Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 401 to 500 of 566

Thread: Foes Mutz

  1. #401
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by Skarecrow View Post
    Soon I think. I have never used one and am trying to decide if it is worth the investment. I am planning to hit a couple bike parks this summer so I need to decide. First need to finish my wheels. Hoping to build this weekend.
    A dropper is worth every penny, I have 5 reverbs between my bikes and my wife's bikes. Reliability is so so, I have had a few rebuilt, but they really expand your riding... unless you are just cranking along rail/trails.... which a mutz should never be made to do... it wants to jump and drop...

  2. #402
    mtbr member
    Reputation: banditpowdercoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    366
    Just got a giant contact for my stumpy and in the 3 rides I did, I freakin love it!!!


    Sent from my iPhone while my Heli plays with the gophers

  3. #403
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    59
    Looking to upgrade suspension. Will most likely go with a Fox 34plus in front since it will fit all wheel sizes I'm interested in trying but I was looking for some feedback on rear shocks. I have used CC DBair in the past and loved it but I'm wondering if it's better to try upgrading to the evol can on my current Fox shock. I don't feel the shock is that bad right now but I feel the bike is more capable than the current suspension allows. I'm 185lbs and ride pretty much everything, drops included so not interested in the CC inline.

  4. #404
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    59
    Ok. Good to know, I'm upgrading a bunch of other parts to save weight and will wait to decide on what to do with wheels. There are so many choices

  5. #405
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by tvan View Post
    Looking to upgrade suspension. Will most likely go with a Fox 34plus in front since it will fit all wheel sizes I'm interested in trying but I was looking for some feedback on rear shocks. I have used CC DBair in the past and loved it but I'm wondering if it's better to try upgrading to the evol can on my current Fox shock. I don't feel the shock is that bad right now but I feel the bike is more capable than the current suspension allows. I'm 185lbs and ride pretty much everything, drops included so not interested in the CC inline.
    What's wrong with the cc inline for drops?

  6. #406
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Skarecrow View Post
    What's wrong with the cc inline for drops?
    Nothing, it's just not the newest thing.

    Mine works great.

  7. #407
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Get an Angleset, you can reduce by 1/2 to 1 degree.

    .
    Are Anyone using angle set on the Mutz? Is it a big difference to on the 150mm Wren?

  8. #408
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    59
    To me it is the newest thing, I've had 2 DB airs and loved them so I see no reason to switch it up now. Aside from weight and price, what would be the advantage of the inline?
    Overall I'd prefer to spend a lot less and upgrade my Fox if it will make a noticeable improvement.

  9. #409
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,625
    What size is the shock on the Mutz?

  10. #410
    alias chicken
    Reputation: matt45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    What size is the shock on the Mutz?
    216 x 63mm

  11. #411
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    I used one on my tandem, not using one on the Mutz though I expect I'll add one to reduce front end wandering at slow speeds.

    Slack is not a bad thing, esp with a long CS.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Are Anyone using angle set on the Mutz? Is it a big difference to on the 150mm Wren?

  12. #412
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,121
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Are Anyone using angle set on the Mutz? Is it a big difference to on the 150mm Wren?
    I have a works components - 1 angleset in mine. I'm currently only using a 120mm bluto, but I don't feel like it's anywhere near too slack

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

  13. #413
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,625
    So is the general consensus that a Fox Float Evol is the best rear shock for the Mutz?

  14. #414
    alias chicken
    Reputation: matt45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    So is the general consensus that a Fox Float Evol is the best rear shock for the Mutz?
    I'll be testing a Rock Shox Monarch plus Debon Air!

  15. #415
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    So is the general consensus that a Fox Float Evol is the best rear shock for the Mutz?
    I don't know if it's a consensus, I saw a couple guys say they liked them.

    I've never tried one, bought my frame with a CC DB CS XV
    for a couple hundred extra. It has been doing well from the beginning and I have no complaints it shocks like a shock should. I was once a motorcycle suspension guy so I like the extra fiddly bits.

  16. #416
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by Nefariousd View Post
    I don't know if it's a consensus, I saw a couple guys say they liked them.

    I've never tried one, bought my frame with a CC DB CS XV
    for a couple hundred extra. It has been doing well from the beginning and I have no complaints it shocks like a shock should. I was once a motorcycle suspension guy so I like the extra fiddly bits.
    I liked my CC DB CS XV until i broke down in the coldest days, and I thought I had the best shock for my Mutz. I got the Fox EVOL 2016 from my LB and I did not believe that it could be so much better. I filled it with air, and adjusted the rebound, and has been never wanted to use the CC DB CS XV or other shocks. The CC DB CS XV came back from service and I put it back, but I could not like it. The Fox is so good and make the bike sitting so much higher in the stroke then the CC DB CS XV. It is extremely good in the adjustment, much better then the previous CDT that fox had. The locking position is a mechanical locking mode, and is actually locking the shock, the trail mode is really good and is the ideal postion in climbing, really plush in the mid stroke. The open mode is just open, but has 3 platforms that actually works really good. You can be using the shock in platform 3, doing all kinds of riding, climbing and downhill.

    The CC DB CS XV is just too complicated for my use. I want the adjustment utility when sitting on the bike riding. Not interested in stopping and using tools to adjust the shock, like CC DB CS XV.

    If I was doing bike park riding with really heavy drops, the CC DB CS XV
    is probably the best choice. I might love the CC DB Coil CS XV, but I will probably not be interested to try it.

    The Fox seems also cold weather proof, and the CC is not.

  17. #417
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    s

    The CC DB CS XV is just too complicated for my use. I want the adjustment utility when sitting on the bike riding. Not interested in stopping and using tools to adjust the shock, like CC DB CS XV.
    Whatever, there is still not a consensus.

