Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 601 to 670 of 670
  1. #601
    SISSIF
    Reputation: TheCanary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    403
    Quote Originally Posted by tdc_worm View Post
    I won't give the angle set all of the credit...running a stiffer shock spring resulted in rear riding higher in the stroke, keeping more weight on the front wheel. slackening the head angle dropped the stack and moved the saddle forward, again helping to place a little weight on the front wheel. if offset is measured on the y axis of the fork, then slackening the head angle should reduce offset, thereby increasing trail. with the axle on a 29er being so high (compared to a 26 or 2.75), it seems like a mm change here and or there would be amplified.

    at the end of the day, the changes may or may not matter, and i could just be getting used to the bike. that said, i don't intend to revert back to the softer spring and the normal headset, as I haven't inherited any negative traits.

    YMMV
    Have the 1.5* Works angleset installed to slacken the front. Hard to change up just one variable at a time but I'm pretty keyed into the Wrecker and this has been a great change. I've gone back and forth between Low and X-Low quite a bit for different missions and this seems to give the best of both worlds. Goes up and pedals better than the Low setting and handles and descends better than the X-Low setting.
    Really like the steeper seat tube, noticeable change, had to bring the front of the saddle up to compensate. Also shortened the reach so went up 10mm on the stem. The DELTA has really good pedaling kinematics, limited by seat position, now it really feels like a trail bike, grab a gear and leap out of the saddle. Took it up some loose, tight switchbacks that I've struggled on in X-Low with no problem. Steeper seat tube seemed to more than offset the slacker fork and the front was less floppy climbing - longer stem probably helped too, hard to change just one variable.
    Definitely settled the front end descending too. Less hunting while carving, able to hold a line better and actually holding tighter lines. The Wrecker is soo good, to be able to throw it into turns with even more abandon is amazing.
    Been riding a lot so the changes, while subtle, are certainly noticeable and add up to a better ride.
    Now the bad news, the Ohlins coil has less lower stack with the integrated crown and race and is not compatible with the Works angleset, had to go back to the Pike for the set-up - another variable. The offset on the Works is in the lower cup and the crown race has significantly more stack than a CC race. Thinking I may be able to switch to the CC angleset that has more of the offset at the top cup, only 1* but I get my Coil back.
    So, ongoing refinements.
    But... Mainly riding!
    Big Wheels and Fat Skis keep me young.

  2. #602
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCanary View Post
    Have the 1.5* Works angleset installed to slacken the front. Hard to change up just one variable at a time but I'm pretty keyed into the Wrecker and this has been a great change. I've gone back and forth between Low and X-Low quite a bit for different missions and this seems to give the best of both worlds. Goes up and pedals better than the Low setting and handles and descends better than the X-Low setting.
    Really like the steeper seat tube, noticeable change, had to bring the front of the saddle up to compensate. Also shortened the reach so went up 10mm on the stem. The DELTA has really good pedaling kinematics, limited by seat position, now it really feels like a trail bike, grab a gear and leap out of the saddle. Took it up some loose, tight switchbacks that I've struggled on in X-Low with no problem. Steeper seat tube seemed to more than offset the slacker fork and the front was less floppy climbing - longer stem probably helped too, hard to change just one variable.
    Definitely settled the front end descending too. Less hunting while carving, able to hold a line better and actually holding tighter lines. The Wrecker is soo good, to be able to throw it into turns with even more abandon is amazing.
    Been riding a lot so the changes, while subtle, are certainly noticeable and add up to a better ride.
    Now the bad news, the Ohlins coil has less lower stack with the integrated crown and race and is not compatible with the Works angleset, had to go back to the Pike for the set-up - another variable. The offset on the Works is in the lower cup and the crown race has significantly more stack than a CC race. Thinking I may be able to switch to the CC angleset that has more of the offset at the top cup, only 1* but I get my Coil back.
    So, ongoing refinements.
    But... Mainly riding!
    I really like the sound of this and may end up trying a -1 myself.

    -1.5 puts you under 65 deg correct? Wow.

  3. #603
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCanary View Post
    Have the 1.5* Works angleset installed to slacken the front.....
    Pretty much sums up my position with the 1* angel set.

    So is the crown dragging on the lower bearing cup? Either way, total bummer as I was aiming for an rxf 36 over the push acs3 system.

    What Stem length were you swapping between? I have a new 50mm stem that I have been holding off on installing in place of my current 35mm....

  4. #604
    SISSIF
    Reputation: TheCanary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    403
    Quote Originally Posted by tdc_worm View Post
    Pretty much sums up my position with the 1* angel set.

    So is the crown dragging on the lower bearing cup? Either way, total bummer as I was aiming for an rxf 36 over the push acs3 system.

    What Stem length were you swapping between? I have a new 50mm stem that I have been holding off on installing in place of my current 35mm....
    Yep. The integrated steerer/race puts the crown up against the lower cup. The Works crown race is taller(more stack) than most, probably to deal with clearance issues. The Pike works(Ha!) fine with the included race.
    I'll be trying the 1* CC angleset that has the offset in the top cup with the stock FSA lower. I like the Works design better and it still may not work but LBS has the upper CC set laying around so worth a try.

