Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 391
  1. #1
    fc
    fc is online now
    stoked Administrator
    Reputation: fc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    28,452

    New Intense T275 Carbon

    IPA will save America

  2. #2
    Dude, got any schwag?
    Reputation: TheSchwagman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    842
    Sweet!
    Billy

    Speed is sweet, it's like an avenue to
    ... Shredtopia!

  3. #3
    Lord of the Chain Rings
    Reputation: orastreet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    118
    What is driving me nuts - is that no one is explaining why Intense has a Tracer 275 and a Carbine 275 that basically the same bike. If I wanted a 6 inch Trail/Enduro bike in Carbon with 275 I would go with the Carbine if I wanted Aluminum I would go with the Tracer. So what is the difference between the Carbine and Tracer C?
    Uzzi

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by orastreet View Post
    What is driving me nuts - is that no one is explaining why Intense has a Tracer 275 and a Carbine 275 that basically the same bike. If I wanted a 6 inch Trail/Enduro bike in Carbon with 275 I would go with the Carbine if I wanted Aluminum I would go with the Tracer. So what is the difference between the Carbine and Tracer C?
    Slight geometry tweaks and a lot of hype. I would expect the Carbine to disappear from the lineup soon.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: scottay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    903
    And internal cable routing. You get more media hype with a new model than you would with just some frame updates.....looks a little beefier too. Has that new buzzword "Enduro" attached to it.
    .

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    459
    Quote Originally Posted by orastreet View Post
    What is driving me nuts - is that no one is explaining why Intense has a Tracer 275 and a Carbine 275 that basically the same bike. If I wanted a 6 inch Trail/Enduro bike in Carbon with 275 I would go with the Carbine if I wanted Aluminum I would go with the Tracer. So what is the difference between the Carbine and Tracer C?
    Seems like pretty minor changes. Sliiiiightly different geo, internal cable routing. No more dropouts for 275.

  7. #7
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,743
    "Enduro"
    Ohhhh, sexy.

    New colors too, don't forget that.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    182
    I'm just hoping that these geometry tweaks and the niceties like internal cable routing make their way to the Aluminum Tracer. I guess it's a little different because they're still selling through back-stock of the current Tracer 275, but can Sam or anyone comment on when we might see the updates to the aluminum Tracer?
    You guys wanna ride bikes?

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    506
    What disturbs me is frame only prices pushing well past $3K and completes for more than $10K... I will wait a while till the hype dies down and pick up a frame cheap. I got my Carbine brand new for half that price.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by gretch View Post
    Slight geometry tweaks and a lot of hype. I would expect the Carbine to disappear from the lineup soon.
    I would agree on your speculation that the Carbine 275 might be getting dropped from the line, but with how much praise the Carbine 29 has gotten, I would guess the Carbine 29 is gonna be around for a few years.

    The Carbine 275 seems to be focused on 'foundation builds' this year with lower level components to have bikes at a lower price point. The Tracer T275 seemingly is only out in pro level (XX1, XTR, XO1) builds at the moment.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    568
    The Carbine is a 26" bike (converted), and the T275 is, well a dedicated 275 design. Subtle, but significant in performance terms.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by WilliamK View Post
    The Carbine is a 26" bike (converted), and the T275 is, well a dedicated 275 design. Subtle, but significant in performance terms.
    interesting...Im curious to understand more about the subtle improvements...can you elaborate?

  13. #13
    Old school BMXer
    Reputation: Blaster1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,678
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    Apparently the "reviewer" [advertorial writer] wasn't paying attention.

    - The travel is adjustable to 145 mm, not 140 mm.
    - This bike does not have G1 dropouts.
    - The bottom bracket was not raised to 13.5". Heck, if that's actually correct, the bottom bracket was lowered to 13.5".
    - The explanation of the brake forces applied to the rear mount is made-up BS.
    - Yes, Intense refers to this bike as the Tracer T275, not Tracer 275C as the 'author' described.

    If you want a more accurate and meaningful review, check this out: 2014 Intense Tracer T275 Carbon Pro ? Reviews, Comparisons, Specs ? Mountain Bikes - Vital MTB
    May the air be filled with tires!

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    133
    There seems to be a bunch of numbers on the site that are possibly wrong. Stand over 31.40 for a Med? 45.25 for a Wheel base ,thats LONG.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dogboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by zootsuitbass View Post
    45.25 for a Wheel base ,thats LONG.
    Sounds right to me.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    133
    For a med?

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dogboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by zootsuitbass View Post
    For a med?
    Yeah, my medium Yeti SB66 which is in the same category (albeit with 26" wheels) has a 45.4" wheelbase. Anytime you mix a reasonably slack headangle and a front center long enough to work properly with a short stem, the end result is going to be a longish wheelbase. The key IMHO is keeping the chainstays reasonably short (as Intense does) so the bike still turns well.

  18. #18
    WheelBanger
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    100
    The new Tracer 275 looks stunning. I like the way it keeps the shape of the aluminum frames top tube. Looks to be more burly than a Carbine 275, put the posted weight says not. My medium Carbine frame weighted 5.7 lbs, just hope my 6 month old Carbine doesn't become a bike of the past.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: scottay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    903
    Agree on the shape. Losing the alu. dropouts and hardware probably shaved some weight compared to the Carbine.
    .
    .

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by bluesrider View Post
    The new Tracer 275 looks stunning. I like the way it keeps the shape of the aluminum frames top tube. Looks to be more burly than a Carbine 275, put the posted weight says not. My medium Carbine frame weighted 5.7 lbs, just hope my 6 month old Carbine doesn't become a bike of the past.
    It just may... gotta love planned obsolescence in the bike industry. The companies love dangling new carrots in front of us to keep their pockets padded and ours empty... I still love my Carbine 275 and while the T275 looks to be well executed its not enough of a change to warrant a purchase at least for me.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    133
    Med. Wheelbases

    Tracer 45.25
    Carbine 44.2
    Bronson 44.9
    Mach 6 44.85

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dogboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by zootsuitbass View Post
    Med. Wheelbases

    Tracer 45.25 - Steeper head angle, shorter reach
    Carbine 44.2 - Steeper head angle, shorter reach
    Bronson 44.9 - Steeper head angle, shorter reach, longer chainstays
    Mach 6 44.85 - Shorter chainstays, shorter reach (almost 1/2" shorter)
    The point is all the numbers add up and things like a 1/2 degree head angle change (coupled with the length of a 160mm fork) does have a meaningful effect on wheelbase. Also worth mentioning that the T275 has more travel than all of the other bikes you listed.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    133
    Cool...so it's normal...

