Page 22 of 79 FirstFirst ... 12 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 32 72 ... LastLast
Results 526 to 550 of 1973

Thread: 2013 Spitfire

  1. #526
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Anyone using the 12x135 dropouts?

    I would assume no issues with those and since my Hadley is currently set up that way there is no reason to go to the 142's.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  2. #527
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    63
    Nice bikes guys! To those running 650B wheels on the spitty... how are they feeling? Are they worth it over the 26 option?? Any comments would be great!

  3. #528
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cave dweller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    Anyone using the 12x135 dropouts?

    I would assume no issues with those and since my Hadley is currently set up that way there is no reason to go to the 142's.
    They dont make a 12x135 option

    They make 142x12, 135x10 and 150x12.

  4. #529
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cave dweller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by RialbSelur View Post
    I'm going to hold off in commenting about the derailleur, and it's spacing. I'm not wonderfully proficient, when it comes to derailleur adjustment. So, I'll get somebody who knows what their talking about to make a proper assessment.
    I can confirm that an old style Shimano 9 speed derailleur will NOT work with the 142x12 dropouts (and probably wont work with the 135x10).

    Besides the fact that the hi/low adjustment does not go far enough (you wont be able to use the largest cog) the actual body of the derailleur hits the chain stay when in the slack setting limiting the movement. It skipped under power.

    I have moved to a 10sp shadow derailleur and no problems, I can get the full cluster range with no interference and no skipping under power. I had the shim over the brake a few mm.

  5. #530
    mtbr member
    Reputation: shanem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    498
    I'm looking at a Spitfire for my next bike. Really leaning towards a 650b build with Fox 34 @150mm. Can anyone speak to haw the suspension reacts during braking? I've gotten really used to a bike whose suspension doesn't stiffen up during braking efforts and was just wondering how the Spitfire behaves.

  6. #531
    Hard funkinī Kraut
    Reputation: NoStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by RialbSelur View Post
    Just got done reading the thread above, and it's exactly what I'm going through with the 650b 12x142 drops. I should be able to install the brake caliper(with adapter) and derailleur, without having to do a lot of shimming. IS tabs too far to the left. Derailleur hanger too far to the right.

    Keith, please speak to this. At this point, I'd gladly pay $50 to get drops that accommodate my components. I thought, by now, 12x142 would be a fairly mature standard.
    Hmmm ... I had the same "Issue", if it is one (!!!), on both 26 and 650B x 142 Dropouts. A washer of max. 1 mm at each Bolt, between the IS-2000-Tabs and PM-Adapter, and the Brake-Caliper was centered perfectly.

    But I have to say that I never needed to use Spacers for the IS-2000 with PM before. Maybe Banshee should check if the Dropouts are within the Tolerance, or are not maschined correct.
    My Rear Derailleur is a Shimano XT Shadow 9 Speed and there were no Issues at all to get proper Adjustment!

    My little bigger Concern are the missing Reliefs/Threads for the 142 x 12 Standard. This is my first Experience with Bolt-Thru-Axles in the Rear. Remove/Build-in the Rear Wheel is a bit laborious without them. It would be nice to have them in the Dropouts as Support and I would likely pay an Upcharge if they are more costy to produce.

    I donīt think 142 x 12 is a matured Standard at all. Iīm not sure if I should believe the Marketing-Speach of being stiffer, lighter bla bla. In my honest Opinion the one and only Benefit this Standard has is easier Rear-Wheel Installment, just because of this drilled out Reliefs/Threads only. Without them this Axle-Width is somehow pointless and you could go back to the tried and trusty 135 x 12 and save money for additional Axle-Adapters for your old Hubs.

  7. #532
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dogboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,130
    Quote Originally Posted by NoStyle View Post
    Hmmm ... I had the same "Issue", if it is one (!!!), on both 26 and 650B x 142 Dropouts. A washer of max. 1 mm at each Bolt, between the IS-2000-Tabs and PM-Adapter, and the Brake-Caliper was centered perfectly.