    Went from 50mm stem to 60mm on a medium. Before seated to pedal I'd be stretched on a medium, standing reach I would be better on a large. Now, with the steeper seat tube, the large would work best.
    Once I get the Ohlins sorted out we'll see.
    Big Wheels and Fat Skis keep me young.

  5. #605
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCanary View Post
    I like the Works design better and it still may not work but LBS has the upper CC set laying around so worth a try.
    Bummer. How severe is the contact? Could you remove a tiny bit of aluminum on the bottom/front of the cup giving enough clearance to free up the crown?

  6. #606
    SISSIF
    Reputation: TheCanary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    403
    May be worth a try. Gonna check out the CC option first.

  7. #607
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,270
    Can you guys with the Works Components headsets confirm the model needed for the Wreckoning, please?

    Thanks!

  8. #608
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,270
    Nevermind. I found a thread I started last winter with the info: 44/62.

    1 deg ordered!

  9. #609
    SISSIF
    Reputation: TheCanary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    403
    Yep. Ordered according to head tube length. Actually ordered mine from Fanatik as they were out of stock at Works.

  10. #610
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5
    This might be a stupid question for TheCanary or tdc_worm, but how does slackening the head angle with the works headset make the seat angle steeper? Is this just from the drop in the front end that occurs?

  11. #611
    SISSIF
    Reputation: TheCanary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    403
    Essentially. The differences are small but noticeable. Flipping the chips works by dropping the BB and the front triangle rotates back slightly giving the other changes: longer wheel base, slacker front end and seat tube.
    By slacking the head tube with an angle set the front triangle rotates forward giving similar changes, in slightly different proportion, except... the seat tube gets slightly steeper.
    For me, starting with the seat all the way forward, flipping the chips was more of a compromise. For others the fit may work fine either way.
    Big Wheels and Fat Skis keep me young.

  12. #612
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    400
    This angelset set thing is very interesting and something I might want to try! Thanks for posting the info.

    With the -1 angleset what mode are you running it in-low or ex low? If run in ex low (which is what I perfer) does the angelset still steeped the seat tube to were it feel better than without the angelset?

  13. #613
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCanary View Post
    May be worth a try. Gonna check out the CC option first.
    Any progress on this? I was looking at the calculator on CC website, and it doesnt show a ZS44 option, only and EC44 option....

  14. #614
    SISSIF
    Reputation: TheCanary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    403
    Quote Originally Posted by tdc_worm View Post
    Any progress on this? I was looking at the calculator on CC website, and it doesnt show a ZS44 option, only and EC44 option....
    I think the EC44 would work, as long as you don't mind the added stack height, probably allows more room for the offset.
    Didn't get around to trying it myself, let someone ride the Wrecker with the Pike and they had to have it, couldn't pass up the easy sale since I knew it would take a large frame to get where I wanted.
    Hope they bring out some new colors this winter.
    Big Wheels and Fat Skis keep me young.

  15. #615
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCanary View Post
    I think the EC44 would work, as long as you don't mind the added stack height, probably allows more room for the offset.
    Didn't get around to trying it myself, let someone ride the Wrecker with the Pike and they had to have it, couldn't pass up the easy sale since I knew it would take a large frame to get where I wanted.
    Hope they bring out some new colors this winter.
    Hope you have a spare sled! Wrecker or not, there is still tons of bike season left!

  16. #616
    SISSIF
    Reputation: TheCanary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    403
    Yep. Mini-Wreckoned the trail bike with the Ohlins coil fork, the CC inline coil shock and stouter rubber. It'll do till the next round of big bike releases.
    Big Wheels and Fat Skis keep me young.

  17. #617
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    14


    Such a sweet ride. Feel like I've found "my bike" after two years of swapping around. Considering most parts were pulled from my older Nomad 3 I'll likely change a few things out, probably start off with a bar that doesn't have as much rise..

    Gunmetal The Wreckoning (stickers removed)
    Invisiframe wrapped
    LightBicycle carbon 29" rims(31.6mm inner width)
    Onyx hubs w/ black chrome powder coat (boost F/R)
    CushCore foam inserts
    Maxxis Minion DHF 2.5" WT up front
    Maxxis Minion DHR II 2.4" WT out back
    Rockguardz carbon downtube protector
    Easton Haven 32mm stem w/ 35mm clamp
    Easton Haven carbon bar (40mm rise, 750mm wide)
    ODI Rogue lock on grips
    Shimano Zee brakes front/rear
    Ashima 2 piece Flotor rotors (203mm front/180mm rear)
    Push Elevensix
    2018 Fox 36 with ACS-3 and Push shimstack
    Raceface SIXC cranks (170mm)
    Crankbros Mallet DH (Older style)
    Absoluteblack 30T oval boost chainring
    Ethirteen LG1 bash with tensioner removed
    Ethirteen TRS Race cassette (9-46t)
    KMC X11.93 black/silver chain
    Shimano XT GS rear derailleur and shifter
    Rockshox Reverb 150mm stealth(removed the guide connector at the base of the post to slam it an extra 3-4mm)
    Rockshox Reverb 1x remote lever
    Fabric Scoop Gel () radius profile (all black)

  18. #618
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,763
    w/ that suspension on a Wreck, among your other components, that's about as nice as bikes get. maybe as good as bikes will ever get. YOW

    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle_Sauce View Post


    Such a sweet ride. Feel like I've found "my bike" after two years of swapping around. Considering most parts were pulled from my older Nomad 3 I'll likely change a few things out, probably start off with a bar that doesn't have as much rise..

