Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29
  1. #1
    Shred all that can be
    Reputation: sickspeed16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    798

    SB-66 vs. Mojo HD

    So despite the Mojo HD having 10mm more rear travel (and having a 36mm Fox fork to match compared to a 32mm, (which I'd assume is stiffer)) Can anyone tell me by actual first hand knowledge, or semi-legitamized hearsay which is A: stiffer, and B: pedals better?
    "This sticker is dangerous and inconvienent, but I do love Fig Newtons"

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Drth Vadr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    780
    it's going to be hard to find someone who is on a SB-66 considering it is brand new, topping it off has also riden a 11-12 HD. Look at it this way, it's the HD is a $1000 more for basicly the same build kit. buy a 36 Fox or a Lyric or a Totem or what ever with the extra grand, sell the 32 Fox and make a buck. I'm a smart shopper. good luck with your choice you can't go wrong with either just get geo # right so it fits.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KTMDirtFace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    753
    see this thread Decisions: SB-66 or Mojo HD

    Love my SB-66 ( with fox 36 and DHX RC4 coil )

    Never ridden the ibis, looks small I went with the yeti because the XL is big enough for me...

  4. #4
    Shred all that can be
    Reputation: sickspeed16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    798
    Thanks man, I guess I should have searched the threads first haha.. How is the SB with the RC4? Do you ride Downhill as well? If so, how capable would you say the SB is in that department?
    "This sticker is dangerous and inconvienent, but I do love Fig Newtons"

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KTMDirtFace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    753
    Have not ridden downhill yet too busy. But I think it should be just as capable as my Giant Reign X1 was. even though it has .7" less travel. It definitely handles better but that could be because it actually fits me and its more slack.

    I like the RC4 but i'm still playing with it it feels great right now until I take a small drop it bottoms out super easy, i need to play with the bottom out control and boost valve air pressure. i think.
    2011 Yeti SB-66 XL Fox Float 36, Fox DHX RC4
    Yeti SB-66 Gallery

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: manchvegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    907
    I got my HD last week, an took it for it's first ride. Whoever said the HD is a thousand more needs to think about the fact that the HD is a FULL CARBON BIKE!!! You are comparing apples to oranges, if you want to compare price points wait until the yeti sb-66 carbon comes out an then compare.

    I honestly was trying to decide between the 2 bikes and honestly went with the HD cuz I rode one an loved it, an will never go back to a 32mm stansion fork. My HD weighed in at 27.25 pounds WITH pedals. Pedals up hill like crazy an goes downhill awesome. If I was getting a yeti I don't think you'll be able to build it as light, until the carbon version comes out. I don't think you can go wrong with either bike. Ride both, I rode an HD an the small bump compliance and the downhill capability is phenomenal an the yeti wasn't out yet, an I never buy first issue of anything. The HD has been proven for a couple years now.
    determined to put the "mountain" back in "MOUNTAIN BIKING!!!" "HIT IT!"
    2012 MOJO HDeeeeeeee!!!!
    2010 scott CR1 comp

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve.E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    740
    I did a lot of research into the Mojo HD recently when shopping for a new frame, it's worth considering that the Mojo uses the dw-link suspension design, which is a tried and tested design, although the switch design on the Yeti isn't revolutionary (despite what Yeti themselves may say) it hasn't been around as long. So conclude from that what you will.

    Also, as the above poster has pointed out, the Mojo HD is a carbon bike, this has a great effect on weight, strength, stiffness,
    Santa Cruz Blur TRc

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,362
    You can put a 160 on an SB, it will sit at 65.9. You would have to put a 170 or 180 fork on an HD or use an angle set to match that. This is what attracts me to the yeti. Suspension design means little to me unless you are comparing single piv to dual link. For me, there are more important factors to consider. The HD, SB, and every other dual link bike on the market will climb very well. I had a old VP Free with 8" of coil rear travel and I could hammer out of the saddle and feel like I was a 4" bike. That was back in 06. Yeti's design is cool, but we've had excellent pedaling long travel dual link bikes for a long time now.

