 08:48 PM
  4. Jet 9 RDO, Ripley, or Czar?
    By etanc in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-16-2013, 12:35 PM
  5. Turner Czar
    By RFXR in forum Turner
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-12-2012, 07:15 AM

Posting Permissions

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