Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: 2011 Am

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    551

    New question here. 2011 Am

    Couple of curiosity questions

    Any change to geo?

    Rear cable routing, really wanted this on my 2010 but was told it was a real issue for cable rub, having the bike now the seatstay route still looks the much more sensible http://www.nicolai.net/44-0-Helius+AM+kompl.html#tab


    Rear shock fitted, looks reversed, as opposed to the way mine is ( on 2010 model ) will it have any detrimental effect switch mine round, seems that it would be better protected from trail crap

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    138
    Don't worry the pictue for the complete bike is an older model, maybe 08.

    The direction of the shock is pretty much up to you. I had mine upside down in the beginning, then I swiched it around - no noticeable change.

    And yes, there is a slight geo change for 11. The headangle slackened out maybe half a degree; the shock mount is now only adapted for 216mm, there is no more offset on the mount plates. I don't know of any other change though.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    24
    Here's my 2011 AM:



    As you can see, rear cable routing is along top side of the downtube and under a new plastic cable cover that has an angled exit to guide the cable into the rear mech. It's very neat and alot better than the arrangement the demo model had. That one had the older seatstay mounted version.

    Also, there are zip-tie mounts on the chain stays just behind the main pivots.

    As mentioned already, new shock levers are for 215mm i2i and 64mm stroke shocks.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    506
    I think it's abit funny that they've changed the head angle. I spoke to Kalle prior to my purchase last year and mentioned that the HA was steeper than most others in its class. The response was that they knew best how to choose their HA bla bla...

    Now see what happened.

    I must admit though that the 67,7 degree HA is spot on and I would not(as I thought before) want it to be slacker.

    Curios to hear from someone who has tried BOTH 215 and 200 mm shock also.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    138
    There have discussion on the two shocks in the german forum among some guys who switched shocklenghts. The opinions were different. But it seemed to me that for a coil it does not make a difference yet it does for an air shock. The air ones seem to run a lot better.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    138
    that was one post too much

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    551
    Cheers for the info

  8. #8
    'All over it!'
    Reputation: lornibear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,105
    Having been out of the loop regarding Nicolai bikes for a short period of time and I am sure this will sound like a daft question, but will the CCDB from my 2008 FR fit the new 2011 AM?

    Many thanks in advance

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    138
    Asked N about that a few weeks ago: If you want to keep your old shock, they can modify the setup of the frame for you. It is then even possible to run both 200 and 216mm shocks alternatively. Marcel sorted this out for me.

  10. #10
    'All over it!'
    Reputation: lornibear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,105
    Oh thats interesting - I didn't realise that. Not being a suspension guru, what are the benefits/constraints using either the 200mm or the 216mm? Does Nicolai charge any extra for the frame modification?

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    898
    The differences between the older and the newer frame regarding the damper dimensions is down to the levers and the mounting bracket that the damper bolts on to. These two changes are independent of anything else that has since changed on the AM.

    You can fit the new levers and mounting bracket to any AM frame but technically speaking there isn't a set up that allows you to swap between a 200mmx57mm and a 216mmx63mm damper without also changing the mounting hardware (the levers and bracket).

    I did ask Nicolai just recently what would be the effect of running a 200x57 damper in the new levers and they said what you would expect, lower BB, slacker HA and (much) slacker ST). They said that it might work from the point of view of the rear wheel not colliding with the ST in the lower travel settings and it would rake and lower the bike out, but the ST would then make climbing a nightmare.

    Lornibear - the idea behind using a longer stroke damper (63mm versus 57mm) is that it is supposed to give better damping performance, for example more consistent, more controlled etc. It's probably one of those areas of technology that is more driven by marketing than by reality; there has been a real surge of marketing hype about long stroke dampers recently. No doubt there is a benefit, but whether that benefit is anything for your average rider to get in a knot about is a moot point.

    IIRC the FR damper dimensions are also 200mm by 57mm, which is the same as the Helius AM was, hence why you can still aks Nicola to make an AM that would accommodate that damper.