    You can save some cash and buy a Banshee is you want a cheaper dual link bike. I rode my buddies Rune, it pedaled as well as my Nomad for much less. I also rode a spit fire, that pedaled VERY well.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: manchvegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    907
    why on earth would you want a 65 degree HA for anything other than straight up downhill/freeride? I ride my HD everywhere from straight up xc to chairlift assisted downhill an 67 HA is perfect.

    Lets look at this last statement about HA vs the HD HA....... sb-66 comes stock with a 150mm 32mm stansion fork and 67 degree HA. Mojo HD comes with 160mm 36mm stansion fork and 67 degree HA. Your statement is bull crap. cuz you could set the HD up as a 140 rear an put a 140/150/160 fork on the front. The yeti will never be as versatile as the HD period. Like I said before as well, wait till the carbon yeti sb66 comes out to really compare an be in the same class as the HD. My fully built hd is 27lbs with 20mm qr front and 142 maxle rear etc... the sb-66 in my opinion is more of a trail bike/light all mountain bike. It's not a ride xc one day an then take it to the chairlift the next day kind of bike like the hd can be......
    determined to put the "mountain" back in "MOUNTAIN BIKING!!!" "HIT IT!"
    2012 MOJO HDeeeeeeee!!!!
    2010 scott CR1 comp

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KTMDirtFace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    753
    My SB-66 is indeed a do everything bike. I have it beefed out to 36 lbs.

    It pedals so well it works on the XC trails just fine here. and straight rips downhill/corners. I like the Ibis too but I wanted the 26.1" top tube and 65.9 head angle. ( I'm on an XL ). All I care about is going down but i have to pedal up first.

    2011 Yeti SB-66 XL Fox Float 36, Fox DHX RC4
    Yeti SB-66 Gallery

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,362
    Quote Originally Posted by manchvegas View Post
    why on earth would you want a 65 degree HA for anything other than straight up downhill/freeride? I ride my HD everywhere from straight up xc to chairlift assisted downhill an 67 HA is perfect.

    Lets look at this last statement about HA vs the HD HA....... sb-66 comes stock with a 150mm 32mm stansion fork and 67 degree HA. Mojo HD comes with 160mm 36mm stansion fork and 67 degree HA. Your statement is bull crap. cuz you could set the HD up as a 140 rear an put a 140/150/160 fork on the front. The yeti will never be as versatile as the HD period. Like I said before as well, wait till the carbon yeti sb66 comes out to really compare an be in the same class as the HD. My fully built hd is 27lbs with 20mm qr front and 142 maxle rear etc... the sb-66 in my opinion is more of a trail bike/light all mountain bike. It's not a ride xc one day an then take it to the chairlift the next day kind of bike like the hd can be......

    Geo is personal preference and what's best suited to your trails. My nomad sits at 65.5 with a 36 180 and I don't use travel adjust. I do climbs as long as 7k+ going as high as 14k here in the rockies. I hardly call that dedicated FR/DH. 67 feels too steep to me. I know I'm a bit unorthodox with my geo preferences, but even 65.5 isn't too slack for the toughest climbs in the US which we have here in Colorado. THe SB with a 160 is 65.9, so basically 66 which isn't that slack really.

    Also, frame weight on the SB is the same as a Nomad which is rated for a 180 fork and free riding. I believe it's the same as the HD too? I would have no issues riding an SB in the resort environment. In fact, Mike West, pro Yeti rider used an SB for the WInter Park Enduro this year which takes riders down the double black Trestle DH course. Just because a company specs a frame with a shorter fork, doesn't mean it can't be built tougher.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Whip Chop!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    234
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMDirtFace View Post
    My SB-66 is indeed a do everything bike. I have it beefed out to 36 lbs.

    It pedals so well it works on the XC trails just fine here. and straight rips downhill/corners. I like the Ibis too but I wanted the 26.1" top tube and 65.9 head angle. ( I'm on an XL ). All I care about is going down but i have to pedal up first.