    How about a 31.25 stand over?

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6
    Anyone else noticed the geometry chart in the intense site is slightly different to the ones on pinkbike/nsmb etc? Mainly slightly longer reach and wheelbase measurements, as well as an extra large size! Anyone know which geo chart is correct?

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: aliikane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    962
    Quote Originally Posted by orastreet View Post
    What is driving me nuts - is that no one is explaining why Intense has a Tracer 275 and a Carbine 275 that basically the same bike. If I wanted a 6 inch Trail/Enduro bike in Carbon with 275 I would go with the Carbine if I wanted Aluminum I would go with the Tracer. So what is the difference between the Carbine and Tracer C?
    My guess is that they are gonna close out the Carbine that has some issues and made the new Tracer 27.5 that has the necessary corrections.

    For example, I just got my Carbine 27.5. 3 rides on it and I already have tire clearance issues. Running a 2.3 Maxxis Minnion DHR tire which should be a standard tire for this rig and it is rubbing when I bottom out. So, I took the air out of the shock and compressed the suspension and the tire touches the seat tube. Now, I have to run it at 5.5" (low travel 140mm) which makes the ride unbalanced with a 160mm fork or get a small tire with less tread. Not good.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by aliikane View Post
    My guess is that they are gonna close out the Carbine that has some issues and made the new Tracer 27.5 that has the necessary corrections.

    For example, I just got my Carbine 27.5. 3 rides on it and I already have tire clearance issues. Running a 2.3 Maxxis Minnion DHR tire which should be a standard tire for this rig and it is rubbing when I bottom out. So, I took the air out of the shock and compressed the suspension and the tire touches the seat tube. Now, I have to run it at 5.5" (low travel 140mm) which makes the ride unbalanced with a 160mm fork or get a small tire with less tread. Not good.
    I'm running a 2.25 Hans Dampf which is a bigger volume tire and no issues at full travel that I can see.

  27. #27
    The MTB Lab
    Reputation: pastajet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaster1200 View Post
    Apparently the "reviewer" [advertorial writer] wasn't paying attention.

    - The travel is adjustable to 145 mm, not 140 mm.
    - This bike does not have G1 dropouts.
    - The bottom bracket was not raised to 13.5". Heck, if that's actually correct, the bottom bracket was lowered to 13.5".
    - The explanation of the brake forces applied to the rear mount is made-up BS.
    - Yes, Intense refers to this bike as the Tracer T275, not Tracer 275C as the 'author' described.

    If you want a more accurate and meaningful review, check this out: 2014 Intense Tracer T275 Carbon Pro ? Reviews, Comparisons, Specs ? Mountain Bikes - Vital MTB
    I had mistakenly put the G1 dropouts, in there that was my error. Before they officially launched their new web site the spec I was given the 140mm travel figure. I had corrected both of those values 2 days ago. And the normal alloy Tracer 275 has a 13.3" bb height while the 275C has a 13.5".

    As far as the braking info, I can't vouch for that, that was the info I was given from the engineers at Seed Engineering, who said they tested the forces.

    Again, they altered the name of the bike from the press camp info, I was originally given the naming of 275C. Notice the same issue with Pinkbike?

  28. #28
    The MTB Lab
    Reputation: pastajet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,436
    The Carbide 275 Carbon is a 150mm bike, while the T275 is a 160mm bike.

  29. #29
    The MTB Lab
    Reputation: pastajet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,436
    Quote Originally Posted by BluePigMatt View Post
    Anyone else noticed the geometry chart in the intense site is slightly different to the ones on pinkbike/nsmb etc? Mainly slightly longer reach and wheelbase measurements, as well as an extra large size! Anyone know which geo chart is correct?
    Intense gave the press some early specs and geometry charts, and after we published our articles on the bike, their new web site had different numbers. They also changed the name on us from 275C to T275.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    133
    One of the articles touted a "industry leading" stand over clearance of 28". For me this a huge spec and I've been waiting/hoping for the 31.4 on the site to change. Any ideas on which is true?

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ozzer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by zootsuitbass View Post
    One of the articles touted a "industry leading" stand over clearance of 28". For me this a huge spec and I've been waiting/hoping for the 31.4 on the site to change. Any ideas on which is true?

    I measured 28"

  32. #32
    I fix your broken ****!
    Reputation: Sam-IntenseCustServ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    353
    Sam Wilson
    Things & Stuff Specialist
    Beer Drinker
    Intense Cycles, Inc.
    Sam@Intensecycles.com

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: scottay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    903
    I liked the roots.....and the doxies!
    .
    .

  34. #34
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,745
    I like the new rear swingarm and how the stealth routing is now out the seat tube. The carbon designs are getting better with each generation. Looks a bit more like a Santa Cruz, though on one of the last gen carbon Intense frame, the inside didn't look very smooth. Hope that was improved this time. Hopefully less chance of creaking in the new rear triangle too.

    I gotta say, the basic 1 solid color Intense decal, especially the font chosen for it, look lame. The Tracer T275 decal looks nice though. I don't have a prob with red or grey, but either the camera and lighting sucked or those are dull/soft shades of red and grey. The red scheme looks good in general, especially with the subtle contrast of white text, but I wonder if it would be better if it were a deeper red. Whoever's behind these decals, and other decals such as the Spider 29 Comp top tube decal (Blk/Gold version), is/are an embarrassment to Intense; I'd rather have a nude frame than those decals. Considering the $3199 asking price for the frame, 10% of that could've bought a much nicer finish.
    Last edited by Varaxis; 03-21-2014 at 11:02 AM.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,573
    Love the look of the new bike, can't wait to give it a go soon!

  36. #36
    Old school BMXer
    Reputation: Blaster1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,678
    Quote Originally Posted by pastajet View Post
    Intense gave the press some early specs and geometry charts, and after we published our articles on the bike, their new web site had different numbers. They also changed the name on us from 275C to T275.
    Yes, I don't doubt they changed the name...and the specs. And as such, Intense's claimed specs have commonly been off from the actual specs. For example, you mentioned that the Tracer 27.5 had a bottom bracket height of 13.3", but I don't think any bike actually had a BB that low. Unless they had 26" wheels in the 27.5 dropouts.
    May the air be filled with tires!

