Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 102
  1. #1
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137

    Taking a gamble on a Zen II

    With no word on the state of things at Mountain Cycle and how poorly the 2012's have been received I still went forward with a purchase from Crosslake sales, $799 was a fair deal to me even if they continue to fall in price.

    The other frames I considered before learning of the new Zen are the Foes Shaver and Santa Cruz Nickel. I like staight tubed frames, steepish HTA's, and the Turntable shock link has that cool SB-66 like eccentric which I think looks and packages better than two links like the Shaver and Nickel.

    So I have a question about high/ forward pivots as this is will be my first single pivot and I am no suspension wizard-

    If I run an eccentric bottom bracket (like problem solvers) clocking the crank spindle between the 7 and 8 O-clock position within the BB shell (viewed from D-side) to shorten the CS length and lower the BB height, how will this affect the bikes behavior as it seems this would effectively move the swing arm pivot forward and higher?

    Quirky I know, but I must consider as I will be running a taller fork and I like short chain stays.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    With no word on the state of things at Mountain Cycle and how poorly the 2012's have been received I still went forward with a purchase from Crosslake sales, $799 was a fair deal to me even if they continue to fall in price.

    The other frames I considered before learning of the new Zen are the Foes Shaver and Santa Cruz Nickel. I like staight tubed frames, steepish HTA's, and the Turntable shock link has that cool SB-66 like eccentric which I think looks and packages better than two links like the Shaver and Nickel.

    So I have a question about high/ forward pivots as this is will be my first single pivot and I am no suspension wizard-

    If I run an eccentric bottom bracket (like problem solvers) clocking the crank spindle between the 7 and 8 O-clock position within the BB shell (viewed from D-side) to shorten the CS length and lower the BB height, how will this affect the bikes behavior as it seems this would effectively move the swing arm pivot forward and higher?

    Quirky I know, but I must consider as I will be running a taller fork and I like short chain stays.
    You're never really going to know till you try it with a regular BB and then try it with the EBB. The only thing you are changing is the angle at which the chain drives the rear wheel relative to the pivot. But, even a small change can have a big effect.

    My biggest question is: what are going to do when the first part breaks? Replacement parts are not available.

  3. #3
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    You're never really going to know till you try it with a regular BB and then try it with the EBB. The only thing you are changing is the angle at which the chain drives the rear wheel relative to the pivot. But, even a small change can have a big effect.
    Of course youíre right, nothing ventured nothing gained. I will be getting an EBB and find out for myself, perhaps my posting a follow up will benefit other members.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    My biggest question is: what are going to do when the first part breaks? Replacement parts are not available.
    A valid concern indeed. My thought is if it is a small part like a derailleur hanger or the shock link I can machine a new part. If itís the front or rear triangle Iím out the cash, but if I like the ride it will have been worth the investment to better gauge what works for me. It is a risk, but I believe the risk vs. reward scale balances in my favor.

    I have never broke a frame or had issues that invoked a warranty claim so while company support would be comforting, Iím not to worried. The Zen will have to be a real piece of garbage if it does break prematurely, and it looks like a lot was invested in the latest MC offerings so this scenario seems remote.

    The geo looks like what Iím after and I truly believe single pivot with a link driven shock is a win. I canít for the life of me understand why Santa Cruz is dropping the Butcher and Nickel.

    Iím actually very excited as the Zen incorporates so many elements Iíve been wanting. It could go bad for me, but I got a feeling the Zen II is going to be something really special.

    Worst case is I hate it, it breaks, I learn a lesson and buy another manufacturers frame. It seems a very possible alternative that I end up loving it and get years of service at a smoking deal.

    As an aside, Crosslake Sales was really great to deal with. I called the day after I ordered and Kelly, the head service rep, hunted down a spare derailleur hanger and threw it in with the frame before it shipped free of charge.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    I got my Zen II last week. Looks good, better than I was expecting as the prototype Zen I had seen regularly over the last 2 years was an XL. Definitely looks a lot better in the smaller size.

    The warranty issue is a valid concern and something each individual person will have to weigh up before pulling the trigger. My experience with some other brands is that a warranty isn't worth much on some occasions anyway. That all aside, the bikes look strong and as with Jon, if a hanger breaks, I'll have one machined up.