    This bike is amazing. Nice job.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jgusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,606
    Agreed, 67* HTA is fairly steep for "do all" AM riding. My bike (Banshee Rune) came stock at 67* w/160mm fork and I now have a head angle set that brought to just below 66* and feels much better on the descents (more stable at speed and better on steeps and corners w/a shorter stem) without sacrificing climbing performance. 65-66* HTA is about right for most true do all AM bikes, and nice you can achieve adequate geometry with a standard 160 fork, like the SB-66, instead of having to jump up to a bigger fork which also raises the BB bike and affects other aspects of the bike such as slacking the STA more. I think Yeti, nailed the geometry (almost) with the SB-66 for a "do all" aggro trail/AM bike with the only exception being the freaky long TT's even when used with a shorter stem. With that said, the HD is an awesome bike when I test rode a few earlier this summer and I really would like to ride an SB-66 as well.
    Ride On!

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,362
    Quote Originally Posted by jgusta View Post
    Agreed, 67* HTA is fairly steep for "do all" AM riding. My bike (Banshee Rune) came stock at 67* w/160mm fork and I now have a head angle set that brought to just below 66* and feels much better on the descents (more stable at speed and better on steeps and corners w/a shorter stem) without sacrificing climbing performance. 65-66* HTA is about right for most true do all AM bikes, and nice you can achieve adequate geometry with a standard 160 fork, like the SB-66, instead of having to jump up to a bigger fork which also raises the BB bike and affects other aspects of the bike such as slacking the STA more. I think Yeti, nailed the geometry (almost) with the SB-66 for a "do all" aggro trail/AM bike with the only exception being the freaky long TT's even when used with a shorter stem. With that said, the HD is an awesome bike when I test rode a few earlier this summer and I really would like to ride an SB-66 as well.
    We are of the same school of thought. Just think, it wasn't that long ago that a guy would be laughed at for pedaling around with a 50mm stem, now anything longer seems out of place for do anything AM set up. People will realize you can be south of 66 and still climb like a mountain goat, and your DH game will improve greatly. Just as 50mm stems are now accepted for more than just DH, 65 to 66.5 HA's will also. Even the Stumpy Jumper Evo has a 67 HA now! That's with a 150 fork. Banshee get's the credit for putting out the spitfire as the first trail bike with super slack geo for it's class. It's becoming the norm now. Yeti calls the SB's geo, "new school" Slack and low.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,362
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMDirtFace View Post
    My SB-66 is indeed a do everything bike. I have it beefed out to 36 lbs.

    It pedals so well it works on the XC trails just fine here. and straight rips downhill/corners. I like the Ibis too but I wanted the 26.1" top tube and 65.9 head angle. ( I'm on an XL ). All I care about is going down but i have to pedal up first.

    She's a beauty! What's the fattest tire you can fit in the back?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KTMDirtFace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    She's a beauty! What's the fattest tire you can fit in the back?
    Yeti claims 2.4" on their FAQ.

    I have 2.4" Panaracer Fire Free rides on it and they are HUGE tires and there is plenty of room.

    somone else on the yeti forum put 2.5" minions with no problem.
    2011 Yeti SB-66 XL Fox Float 36, Fox DHX RC4
    Yeti SB-66 Gallery

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,362
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMDirtFace View Post
    Yeti claims 2.4" on their FAQ.

    I have 2.4" Panaracer Fire Free rides on it and they are HUGE tires and there is plenty of room.

    somone else on the yeti forum put 2.5" minions with no problem.
    Your 2.4 fire is higher volume and wider than a 2.5 minion so I'm surprised yeti says 2.4 max? Sounds like the frame accepts fatties no problem.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KTMDirtFace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    Your 2.4 fire is higher volume and wider than a 2.5 minion so I'm surprised yeti says 2.4 max? Sounds like the frame accepts fatties no problem.
    I think yeti was conservative from their FAQ.

