Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    708

    Trance X - why F120?

    I'm shopping for a new bike and the Trance X is on the list. I haven't ridden one yet, so far I have just been looking at the geo and specs.

    Looking over the specs, I just don't quite understand why the bike is specced with a 120mm fork. It seems like a 140 would be a better match for it.

    Can I get some input from anyone who has ridden both (120 and 140)?

    Would you purchase a Trance X with 120, or recommend trying to swap out the fork on purchase?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by grundy
    I'm shopping for a new bike and the Trance X is on the list. I haven't ridden one yet, so far I have just been looking at the geo and specs.

    Looking over the specs, I just don't quite understand why the bike is specced with a 120mm fork. It seems like a 140 would be a better match for it.

    Can I get some input from anyone who has ridden both (120 and 140)?

    Would you purchase a Trance X with 120, or recommend trying to swap out the fork on purchase?

    Thanks.
    I've ridden both.

    120mm is ideal for XC as that's what the bike is for. Even though the fork is low, so is the BB. What really matters is the vertical distance from the BB to the handle bars. That distance on the Trance X will be slightly greater than even other bikes with 140mm forks, but higher BB.

    If you want to ride more AM, 140 feels better.

    I think the best bet is a travel adjustable fork. The one I rode had a 140mm TALAS which was three steps 140, 120, 100.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,420
    [SIZE=2]Neither is spot on, to best match the back you want a 130mm travel to get the best performance but it was designed for a 120mm fork so it really comes down to what riding you do, the bike is better for XC lower and the heavy stuff at 140mm so get an adjustable fork if you want.
    [/SIZE]

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    46
    As a Trance X owner, I can tell you that a 120 mm is perfect for the bike and well-matched to rear end. That said, the 100-120-140 TALAS (yes, I've ridden one) is pretty sweet, if you don't mind buying a new fork and the slackened head angle when it's set to 140.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    41
    140mm is Reign territory, if you're looking for a bike with that much travel go for one of them.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    708
    thanks for the replies, that gives me more perspective.

    I guess what it boils down to, is that I am not sure quite what I want. Something in the 5"-6" travel range, something a little more than XC but not quite FR. There's a lot of room in that range.

    I'm riding a 575 Race 20 this weekend and hope to ride a Trance X1 down the same trails soon after. I'm curious to see which I like better.

  7. #7
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    17,841
    I'd say definitely a travel adjust/U-Turn PIKE would be the ideal fork for that bike. Haven't ridden one, but from how the standard trance was it begged for a longer than 100mm travel fork to compliment the rear. Most people were putting, 115mm and longer forks on the 4.2" Trances and loving it. Once again PIKE U-Turn and you'll have the absolute best combo for climbing and bombing DHs, plus the 20mm Maxle Lite helps stiffen up the front end loads.

  8. #8
    Scott is a tool.
    Reputation: waldog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    843
    I really don't think 140mm is only Reign territory. I have an Air U-turn Revelation on my Trance X and it is perfect!!! I run it at 115-120mm for 90% of the time and then wind it out to 130mm on the steepest descents, but even at that height it still climbs bloody well.

    I would strongly recommend getting a travel adjustable fork for this bike, just opens up it's capabilities amazingly. Which fork? Revelation or Pike, i just don't rate the Fox forks, that's just me.

    Wal.

    Edit: 300th POST!!! Woo yeah!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: farmertan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    659

    F120rlc

    I bought the Trance X frame and built it up using an Fox F120RLC. I thought about the Talas, but it's almost 1/2 pound heavier. I loved the Talas I had on a Stumpjumper previously, but I did notice that I ran it at 120mm most of the time. A lot of the trails I ride aren't extremely long climbs; they're more constant ups and downs. I found myself fidgeting with the adjustment too much, so I just left it at 120 unless the descent was really steep and technical. Even still, a good rider can do a lot with a 120mm fork.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    46
    I realize I'm late with this, but fwiw.....

    I just built a Trance X with a Pushed 140RLC and it rocks. I had the fork previously (on a Reign) and wasn't about to spend more money just because the fork might be too long.

    It's my opinion that the 140 works really well. One reason being that for 95% percent of the time it's a 4.5-5 inch travel fork with that last inch being for when an "Atta Boy" turns into an "OHHHH Sh*t".

    As for axle to crown height.... well, I don't know, but I do religously set my sag to an inch and a quarter that could be some of it. Whatever the case, the bike handles great, a lot better than the Reign.