    The suspension is engineered by the guys who did the Yeti switch system, so it should prove to be a nice design. As with you, I like the geometry numbers and think it all stacks up will with offerings from other companies.

    If the frame goes and has issues, I'll weigh it up at the time and probably have it repaired, but I hope I never have to worry about that. I've ridden Proflex's for 20 years and they are a pain to get bits for and machining/improvising becomes one of the best options. If the San An and Zen are bikes that leave a mark on me, getting bits machined is somewhere I would be prepared to go.

    What fork are you looking to run on the bike Jon? i am running a Revelation RTL Ti at 150mm. Rakes the front out a bit to about 68 degrees, but the BB height is still fine.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Taking a gamble on a Zen II-zen.jpg  


  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    Of course youíre right, nothing ventured nothing gained. I will be getting an EBB and find out for myself, perhaps my posting a follow up will benefit other members.



    A valid concern indeed. My thought is if it is a small part like a derailleur hanger or the shock link I can machine a new part. If itís the front or rear triangle Iím out the cash, but if I like the ride it will have been worth the investment to better gauge what works for me. It is a risk, but I believe the risk vs. reward scale balances in my favor.

    I have never broke a frame or had issues that invoked a warranty claim so while company support would be comforting, Iím not to worried. The Zen will have to be a real piece of garbage if it does break prematurely, and it looks like a lot was invested in the latest MC offerings so this scenario seems remote.

    The geo looks like what Iím after and I truly believe single pivot with a link driven shock is a win. I canít for the life of me understand why Santa Cruz is dropping the Butcher and Nickel.

    Iím actually very excited as the Zen incorporates so many elements Iíve been wanting. It could go bad for me, but I got a feeling the Zen II is going to be something really special.

    Worst case is I hate it, it breaks, I learn a lesson and buy another manufacturers frame. It seems a very possible alternative that I end up loving it and get years of service at a smoking deal.

    As an aside, Crosslake Sales was really great to deal with. I called the day after I ordered and Kelly, the head service rep, hunted down a spare derailleur hanger and threw it in with the frame before it shipped free of charge.
    Yeah, a broken hanger is ok, there's a company that sells every hanger ever made. But, when one of the pivots wears out, it's going to be hard to find a new one.

    I also like the single pivot and small link or links to controll wheel movement. It's stiff, centralized, simple and as effective as it needs to be. Apparently, the Nickel/Butcher wasn't selling well enough. I think, because they marketed it as a cheaper alternating. They should have marketed it as an evolution and improved version of the single pivot.

    I have emailed Crosslakes three times asking how they would handle warranty issues. I never got an answer.

    I really wish the new Zen was a match for me. But, no warranty, 1.5" HT top and bottom, non-standard rear axel. I could live with the BB, I just can't live with the rest.

    Let us know how yours turns out and post some pics!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    After an old DH bike of mine had a bolt up rear axel, I have been sold on them since. The 142mm hub width is becoming more and more common now, so the rear end is a non issue for me. As a bonus though my hubs could be converted from 135mm QR to the 142mm 12mm axel so a new wheel set wasn't needed.

    Why is the tapered head tube an issue for you, I thought that would have been the smallest issue of the three. 44mm upper cup and a 49mm lower, not really an issue to get a headset and run whatever fork you want.

    I have to say, the Turn cranks are really growing on me. If they could take a new spider with a 104/64 BCD I would rate them as almost perfect. The BB os super smooth, just chainring sizes are limited with the 120/80 BCD. A 38/26 combo is the smallest I can find. Not a bad ratio for the Zen, but it could make sustained climbs on the San An interesting.

    On the pivot wear issue, I suspect by the time the pivot wears I will have moved on, or at the very least the bike will owe me nothing by that point. I'd be surprised if it wore out after a few seasons use.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    The HT, for the Zen, is way overkill. It should have been a tapered HT. and, it looks awfull, it looks like a beer can on the frame.

  8. #8
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    Man, that is nice looking to my eyes. I was hoping you would weigh in sammydog.