    Gunmetal The Wreckoning (stickers removed)
    Invisiframe wrapped
    LightBicycle carbon 29" rims(31.6mm inner width)
    Onyx hubs w/ black chrome powder coat (boost F/R)
    CushCore foam inserts
    Maxxis Minion DHF 2.5" WT up front
    Maxxis Minion DHR II 2.4" WT out back
    Rockguardz carbon downtube protector
    Easton Haven 32mm stem w/ 35mm clamp
    Easton Haven carbon bar (40mm rise, 750mm wide)
    ODI Rogue lock on grips
    Shimano Zee brakes front/rear
    Ashima 2 piece Flotor rotors (203mm front/180mm rear)
    Push Elevensix
    2018 Fox 36 with ACS-3 and Push shimstack
    Raceface SIXC cranks (170mm)
    Crankbros Mallet DH (Older style)
    Absoluteblack 30T oval boost chainring
    Ethirteen LG1 bash with tensioner removed
    Ethirteen TRS Race cassette (9-46t)
    KMC X11.93 black/silver chain
    Shimano XT GS rear derailleur and shifter
    Rockshox Reverb 150mm stealth(removed the guide connector at the base of the post to slam it an extra 3-4mm)
    Rockshox Reverb 1x remote lever
    Fabric Scoop Gel () radius profile (all black)
    breezy shade

  19. #619
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    21
    To wreckoning owners.
    I want to jump to 29er game and Wrekoning is on top of my list. I'm wondering whether a Wrek will be any good for the UK - short, twisty and narow trails. I'm on the Ibis Mojo HD3 (with -1į angleset) and I love it. There is a video from my trails (it's not me)
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6Jxj8HLthLo

  20. #620
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    967
    Quote Originally Posted by wcinek View Post
    To wreckoning owners.
    I want to jump to 29er game and Wrekoning is on top of my list. I'm wondering whether a Wrek will be any good for the UK - short, twisty and narow trails. I'm on the Ibis Mojo HD3 (with -1į angleset) and I love it. There is a video from my trails (it's not me)
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6Jxj8HLthLo
    Trails look super fun. From what I can see, I'm pretty sure I'd have a good time on them with my Wreck.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  21. #621
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    76
    Hi,

    I can answer this as I made the exact same move.

    Like you I loved the Ibis HD3, a dream bike and a great trail bike.

    Like you I couldn't ignore the pull of the 29er and wanted something in the 150-170mm category.
    The reviews on the Wreckoning were too hard to resist, my local shop also sells them so a win win!

    When I got the Evil I though I would keep the ibis to save losing loads of money. After riding the Wrecker the ibis never really came out of the garage again. The evil does everything and more the Ibis did.

    The only thing I would say is it's a bike that needs to be pushed hard to make it come alive, sadly I'm not that rider 90% of the time but when I have pushed it, it's amazing.

    The only thing you will regret is the money you will lose on the Ibis when you sell it.

    Also make sure you get the right size.

    Neil

  22. #622
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by wcinek View Post
    To wreckoning owners.
    I want to jump to 29er game and Wrekoning is on top of my list. I'm wondering whether a Wrek will be any good for the UK - short, twisty and narow trails. I'm on the Ibis Mojo HD3 (with -1į angleset) and I love it. There is a video from my trails (it's not me)
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6Jxj8HLthLo
    I live in the Uk down in Devon, when I was considering moving from my 27.5 stumpjumper to a Wreckoning I wondered the same thing,but you need not be concerned, its such a great bike that you can have fun on it anywhere,took me a while to get it dialled in,& even now after 4 months im still learning things,but its the best bike ive owned,very stable at speed,& inspires you to go faster.
    Get one....you wont regret it.

  23. #623
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sid Duffman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    161
    Hi Wreckoning rippers. It seems that a frequent comment about the Wreck is that it needs to be pushed hard to "come alive," and may be not so great at slower speeds. Can anyone explain that a little further? I understand that it may shine brightest in the hard charging situations, but is it really worse than other long travel 29ers at more modest speeds?

    I'm looking for a point-and-shoot plow of a bike, that is very stable and confidence inspiring when things get a rough. However, I'm not a particularly aggressive rider, and don't race, but I do like going fast as much as the next guy. I'm wondering if the Wreckoning will still be awesome with a more conservative approach, or will it just feel like a pig? (I already have a light/efficient/nimble trail bike which I love, so I'm not looking for a 1 bike quiver here, but a bike that encourages me lay off the brakes and just go.)