  37. #37
    Old school BMXer
    Reputation: Blaster1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,678
    I recently saw some pics of the complete bike, and while the internally routed cables - or most of them - look great, the dropper cable is routed right down the top of the down tube. Looked like hell. How the hell could they have screwed that one up so badly. Was there some engineering issue that prevented them from doing that properly?
    May the air be filled with tires!

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaster1200 View Post
    I recently saw some pics of the complete bike, and while the internally routed cables - or most of them - look great, the dropper cable is routed right down the top of the down tube. Looked like hell. How the hell could they have screwed that one up so badly. Was there some engineering issue that prevented them from doing that properly?
    Yes apparently the angle near the BB would be too tight for cable actuated dropper posts to function correctly.

  39. #39
    ride
    Reputation: ignazjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaster1200 View Post
    ...you mentioned that the Tracer 27.5 had a bottom bracket height of 13.3", but I don't think any bike actually had a BB that low. Unless they had 26" wheels in the 27.5 dropouts.
    My Tracer 27.5 measures just a hair over 13" with a Pike 150, High Roller II 2.4 front tire and Vigilante 2.3 rear tire.
    Redstone Cyclery
    intense*transition*rocky mountain*turner
    web - tweet - FB
    Lyons, CO

  40. #40
    Old school BMXer
    Reputation: Blaster1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,678
    Quote Originally Posted by ignazjr View Post
    My Tracer 27.5 measures just a hair over 13" with a Pike 150, High Roller II 2.4 front tire and Vigilante 2.3 rear tire.
    Interesting.
    What's different on your bike than the ones described in this thread? (I know, most are Carbines, but aren't those about the same height?)
    What is the true Carbine 275 BB height with a Fox 34 150 and a Fox 34 160
    May the air be filled with tires!

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by 7pointme View Post
    i'm just hoping that these geometry tweaks and the niceties like internal cable routing make their way to the aluminum tracer. I guess it's a little different because they're still selling through back-stock of the current tracer 275, but can sam or anyone comment on when we might see the updates to the aluminum tracer?
    x2!

  42. #42
    ride
    Reputation: ignazjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,224
    I'm running a Pike on the front. Little bit shorter fork than the Fox.
    Redstone Cyclery
    intense*transition*rocky mountain*turner
    web - tweet - FB
    Lyons, CO

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    124
    I've ridden all formats of both bikes, all size mediums - Tracer VP, Tracer 2, Tracer 275, Carbine SL, Carbine, and now the T275.

    This bike blows everything out of the water! Light, low, true sizing, short chain stay, excellent shock rate, the right head angle, bb is low (sick, but took a ride to get used to), easy to build (internal routing was a breeze). The bigger wheels have more advantages and didn't notice any disadvantages.

    I loved the Tracer 2, but the small bump and mid-stroke wasn't nearly as dialled as the T275.

    Just try it. Then make a statement

  44. #44
    Old school BMXer
    Reputation: Blaster1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,678
    Quote Originally Posted by big bear View Post
    I've ridden all formats of both bikes, all size mediums - Tracer VP, Tracer 2, Tracer 275, Carbine SL, Carbine, and now the T275.

    This bike blows everything out of the water! Light, low, true sizing, short chain stay, excellent shock rate, the right head angle, bb is low (sick, but took a ride to get used to), easy to build (internal routing was a breeze). The bigger wheels have more advantages and didn't notice any disadvantages.

    I loved the Tracer 2, but the small bump and mid-stroke wasn't nearly as dialled as the T275.

    Just try it. Then make a statement
    Good to hear!

    My last Intense trail bike was the Tracer VP, and that thing was horrible, so I'm glad to hear they finally built a good frame again (the SlopeStyle was my favorite geometry-wise, but had lots of other issues - at least the second one was straight).
    May the air be filled with tires!

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bradical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    244
    What is the shock size and stroke?
    7.875 x 2.25 ? or 7.875 x 2.2?

  46. #46
    The MTB Lab
    Reputation: pastajet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,436
    200×57 mm (7.875 x 2.25 )

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bradical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    244
    Hmm, 200 x 57 (7.875 x 2.25)
    I hope so, that would mean my Bronson's CCDB Air CS would fit.

    However If I check Cane Creeks web page they claim its 200 x 55 (7.875 x 3.5)
    but 55 mm isn't 3.5 inches....
    So I'm confused.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by Bradical View Post
    Hmm, 200 x 57 (7.875 x 2.25)
    I hope so, that would mean my Bronson's CCDB Air CS would fit.

    However If I check Cane Creeks web page they claim its 200 x 55 (7.875 x 3.5)
    but 55 mm isn't 3.5 inches....
    So I'm confused.
    Cane Creek has a typo on their site... its definitely 200 x 57, so your CCDB Air will fit.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    26
    Just waiting on a bottom bracket for my Next SL cranks.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails New Intense T275 Carbon-bikepic.jpg  


  50. #50
    Old school BMXer
    Reputation: Blaster1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,678
    /\ Nice build!!!

    Could you measure the bottom bracket height?

    I was looking at Jenson's website, and they're showing the chainstay length as effective instead of actual. Sam, could you clarify if the 17" measurement is effective or actual? I believe Intense has always measured actual, but I don't recall.
    May the air be filled with tires!

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    60
    VPP 3rd Generation is out...will wait for the update for the UzziC 27.5

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    471
    Quote Originally Posted by bashtee View Post
    VPP 3rd Generation is out...will wait for the update for the UzziC 27.5

    Wont have to wait , this is the Uzzi...

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: scottay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    903
    This is the new Uzzi? Nomad | Santa Cruz Bicycles

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by motoguru2007 View Post
    Wont have to wait , this is the Uzzi...
    Not so sure about that...

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    133
    Who's got one?