    But I have to say that I never needed to use Spacers for the IS-2000 with PM before. Maybe Banshee should check if the Dropouts are within the Tolerance, or are not maschined correct.
    My Rear Derailleur is a Shimano XT Shadow 9 Speed and there were no Issues at all to get proper Adjustment!

    My little bigger Concern are the missing Reliefs/Threads for the 142 x 12 Standard. This is my first Experience with Bolt-Thru-Axles in the Rear. Remove/Build-in the Rear Wheel is a bit laborious without them. It would be nice to have them in the Dropouts as Support and I would likely pay an Upcharge if they are more costy to produce.

    I donīt think 142 x 12 is a matured Standard at all. Iīm not sure if I should believe the Marketing-Speach of being stiffer, lighter bla bla. In my honest Opinion the one and only Benefit this Standard has is easier Rear-Wheel Installment, just because of this drilled out Reliefs/Threads only. Without them this Axle-Width is somehow pointless and you could go back to the tried and trusty 135 x 12 and save money for additional Axle-Adapters for your old Hubs.
    X-12 (142x12) is a mature and well documented standard. There isn't another manufacturer I know of that has not followed the design spec and included the 3.5mm per side relief in the dropouts. If those are omitted, then the brake mount and derailleur hanger are going to be 3.5mm out of spec on each side - the fact that you are able to get the caliper positioned via washers and the derailleur adjusted at the extreme end of it's adjustment range doesn't sit well with me. I'm not going to claim any huge advantage over 135x12 other than convenience, but the advantages over a 135x10 qr or thru-bolt are pretty obvious.

  8. #533
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MartinS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,431
    I've got experiences with another bike brand with the 142 standard and also had to shim the brakes. Not a big deal at all (I didn't think twice about it until I read this thread) but I wonder if the general advised specs are off somewhere...
    I also have noted that Hope hubs are also a bit of an issue in this regard, the disc mounts on the hub are about 1 - 1.5 mm further in towards the wheel center than all the other hubs I've used.

  9. #534
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MartinS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,431
    Quote Originally Posted by Dogboy View Post
    X-12 (142x12) is a mature and well documented standard. There isn't another manufacturer I know of that has not followed the design spec and included the 3.5mm per side relief in the dropouts. If those are omitted, then the brake mount and derailleur hanger are going to be 3.5mm out of spec on each side - the fact that you are able to get the caliper positioned via washers and the derailleur adjusted at the extreme end of it's adjustment range doesn't sit well with me. I'm not going to claim any huge advantage over 135x12 other than convenience, but the advantages over a 135x10 qr or thru-bolt are pretty obvious.


    Not exactly true with the desgn of Banshees drop outs, the width is still the same for the hub, the dropout is just missing the extra material on the inside of the dropout to act as a stop.

  10. #535
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dogboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,130
    Quote Originally Posted by MartinS View Post
    Not exactly true with the desgn of Banshees drop outs, the width is still the same for the hub, the dropout is just missing the extra material on the inside of the dropout to act as a stop.
    Sure, the inside spacing on the dropouts is 142mm, I get that. The issue is that the inside edge of the brake mount and derailleur hanger are on that same plane when they should be inboard of the hub ends by 3.5mm on each side - which would locate them where they would be on a 135mm dropout. This is simple stuff.

  11. #536
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,935
    It would definitely be an issue if the drop-outs were post-mount. But they aren't...

    As it is, derailleur limit screws and 3.5mm spacers between the drop-out and caliper adapter would line everything up correctly.

    I agree it's not ideal, but nothing a competent mechanic couldn't sort out quickly. I do agree though, would be good if Keith revised the design.

  12. #537
    Hard funkinī Kraut
    Reputation: NoStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by Dogboy View Post
    Sure, the inside spacing on the dropouts is 142mm, I get that. The issue is that the inside edge of the brake mount and derailleur hanger are on that same plane when they should be inboard of the hub ends by 3.5mm on each side - which would locate them where they would be on a 135mm dropout. This is simple stuff.
    Iīm not sure at all, but have not every Detail of X-12 in Mind ...
    My experience was like this:
    My Mechanic took the Derailleur off the Wildcard (with 135x10 Axle), screwed it in the Spitfire and it fits! Only very slightly adjustments on the Trigger were done to get proper Shifting. The Screws that limits the Derailleurs movement were not touched at all!!!
    As mentioned - the Brake only needed a simple average thin Washer and was ready to go.