    Quote Originally Posted by sammydog View Post
    The suspension is engineered by the guys who did the Yeti switch system, so it should prove to be a nice design. As with you, I like the geometry numbers and think it all stacks up will with offerings from other companies.
    I thought the SB-66 switch eccentric pivot was really clever, But was convinced single pivot was for me. A linkage driven shock seemed an obvious step in the right direction, and they both are packaged together in the Zen II. The geo #ís do stack with that of other companies offerings, save for the HTA. I demoíed a Foes Shaver having a HTA of 67* and found it a bit to slack for my liking.

    Quote Originally Posted by sammydog View Post
    What fork are you looking to run on the bike Jon? I am running a Revelation RTL Ti at 150mm. Rakes the front out a bit to about 68 degrees, but the BB height is still fine.
    Some won't like this at all, but I aim to run a 150mm Maverick DUC 32. The A2C is around 515mm so it will relax the HTA a bit. My Titus El Guapo sits at about 68.5* HTA and I like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    The HT, for the Zen, is way overkill. It should have been a tapered HT. and, it looks awfull, it looks like a beer can on the frame.
    I was under the impression the head tube is indeed tapered 1 1/8Ē top 1 ĹĒ bottom. I will certainly post pics and impressions when it arrives. If you have the time try calling Crosslake and ask for Kelly, You will get a definite answer concerning warranty issues from her. I suspect at the rock bottom price these are being offered it will be factory warrant only, in other words NONE.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    You're right it is tapered, sorry.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    I was under the impression the head tube is indeed tapered 1 1/8Ē top 1 ĹĒ bottom. I will certainly post pics and impressions when it arrives. If you have the time try calling Crosslake and ask for Kelly, You will get a definite answer concerning warranty issues from her. I suspect at the rock bottom price these are being offered it will be factory warrant only, in other words NONE.
    It is tapered. 44mm inner diameter at the top and 49mm diameter at the bottom. I am putting in one of the FSA adjustable headsets in mine. My fork has a 1 1/8th steerer but that is no problem either.

    The head tube on the San An is 1.5" top and bottom.

    Pretty sure it was Kelly I had an email conversation with when I bought the San An off them. Got back to me very quickly each time as I was having issues with ebay sending to Australia despite the add saying it would. I can't fault their customer service based on my experiences.

    Might have to contact them again and see if they can sell me a spare hanger though. Didn't even cross my mind at the time.

  11. #11
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by sammydog View Post
    After an old DH bike of mine had a bolt up rear axel, I have been sold on them since. The 142mm hub width is becoming more and more common now, so the rear end is a non issue for me. As a bonus though my hubs could be converted from 135mm QR to the 142mm 12mm axel so a new wheel set wasn't needed.
    Iíve always been vexed by 9mm QRís, seems odd it has taken this long to focus on this particular area of MTBís. I understand how some are happy with 9x135 and feel they are being squeezed into a direction they donít want to go. Iím running a single speed Hadley hub so converting does not present a problem for me. The 12x142 axle system itself seems very stout and straight forward.

    Quote Originally Posted by sammydog View Post
    I have to say, the Turn cranks are really growing on me. If they could take a new spider with a 104/64 BCD I would rate them as almost perfect. The BB os super smooth, just chainring sizes are limited with the 120/80 BCD. A 38/26 combo is the smallest I can find. Not a bad ratio for the Zen, but it could make sustained climbs on the San An interesting.
    I have a BMX background so press fit bearing cups are really a throw back in my perspective. I like the Shimano threaded external BBís, but Iím glad for the Zen II having a PF30 so I can experiment with an EBB.

    I bought a set of Rotor cranks with a 74/110 five arm compact double spider. I was never happy that everything had gone to a four arm spider. The 35mm spindle on the Turn cranks are intriguing, but I think they nerfed it up putting the 80/120 spider on them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    The HT, for the ZenÖ, it looks like a beer can on the frame.
    You say that like itís a bad thing.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    You say that like itís a bad thing.
    I prefer my beer in a bottle!

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JRA009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    173
    Just an FYI on the Hanger and Rear Axel: They are Syntace (thats the brand name) X12 so parts are available from just about any dealer. Happy Riding

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by JRA009 View Post
    Just an FYI on the Hanger and Rear Axel: They are Syntace (thats the brand name) X12 so parts are available from just about any dealer. Happy Riding
    Awesome, I knew the axel was Syntace (it's written all over it) but its really nice to know about the hanger.

