Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: 140mm?

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    115

    140mm?

    Im curious what are the benefits of running the hd in 140mm mode. Does it pedal more efficiently, lighter, corner better. I'm going to start enduro racing and was curious if this set up would suit me better. Opinions?

  2. #2
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,699
    Only benefit I found was it was lighter due to lighter shock and fork.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    ...People thought they were getting a good fork because it was a "fox".

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    827
    .5" lower bottom bracket. Approved for 650b by IBIS. That said there are plenty of threads indicating a 140 set up with a 7.875x2.25 shock will actually give approx. 150mm of travel with the same lower BB of the 2" shock at 140mm (dependent on tire choice).

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by Ramjm_2000 View Post
    .5" lower bottom bracket. Approved for 650b by IBIS. That said there are plenty of threads indicating a 140 set up with a 7.875x2.25 shock will actually give approx. 150mm of travel with the same lower BB of the 2" shock at 140mm (dependent on tire choice).
    Thanks for the great response. Do you think it would be a faster set up for California enduros?

  5. #5
    Dissolved member
    Reputation: StiHacka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,629
    Quote Originally Posted by Ramjm_2000 View Post
    .5" lower bottom bracket. Approved for 650b by IBIS. That said there are plenty of threads indicating a 140 set up with a 7.875x2.25 shock will actually give approx. 150mm of travel with the same lower BB of the 2" shock at 140mm (dependent on tire choice).
    This is only partially true. Ibis themselves admitted that in the 140mm mode, the actual wheel travel is closer to 130mm, hence the HD-R is officially a 130mm bike.

    I personally do not believe that you can get 150mm with the same BB height as in the 130mm mode with just a different shock (and offset bushings) - it just does not seem to be possible given my experience with a true 150mm setup, BB height and clearance of the wheel-seat tube on my HD. The numbers do not add up.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    827
    Quote Originally Posted by StiHacka View Post
    This is only partially true. Ibis themselves admitted that in the 140mm mode, the actual wheel travel is closer to 130mm, hence the HD-R is officially a 130mm bike.

    I personally do not believe that you can get 150mm with the same BB height as in the 130mm mode with just a different shock (and offset bushings) - it just does not seem to be possible given my experience with a true 150mm setup, BB height and clearance of the wheel-seat tube on my HD. The numbers do not add up.
    I do recall Hans mentioning that on a past thread. I'd love to hear what your numbers say the 2.25" gives. Derby seemed to feel pretty confident about the 2.25" set-up giving 152-154mm travel. Given Hans feedback I'd probably guess it's closer to 148ish which is still great.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,969
    The 147 travel bike is achieved using a short stroked 2.5x8.5 shock not the 7.875 stroke. They put a 5 mm shim in the rear shock which using the 2.6 leverage ratio limits the travel my 13 mm (5mmx2.6=13mm in lost travel at the end of the stroke) and avoids the tire contacting the seat tube. This also give a BB height above 14".

    Ibis has also stated in this forum that the 140 bike is no faster uphill when setup like for like. Only when changing to lighter wheels etc will there be a difference and it would be the same result on the 160 bike as well.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    827
    7.875 is the e2e length of the shock not the stroke, I assume you wanted to point out the difference in overall stroke. It seems to me there is more than one way to skin a cat, a 5mm shimmed 2.5" shock at 2.6 LR should should be 2.3" (57.2mm) or 148-149mm. An unshimmed 2.25" (57mm) should be around 148-148.5mm...pretty close if you ask me. The question is the delta between calculated travel and what Hans mentioned as "actual". I wonder if the LR is actually 2.6.

    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    The 147 travel bike is achieved using a short stroked 2.5x8.5 shock not the 7.875 stroke. They put a 5 mm shim in the rear shock which using the 2.6 leverage ratio limits the travel my 13 mm (5mmx2.6=13mm in lost travel at the end of the stroke) and avoids the tire contacting the seat tube. This also give a BB height above 14".

