Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    434

    Felt mountain bikes are porky!

    So, I just got a Compulsion 1 and Nine Pro weighed yesterday. The Nine Pro, stripped down, came in at 2000g without headset, right on the nose, for a 17.5" frame. This seems pretty heavy for an alloy hardtail. That is around 1lb heavier than the competition, as well.

    The Compulsion was even more disappointing. With headset, the frame was 3670g! That is a tank for a 5" bike. My Ventana El Ciclon, by comparison, was a strong, gusseted frame and laterally stiffer than the Compulsion, yet it only came in at 2910g for a medium. I understand that the Compulsion is fairly complex suspension-wise, but that kind of weight is pretty much over the top. My Medium Niner RIP9 only comes in at 3100g, and that is for a 29er frame which uses more metal. The weight of the Compulson is pushing freeride territory: my Turner RFX (2006 model) was 1/2lb lighter, and it had 6" of travel and a ISO chainguide braze-on.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by dawgcatching
    So, I just got a Compulsion 1 and Nine Pro weighed yesterday. The Nine Pro, stripped down, came in at 2000g without headset, right on the nose, for a 17.5" frame. This seems pretty heavy for an alloy hardtail. That is around 1lb heavier than the competition, as well.

    The Compulsion was even more disappointing. With headset, the frame was 3670g! That is a tank for a 5" bike. My Ventana El Ciclon, by comparison, was a strong, gusseted frame and laterally stiffer than the Compulsion, yet it only came in at 2910g for a medium. I understand that the Compulsion is fairly complex suspension-wise, but that kind of weight is pretty much over the top. My Medium Niner RIP9 only comes in at 3100g, and that is for a 29er frame which uses more metal. The weight of the Compulson is pushing freeride territory: my Turner RFX (2006 model) was 1/2lb lighter, and it had 6" of travel and a ISO chainguide braze-on.
    First of all, just weighing the frames in the store isn't a very good evaluation of a bikes potential nor is it an indicator of how a suspension design will perform on the trail. A heavier frame that has an efficient suspension design
    will be easier to pedal on the trail than a lightweight frame that bobs a lot.
    If I remember correctly, Felt claims on their website a weight of 32.7 lbs for the
    Compulsion 2, not a bad weight for a bike with it's travel and intended application.
    I ride a chumba XCL which has a similar weight, I think the frame alone with
    the DHX was probably around 7.7 lbs. I have no idea what that is in grams,
    you should really consider posting your numbers in pounds, since most of us
    Americans will not have any idea what you're talking about otherwise.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by le_buzz
    First of all, just weighing the frames in the store isn't a very good evaluation of a bikes potential nor is it an indicator of how a suspension design will perform on the trail. A heavier frame that has an efficient suspension design
    will be easier to pedal on the trail than a lightweight frame that bobs a lot.
    If I remember correctly, Felt claims on their website a weight of 32.7 lbs for the
    Compulsion 2, not a bad weight for a bike with it's travel and intended application.
    I ride a chumba XCL which has a similar weight, I think the frame alone with
    the DHX was probably around 7.7 lbs. I have no idea what that is in grams,
    you should really consider posting your numbers in pounds, since most of us
    Americans will not have any idea what you're talking about otherwise.
    I like the Compulsion as a ride (I was on it at Interbike last year) and thought it was a really solid trailbike. It just seems heavy for what it is. It doesn't out-perform my Ciclon (probably the other way 'round, actually) but it is nearly 2lbs heavier for the frame, at similar travel (I had the Ciclon at 5.4"). Even Ventana's Terremoto comes in under the Compulsion's weight.

    BTW, your Chumba is 3450g with DHX, the Compulsion is 3650g with an RP23. So, your Chumba is a good pound lighter as well (assuming you have a DHX Air, but if it is a coil, make it 1.5lbs lighter).

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by dawgcatching
    I like the Compulsion as a ride (I was on it at Interbike last year) and thought it was a really solid trailbike. It just seems heavy for what it is. It doesn't out-perform my Ciclon (probably the other way 'round, actually) but it is nearly 2lbs heavier for the frame, at similar travel (I had the Ciclon at 5.4"). Even Ventana's Terremoto comes in under the Compulsion's weight.