    The Cane Creek, wasn't for you, you couldn't get a handle on it, whatever. Just because you happen to like the Fox doesn't mean it's the best shock, it's all very subjective.

    When I said I was a motorcycle suspension guy I meant more specifically that I'm an engineering degree possessing person that owned a business that paid all my bills by understanding and manipulating fluid flow to get the desired results for myself and my clients. In Fact I was an authorized Fox service center and I really like those guys.

    Personally I like the Cane creek double barrel (not the inline) this does not mean I'm saying saying the Cane Creek is the best. All I'm saying is that I like the ability to control the circuits independently.

    Probably it might be a bad choice for some people like you that admittedly don't want to take the time to dial it in. But you can't dispute it's flexibility and precision.

    98% of the people that road race motorcycles can't use or appreciate the awesomeness that a $30K Ohlins fork and shock package brings to the party, so to each there own.

    I was specifically addressing the fact that there really isn't a consensus not saying the CC was superior in all cases.

  18. #418
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,625
    I ended up ordering a Fox Evol. I'm just a Fox guy. I'm trying to build a super light Mutz for summer riding and think the Fox will suit me better.

    I have a brand new CCDB air CS with hardware for sale for cheap.
    Last edited by kntr; 04-12-2016 at 10:51 PM.

  19. #419
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    I ended up ordering a Fox Evol. I'm just a Fox guy. I'm trying to build a super light Mutz for summer riding and think the Fox will suit me better.

    I have a brand new CCDB air CS with hardware for sale for cheap.
    If it's not the inline I'm interested pm me details

  20. #420
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Nefariousd View Post
    If it's not the inline I'm interested pm me details
    Sorry sold it.



    What size hardware do I order for the Fox?

  21. #421
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    I'm thinking about selling my Mutz as a rolling chassis, size large, color red:

    150mm x 150mm Wren fork, CC Inline shock, 26 x 4" Onyx/Scraper/JJ 4.0 wheelset, possibly a dropper and some RF Cinch cranks...

    Great bike, just thinking about going a different direction.

    Inquire within:

  22. #422
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    I'm thinking about selling my Mutz as a rolling chassis, size large, color red:

    150mm x 150mm Wren fork, CC Inline shock, 26 x 4" Onyx/Scraper/JJ 4.0 wheelset, possibly a dropper and some RF Cinch cranks...

    Great bike, just thinking about going a different direction.

    Inquire within:
    What kind of bike are you looking at now? What size is the Mutz and what kind of price are you looking at?

  23. #423
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    What kind of bike are you looking at now? What size is the Mutz and what kind of price are you looking at?
    Not sure what comes next.

    PM for pricing. I prefer to sell the frame/fork/shock, keeping the wheels or selling them seperately. Parts is parts, I hate losing money selling parts as I can use them again.

    Frame is size Large, color Red, no damage other than typical scuffs. The Wren 150 x 150 Fork is new, no issues, under warranty. I'm sure Wren will continue to be very supportive of their products, so no worries.

  24. #424
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    33
    I've just ordered a Wren for my Mutz (now distributed in the UK by Cranknuts) and am wondering about travel/head angles. For the people out there with Wren experience, are you running the full 150 travel (I was thinking 140) and am I going to want/need an angleset?

  25. #425
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    I am running the wren at 150, which does make the HTA slack, I will measure it tonight, as well as measure my wife's mutz with a Bluto to give you its HTA as a comparison.

  26. #426
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by brownmruk View Post
    I've just ordered a Wren for my Mutz (now distributed in the UK by Cranknuts) and am wondering about travel/head angles. For the people out there with Wren experience, are you running the full 150 travel (I was thinking 140) and am I going to want/need an angleset?
    You can run 150, 130, or 120. There is a clip being developed that will allow for 140, but it has not been released.

    150 is tall, but only when compared to 120. After riding mine hard for a week in the high desert, it's not a problem
    .. as long as you like slack bikes.

  27. #427
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    33
    Thanks for that NB - hadn't realised 140 wasn't an option yet. Going by the old rule of thumb, It should be about 2 degrees slacker than with the Bluto, which sounds a lot. Then again, it doesn't feel slack at all with the Bluto. Guess I'll just try it and see.

  28. #428
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    69
    I put a 140 Boost Pike on with my 3" summer wheels today and it feels proper and well balanced between 25 and 30% sag

  29. #429
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,625
    Just got my Fox Float Evol on. How are people setting the Fox up? It seems like I need to run a lot less air pressure than the Inline. Help.

  30. #430
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by brownmruk View Post
    Thanks for that NB - hadn't realized 140 wasn't an option yet. Going by the old rule of thumb, It should be about 2 degrees slacker than with the Bluto, which sounds a lot. Then again, it doesn't feel slack at all with the Bluto. Guess I'll just try it and see.
    Minus 1.5 degrees going from 120mm to 150mm. It is pretty durn slack, great for DH, a little doggy in tight stuff, some front end push going into flat turns, a little front end wandering when climbing. Honestly, I liked the handling better with 120mm (67 deg HTA), but I wanted more travel and a burlier fork.

    So, I have a new lower headset cup on order, an internal vs the external CC I'm using now, this will lower my front end 10mm, increasing the HTA by 0.5deg. Then, once the 10mm reduction base clip is available I'll reduce the Wren to 140mm travel/A-C, which will net another 0.5 deg increase, which will leave me sitting pretty at ~66.5 deg

    If only the back end had a sliding drop, I would so love to have the option of pulling my rear wheel in tighter for 27+ and pushing it out for 29+.

    I never heard back from Foes about getting a longer rear triangle, I think they're covered up with the Alpine builds.