  24. #624
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Sid Duffman View Post
    Hi Wreckoning rippers. It seems that a frequent comment about the Wreck is that it needs to be pushed hard to "come alive," and may be not so great at slower speeds. Can anyone explain that a little further? I understand that it may shine brightest in the hard charging situations, but is it really worse than other long travel 29ers at more modest speeds?

    I'm looking for a point-and-shoot plow of a bike, that is very stable and confidence inspiring when things get a rough. However, I'm not a particularly aggressive rider, and don't race, but I do like going fast as much as the next guy. I'm wondering if the Wreckoning will still be awesome with a more conservative approach, or will it just feel like a pig? (I already have a light/efficient/nimble trail bike which I love, so I'm not looking for a 1 bike quiver here, but a bike that encourages me lay off the brakes and just go.)
    Check out my review of this bike on YouTube riding tame trails. Channel name "Trailjunkie" think it will answer most of your questions

  25. #625
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    967
    Quote Originally Posted by Sid Duffman View Post
    Hi Wreckoning rippers. It seems that a frequent comment about the Wreck is that it needs to be pushed hard to "come alive," and may be not so great at slower speeds. Can anyone explain that a little further? I understand that it may shine brightest in the hard charging situations, but is it really worse than other long travel 29ers at more modest speeds?

    I'm looking for a point-and-shoot plow of a bike, that is very stable and confidence inspiring when things get a rough. However, I'm not a particularly aggressive rider, and don't race, but I do like going fast as much as the next guy. I'm wondering if the Wreckoning will still be awesome with a more conservative approach, or will it just feel like a pig? (I already have a light/efficient/nimble trail bike which I love, so I'm not looking for a 1 bike quiver here, but a bike that encourages me lay off the brakes and just go.)
    I think the Wreck could be a good fit for you. I don't find it particularly challenging to ride at slower speeds, on tight trails, or on mellower trails that are not particularly high speed or technically challenging. It's not as fast or efficient as my 429Trail or as quick and playful as my Calling, but I have zero issue riding it on most of the same trails.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  26. #626
    dmo
    dmo is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    665
    Quote Originally Posted by Sid Duffman View Post
    Hi Wreckoning rippers. It seems that a frequent comment about the Wreck is that it needs to be pushed hard to "come alive," and may be not so great at slower speeds. Can anyone explain that a little further? I understand that it may shine brightest in the hard charging situations, but is it really worse than other long travel 29ers at more modest speeds?

    I'm looking for a point-and-shoot plow of a bike, that is very stable and confidence inspiring when things get a rough. However, I'm not a particularly aggressive rider, and don't race, but I do like going fast as much as the next guy. I'm wondering if the Wreckoning will still be awesome with a more conservative approach, or will it just feel like a pig? (I already have a light/efficient/nimble trail bike which I love, so I'm not looking for a 1 bike quiver here, but a bike that encourages me lay off the brakes and just go.)
    I feel the same way but also wonder why not a Following MB? Maybe a better fit for trail riding? I keep going back and forth, wreck or following mb?

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  27. #627
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Sid Duffman View Post
    Hi Wreckoning rippers. It seems that a frequent comment about the Wreck is that it needs to be pushed hard to "come alive," and may be not so great at slower speeds. Can anyone explain that a little further? I understand that it may shine brightest in the hard charging situations, but is it really worse than other long travel 29ers at more modest speeds?

    I'm looking for a point-and-shoot plow of a bike, that is very stable and confidence inspiring when things get a rough. However, I'm not a particularly aggressive rider, and don't race, but I do like going fast as much as the next guy. I'm wondering if the Wreckoning will still be awesome with a more conservative approach, or will it just feel like a pig? (I already have a light/efficient/nimble trail bike which I love, so I'm not looking for a 1 bike quiver here, but a bike that encourages me lay off the brakes and just go.)
    Sounds like you need a Wreckoning based on what you've said. I would say it's a pretty good trail bike, impressive climber for what it is and amazing when things get fast and rough. It does everything well, but shines on the DH. Just point and shoot.
    You already have a light trail bike so this would compliment that well.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  28. #628
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sid Duffman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    161
    Thanks for the replies, y'all. To clarify my question, I'm not going to be riding this (potential) Wreckoning on tame trails; I'll be riding technically challenging trails, but at less than full pinned speed. @trailjunky, I enjoyed hearing your review in your video. I took note when you talked about demoing it at Moab, and it gave you the confidence to hit those trails chunky really fast. That's exactly what I'm looking for in a bike.

    I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around the sentiment that the Wreck is awesome when going all out, but not great when not pinned. This thread is an example: Wreckoning - 11.6 - settings

    Is it that the first part of the travel is very stiff, but once you get beyond that it opens up and become more plush and active?

  29. #629
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    578
    I got on my Wreckoning yesterday on some super mellow trails (Grande Ridge Washington) after a few weeks being off the bike. Just reminded me how fun this bike is on everything from rowdy DH type stuff to buffed out XC. I think it may be the perfect AM bike for the PNW and definitely not limited to one type of terrain. Two full seasons on this bike and it keeps getting better. For reference my last bike was a Kona process 111 and this bike does everything better, including climbing.