    As far as I know the X-12-Standard is nothing more but being 135 x12 Bolt-Thru plus adding 3,5 mm additional Axle-Width per Side, build as Threads to give more Fix or Path to easier install the Wheel. Just the Same with Forks, but in opposite they only have around 1 mm Threads inside the regular Axle-Width. The X-12 Inside-Spacing of IS-2000 or Derailleur-Hanger should be the same as 135 x 12, isnīt it this way??? Otherwise the Mechanic had to completely readjust the Derailleur, or had to put 3,5 mm Spacers to fix the Brake - both was not the Case!

    The Fact that only small Spacers were required for the Brake seems to me just a Tolerance-Issue only. Am I wrong ???

  13. #538
    Hard funkinī Kraut
    Reputation: NoStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by NoStyle View Post
    Iīm not sure at all, but have not every Detail of X-12 in Mind ...
    My experience was like this:
    My Mechanic took the Derailleur off the Wildcard (with 135x10 Axle), screwed it in the Spitfire and it fits! Only very slightly adjustments on the Trigger were done to get proper Shifting. The Screws that limits the Derailleurs movement were not touched at all!!!
    As mentioned - the Brake only needed a simple average thin Washer and was ready to go.

    As far as I know the X-12-Standard is nothing more but being 135 x12 Bolt-Thru plus adding 3,5 mm additional Axle-Width per Side, build as Threads to give more Fix or Path to easier install the Wheel. Just the Same with Forks, but in opposite they only have around 1 mm Threads inside the regular Axle-Width. The X-12 Inside-Spacing of IS-2000 or Derailleur-Hanger should be the same as 135 x 12, isnīt it this way??? Otherwise the Mechanic had to completely readjust the Derailleur, or had to put 3,5 mm Spacers to fix the Brake - both was not the Case!

    The Fact that only small Spacers were required for the Brake seems to me just a Tolerance-Issue only. Am I wrong ???
    Ehhhhrrrrrr ... to make Confusion complete ?!?!?

    I have read the complete Prime/Rune Dropouts/Hangers-Thread.

    - After that I called my Mechanic, just to check back and not prove myself a liar - he has confirmed to me definitely from his memory that a readjustment of the Derailleur was NOT necessary?! I have checked his work and all I can see is a perfect adjusted Derailleur for every Gear of the Cassette, with crisp and tight shifting as a Result. How could this be possible? Due to the Thread above and coming from a 135 x 10 the Derailleur must be 3,5 mm offset, but isnīt? I donīt get it ... ?!?

    - User jncarpenter (Threadstarter) measured the IS-Brakemount being 3,5 mm outboard with his Set of Dropouts. Same with the Derailleur-Hanger. My Postmount only required a washer around 1 mm of thickness and the Brake-Caliper was fine. The Bolts look like they are relatively centered in their Caliper Eyelets. I donīt get it again. Especially while the IS-2000 Mount is a plane Surface with the Axle (inner Side of the Dropout) ... ?!?

  14. #539
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    337
    To be honest. I don't remember having a bike which did not require shims to properely set up a brake caliper. If one is really desperate to avoid shimming, then IS QR20 _front_ adapters are thicker by about 3mm then normal ones. Just remember to subtract 20mm from disc size. Ie - 203mm front adaptor is 180 rear adaptor( 180 front is 160 rear, 160 front is 140 rear ).

    Besides - getting a 142mm drops on a bike that is capable of 150 is kind of foolish anyway

    As for mech hanger. FSR bikes were notorious for klunking deraileurs on traditional shimano derailleurs. I remember my Enduro SL to be a klack-fest on rooty trails with LX rear mech ( with long cage as well, to make matters worse ). There was also a problem with adjusting high gears on old shimano mechs and Enduro SL - the 11t cog required alot of B-tension adjustment, otherwise the cage hit the frame and auto-shifted to next gear.

