Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 341
  1. #1
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935

    Gravity Quigley: Full suspension fat bike

    Alright, my bike should be arriving today, and as promised im starting a new thread so that we don't have to deal with the 8 pages of garbage that the original one turned into. the point of this thread is to be informative and unbiased in order to help others decide if this bike is something that they may be interested in.
    I will post pictures as soon as the bike gets here.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    120
    Hope UPS comes through for you. Looking forward to the report.
    It's all good!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    If you could please post the weight of the bike, and any parts that you happen to have off of it.

  4. #4
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    Its in!


    Came with x9 Rd and guide brakes. I'm more than happy.
    Putting it together now
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WSUPolar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    197
    Sweet
    MacGyver is my spirit animal

    -Until proven wrong, assume you are the weak link in any system-

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    19 minutes and still no ride video. Sheesh

  7. #7
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    Assembled.

    No shortage of grease either.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  8. #8
    Pedal through the Pain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    82
    Gravity Quigley: Full suspension fat bike-quigley.jpgI picked mine up this morning right when UPS opened their doors. I put it together completely stock, weight for the size Large is 38.9lbs. Upgrading shall commence.

    Edit: Wow, this picture is really crappy. I will try and post better pics as I upgrade.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    Thats a lot lighter than I thought it would be! Probably could get it to 35 relatively easily.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: watts888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    6,180
    Curious how this guy goes. I have one of the FSX bikes that use the same general design. The main bushing has developed a litle play and I really have to clamp the rear axle down tight otherwise I get a whole lot of flex in the rear triangle. I'm waiting for motob to put one out with a 4-link design or one with a larger rear triangle. I think the short rear triangle design lends itself to a litle bit of twist when riding.

  11. #11
    Pedal through the Pain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    82
    The Sram guide brakes were a pleasant surprise. The only things I weighed so far were the saddle/post= 734g, front wheel/tire=8lb 3oz, and pedals=423g. Parts swapping is happening now. Replacement saddle/post (Phenom/RaceFace) =519g, Shimano M520 pedals= 420g. Weight savings so far =218g. More to come!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    Its interesting that this bike is only 1.3 pounds heavier than a Bullseye Monster Pro hard tail.


    Does it look like it will take a bigger tire in the rear than a 4.0?

  13. #13
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    After riding it around a bit Its definitely got some flex and a bit of a Bob problem in the 22t ring. The high pivot is much less noticeable in the 36 because the chain tension is much more in line with the swingarm.
    Overall though it's a solid bike.
    It doesn't have a whole lot of suspension travel, but it certainly takes the edge off.

    Next to the normal fat


    I'm also less worried about this now that I've seen it in person
    Looks beefy enough to hold up.

    I already have a new hub waiting to be laced up, and a 26t ring on order. I will be looking for a nubby stem and some wider bars, but other than those I think it's going to be a great trailbike.
    Last edited by dirtdawg21892; 04-23-2015 at 04:46 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  14. #14
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by blown240 View Post
    Its interesting that this bike is only 1.3 pounds heavier than a Bullseye Monster Pro hard tail.


    Does it look like it will take a bigger tire in the rear than a 4.0?
    Yeah, I think it will. I will take a shot of the tire in the swingarm but it looked like it had some space.
    Last edited by dirtdawg21892; 04-23-2015 at 08:33 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    Thanks for the pics. How much travel do you think it has?

    Also, can you please measure the BB height and the distance from the BB to the axle?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    15
    Any chance you could post the size of the shock?

    I have a backup bike with a 6.5 x 1.5 upgraded Monarch (the 3 setting one) that looks about the same size.

    Thanks

  17. #17
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,604
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtdawg21892 View Post
    Yeah, I think it will. I will take a shot of the tire in the swingarm but it looked like it had some space.
    Looks like rear tire clearance will be determined by the travel of the rear wheel. Better check clearance with the shock fully compressed, too.

    I have a feeling this bike will eat rear hub bearings.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    I have a feeling this bike will eat rear hub bearings.
    Why is that? Honest question, not starting anything...