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    I have had one for a week now. Ive rode it three times now and will have a complete ride report by the end of the week. Waiting on a new wheelset that will be here today.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308

    Cool-blue Rhythm

    New Intense T275 Carbon-image.jpg

    I'll be riding it tomorrow
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440

    New Large Tracer T275

    I got my large Tracer T275 almost 2 weeks ago and have had about 6 rides on it at this point. I finally have some ok pics to post as well. I thought I'd offer my perspective on this new ride as I have had pretty much every VPP trail bike that Intense has put out. Starting with the SC Blur, 5.5, 6.6, Tracer VP, Uzzi VP, Carbine 26 and then Carbine 275 and now a Tracer T275. I even had a Uzzi Dh at one time that was a really fun heavy trail bike back in it's day. I like to ride bikes that compromise a little on the climbing efficiency for better cornering, a bike that is easy to manual, more stable DHing and a all around more fun bike. The Uzzi VP that I had was built up very light at 31 lbs. and a very fun bike in the shorter travel mode with a RS Monarch Air and a 160mm RS Lyric Solo Air and a very lightweight wheel set. I say this because I think the Tracer T275 reminds me of the Uzzi VP a little. T275 feels very stable at higher speeds going downhill. It carries speed so well that the bike encourages you to let it go faster. I found myself coming into corners far faster than I'm used to and having to really brake hard. Coming from the Carbine, the T275 feels more like it is leaning more toward the Uzzi VP in short travel mode but much lighter and more efficient. For those of you that are wondering why Intense would release a new frame that is so close to the Carbine 275. I think that the two bikes are very similar but the T275 is a no compromise Enduro Race bike. I think that there is still room in the Intense line up for the Carbine however. Much like the Carbine SL was intended. It would be a good idea for Intense to do some refining of the Carbine much like the T275 with internal routing, stealth routing, dedicated axle, carbon pivot bores instead of alloy(carbine) and last but not least, the beautiful new lines of the T275 frame are simply sexy. The Carbine could be more of a Trail bike, maybe lighter weight with 145mm – 150mm. Maybe a little more climbing friendly.
    The T275 climbs well but I would say that the Carbine was pretty much just as capable. Where the T275 really stands apart from the Carbine is when you point it DH. You can feel the slightly longer wheelbase and the lower BB but it does corner like on rails. The frame does feel stiffer than the Carbine but I am also running Industry 9 wheels and I was on Stan's Crest wheels on the Carbine.
    Overall I thought I'd try to compare the T275 to other recent Intense offerings. I hope this helps any of you decide if this should be your next bike.

    Here is the build:
    Large T275
    RS Monacrch RC3
    RS Pike Solo Air 160mm
    Industry Nine Trail Wheelset
    Sram XX1, 32T
    Shimano XT Brakes
    Cane Creak HS
    Raceface Carbon bar
    Ergo Pro Carbon seat
    RS Reverb Stealth dropper post
    Schwabe Nobby Nic front/ Razor Rock rear
    Thomson 70mm stem
    Crank Brothers pedals

    26 lbs. 14 oz.

    New Intense T275 Carbon-img_1203.jpgNew Intense T275 Carbon-img_1209.jpgAttachment 886473New Intense T275 Carbon-img_1206.jpg
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails New Intense T275 Carbon-img_1211.jpg  


  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Ride, your bike looks rad! Glad your happy i should have mine finished this morning and hopefully have a ride in this afternoonNew Intense T275 Carbon-image.jpg I'll have some better pics
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    506
    Nice T275s

    Just one comment about the Carbine in regards to descending is that the right shock can transform that frame into a great descender... for me it was bolting on the BOS Kirk.

  61. #61
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,895
    Quote Originally Posted by vice grips View Post
    Ride, your bike looks rad! Glad your happy i should have mine finished this morning and hopefully have a ride in this afternoon I'll have some better pics
    Needz carbon hoops!
    Nice steed you have there. Bring it to Highland!

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by StiHacka View Post
    Needz carbon hoops!
    Nice steed you have there. Bring it to Highland!
    Rims have been ordered Mr STI
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    Im sure that a rear shock like the BOS and DB Air would definitely be a improvement from the Fox. I thought the Carbine was a pretty good decender but I think the T275 is better. The lower BB and little longer WB help. The frame is noticeably stiffer as well.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    369
    So, pedals great, descends better.

    I'm seriously considering this bike to replace my 650b heckler.

    I really like the heckler, but am doing a full race season w/ the CA enduro series, downieville and xc thur night races.
    so,
    I think dropping some weight and having a more refined rear suspension may pay off this summer.

    any thoughts on this bike vs the heckler, and the comments about it squating down into the travel on techy uphill moves, ledges etc in some pro reviews.

    Thx!

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    I guess I can understand these comments from the reviews that you mentioned. I read them as well. In the long travel position, the bike tends to squat a little more than some designs out there especially when standing up and really laying down some power when climbing on techy steep, slow stuff. This is where the bike reminds me a little of the Uzzi VP that I had. It has little longer(wheelbase) so techy, turny climbing is a little tougher than I imagine the heckler to be. But in the short travel mode, the bike climbs much better.
    I'm not sure how many others out there do this, but the rides around here usually start with a long consistent climb and then a long consistent downhill. So I have always started my rides with the sag(rear shock air pressure) set with the bike in long travel mode but then put the bolt in the short travel position. You can then change to long travel mode when you get to the top and have the rear shock setup for the DH. The air pressure will be a little high when climbing but I have found that I barely notice it. Rider positioning is better in the short travel position as it puts the rider above the pedals more which allows for better power transfer whereas int he longer travel mode, you kinda feel like the pedals are in front of you a little.
    I can't speak to the comparison between the Heckler and the T275 but I do think that you would find this ride to be much more efficient and refined. The frame is a work of art as well. I miss the welds that made me a lifer on Intense bikes but there is something futuristic about the way carbon frames flow from front to back. Seamless. I had a Carbine prior to this frame. I thought the Carbine was beautiful but the T275 is on another level as far as looks. The rear triangle alone is a big improvement.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    Thanks VG! so does yours. Enjoy the ride! I hope you like to go fast