  15. #15
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    The HT, for the Zen,Ö it looks like a beer can on the frame.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    You say that like itís a bad thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    I prefer my beer in a bottle!
    Be it a mountain bike with a head tube shaped like a beer can called the Zen or a Buddhist temple made from a million empty beer bottles, I think we can agree that whatever oneís preferred barely based beverage container, when implemented in structural architecture it is the true path to spiritual enlightenment.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Taking a gamble on a Zen II-buddabeer.jpg  


  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    The 35mm spindle on the Turn cranks are intriguing, but I think they nerfed it up putting the 80/120 spider on them.
    I like the 35mm spindle,, particularly like that the system easily can take other standards as well.

    On the spider issue, that is the only thing that really hurts these cranks, The 80/120 spider seriously limits the ring choice. I wanted to put 36/24 rings on the San An, but the smallest you can go with the spider (that I can find rings for) is 38/26.

    If turn ever bring out a smaller spider then the cranks will be spot on. The praxis BB is super smooth, absolutely love it and would happily get one of their BB's again. the chain rings look nice as well, but I have swapped them out for smaller truvativ rings.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    Be it a mountain bike with a head tube shaped like a beer can called the Zen or a Buddhist temple made from a million empty beer bottles, I think we can agree that whatever oneís preferred barely based beverage container, when implemented in structural architecture it is the true path to spiritual enlightenment.
    So the lack of a bottle opener in the rear drop outs is a design flaw?

  18. #18
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by sammydog View Post
    So the lack of a bottle opener in the rear drop outs is a design flaw?
    I thought the reason for using the Turn 35mm cranks was because a bottle cap fits snugly in the spindle hollow, thus allowing for efficient cap removal.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    I thought the reason for using the Turn 35mm cranks was because a bottle cap fits snugly in the spindle hollow, thus allowing for efficient cap removal.
    I think you may be onto something, Might have to do some tinkering with the cranks tonight while watching the tour.

    Surely something could be retrofitted in there.

    Worst case you could store one in the spindle and work out a plug for the end.

  20. #20
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    I'm sure you could Mickey Mouse something up that would work-
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  21. #21
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137

    Medium Zen II on scale

    I thought this might be of interest as Mountain Cycle doesn't advertise weights.

    I'm not sure if those companies that do, do so with shock, but I didn't want to remove the shock just for a pic. X Fusion lists the 165/38 02 RCX at 228g. I believe the Zen II is equiped with the 200/57. The Syntace thru axle weighs 39g.

    Med. Zen II Frame, X Fusion 02 RCX shock, and 12x142 Syntace axle weigh in at 8lbs. 3oz. or 3700g-

    Frame only probably closer to 7lbs. 8oz. or 3420g. This is pretty much what I expected when I un boxed it, seems very stout. It will probably weigh around 29lbs. (13kg.) once assembled.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Taking a gamble on a Zen II-zeniiscale.jpg  

    Attached Images Attached Images   

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Looks nice. I'm hoping for around the 13kg mark when I get some new wheels.

    Still need to build mine, got all the bits to go on, just been lazy.

    Parts sitting around though;
    Revelation RLTi forks.
    FSA Obit Adjustable Headset
    XTR Brakes
    XT 10 speed front and rear mech/shifters/chain/cassette
    FSA carbon bar (needs to be replaced with something wider and flatter).

    Sharing the wheels with the San An for now until I decide what it is I really want.

  23. #23
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    The Syntace Vectoer carbon bars may be right for you-
    Universal Cycles -- Syntace Vector Carbon Riser Bar

    I'm not sure where to find the wider 29.1" (740mm) set at the moment, but these may be worth your consideration.

    The Zen is a tad heavy, but looking it over I see nothing I would have compromised for the sake of weight savings. I intend to catch some air while I still have the moxie to do so. I had contemplated building a Battery into a trail bike, but the Zen II is lighter with better fit and has the Turntable link- Joy

    I love the new Shimano stoppers, but I will be running my old Magura Marta SL brakes. Mine are the white w/ red accent and carbon levers, but I special ordered replacement yellow reservoir caps off the Raceline series so I think these will look really well with the paint scheme on the frame.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Id rather save a little weight in the wheels than the frame anyway. And by the time I fill my camelbak with food and water, a little change to frame weight is negligible anyway. Its not like I am racing the thing.