    There is great tire clearance on the SB-66 but tire sizes vary widely by manufacturers, so it's hard to give a number that works for all tires. The short answer is the SB66 can accept up to a 2.4" tire.
    2011 Yeti SB-66 XL Fox Float 36, Fox DHX RC4
    Yeti SB-66 Gallery

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jgusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,606
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    We are of the same school of thought. Just think, it wasn't that long ago that a guy would be laughed at for pedaling around with a 50mm stem, now anything longer seems out of place for do anything AM set up. People will realize you can be south of 66 and still climb like a mountain goat, and your DH game will improve greatly. Just as 50mm stems are now accepted for more than just DH, 65 to 66.5 HA's will also. Even the Stumpy Jumper Evo has a 67 HA now! That's with a 150 fork. Banshee get's the credit for putting out the spitfire as the first trail bike with super slack geo for it's class. It's becoming the norm now. Yeti calls the SB's geo, "new school" Slack and low.
    Yep, one of the benefits of bikes coming in lighter these days with very effective pedalling suspension designs in +6" travel bikes. Allows a person to be able to run more aggro geometry to get even more out of the descents and the bike, but still being able to get you up the hill fairly efficienctly. Today's AM bikes are just getting better and better, IMO. Like mini-DH/FR machines that can climb just as good or better than yesterday's trail bikes.
    Ride On!

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Drth Vadr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    780
    Quote Originally Posted by manchvegas View Post
    I got my HD last week, an took it for it's first ride. Whoever said the HD is a thousand more needs to think about the fact that the HD is a FULL CARBON BIKE!!! You are comparing apples to oranges, if you want to compare price points wait until the yeti sb-66 carbon comes out an then compare.

    I honestly was trying to decide between the 2 bikes and honestly went with the HD cuz I rode one an loved it, an will never go back to a 32mm stansion fork. My HD weighed in at 27.25 pounds WITH pedals. Pedals up hill like crazy an goes downhill awesome. If I was getting a yeti I don't think you'll be able to build it as light, until the carbon version comes out. I don't think you can go wrong with either bike. Ride both, I rode an HD an the small bump compliance and the downhill capability is phenomenal an the yeti wasn't out yet, an I never buy first issue of anything. The HD has been proven for a couple years now.
    I didn't know comparing two bike of the same discipline was apples and oranges, I thought that comparing a DH to AM maybe. Go figure everyone is a brainiac. A $1000 is a $1000, especially for a frame tha only wieght a 1/2 less then the SB. Ibis has been doing carbon long enough for it to be cheap for them, plus their also not producing a Al version of there bike so that's less their spending in R&D. DW, VPP, CVA, Meisto, FSR what ever, no one producing a suspension that doesn't pedal. I will agree you should approach new designs with caution, but I think Yeti's reputation speaks for its self. Carbon... so what Unless I'm saving pounds, as in plural, I'll take tried and true Al everytime along with my $1000.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KTMDirtFace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    Your 2.4 fire is higher volume and wider than a 2.5 minion so I'm surprised yeti says 2.4 max? Sounds like the frame accepts fatties no problem.
    I just noticed I may be really close to my tire rubbing the seat tube on full bottom out.

    Noticed a patch of dust missing in a very small line today where the tire probably was. not enough to even scuff the paint or anything but that could be why the 2.4" size limit. I bottomed out a lot latley..got that fixed now though.

    I will have to take my spring off the shock and see for sure.
    2011 Yeti SB-66 XL Fox Float 36, Fox DHX RC4
    Yeti SB-66 Gallery

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,362
    That's good info to know. So tire volume may be an issue, but width isn't so much.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KTMDirtFace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    That's good info to know. So tire volume may be an issue, but width isn't so much.
    Just took my spring off put shock back on pressed the bike down to bottom. There is about enough room to squeeze a penny between the tire and the seatpost tube.