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    369
    Quote Originally Posted by Ridnw/bear View Post
    I guess I can understand these comments from the reviews that you mentioned. I read them as well. In the long travel position, the bike tends to squat a little more than some designs out there especially when standing up and really laying down some power when climbing on techy steep, slow stuff. This is where the bike reminds me a little of the Uzzi VP that I had. It has little longer(wheelbase) so techy, turny climbing is a little tougher than I imagine the heckler to be. But in the short travel mode, the bike climbs much better.
    I'm not sure how many others out there do this, but the rides around here usually start with a long consistent climb and then a long consistent downhill. So I have always started my rides with the sag(rear shock air pressure) set with the bike in long travel mode but then put the bolt in the short travel position. You can then change to long travel mode when you get to the top and have the rear shock setup for the DH. The air pressure will be a little high when climbing but I have found that I barely notice it. Rider positioning is better in the short travel position as it puts the rider above the pedals more which allows for better power transfer whereas int he longer travel mode, you kinda feel like the pedals are in front of you a little.
    I can't speak to the comparison between the Heckler and the T275 but I do think that you would find this ride to be much more efficient and refined. The frame is a work of art as well. I miss the welds that made me a lifer on Intense bikes but there is something futuristic about the way carbon frames flow from front to back. Seamless. I had a Carbine prior to this frame. I thought the Carbine was beautiful but the T275 is on another level as far as looks. The rear triangle alone is a big improvement.
    I have to admit, Ridnw, this post has just about talked me out of this ride.
    seems it may be too descent oriented for me if you like to change travel modes for climbing and descending. in some bikes, my heckler included, I'll change compression from fully open to trail, but many bikes I even leave fully open always (dw bikes).
    a race like downieville, you climb for 1hr, then descend for most of 1.25 to 1.5hrs. no time for changing anything in setup after blasting your lungs for 4k vert.

    one question, does changing the travel change the bb height?
    maybe running this one at 150 w/ my 150 travel fork would be a good compromise, but I don't want to lower the bb anymore.

    also, I really hate the feeling of being being behind the pedals you mention. that is why I liked the 74 seat angle on this one on paper.

    thx,
    Holiday

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    133
    "maybe running this one at 145 w/ 150 travel fork would be a good compromise,"

    I'm wondering about how this one would perform set up this way. I like the room-ier reach on the frame. I want a little less bike than 160/160 although the option for converting on a rowdier sunday is appealing.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    I dont think that there is really a need to change back and forth between travel modes during one ride, I am just kinda a nerd like that As is with all Intense frames, they are designed to be used as either a 160mm fork/ bolt in long travel mode setup or 150mm fork/ bolt in short travel mode setup. Not back and forth during the same ride, I just find that I like to climb in the short travel mode better than the long. However, I dont mind climbing in the long travel mode. It's plenty efficient, it's just doesnt climb as well. I think for your purpose, you could do a travel adjust fork or a RS Pike in 150mm and have a $40 160mm travel rod that is really easy to install on hand for most of your riding. The T275 does climb well in short travel mode and a 160mm pike so maybe having a 150mm fork is not all that important.
    I'm pretty sure that there is no change in BB height or HA when changing between the two positions just leverage ratio on the rear shock.

    Its good to have options in how you set the bike up.

    Just to add to this. I did a ride today that has a lot of ups and downs in it. Short fun, flowy downhills followed by 5 -20 minute climbs. I used the long travel mode the whole time and loved it. It climbed well and the compression in the rear was wide open. I also rode the bike a few days ago on the same trail in the short travel mode and felt like I was faster. I say this because I think the bike is more fun in long travel mode but probably faster in short travel mode unless you intend to do some serious DH. The T275 in long travel mode feels like it can handle some pretty tough Enduro courses like I've seen they have over in europe.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    I do like the long top tube on this. It is roomy. Im running a 70mm stem and might try a 60mm.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by vice grips View Post
    Ride, your bike looks rad! Glad your happy i should have mine finished this morning and hopefully have a ride in this afternoonClick image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	583 
Size:	178.6 KB 
ID:	886527 I'll have some better pics
    Did you ride your new bike yet? Curious what you think if the ride.

  72. #72
    Lord of the Chain Rings
    Reputation: orastreet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    118
    Quote Originally Posted by motoguru2007 View Post
    Wont have to wait , this is the Uzzi...
    I went from an Uzzi to a Tracer 275. I did not notice much difference in the Tracer 275 at the 6inch travel setting and the Uzzi in the 7 inch setting. This might be why Intense isn't pumping out a 275 Uzzi.
    Uzzi

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by Ridnw/bear View Post
    Did you ride your new bike yet? Curious what you think if the ride.
    Hay ridnwn, i have gotten out on three rides so far. Still dialing my suspension. Forks a little stiff and rear shock is a little soft. My home town trails that I know so well and will be the true test for the bike, are still under snow or really muddy. Hopefully this weekend I'll be riding them to get true brake down of this beauty.New Intense T275 Carbon-image.jpg
    New Intense T275 Carbon-image.jpg

    My last ride was a true spank fest, I was riding with a very fast in shape rider on a 29er stumpy. We were riding his home trails that were smooth flowy single track. I have a 32 tooth front ring which was not helping my preseason legs any.

    For the most part i could stay with him on the climbs. Only when he jumped out of the saddle he would start to slowly pull away. I couldn't match him riding like that with the way i had the rear shock set up. But I could slowly pull him back if I just stayed seated and put the power to the peddles.

    The bike feels longer in the front than the carbine and shorter in back, like 3/5 of the bike is in front of you, instead of being more balanced like the carbine. I could feel the wheel base was longer with the tracer C. I felt myself weighting the front wheel more to get it to steer throw a flat turn. I could have been really tired to. But i do know that feeling pretty well, when i ride my M9.

    The bike jumps very well. As well as flying off drops. I hit a few 4 foot drops, that felt much smaller even with the fork being to stiff. I noticed the length of the bike when I needed to low speed wheelie drop the bike, i was a little to far back to pick up on the bars. Something I'm sure I'll get used to.

    This thing just screams on the DH! I was riding with 5 guys that knew the trails very well. Two where more DHers than xc guys, I felt I could ride much faster than them, and could easily make up lost ground behind them. Even the fast 29er guy, mentioned how fast the bike was rolling when I stayed with him on trails that his bike should be faster on.

