Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    36

    Mach 5.7 or 5 spot

    I want some more bike and ive test rode a few. I decided that im going to sell my Pivot mach 5 and my favorites for now are the 5.7 and 5 spot. (im a 6'1" guy at 176 lbs who rides a large in all makes)

    I do what i think to be true all mountain riding. This involves long climbs where technical rocks/switches/steeps are the highlight, covering long distance and slammin a great downhill where 3 foot drops bring a smile but if a 5-6 footer comes up i raise an eyebrow and let go of the brakes. this can involve up to 60 miles and over 10,000 feet of climbing. So i guess i want a bike that can do it all. i want it first to pedal efficiently and feel like a snappy rocket. weight of the bike doesnt matter, but it should 'feel' light and nimble enough to pop the front or flick it over some rocks if i change my mind. i want to feel the bike flow under me and feel connected to the ground but not as if im carefully dancing on top of it.

    my experience:
    mojo is too flexy and fragile (i broke 2)
    mach 5 has too high of a bb and too firm, i want more travel/downhill worthiness
    mach 5.7 is a bit soft but sweet climber. wanders a bit
    5spot a bit stiffer but great point and shoot bike
    knolly is too heavy and pedals like crap
    giant is decent but pedaling feels kinda dead, not too fast
    tracer is a 9/10 bike but the pedaling efficiency just aint there
    bionicon is crap on up hill, ok on down
    yeti is a surprisingly fun bike up and down but their carbon seat stays break often
    I hate the way FSR suspension feels and single pivot bikes suck at climbs.
    29ers (giant anthem, pivot 429) are decent but holding a perfect line seems difficult, i have to force the bars and keep looking at the tire instead of the trail. not intuitive.

    what say you guys?

  2. #2
    usually cranky
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,927
    you have some misinformation in there but i'll ignore that. to me it seems really silly to replace a mach 5 with a 5 spot or 5.7. they are pretty similar. the 5 spot and 5.7 have a bit slacker geo but not much. but are pretty squarely trail bikes. if your looking for a more burly ride and want to stay with dw link look at the rfx or the firebird.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    36
    i dont think i supplied any actual information. i have my self, my riding style and my experience and in things ive done or seen.

    now a knolly endorphin and ibis mojo are both 5.5 inch bikes but you wouldnt know by riding them. and i would use the two bikes in different situations. but thats just me.

    then again, it is possible that ill just get off it and keep riding the mach 5

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nightofthefleming's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    607
    Since when do Yeti seatstays break often?
    2013 Medium Santa Cruz Blur Trc in Matte/Silver, full XT kit, 1x10 with 32T wolftooth ring, 25 pounds 7 ounces

  5. #5
    usually cranky
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,927
    you cant just look at travel. you need to look at geo too. you said you wanted a more all mountain bike and a 5.7 or 5 spot would barely be a jump from a mach 5.

  6. #6
    3 "fiddy" for short
    Reputation: be350ka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,748
    What don't you like about the Knolly and its pedaling?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Broccoli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,769
    Quote Originally Posted by nightofthefleming
    Since when do Yeti seatstays break often?
    Since interwebz say so.

    AS-R 7 does not have carbon seatstays, if that is the problem. I think it climbs remarkably well, especially in chunky stuff. (and who cares about fireroad climbing, any bike will do fine, just pedal dammit).

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    954
    I'm obviously biased being an owner of a DW 5 Spot, but Turner bikes have always been awesome handling/descending bikes. I haven't ridden any Pivot bikes, so I can't comment on the comparison, but I've owned an Intense Uzzi, 4 versions of the Spesh Enduros and a couple of other trail bikes including the HL 5 Spot. The Spot handles/descneds just as well as the longer legged trail bikes, but pedals way better! The 2011 Spot sounds right down your alley since they updated the geo and made it an even better descender from what I've heard. I love my Spot, and with the low bb it rails so well.

  9. #9
    3 "fiddy" for short
    Reputation: be350ka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,748
    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBidnezz
    I'm obviously biased being an owner of a DW 5 Spot, but Turner bikes have always been awesome handling/descending bikes. I haven't ridden any Pivot bikes, so I can't comment on the comparison, but I've owned an Intense Uzzi, 4 versions of the Spesh Enduros and a couple of other trail bikes including the HL 5 Spot. The Spot handles/descneds just as well as the longer legged trail bikes, but pedals way better! The 2011 Spot sounds right down your alley since they updated the geo and made it an even better descender from what I've heard. I love my Spot, and with the low bb it rails so well.
    How do you like the DW Spot compared to the HL Spot?

  10. #10
    Appalachian Singletrack'n
    Reputation: Endomaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by nightofthefleming
    Since when do Yeti seatstays break often?
    Anything Yeti and carbon is about to break at any moment.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    954
    DW out pedals the HL hands down. I was trying not to get to into the hype, but once I rode it you can really feel the difference. The bike feels really firm almost like its scooting/pushing you along on the climbs. Descending is the the same great feeling. I have a large DW link vs a medium HL so it is a bit more stable as well with the longer wheelbase etc. I really want to try the 2011! Dang upgraditious....

