Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 180

Thread: Hendrix

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    14

    Hendrix

    There have been a few people asks for reviews of the new Hendrix. So I thought I'd start this thread to provide mine. I've had it 11 days and have 20 hrs on it. So far, I love it, LOVE it, LOVE IT! I've ridden it on fast flowy trails, slow technical trails, fast technical trails and a pump track. To me, its handled it all fantastic and I couldn't be happier.

    So, what do I like? Traction without feeling like a truck. The traction allows me to make climbs and obstacles I've never made before. The traction provides great grip in the corners for better corner speed. And the traction gives more confidence on sketchy descents.

    I like the geometry of the bike. All my previous mtbs have had XC geometry. The slacker geometry gives better downhill confidence.

    I like the look of the bike and have been surprised by the number of "cool bike" compliments its received from strangers.

    The components aren't anything special, but, they all do their job with no issues.

    History: Before buying it, I demoed 29er XC and trail bikes, 27.5 XC and trail bikes, fatbikes and 27.5+ bikes. In general, I preferred the 27.5+ because they provided most of the traction of a fatbike with maneuverability similar to a non-fatbike.

    The 27.5+ bikes I demoed were the Specialized 6fattie carbon, Rocky Mountain Sherpa and Salsa Pony Rustler carbon. Of those, I liked the Pony Rustler best, followed by the Sherpa. After demoing the PR, if it'd been available, I would've bought it on the spot. However, it'll be March before my local Salsa dealer can get a PR. The Hendrix has similar geometry to the PR but with 10mm less travel. I ordered the Hendrix hoping it'd feel close enough to the PR that I wouldn't notice any big differences...the Hendrix feels every bit as good as I remember the PR feeling. I am extremely glad I did not wait until a PR was available!

    In summary, every ride on the Hendrix leaves me looking forward to the next one!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    6
    Great review! It's nice to finally hear a review of this bike from a forum user. I pick mine up tomorrow and I'll have to post my thoughts once I get my hands on mine.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    245
    Sweet, keep the stoke coming. And, uh, where are the pictures? We need pics! Talked to my LBS today and he's keen on getting a demo, but he's expecting no more availability until March.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7
    Nice! I mail ordered one, and have since learned the frame is sent separately from the parts build kit. The frame arrived today, hopefully the rest soon! I am told they will be offering different level of build kits in the near future.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: schnee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,798
    leanin, how close to a clydesdale are you?

    And, if you don't mind, where would you put this bike on the stiffness scale of other bikes you've ridden?

    TIA!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by schnee View Post
    leanin, how close to a clydesdale are you?

    And, if you don't mind, where would you put this bike on the stiffness scale of other bikes you've ridden?

    TIA!
    I'm 5'10", 170lbs and about 10% body fat. I haven't noticed any unwanted flex. The Hendrix tracks straight and steers true. My old 26 scalpel and older 26 Specialized FSR had quite a bit of flex in hard cornering. But, they are old, lightweight XC race bikes and it wasnt enough to be a real problem. Of the 27.5+ bikes I demoed/rented, only the 6fattie carbon wallowed. I don't know if it was a characteristic of the model, the bike I rented or the setup of the rental. But, it wallowed around corners the worst of any bike Ive ridden. If the 6fattie is on your want list, please dont use my bad experience to remove it from your list since it couldve just been a problem with that particular rental.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    14
    Hendrix-resized.jpg

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    9
    The boxer looks awesome! Great pups. I'm really intrigued by the Hendrix but I ride a Troy already. I fear the bikes my be too similar to keep both? If DeVinci ever decides to go full Fatty with the general specs of the Hendrix, then I'll be on board for sure.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    6

    Got it!

    Picked up my Hendrix yesterday, but we're getting some Xmas rain unfortunately. Can't wait to try this baby out!

    Side note: how do you post a picture?

  10. #10
    Big Gooner
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    25
    Solidman we need a review asap!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7
    Without Boost there is no hope.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    79
    Anybody else have any ride time on this bike yet?

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    79
    anyone?

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I have a frame on order, it'll be a while until I get it built though

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    553
    Did a 27 mile test ride last weekend on a variety of trails... from XC to techy downhill. I haven't had this much fun on a bike in a long time. The bike climbed far better than I expected and the wide tires rolled through the rock gardens with no problem. It did get a little squirrely when gravity took over butI'm sure some of that is getting used to the bike. Placing my order this week.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    Just discover this bike. And I would like very much to test this bike in 29" setup, back to back agains my Evil Following. Of course with matching spec.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    79
    looking at the numbers, the bike seems to run big?I stand 5'6''and ride a 17.5 frame or a medium in some models. . No dealers around me and really
    looking at this. I like the idea of the 120mm travel 67 HA.also wondering about pedal strikes as I ride east coast rocks and roots.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I got my frame yesterday. I was looking at the cable routing for the shifter. The area around the bottom bracket where the cable needs to attach to the chainstay seems a little odd. Can anyone get me a close up of this area.

    All the advertisement photos show the cable routed internally through the chainstay, it appears the production bikes don't have this option

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    I just received my frame yesterday and It weighs 8lbs 3oz with the shock. That is a hefty bike! I really hope it is over built and super stiff. I am going to build mine up with 29 inch wheels for the summer and fall race season and then swap over to 27.5 plus wheels next winter. I will give updates as I get mine built up.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    smjergie, what size? hope it's xxxxl.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    It is a large! I know the frame is heavy but weight is just a number. If it's as stiff as it appears to be. I am going to be a happy camper!