  31. #431
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 11053's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,175
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    Just got my Fox Float Evol on. How are people setting the Fox up? It seems like I need to run a lot less air pressure than the Inline. Help.
    Initial set up is quick and easy.
    Follow the FOX instructions.
    http://www.ridefox.com/2016/dl/bike/...white-revA.pdf

    Depending on how precisely you measure sag, you can expect a range of air pressures that will appear to give almost the same amount of sag, but will feel very different on the trail.
    Easily +/- 10psi to tune in the feel you like once you're close to the sag you want.

    Get in the ballpark to start and then adjust after some trail time.

    There will be noticeable difference between the 3 compression settings.
    There will be noticeable difference between the fine tuning settings in open mode.

    28% sag by my measurements and medium compression work well for all my riding.
    I rarely put the firm compression setting on.
    Full open sees use depending on terrain and speed.

    I found the FOX rebound recommendations to be a good place to start for whatever PSI you end up running.

    My Mutz is in 5" rear travel mode.

  32. #432
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Let's talk cranks!

    I'm running RF Turbine Cinch, direct mount 1x. I have two spacers and ~15mm on the brake side clearance and one spacer and ~10mm clearance on the drive side.

    I'd like to tighten things up a bit, so I'm curious what cranks folks are using and if anyone has found a crank/BB that fits tight to frame; ie arm to chainstay.

    I would love to fit 165mm cranks and narrow the spacing by 10mm.

  33. #433
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,625
    Quote Originally Posted by 11053 View Post
    Initial set up is quick and easy.
    Follow the FOX instructions.
    http://www.ridefox.com/2016/dl/bike/...white-revA.pdf

    Depending on how precisely you measure sag, you can expect a range of air pressures that will appear to give almost the same amount of sag, but will feel very different on the trail.
    Easily +/- 10psi to tune in the feel you like once you're close to the sag you want.

    Get in the ballpark to start and then adjust after some trail time.

    There will be noticeable difference between the 3 compression settings.
    There will be noticeable difference between the fine tuning settings in open mode.

    28% sag by my measurements and medium compression work well for all my riding.
    I rarely put the firm compression setting on.
    Full open sees use depending on terrain and speed.

    I found the FOX rebound recommendations to be a good place to start for whatever PSI you end up running.

    My Mutz is in 5" rear travel mode.
    I weigh about 180 and 180 psi is way too much pressure. I have to run about 160 psi to get 30% sag. Does that sound about right?

  34. #434
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 11053's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,175
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    I weigh about 180 and 180 psi is way too much pressure. I have to run about 160 psi to get 30% sag. Does that sound about right?
    Shock pumps vary in accuracy.
    Body position can influence perceived sag.
    Lots of variables.
    Just go off of sag initially and then adjust to preference on the trail.
    But yes, psi below body weight for me as well.

  35. #435
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Let's talk cranks!

    I'm running RF Turbine Cinch, direct mount 1x. I have two spacers and ~15mm on the brake side clearance and one spacer and ~10mm clearance on the drive side.

    I'd like to tighten things up a bit, so I'm curious what cranks folks are using and if anyone has found a crank/BB that fits tight to frame; ie arm to chainstay.

    I would love to fit 165mm cranks and narrow the spacing by 10mm.
    I'm running SRAM GX 1000 1x11. I have 7mm clearance on the brake side and 10mm on the drive side. That is measuring to the chainstay itself- the gap is 2mm narrower on both sides where the weld is. I am pretty sure there is a spacer each side but will check next time I take it off.
    It's a cheap and cheerful crank but I have no complaints about the performance. It does have an odd design issue though - when fitted correctly there is a 2-3mm gap (exposed spindle) between the ds bearing cover and the inner face of the spider. Although odd, this Googles as normal. The problem is the ds bearing cover is also a bushing between the spindle and the bearing and it can work its way out in to the gap, causing play. Easily solved with a couple of O-rings but why SRAM don't point this out or supply some sort of flexible spacer is a mystery to me.

  36. #436
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    I just spoke with Race Face, they told me that the Next SL crank would decrease my Q Factor by 10mm over the RF Turbine Cinch, which is nearly a 1/2", but it's $300 or more clams... it's a good thing I "need" a crankset for my hardtail fatty build

    Now for some narrower pedlas

    Also, I just spoke with Russ at Wren, he says the new 10mm fork spacer and new TA are nearly done. No details on the TA, but he said it was stronger. The new 10mm spacer will serve as a "base" spacer, whcih means it can be used at teh top to reduce travel or at the bottom to reduce travel and A-C. It will work in the 110mm and 150mm travel forks.

    Narrower and lower, but still plenty of travel, I might not be looking at giving up the Mutz so soon.

  37. #437
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Crank update: I mounted up some Next SL cranks, RF bb, 177 spindle, chain guard and one spacer drive side, two spacers non drive side, clearance at the welds is ~4mm. I had just enough space remaining to tighten the adjusting nut ~1 turn.

    Can't get much better than that!

  38. #438
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Crank update: I mounted up some Next SL cranks, RF bb, 177 spindle, chain guard and one spacer drive side, two spacers non drive side, clearance at the welds is ~4mm. I had just enough space remaining to tighten the adjusting nut ~1 turn.

    Can't get much better than that!
    Pics?

  39. #439
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    33
    Neat! I hope you have dainty feet.

  40. #440
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by brownmruk View Post
    Neat! I hope you have dainty feet.
    Nope, size 13's, never have a problem, decreasing the Q will be just the thing to narrow thigs up, next step is getting narrower width platforms pedals that are still deep enough to support.

    I finally found a stiff soled shoe (Specialied 2FO) so I no longer get sore feet on long rides.

    Sorry, no pics, clearance is about half of what I had with the Turbine Cinch, so ~5mm per side at the welds.

