Results 1 to 28 of 28
  1. #1
    Live Free & Ride
    Reputation: NH Mtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,145

    Rocky Suzi Q 27.5

    Looks like RM is late to the party following the Farleys lead....but with something differnt! The -90 RSL looks like one hell of a fast xc fatty with slightly taller Minions 3.8. Sure most fat bikes will already set up this way, but Rocky has a way of putting together a super sweet package off the floor! Carbon or alum models on the way....

    Rocky Mountain Launches Two 27.5? Fat Bike Models at Eurobike 2016 | Singletracks Mountain Bike News

    BTW, they also have a record for digging up older models and re-badging them into current bikes. Take a look at the original Suzi Q:

    ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUZI Q. | Retrobike
    14 GT Zaskar 9r
    15 Moto Night Train
    08 BMC Trailfox
    06 Cannondale Rush
    99 GT XCR
    93 Raleigh MT 200

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    584
    Fast playful fat bikes are just now gaining traction. This, plus the cs-197 out of China it's nice to see manufacturers listening to riders. Or maybe they all sold crap expecting people to upgrade to the more playful geometry.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,136
    You call it playful, us snow riders call it twitchy....
    '17 Cutthroat
    '16 Bucksaw Carbon
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    584
    We haven't gotten a lot of snow these past years. I don't think I'll be needing a second fat bike

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,104

    Rocky Suzi Q 27.5

    Im interested. All my trails get packed by walkers anyways. We dont get much pow, most is 6" once a season and my 4"x26" has handled it all.

    Says it can handle up to 4.2" tire whenever that will become available and i dont see why it wont, the 4.5" bontragers dont fit the bluto. Would like a 27.5" dillinger 4 myself.
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  6. #6
    Live Free & Ride
    Reputation: NH Mtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,145
    Quote Originally Posted by solarplex View Post
    Im interested. All my trails get packed by walkers anyways. We dont get much pow, most is 6" once a season and my 4"x26" has handled it all.

    Says it can handle up to 4.2" tire whenever that will become available and i dont see why it wont, the 4.5" bontragers dont fit the bluto. Would like a 27.5" dillinger 4 myself.
    Right on! We definitely need to see this segment of fat bikes open up more. The D4 in 275 would be awesome. I just mounted up the Hodag 3.8 on 50mm rims and it looks great at about 29in tall....still waiting to ride it on the front of my fat bike. I like how RM made this frame slacker and a bit shorter chainstays. And yes, more tire selection is needed plz!

    Suzi Q | Rocky Mountain Bicycles
    14 GT Zaskar 9r
    15 Moto Night Train
    08 BMC Trailfox
    06 Cannondale Rush
    99 GT XCR
    93 Raleigh MT 200

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dRjOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,344
    Quote Originally Posted by kidd View Post
    Fast playful fat bikes are just now gaining traction....
    i see what you did there ;-)~

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    325
    Anyone know what the BB shell width is? 100mm? 83mm? Any ideas on Q factor numbers? I was on their website and couldn't figure it out. Oh....also....Bluto compatible? Thanks.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    831
    I think it's a press fit equivalent of 83mm. Based on that I'd expect the q-factor to be around 180mm, nice and tight, only 10mm more than a standard MTB width.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    83mm is nice if you will never run anything wider than 3.8, but a 100mm bb lets you run a 4.8 as well as taller tires, it's nice to have choices.

    The specd Minions are closer to a 3.5, getting into the B+ realm here...

    Since when is 434mm chainstay considered short? The Beargrease has chainstays that short...

    Needs some tweaking me thinks, 420mm chainstays for a start.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bacon Fat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by beachbum1 View Post
    Anyone know what the BB shell width is? 100mm? 83mm? Any ideas on Q factor numbers? I was on their website and couldn't figure it out. Oh....also....Bluto compatible? Thanks.
    The Q should be 183 with race face next. 188 with race face aeffect.

    The narrow Q is very nice if a wide Q causes any hip or knee pain

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    83mm is nice if you will never run anything wider than 3.8, but a 100mm bb lets you run a 4.8 as well as taller tires, it's nice to have choices.