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    I was not judging the weight it self, more the 31 lbs weight of the complet bike list on Devinci site, which seem, now that I know the weight of the frame alone: low.
    My friend medium carbon Spartant RS weight 29.5# tubless, Carbone wheels and handlebar and non DH tire, the rest is almost the same spec as the Hendrix. The spartan frame weight 2# less than the hendrix. I wonder if they beef up the frame.
    This bike with 29'' wheels and a fork to take the heat is going to be a hell of a machine. (Evil Following territory ?)
    Edit: I forgot to take into account the dropper weight.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    This is a replacement for my Following so that's exactly what I'm going for! I am going to run a monarch plus which may add some weight as well bet on extended descents it should Excel

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I'm really itching to get mine built. Today I put the front wheel from my b+ wheelset for my fatbike in the back of the hendrix to check tire clearance. I was relieved to see 50mm rims and purgatory 3.0s have room to spare.

    I also ordered a - 1.5 angleset...

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    So here is a quick update on my build. I should be done by the end of the week, I just need to finish my wheels.

    Hendrix-img_20160314_201458.jpg

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    Are you using a boost Pike ?
    Nice Porn by the way.... remove the top

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    Its actually a Boosted YARI. I wanted a Pike but could not get ahold of one so I went with a YARI which should be a tad stiffer than a Pike and if I don't like the damper i believe I can swap it with a charger damper and it will be a 130 lyric.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by smjergie View Post
    Its actually a Boosted YARI. I wanted a Pike but could not get ahold of one so I went with a YARI which should be a tad stiffer than a Pike and if I don't like the damper i believe I can swap it with a charger damper and it will be a 130 lyric.
    I'm going yari too. If I really love the bike, I'll go with an avy cartridge later.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    Here is a quick tease of my final build!

    Hendrix-img_20160315_162928.jpg

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    Alright here she is! I can't wait to take it for a ride and see what it can do.

    Hendrix-img_20160315_174913.jpg

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by smjergie View Post
    Alright here she is! I can't wait to take it for a ride and see what it can do.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_20160315_174913.jpg 
Views:	332 
Size:	303.8 KB 
ID:	1057099
    What size is it?

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    No you won't make me do it, no you won't make me do it. no you won't....

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    It is a large.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by smjergie View Post
    It is a large.
    Thanks, I'm building an xl. I was curious how much different the weights of our builds will be

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I'm waiting on wheels, tires and a dropper. I got my yari today and side clearance looks decent with purgatory 3.0 on 50mm carbon rims. I eyeballed it using my 150 mm hub wheel from my mutz.
    I'm using the 130mm yari and a - 1.5 angleset, in case you're wondering why it looks so slack. I like super slack trail bikes.



    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by rollertoaster View Post
    I'm waiting on wheels, tires and a dropper. I got my yari today and side clearance looks decent with purgatory 3.0 on 50mm carbon rims. I eyeballed it using my 150 mm hub wheel from my mutz.
    I'm using the 130mm yari and a - 1.5 angleset, in case you're wondering why it looks so slack. I like super slack trail bikes.



    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Looks awesome!

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    @ rollertoaster: Do you paln to add bottomless rings, mine came stock without none already installe. I add 2 and I now use my travel wisely.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by cadoretteboat View Post
    @ rollertoaster: Do you paln to add bottomless rings, mine came stock without none already installe. I add 2 and I now use my travel wisely.
    I'll put some it if I have too. I don't really plan on running this shock for too long. I'll most likely upgrade to a dvo topaz asap

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sml-2727's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,401
    What is your opinion on the stock rims? and do you think something wider would fit with a 2.8 tire?
    2018 Spot Mayhem
    2016 Salsa Bucksaw
    2016 GT Grade Carbon

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by sml-2727 View Post
    What is your opinion on the stock rims? and do you think something wider would fit with a 2.8 tire?
    The stock wheelset seemed descent for what they are..I just upgraded to the NOX Kitsuma rim which are 42mm and running Rocket Rons 2.8..I just prefer Shimano carrier cassettes over Sram..so I switched and went silent with the Onyx hubs..they Rawk!

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    359

    Wheels on and ready to roll!

    Got the wheels from NOX Composities...1st go around with the carbon..the build seems perfect so far..eyeball see's no flaws..yard test seem off the hook...Kitsuma rims on Onyx polished hubs..Now if the rains ever stop I can get it on the trails!Hendrix-img_3932.jpgHendrix-img_3933.jpgHendrix-img_3928.jpg

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by staz View Post
    Got the wheels from NOX Composities...1st go around with the carbon..the build seems perfect so far..eyeball see's no flaws..yard test seem off the hook...Kitsuma rims on Onyx polished hubs..Now if the rains ever stop I can get it on the trails!Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3932.jpg 
Views:	160 
Size:	350.3 KB 
ID:	1067833Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3933.jpg 
Views:	130 
Size:	314.6 KB 
ID:	1067834Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3928.jpg 
Views:	113 
Size:	305.5 KB 
ID:	1067835
    I would kill for a set of those hubs, not to mention rims. My wheelset is still in transit. I can not wait to ride this bike

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    58

    Devinci Hendrix RS

    Hendrix-img_6680.jpgHendrix-img_6681.jpg

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    It's been raining here all week. Finally finished the bike last night and it poured all day today. Hopefully I can give it a shakedown Sunday.