  19. #19
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,604
    Quote Originally Posted by watts888 View Post
    Curious how this guy goes. I have one of the FSX bikes that use the same general design. The main bushing has developed a litle play and I really have to clamp the rear axle down tight otherwise I get a whole lot of flex in the rear triangle. I'm waiting for motob to put one out with a 4-link design or one with a larger rear triangle. I think the short rear triangle design lends itself to a litle bit of twist when riding.
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtdawg21892 View Post
    After riding it around a bit Its definitely got some flex and a bit of a Bob problem in the 22t ring.
    Quote Originally Posted by blown240 View Post
    Why is that? Honest question, not starting anything...
    A similar design non-fat bike is stated to have a flexy rear end, specifically at the axle. One owner agrees that the bike has some flex. In some discussions I had with I9 staff earlier this year, hub flex on fatbikes is a real issue. I strongly feel like hub flex is why so many people report trashed bearings on the rear ends of their fatbikes. AND, thru-axles are documented to stiffen things up as compared to QR skewers.

    So, given that the bike is already stated to be flexy and given what I know and suspect already, I think this bike will eat rear hub bearings.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    Makes sense. Thanks

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MUSTCLIME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    385
    Loose the front derailer, get a 42 tooth rear cog and run a 26 or 30 in the front...like I said in the first thread on these, the pivot is way high. This thing was never going to be anything but a inch worm machine. A clutch rear derailer would not be a bad idea ether, the chain is going to be all over the place with the big wheel base changes.

    I would also think about pulling the pivot apart and check to see if it needs lube.
    The bike is never to heavy, you are just to WEAK!

  22. #22
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by tyrion View Post
    Any chance you could post the size of the shock?

    I have a backup bike with a 6.5 x 1.5 upgraded Monarch (the 3 setting one) that looks about the same size.

    Thanks
    Says 152x31
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  23. #23
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by blown240 View Post
    Thanks for the pics. How much travel do you think it has?

    Also, can you please measure the BB height and the distance from the BB to the axle?
    Not much unfortunately. I'm not really sure how to measure that, but I would ballpark it around 80. It's good for taking the edge off though, makes landing a much nicer experience.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  24. #24
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by MUSTCLIME View Post
    Loose the front derailer, get a 42 tooth rear cog and run a 26 or 30 in the front...like I said in the first thread on these, the pivot is way high. This thing was never going to be anything but a inch worm machine. A clutch rear derailer would not be a bad idea ether, the chain is going to be all over the place with the big wheel base changes.

    I would also think about pulling the pivot apart and check to see if it needs lube.
    I have a 26 on the way, and if it rides well enough I will stick with it. Otherwise I may suck it up and get a dinner plate for the rear and a bigger front. Honestly the 30t is tempting, but I'm not sure I like the chain angle from the 104 position. I think there will be too much sideload on the larger cogs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    44
    Right on Dirtdawg! I was happy to see you had already started a review/write up on your Gravity Quigley FS. I enjoyed your in depth and on going review of your Gravity Bullseye Monster. I hope that you are able to put as much time & effort into keeping us informed with your new Quigley and you're able to log as many trouble free miles as you did on your Monster!

    I ordered a Quigley Yesterday in Orange!

  26. #26
    Pedal through the Pain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by blown240 View Post
    Thanks for the pics. How much travel do you think it has?

    Also, can you please measure the BB height and the distance from the BB to the axle?

    Floor to center of BB = 330mm (13in)
    Axle to BB measured centered = 452mm (almost 18in)

  27. #27
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    25,793
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    A similar design non-fat bike is stated to have a flexy rear end, specifically at the axle. One owner agrees that the bike has some flex. In some discussions I had with I9 staff earlier this year, hub flex on fatbikes is a real issue. I strongly feel like hub flex is why so many people report trashed bearings on the rear ends of their fatbikes. AND, thru-axles are documented to stiffen things up as compared to QR skewers.

    So, given that the bike is already stated to be flexy and given what I know and suspect already, I think this bike will eat rear hub bearings.
    Typically, that design is a little flexier due to the elevated seat stays and suspension "mast" above the single pivot, it allows the rear triangle to act as a giant lever and the only thing in the way is the shock, which is poor at dealing with lateral loads. This sometimes means more frequent shock rebuilds and is the number one reason Foes used a non-rate changing scissor linkage for many years on their single pivot bikes, but now they vary the rate as well. A thru axle won't make a ton of difference here IME, but it is what it is, a simple bike design.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MUSTCLIME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    385
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtdawg21892 View Post
    I have a 26 on the way, and if it rides well enough I will stick with it. Otherwise I may suck it up and get a dinner plate for the rear and a bigger front. Honestly the 30t is tempting, but I'm not sure I like the chain angle from the 104 position. I think there will be too much sideload on the larger cogs.
    Just use the spacers on the bearing cups to to adjust your chain line, looks like you have plenty of room between the crank arms and the swing arm.
    The bike is never to heavy, you are just to WEAK!