    I'll keep updating as I ride. Ones thing for sure this is a high quality bike!
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    102
    Best bike I've ever ridden. CCDBA-cs on the rear. Pike up front. Pro build - X01 drivetrain, XT brakes, flow ex wheels, answer carbon 780 bar, specialized purgatory grid rear tire and High roller 2 3c tr up front. Setup Tubeless. Large. 29.12 lbs on a park scale. My ccdba-cs adds .45 lbs. Can't imagine those I9 wheels, xx1 and tires are that much lighter to get down to 26.18 lbs like ridenw/bear's is though. 3lbs is a lot!

    Either way, I've had a tracer 2 for the past couple years and this thing destroys it on the downs and ups. It's longer than the tracer 2 so I find it climbs better and it seems to make you go faster on the flats and downhill. I thought my tracer 2 jumped great, but this thing propels you off jumps. I was landing at the bottom of the transitions of jumps that I usually have to throw the bike in front of me to make.

    Literally the most fun I've had on a bike in the past four years. Past four bikes being: T27.5 L, Specialized Carbon Enduro expert L, Tracer 2 L, Giant Reign 0 L.

    As far as the ccdba-cs goes, I have no idea if it's the suspension on this bike, or the shock, but the stock tune mates to this pike perfectly. The 1/2 lb penalty seems worth it to me, however I haven't ridden one with a Monarch plus, so I can't make that comparison.

    If you can make it work, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I like to buy and sell a bike every year to stay current, but I can see myself holding on to this one for a few years.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by markcjr View Post
    Best bike I've ever ridden. CCDBA-cs on the rear. Pike up front. Pro build - X01 drivetrain, XT brakes, flow ex wheels, answer carbon 780 bar, specialized purgatory grid rear tire and High roller 2 3c tr up front. Setup Tubeless. Large. 29.12 lbs on a park scale. My ccdba-cs adds .45 lbs. Can't imagine those I9 wheels, xx1 and tires are that much lighter to get down to 26.18 lbs like ridenw/bear's is though. 3lbs is a lot!

    Either way, I've had a tracer 2 for the past couple years and this thing destroys it on the downs and ups. It's longer than the tracer 2 so I find it climbs better and it seems to make you go faster on the flats and downhill. I thought my tracer 2 jumped great, but this thing propels you off jumps. I was landing at the bottom of the transitions of jumps that I usually have to throw the bike in front of me to make.

    Literally the most fun I've had on a bike in the past four years. Past four bikes being: T27.5 L, Specialized Carbon Enduro expert L, Tracer 2 L, Giant Reign 0 L.

    As far as the ccdba-cs goes, I have no idea if it's the suspension on this bike, or the shock, but the stock tune mates to this pike perfectly. The 1/2 lb penalty seems worth it to me, however I haven't ridden one with a Monarch plus, so I can't make that comparison.

    If you can make it work, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I like to buy and sell a bike every year to stay current, but I can see myself holding on to this one for a few years.
    Mine came in at 28.12 I have a max HR front and back and race face C bars but same build and size as you, i dont see why Ridens bike cant be that much less. The first thing i learned in drug dealing school is grams add up to pounds

    How does the T275 comprare to the C endro?
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    102
    Vicegrips, both our bars are carbon and ~ the same weight, and the tires weigh about the same, so maybe I read the scale wrong if yours is a pound lighter. Do you have the ccdba on there too? If everything else is the same, a pound variance just doesn't make sense.

    Feels stiffer than the enduro. I have a fox 36rc2 on the enduro with 2013 crossmax sx wheels. The t27.5 carries more speed through the same sections with less input to the handlebars. On the enduro, I had to really compress my bike before I hit a jump and use a lot of body english. The T275 not so much. Really just easier to ride all around. I'm running 780 bars on the intense, and had 750's on the Enduro. Not sure if that affects it.

    Trying to figure out what can be heavy on mine. Hanging from park scale at bike shop came in at 29.12lbs, on my bathroom scale 29lbs
    ccdba-cs
    standard "time" pedals
    stock seat
    Maybe I put 1/2 lb of stans sealant in?? doubt that though

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    26
    I'll echo Mark's thoughts, the bike is incredible.

    Mine comes in at 28.0 lbs, medium with a 785 Raceface SixC bar, 50mm Atlas stem, Raceface Next SL cranks, MRP AMG, and Derby rims on Hope Pro II Evos with A 2.3 DHF 3C EXO TR up front and a 2.25 Ardent EXO in back. I was hoping it'd be a bit lighter with all the carbon but it's a respectable weight especially compared to my Tracer2 at almost 33lbs.

    Sick bike, believe the hype!

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by markcjr View Post
    Best bike I've ever ridden. CCDBA-cs on the rear. Pike up front. Pro build - X01 drivetrain, XT brakes, flow ex wheels, answer carbon 780 bar, specialized purgatory grid rear tire and High roller 2 3c tr up front. Setup Tubeless. Large. 29.12 lbs on a park scale. My ccdba-cs adds .45 lbs. Can't imagine those I9 wheels, xx1 and tires are that much lighter to get down to 26.18 lbs like ridenw/bear's is though. 3lbs is a lot!

    Either way, I've had a tracer 2 for the past couple years and this thing destroys it on the downs and ups. It's longer than the tracer 2 so I find it climbs better and it seems to make you go faster on the flats and downhill. I thought my tracer 2 jumped great, but this thing propels you off jumps. I was landing at the bottom of the transitions of jumps that I usually have to throw the bike in front of me to make.

    Literally the most fun I've had on a bike in the past four years. Past four bikes being: T27.5 L, Specialized Carbon Enduro expert L, Tracer 2 L, Giant Reign 0 L.

    As far as the ccdba-cs goes, I have no idea if it's the suspension on this bike, or the shock, but the stock tune mates to this pike perfectly. The 1/2 lb penalty seems worth it to me, however I haven't ridden one with a Monarch plus, so I can't make that comparison.

    If you can make it work, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I like to buy and sell a bike every year to stay current, but I can see myself holding on to this one for a few years.
    My build came in just under 27 lbs. @ 26 lbs. 14 oz.
    I think the weight difference between my bike and vice grips or markcjr's is in the wheels, tires, pedals, stem and seat. And obvisiosly the CCDB is a little heavier as well.