  25. #25
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    I totally agree on frame weight vs. wheel weight.

    I think American Classics are an excellent wheel choice, but ultimately I chose Stans Arch EX as I need very specific hubs to accomodate the 6 speed rear and the 24mm axle on the DUC 32 forks. Apparently American Classic rims are only sold as completes.

    These may also be worthy of your consideration, they would have been my choice if not for the afore mentioned.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    American Classics were on my short list alone with Easton Havons and something based around Hope Hubs.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Handlebar: take a look at an Answer 720 AM Carbon bar. I just picked one up for my new SC Nickel frame.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    I'll add it to the list of potential candidates.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dytrdr5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    96
    Considering the santa cruz nickel was $10 more I would have bought that. I have two mountain cycle battery bikes and will stop using one of them soon so the other one has spare parts.

  30. #30
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by dytrdr5 View Post
    Considering the santa cruz nickel was $10 more I would have bought that. I have two mountain cycle battery bikes and will stop using one of them soon so the other one has spare parts.
    Na, the geo numbers weren't right for me.

    Besides, the nickel has a 1/2" less travel, comes with a Fox RP 23 rather than the X Fusion, the switch technology turntable eccentric is much more robust than a simple intermediate link for stiffness, I prefer the straight tubed front triangle, and I even like the color

    Money wasn't an issue, between the Zen II, Foes Shaver, and the Nickel, the Nickel placed third.

    If I like this well enough I will buy a second to have on deck for back up like your doing with your Batterys.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Quote Originally Posted by dytrdr5 View Post
    Considering the santa cruz nickel was $10 more I would have bought that. I have two mountain cycle battery bikes and will stop using one of them soon so the other one has spare parts.
    I paid $675 brand new for the Nickel from Huck & Roll. Brown Santa is delivering it tomorrow! The Nickel really reminds me of a modern SA, in that it is a very stout, do it all kinda bike.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    The X-Fusion is a better shock. I'll be putting a CCDBA on mine.
    You can't feel a difference in stiffness between the two frames. If the Zen II is stiffer, it's because of the rear axel.

  33. #33
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    As far as stiffness is concerned I don't have a Nickel to compare to, but it wouldn't suprise me as I feel any single pivot design would benefit from running a link driven shock not only for tuning, but rigidity as well. The swingarm on the Zen feels like a welded member so if anything the eccentric could be considered overbuilt, way more stiff than the rear of my Horst link equiped Titus El Guapo.

    All that to say my comments weren't a dis on the Nickel, I think the Nickel is rad and would own one if it were closer to what I want in geometry. I was just saying that between the two I thought the Turntable switch was more trick as I was already dazzled by the Yetti SB-66.

    The rear axle is a win all around, so simple and strong. I'm not sure about the PF30 BB shell yet. I have to return the Problem solvers eccentric BB as it was a slop fit. I have a Beer Components on the way which after talking to Jim at Beer should be much more snug.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Richard View Post
    As far as stiffness is concerned I don't have a Nickel to compare to, but it wouldn't suprise me as I feel any single pivot design would benefit from running a link driven shock not only for tuning, but rigidity as well. The swingarm on the Zen feels like a welded member so if anything the eccentric could be considered overbuilt, way more stiff than the rear of my Horst link equiped Titus El Guapo.

    All that to say my comments weren't a dis on the Nickel, I think the Nickel is rad and would own one if it were closer to what I want in geometry. I was just saying that between the two I thought the Turntable switch was more trick as I was already dazzled by the Yetti SB-66.

    The rear axle is a win all around, so simple and strong. I'm not sure about the PF30 BB shell yet. I have to return the Problem solvers eccentric BB as it was a slop fit. I have a Beer Components on the way which after talking to Jim at Beer should be much more snug.
    Yeah, I think both are a little overbuilt, which is ok. I think the turntable is a great piece. I hope it makes it way onto some other frame someday.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Yeah, I think both are a little overbuilt, which is ok. I think the turntable is a great piece. I hope it makes it way onto some other frame someday.
    You won't have to wait long for that to happen. When I'm not on my phone I can post more details.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Quote Originally Posted by sammydog View Post
    You won't have to wait long for that to happen. When I'm not on my phone I can post more details.
    Oh, please do. Can't wait to hear where Turntable might turn up, lol.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Do I detect a not of sarcasm in there?

