Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 188
  1. #1
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308

    09 RIP9 / XT crankset clearance - updated w/pix

    If anyone else is using stock XT cranks with the outboard bearings on an 09 RIP9, could they post a pic of the clearance between the big ring and the drive-side seat stay for me? Thanks!

    (see below for pix of my issue)
    Last edited by pinkheadedbug; 05-05-2009 at 02:42 PM.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  2. #2
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038
    Told ya, already had a thread dealing with this, according to the poster who started it (I believe AZmtn) he had to remove the big ring because when torque was applied there was contact. Seems the try at more tyre clearance has created this issue. It may have been noticed by Niner in development and thought "not a problem" since most will use a double ring setup on the RIP9s Steve or Chris had chimed in on the other thread.

    'Cause I'm feeling nice today my 09 RIP in RAW
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  3. #3
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    I looked at that thread and he doesn't have the same set-up. He's riding LX cranks. The response from Niner was that they've never had the problem in 30 builds. So I'm interested to see how it's working for other people rather than assuming it's a defect, as you do.

    You're a nice enough guy, Lynx, but you don't have to patrol every thread.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  4. #4
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038
    I don't mean to "patrol", but works not slow, more like dead for me right now, plus my backs giving me the ****s, I'm bored and lusting after stuff I can't afford until a year or two down the line and without the ability to go ride, "patrolling" is the closets I can get Plus as you said I'm a nice guy and like to help if I can

    Quote Originally Posted by pinkheadedbug
    I looked at that thread and he doesn't have the same set-up. He's riding LX cranks. The response from Niner was that they've never had the problem in 30 builds. So I'm interested to see how it's working for other people rather than assuming it's a defect, as you do.

    You're a nice enough guy, Lynx, but you don't have to patrol every thread.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  5. #5
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    OK, here are the pix of my set-up. This shows that the clearance between the big ring and the chainstay with the suspension unsagged is just over 1/16". I also show that I'm using the drive side spacer (none on the other side). You can see in one of the pictures a bright spot where the chain has been jammed against the chainstay.

    What happens in riding is that most of the time it's fine, but then you shift and the chain gets caught between the big ring and the chainstay while the suspension is compressed, and is sucked up ABOVE the chainstay, where it stays once the suspension uncompresses. It is basically impossible to get out at that point without breaking the chain.

    I am not very happy about this as I like having the big ring, and I think there is a possible (but remote) safety concern, since this can't be good for the chain and I could see it breaking if you were mashing. Would welcome a further response from Niner.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  6. #6
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    So I spoked to Niner about this and one of the guys there measured the clearance on a bike there and came up with about the same measurement as mine. So it appears that the frame is in spec.

    He (?Brian) suggested that chainring wear may be causing the chainsuck and that seems possible since although the chainset isn't that old it has been through a lot of rocks.

    I guess I will check for bent and burred teeth.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  7. #7
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038
    If I might give a possible solution......unless you have to ride a lot of road to get to the trail or between trails consider going to a double or if you want the tripple go to a compact tripple (patent pending from yours truly ) and buy some new chainring in the form of a 40 or maybe 42 for the big ring. My compact tripple will be a 24/34/40 setup. Even using a 7 cogs setup I stil can get more than enough speed without killing myself right now running a 24/38 ring setup and a 34-15 cassette.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  8. #8
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    I like the idea of the compact triple, but I may go to a bash ring if I can't fix it as some of the trails I ride are real ring-bashers.

    After talking to Niner I went back to the bike, cleaned it all up and inspected the big ring. There was one nasty inwardly bent tooth on the big ring where I must have augured into a rock. I straightened it out with a pair of pliers until I couldn't feel it with my eyes closed. So we'll see if that does the trick.

    I don't believe I'm getting any contact thru frame flex so the only reason for the chain to suck up would be ring-related.