  12. #12
    'All over it!'
    Reputation: lornibear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,105
    Hey Geetee, thanks for the simplified info there - I have never really been able to get my 'grey cells' around the mechanics of suspension, so that's much appreicated.
    I am thinking of a new project for next year after my enforced overseas trip.
    I have an idea of the usage, the components but need to do more digging regarding the frame.
    By this you may already have deduced it is going to be an AM of sort, (not a 29'er I'm affraid Whafe).
    I am trying to decide as to the benefits of the AFR downtube that could justify keeping my Totem coils, or indeed sell them for another set of Lyriks, the latter making more sense at the moment.
    I will retain the FR frame and CCDB until the new bike is up and running, then it will be sold to the highest bidder. Can anybody shed any light on the difference in ride characteristcs between the AM and the FR? I know a few of you have had both......

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,962
    Alex, Hi mate

    The latest Am seems to be an Fr with about 100g knocked from it.And you can run a slightly longer stroke shock.

    If i still had the Fr i definetely wouldnt sell it to buy an Am,far to similar.100g and thats about it.

  14. #14
    'All over it!'
    Reputation: lornibear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,105
    So there is only 100g between the AM and the FR?

  15. #15
    'All over it!'
    Reputation: lornibear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,105
    I have also been thinking of an AC, but didn't think it was enough bike for me - but maybe it is? Was also considering an Endorphin, but perfer the look of a Nicolai.
    I wonder how much an AC could really take?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,962
    There used to be 300g,but they made the Am a bit heavier duty.

    I dont see the point of getting rid of your Fr for the Am.

    Get it re-painted by Argos,if you want a different colour.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    138
    What the other guys say seems to be just it. Kalle told me that the main difference between the FR and the AM is mainly weight and then a slightly lower downtube. In terms of Geometry they are almost same.

    To my feeling the AM is principally a newer Version of the FR that is not that much of a tank and so can be built up a bit lighter. But at the end it comes down to a difference in weight difference of about 300gr and the added possibility to run different travel settings.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,962
    Quote Originally Posted by marcoton21
    What the other guys say seems to be just it. Kalle told me that the main difference between the FR and the AM is mainly weight and then a slightly lower downtube. In terms of Geometry they are almost same.

    To my feeling the AM is principally a newer Version of the FR that is not that much of a tank and so can be built up a bit lighter. But at the end it comes down to a difference in weight difference of about 300gr and the added possibility to run different travel settings.

    I think they incresed the weight of the Am so its more like 100g differenece now.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Karve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,431
    Quote Originally Posted by norcosam
    I think they incresed the weight of the Am so its more like 100g differenece now.
    blimey - the FR looks so much more burly?
    Last edited by Karve; 11-28-2010 at 09:52 AM.
    www.essexhertsmtb.co.uk - Mountain Biking near London in the UK

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    898
    The website is saying one thing the PDF brochure is saying another but I think the added weight is gained by using the downtube from the AFR in order to allow the warranty to extend to 170mm forks (although you can't actually buy 170mm forks in stock guise).

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,962
    I thought Lyriks were 170mm,My ones definetely were..

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    898
    Yep good point, they are. I'm tempted to say that they are the only ones so far but most likely that'd still be wrong!

  23. #23
    'All over it!'
    Reputation: lornibear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,105
    Hmm, perhaps I should start a new thread for the building of a burly AC instead of derailing this one. Sam - would you PM me your MSN address, I seem to have lost it.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    551
    Quote Originally Posted by lornibear
    Hmm, perhaps I should start a new thread for the building of a burly AC instead of derailing this one. Sam - would you PM me your MSN address, I seem to have lost it.
    I would imagine AC geo AM tubing would be one tough little mile muncher, if I was doing my bike again I'd stick with the AM and go with a medium seattube and large top tube with 2cm extra length on the HT, whilst somehow losing an 30mm of the wheelbase

  25. #25
    'All over it!'
    Reputation: lornibear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,105
    I would want a 160mm fork - nothing smaller as I am a big lad, but the AC with AM tubing sounds interesting.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 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
  •