    Industry Nine Trail wheelset is 1460 grams. This is the trail wheelset, not the enduro wheelset. I'll bet most of the weight difference is in the wheels/ tires. I am also running a 6" rotor in the rear and a 7" rotor in the front.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by Ridnw/bear View Post
    My build came in just under 27 lbs. @ 26 lbs. 14 oz.
    I think the weight difference between my bike and vice grips or markcjr's is in the wheels, tires, pedals, stem and seat. And obvisiosly the CCDB is a little heavier as well.

    Industry Nine Trail wheelset is 1460 grams. This is the trail wheelset, not the enduro wheelset. I'll bet most of the weight difference is in the wheels/ tires. I am also running a 6" rotor in the rear and a 7" rotor in the front.
    Wow, yeah, stans flow ex 27.5 are 1850g, so that's 390 grams for the wheels alone. Don't think I could run those at 200lbs without a pack.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    Hey markcjr and beaterdit,
    There is a picture thread for the T275. Where are the pics???
    Do either of you have a black/ white frame?

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by markcjr View Post
    Vicegrips, both our bars are carbon and ~ the same weight, and the tires weigh about the same, so maybe I read the scale wrong if yours is a pound lighter. Do you have the ccdba on there too? If everything else is the same, a pound variance just doesn't make sense.

    Feels stiffer than the enduro. I have a fox 36rc2 on the enduro with 2013 crossmax sx wheels. The t27.5 carries more speed through the same sections with less input to the handlebars. On the enduro, I had to really compress my bike before I hit a jump and use a lot of body english. The T275 not so much. Really just easier to ride all around. I'm running 780 bars on the intense, and had 750's on the Enduro. Not sure if that affects it.

    Trying to figure out what can be heavy on mine. Hanging from park scale at bike shop came in at 29.12lbs, on my bathroom scale 29lbs
    ccdba-cs
    standard "time" pedals
    stock seat
    Maybe I put 1/2 lb of stans sealant in?? doubt that though

    Yup I Have ccdb, i know its more lbs than RS. I'm still working out the kinks out the rear shock(settings), i have XT peddles. I know the scale is on, the same as the post office scale in weights of stuff that i ship out. I am build up some derby rims with some hope evo 2s, hopfully it drops some more weight. Im not sure how much but i think this bike weights less than my XT carbine, and yes we need to see some pics
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    102
    Yep I do, i'll throw some up later. Vicegrips, I just went with the stock tune that cc recommends for the t275 and it's awesome. I'm 200lbs dry, 212 with riding gear. I think I ran it at 182 psi to get 17mm sag. Plush almost all the way through, and then it just ramps up perfectly right at the end for hitting any shape kicker I could find. At lower speeds though, it just tended to suck stuff up as opposed to pop off small rocks on the trail. I'd rather have it mach down rocky sections then perform perfectly on a transition than pop off little rocks and buck me off a gap jump. I probably won't try to fix that though, as I hate fiddling with things. I ran 17mm sag and never ended up bottoming out, even when I cased one transition. No matter how hard I smashed into something, I couldn't get the o ring to the end of the shaft - do the ccdba have a built in bottoming out feature? My buddy bought one with monarch plus rc3, so I'll try that in a couple weeks. I figured since I had never tried the ccdba, I'd give it a go, and if I like the monarch just as much, I can always sell the ccdba and buy the monarch. Gotta love no interest credit cards.

    Edit: The bike is poppy.....when you are going fast! I was going slow down a few fire roads and it was just sucking up the rocks on the side of the trail. But as soon as you open it up and let it plane out, the bike takes off. It rewards you more the faster you ride.
    Last edited by markcjr; 05-07-2014 at 05:32 PM.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by markcjr View Post
    Yep I do, i'll throw some up later. Vicegrips, I just went with the stock tune that cc recommends for the t275 and it's awesome. I'm 200lbs dry, 212 with riding gear. I think I ran it at 182 psi to get 17mm sag. Plush almost all the way through, and then it just ramps up perfectly right at the end for hitting any shape kicker I could find. At lower speeds though, it just tended to suck stuff up as opposed to pop off small rocks on the trail. I'd rather have it mach down rocky sections then perform perfectly on a transition than pop off little rocks and buck me off a gap jump. I probably won't try to fix that though, as I hate fiddling with things. I ran 17mm sag and never ended up bottoming out, even when I cased one transition. No matter how hard I smashed into something, I couldn't get the o ring to the end of the shaft - do the ccdba have a built in bottoming out feature? My buddy bought one with monarch plus rc3, so I'll try that in a couple weeks. I figured since I had never tried the ccdba, I'd give it a go, and if I like the monarch just as much, I can always sell the ccdba and buy the monarch. Gotta love no interest credit cards.

    17mm of sag, is that enough? Think I'm running over 20mm. If you're not getting full travel use a little less high speed compression.
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    102
    17mm is what they recommend for our bike and I get full travel for sure. The o ring is about 1/3 of a centimeter from the end. The stock tune they speced from intense/ccdba works great for me. I don't think I'll be changing anything besides air pressure/sag depending on my weight (if I go with a pack or not)

  85. #85
    Old school BMXer
    Reputation: Blaster1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,678
    Come on guys! Too much chatter and not enough pics!
    May the air be filled with tires!

  86. #86
    Master
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    41
    Anyone on the new T275 Carbon that is 6'2" or taller? Wondering how the Large fits you. I don't want to wait for the XL to come out and I'm having trouble finding a Large to try before buying. I welcome your input.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    24
    I have exactly the same question..
    I'm 6'2'' with 35'' inseam and wonder if the Large is ok for me..

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    I am 6'3" with a 34" inseam and am on a large. It does have a long top tube that makes the bike feel very roomy. I have a Rock Shox Reverb and unfortunately I purchased the shorter one that barely allows for the correct leg extension while climbing. Reverbs only have a minimum post insertion of about 3 1/4" which just doesnt seem real safe as far as seatpost insertion. So, I would make sure to get a longer Reverb if going that route. Other than that, I dont feel that I need a XL at 6'3". I have also had a 5.5, 6.6, Socom, Uzzi VP, Tracer VP and a Carbine all in large and have never felt that I needed a XL. I hope this helps.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaster1200 View Post
    Come on guys! Too much chatter and not enough pics!
    There is a picture thread
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  90. #90
    Master
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Ridnw/bear View Post
    I am 6'3" with a 34" inseam and am on a large. It does have a long top tube that makes the bike feel very roomy. I have a Rock Shox Reverb and unfortunately I purchased the shorter one that barely allows for the correct leg extension while climbing. Reverbs only have a minimum post insertion of about 3 1/4" which just doesnt seem real safe as far as seatpost insertion. So, I would make sure to get a longer Reverb if going that route.
    Thanks for the input on sizing! I currently ride an XL Sultan but the top tube length is the same as the Large T275.

