After my MKIII front triangle cracked a few months ago, the daunting task of replacing it was upon me. At first the other DW-Link offerings looked good, but they were VERY expensive, and in many cases did not have the geometry I was looking for.
I would have been interested to know what people moved onto after their MKIII, and how the new rides compare. So, for anyone else in this predicament I figured I would start this thread.
I'll start:
I wanted a bike with around 5" travel with a stable yet playful geometry that was built around a 5" fork. I did not want a high BB. And I wanted it tough. I test rode a SC Nickel, and really liked the feel, though it was expensive and I was not sure I wanted to go back to a high forward SP (I've owned a Superlight and Heckler in the past). However, I really liked the geometry, so I looked for similar numbers.
I ended up with a 2010 Marin Mount Vision frame. I got it for $650 shipped from Adrenaline Bikes. Built it up with all the parts from the MKIII, except for the front derailleur, seatpost shim, and seat collar.
It has 120mm rear travel, but in reality it is more like 110. It feels like it has a lot less travel than the MKIII, even though the MKIII is only 125mm (or is it 130?). It's ability to soak up rough trails is limited. It sags very far into it's travel, and the suspension ramps up severely in the second half of the travel, so there is just not left there to absorb the hits. So it is not as stable on high speed bombing, as the rear does not track as well.
However, it is great on the smaller bumps, and actually handles drops and jumps a little better than the MKIII. It does seem better on twisty swoopy trails with dips and berms, the reduced travel seems to work in my favor there. I am able to pump through sections better. On drops, it works very well. With the MKIII, I could feel it soak up the drop, with the Mt Vision, it feels like the drop never even happened. Several times I have done a drop that I have done for years, then stopped and turned around looking for what had changed, thinking someone must have built a big transition, or made the drop a foot or so less. Nope, same drop.
I should mention that the MKIII had a PUSHed AVA. Getting the Mt Vision's RP2 PUSHed (or getting a PUSHed Monarch) might close a bit of the performance gap on the rough stuff, and get me the rest of the travel.
The frame with shock was within 0.1 lb of the MKIII, so the final build was identical in weight. However, the MT Vision feels heavier on climbs. It does have a tad more pedal feedback in the middle ring (not enough to really matter) but in the granny it is noticeable. Steep, rough, granny gear climbs are noticeably better on the MKIII.
The frame is a LOT stiffer torsionally. Out of the saddle efforts are rewarded on this bike, I never felt like the MKIII did so well there, and I think all the flex in the rear was part of the reason. Despite it feeling a little heavier, this bike feels faster on the flats and rolling singletrack with sprints.
I was tired of replacing the rear bearings every year on the MKIII, the Mt Vision comes with a lifetime warranty on all of them.
On the MKIII I either ran the Pike at 140mm most of the time, or used a 15mm externalizer and ran the fork at 125mm most of the time. On the Mt Vision, I run the Pike at 125mm most of the time, and it feels well balanced. The frame was designed around a 120mm Fox Fork (68.5 degree HA), so I figure running the Pike @ 125 puts me somewhere between 67.5 and 68 degree HA (RS run a little longer A2C than Fox),.
Anyway, here is a pic
I would have been interested to know what people moved onto after their MKIII, and how the new rides compare. So, for anyone else in this predicament I figured I would start this thread.
I'll start:
I wanted a bike with around 5" travel with a stable yet playful geometry that was built around a 5" fork. I did not want a high BB. And I wanted it tough. I test rode a SC Nickel, and really liked the feel, though it was expensive and I was not sure I wanted to go back to a high forward SP (I've owned a Superlight and Heckler in the past). However, I really liked the geometry, so I looked for similar numbers.
I ended up with a 2010 Marin Mount Vision frame. I got it for $650 shipped from Adrenaline Bikes. Built it up with all the parts from the MKIII, except for the front derailleur, seatpost shim, and seat collar.
It has 120mm rear travel, but in reality it is more like 110. It feels like it has a lot less travel than the MKIII, even though the MKIII is only 125mm (or is it 130?). It's ability to soak up rough trails is limited. It sags very far into it's travel, and the suspension ramps up severely in the second half of the travel, so there is just not left there to absorb the hits. So it is not as stable on high speed bombing, as the rear does not track as well.
However, it is great on the smaller bumps, and actually handles drops and jumps a little better than the MKIII. It does seem better on twisty swoopy trails with dips and berms, the reduced travel seems to work in my favor there. I am able to pump through sections better. On drops, it works very well. With the MKIII, I could feel it soak up the drop, with the Mt Vision, it feels like the drop never even happened. Several times I have done a drop that I have done for years, then stopped and turned around looking for what had changed, thinking someone must have built a big transition, or made the drop a foot or so less. Nope, same drop.
I should mention that the MKIII had a PUSHed AVA. Getting the Mt Vision's RP2 PUSHed (or getting a PUSHed Monarch) might close a bit of the performance gap on the rough stuff, and get me the rest of the travel.
The frame with shock was within 0.1 lb of the MKIII, so the final build was identical in weight. However, the MT Vision feels heavier on climbs. It does have a tad more pedal feedback in the middle ring (not enough to really matter) but in the granny it is noticeable. Steep, rough, granny gear climbs are noticeably better on the MKIII.
The frame is a LOT stiffer torsionally. Out of the saddle efforts are rewarded on this bike, I never felt like the MKIII did so well there, and I think all the flex in the rear was part of the reason. Despite it feeling a little heavier, this bike feels faster on the flats and rolling singletrack with sprints.
I was tired of replacing the rear bearings every year on the MKIII, the Mt Vision comes with a lifetime warranty on all of them.
On the MKIII I either ran the Pike at 140mm most of the time, or used a 15mm externalizer and ran the fork at 125mm most of the time. On the Mt Vision, I run the Pike at 125mm most of the time, and it feels well balanced. The frame was designed around a 120mm Fox Fork (68.5 degree HA), so I figure running the Pike @ 125 puts me somewhere between 67.5 and 68 degree HA (RS run a little longer A2C than Fox),.
Anyway, here is a pic