    Brian also mentioned that the unsagged clearance may open up slightly with wear (as the shock unsticks I guess).
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  9. #9
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    A bit more reading seems to indicate that gritty mud + worn chainrings = chain suck. The last ride was the epitome of gritty mud, wrangling the RIP9 through hub deep gunk. My chainrings are not at all hooked but as I said above, one was bashed inward through rock contact. I'll post results of the next ride, which will most likely be the same conditions.

    (I should say that I took the 07 version with the same chainrings to hell and back and never had an issue).
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  10. #10
    trail "cleaner"
    Reputation: AZmtncycler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,351

    different, yet the same chainline..

    Yes, LX and XT outboard cranks are different but both operate off a 50mm chainline. One other option I posted was to install a 2nd spacer on the driveside cup to give you more clearance. The only issue I could think of is the more acute chainline you'd have if you run middle ring/large cog combination. Like I stated in my thread, I just pulled the large chainring and installed a bashguard. It is BTW an "All Mountain" bike.
    No dabs allowed!

  11. #11
    Underskilled
    Reputation: CaveGiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,117
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkheadedbug
    You're a nice enough guy, Lynx, but you don't have to patrol every thread.
    What lead you to that strange conclusion?





    edit: I thought I should mention pink, best signature ever, still gets a smile after reading it for the 400th time.

  12. #12
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038
    And yet I seem to have contributed something helpful to his thread, which is in contrast very different to your fantasticly helpful post
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveGiant
    What lead you to that strange conclusion?.
    pinkheadedbug I like the idea of the compact triple, but I may go to a bash ring if I can't fix it as some of the trails I ride are real ring-bashers
    .
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  13. #13
    BMJ
    BMJ is offline
    "42 lbs and climbing!"
    Reputation: BMJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,023

    I'm curious Pink...

    If the rear triangle moves up and back when it compresses on the trail, couldn't you compress the suspension enough with your body weight so a budy could slip the chain back out? If alone, compress by hand and yank? You probably tried it, just thought I'd through it out there.

  14. #14
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    Yeah I thought of that -- AFTER the ride. I think with a buddy it would be doable. Alone it might be a bit tricky but worth a try.

    I use powerlinks so it's not that much of a deal to break the chain.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  15. #15
    Underskilled
    Reputation: CaveGiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,117
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx
    And yet I seem to have contributed something helpful to his thread, which is in contrast very different to your fantasticly helpful post
    I suppose it does make a change from your usual patronising posts.

    I am sorry to hear work is slow at the moment, it's a shame when bad things happen to good people.

  16. #16
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038
    ............OR, carry a shock pump with you and if it happens again just deflate the shock and get the chain out, then re-inflate Once there's suspension on a bike I'm riding I always have 2 pumps with me. I normally don't have to use either of them, but it's amazing how many of the people I ride with do

    Quote Originally Posted by pinkheadedbug
    Yeah I thought of that -- AFTER the ride. I think with a buddy it would be doable. Alone it might be a bit tricky but worth a try.

    I use powerlinks so it's not that much of a deal to break the chain.
    CG, appreciate the thought and taken with sincerity
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  17. #17
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    I'm thinking about your compact triple, Lynx. I'm one of those guys who changes as much on the front as the back, and a closer set of ratios could work for me.

    When I was riding slickrock I was really hurting for a smaller gear, in line with the 26ers. So I'm thinking of notching down the whole crankset and also closing up the ratios.

    Anyone done this?
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  18. #18
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038
    I see no reason why it wouldn't work, but myself haven't found (once conditioning is there) the need for anything smaller than a 22t granny (personally prefer a 24t), but a 20/30/40 would shift very nice and offer loads of top end and low end. Check the recent threads somoene else was doing exactly this. And the guy who makes chainrings is working on a 40t with ramps. Check the 29er forum, saw it somewhere recent , maybe in a RIP9 related thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkheadedbug
    I'm thinking about your compact triple, Lynx. I'm one of those guys who changes as much on the front as the back, and a closer set of ratios could work for me.

    When I was riding slickrock I was really hurting for a smaller gear, in line with the 26ers. So I'm thinking of notching down the whole crankset and also closing up the ratios.