    Great point on the Reverb. Do you have the 100MM or the 125mm? Also, any chance you could tell me the length from the center of the BB to the top of the saddle when fully extended? I want to make sure to get the right length Reverb. Thanks!

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by ~Ish View Post
    Thanks for the input on sizing! I currently ride an XL Sultan but the top tube length is the same as the Large T275.

    Great point on the Reverb. Do you have the 100MM or the 125mm? Also, any chance you could tell me the length from the center of the BB to the top of the saddle when fully extended? I want to make sure to get the right length Reverb. Thanks!

    I have the 125mm Reverb but it has the 380mm post and I should have got the 430mm post for more insertion. I am at work now but I will measure it tonight and get back to you with that length.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by ~Ish View Post
    Thanks for the input on sizing! I currently ride an XL Sultan but the top tube length is the same as the Large T275.

    Great point on the Reverb. Do you have the 100MM or the 125mm? Also, any chance you could tell me the length from the center of the BB to the top of the saddle when fully extended? I want to make sure to get the right length Reverb. Thanks!

    Heres the measurements you wanted.
    Top of Reverb seatpost clamp(125mm drop/ 380mm length of post) to center of BB: just under 31"

    Center of BB to top of Specialized Phenom Pro seat(I would imagine this differs from seat to seat): 32"

    Definitely get the 430mm post if getting the Reverb

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    102
    Anyone know if you can fit a water bottle on the down tube if you have a ccdba-cs? Maybe using one of those side opening cages?

  94. #94
    I fix your broken ****!
    Reputation: Sam-IntenseCustServ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    353
    Quote Originally Posted by markcjr View Post
    Anyone know if you can fit a water bottle on the down tube if you have a ccdba-cs? Maybe using one of those side opening cages?
    You'll have to find a really low-profile bottle to be able to clear the reservoir on the CCDB Air.
    Sam Wilson
    Things & Stuff Specialist
    Beer Drinker
    Intense Cycles, Inc.
    Sam@Intensecycles.com

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Hay Sam, i was going to call/email Andrew but I'll ask you. Have any of you guys tried the new DB shock on the T275? and how did it ride?
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  96. #96
    I fix your broken ****!
    Reputation: Sam-IntenseCustServ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    353
    Quote Originally Posted by vice grips View Post
    Hay Sam, i was going to call/email Andrew but I'll ask you. Have any of you guys tried the new DB shock on the T275? and how did it ride?
    Cane Creek came out to do some testing with us on the DB Inline a few months ago and I was able to ride laps with it. Pretty crazy how well it rode! Tracks well, super supple small bump sensitivity and resists bottom out very well. The climb switch also works great, very similar to the CS on the DB Air. Absolutely my favorite shock at the moment.
    Sam Wilson
    Things & Stuff Specialist
    Beer Drinker
    Intense Cycles, Inc.
    Sam@Intensecycles.com

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    102
    Sam, have you had a chance to ride the T275 with a Monarch+ Debonair? Thinking about a switch from the ccdba-cs to the inline or Monarch+ Debonair. The inline sounds sweet because I could lose my pack and ride with a water bottle for shorter rides.

  98. #98
    I fix your broken ****!
    Reputation: Sam-IntenseCustServ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    353
    Quote Originally Posted by markcjr View Post
    Sam, have you had a chance to ride the T275 with a Monarch+ Debonair? Thinking about a switch from the ccdba-cs to the inline or Monarch+ Debonair. The inline sounds sweet because I could lose my pack and ride with a water bottle for shorter rides.
    The perfect setup would be to have the DB Inline for regular riding and then have a DB Air for more aggressive riding, bike parks, etc.
    Sam Wilson
    Things & Stuff Specialist
    Beer Drinker
    Intense Cycles, Inc.
    Sam@Intensecycles.com

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vice grips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam-IntenseCustServ View Post
    Cane Creek came out to do some testing with us on the DB Inline a few months ago and I was able to ride laps with it. Pretty crazy how well it rode! Tracks well, super supple small bump sensitivity and resists bottom out very well. The climb switch also works great, very similar to the CS on the DB Air. Absolutely my favorite shock at the moment.
    Thanks Sam, does the DB inline have a stronger climb switch mod for climbing than the CS? Trying not to sound to much like a xc nerd but my weak knees and poor fitness hasn't left warm fuzzy feeling when I get to a long super steep climb. I may get rid of my M9 and use the T275 as my do it all dh/trail bike and get an other carbine or spider comp as my xc trail bike, or dare I say it a SC solo
    Once you go slack, you never go back!

  100. #100
    I fix your broken ****!
    Reputation: Sam-IntenseCustServ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    353
    Quote Originally Posted by vice grips View Post
    Thanks Sam, does the DB inline have a stronger climb switch mod for climbing than the CS? Trying not to sound to much like a xc nerd but my weak knees and poor fitness hasn't left warm fuzzy feeling when I get to a long super steep climb. I may get rid of my M9 and use the T275 as my do it all dh/trail bike and get an other carbine or spider comp as my xc trail bike, or dare I say it a SC solo
    The CS on the DB Inline had a very similar feel to the one on the DB Air in my opinion. Maybe just slightly better, maybe I was just overly excited to ride it, who knows! haha

    If you buy a solo Andrew and I will not forgive you!!!
    Sam Wilson
    Things & Stuff Specialist
    Beer Drinker
    Intense Cycles, Inc.
    Sam@Intensecycles.com

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Carbon Intense DH bike
    By gretch in forum Intense
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-28-2015, 03:25 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-26-2014, 05:50 PM
  3. New carbon Intense fs
    By smithrider in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2012, 08:27 PM
  4. The new generation of Intense Carbon
    By mr intense in forum Intense
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 11-29-2011, 07:55 PM
  5. Intense M9 or Carbon V10
    By Curler in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-29-2011, 05:18 PM

Members who have read this thread: 88

Posting Permissions

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