    Anyway, as you probably know/guessed, G is doing his own thing, this is a post from elsewhere

    Quote Originally Posted by g
    We have the license for the Turntable suspension and the (full) monocoque style design is 95% done - this is the bike I have always wanted to do without having to make compromises. I'm readying to hand it over to the engineer types and then we'll move to initial tooling and proto. Our effort though is the first option of ultra low volume, where each and every frame we are looking at doing is hands on by yours truly and the 'team'.
    I've seen the final 3D renders of the bike, looks really nice. Very different to any of the new MC bikes.

    Having ridden the Turntable, I love it, so I will be interested to try this new frame when it comes out. Being made in this part of the world though, I am guessing it will be done in small numbers (thats an assumption on my part, not a comment guided by the people involved in the bike) and not sure how widely it will be distributed.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Quote Originally Posted by sammydog View Post
    Do I detect a not of sarcasm in there?

    Anyway, as you probably know/guessed, G is doing his own thing, this is a post from elsewhere



    I've seen the final 3D renders of the bike, looks really nice. Very different to any of the new MC bikes.

    Having ridden the Turntable, I love it, so I will be interested to try this new frame when it comes out. Being made in this part of the world though, I am guessing it will be done in small numbers (thats an assumption on my part, not a comment guided by the people involved in the bike) and not sure how widely it will be distributed.

    No, not at all. I do, for real think the Turntable is a great piece. I hope G, this time, can make good use of it.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    No, not at all. I do, for real hint the Turntable is a great piece. I hope G, this time, can make good use of it.
    I'll make sure pics/info go up when they are available.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,318
    Where can that rendering be viewed? Or where is there more info? They must not have an exclusive license on the Turntable. Unless they just recently secured it. Because The Sotto Group told me it was available.

    This is very interesting. I hope something great comes of it.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    There is no renderings on the net, well that I am aware of. G, has been letting little bits of info out on the net.

    Other than what he has put out there himself, I won't divulge anymore info/details as its not my place, nor my bike. happy to collate the info he throws out there though and put it on here.

  42. #42
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137

    Out with the new and in with the new

    I've only been riding the Titus since late January. I had the rear tri powder coated and believe the El Guapo in general to have the most eye appeal amungst the swoopy tubed bikes on the market.

    Unfortunately it has a 17.36" (441mm) chain stay and an overall wheel base of 45 1/8" (1146mm) otherwise the EG would be the one, very stable at speed but lumbersome in the slow and technical. The 6" of Horst link suspension with the Monarch RT3 works extremely well.

    Can't hardly wait to ride the Zen, after the experience i've gained on the EG as a baseline it should be very telling as I'm still very much at a stage where I'm trying to hone in on what my own personnal strengths, weaknesses, and preferences are.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Taking a gamble on a Zen II-mceg.jpg  


  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by sammydog View Post
    I got my Zen II last week. Looks good, better than I was expecting as the prototype Zen I had seen regularly over the last 2 years was an XL. Definitely looks a lot better in the smaller size.

    The warranty issue is a valid concern and something each individual person will have to weigh up before pulling the trigger. My experience with some other brands is that a warranty isn't worth much on some occasions anyway. That all aside, the bikes look strong and as with Jon, if a hanger breaks, I'll have one machined up.

    The suspension is engineered by the guys who did the Yeti switch system, so it should prove to be a nice design. As with you, I like the geometry numbers and think it all stacks up will with offerings from other companies.

    If the frame goes and has issues, I'll weigh it up at the time and probably have it repaired, but I hope I never have to worry about that. I've ridden Proflex's for 20 years and they are a pain to get bits for and machining/improvising becomes one of the best options. If the San An and Zen are bikes that leave a mark on me, getting bits machined is somewhere I would be prepared to go.