    BTW, your Chumba is 3450g with DHX, the Compulsion is 3650g with an RP23. So, your Chumba is a good pound lighter as well (assuming you have a DHX Air, but if it is a coil, make it 1.5lbs lighter).
    THe Ventanas are beautiful frames, but they're singlepivot faux bars just like Turners and Konas. Not exactly advanced, cutting edge designs, although I'm
    sure a well executed single pivot can ride very well although it has it's limitations
    over others.
    The equilink design should outperform those, certainly in climbing efficiency and traction. So, I'm curious. What are 3450g's and 3650g's in lbs ?
    I'm using my calculator, using 450g's/lb and I get 3465 for my 7.7 lb large Chumba frame, and 8.1 lbs for the Compulsion. I'm not sure what the exact number is
    to convert grams/lbs, tho. Maybe I'm a bit off. I'm still not seeing it as being that
    bad, though, when you consider the extra strut and links that the Compulsion has.
    There's always the option of the team frame. Not numbers on frame weight, but I'm guessing it should be a bit lighter.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    733
    I just looked it up. More accurate numbers using your figures are
    7.5 for the Chumba XCL with the DHX and 7.9 lbs for the Compulsion frame.
    I suspect the figure you gave for the XCL might be an ounce or 2 low side, tho.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by le_buzz
    I just looked it up. More accurate numbers using your figures are
    7.5 for the Chumba XCL with the DHX and 7.9 lbs for the Compulsion frame.
    I suspect the figure you gave for the XCL might be an ounce or 2 low side, tho.
    How do you like the Chumba? I have heard great things....

    I am debating on whether to keep the Compulsion, or to step up to a true 6" bike. I like the steeper HTA on the compulsion for trail riding, so perhaps I will keep it and put a slightly longer fork up front to slacken it to 68 degrees even.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    733

    My apologies, dawg

    Quote Originally Posted by dawgcatching
    How do you like the Chumba? I have heard great things....

    I am debating on whether to keep the Compulsion, or to step up to a true 6" bike. I like the steeper HTA on the compulsion for trail riding, so perhaps I will keep it and put a slightly longer fork up front to slacken it to 68 degrees even.
    I thought from your previous post that you had only weighed a frame and not
    ridden it. So have you had a chance to put in much riding time yet ?
    Give us your impressions of overall performance when you do.
    I think it's 5.7", isn't it ? I think with something like a Lyric you could slacken it quite a bit to where it would be pretty close to 6" travel in capability.

    The Chumba is a very good all around trail riding bike that does everything well.
    I recently put a Hope 25 degree, 70mm stem on it to give it a more AMish feel
    for the technical descents. I sometimes wish the BB were a tad higher, I occasionally clip the pedals in the rocky AZ terrain, although 13.5 is about average for a 5" travel bike. Have you measured the BB height on your
    Compulsion ? I can't make any sense of what they're saying on the Felt site.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    434
    I rode a Compulsion 2 at the Interbike demo last year, on a combo of XC and all-mountain terrain. It was a capable bike, very well rounded: climbed and descended well, felt very grounded, but no where near the claimed travel. This has been a compliant about Equlink from other riders at Interbike as well. I was getting the maximum travel according to the rear shock, yet it felt like it had less travel than my Ciclon, which can feel bottomless at time. Pedaling efficiency was a bit better than my Ciclon, but I think that it came at the expense of bump-eating prowess (the Ciclon has as good of rear suspension as any bike I have ridden, and better than 95% of the competition). I would say that in comparison, the Felt seemed like it had around 110mm of travel to the Ciclon's 125, just by the way it was absorbing the same terrain. And, it did feel heavy, especially the Compulsion 2. The steering up front had a great feel to it, and I really enjoyed the balanced feel of the bike.

    My overall take was this: due to the overall feel of the suspension (very efficient) I would say that Felt should lighten up the frame considerably and make this more of a trail bike, and less of a super-durable AM build. The bike pedals like an all-day trail bike, and people who are looking for a nearly 6" bike are going to want something plusher, and people that are looking for a trail bike something lighter. This bike isn't plush, and isn't light, so I think they have a great platform that needs to be mated to more of a mid-weight trail bike. Also, due to the suspension feeling shorter than claimed travel, it should work well on the Redemption, where the travel is claimed at over 6". That should be their AM bike: they could have a build around 30lbs and have a very versatile burly trail and do-everything bike. I may end up going that route and building it up around 30lbs, as I would rather have a 5" trailbike in the 27lb or under range, which will be very difficult on the Compulsion.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by dawgcatching
    I rode a Compulsion 2 at the Interbike demo last year, on a combo of XC and all-mountain terrain. It was a capable bike, very well rounded: climbed and descended well, felt very grounded, but no where near the claimed travel. This has been a compliant about Equlink from other riders at Interbike as well. I was getting the maximum travel according to the rear shock, yet it felt like it had less travel than my Ciclon, which can feel bottomless at time. Pedaling efficiency was a bit better than my Ciclon, but I think that it came at the expense of bump-eating prowess (the Ciclon has as good of rear suspension as any bike I have ridden, and better than 95% of the competition). I would say that in comparison, the Felt seemed like it had around 110mm of travel to the Ciclon's 125, just by the way it was absorbing the same terrain. And, it did feel heavy, especially the Compulsion 2. The steering up front had a great feel to it, and I really enjoyed the balanced feel of the bike.