  30. #630
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    25
    Yeah - I'm in the same boat of wondering about this. I've owned/loved my (v1) Following, but want more squish/capability without loosing the fun-factor.

    I think about how to either make the Following MB "bigger" [coil fork + 11.6 in rear... if it can fit?], vs. making the Wreck "smaller" [dual-position fork + stiffer/poppier shock settings].

    I don't think I could loose either way, honestly. But my gut hunch says for the rocky west that the Wreck could be a better quiver-of-one. Thx for the link on shock settings... I think it's a good start.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sid Duffman View Post
    Hi Wreckoning rippers. It seems that a frequent comment about the Wreck is that it needs to be pushed hard to "come alive," and may be not so great at slower speeds. Can anyone explain that a little further? I understand that it may shine brightest in the hard charging situations, but is it really worse than other long travel 29ers at more modest speeds?

    I'm looking for a point-and-shoot plow of a bike, that is very stable and confidence inspiring when things get a rough. However, I'm not a particularly aggressive rider, and don't race, but I do like going fast as much as the next guy. I'm wondering if the Wreckoning will still be awesome with a more conservative approach, or will it just feel like a pig? (I already have a light/efficient/nimble trail bike which I love, so I'm not looking for a 1 bike quiver here, but a bike that encourages me lay off the brakes and just go.)

  31. #631
    wretch
    Reputation: Truckee Trash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,831
    Quote Originally Posted by laserjockrock View Post
    Yeah - I'm in the same boat of wondering about this. I've owned/loved my (v1) Following, but want more squish/capability without loosing the fun-factor.

    I think about how to either make the Following MB "bigger" [coil fork + 11.6 in rear... if it can fit?], vs. making the Wreck "smaller" [dual-position fork + stiffer/poppier shock settings].

    I don't think I could loose either way, honestly. But my gut hunch says for the rocky west that the Wreck could be a better quiver-of-one. Thx for the link on shock settings... I think it's a good start.
    I want to do very bad things to the new Following MB ... 11.6 and the ACS Fox....yes please! Whenever I tell people about the Wrecker and how much I love it, the only follow up comment I have is if I could I would also own the Following...

  32. #632
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle_Sauce View Post
    Absoluteblack 30T oval boost chainring
    Do you have to use the boost version of the AB 30T oval ring? (For it to line up in the Evil upper chain guide?) Or could a standard AB 30T sram direct mount ring work?
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  33. #633
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    307
    The 6mm offset absolute black oval on my sram carbon cranks lined up perfectly.

  34. #634
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    967
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Do you have to use the boost version of the AB 30T oval ring? (For it to line up in the Evil upper chain guide?) Or could a standard AB 30T sram direct mount ring work?
    You can use a standard ring, but you'll have to correct spacing/chain line with spacers behind the drive side BB cup.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  35. #635
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    290
    Are any of you guys doing longer trail rides on your wreckonings? Say in the 20-30 mile range? Not something I'd do all the time with it but just wondering how it works for longer trail rides like that. Also curious what the average'ish weight is on these builds?

    edit: google helped me find a thread about the weight. sounds like 31-32 for most builds.

  36. #636
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5
    @dfinn I regularly do 25-30 mile rides, often once a week, I have a wreckoning with 11.6, and weighs about 35lbs, i think it works fine for this, probably easier on a lighter bike but no reason you couldn't do this on the wreckoning

  37. #637
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    967
    I do occasional rides in the 20 range on mine. Again, does just fine. I do have a Calling and a 429 Trail that get pulled out more often for those types of rides, but I have no problem doing them on the Wreck. Mine is running an 11/6 as well, large frame, just under 30 pounds.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  38. #638
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,462
    And this is exactly why I asked...

    Quote Originally Posted by PurpleMtnSlayer View Post
    The 6mm offset absolute black oval on my sram carbon cranks lined up perfectly.
    Quote Originally Posted by godfather View Post
    You can use a standard ring, but you'll have to correct spacing/chain line with spacers behind the drive side BB cup.

    Those two comments contradict each other. The standard SRAM AB chainring is 6mm offset, Boost is 3mm offset.

    PurpleMtnSlayer says the 6mm lines up perfectly
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  39. #639
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    307
    I was happily surprised the standard ring lined up. Again, I'm running sram cranks and obviously one 2.5 mm bb spacer on the drive side per gxp design.

  40. #640
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,462
    Quote Originally Posted by PurpleMtnSlayer View Post
    I was happily surprised the standard ring lined up. Again, I'm running sram cranks and obviously one 2.5 mm bb spacer on the drive side per gxp design.
    Oh. Well that answers it. SRAM GXP BB's use NO spacers for 73mm shells. (And two 2.5mm spacers for 68mm shells) You should actually remove that BB spacer from your GXP bottom bracket. (Which would then move your chain ring 2.5mm and require a 3mm offset/BOOST chain ring)

    68 mm bottom bracket shells require one 2.5 mm spacer on each side of the bottom bracket shell.