    Old Shimano Derailleurs are just failed design.

    BTW - there is no standard how wide/narrow the hanger must be. I believe that each manufactuer gives minimum/maximum range of how offset a hanger must be from the cassette. If the 142 drops do not exceed that limit, then they are ok.

  15. #540
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Dogboy View Post
    Sure, the inside spacing on the dropouts is 142mm, I get that. The issue is that the inside edge of the brake mount and derailleur hanger are on that same plane when they should be inboard of the hub ends by 3.5mm on each side - which would locate them where they would be on a 135mm dropout. This is simple stuff.
    Agreed...simple!


  16. #541
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,758
    Quote Originally Posted by NoStyle View Post
    Ehhhhrrrrrr ... to make Confusion complete ?!?!?

    I have read the complete Prime/Rune Dropouts/Hangers-Thread.

    - After that I called my Mechanic, just to check back and not prove myself a liar - he has confirmed to me definitely from his memory that a readjustment of the Derailleur was NOT necessary?! I have checked his work and all I can see is a perfect adjusted Derailleur for every Gear of the Cassette, with crisp and tight shifting as a Result. How could this be possible? Due to the Thread above and coming from a 135 x 10 the Derailleur must be 3,5 mm offset, but isnīt? I donīt get it ... ?!?

    - User jncarpenter (Threadstarter) measured the IS-Brakemount being 3,5 mm outboard with his Set of Dropouts. Same with the Derailleur-Hanger. My Postmount only required a washer around 1 mm of thickness and the Brake-Caliper was fine. The Bolts look like they are relatively centered in their Caliper Eyelets. I donīt get it again. Especially while the IS-2000 Mount is a plane Surface with the Axle (inner Side of the Dropout) ... ?!?
    If you read my thread, you also noted that I agreed that one could setup a 142x12 rear to work just fine...no issues. However, my issue was/is that I like to swap rear wheels...that's where the real conflict lies. The 150x12 & 135x10 wheels are a seamless swap with appropriate drop-outs....not soo much with the 142x12 wheel. I have to completely re-tune the der. & reset the brake caliper.

    Keep in mind, you have a PM rear caliper (same here)...so the 1mm spacer gets the caliper just enough inboard to allow the pm mount to "work".


  17. #542
    Hard funkinī Kraut
    Reputation: NoStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter View Post
    If you read my thread, you also noted that I agreed that one could setup a 142x12 rear to work just fine...no issues. However, my issue was/is that I like to swap rear wheels...that's where the real conflict lies. The 150x12 & 135x10 wheels are a seamless swap with appropriate drop-outs....not soo much with the 142x12 wheel. I have to completely re-tune the der. & reset the brake caliper.

    Keep in mind, you have a PM rear caliper (same here)...so the 1mm spacer gets the caliper just enough inboard to allow the pm mount to "work".
    Yes, I do understand the Problem with your Rear Wheels and yes - the real Issue assembling my Spitfire was ISCG 05 with 73 mm BB-Shell when using Double Ring with Chaindevice. This problem was solved by filing off 2-3 mm off the ISCG-Tabs.
    What somehow crazes me is that you have had to completely re-tune the Derailleur when going from 135x10 to 142x12. This re-tuning wasnīt necessary when we made the same swap. Maybe my Mechanic does remember wrong ... ? Apart from this Setup was really easy.

    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator View Post
    To be honest. I don't remember having a bike which did not require shims to properely set up a brake caliper. If one is really desperate to avoid shimming, then IS QR20 _front_ adapters are thicker by about 3mm then normal ones. Just remember to subtract 20mm from disc size. Ie - 203mm front adaptor is 180 rear adaptor( 180 front is 160 rear, 160 front is 140 rear ).

    Besides - getting a 142mm drops on a bike that is capable of 150 is kind of foolish anyway
    Hehehe, well ...
    To be honest my Experiences are different. I remember shimming was only necessary when using IS-Mounts with IS-Calipers and Adapters back in the Days, with older Magura Louises.
    Iīm not in the Boat for absolutely shimm-free Installment, Iīm pretty much ok as it is. At least only 1 mm shimming was done on the Brakes - the Point jncarpenter mentioned to make them work fine.