    The specd Minions are closer to a 3.5, getting into the B+ realm here...

    Since when is 434mm chainstay considered short? The Beargrease has chainstays that short...

    Needs some tweaking me thinks, 420mm chainstays for a start.
    Not everyone needs 4.8" tires. I dont, not sure i would love fatbiking if i needed them either. Low pressure slow floating, sweating your balls off riding is lame.

    The beargrease has 440mm... and your point is? Its a xc race fatbike not a wozo...
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    338
    I read that the Q is 190mm, which is a little disappointing for a 1x and a reduced BB width. The article says that it's 20mm narrower than common cranks, but there are plenty at 200mm Q-factor. Exceptional ones keep nearly that width and also fit 4.5ish tires. I also have the impression that with some creativity one could put narrower cranks on a Mukluk and some other frames. I wonder what the tightest fit could be on a Wednesday. Both of those frames have more generous clearance than the Suzi-Q.

    I had been wanting a Suzi-Q eagerly until reading that article. I could still see advantages to it if it scored well in the weight department, and perhaps if it handled very well. But I'm starting to lose interest with what I've read so far.

  14. #14
    LFJ
    LFJ is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    274
    I read this on the rocky mtn web site in the stories section:
    Full carbon and aluminum models available.
    192mm Q-factor is 20mm narrower than standard fat bikes to improve pedaling performance and comfort.
    27.5x3.8 tires for improved rollover and lower rotating weight.
    Fits up to 27.5x4.2 tires (when available, with safe clearance from 770mm x 104mm).
    Next generation fat bike geometry is longer, slacker, and more agile.
    Integrated chainstay protector and downtube protector.
    Di2 electronics-compatible with internal stealth battery port.
    Full carbon monocoque fork on the -90°, -70°, and -50° models.
    Lightweight bolt-on axles save 100g per bike compared to a Maxle.
    Suspension compatible. A 100mm Bluto at 20% sag maintains the ideal stock geometry.
    Two bottle cages on the fork, plus two in the front triangle.
    Front triangle Rivnuts for custom, bolt-on frame bags (not included).
    1x specific.
    Stealth dropper post compatible.
    Internal cable housing.
    PressFit BB107 bottom bracket, ZS44|56 headset, 177mm real axle spacing.
    Sizing: S/M/L/XL.



    Quote Originally Posted by BATRG3 View Post
    I read that the Q is 190mm, which is a little disappointing for a 1x and a reduced BB width. The article says that it's 20mm narrower than common cranks, but there are plenty at 200mm Q-factor. Exceptional ones keep nearly that width and also fit 4.5ish tires. I also have the impression that with some creativity one could put narrower cranks on a Mukluk and some other frames. I wonder what the tightest fit could be on a Wednesday. Both of those frames have more generous clearance than the Suzi-Q.

    I had been wanting a Suzi-Q eagerly until reading that article. I could still see advantages to it if it scored well in the weight department, and perhaps if it handled very well. But I'm starting to lose interest with what I've read so far.

  15. #15
    Live Free & Ride
    Reputation: NH Mtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,145
    This is easily under 23 lbs with tubeless Hodags, carbon cockpit and lighter cranks. I would be interested in running the front with a 4.5 and the rear at 3.8 for fatty conditions. Hodags on 50-60mm rims all other times is perfect imo. Would also like to see Rocky sell these as frame only in the future!
    14 GT Zaskar 9r
    15 Moto Night Train
    08 BMC Trailfox
    06 Cannondale Rush
    99 GT XCR
    93 Raleigh MT 200

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    It's not about whether you will use wider tires, but whether you CAN use wider tires.

    There was a time when 4" tires were the fattest you could get. The BFL was the new "wide tire" in it's day, but it was simply fatter and sloppier than it's little brother.

    The current crop of 4.5-4.8" tires have more structure and ride better than the best 4" tires from a few years ago. If you think a 4.8 Minion is all about slow floating and sweating your balls off, you just don't know what you're talking about.