    73 mm bottom bracket shells do not require spacers.
    https://www.sram.com/sites/default/f...e_manual_0.pdf

    Shimano (not SRAM) BB's use 1 drive side spacer for 73mm shells.

    Evil Bikes: The Wreckoning - User Review-capture.jpg
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  41. #641
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    307
    I'll be damned. I can admit when I'm wrong. Sorry if you bought the wrong ring. But hey this set up, even if incorrect, performs great.

  42. #642
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by Sid Duffman View Post
    Hi Wreckoning rippers. It seems that a frequent comment about the Wreck is that it needs to be pushed hard to "come alive," and may be not so great at slower speeds. Can anyone explain that a little further? I understand that it may shine brightest in the hard charging situations, but is it really worse than other long travel 29ers at more modest speeds?
    I only have 2 shakedown rides on my Wreck, but I noticed two things right away: 1) the bike doesn't bob like I would expect a single-pivot suspension to bob, and 2) the rear suspension isn't what I would call "super plush", despite having so much travel.

    This is a guess, but I think the factor that would explain both things is the leverage ratio curve built into the DELTA suspension. It might take rowdier riding to get the shock into a more lively part of the curve.

  43. #643
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    227
    Quick question on dropper posts for those with size large bikes. If you slam a 170 reverb as far as it will go into the frame how much post is exposed? I'd heard you can't quite slam it to the collar due to the connector interfering with the frame.

    If there are other posts which work slammed like the pnw bachelor 170 I'd be interested in those options too.

  44. #644
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    967
    Quote Originally Posted by Skedasticity View Post
    Quick question on dropper posts for those with size large bikes. If you slam a 170 reverb as far as it will go into the frame how much post is exposed? I'd heard you can't quite slam it to the collar due to the connector interfering with the frame.

    If there are other posts which work slammed like the pnw bachelor 170 I'd be interested in those options too.
    I'm running a 150 Reverb, and it hits before completely bottomed. That's with all the factory bits in place. I bet you'll have close to 20mm exposed with a 170.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  45. #645
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    2
    This is as far as I can get my 170mm reverb in without the hose being kinked & then the dropper wont work.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Evil Bikes: The Wreckoning - User Review-dsc_0001.jpg  


  46. #646
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    307

    Evil Bikes: The Wreckoning - User Review

    Guys, everyone with a reverb should consider the wolf tooth lever and cable adapter. I needed a half inch more insertion than the stock set up allowed, the wolf tooth let me drop it an extra two for the bike park. The lever form and function also makes using the post much more intuitive and enjoyable. I was sick of spending money on bike stuff and just going to live with the extra exposed post, until my stock hydraulic hose got a cut during a race and my post was stuck down. In hindsight the $90 for the kit is well worth it.

  47. #647
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    227
    Well looks like no way a 170 reverb would work for me if that's a large bike. Guess I will probably have to go with a 150 or another post. Any idea how long the connector on is beyond the post?

  48. #648
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6

    Reverb 170 in L Wreck

    Old style hose barb ( no connectamajig) cut down a bit on my L Wreck with a 170mm post. Center bb to seat rail is 28 inches exactly. Post is 3/4 inch from full insertion.

  49. #649
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    307
    Quote Originally Posted by ludorhb View Post
    Old style hose barb ( no connectamajig) cut down a bit on my L Wreck with a 170mm post. Center bb to seat rail is 28 inches exactly. Post is 3/4 inch from full insertion.
    Omitting the connectamajig saves ~25mm the Wolf Tooth another ~15mm. I think someone could slam a 170 on a large. But I'd pull the shock and make sure the rear tire clears the seat before I'd ride like that.

  50. #650
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    3
    Hey guys, thinking of getting a used Wreckoning frame,on the photos looks like the rear triangle has some rub damage from the chainring and on the inside from the tyre. Looks like cosmetic damage no real damage on the carbon but was wondering anybody knows how much will a new rear triangle only cost from Evil? Its a good deal on the frame so i wanna make sure if it fails its worth it replacing the rear. Thanks

  51. #651
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BPSarge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    398
    I removed the hose guide inside the seat tube and have no problem getting my 170 in my large. Also no issues routing the hose after the guide was removed.

  52. #652
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    307
    Quote Originally Posted by BPSarge View Post
    I removed the hose guide inside the seat tube and have no problem getting my 170 in my large. Also no issues routing the hose after the guide was removed.
    How?

  53. #653
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BPSarge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    398
    Used a long punch that fit inside the tube and worked it out of the hole. It's held in with some week epoxy that came out easy.

  54. #654
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    307
    Interesting. Thanks

  55. #655
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    226
    Anyone with a medium wreck able to measure an actual seat tube angle for me? I know with these bikes frame size is important because of the slack actual seat tube angle. I have a 33" cycling inseam and just measured my bike and its roughly 27.5 to the seat rails or 29.5 to the top of the saddle. Could anyone help a brother out?

