Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    348

    Suggested improvements for Ripley

    What are the improvements or additions you'd like to see for the Ibis Ripley?

    My short list would be something like:
    - tidy up the cable routing in general
    - provisions for internal dropper post cable
    - cable mount on RHS of top tube for and brake line and dropper post remote on LHS of handlebar.
    - room for a true 2.4" rear tyre (many stories of seat tube rub)
    - Rock Shox suspension factory option
    - down tube protector
    - semi-integrated full head set
    - longer travel variant Ripley LT

    Girls and guys - let's give Ibis some input!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Joules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,184
    Internal dropper and tire clearance are the big ones for me, from your list.

    But the reason I'm probably going to buy something else is Ripley's TT is too short and the HT is just too steep to handle like I want. If it were one of the 2 (i.e., the TT on the XL was .75-1" longer or the HT was 1degree less) I'd consider it, but as the geometry sits now... the fit and handling are, well just weird. I guess it makes sense that their first try at a 29er wouldn't get the geometry right, you'd think they'd know better how to fit bikes though.
    Niner and Santa Cruz are just as guilty of this.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    11
    My only beef with the Ripley is Cable routing. I would prefer routing similar to the HD,Not a fan of internal routing.
    also more room for a bigger rear tire is always a good thing.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: neilether's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by Joules View Post
    ......as the geometry sits now... the fit and handling are, well just weird. I guess it makes sense that their first try at a 29er wouldn't get the geometry right, you'd think they'd know better how to fit bikes though.
    Niner and Santa Cruz are just as guilty of this.
    Opinion stated as fact. Love it. Maybe the guys at Ibis/Santa Cruz/Niner know something you don't know.......

  5. #5
    Dropshot Champ!
    Reputation: redmr2_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,474
    Quote Originally Posted by Joules View Post
    But the reason I'm probably going to buy something else is Ripley's TT is too short and the HT is just too steep to handle like I want. If it were one of the 2 (i.e., the TT on the XL was .75-1" longer or the HT was 1degree less) I'd consider it, but as the geometry sits now... the fit and handling are, well just weird. I guess it makes sense that their first try at a 29er wouldn't get the geometry right, you'd think they'd know better how to fit bikes though.
    you have to look at HTA a little diffferently on 29ers. The bigger wheel and trail numbers make it feel alot slacker than a similar 26. What's the rule of thumb, 1-1.5* difference in "feel"? A ~68-69 degree 29er actually feels pretty slack. Have you been on a ripley with a 140? I wouldn't call it steep at all.

    The specialized enduro 29er is only a degree slacker than the ripley, and it feels like overkill while riding it. It's a big bike. It feels like a dh bike going down the hill...which is awesome, but not what I think ibis was going for at all with the ripley.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    209
    Ive had mine for 6 months, the Ripley is pretty nice and I would generally agree with the OPs list, not madatory but they would be decent upgrades. Especially the LT version x'cept call it a Ripley HD 150mm. I rode the BMC TF150mm at Interbike and it felt like a long travel Ripley...it was nice, really nice climed as well but extra 1+ of travel and longer wheelbase was cool.

    My short list would be something like:
    - tidy up the cable routing in general
    - provisions for internal dropper post cable
    - cable mount on RHS of top tube for and brake line and dropper post remote on LHS of handlebar.
    - room for a true 2.4" rear tyre (many stories of seat tube rub)
    - Rock Shox suspension factory option
    - down tube protector
    - semi-integrated full head set
    - longer travel variant Ripley LT

  7. #7
    Lightly salted
    Reputation: fuenstock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,173
    Over 2 months on my Ripley. Only things I would like to see are, no internal routing and Rockshox as an option for suspension. I do my own wrenching and constantly change things around. The internal routing makes it a hassle to do so.
    Overall, Im really pleased!

  8. #8
    Lightly salted
    Reputation: fuenstock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,173
    Quote Originally Posted by Joules View Post
    Internal dropper and tire clearance are the big ones for me, from your list.

    But the reason I'm probably going to buy something else is Ripley's TT is too short and the HT is just too steep to handle like I want. If it were one of the 2 (i.e., the TT on the XL was .75-1" longer or the HT was 1degree less) I'd consider it, but as the geometry sits now... the fit and handling are, well just weird. I guess it makes sense that their first try at a 29er wouldn't get the geometry right, you'd think they'd know better how to fit bikes though.
    Niner and Santa Cruz are just as guilty of this.
    If you have not yet, you should try to demo a Ripley. I felt the same way until I rode one.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    70
    On item not yet mentioned:
    - more clearance of LHS 156Q crank. XX1 156Q crank may touch or has very tight clearance as reported.