    Iīm not complaining at all, just purely out of interest: Why going 142 mm with no Reliefs/Threads plus 3,5 mm Offset on Mounts and Hanger? I could do without the Reliefs, but why this Offset?

  18. #543
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,758
    Quote Originally Posted by NoStyle View Post
    Yes, I do understand the Problem with your Rear Wheels and yes - the real Issue assembling my Spitfire was ISCG 05 with 73 mm BB-Shell when using Double Ring with Chaindevice. This problem was solved by filing off 2-3 mm off the ISCG-Tabs.
    What somehow crazes me is that you have had to completely re-tune the Derailleur when going from 135x10 to 142x12. This re-tuning wasnīt necessary when we made the same swap. Maybe my Mechanic does remember wrong ... ? Apart from this Setup was really easy.
    Well, I don't see how you can move the rear der. 3.5mm outboard and not need to re-tune...props to your alchemist!


  19. #544
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    So I can take my 12x135 wheel, stick it in the 142 drops squeeze the whole thing together and presto no shimming needed

    Seriously, this is turning into a bit of a head scratcher and maybe Keith needs to chime in on what's going on.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  20. #545
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cave dweller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    So I can take my 12x135 wheel, stick it in the 142 drops squeeze the whole thing together and presto no shimming needed

    Seriously, this is turning into a bit of a head scratcher and maybe Keith needs to chime in on what's going on.
    Yes, that is basically the problem. Dropouts should have 3.5mm wheel slots and then entire dropout assembly needs to be moved inboard 3.5mm each side.

    The setup does work though - you just need to shim the brake adapter and use derailleurs with enough hi/low adjustment (such has Shimano shadows). Or you could use a 135mmx12 hub and try bending the triangle 3.5mm each side, but probably not a good idea......

  21. #546
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by cave dweller View Post
    Yes, that is basically the problem. Dropouts should have 3.5mm wheel slots and then entire dropout assembly needs to be moved inboard 3.5mm each side.

    The setup does work though - you just need to shim the brake adapter and use derailleurs with enough hi/low adjustment (such has Shimano shadows). Or you could use a 135mmx12 hub and try bending the triangle 3.5mm each side, but probably not a good idea......
    This is what I heard from the man himself,
    I haven’t heard of any issues with XX1 derailleur alignment, and I haven’t personally has issues with 1x10 X0 or X9 rear derailleurs.

  22. #547
    Hard funkinī Kraut
    Reputation: NoStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by jgusta View Post
    Very nice NS with pretty much same geo as I am running with my Rune with 160 fork and neutral chips for 65.5 deg front, 74 deg rear and 13.45" BB with low rims (Stans Flow EX on 2.3 tires). I very much like this geo and set-up for aggro trail/hardy AM riding. Felt much better to me than in the slacker setting, which resulted in too much of a rear wheel bias when climbing and even felt slower on the pedally descents. For some reason the bike feels faster and more lively and responsive in the neutral setting for me as well (better jumper and cornering). For bike park or shuttling with no/minimal pedalling, imagine the slacker setting to be pretty good though.

    Cheers on the new bike, it's a treat!
    Thank you man!
    Glad to hear you are enjoying your Rune the same way.

    Yes, I too like the Geometry set-up this way right from the start - feels so much at Home! On the Flat I feel I have great and fast Acceleration - on or out of the Saddle. Going down the slacker HA gives a nice, more centered Position over the Bike, which I had already expected in Theory. The next planned Rides are combined with longer Uphills, so letīs see how the Bike works there.

    Me personally Iīm not too much Fan of super low BB-Heights. They do have Benefits on shaped or mellow Trails, but have some downsides in more technical Terrain. So for me BB-Heights around 34 cm works very well in all Conditions. This is the Reason to go with Angleset from the start: steeper Seatangle to support Climbing, slacker Rune-Style Headangle and not overly low BB. For the Park-Days I can go with the slack Flip-Chips and lower BB. If this is not enough I have the -1,5 Deg Cup, but I donīt see this for now. The Bike is so great and overall Fun. The Deville and the KS-Link are sooo smooth but lively and responsive at the same Time - Iīm so heavily in love with the Spitfire as it is.