    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    130mm yari, suspension in low position, - 1.5 works components angleset



    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    359
    Looks good..Bummer on the weather...

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I got 2 rides on the bike so far.
    I love the geometry with the angleset. The bike is huge and super long. I prefer that type of fit.
    I have had a very low amount of pedal strikes even with 175 cranks.
    My Seatpost sucks, but it temporary until I get a new one.

    My main issue with the bike is the monarch R. The thing has way too much compression dampening. I'm getting full travel at just over 30% sag with no bottomless bands installed.
    The bike feels great when you get it up to speed but the lsc sucks and makes seated riding through rocks feel like a hardtail.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by rollertoaster View Post
    I got 2 rides on the bike so far.
    I love the geometry with the angleset. The bike is huge and super long. I prefer that type of fit.
    I have had a very low amount of pedal strikes even with 175 cranks.
    My Seatpost sucks, but it temporary until I get a new one.

    My main issue with the bike is the monarch R. The thing has way too much compression dampening. I'm getting full travel at just over 30% sag with no bottomless bands installed.
    The bike feels great when you get it up to speed but the lsc sucks and makes seated riding through rocks feel like a hardtail.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    monarch R is very sensitive with air pressure adjustment. I don't remember how much psi I put into but when I stand on the bike the sag is at only 20%. I prefer a stiffer rear compression for more efficient pedaling and I don't feel it is too hard because it is working well on bumps. You can also fine tune the compression with the adjustment knob on the shock. Make sure also you have the correct tires pressure because it can be misleading.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    This isn't my first b+ bike, so I know my desired tire pressures. I'm kind of a suspension snob so it figures I would not get along well with the monarch r. I'm looking into doing a low budget re-shim on the shock next week to fix my dampening complaints.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    Quote Originally Posted by rollertoaster View Post
    This isn't my first b+ bike, so I know my desired tire pressures. I'm kind of a suspension snob so it figures I would not get along well with the monarch r. I'm looking into doing a low budget re-shim on the shock next week to fix my dampening complaints.
    I try a bunch of setups. The one that work best for me is 2 spacers at 35% sag. 75% of travel is use 75% of the time. I excepte the few buttoms out.
    I ride rocks and rock gradens a lot. up and down.
    You can try with lighter oil. I think that might solve your complaint.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I do have some 2.5wt oil but the low speed compression is definitely too firm. I'm probably going to remove a shim there.
    I'm currently not any bottoming, ideally I'd like to be able to fun a couple bottomless rings with less compression.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    The shock on the Hendrix does not use the full shaft on the shock. The stroke for that shock is 51mm. I was stumped by this at first too and I had some work done to the shock to try to achieve full travel but instead I had a shock that rode like crap and still didn't use the full shock shaft. Whoops haha hopefully you have not started already. What I did was put a zip tie bellow the o-ring on shaft, then I let all the air out of the shock and cycled it to full travel, then I left the zip tie at full travel and reset the o-ring to determine travel usage. I hope this makes sense.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    58
    a debonAIR upgrade might be a solution maybe ?

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I know the shock doesn't use the full shaft. I am measuring with a ruler.
    And I already have debonair. I'm just a suspension snob searching for perfection.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    So I re-shimmed the monarch r today when I should have been working. Removed one low speed shim, and replaced one middle shim with a thinner perforated one that was laying around. Removed one shim from the rebound stack and add spacer shims where necessary to keep everything the same height. I used rs 2.5wt oil vs 3wt. I also added a ghetto bottomless ring (equivalent to 2) to compressed for the loss of support deep in the stroke.

    I won't have a ride report till next week, but around my yard and driveway seems promising. Rebound can go much faster and I can now run the adjuster near the middle where before I was almost full fast. The low speed seems to blow off easier than before when running over a curb (I had harshness issues during seated pedaling through rocks).
    So like I said no definite outcome yet, but I'm hoping this did the trick.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by rollertoaster View Post
    My main issue with the bike is the monarch R. The thing has way too much compression dampening. I'm getting full travel at just over 30% sag with no bottomless bands installed.
    The bike feels great when you get it up to speed but the lsc sucks and makes seated riding through rocks feel like a hardtail.
    Not surprising. Devinci tells me they spec'd a standard "Medium / Medium" tune for the Hendrix, which is inappropriate for one of the lowest leverage linkages on the market.

    The Monarch may not be the most advanced shock on the market, but a "Low / Low" tune should work pretty well.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208

    Excessive damping on the Hendrix

    Not surprising the damping feels excessive: Devinci tells me they spec'd a standard "Medium / Medium" tune for the Hendrix, which is inappropriate for one of the lowest leverage linkages on the market.

    The Monarch may not be the most advanced shock on the market, but a "Low / Low" tune should work pretty well.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I probably modded mine to about a l/l tune. The bike absolutely rips now. The suspension is pretty much dialed in. I can "play" in corners and trail features at ridiculous speeds. The bike is super stable and begs to be ridden fast (xl with a - 1.5 angleset and suspension in low position). I'm really stoked on this bike, I can't wait to ride it more!

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    Glad you're enjoying it! Haven't decided on the replacement for my current ride, but the Hendrix is on the short list. If I go this route, I'd like to try to mount a 200 x 57 shock with an external reservoir (to avoid IFP pressure issues on a low-leverage bike).