    Anyone done this?
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    21
    Pink,
    I did the exact same thing on today's ride. I sucked the chain above the chainstay, I had to break the chain to get it back past the big ring. I'm running a brand new chain on brand new rings, 44T big ring. I'm not too stoked about the nasty gouge, the same as you show in your pic.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    10
    I'd appreciate if some of the Niner-guys could comment on this. I'm expecting my RIP to arrive the next few days and had planned building it with 2009 XT. Not too keen on having to deal with this on every ride.

    Edit: OK, just saw the thread Lynx linked to.
    Last edited by theDuke; 05-07-2009 at 03:57 AM.

  21. #21
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    I just took a look at the 20-30-40 options and although it sounds great at first I can see a few problems. The best (only?) integrated approach is Middleburn R7 + 20-30-40 chainrings and while these seem like really excellent products, they are only available for ISIS BBs, which max out at 113mm. With 113mm BBs the chainline is 48mm, which is 2mm narrower than the XT/LX cranks.

    SO you get a smaller big ring but 2mm less clearance. I'm guessing you end up pretty much in the same place!

    If you want to retain the XT cranks it's hard to find 4-bolt chainrings to fill out the 20-30-40 chainset.

    It's probably the bashring for me, I'm thinking.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  22. #22
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,113
    I converted my Jet9 to 22-32 bash ring, but why couldn't you do 22-32-40? If you still want a big ring. I can pedal the 32-11 to 25 mph easily so I see no reason to have a big ring.

  23. #23
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    well, I sort of feel that if I'm gonna fool around with the chainrings I might as well get what I really want. I don't much care about the top end but I definitely felt the lack of a bottom end when riding slickrock. That trail is different from most anything I had ever ridden before and seemed like it could take whatever (low) ratio I threw at it.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,587
    Run 2 Rings and a bashguard - problem solved. pink you are in EAstern Canada right?

    If your trails are similar to what we have down here in New England - you don't need the big ring for a bike like the RIP 9 IMO. Lose it and get a nice bashguard for it.

    Cheers,

    Mark

  25. #25
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    I picked up a bashguard and a 36T ring from the parts bin at my LBS for $5 each. I think the bashguard is probably the answer for the moment but I'm still thinking about that Middleburn setup.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14
    A big ring is something I use here in the Midwest so I'm still searching for an option to this issue. The shop I'm working with is thus far listening to Niner's suggestions to help the issue. Niner's first suggestion is to swap to a 42t with hopes to gains more clearance. Their second suggestion is to replace the cranks I use with a stiffer model. If I have to go with the second suggestion, I will be going with a 20-30-40 setup with either Middleburn or Surly Mr. Whirly cranks and I'm leaning towards Surly.

  27. #27
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    I sucked my chain up again today. Compressing the suspension doesn't provide enough clearance to get it out. We had been riding deep mud and also sawing over a lot of fallen trees, so it's possible I bent another tooth and/or the mud was just too gluey.

    Bash ring it is, then. Was trying to put it on before the ride but I actually have to dismantle the damn crankset to get it on.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    48
    I got my Rip almost 3 weeks ago and have had chain suck 5 times, Twice being in a race where I had to get off my bike and rip the chain through the bottom bracket and the big ring. The last chain suck was this past weekend. I was 8 miles into some back country and the cain sucked and it took my rear derailleur with it and snaped it. I made it into SS and took a fire road out. I love this bike but the chain suck is a huge negitive. It has been sitting in the BS for 3 days tryingt to figure out what the hell we are suppose to do. I have a call scheuduled with the manager of my shop and Brian at Niner to discuss this on Wed. I will post some pics when I get the bike back but as you can imagine my bottom bracket is aleady pretty ripped up and paint is scrapped bad. The manager at my shop called Niner 2 weeks ago when this 1st happend and they said they have not heard any problems with cain suck. Well I think they have now. I hope they come on this site and read up!! I have all brand new parts on this bike with a 175 XT crank so nothing out of the ordinary. I had to vent, thanks....