    I also reduced my suspension travel to 130mm front/130 rear (5"), so even though I have the 29+ up front and 10mm more suspension that stock (Bluto 120mm), the angleset has me durn near 67 deg at the HT. Honestly, I liked it at 66 degree

    As I make these tweaks, I try to keep track of where I've been in terms of settings and feel. So far my favorite "feel" has been at 150mm/140mm travel, 66-66.5 HTA, angleset +1 deg, 29+/27+. What I didn't like about this setup was the stack.

    At my current set up, I think I could use another 10mm of fork travel (waiting in the 10mm reduction base clip from Wren), maybe go back to 140mm of shock travel (130mm feels pretty good), and I'd consider ditching the angleset to reduce stack.

    Oh, and I won't be going back to a 27+ up front, I guess I just didn't relaize how much I missed my big front wheel

    Did anyone say Mixer? Yeah, I'm leaning that way...

  41. #441
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    563
    Would an Olaf work on a mutz?

    I appreciate its 100mm so that's a slight adjustment but would the fit be right?

  42. #442
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    I put a SID on the front of a Kona Stinky... it didn't work....

    Sorry, that was just too easy to be an A$$. that much of a mismatch in travel and purpose will not result in an enjoyable bike to ride.

    Quote Originally Posted by blidner View Post
    Would an Olaf work on a mutz?

    I appreciate its 100mm so that's a slight adjustment but would the fit be right?

  43. #443
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    563
    I suspected that was the answer but thought I'd toss it out to this Mutz think tank!

    Appreciate the quick response

    I can refocus my obsession now

  44. #444
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by blidner View Post
    Would an Olaf work on a mutz?

    I appreciate its 100mm so that's a slight adjustment but would the fit be right?
    Anything would work, but you'd be dragging the BB.

    The Mutz is a 5-5.5" travel bike, so a 130-140 fork is the best fit. I ran a 150mm Wren for a while, it worked fine, but I felt a bit choppered out. When I added a 29+ frot wheel I also added an angleset which returned the HTA to normal, but the STA was too slack and the stack was excessive.

    I just dropped the fork to 130mm, reduced the travel to 5" in back, and removed the angleset, so far that feels pretty good. I am still running a 29+ up front, liking that mixed feel.

  45. #445
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    33
    Nurse Ben - Did you notice if the chainline moved when you fitted the Next SLs? I see you are running 29+ now. Do you think that crank would be OK with a 4.5" tyre in the back.

  46. #446
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    The chainline moved in 5mm or so, not sure about tire clearance, but the chain is now inside the chainstay by half it's thickness, so 2-3mm inside of the weld. For sure it'd clear a 4" tire.

    27.5 x 3 in back, 29 x 3 in front.

  47. #447
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    563
    So after a year on a bluto i may have finally broken it (it's probably an easy fix). Maybe the universe it telling me to buy a new fork. I'm currently enjoying a b plus setup. As much as I don't want to relace the wheel it's likely my fate. What do folks recommend??

  48. #448
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by blidner View Post
    So after a year on a bluto i may have finally broken it (it's probably an easy fix). Maybe the universe it telling me to buy a new fork. I'm currently enjoying a b plus setup. As much as I don't want to relace the wheel it's likely my fate. What do folks recommend??
    I love my Wren. I have used it in an enduro race, at the bike park, and long XC rides. The fork is the best available fat fork.

  49. #449
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    33
    I think you did well to get a year out of it. My 120mm Bluto lasted 5 months before I traded it for a new one through the warranty because of a loose stanchion and more worryingly, a loose steerer. Strangely, I have a 100mm Bluto on another bike that is still sort of working after 2 years. I have a 150mm Wren wrapped up waiting for my Birthday in a few days time and I can't wait to try it. I don't really see much alternative to the Wren at the moment if you want to keep your options open on wheel wheel/tyre size. Obviously there is the Fox but that is a bit more restrictive on tyre size.

  50. #450
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by brownmruk View Post
    I think you did well to get a year out of it. My 120mm Bluto lasted 5 months before I traded it for a new one through the warranty because of a loose stanchion and more worryingly, a loose steerer. Strangely, I have a 100mm Bluto on another bike that is still sort of working after 2 years. I have a 150mm Wren wrapped up waiting for my Birthday in a few days time and I can't wait to try it. I don't really see much alternative to the Wren at the moment if you want to keep your options open on wheel wheel/tyre size. Obviously there is the Fox but that is a bit more restrictive on tyre size.
    Congrats on the Wren.... don't forget to act surprised when you open it....

  51. #451
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    563
    A local shop loaned me a demo stumpy Fattie

    Looking forward to trying out 150mm of travel on the fox fit4. At 140mm that could be the ticket for Mutz

  52. #452
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    I pounded the snot out of my Wren for a week in the southwest, no issues. Then this past weekend I did a big day at Tiger Mountain: Off the Grid, Full Rigid, Silent Swamp, etc... The last time I rode big at Tiger, it was with the Bluto, what a huge improvement.

    I think the Wren is a pretty sweet riding fork, all things considered. I wouldn't drop a dime on a Bluto.

    Still rocking the CC inline, no issues, works great.

  53. #453
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    I would love to have 29plus up front on the Mutz. But I consider it is no tire that is good enough. Waiting for a 3" schwalbe with trailstar compound. I mean no other tires can match that compound. On wet ruts and rocks, 27+ with Schwalbe trail compound will beat all 29+ with currently available tires.

  54. #454
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    Maxxis will have some by the end of the summer. I am planning to upgrade my FXR to a plus bike, with a maxxis DHF 3.0 up front and a HR II 2.8 in the rear.

    Just wait and more tires will roll out soon enough.

  55. #455
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by JCHKeys View Post
    Maxxis will have some by the end of the summer. I am planning to upgrade my FXR to a plus bike, with a maxxis DHF 3.0 up front and a HR II 2.8 in the rear.

    Just wait and more tires will roll out soon enough.
    Maxxis is the second best alternative. There is not so good rubber compound, but the knobs are more aggressive.