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Broccoli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Endomaniac
    Anything Yeti and carbon is about to break at any moment.
    You see. Da interwebz said so.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Broccoli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,769
    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBidnezz
    The bike feels really firm almost like its scooting/pushing you along on the climbs.
    For me, that feeling sucks when climbing over technical stuff. I would rather flip platform on fireroads, but have that plush travel of a simple low-pivot when climbing over rough stuff.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    36
    That asr 7 is a good consideration. Sweet plush ride. Feels a bit heavy and I don't think my 150 fork can work well on it. Only reason that is a problem is bigger forks are heavy. I guess my biggest problem without the asr 7 is that the pedaling ain't quite snappy.
    My buddy broke his seatstay on the 575 last year and I googles it. Lots of broken stays on the 575. A shop owner told me to stay away from the 575 cause he keeps getting broken ones back in.
    That turner is a sweet bike. Hard to justify a 2550 frame though.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    36
    The knolly chilcotin, to me, felt a touch heavy when lifting it. when riding, it felt like the bike was even heavier than it actually is when pedaling. as a mainly xc guy i found myself looking how to avoid climbs, which is bad. the bike didnt quite feel nimble but it felt like it would smash anything in its way and jumps are a joke (as in stupid easy).

    the giant reign is a better climber, but that chili is wicked fun on a down

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    900
    60 miles and 10,000 feet of climbing makes me want a more efficient geometry and suck it up a little on the way down. I would stick with your current Mach 5, but that's just my opinion.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    36
    my buddy just told me about a ride he thinks will be about 80 miles connecting 5 trails together and probably 8000 feet of climbing. im slowly leaning towards keeping the mach 5 and stopping my quibbling.

    what sticks in my head is that i test rode that mach 5.7 and it felt more efficient than the mach 5 and i cleaned more stuff on my favorite trail to test ride bikes: Elfin Forest. I only touched down twice for dumb stuff so i cleaned all the hard stuff that usually takes me dab and its climbing ability is what is making me do this questioning. If you are familiar with that trail i cleaned the way up and witch trail backwards, and ive only done that once before. this time it was way easier to do.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    551
    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBidnezz
    DW out pedals the HL hands down....

    Not true my Nicolai puts all the DW bikes I tried to shame, it also uses it's travel a hell of a lot better

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    954
    [QUOTE=Curmy]For me, that feeling sucks when climbing over technical stuff. I would rather flip platform on fireroads, but have that plush travel of a simple low-pivot when climbing over rough stuff.[

    Maybe I didn't describe the feeling correctly, but when I'm climbing i feel like I'm being pushed and accelerating in the climbs where before with the HL Spot I felt the suspension absorbing the hits but not moving forward even with the shock locked out. The thing that amazed me was how I cleaned more sections on the techie climbs that had lots of rooty rocky sections with the DW Spot. Before I would sometimes get stalled on the slow tech bumpy sections, but the new Spot shines when pedaling through the rough stuff.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by wpuk
    Not true my Nicolai puts all the DW bikes I tried to shame, it also uses it's travel a hell of a lot better

    Yeah I can't comment on a Nicolai, but all of the HL bikes I've owned haven't been as good at climbing as my DW 5 Spot. Just out of curiosity have you ridden the new Dw Spot? After all, not all DW bikes are equal.

    Volcanized, gotta agree 2500 isn't cheap but boy am I stoked to have one! You can always find a 10' for a lot less.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Broccoli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,769
    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBidnezz
    Maybe I didn't describe the feeling correctly, but when I'm climbing i feel like I'm being pushed and accelerating in the climbs where before with the HL Spot I felt the suspension absorbing the hits but not moving forward even with the shock locked out. The thing that amazed me was how I cleaned more sections on the techie climbs that had lots of rooty rocky sections with the DW Spot. Before I would sometimes get stalled on the slow tech bumpy sections, but the new Spot shines when pedaling through the rough stuff.
    Your bio-mechanics and preferences are certainly different than mine.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    551
    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBidnezz
    Yeah I can't comment on a Nicolai, but all of the HL bikes I've owned haven't been as good at climbing as my DW 5 Spot. Just out of curiosity have you ridden the new Dw Spot? After all, not all DW bikes are equal.

    Volcanized, gotta agree 2500 isn't cheap but boy am I stoked to have one! You can always find a 10' for a lot less.

    It was a 09 DW Spot, of the DW bikes I've been on since it fit me and rode the best, I am hankering having a play on the 5.7 & 11 Spot, just for curiosities sake,(decent) demo bikes are not as accessible this side of the pond

  23. #23
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by volcanized
    what say you guys?
    I'd say you need to either get these bikes you are talking about set up better (shocks, cockpit) or spend more time on them, and learn some new climbing techniques, because you are making a number of judgments that sound more like setup and technique issues than traits of those designs/bike.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  24. #24
    Appalachian Singletrack'n
    Reputation: Endomaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Curmy
    You see. Da interwebz said so.
    No interwebz, a significant amount of personal experience.
    Iím good friends with the owner of an LBS that is a very large yeti dealer. They have sold about 20 ASRc none have lasted a year 2 have broken on the first ride. Carbon rears of aluminum bikes donít fare much better. It is actually a pretty big joke locally.

  25. #25
    Appalachian Singletrack'n
    Reputation: Endomaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,416
    5.7 is lighter and ~$400 cheaper and has a longer top tube for a given size.
    5 spot will take a bigger fork and is slacker plus its USA made.
    They are both constructed very well and will last longer than most who purchase them will want to keep it. At the geometry and weight of the 5 Spot I personally had just soon jump on to a Nomad/ Firebird/ RFX/ etc.. If I really wanted to climb a ton and ride huge distances on a regular basis the 5.7 seams much more appropriate on paper. It would come down to fit and test ride for me. In fact it did, I was recently between these two frames and after test riding a few things I wound up going a little bigger /slacker. I donít do huge distances very often and when I do I prefer a 29er hardtail. If Iím riding to descend Iíd rather go to a bike that carries a 160 fork well and has an appropriate geometry for really descending.
    Does your current Mach 5 have a 150 fork?

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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