    Ibis has also stated in this forum that the 140 bike is no faster uphill when setup like for like. Only when changing to lighter wheels etc will there be a difference and it would be the same result on the 160 bike as well.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,969
    Great point

    Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    552
    Leverage ratio curve from Tony's website: Linkage Design: Ibis





    Quote Originally Posted by Ramjm_2000 View Post
    7.875 is the e2e length of the shock not the stroke, I assume you wanted to point out the difference in overall stroke. It seems to me there is more than one way to skin a cat, a 5mm shimmed 2.5" shock at 2.6 LR should should be 2.3" (57.2mm) or 148-149mm. An unshimmed 2.25" (57mm) should be around 148-148.5mm...pretty close if you ask me. The question is the delta between calculated travel and what Hans mentioned as "actual". I wonder if the LR is actually 2.6.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
    - Arthur C. Clarke

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,969
    I was thinking about this and I think the issue with the 130/140 setup is they did not think about the leverage ratio change that comes with the limbo chip change. My guess is that it moves the entire leverage ratio down a little hence the change in travel from 140 to 130. They probably assumed that the leverage ratio stayed the same.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    827
    Totally forgot about that graph...it was one of the pieces of data I used when deciding on my next frame earlier this year, it actually explains a lot. By the looks of it with the 51mm stroke shock and 140 limbo chips the LR is actually at 2.55 giving like Hans said 130.5mm travel. Again based on the LR graph it looks like if you can increase stroke/travel past 51/140 you get more bang for your buck so that extra 56mm on a 2.25 shock should give a LR b/w 2.6 and 2.65 and 148mm-151mm travel. I guess on the flip slide if the graph is accurate a 2.5"/63.5mm stroke shock at 160mm should be giving a LR of 2.75 or closer to 174mm travel and I doubt that is happening. Thi is of course total speculation on my part...hoping someone with a background in kinematics or suspension LRs can chime in and explain the increase in travel and LR. BTW I hope everyone is having a Merry Christmas!

    JR

  13. #13
    Mtb Guide
    Reputation: Maverick005's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,023
    Went from 140-160 mode front and rear with same fork but different shock than the RP23 the HD is way better in any situation than it was in 140 mode for me, lower bb did nothing for cornering for me steeper HA cancelled that out plus I had many close call pedal strikes, I out climb even on fire road and no contest on way downs. 140mm on a std RP23 chokes this bike in my experience, set it up light in 160mode and go kill Enduro.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    68
    Your response sounds like you are commenting on the bikeco 147mm setup with regards to BB height. I think the OP was asking about the HD140 (26"), in which a 2.25 stroke shock may be very close to clearing at bottom out depending on tires. In stock configuration, the HD140 26" has enough clearance for me to run converted 650b with 2 offset bushings fully forward (max adjustment) wit the new 27.5 Maxxis HR2 TR tires on arch ex rims. I posted a pic on here showing about 13.5 BB with a 650b 140 fork.

    I race a lot of enduros, and use both travel configurations. They DO feel different. The HD140 has a more progressive feel. It's not just the lighter wheels that one may run, but it's the complete package that makes the 140 snappier (quicker ramp up-less stroke). I suppose the benefit of squeezing a bit more travel out of the 26" HD140 would be if one wanted a bit more travel, all the while running a lighter fork like a Pike 150, while maintaining the lower BB of the HD140.

    My personal setups are:
    HD160, Float X, Fox 36RLC (soon to be push RC2 or Avy), carbon Havens
    HD140, RS Monarch Plus, 2012 RS World Cup, Carbon Havens
    HD140650b, RS Monarch plus, 2 offset bushings, Arch Ex, WB Loop (borrowed)

    Fastest on the Shore: HD 160
    FAstest on most smoother trails out here in the Sea to Sky Corridor HD140

    Not blown away with the 650b, sorry guys. I'll reserve judgement until I get a different fork, and some quicker tires in the summer. I feel a bit better momentum, and corner grab, but I'm carrying more rolling weight. If that's all we have in the he future so be it, I'll just have to wait for more carbon wheel options




    Quote Originally Posted by StiHacka View Post
    This is only partially true. Ibis themselves admitted that in the 140mm mode, the actual wheel travel is closer to 130mm, hence the HD-R is officially a 130mm bike.

    I personally do not believe that you can get 150mm with the same BB height as in the 130mm mode with just a different shock (and offset bushings) - it just does not seem to be possible given my experience with a true 150mm setup, BB height and clearance of the wheel-seat tube on my HD. The numbers do not add up.

Similar Threads

  1. White Brother 140mm Loop 29er vs Manitou TOWER PRO 140MM 29er
    By hang10jeff in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-14-2013, 12:32 AM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-13-2013, 06:27 AM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-06-2013, 06:37 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-11-2013, 01:21 PM
  5. 140mm up front?
    By rc51kid in forum Brake Time
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-23-2011, 05:30 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
  •