  56. #456
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    I would love to have 29plus up front on the Mutz. But I consider it is no tire that is good enough. Waiting for a 3" schwalbe with trailstar compound. I mean no other tires can match that compound. On wet ruts and rocks, 27+ with Schwalbe trail compound will beat all 29+ with currently available tires.
    The Dirt Wizard is awesome! I ride it up front with the Wren at 130mm travel, out back I have a WTB Trail Boss 3.0 with a CCI at 5", great combo, no burping issues, excellent traction, front carves like it's on a rail, back hooks up well, but is easy to break free on tight stuff.

    I rode mine the last two weekends on steep gnarly West Cascade trails and up in BC's Fraser Valley. It'd be tough to beat the carvability of the Dirt Wizard for a front tire.

  57. #457
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    34
    I am using the trail Boss up front and Bomboloni on the rear and really like it so far. Very easy to seat tubeless with floor pump as well.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  58. #458
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    I put a CCDB Coil on last night, just to try it out. It came with the explicit warning from a friend that I will like it so much more, I wont want to put the CCDB Air CS back on... and he was dead on. With a 450lb spring, the bike felt so much better, specially on the jumps and hard hits. If you are riding your Mutz at bike parks, or where it is stupid rough, then really consider picking one of these up...

    CC has hinted that they are developing a hollow spring to significantly reduce the weight, just like Fox did. If they do pull it off, a CCDB Coil CS will be on my mutz permanently....

  59. #459
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by JCHKeys View Post
    I put a CCDB Coil on last night, just to try it out. It came with the explicit warning from a friend that I will like it so much more, I wont want to put the CCDB Air CS back on... and he was dead on. With a 450lb spring, the bike felt so much better, specially on the jumps and hard hits. If you are riding your Mutz at bike parks, or where it is stupid rough, then really consider picking one of these up...

    CC has hinted that they are developing a hollow spring to significantly reduce the weight, just like Fox did. If they do pull it off, a CCDB Coil CS will be on my mutz permanently....
    Yeah, it has crossed my mind, cuz I do ride some rough stuff.

    How much did it set you back? How did you determine spring size?

    What is needed is a CF spring.

    Why not get the Fox?

  60. #460
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    I got a used one off of Pinkbike for... Well I got a deal from a guy selling a 8.5 and a 9.5, I got bothe with two springs each for $400. One is now on my FXR.

    I used the fit finder and spring finder links on Cane Creeks website to help me know what to do.

    I didn't go with fox because their lever system just came out and it not as proven as the CC one. Also, I try to support USA small firms.

    I will give a ride report when the trails come above the water again. It rained in Maryland 18 days straight.

  61. #461
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    The Dirt Wizard is awesome! I ride it up front with the Wren at 130mm travel, out back I have a WTB Trail Boss 3.0 with a CCI at 5", great combo, no burping issues, excellent traction, front carves like it's on a rail, back hooks up well, but is easy to break free on tight stuff.

    I rode mine the last two weekends on steep gnarly West Cascade trails and up in BC's Fraser Valley. It'd be tough to beat the carvability of the Dirt Wizard for a front tire.
    I believe you when looking at the Surly Dirt Wizard it has aggressive knobs. Almost like a Scwhalbe tire. But to my concern the Surly rubber compound is not the best though. Today it has been raining here in my tracks and suddenly all ruts and rocks that where negotiable before needs to be tackled. Just so happy to run sticky rubber when the rain comes.

  62. #462
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Yeah, it has crossed my mind, cuz I do ride some rough stuff.

    How much did it set you back? How did you determine spring size?

    What is needed is a CF spring.

    Why not get the Fox?
    Curious about using a coil on the Mutz. Talked to Cane Creek the other day, about that and they asked about the suspension how it should work with a coil, they talked about if the suspension design might be suited for an air spring rather then a coil, and that it could be progressive suspension in the start and that it could be ramping up in the end of the travel? Do anyone know if this is the case with the suspension design for the Mutz, and if it is designed for an air spring?

  63. #463
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    100
    Could those of you running the CC DBA XV post the tubes you've had success with? I just installed mine tonight and I'm wondering if I need some volume spacers.



    Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

  64. #464
    pit
    pit is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by syntheticreality View Post
    Could those of you running the CC DBA XV post the tubes you've had success with? I just installed mine tonight and I'm wondering if I need some volume spacers.





    Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
    Hi,

    Is that a 36 you have in the front ? 27,5 or 29 version ? Is there enough room for the tire ?

    Thanks


    Steve

  65. #465
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by JCHKeys View Post
    I put a CCDB Coil on last night, just to try it out. It came with the explicit warning from a friend that I will like it so much more, I wont want to put the CCDB Air CS back on... and he was dead on. With a 450lb spring, the bike felt so much better, specially on the jumps and hard hits. If you are riding your Mutz at bike parks, or where it is stupid rough, then really consider picking one of these up...

    CC has hinted that they are developing a hollow spring to significantly reduce the weight, just like Fox did. If they do pull it off, a CCDB Coil CS will be on my mutz permanently....
    How does the coil feel on roots and rocks, and is it good when climbing?

  66. #466
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by pit View Post
    Hi,

    Is that a 36 you have in the front ? 27,5 or 29 version ? Is there enough room for the tire ?

    Thanks


    Steve
    Actually, it's a 34 take-off from a Speccy 6fattie whatever. It's 27.5 650b boost. Those are 4.0 tires on 65mm rims and the fit is not spacious but comfortable. The ride quality is GREAT!

  67. #467
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    How does the coil feel on roots and rocks, and is it good when climbing?
    Only riding the trail on my property, with minimal roots and rocks, it felt much better. It glues the wheel to the ground even better, I am still tuning it. As anyone with a CCDB knows, tuning takes a while... I think I am going to give it another turn of preload to reduce sag a bit, and play more. This weekend will be the first real trail tests.