    Do you have a sense of whether the frame could handle an extra 13 mm of travel (with 2.8" tires, if tire clearance is the limiting factor)?

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by R-M-R View Post
    Glad you're enjoying it! Haven't decided on the replacement for my current ride, but the Hendrix is on the short list. If I go this route, I'd like to try to mount a 200 x 57 shock with an external reservoir (to avoid IFP pressure issues on a low-leverage bike).

    Do you have a sense of whether the frame could handle an extra 13 mm of travel (with 2.8" tires, if tire clearance is the limiting factor)?
    A slightly longer shock should works, but it is not required in my case, I never ran out of travel so far and I'm a heavy rider at 220 lbs. 120mm of rear travel is enough for me. I actually find the mornarch R just perfect after being adjusted properly but I don't ride enduro tracks at high speed. Just single tracks at average speed. The only clearance to be checked is you add a longer shock is between the right swing arm and the bottom bracket since you only have about 1/2''. I like the firmness of the rear shock because it does provide a good climbing ability and good power transfer. The Hendrix as an amazing geometry for an all around use; very efficient for climbing and good stability in descent.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208

    I agree!

    Quote Originally Posted by Davex1 View Post
    120mm of rear travel is enough for me.
    Me too, which is why I want to try a longer shock! (It has 110 mm in stock form; the longer shock would bring it to just over 120 mm.)

    Seriously, though, thank you for the feedback

    My idea is to add a shock with longer stroke, not longer length, so the chainstay won't be any closer to the BB. i.e. There won't be any more extension, but there will be a little more compression, which is why I'm concerned about contact between the seatstay bridge and the seat-tube.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by R-M-R View Post
    Me too, which is why I want to try a longer shock! (The bike has 110 mm in stock form; the longer shock would bring it to just over 120 mm.)

    Seriously, though, thank you for the feedback
    yes, specs on the web site are saying 110 but a rep from devinci told me it is 120mm. my brother has a Devinci Django RS with 120mm of rear travel and there is exactly the same distance within the upper rear triangle and the seat post wich is the travel stop. We also mesured full travel directly on the shocks on both bikes and seems very close. It looks like both bikes have about the same travel. 10mm is not a lot anyway.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    Interesting. I exchanged messages with Devinci yesterday and they maintained it's 110 mm. There's conflicting info everywhere and I'm unsure whom to believe.

    It's true 13 mm isn't much, but the bike world routinely gets worked up over changes a lot smaller than 10%!

    I'm sure I could enjoy the bike either way, but if I already want to alter the shock due to what I suspect is excessive damping in the base tune, I might as well try to squeeze out a little extra travel while I'm at it.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    58
    it is possible the rep were wrong and yes it could be 110mm. in this case a 10mm longer shock should works because you should not loose too much clearance between the right swing arm and the bottom bracket. I would guess that a 10mm longer shock could translate into 1/8'' less clearance but the best way to make sure would be to measure it.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    The rep to whom I spoke gave some incorrect information along the way, so I'm not convinced the travel info was accurate.

    I'm unclear on what you mean about clearance between the swingarm and the BB. Do you mean they could contact if the swingarm moves farther down? If so, this will not occur with a shock that has the same extended length (i.e. "eye to eye length"), but longer stroke (how far it can compress).

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    58
    I believe that down travel (compression) is limited by the frame; the rear upper triangle will hit the seat post tube when fully compressed and up travel (full extension) is limited by the shocks. That is why I think, if you want more travel, you will need a longer shock (eye to eye lenght) and yes a longer shock will move the swing arm farther down and closer to the BB.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    Davex1,

    I can gain more compression travel by using a shock with the same eye-to-eye and longer stroke. This is not always the case: usually, there is only one stroke available for a given eye-to-eye, but, in this case, there is a longer stroke available. I would not use a longer eye-to-eye because I don't want to raise the BB (or, as you mentioned, risk frame interference at the BB, though height is my main concern).

    The only issue is whether the rear brace will hit the seat-tube. If this brace already gets really close at full compression, then my idea won't work; if there's a little room to spare, I may be in luck.

    i.e. Don't worry, I know what I'm doing! I just need some insight into how close that brace gets ... or I need to go to my local Devinci dealer, remove the shock, and measure with calipers.

    Thanks for your concern!
    Last edited by R-M-R; 05-21-2016 at 05:20 PM. Reason: typo

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I'm going to try a 57mm stroke shock as well, not that I think I need it. I set a Kom on a popular trail today and almost beat my current Kom on a long dh today with several mistakes.

    I have aired the stock shock down all the way and I'm fairly certain there will be no seat stay brace contact with the seat tube even in the low position. If there is just run it in high, there is no way it will hit in that setting.

    I figure if I have clearance issues I can install an offset bushing in the lower shock mounting (3mm offset). Again, if there is a clearance issue it will only be in the low position.

    As long as a 200mm overall length shock is used the static bb height and geometry will be unaffected

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    42
    Well.... after a series of extremely unfortunate events, I have to part ways with my Hendrix . I am selling it as a frame only with the shock and headset, size large. PM me if anyone is interested.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    4
    Just tried a 200x57mm Cane Creek Db coil on a medium Hendrix last night. At full compression there is still about 5mm or so of clearance between the seat stay bridge and the seat tube. Rough measurements with a tape measure shows about 124mm or so of travel. That coupled with a 130mm or 140mm fork could make for a very capable bike.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    Michael Austin,
    Thank you! That's what I was looking for!