  29. #29
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    So after 20 miles of tech I'm still not sure how I feel about it. If you can keep it in the big ring it pedals fine, but the 22t is completely useless. I need to install a bash, but I'm still not sure what I want to do for rings.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    That's a tough one.

    What about swapping in a different rear shock? One that has a lockout, or at least propedal.

  31. #31
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    So after one real ride (real meaning that I'm actually putting power down) all the paint has been worn off one side of the ring.

    The other is fine. This is a good indication of too much side load.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  32. #32
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    Oops.

    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    427
    Uh oh.. how many miles?

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    Wow! How did that happen?


    So here is the question... Return or replace?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    918
    Almost looks like that tune isn't strong enough to take the twist from the rear end.

  36. #36
    Loser
    Reputation: Jisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,532
    dang.

  37. #37
    Pedal through the Pain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    82
    Oh no, this really has me worried. Details, man, details! I haven't had a chance to hit the trails on mine yet and by the looks of that, I am not sure I even want to. Please tell us you took it off some kind of insane drop. Come Monday, I am going to get on it hard and see if I can replicate that same breakage to determine if it is definitely a frame issue. Good lord what have we done.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    44
    This isn't good on any bike, but this is really bad on a 2 day old bike!

    Hope it was a bad weld under that power coat and not a design flaw.
    But this could be the reason for the uneven chain ring wear. (If there's some good out of this)

  39. #39
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,078
    Yikes that didn't take long.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blowery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    241
    WOW! thats a bad deal there.

  41. #41
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    No insane drops. This was just aggressive trail riding. Personally I'm going for a refund, if it gave out on me that quick its just a matter of time until it did it again. Its a bummer, because I really liked it under certain conditions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  42. #42
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    I don't think that this will be the norm. I'm rough on my stuff, and have a tendency to find the weak point on frames.

    They should probably just hire me as a product tester.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    44
    I fully understand your decision, but hoped that wasn't the route you were going to go.
    Have you contacted BD already? Could they have just sent you a new swing arm? Heck maybe they should send a new swing arm with your refund and ask if you'd please continue to R&D it for a year!

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    120
    Um, I would be going for the refund, too.
    It's all good!

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    417
    Doesn't surprise me at all. I have replaced hundreds of dollars in failures on my Boris X9 and I only have like 150 miles on it. Now that some decent bikes are coming out in 27.5+ full sussy I'm going that route.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    120
    Cody01 what all have you replaced? My X7 only has about 15 miles in it and I am hoping I don't have the same issues.
    It's all good!

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    120
    oops. Wrong thread.
    It's all good!

  48. #48
    Hooligan
    Reputation: dirtdawg21892's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody01 View Post
    Doesn't surprise me at all. I have replaced hundreds of dollars in failures on my Boris X9 and I only have like 150 miles on it. Now that some decent bikes are coming out in 27.5+ full sussy I'm going that route.
    Yeah, what could possibly go wrong with an x9? It's all name brand stuff except for the frame (which is the same as a 4 season)
    maybe the hub?
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Hell of a jump, dawg. Even though they're baggy shorts, I'm surprised that you can fit your balls into them.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Shock_Hazzard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtdawg21892 View Post
    I don't think that this will be the norm. I'm rough on my stuff, and have a tendency to find the weak point on frames.
    Yes, yes you do. As long as I've known you, you've broken a frame a year.
    One is all I need.

    They call me 'Captain Coaster Brake'.
    Carfree and riding 16,000 miles/year.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by Shock_Hazzard View Post
    Yes, yes you do. As long as I've known you, you've broken a frame a year.
    Well this comment makes me feel a little better! Haha!
    Kinda nervous right about now, but will wait and see as I didn't get the free shipping option.

Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Gravity FSX 2.0 Full Suspension Mountain Bikes
    By Falkster109 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-12-2014, 06:09 AM
  2. Best Full suspension Bike for $2,000
    By BrokenCobra in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 86
    Last Post: 07-18-2013, 10:58 AM
  3. Replies: 57
    Last Post: 07-09-2013, 02:22 PM
  4. Which full suspension bike would be the best?
    By TorturedSoul in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-03-2012, 09:59 PM

Posting Permissions

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