    If you have a 150mm Wren, this is such a superior shock if you are going to get ROWDY. It does weigh more, I am now pushing over 38lbs. If an alloy or hollow spring comes out, the CS version of the shock is what I will be getting. The fox lever shock is attractive though....

  68. #468
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    I did a new try on the CCDB XV w/CS. Tried to go up to 180psi to get the shock to sit higher on travel. The shock got to firm and I did turn off all compression both LC and HC. Just to see how it reacted. The shock absorbs small bumps, but still to firm on higher speed downhill. Also using to little travel. I have not been doing crazy stuff so I guess I should not use all travel. Tried to low down to 170psi, then the shock sits to low in travel. The shock have been serviced so it should be technically good.

  69. #469
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    100
    It sounds like you need less pressure and some volume spacers

    Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

  70. #470
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by syntheticreality View Post
    It sounds like you need less pressure and some volume spacers

    Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
    Okay I thought I needed to remove volume spacers......how difficult is it to do that yourself????

  71. #471
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Okay I thought I needed to remove volume spacers......how difficult is it to do that yourself????
    Maybe I do have it backwards, but I assumed it came with no spacers installed. Also, most "modern" frames aren't modern enough yet because they don't have the proper leverage ratios to work with all the new high volume shocks. Most high volume shocks come "tuned" on bikes with volume spacers added. This means they are just reversing the "extra volume" because the suspension isn't really designed for it. I could be wrong, but that's just what I've gleaned from chatting with one of the most reputable suspension tuners in the industry on the phone. I won't name names just in case I am incorrectly paraphrasing.

    That particular gentleman told me usually you are having to add too much pressure to get the sag you want and it makes the shock rock hard, so in the end you have to add spacers.

    I think there are instructions online to do it and I think it's supposed to be easy enough for the average home garage mechanic.

    Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

  72. #472
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Maybe it should get more progressive from the start of the stroke also. Not only in the end of the travel. Therefore the it could be a solution to put in spacers, and then reduce the pressure and still obtain the travel?

  73. #473
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    I did a new try on the CCDB XV w/CS. Tried to go up to 180psi to get the shock to sit higher on travel. The shock got to firm and I did turn off all compression both LC and HC. Just to see how it reacted. The shock absorbs small bumps, but still to firm on higher speed downhill. Also using to little travel. I have not been doing crazy stuff so I guess I should not use all travel. Tried to low down to 170psi, then the shock sits to low in travel. The shock have been serviced so it should be technically good.
    That's a lot of air, how much do you weigh?

    I'm 200# and run 140psi

  74. #474
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    I am 240-250# depending on outfit. Normally I would think 160 psi was okay, but the shock is then sitting to low. The thing is that I find the climbing abilities with CS on with high pressure like 180psi, to be good. But the down hill a abilities are not so good. Might be something compromise with pressure between 170-180psi?

  75. #475
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    I am 240-250# depending on outfit. Normally I would think 160 psi was okay, but the shock is then sitting to low. The thing is that I find the climbing abilities with CS on with high pressure like 180psi, to be good. But the down hill a abilities are not so good. Might be something compromise with pressure between 170-180psi?
    Might need to play with settings. This morning I was fiddling with low speed seetings, trying to reduce bounce, increasing LSR was helpful, but increasing LSC made the backend more skittery abd dud nothing for low speed comfort.

  76. #476
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Actually I tried to play a bit with the rebound yesterday. It changed the ride dramatically. I have obvious used to little rebound, since the bike calmed down and I gained so much more control. Would have appreciated a lot to find the correct pressure/sag that still keep the shock sitting high when climbing. Now I am running minimum HSC and LSC so it could help to lower pressure and increase compression?

  77. #477
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Actually I tried to play a bit with the rebound yesterday. It changed the ride dramatically. I have obvious used to little rebound, since the bike calmed down and I gained so much more control. Would have appreciated a lot to find the correct pressure/sag that still keep the shock sitting high when climbing. Now I am running minimum HSC and LSC so it could help to lower pressure and increase compression?
    I like the CCI, but I find it challenging to get it set correctly. The starting point was okay, but getting the sag correct took some time, too much pressure and it rode like brick, but when I dropped the pressure I was blowing through the travel. I dound that using more rebound and compression could make up for running lower pressures.

    Are you running 5" or 5.5" travel?

  78. #478
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    I am using the 5.5" travel. I have no problem With blowing through travel, since I am not doing a lot of dropping. It might also be a reason for not using all travel.....I am using all travel on the Wren though running it at 65psi now....

  79. #479
    pit
    pit is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by syntheticreality View Post
    Actually, it's a 34 take-off from a Speccy 6fattie whatever. It's 27.5 650b boost. Those are 4.0 tires on 65mm rims and the fit is not spacious but comfortable. The ride quality is GREAT!
    Thanks Syntheticreality,

    I think that a fox in the front would do the job well but I like to have enough room for the tire, so i'll go for a Wren i think.....

  80. #480
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Just put back the fox evol for a ride yesterday. I am afraid it is a much more easy shock to set correctly than CC. Plug and play. Set the sag and rebound. That's it. If the CC had been like the Fox, for the first step, and then be fine tuned with the LS and HS rebound and compression, it should be the winner. But when it is a struggle just to find the correct sag, than you feel you need to be a pro to find the settings.

  81. #481
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 11053's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,175
    Love this bike
    Foes Mutz-img_1326.jpg
    Foes Mutz-img_1327.jpg

  82. #482
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Just put back the fox evol for a ride yesterday. I am afraid it is a much more easy shock to set correctly than CC. Plug and play. Set the sag and rebound. That's it. If the CC had been like the Fox, for the first step, and then be fine tuned with the LS and HS rebound and compression, it should be the winner. But when it is a struggle just to find the correct sag, than you feel you need to be a pro to find the settings.
    I love the Fox Evol compared to the CCDB air and Inline. I like the lockout feature. I want one on my other bike too. Super plush and so easy to set up. It just feels so good.