  56. #656
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,318
    Quote Originally Posted by sb1616ne View Post
    I know with these bikes frame size is important because of the slack actual seat tube angle.
    The STA will be the same on every size Wreck given the same distance from pedal to to of saddle. So in that sense frame size doesn't matter. So same person on a Med or a Large will have the same actual measured STA. The only difference will be how much seatpost is above the top of the seat tube.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  57. #657
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rondre3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    The STA will be the same on every size Wreck given the same distance from pedal to to of saddle. So in that sense frame size doesn't matter. So same person on a Med or a Large will have the same actual measured STA. The only difference will be how much seatpost is above the top of the seat tube.
    Exactly, so OP what you really need to be worried about is how much closer to the rear wheel you'd be on a Medium vs a Large.

    Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

  58. #658
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,318
    Quote Originally Posted by rondre3000 View Post
    Exactly, so OP what you really need to be worried about is how much closer to the rear wheel you'd be on a Medium vs a Large.
    That won't change either for the same leg length.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  59. #659
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rondre3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    That won't change either for the same leg length.
    Really?! Man, I'm all sorts of confused then. Thx for the correction.

    So really the only consideration here is how much seat tube is exposed?

    Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

  60. #660
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,318
    Quote Originally Posted by rondre3000 View Post
    Really?! Man, I'm all sorts of confused then. Thx for the correction.

    So really the only consideration here is how much seat tube is exposed?
    Yes and that will determine how long a dropper you can use.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  61. #661
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    6
    I just posted this in a wreckoning sizing thread but am
    Looking for some immediate feedback so gonna post it here as well.

    Im 6í5í with a 32 inch inseam. I have a hard time fitting on most bikes. I have recently purchased an evil following MB XL. Love the playful nature and pedaling platform but Iím running a 140 fork and that has shortened the reach on this bike. I have realized I can overwhelm this bike pretty quickly and the combination of the shorter wheelbase, reach, and shorter travel from what I am used to. I want to sell my following MB frame at replace it with a wreckoning with a 150 fork to be my everyday TRAIL assasin. The numbers look good with a 150 fork. Has anyone run a 150 fork on the wrecker?

  62. #662
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by tbjorkman View Post
    I just posted this in a wreckoning sizing thread but am
    Looking for some immediate feedback so gonna post it here as well.

    Im 6í5í with a 32 inch inseam. I have a hard time fitting on most bikes. I have recently purchased an evil following MB XL. Love the playful nature and pedaling platform but Iím running a 140 fork and that has shortened the reach on this bike. I have realized I can overwhelm this bike pretty quickly and the combination of the shorter wheelbase, reach, and shorter travel from what I am used to. I want to sell my following MB frame at replace it with a wreckoning with a 150 fork to be my everyday TRAIL assasin. The numbers look good with a 150 fork. Has anyone run a 150 fork on the wrecker?
    I can't remember mention of a 150 on a Wreckoning. I think the only issue would be BB height as it's already on the lower end for it's travel. If you can deal with that it should work great.

    PM'd you about the XL Following MB you may sell...interested.

  63. #663
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by tbjorkman View Post
    I want to sell my following MB frame at replace it with a wreckoning with a 150 fork to be my everyday TRAIL assasin. The numbers look good with a 150 fork. Has anyone run a 150 fork on the wrecker?
    Thanks for bringing this up... I'm super-curious of creating such a 'crossover' bike, too.

    Here on the CO Front Range, there are a couple shops that have apparently put a Dual-Position Air front fork for 160/140mm operation (for the steep climbs), and I've heard it's a good fit. Also, I recall a post from another fellow in the SouthEast who did the same, and uses the DPA in the 140mm range for "trail" riding... stating that it's more nimble, etc.

    I think it's a good idea with merits for the right conditions. I'd seriously consider a DPA if I didn't want a coil fork (thinking the Push ACS3...), so I may consider a lower front end as well. Just wouldn't want to be under-gunned when going out to Moab...

  64. #664
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    6
    Response I have received from this is that it would lower the B.B. too much but even in the extra low position the B.B. would still be around 334-335. Thatís not ridiculously low
    in my opinion. Yes itís low for some ridiculously trails with large square hits but the intent of going to 150 is to ride this fast as **** on trails that arenít necessarily gnarly Moab. IMO 335 BB rides can do just fine in pretty technical terrain.

  65. #665
    SISSIF
    Reputation: TheCanary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    403
    Quote Originally Posted by laserjockrock View Post
    Thanks for bringing this up... I'm super-curious of creating such a 'crossover' bike, too.

    Here on the CO Front Range, there are a couple shops that have apparently put a Dual-Position Air front fork for 160/140mm operation (for the steep climbs), and I've heard it's a good fit. Also, I recall a post from another fellow in the SouthEast who did the same, and uses the DPA in the 140mm range for "trail" riding... stating that it's more nimble, etc.

    I think it's a good idea with merits for the right conditions. I'd seriously consider a DPA if I didn't want a coil fork (thinking the Push ACS3...), so I may consider a lower front end as well. Just wouldn't want to be under-gunned when going out to Moab...
    Started the Wrecker off with a DPA Pike. Definitely helped pedaling up steep, tight trails.
    It was ok all around but there are much better performing forks - Coil! So got used to climbing with a slack bike. Hopey steering damper has been mentioned to help pedaling but I never got around to trying it.
    This summer found maybe the best solution - Works angleset. Slacking the front out helps on the downs but it actually steepens the seat tube angle and noticeably improved pedaling.
    I'd say FOX Coil conversion with an angleset would be hard to beat.
    Big Wheels and Fat Skis keep me young.