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Of of curiosity was this test in the low or high geometry setting?

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    4
    I will double check but I'm pretty sure that was in the low position

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    An easier way to solve the question of fitting a longer shock would be to unbolt one end of the shock, allow the seatstay bridge to rest against the seat-tube, and measure the distance between shock mounting points. This would have to be done for both flip chip positions.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Wow I feel like an idiot for not thinking of that myself. Thanks r-m-r!

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    No worries. Looking forward to what you find!

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    114
    Ive been running a 200 x 57 mm rearshock since start of May. If you have more hike-a-bike terrain, this matched with a 140mm fork is great! Im running mine in low position. Great traction, but tend to feel a bit rear-heavy on steep climbs. The 110/120 original setup is better balanced to allround trailriding. But except a higher BB, putting the rearframe in high-position, should get you about the same HT and ST degrees with my setup as in low with original suspension.

    Bike defenetly feels very plush with the 57mm stroke at the back. Doing small dropoffs and general playing around in high speeds is fun and controlled. Im also on the heavy side 240+ and I feel the M/M tune works great for me. Running about 33% sag, and rearshock is a monarch debonair rt3. Im dreaming of a DB inline though, so if someone who has this on the Hendrix could share their base-setup, it would help alot. There are no base-setups to find, and never having a full tuneable rearshock before scares me to get lost in the adjustment-jungle.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Nilsern View Post
    Ive been running a 200 x 57 mm rearshock since start of May. If you have more hike-a-bike terrain, this matched with a 140mm fork is great! Im running mine in low position. Great traction, but tend to feel a bit rear-heavy on steep climbs. The 110/120 original setup is better balanced to allround trailriding. But except a higher BB, putting the rearframe in high-position, should get you about the same HT and ST degrees with my setup as in low with original suspension.

    Bike defenetly feels very plush with the 57mm stroke at the back. Doing small dropoffs and general playing around in high speeds is fun and controlled. Im also on the heavy side 240+ and I feel the M/M tune works great for me. Running about 33% sag, and rearshock is a monarch debonair rt3. Im dreaming of a DB inline though, so if someone who has this on the Hendrix could share their base-setup, it would help alot. There are no base-setups to find, and never having a full tuneable rearshock before scares me to get lost in the adjustment-jungle.
    The Hendrix RS uses a 200mm x 51mm rear shock and I tought it doesn't use the full 51 mm travel ? I believed the rear travel was limited by the frame ?

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    114

    Hendrix

    Quote Originally Posted by Davex1 View Post
    The Hendrix RS uses a 200mm x 51mm rear shock and I tought it doesn't use the full 51 mm travel ? I believed the rear travel was limited by the frame ?
    A Monarch 200x51 actually has a 64mm long airshaft, but is limited to use 51mm of the stroke-length.

    Last edited by Nilsern; 06-04-2016 at 09:52 PM.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    20
    I just got my Devinci Hendrix this week. I am so happy I went with it. I am really loving the 27.5x3.0 tires. This bike climbs so well, A long climb that I am normally out of breath on I was able to just keep going no problem. I felt I was climbing faster and so did my riding buddies. Also it rails the corners awesome and down-hills amazing. I really had a blast on this bike and am stoked I went with this over the Diamondback Catch 2 or Trek Fuel 27.5+ that I was looking at. I converted it to tubeless and there is no issue with weight. I don't know if I could be happier than I am with this purchase from MTB Garage in John's Creek Ga. Another thing is it is so comfortable to ride and is more nimble and responsive than I expected a 27.5+ to be. I did put an internally routed dropper post on it which allowed some nice stable landings.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    Good to ear. How much sag are you using?

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaTega View Post
    .... I converted it to tubeless and there is no issue with weight....
    The Hendrix rims are not reliable at all when use tubless.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    20
    30% but I am messing around with it now to see what I like. I haven't had any issues with the tubeless setup yet but we will see.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    30% turn out to be perfect for me to, plus I use 1 or 2 reducer. depend of where I ride.

    With the stock Maxxis they hold relatively good (few burps) but compare to the Spech purgatory I am riding right now. 18 psi, first burm and I'm out. so tubless is out of question with the spech.
    I now ride with regular 26" 2.2 tubes. After near 100 miles everything is good. No flat.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208

    Review: Devinci Hendrix RS

    I took a Hendrix out for a couple hours and thought I'd share my observations. For reference, I:

    - prioritize descending and handling performance, but I'm not willing to accept a bike that can't pedal and climb efficiently
    - like bikes with a super long reach (think Geometron or Mondraker long) and super slack head angles, though I usually have to pick a bike with only some of these characteristics
    - have recently been on several Plus bikes, including the Scott Genius 710, Santa Cruz Hightower, and Trek Fuel EX
    - am 183 cm (6') tall and rode size Large
    - currently own a Specialized Stumpjumper Evo that's been slighly lowered and slacked out with a 160 mm Lyrik

    Before riding the Hendrix, it was the leading candidate for replacing my SJ Evo; I had high expectations. Unfortunately, the Hendrix RS was the most disappointing bike I've ever ridden. The good news is the flaws may not be inherent to the frame, so a different built may salvage the bike.