  83. #483
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Anyone have dimensions for the shock used on the Mutz...I'm contemplating something

  84. #484
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    33

    Just a moan about parts not lasting as long as I'd like.

    While trying to work out if the odd noises I was hearing were coming from my Wren, I noticed the frame bearings on my Mutz had developed play. That's after 1400km of riding over 6 months. So having changed them all, the 6 bearings in the shock linkage were all pretty sloppy, as was the lower shock bushing. The main pivot on the drive side was pretty bad, but the non-ds felt fine. The bike feels a lot tighter now but pretty disappointed at having to change the bearings this early. We had quite a wet winter here in Scotland, but still.

    Also, last week my rear axle unwound itself and the wheel got wedged in the rear triangle. Luckily I wasn't going too quickly. Turned out one of the freehub bearings had destroyed itself and I think caused the axle to bind. The inner race of one bearing (the one nearest the wheel) was in 3 pieces. This was on a 6 month old Hope Fatsno pro2 evo hub. Thinking I could borrow a freehub of my other fatbike, when I pulled it off, the same bearing on that freehub also had a broken race - it just hadn't caused any problems yet. That hub is about a year old. Fat specific problem for the Hope freehubs?

  85. #485
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    563
    I had a thread hear about my similar experience with hopes on Mutz

    I think the gen 1 bearings were not large enough for the torque exerted by extended range cog

    Hope did right by me and send me s new driver with larger bearings

  86. #486
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    This is the reason for changing from Hope wheel set to Onyx Racing. The hope where not taking the use of my 250lbs. The free hub bearings, especially the one closest to the hub where blowing continuously. I got some sort of proto type free wheel hub that was made with a bit more aluminum. But the greatest improvement was with s more rigid axle I bought a steel bolt, that where improving s lot. The main bearings in tube hub is not great. They did not stand out more than 10 rides before it started dragging.

  87. #487
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Hope hubs are nice eye candy, but they are not durable, so don't be too surprised when they blow up.

    I ride Onyx, three pairs, expensive, but they last like no other.

    I've had no bearing issues with my Metz, one year, lots of hard riding, but I ride dry stuff except when it's snowing.

    Do you wash your bike with a hose? Might be better off brushing it off once the mud dries, store the bike where it can dry out daily.

    Quote Originally Posted by brownmruk View Post
    While trying to work out if the odd noises I was hearing were coming from my Wren, I noticed the frame bearings on my Mutz had developed play. That's after 1400km of riding over 6 months. So having changed them all, the 6 bearings in the shock linkage were all pretty sloppy, as was the lower shock bushing. The main pivot on the drive side was pretty bad, but the non-ds felt fine. The bike feels a lot tighter now but pretty disappointed at having to change the bearings this early. We had quite a wet winter here in Scotland, but still.

    Also, last week my rear axle unwound itself and the wheel got wedged in the rear triangle. Luckily I wasn't going too quickly. Turned out one of the freehub bearings had destroyed itself and I think caused the axle to bind. The inner race of one bearing (the one nearest the wheel) was in 3 pieces. This was on a 6 month old Hope Fatsno pro2 evo hub. Thinking I could borrow a freehub of my other fatbike, when I pulled it off, the same bearing on that freehub also had a broken race - it just hadn't caused any problems yet. That hub is about a year old. Fat specific problem for the Hope freehubs?

  88. #488
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Did also change today all bearings exept main pivot bearings, that I did change two months ago. The linkage bearings where not good. I have used the bike for one year now and have been riding through all kinds of weather and I have been using my bike almost every day for one year. I use water as little as possible, but I think it was a reasonable to get one year.
    Just confused about the main pivot bearings? Why is it not just 4 bearings there, since it could be made Space for it. It sits to Spacers almost the size of a bearing on each side? Why not put 2 bearings on each side instead? Would be much more durable?



    Quote Originally Posted by brownmruk View Post
    While trying to work out if the odd noises I was hearing were coming from my Wren, I noticed the frame bearings on my Mutz had developed play. That's after 1400km of riding over 6 months. So having changed them all, the 6 bearings in the shock linkage were all pretty sloppy, as was the lower shock bushing. The main pivot on the drive side was pretty bad, but the non-ds felt fine. The bike feels a lot tighter now but pretty disappointed at having to change the bearings this early. We had quite a wet winter here in Scotland, but still.

    Also, last week my rear axle unwound itself and the wheel got wedged in the rear triangle. Luckily I wasn't going too quickly. Turned out one of the freehub bearings had destroyed itself and I think caused the axle to bind. The inner race of one bearing (the one nearest the wheel) was in 3 pieces. This was on a 6 month old Hope Fatsno pro2 evo hub. Thinking I could borrow a freehub of my other fatbike, when I pulled it off, the same bearing on that freehub also had a broken race - it just hadn't caused any problems yet. That hub is about a year old. Fat specific problem for the Hope freehubs?

  89. #489
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Did check play in the linkage before and after getting new bearings. Did not get much better. Compared to another Mutz that is less used and is half year newer than mine and find much less play. Could you do the test on your Mutz by holding the seat tube and push and pull against the suspension linkage. You will surprised or disappointed by how much. The upper linkage should be much stronger if it was made out of one block of aluminum. At least more side way support.

  90. #490
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    My Mutz frame and linkage is tight after a year of riding, no complaints.

  91. #491
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    My Mutz frame and linkage is tight after a year of riding, no complaints.
    That was really surprising. I made improvement to the upper link yesterday and what an upgrade.... Made two tubes in aluminum and tightened together with bolts. Much improved ride quality and of course the play was much less. The seat tube felt tight as a rock.