    So I guess thats the reason, I don't think you would want any bigger tires than these ones I've got volume wise.
    2011 Yeti SB-66 XL Fox Float 36, Fox DHX RC4
    Yeti SB-66 Gallery

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: manchvegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    907
    Quote Originally Posted by jgusta View Post
    Agreed, 67* HTA is fairly steep for "do all" AM riding. My bike (Banshee Rune) came stock at 67* w/160mm fork and I now have a head angle set that brought to just below 66* and feels much better on the descents (more stable at speed and better on steeps and corners w/a shorter stem) without sacrificing climbing performance. 65-66* HTA is about right for most true do all AM bikes, and nice you can achieve adequate geometry with a standard 160 fork, like the SB-66, instead of having to jump up to a bigger fork which also raises the BB bike and affects other aspects of the bike such as slacking the STA more. I think Yeti, nailed the geometry (almost) with the SB-66 for a "do all" aggro trail/AM bike with the only exception being the freaky long TT's even when used with a shorter stem. With that said, the HD is an awesome bike when I test rode a few earlier this summer and I really would like to ride an SB-66 as well.
    Your totally not getting it. You can acheive the same geometry with the HD 140 rear and 160mm front fork, just tryin to get that point accross, that the HD is a much more versatile frame. set it up 140 rear an put anywhere from a 140mm to a 160mm fork or go for a 160mm rear an put anywhere from a 160-180mm fork and you can achieve the same geo your talking about an you have 2 options on the same bike to acheive it.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Drth Vadr View Post
    I didn't know comparing two bike of the same discipline was apples and oranges, I thought that comparing a DH to AM maybe. Go figure everyone is a brainiac. A $1000 is a $1000, especially for a frame tha only wieght a 1/2 less then the SB. Ibis has been doing carbon long enough for it to be cheap for them, plus their also not producing a Al version of there bike so that's less their spending in R&D. DW, VPP, CVA, Meisto, FSR what ever, no one producing a suspension that doesn't pedal. I will agree you should approach new designs with caution, but I think Yeti's reputation speaks for its self. Carbon... so what Unless I'm saving pounds, as in plural, I'll take tried and true Al everytime along with my $1000.
    yes they are both of the same discipline... but are they? can you put a 180mm fork on the sb66 an do straight up downhill? no. can you build it up straight up 140mm an have a build at 25-26 lbs? the aluminum version of the yeti is 1 pound heavier in the frame weight and is about the same price as an ibis full carbon. The full carbon version was unveiled at eurobike and is around the same weight as the mojo hd now at 6 pounds, but, will sell for 4-500 dollars more than the mojo.... here's the article if you don't believe me...

    Eurobike 2011: Yeti Unveil Carbon SB-66 Plus A 29er Variant - BikeRadar
    determined to put the "mountain" back in "MOUNTAIN BIKING!!!" "HIT IT!"
    2012 MOJO HDeeeeeeee!!!!
    2010 scott CR1 comp

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Drth Vadr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    780
    Quote Originally Posted by manchvegas View Post
    yes they are both of the same discipline... but are they? can you put a 180mm fork on the sb66 an do straight up downhill? no. can you build it up straight up 140mm an have a build at 25-26 lbs? the aluminum version of the yeti is 1 pound heavier in the frame weight and is about the same price as an ibis full carbon. The full carbon version was unveiled at eurobike and is around the same weight as the mojo hd now at 6 pounds, but, will sell for 4-500 dollars more than the mojo.... here's the article if you don't believe me...

    Eurobike 2011: Yeti Unveil Carbon SB-66 Plus A 29er Variant - BikeRadar
    I was strickly going by Yeti and Ibis price and weight indicated on their site. Someone's fudging weight total and it looks like Yeti by a !/2 lb. I was also thinking we were talking about the HD, so that was apples and oranges, my bad.
    Last edited by Drth Vadr; 09-13-2011 at 07:40 AM.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 390
    Last Post: 06-29-2013, 10:46 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-09-2011, 08:19 AM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-27-2010, 08:16 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-23-2009, 12:16 AM
  5. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-07-2008, 11:47 PM

Posting Permissions

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