    Been riding my Ripley for less than 2 months, I am very happy so far.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kiwisimon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    233
    Quote Originally Posted by Joules View Post
    Internal dropper and tire clearance are the big ones for me, from your list.

    Ripley's TT is too short and the HT is just too steep to handle like I want.
    Niner and Santa Cruz are just as guilty of this.
    What 29ers have you been riding? These three have been doing this for quite a while.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles wadsworth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    577
    I am not much of a complainer, so I will just say I am very happy with the Ripley. My cables are clean and quiet and my local conditions don't require large tires. The bike rides like a dream.
    milesW

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    875
    I've been on my ripley for a while, an love it for what it is. I guess my only thing would be a LT version with 135-140mm rear an 150 front.. but at the same weight frame.. but then again.. the ripley is so fast as it is, an rides more like a hardtail, that just happens to have some squish to soften everything up.. I like more suspension but.. then again, that's what I have an HD for..
    determined to put the "mountain" back in "MOUNTAIN BIKING!!!" "HIT IT!"
    2012 MOJO HDeeeeeeee!!!!
    2010 scott CR1 comp

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    360
    +1 on the LT version, only:

    - Keep the travel to 140mm, those 150+ 29ers are getting BIG and are overkill, 140-150 fork
    - Sub 17.5" stays and even better, lengthen the front, shorten the rear (shorter the better I guess but I would ride an XL so it doesn't need to be E29 short)
    - Head tube doesn't need to be that slack due to the inherent stability of the bigger wheels, 68 degrees perhaps

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,775
    Quote Originally Posted by neilether View Post
    Opinion stated as fact. Love it. Maybe the guys at Ibis/Santa Cruz/Niner know something you don't know.......
    Yeah, like how to design kick-ass bikes for the 90% of us nearer the middle of the bell curve.....

    Joules, your silence is deafening....

  15. #15
    Dropshot Champ!
    Reputation: redmr2_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,474
    Quote Originally Posted by robnow View Post

    - Keep the travel to 140mm, those 150+ 29ers are getting BIG and are overkill, 140-150 fork
    this is really big. People seem to think more is better, but in this case...it's just too much. The 150+ 29ers are ridiculous. They're massive. It's like a bus! They're more bike than a huge majority of people need.

    But then again, you see people on HD's climbing and descending fireroads. So yeah. I get the 1 bike do-it-all dilemma, but most of us don't need full gnar-biscuit enduro bikes.

  16. #16
    Too Much Fun
    Reputation: benja55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,954

    True that

    Quote Originally Posted by redmr2_man View Post
    The 150+ 29ers are ridiculous. They're massive. It's like a bus! They're more bike than a huge majority of people need.
    Could not agree MORE. YES.

    I was looking at a new Spesh 29'er in a LBS and was stunned at how tall it was. I'm 5"8" and this thing was my size apparently, and I just looked at it and had a hard time getting my head around riding something that BIG
    (insert joke of your choice there )

    Quote Originally Posted by redmr2_man View Post
    But then again, you see people on HD's climbing and descending fireroads. So yeah. I get the 1 bike do-it-all dilemma, but most of us don't need full gnar-biscuit enduro bikes.
    YEP. 95% of MTBs sold are never ridden within a fraction of their potential. And that's FINE, but lets face it there is a vaaaast surplus of travel in the world that is rarely if ever needed.
    - -benja- -

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,505
    ...and if Ibis released a 160mm travel 29er tomorrow, every person in this thread would be slurping the koolaid till they passed out.

    Any time you want to make the "but you don't need that much travel" argument, don't. No one needs any travel at all. But they'll ride what they like. My guess is that most people haven't ridden a single 150mm 29er, since only a handful of models exist, and almost no one has ridden more than one so as to have an informed opinion about the class as a whole.

  18. #18
    Too Much Fun
    Reputation: benja55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,954

    KoolAid can be deadly

    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    ...and if Ibis released a 160mm travel 29er tomorrow, every person in this thread would be slurping the koolaid till they passed out.
    ...feel free to speak for yourself!

    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Any time you want to make the "but you don't need that much travel" argument, don't. No one needs any travel at all. But they'll ride what they like.
    100% true, but my point was just that: it's "FINE" that people ride what they like, but there's a vast difference between "want" and "need". Do some riders "need" longer travel bikes? Definitely. There are areas where having more travel will definitely be a benefit (AZ, UT, BC are a few spots that come immediately to mind), and have a positive qualitative impact for some riders.