    3-4" tires are fine for non snow applications or very firm groomed snow, snow covered roads, etc , but they just aren't enough for the wider range of snow conditions encountered in snow biking. The Suzi Q is really more of a "fat minus bike".

    If you want a sporty fat bike and you don't care about fat tires and float, then you most certainly don't want long chainstays; 435mm chainstays on a hardtail fatbike is not sporty.

    I ride a Wozo with a 420mm chainstay, it is a sporty fat bike. If you want more of an XC fat bike, my Beargrease frameset is for sale, interested?

    Oh wait, you have a Farley, it also has 440mm chainstays. Now I get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by solarplex View Post
    Not everyone needs 4.8" tires. I dont, not sure i would love fatbiking if i needed them either. Low pressure slow floating, sweating your balls off riding is lame.

    The beargrease has 440mm... and your point is? Its a xc race fatbike not a wozo...

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mnyquist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    384





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: crankpuller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    541
    Quote Originally Posted by mnyquist View Post





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    This is one fast looking ride - I enjoy my Sasquatch but am thinking I need to test ride a suzieq

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ADKMTNBIKER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    693
    Quote Originally Posted by crankpuller View Post
    This is one fast looking ride - I enjoy my Sasquatch but am thinking I need to test ride a suzieq
    That a really nice looking bike.

  20. #20
    Live Free & Ride
    Reputation: NH Mtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,145
    Nice crankpuller!^^^
    Those 3.8 Minions look big on that bike for a sub 4 in tire btw. Are they mounted to 60mm+ rims?
    14 GT Zaskar 9r
    15 Moto Night Train
    08 BMC Trailfox
    06 Cannondale Rush
    99 GT XCR
    93 Raleigh MT 200

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mnyquist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    384
    They are 65mm Nextie rims.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  22. #22
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    324
    hmm... the suziQ just hit my radar. doing more research now...

  23. #23
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    324
    could someone post a pic of the rear wheel/tire width clearance?

    think it would be possible to run dillinger 5? (which measure 4.3 inch width on 80mm rims). crossing fingers...

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dRjOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,344
    interesting - i hadnt clocked the race face bb axle compatible with next sl cranks on the suzi q until now. that means an equivalent to 83mm external right? which means no more need to shorten the splines on sixc axles to fit next sl to that spacing. thats cool.

    anyone know if it is availabel aftermarket? i know race face were not keen that their next sl's could be fitted to dh bikes - so there may still be some reticence to release it not oem.

  25. #25
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    324
    i may have found the answer to my question... taken from RM's site:

    Kris Abrahamson • a month ago
    ....You say 104mm max width, is that with reasonable clearance or with the tire basically rubbing the frame? I'd love this bike with Flowbeist/Dunderbeist tires on 65mm wide 26er rims. According to 45nrth these have a 760mm diameter and a 109mm width. Would that work on this frame?

    Rocky Mountain Bicycles Mod Kris Abrahamson • a month ago
    Hey Kris, great question! The Suzi Q was designed around 27.5" wheels/tires and the combo that you are asking about will not fit.

    i still would like some pics of anyone has got their bike handy.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mnyquist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    384
    According to the shop that built mine, the Next SL is not supposed to fit. I had the crank already and asked them to try. It fits no problem. I'm running a 32T Oval ring.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dRjOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,344
    so thats a normal 73mm shell sized next sl? just fewer spacers and a flipped ring? if so - wow...thats pretty cool.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mnyquist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    384
    Yes


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Similar Threads

  1. Budget Rocky Fatbike - Rocky Mountain Blizzard - 10
    By tbonegreen in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 12-07-2016, 08:28 AM
  2. Rocky Mtn
    By Gmc55 in forum 27.5
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-25-2015, 09:12 AM
  3. Rocky Mtn
    By solly98 in forum 27.5
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-30-2014, 10:52 AM
  4. Rocky Knob
    By trap121 in forum North & South Carolina
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-31-2011, 08:36 AM
  5. My Old Rocky
    By thebronze13 in forum Vintage, Retro, Classic
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 01-15-2011, 12:21 PM

Members who have read this thread: 30

Posting Permissions

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