    Oldnotdead

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    97

    A/C Length

    I built mine up with a 2008 Fox Float 140 RLC Pushed and having come off a much longer travel all mountain thought it was great. Then I put in the spacer to make that fork a 120 and the bike felt much more balanced, yet I never felt like I gave up anything. A friend thought I was crazy but after he rode it he agreed. I guess on the surface who would take a 120 over a 140 yet on this bike imho the 20 mm I gave up went unnoticed, having the axle to crown where the designers want was way more beneficial. Fwiw I ride mine over rocks and roots and every weekend for the last few months its seen rock gardens, downhills and 2,3 and 4 foot drops all with the 120.
    Last edited by Timan; 06-25-2008 at 06:31 PM.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rydog9991's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    285
    buy a reign then

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pedaler845's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,063
    Giant designed the X w/120 front and rear...works great, no levers on the X2, perfectly balanced "All-Trail"
    Howd the Yeti 575 and X compare??

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by pedaler845
    Howd the Yeti 575 and X compare??
    I haven't ridden the X yet. I was just about to pick up the phone to see if I could find a demo for tonight's ride.

    The Yeti was set up with an F36 @ 160. Surprisingly, it climbed well, though it was difficult to thread it through switchbacks. Overall, it felt a little too big and slack for the majority of my riding.

    After riding the Yet, I rode a Titus El Guapo with an F36 TALAS. That was a HUGE improvement - it too was difficult to ride through switchbacks @ 160, but was really easy to set down to 130 or even 100 on the fly, and that made a huge difference. I had never ridden a TALAS fork before and was really impressed. However, the El Guapo felt like overkill (too big and heavy for what I do), and I preferred the Motolite overall.

    I think I would have liked the Yeti quite a bit more had it been set up with a TALAS.

    I'm still intending to ride a 5 Spot and Trance X.

  15. #15
    SP Singletrack rocks
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,007
    I have 05 trance with a reba, and want to make the bike more stable for going downhill and riding more tech section. Would a Rockshox Pike be totally overkill? I would probably run about 115mm for just riding and slack it out for going down.

    Love how the bike pedals, but feels overly twitchy to me and I have been riding it for 2 years now.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,420
    [SIZE=2]Yep total overkill, the Revelation would be more appropriate if you set it to 115mm.
    [/SIZE]

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    97

    Revelation

    I have a Pushed Revelation dual air set to 130mm and it feels great in terms of geometry. A/C is about a 1/4 inch longer than the Fox 120mm Float RLC I was running. I think the fork just has too much rebound even when set at the fastest setting though. Guess I need to have a chat with Darren. You would think having such a great bike and two of the best forks on the market I would be dialed. Well as it stands I prefer the Fox due to the broader adjustment of the rebound setting. Yet the Revelation seems to be a little plusher on compression. If I could only get Push to give me a more usable range of rebound adjustment it might be the Revelation in the end. As far a travel adjustment on the Revelation couldn't you just run a little more negative air to reduce the A/C length?

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,501
    I support the adjustable fork option
    07 Giant Anthem 2 (Int'l Edition) | omartan.co.cc
    Im a MOJO Fanboy

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    279
    On my Trance X I put on a Pike and just left it at 140 all the time and it felt perfect to me. I also weigh 190lbs and wanted the 20mm thru, if I was around 175lbs or lighter I would probably go Fox Talas as suggested above or RS Revelation. Hope this helps

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    36

    Trance X w/Talas

    Don't know if you bought the bike yet, but if you can get the TranceX, do it. I bought a Trance X0 on 7/2 and had the LBS swap out the F120 for a Talas RLC (for $100 extra!) I have about 62 miles on it now. I have found the 120 to be the best travel for most riding, with the 100 for steep paved climbs and the 140 for knarly downhills. It does turn amazingling well on downhill switchbacks with fork at 140! Added about 1/2 pound (27 lbs with pedals) but worth the ability to adjust on the fly.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,522
    I have a Tora 318 with U-turn on mine, and after running it at 130 for a while, I went back to 120 because it handles a bit better on singletrack. I don't think it has as much to do with a lower bar height as it does a bit steeper geometry, but I could be wrong. I do think the suspension feels more balanced with 130 mm in front, but that could be a coil spring/air shock thing. Either way, a half degree or 1 cm of travel won't make a ton of difference.

Posting Permissions

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