    What fork are you looking to run on the bike Jon? i am running a Revelation RTL Ti at 150mm. Rakes the front out a bit to about 68 degrees, but the BB height is still fine.
    dont care what the haterz say, the new lineup is dope

  44. #44
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    I took the new Zen out this morning, no time for pics or anything to in depth but I can say this was for sure a smart buy.

    She weighs in at 30 1/4 lbs. (13.720 kg) I run sticky tires, 165mm cranks, and my granny is 25t front 28t rear so climbing is a bear. Even so, the rear suspension tracks the terrain perfectly. The El Guapo is an extremely nice execution of the Horst link design, but the Zen is noticably better. The rear of the Zen is stiffer than a wedding d!ck.

    I am actually shocked at how well the rear performed. It is supple while having a fast rebound yet damped just right. I attribute this to the turn table design. You can feel the falling rate followed by the ramping up of the shock rate. The initial part of the rebound accelerates rapidly but slows as it stabilizes, like it gives easily but is eagar to stand back up without any sensation of bucking. Very natural feeling and the rear wheel always tracks and follows the terrain.

    Overall this is a fun, nimble, bomber of a bike that leaves me feeling more in control that will undoubtedly take abuse. I am quite happy with my decision to give the Zen a shot.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    I was really impressed with the suspension on the San An, so I can't wait to get out on the Zen. Should finish the build tonight which means I can ride very soon.

    Can't wait to see some pics of your bike finished,

    What fork did you end up running? I have a 150mm Revelation on mine, a bit longer than should be on there so the head angle will slacken, and I am running a -0.5 degree headset. Hopefully its not too slack or I will need to turn the headset around. To compensate for the superslack head angle though I will be running a short stem.

    Great to hear you are loving yours though.

  46. #46
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    I'm running a Maverick DUC 32 150mm travel fork. The A2C is around 520mm. I measured the HTA at 68.1 deg. which was what I was aiming for.

    I wanted this frame as it measured at 69.5 deg. HTA with a 130mm fork so I had a feeling the DUC 32 fork would slacken the HTA to where I wanted it, it worked out perfectly.

    Hers a pic of the forks on my El Guapo-


    I'm 6'1" tall with a 34" inseam. The Zen frame is a medium so I run a 90mm stem. The Beer Components eccentric BB sets the cranks back and down 5mm so it helps correct the fact that the seat tube was slackened and puts the BB height right back to the listed 13.3" stock measurement.

    The stack and reach feel great for me, the short 16.7" (425mm) chainstay and overall short 42.7" (1084.5mm) wheel base make for a real playful ride.

    I'll try for some pics tommorrow.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Just measured my head angle to be 67 degrees with the 150mm Revelations and a -0.5 degree angleset. I will see how it rides and I may end up spinning the headset the other way which would put me at 68 degrees.

    I'll start with trial and error I guess.

  48. #48
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    I demo'ed a Foes Shaver that ran at 67 deg. on the head tube. The Shaver has a similar rear suspension design being single pivot with a added link to modify the shock rate and the travel is around the same as the Zen.

    That one degree of head tube angle really changed the handling. I didn't like it as much personally and feel anything beyond 68 deg. is better served on a longer travel bike traveling at stupid rediculous speeds. I built my Zen for trail duty and I'm kinda slow.

    Remember, as the head tube gets slackened the front wheel to BB distance increases (front center). This plays a huge roll in how a bike handles. The front center on my Zen with a 68 deg. HTA and a 520mm A2C fork measures 26" (660mm). That medium Shaver at 67 deg. HTA I rode had an identical front center as my large El Guapo having an HTA of 68.5 deg. both being 27.75" (705mm).

    I would be curious to know what your front center measures at with the slackset.

    Sorry, no pics yet

  49. #49
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,137
    Heres a (poor quality) shot of the Zen II as ridden last Sunday. Not exactly how I want it set up, but good enough for a shake down.

    Lucky #13
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Taking a gamble on a Zen II-zenside.jpg  

    Attached Images Attached Images  

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    274
    Nice, looks good with those forks.

    Any idea on the finished weight?

    Mine will be rideable tomorrow hopefully, but I just ordered some Stans Wheels so I don't have to share a wheelset with my San An.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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