    I had hoped the larger tires would take the edge off small to medium terrain, yielding similar performance to a longer-travel bike, but with better small-bump performance. Turns out the automotive adage is true: there's no replacement for displacement! Specifically, I now believe the ratio of undamped suspension (tire casing flex) to damped suspension (fork and frame travel) is important, as a great deal of undamped suspension can overwhelm the damped suspension and lead to excessive bounce. There's certainly some complex interplay between these variables, though: I wouldn't suggest a fully rigid bike should have zero tire flex, but I would suggest a long-travel bike helps tame a potentially bouncy tire. In short, the Hendrix bounced all over the place, even with so little tire pressure that the tires collapsed when cornering.

    I also suspect large tires greatly benefit from reduced unsprung weight, allowing the damped suspension to do more work and reducing the energy into the undamped suspension ... but back to the review, and let's switch to bullet points.

    - The seat tube angle is steep, facilitating a larger size than expected. I would prefer the XL.

    - Occasional calf rubbing, but not severe.

    - Astoundingly high rolling resistance. I believe large tires can be faster than "normal" tires, so there must be something odd about the Chronicle. There were tubes in the tires and they could have been excessively thick, but doesn't seem enough to explain how slow it was.

    - Handling felt more like a fatbike than a "normal" bike, i.e. it was resistant to steering input and responsive to lean, especially at higher speeds. I find 2.8" tires exhibit only a moderate amount of this trait, yet it was pronounced on the Hendrix. Unexpected, given the modest change in tire size, but it strongly affected the handling.

    - The Reba fork was awful: harsh, even with 12 psi in the front tire, and lacked stiffness.

    - Shock damping seemed excessive, but it's more difficult to separate tire travel from suspension travel on the rear, compared to the front.

    - Severe tire bounce, especially on a new trail with that "new trail washboard" texture.

    - Poor traction for a Plus tire. I strongly dislike the Maxxis Chronicle; try the vastly superior Rekon on the front and anything with minimal rolling resistance on the rear.

    - Tire collapse became excessive when pressure was reduced in an attempt to manage bounce and increase grip. The rims should be much wider to support this tire.

    - Ran wide on many corners due to the resistance to steering input and tire deflection.

    Recommendations:

    - If in doubt, go up a size
    - Dropper seatpost
    - Tubeless
    - Narrower tires (maybe 2.6" - 2.8")
    - Wider rims, especially with a 3" tire (maybe 50 mm internal)
    - Different fork (I was impressed by the inexpensive Fox Rhythm 34 on the Trek Fuel EX 8 Plus)
    - Less damping on the shock (stock tune is Medium compression and Medium rebound, which is inappropriate for such a low-leverage bike; it needs a Low & Low tune)
    - If you're adventurous, try a 200 x 57 mm shock for a touch more travel and angled headset cups to put the front wheel farther ahead of you (I recommend the latter for every bike, so take it with a grain of salt)

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by R-M-R View Post
    I took a Hendrix out for a couple hours and thought I'd share my observations. For reference, I:

    - prioritize descending and handling performance, but I'm not willing to accept a bike that can't pedal and climb efficiently
    - like bikes with a super long reach (think Geometron or Mondraker long) and super slack head angles, though I usually have to pick a bike with only some of these characteristics
    - have recently been on several Plus bikes, including the Scott Genius 710, Santa Cruz Hightower, and Trek Fuel EX
    - am 183 cm (6') tall and rode size Large
    - currently own a Specialized Stumpjumper Evo that's been slighly lowered and slacked out with a 160 mm Lyrik

    Before riding the Hendrix, it was the leading candidate for replacing my SJ Evo; I had high expectations. Unfortunately, the Hendrix RS was the most disappointing bike I've ever ridden. The good news is the flaws may not be inherent to the frame, so a different built may salvage the bike.

    I had hoped the larger tires would take the edge off small to medium terrain, yielding similar performance to a longer-travel bike, but with better small-bump performance. Turns out the automotive adage is true: there's no replacement for displacement! Specifically, I now believe the ratio of undamped suspension (tire casing flex) to damped suspension (fork and frame travel) is important, as a great deal of undamped suspension can overwhelm the damped suspension and lead to excessive bounce. There's certainly some complex interplay between these variables, though: I wouldn't suggest a fully rigid bike should have zero tire flex, but I would suggest a long-travel bike helps tame a potentially bouncy tire. In short, the Hendrix bounced all over the place, even with so little tire pressure that the tires collapsed when cornering.

    I also suspect large tires greatly benefit from reduced unsprung weight, allowing the damped suspension to do more work and reducing the energy into the undamped suspension ... but back to the review, and let's switch to bullet points.

    - The seat tube angle is steep, facilitating a larger size than expected. I would prefer the XL.

    - Occasional calf rubbing, but not severe.

    - Astoundingly high rolling resistance. I believe large tires can be faster than "normal" tires, so there must be something odd about the Chronicle. There were tubes in the tires and they could have been excessively thick, but doesn't seem enough to explain how slow it was.

    - Handling felt more like a fatbike than a "normal" bike, i.e. it was resistant to steering input and responsive to lean, especially at higher speeds. I find 2.8" tires exhibit only a moderate amount of this trait, yet it was pronounced on the Hendrix. Unexpected, given the modest change in tire size, but it strongly affected the handling.

    - The Reba fork was awful: harsh, even with 12 psi in the front tire, and lacked stiffness.

    - Shock damping seemed excessive, but it's more difficult to separate tire travel from suspension travel on the rear, compared to the front.