  92. #492
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    I would also prefer to have 2 bearings on each side in the main pivot. I cannot see why there is not???

  93. #493
    alias chicken
    Reputation: matt45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    182
    I have exchanged the CCDB against RS Monarch Debon Air.
    The CC is losing air...

    Now 60 mm Carbon Rims with Schwalbe JJ 4", 2 kg lighter! Now 15.2 kg
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Foes Mutz-foto-01.07.16-19-59-54.jpg  

    Foes Mutz-foto-01.07.16-20-01-26.jpg  


  94. #494
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    563
    Can't say enough about the Mutz yet with so many bikes, and not enough time to ride (damn work!) I'm to dining myself listing a few of my favorite bikes. But - if I can't sell for the right price (and I'm pretty stuborn) I'll go fat again (from b plus). Anyone here move away from fat and have a wheelset they are considering parting with?

    Or know someone who wants a pre loved b plus Mutz

    Thanks all

  95. #495
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    My Mutz frame and linkage is tight after a year of riding, no complaints.
    Try to hold the seat tube With both hands, and push With both thumbs against the rear triangle, thapart that follows the seat tube. You will find a lot of play. The seat tube is moving because of the biggest suspension link. It was a really tight feel when testing after I made the improvement of the two aluminum tubes and bolts holding the links together. I will post som Pictures to show What I have done.

    The link itself is a long one, and would have been much better if it was made of one Peace of cnc machined alumium, instead of 2 halfs Connected only through the bearings. If the surfaces of the Connection Points where big, it would have helped. But it is really small tubes and small surfaces connecting the two links through the bearing. Since Your body weight and pedal forces goes through the seat tube I am pretty sure it is a big improvement to take away the play. It is a cheap and easy improvement that Foes could implement.

  96. #496
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    563
    After much reflection regarding the future of my Mutz, and my unwillingness to accept anything but a really high offer (which is what you do when you don't want to sell!) I'm going to return the Mutz to fat from b plus. I have an opportunity to be a part of a nextie group buy and am wondering people's thoughts on 65 versus 80mm rims. While once a 4 season bike it's really now 3 season as I am enjoying a 29 plus for summer

    Thanks!

  97. #497
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by blidner View Post
    After much reflection regarding the future of my Mutz, and my unwillingness to accept anything but a really high offer (which is what you do when you don't want to sell!) I'm going to return the Mutz to fat from b plus. I have an opportunity to be a part of a nextie group buy and am wondering people's thoughts on 65 versus 80mm rims. While once a 4 season bike it's really now 3 season as I am enjoying a 29 plus for summer

    Thanks!
    80mm is the far best for getting best flotation in loose snow. If you want to have the versatility to use narrower tires like 3.8" and 4" tires you need to have narrower rims like 65mm. 80mm is actually not so bad for some of the 4" tires. I know that Schwalbe 4" is pretty wide and I wille believe that minion FBR and RBH is not so bad either on the 80mm rims. Other 4" tires I have tried is to narrow and it will be easy to hit the rim in rock beds. When it comes to loose snow it is no better than a wide rim. I have been able to fit Minion FBR 4.8 rear on 90mm rims on my Mutz, though it can rub a bit. If you use 80mm rim it should be fine. Narrow rim and wide tires is no good combination since it will get wallowing when low air pressure.

  98. #498
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,046
    Quote Originally Posted by blidner View Post
    After much reflection regarding the future of my Mutz, and my unwillingness to accept anything but a really high offer (which is what you do when you don't want to sell!) I'm going to return the Mutz to fat from b plus. I have an opportunity to be a part of a nextie group buy and am wondering people's thoughts on 65 versus 80mm rims. While once a 4 season bike it's really now 3 season as I am enjoying a 29 plus for summer

    Thanks!
    Four inch tires are really the max width on the Mutz, esp with 177 spacing, otherwise you risk breaking thr chain or rubbing the stays. A 65mm wide rim is plenty, also lighter, and you'll have less chance of rim damage. You could go wider, but it'll serve no signuficant advantage as 15mm is less than 10% of bead to bead.

  99. #499
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Four inch tires are really the max width on the Mutz, esp with 177 spacing, otherwise you risk breaking thr chain or rubbing the stays. A 65mm wide rim is plenty, also lighter, and you'll have less chance of rim damage. You could go wider, but it'll serve no signuficant advantage as 15mm is less than 10% of bead to bead.
    That is not the case, 4" is not the Maximum tires for Mutz. I have been riding With several others that uses 4.5 tires and wider
    with no issue. Take into account that if you are biking in bad condition With gravel and mud you need more clearance than in snow condition. If you want a Fat bike in snow conditions you need as Wide tire and rim as possible. If you are running in snow free conditions you should ame for a narrow rim and a narrow tire.

    Tires that has a good enough clearance for a Mutz With 90mm rim is Bulldozer, Dillinger 5, Schwalbe 4.4" (from Cube Fat bikes).
    In snow conditions With 90mm rim the widest I have been using is the Minion FBR.

  100. #500
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    563
    I ran dunder flow last year on whiskeys - no issues

    Probably should have just stuck with it - but drank the plus cool aid

    Thanks for the feedback

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Foes meets Foes 2014
    By matt45 in forum Foes
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-16-2014, 08:59 PM
  2. Let's see those new Foes!!!!
    By oakhills in forum Foes
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 07-30-2013, 12:44 PM
  3. Foes meets Foes 2013
    By matt45 in forum Foes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-30-2013, 12:42 PM
  4. Foes 275!!!
    By slowrider in forum 27.5
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-16-2012, 10:48 AM
  5. Foes FXR
    By fafaafooie in forum Foes
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 09-07-2011, 06:01 PM

Members who have read this thread: 240

Posting Permissions

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