    My overall take was this: due to the overall feel of the suspension (very efficient) I would say that Felt should lighten up the frame considerably and make this more of a trail bike, and less of a super-durable AM build. The bike pedals like an all-day trail bike, and people who are looking for a nearly 6" bike are going to want something plusher, and people that are looking for a trail bike something lighter. This bike isn't plush, and isn't light, so I think they have a great platform that needs to be mated to more of a mid-weight trail bike. Also, due to the suspension feeling shorter than claimed travel, it should work well on the Redemption, where the travel is claimed at over 6". That should be their AM bike: they could have a build around 30lbs and have a very versatile burly trail and do-everything bike. I may end up going that route and building it up around 30lbs, as I would rather have a 5" trailbike in the 27lb or under range, which will be very difficult on the Compulsion.
    So was that your only ride on the Compulsion so far - at Interbike ?
    Not trying to dispute what you're saying, just wondering if some of what you
    experienced could have been due to some setup issue like using a shock that wasn't a good match for the suspension system or something like that.
    If everyone else experienced the same thing, then there must be something to it, but one of the things that makes it hard to evaluate the potential of this system is that the only reviews of it so far have been from Interbike.
    I've read from other Interbike reviews in the past that sometimes the manufacturer when first coming out with a new suspension design at Interbike doesn't have the thing tuned quite right for the first unveiling of it.
    Perhaps they need to tweek something in the linkage or the leverage rates to make it more supple feeling.

    I actually read your Interbike reviews which seemed pretty good.
    Was the Compulsion one of the ones you rode on other trails besides the main
    Bootleg route ?

    I'm a little confused about the last part of what you said above, you plan on keeping it and lightening it up to make it more of a do everything trail bike, instead of an AM specific machine, right ?

    I think I agree with your assessment that the Redemption would better be suited for purely AM instead of having it more targeted more toward the freeride stuff,
    as the current geometry on the Redemption seems to indicate.
    Maybe they'll straighten out some of these issues by this falls Interbike.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by le_buzz
    So was that your only ride on the Compulsion so far - at Interbike ?
    Not trying to dispute what you're saying, just wondering if some of what you
    experienced could have been due to some setup issue like using a shock that wasn't a good match for the suspension system or something like that.
    If everyone else experienced the same thing, then there must be something to it, but one of the things that makes it hard to evaluate the potential of this system is that the only reviews of it so far have been from Interbike.
    I've read from other Interbike reviews in the past that sometimes the manufacturer when first coming out with a new suspension design at Interbike doesn't have the thing tuned quite right for the first unveiling of it.
    Perhaps they need to tweek something in the linkage or the leverage rates to make it more supple feeling.

    I actually read your Interbike reviews which seemed pretty good.
    Was the Compulsion one of the ones you rode on other trails besides the main
    Bootleg route ?

    I'm a little confused about the last part of what you said above, you plan on keeping it and lightening it up to make it more of a do everything trail bike, instead of an AM specific machine, right ?

    I think I agree with your assessment that the Redemption would better be suited for purely AM instead of having it more targeted more toward the freeride stuff,
    as the current geometry on the Redemption seems to indicate.
    Maybe they'll straighten out some of these issues by this falls Interbike.
    I am not sure what the main Bootleg route is, but I did the upper loop with lots of climbing and descending, twice. That just about throws everything at the bike: technical climbing and descending, a 20-minute climb, ect. I took a shock pump and played with settings on it, and had it dialed in. My feedback was also confirmed by other users at Interbike. We have been riding the Redemption and Compulsion at the shop this spring, but my broken leg has precluded my participation. My employees are saying the same thing: very efficient, not as plush as the claimed travel would indicate, a little heavy.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by dawgcatching
    I am not sure what the main Bootleg route is, but I did the upper loop with lots of climbing and descending, twice. That just about throws everything at the bike: technical climbing and descending, a 20-minute climb, ect. I took a shock pump and played with settings on it, and had it dialed in. My feedback was also confirmed by other users at Interbike. We have been riding the Redemption and Compulsion at the shop this spring, but my broken leg has precluded my participation. My employees are saying the same thing: very efficient, not as plush as the claimed travel would indicate, a little heavy.
    Hey, thanks for the info. Just curious, are you in Canada ?
    How are your guys describing the climbing handling/traction behaviour ?
    Does it feel smooth climbing rocky sections or is there noticeable pedal feedback?
    Does the Redemption feel better/more plush than the Compulsion ?

    I remember from Tscheezy's Redemption review at interbike that he said it felt
    very good climbing on, very active at sag, but that going downhill it felt like it
    only had 4" of good travel

  12. #12
    Single Track Slayer
    Reputation: story mt biker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    50

    My Felt is Light!!!

    The Felt Nine Pro I ride weighs in with pedals at just under 20 lbs on my LBS scale. Which is par with my training parteners Ti Grail set up indentically. Of course he has the plush ride of Ti but at 220 lbs the Ti feels like a noodle under me.
    Life is like a bicycle to stay upright you have to keep moving.

Posting Permissions

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