    - Severe tire bounce, especially on a new trail with that "new trail washboard" texture.

    - Poor traction for a Plus tire. I strongly dislike the Maxxis Chronicle; try the vastly superior Rekon on the front and anything with minimal rolling resistance on the rear.

    - Tire collapse became excessive when pressure was reduced in an attempt to manage bounce and increase grip. The rims should be much wider to support this tire.

    - Ran wide on many corners due to the resistance to steering input and tire deflection.

    Recommendations:

    - If in doubt, go up a size
    - Dropper seatpost
    - Tubeless
    - Narrower tires (maybe 2.6" - 2.8")
    - Wider rims, especially with a 3" tire (maybe 50 mm internal)
    - Different fork (I was impressed by the inexpensive Fox Rhythm 34 on the Trek Fuel EX 8 Plus)
    - Less damping on the shock (stock tune is Medium compression and Medium rebound, which is inappropriate for such a low-leverage bike; it needs a Low & Low tune)
    - If you're adventurous, try a 200 x 57 mm shock for a touch more travel and angled headset cups to put the front wheel farther ahead of you (I recommend the latter for every bike, so take it with a grain of salt)
    I agree the stock hendrix is less than Ideal. I built mine from scratch to avoid some of the issues. - 1.5 angleset for starters with a 130mm yari. The stock shock is one of the worst I've felt, I took mine apart and re-tuned it for significantly less compression and faster high speed rebound.

    I don't like low tire pressures I generally run 18f 21r with surly dirt wizards which are absolutely insane in the traction department. And I agree when in doubt size up, I chose the xl (I'm 6'2").

    With all that said, the hendrix is usually my go to bike, I often choose it over my carbon Nomad. Plus suspension will never feel like a normal full suspension bike, it's different but not necessarily worse.

    There is a chance I'll race an enduro or 2 on the hendrix this year, all depends on the course.


    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by rollertoaster View Post
    I agree the stock hendrix is less than Ideal. I built mine from scratch to avoid some of the issues. - 1.5 angleset for starters with a 130mm yari. The stock shock is one of the worst I've felt, I took mine apart and re-tuned it for significantly less compression and faster high speed rebound.

    I don't like low tire pressures I generally run 18f 21r with surly dirt wizards which are absolutely insane in the traction department. And I agree when in doubt size up, I chose the xl (I'm 6'2").

    With all that said, the hendrix is usually my go to bike, I often choose it over my carbon Nomad. Plus suspension will never feel like a normal full suspension bike, it's different but not necessarily worse.

    There is a chance I'll race an enduro or 2 on the hendrix this year, all depends on the course.
    And there you have it: a good bike that's better to build from a frame than buy complete.

    I'm concerned about those tire pressures, though. What keeps you from going lower?

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by R-M-R View Post
    And there you have it: a good bike that's better to build from a frame than buy complete.

    I'm concerned about those tire pressures, though. What keeps you from going lower?
    2 reasons, tire squirm, and rocks.... I can't stand a squirmy rear tire on a hard corner. I still get the benefit of much more traction.
    I'm not just out putting around on my bikes, I ride hard and fast. It's hard to get a feel for what type of rider your dealing with on forums.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by rollertoaster View Post
    2 reasons, tire squirm, and rocks.... I can't stand a squirmy rear tire on a hard corner. I still get the benefit of much more traction.
    I'm not just out putting around on my bikes, I ride hard and fast. It's hard to get a feel for what type of rider your dealing with on forums.
    True. When people say they run their tires at 12 psi and haven't had problems with tire squirm, it says a lot

    That's why I'm conflicted about larger tires: I love the traction and smooth rolling over rocks and roots, but the lateral collapse is frustrating - and with higher pressure, bounce becomes a problem. I was hoping super wide rims would be the solution, but the Rekon tread became so flat that I was leaning beyond the lugs and the sidewalls became so exposed that they showed a concerning level of damage after one ride.

    I'm interested to try a 29" tire in maybe 2.6" width on ~40 mm (internal) rims.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by R-M-R View Post
    True. When people say they run their tires at 12 psi and haven't had problems with tire squirm, it says a lot

    That's why I'm conflicted about larger tires: I love the traction and smooth rolling over rocks and roots, but the lateral collapse is frustrating - and with higher pressure, bounce becomes a problem. I was hoping super wide rims would be the solution, but the Rekon tread became so flat that I was leaning beyond the lugs and the sidewalls became so exposed that they showed a concerning level of damage after one ride.

    I'm interested to try a 29" tire in maybe 2.6" width on ~40 mm (internal) rims.
    Yeah 12psi and no squirm.... I feel a completely unacceptable amount of squirm at 18 psi rear. I am currently running a dirt wizard which is a pretty tough casing compared to others. I also run 45mm inner width rims to give the sidewall some extra support.

    I broke a rear rim last week, so I'll be switching to a scraper vs carbon. I plan on possibly racing a couple eastern states cup enduro events on this bike of the course suites the bike. Pro class is some stiff competition so wish me luck!

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    This has me thinking about Procore, and I suspect it's the wrong solution: it addresses pinch flats, but - as I understand it - not lateral collapse. For the same weight as narrow, 2-ply DH tires with Procore, I suspect we could use wider tires designed for extremely wide rims (ex. tread that wraps far down the sidewalls) and redesign the bead area to prevent pinch flats (ex. a thick strip of strain rate sensitive foam).

