Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    RPG
    RPG is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    508

    Do the sl and hd cockpits feel any different?

    Looking to upgrade to an hd 140 and want to know if they fit any different. My sl is a bit tight. Wouldn't mind an extra half inch in the tt and noticed the hd is .3" longer in the tt. Any feedback from those that moved from sl to hd would be appreciated.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    313
    The biggest thing that I notice when I ride my old Mojo C after riding my HD 160/170 is OMG this thing has a really steep head angle. After a few minutes of twisty XC track that feeling goes away. I have a 70mm stem on the C and a 45mm on the HD with a setback dropper post. I thought I would still ride the C on XC rides but the HD climbs really well and is so much more fun in the air that the Mojo C hardly ever gets ridden.

  3. #3
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,611
    I have my Mojo C and HD 160/170 setup with the same cockpit parts. Same stem (Ibis 70mm), same bars, same grips, seat in the same relative place to cranks...
    I notice 2 things when switching, the HA (like d3toid mentions) and the weight. The HD is all coil and weighs 5lbs more. I prefer the HD just because it has a more solid feel.

    For $40 you could get a 10mm longer stem and see how you like the feel before dropping $$$$
    Those who know, ride a Mojo AND a Mojo HD.
    Quadzilla
    Quote Originally Posted by benja55
    Ok, whatever, cold water on my bike boner right there.

  4. #4
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788
    Going from a large Mojo C to large HD, swapping over all the components with no fit change, the HD feels about 1/2 size larger.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hani1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by derby View Post
    Going from a large Mojo C to large HD, swapping over all the components with no fit change, the HD feels about 1/2 size larger.
    Thanks Derby. That's very insightful I'm having the same dilemma. I think a half size increase would be just too big for me. My large SL feels just a tad too big at times.

  6. #6
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788
    Quote Originally Posted by hani1 View Post
    Thanks Derby. That's very insightful I'm having the same dilemma. I think a half size increase would be just too big for me. My large SL feels just a tad too big at times.
    A shorter stem with wider bars can do wonders to improve steering and front end traction feel.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    121
    I've demoed both bikes - HD set up with a shorter stem so the fit was about the same. The main thing I noticed was that the HD climbed techy steeps (rock steps, loose gravel, etc) way worse for me whiled seated. I think the main reason was the slacker seat angle which put your feet further out front relative to the saddle. It was much harder to keep the front end down as you powered up stuff and it made me feel more tired just trying to keep it in control. I guess the shorter stem compounds the light front end feeling going up. I thought the SL was the best climbing FS bike I've ever been on.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hani1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by derby View Post
    A shorter stem with wider bars can do wonders to improve steering and front end traction feel.
    I'm already running at 50 MM stand and 730 and M bars on my large excel. I love the way that bike handles. I'm hoping to get a similar feel on an HD

  9. #9
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,611
    Quote Originally Posted by jaks View Post
    I've demoed both bikes - HD set up with a shorter stem so the fit was about the same. The main thing I noticed was that the HD climbed techy steeps (rock steps, loose gravel, etc) way worse for me whiled seated. I think the main reason was the slacker seat angle which put your feet further out front relative to the saddle. It was much harder to keep the front end down as you powered up stuff and it made me feel more tired just trying to keep it in control. I guess the shorter stem compounds the light front end feeling going up. I thought the SL was the best climbing FS bike I've ever been on.
    Varying seat angle between bikes that get pedaled is retarded IMO. On my bikes, the fore/aft difference of seat position is .75 inches, assuming seat is the same height and in same position on the rails. (I got outmy old trig book and did the math a while back) The slack seat angle on the hd puts the seat .75" rearward, which is a huge weight shift. For this reason I have to slide the seat all the way forward to get into proper pedaling position. Once you get the seat right, you'll find the hd climbs tech way better than the SL.
    I have yet to see or hear a good explanation for slack seat angles.
    Those who know, ride a Mojo AND a Mojo HD.
    Quadzilla
    Quote Originally Posted by benja55
    Ok, whatever, cold water on my bike boner right there.

  10. #10
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,611
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug View Post
    Varying seat angle between bikes that get pedaled is retarded IMO. On my bikes, the fore/aft difference of seat position is .75 inches, assuming seat is the same height and in same position on the rails. (I got outmy old trig book and did the math a while back) The slack seat angle on the hd puts the seat .75" rearward, which is a huge weight shift. For this reason I have to slide the seat all the way forward to get into proper pedaling position. Once you get the seat right, you'll find the hd climbs tech way better than the SL.
    I have yet to see or hear a good explanation for slack seat angles.
    Also on this note, if you slide the seat forward to the same relative place to the BB, the cockpit may not be longer, it could be shorter on the HD. Add to that mix you'll likely want to run a shorter stem, and now you may have a significantly shorter cockpit.
    Case in point, I just measured my bikes.
    Both are size L, have 70mm stems, 725 width bars, and straight seatposts.
    Measuring from the bar/stem clamp to the center of the seatport just below the rails I get 27".
    The HD has the seat slid forward by about 1/2", so now the HD cockpit is 1/2" shorter than the Mojo C. If I were to go to a 50-60mm stem, I could subtract another 1/2" or so from cockpit length. So now the HD cockpit is 1" shorter than a similarly equipped SL, despite the TT being slightly longer.
    To help compensate for the 1" difference, I could go to wider bars on the HD.

    Bottom line, the only way to know for sure is to demo a bike and put your bars and stem on it, and make sure to put the seat to a position you like, not just what looks right. My seat looks friggin retarded pushed all the way forward, but that's where the bike works best for me.
    Those who know, ride a Mojo AND a Mojo HD.
    Quadzilla
    Quote Originally Posted by benja55
    Ok, whatever, cold water on my bike boner right there.

  11. #11
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug View Post
    ...
    I have yet to see or hear a good explanation for slack seat angles.
    Slack seat angle produces more nimble tight corner turning, lower rider weight center, more rearward weight center bias, more rear tire traction, easier to manual, easier to stand back behind the seat when descending.

    Usually longer travel bikes have longer chain stays and are more rock crawling and downhill oriented, where a higher rider weight centered steep seat tube angle is not desirable.

    Personally I use a u-turn fork on my HD to steepen the frame angles including the seat position, for those conditions where steeper angles are an advantage.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    44
    I find the santa cruz and ibis seatback geometry a little odd too. I like the seat forward for efficient climbing and pedaling. It doesn't matter where it is when descending on the other hand, since I'm weighting on the pedals.

Posting Permissions

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