    ...but really most riders don't "need" more travel. But they WANT it. Because more has to be better, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    My guess is that most people haven't ridden a single 150mm 29er, since only a handful of models exist, and almost no one has ridden more than one so as to have an informed opinion about the class as a whole.
    I've only done parking lot rides on the a longer travel Spesh and the BMC. Not real trail rides. Done a lot of trail rides on the TallBoy LTc, and IMO, that's about as much travel as I think I'd ever put on a 29er.

    Like I think I mentioned, at 5'8" I'm not a taller person and while I dig my HT 29" for XC riding, I don't like the super tall feel of the long travel 29ers.

    27.5 feels just about perfect for me. Anyway, opinions are fun and everyone's got one!

    Time to go ride
    - -benja- -

  19. #19
    MSH
    MSH is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MSH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by miles wadsworth View Post
    I am not much of a complainer, so I will just say I am very happy with the Ripley. My cables are clean and quiet and my local conditions don't require large tires. The bike rides like a dream.
    ^^^this^^^
    I think the bike and Ibis in general are top notch. This is my first go at an Ibis and i couldnt be happier. Their CS reminds me of Turner. These are the types of companies I tend to stay loyal to and love to support.
    My Ripley has single handedly allowed me to climb the Strava ladder to KOM to 3rd on all the major descents on my local trails.

    If I was to ***** about anything maybe the cable routing through headtube...only because it appears to have caused grief for others (mine has been perfectly fine so far). I don't see myself doing a Hans Dampf 2.35 in the back so not concerned nor had issues with tire clearance.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    316
    FYI, no way to do internal dropper post routing with the eccentric pivots used for Ripley suspension; they completely block the seat tube. Hans was asked about this...

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    63
    Loving my Rip so comments below are nice to haves, not necessities.

    - tidy up the cable routing in general, does NOT have to be internal. Includes mounts for moto rear brake and dropper cable on RHS of HT.
    - provisions for internal dropper post cable, cable could get past eccentrics if ST was changed.
    - more room for XX1 156 cranks on NDS
    - non proprietary seat binder. It scares me that I couldn't get a new binder from the LBS

    I love the way the bike handles with a 140 up front but don't need the travel most times so maybe a slightly slacker HA?

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    234
    I've read quite a few posts of owners not being entirely happy with the Ripply's internal cable routing.
    Being a CF frame, I wonder why Ibis doesn't just provide an external cable routing kit.
    It would only be a few cable guides, pop rivets, paper templates and instructions.
    They could provide it as a DIY kit or an LBS kit. Either way, seems like a simple solution that would make many happy.

    Just my 2c

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    115
    Why does everyone complain about the internal routing? I'm running xx1 and its 100% silent and the rear derailler cable and brake cable are perfectly silent and everything was took maybe 10 min more to install.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    348
    The routing issues discussed so far are:

    - The cables that exit from the top tube are suspended "in mid air" above the shock. This looks messy on an otherwise clean-looking bike.
    - If you run a 2x setup and a LHS dropper remote, you will need to run the shifter and dropper cables in a very tight arc on the LHS of the top tube. This can cause kinks, extra friction, paint damage and additional cable damage in case of a crash.
    - You need to secure the cables together under the tup tube to avoid fore and aft movement as the suspension cyles. This can be seen as a annoyance by some and can cause damage to the paint around the head tube exit-holes as documented on MTBR.
    - The internal rub-issue on the fork steerer tube seems only to happen on non-crossed cables (otherwise they arc along the inside wall of the head tube).
    - The finish around the head tube exit holes is not great.
    - No option to run an internal dropper post routing or a cable exit hole above the links.

    It is a bit diffucult to understand why the routing based on non-crossed cables (on the LHS brake line and LHS dropper remote) was chosen and why there are no RHS cable mounts. What is the idea behind this? Seems very un-Ibis like.

    Hans?

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    348

    Suggested improvements for Ripley

    Deleted

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. suggested fork air pressure
    By Michaud in forum Rocky Mountain
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-09-2013, 05:31 PM
  2. Suggested Sedona Rides
    By Rzar in forum Arizona
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-28-2012, 12:59 PM
  3. Sedona Suggested Ride of the DAY
    By traildoc in forum Arizona
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-15-2012, 05:58 PM
  4. Suggested McDowell Route?
    By pointerDixie214 in forum Arizona
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-02-2011, 10:30 AM
  5. HD, any SL-R like improvements on the way?
    By brankulo in forum Ibis
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-14-2011, 12:19 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
  •