    Anyway, we're a little off topic! Seems we agree the 3" Chronicle on 33 mm rims is a disaster.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    I may actually try procore on my Nomad. It isn't about running less pressure for me. I'd just like to make it to the bottom on a race run with rim and tire intact.
    They would need to redesign it for use with plus wheels I think. I don't believe it could span a 45mm inner diameter wheel as it is currently designed

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by rollertoaster View Post
    I may actually try procore on my Nomad. It isn't about running less pressure for me. I'd just like to make it to the bottom on a race run with rim and tire intact.
    They would need to redesign it for use with plus wheels I think. I don't believe it could span a 45mm inner diameter wheel as it is currently designed
    If you do, I'll be interested to hear the results from someone who seems to share several of my ideas!

    I wasn't meaning Procore for plus tires; I was thinking about ways to improve traction and flat resistance, with Procore being one option and wider, modified tires being another. My concerns about Procore include:

    • additional mass that adds bottom-out protection without putting more rubber on the trail
    • lower pressure is recommended without adding lateral stability (as I understand it)
    • less volume in the tire before the tire hits the Procore bumper

    My guess is that it would be a better solution to use extremely wide rims (perhaps an internal width of 75% of casing width) with moderately wide tires (2.5" - 2.7"?) that are designed for this configuration with a wide enough tread and additional bottom-out prevention built into both the rim's edge and the tire's bead area.

    Things will be different when I run the world; until then, we'll just have to put up with mediocre tires and rims

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,138
    Well I spoke with my one racer friend about procore today and it kinda scared me off. He has destroyed multiple rims with it due to it loading the rim up in an area which wasn't designed for that much pressure. I guess I'll stick with my trusty double ply tires for now

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    17
    Just wanted to chime in and say I LOVE the Hendrix. It is by far the funnest bike I've owned.

    I did demo a Norco Torrent (liked it) and a Specialized Fattie (liked it) and the Hendrix. The Devinci geometry just felt more nimble- it is such a stable descender!

    I do think it's a tad on the heavy side (coming from a very light Hei-Hei), the components are not top of the line, and sometimes I miss the sit-and-spin granny gear on my Kona, but I have no regrets in going for the Hendrix. Like I said- it's just fun.

    Hendrix-bangtail2.jpg

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    962
    Did you get a chance to try this bike with 29'er wheels? I'm looking at buying the Hendrix and running a 29'er wheelset for certain rides. Has anyone else on this forum setup the Hendrix with 29'er wheels? thanks

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    20
    I have not. Not sure that I want to now after getting used to the 27.5+ tires. I hoped on my 29er and felt so much less stable - like it was a bike I had never been on.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    359

    Any other rear shocks being used?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nilsern View Post
    A Monarch 200x51 actually has a 64mm long airshaft, but is limited to use 51mm of the stroke-length.


    While I upgraded to the new 2017 Fox 34...would like to switch out the rear shock while I'm at it...

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    14
    I started this thread with a glowing review of my Hendrix 7 months ago. Since then, I've ridden it on a wide variety of trails in Moab, Colorado, Arkansas and Oklahoma. I have yet to ride it on a trail where I wasn't pleased with its performance. Just wanted to give a quick update that the love shown in the first post wasn't just new bike love. Its a keeper.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    17
    I'm right there with you. Funny, because there are a bunch of +bikes that have come out since and most are carbon (this bike will likely be carbon for 2017). I'm guessing that I'd be happy on any of those bikes, but there's something about the wheelbase/reach-cockpit/HT angle/standover on the Hendrix that just works for me. It feels like a downhill bike in some regards.

    A couple of questions- what tires are you running? And do you use a dropper, and if so, does your dropper frame access hole have a plastic housing (mine is just an opening in the frame without any housing). Cheers...

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    810
    Quote Originally Posted by crabbychapman View Post
    I'm right there with you. Funny, because there are a bunch of +bikes that have come out since and most are carbon (this bike will likely be carbon for 2017). I'm guessing that I'd be happy on any of those bikes, but there's something about the wheelbase/reach-cockpit/HT angle/standover on the Hendrix that just works for me. It feels like a downhill bike in some regards.

    A couple of questions- what tires are you running? And do you use a dropper, and if so, does your dropper frame access hole have a plastic housing (mine is just an opening in the frame without any housing). Cheers...
    Keeper for me to for the same reason quotes by Crabby. (but i will get the Carbon next years with the Pike and the new DT-Swiss plus whellset).
    I have a Raceface dropper an no housing. I ditch the Chronicle for a set of Spech Purgatory. Biiiiig improvement. I am thinking upgrading the rear schock with a Coil shock. will see next year.
    And by the way, the 2017 model will have a new name: Marshall.because of a trademark problem with -Hendrix- in some euros countries.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hendrix sizing
    By wankel in forum Devinci
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-02-2016, 05:58 PM
  2. Devinci Hendrix 120mm 3.25" tires 433mm Chainstay
    By PHeller in forum 26+/27.5+/29+ Plus Bikes
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 03-31-2016, 07:31 PM
  3. Hendrix Seat post length and dropper length
    By Thesolidman1 in forum Devinci
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-25-2015, 10:41 AM
  4. Hendrix doc on PBS tonite
    By Finch Platte in forum Off Camber (off topic)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-06-2013, 06:34 PM

Members who have read this thread: 52

Posting Permissions

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