  66. #666
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    354
    Just took my Wreck up to Laurel Lakes in the Eastern Sierras. It's a brutal climb with plenty of HAB. I can't believe how well the bike climbs steep, techy, loose slopes. There were so many times I thought, "there is NO way I'm clearing that", but I just hung on and kept my head down, and I'll be damned but it kept the momentum, kept hooking up over the rocks and scree like nothing I've experienced before. Every time I braced for the rear wheel to spin out it wouldn't do anything worse than "chirp" and dug right back in. I have to rethink my expectations about what's possible, and that's intoxicating stuff.

    I've done that climb on a RIP9, a Mojo SL, and a Mojo HD. This is the first time I realized I could theoretically clear the whole thing if I only had the cardio and gearing to keep up my momentum without blowing up.

    Of course, the trip down was fantastic. The Wreck ate all that rocky stuff like it was nothing. Hell, it felt like it wanted to play much harder.

    A couple side notes:
    - The lack of plushness I felt initially was from too much LSC on my X2. Even with zero clicks of LSC, the bike doesn't bob much under pedaling. I could probably stand to add a few clicks, but no rush.

    - I did manage to fit a 175mm KS Lev Integra on my Medium Wreck. This is very much a YMMV kind of thing. I was using a 150 before at minimum insertion and kept wishing I could get a little lower without losing travel off the top. A lot of careful measuring told me that it could work in my case, and it's been great. The only downside is that the seat clamp on the Lev is just *barely* able to get my saddle level considering the super laid-back angle of the seat tube.

  67. #667
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rynee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    204
    hi @kestrel242, thanks for sharing your experience, that sounds very intriguing. can i ask two questions - are you running a round or oval ring up front? and which rear tire, on what rim, and at which pressure?
    great that the 175 lev fits - i guess it feels like a big big bmx now hehe
    cheers, rynee

  68. #668
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,462
    Quote Originally Posted by kestrel242 View Post
    The only downside is that the seat clamp on the Lev is just *barely* able to get my saddle level considering the super laid-back angle of the seat tube.
    This is becoming more common place and is definitely worth mentioning. The shape of your saddle can definitely dictate this as well. More specifically, saddles that sit higher on the rear and slope down to meet the rails at the nose will work better on frames with such a dramatic bend in the seat tube.

    For example, at WTB Silverado Thinline has a very "level" profile when compared to other saddles. I found my seatpost clamp was almost out of adjustment when I put on the WTB saddle.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  69. #669
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    This is becoming more common place and is definitely worth mentioning. The shape of your saddle can definitely dictate this as well. More specifically, saddles that sit higher on the rear and slope down to meet the rails at the nose will work better on frames with such a dramatic bend in the seat tube.

    For example, at WTB Silverado Thinline has a very "level" profile when compared to other saddles. I found my seatpost clamp was almost out of adjustment when I put on the WTB saddle.
    I believe it. I have a Selle Italia SL XC Flow, which barely works jammed all the way nose down. I'd be more comfortable if I knew I had the adjustment range to pitch it too far down. I have a Selle SMP Hell that does have the high profile rear and sloped down nose, which may work better that way. The main issue for me is that the wide part of the Hell saddle sits substantially further back than the flow, and I tend to ride with my saddles as far forward as possible since I spend so much time climbing.

  70. #670
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by Rynee View Post
    hi @kestrel242, thanks for sharing your experience, that sounds very intriguing. can i ask two questions - are you running a round or oval ring up front? and which rear tire, on what rim, and at which pressure?
    The ring is an Absoluteblack 28T oval. Next time I try that climb I may switch to a 26T round ring.

    The rear tire is a Nobby Nic 2.35 Pacestar at 25psi on a Yuan'An 40mm (35 interal) AM/Enduro rim.

    great that the 175 lev fits - i guess it feels like a big big bmx now hehe
    cheers, rynee
    I wouldn't say "it fits" in a general sense. It's possible that it may fit for some people, you'd just have to do your homework to see if there's enough room in the seat tube to accomodate it. It is fun getting the saddle so far out of the way like a trials bike, no doubt.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567

Similar Threads

  1. Evil Bikes: The Following Ė User Review
    By ducrider in forum Evil Bikes
    Replies: 3094
    Last Post: 2 Days Ago, 06:01 AM
  2. User Review: Nitefighter BT40S ( CAt Review )
    By Cat-man-do in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 1164
    Last Post: 6 Days Ago, 11:58 AM
  3. Evil Wreckoning Build Pictures
    By tangrip9 in forum Evil Bikes
    Replies: 601
    Last Post: 3 Weeks Ago, 01:25 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-2014, 12:11 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-02-2014, 01:35 PM

Members who have read this thread: 594

Posting Permissions

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