    Cheers and many Greetings

  23. #548
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    55
    Just had my first proper ride on the new spitfire and it was seriously good fun!
    My build is on the heavy side with freeride inner tube and heavy wheels, fox 36 coil forks, ccdbair etc I reckon it must be at least 34lb+, i ride 1x9 with a 34 front ring and am not that fit, I weigh 85kg.
    When I built it I was worried by the weight but as soon as i started pedalling all those worries disappeared, I climbed my local trails with ease! I was also worried that the fox 36 would make everything feel dead and too easy as that is how it used to feel on my old bike, but again those worries soon disappeared as I started decending. It was so much fun to ride, it felt lively and light. In the air it was balanced, I was expecting the DBair to soak up the jumps but it had plenty of pop of all lips, roots.
    I'm used to a low bb bike but I think the extra wheel base just helps add to the stability of the bike, there is lot of grip on the rear and it just rails berms and corners. I'm only using the 135x10 dropouts with 10mm bolt through and it feels plenty stiff. I also ride a dh bike with 150 rear end so know what that setup feels like, the back end of the spitfire definetly feels strong and planted. Finally I was concerned about the length of the top tube and the reach of the bike but with a 50mm stem it feels spot on. My last bike had top tube of 559mm with a 50mm stem, this is so much more comfy to ride. I know this sounds like I'm looking through rosé tinted glasses, but I have had so much fun on this bike today!

  24. #549
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jgusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,645
    Quote Originally Posted by NoStyle View Post
    Thank you man!
    Glad to hear you are enjoying your Rune the same way.

    Yes, I too like the Geometry set-up this way right from the start - feels so much at Home! On the Flat I feel I have great and fast Acceleration - on or out of the Saddle. Going down the slacker HA gives a nice, more centered Position over the Bike, which I had already expected in Theory. The next planned Rides are combined with longer Uphills, so letīs see how the Bike works there.

    Me personally Iīm not too much Fan of super low BB-Heights. They do have Benefits on shaped or mellow Trails, but have some downsides in more technical Terrain. So for me BB-Heights around 34 cm works very well in all Conditions. This is the Reason to go with Angleset from the start: steeper Seatangle to support Climbing, slacker Rune-Style Headangle and not overly low BB. For the Park-Days I can go with the slack Flip-Chips and lower BB. If this is not enough I have the -1,5 Deg Cup, but I donīt see this for now. The Bike is so great and overall Fun. The Deville and the KS-Link are sooo smooth but lively and responsive at the same Time - Iīm so heavily in love with the Spitfire as it is.

    Cheers and many Greetings
    Cool, I am pretty impressed with how smooth the KS link is as well. Night and day to me as compared to the former VF4b design that makes running air shocks that much better.

    I hear ya with the low BB thing. I used to think lower was always better for added stability and control in/out of corners, which can definitely be an advantage, but I feel you lose some poppy, lively action and performance over square hits and lips and whatnot due to lower BB wanting to hug the ground more. I think 13.3-13.6" BB's are about spot on for these bikes especially since the KS is so smooth and wants to grip and comply to to everything so well.

    I am at home with the kiddos all day today, but can't wait to get after it tommorrow for day of some techy aggro trail goodness!
    Ride On!

  25. #550
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zoro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    310
    Is it possible to stick a 1.5 fork in a V2 Spitty? This guy on NSMB seems to have done it on his, but maybe it's a typo?? BUT the stem and spacers look bigger than the regular 1 1/8.

    + look at the upper cup?

    THoughts??

    2013 Spitfire-imgp4983_zps10853c43.jpg

    North Shore Mountain Biking Forums - View Single Post - NSMB - 2013 - Enduro/Trail Bike Build thread

Page 22 of 79 FirstFirst ... 12 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 32 72 ... 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
  •