  29. #29
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    I'm sure they're reading this thread. I would imagine the lack of a response is because they are still working on the solution. Jeez, I HOPE that's the case anyway.

    The possible solutions appear to be

    1. Bash ring
    2. Smaller big ring, possibly smaller chainset overall

    The Middleburn cranks look nice but the chainline is smaller than the XT and I strongly suspect it won't solve the problem. And I LIKE the XT cranks.

    The bash ring works OK for me in my local riding but it would be a PITA on some fireroad stuff when I'm out west and I'm not really happy about it as a solution. However the bike is marginal to ride without it.

    It would be a horrible shame if such an awesome frame got a bad rap because of such a stupid niggle. The bike absolutely rocks in every other respect.

    /edit -- I've had four cases of chain suck
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    48
    If not for chain suck I would say this is the best bike I have owned period. I have owned or riddend most manufactures out there. I climb faster on this bike than I did my Ibis Mojo and that was 5 lbs lighter. And decending... forget about it, its not even close After my call with Niner tomorrow I will give an update on this link.

  31. #31
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    Agreed... the 07 Rip was easily the best bike I'd ever ridden, and the 09 is (chain suck aside) MUCH better, especially downhill and over the gnar.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    48
    There was another guy on line from AZ that had a RIP, is that you?

  33. #33
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    No, I'm in Ontario. The other guy is in this thread. There are other guys with clearance issues in this thread.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  34. #34
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038

    We the people ...

    Sitting back and watching this thread ...........
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PaloComadoGrinder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    53
    It's looking like my decision to go with a 2x9 set-up on my '09 RIP 9 was a lucky one. While out riding today I was thinking about this thread and while on a slightly descending, fairly smooth fireroad I put it in my top gear ratio and cranked it up to about 27 mph before needing a taller gear. For me, that's all I need. But, it's totally unacceptable that a standard 3x9 setup isn't working for you guys. I've got the Shimano SLX M665, 22/36 Crank Set with a bash guard up front and an 11-34 cassette. It's working well for the riding that I do.
    Last edited by PaloComadoGrinder; 05-14-2009 at 04:35 PM.

  36. #36
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    7,939
    Gotta love early adopters that love bleeding edge technology and get to sort all the headaches out for the rest of us. I'm sure when Niner has a solution, they'll make an announcement. I'm wondering if it will be a redesigned rear triangle with a bit less wheel space for less to no chain suck?

    Maybe with this being v2.0 of the RIP, I'll buy a new one with v 2.1 or 2.2. I have to say I do love the one I got and the way it rides on everything except granite spines. That's the only condition I notice the flex in the frame /rear triangle, which is quite rare.

  37. #37
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038
    Just saw in another thread a guy having trouble running a 36t double ring combo on a new Niner HT so it seems that Niner has gone out of their way to increase tyre clearance and/or have shortened up the chainstay length which is causing these new problems Has anyone measure the CS length on the new RIP9s? According to Niner's site Geo for the new RIP9 the CS is still 17.9", same as the old RIP9, but I still wonder what's causing all these new issues - Can't run a tripple on the RIP9, Can't run a double using a 36t on the new AIR9.....WTF is up?
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  38. #38
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    The issue is to do with the chainstay yoke rather than the chainstay length. It is designed for tons of lateral clearance. You could run a massive tire in there. This makes the yoke very square which brings it up against the chain ring. The yoke is also pretty beefy just there.

    These are all good qualities in and of themselves, but everything gets very tight and busy 'down there'.

    It looks to me as though they need to tweak the yoke design. It is only about a mm or two from being totally fine. I'm guessing that running a 40t big ring would solve it too (if you can find one).

    It also probably has to do with the chainline on the crankset. This is the distance from the middle of the BB to the middle ring. On XT stuff it is 50mm. The Middleburn R7 is 48mm which I imagine is going to make things even tighter.

    The problem could also be solved by offsetting the BB by a few MM but I can't imagine that being an optimal solution.

    This photo shows the yoke pretty clearly. You can see that the chainstays are burly and straight, and then the yoke is pretty darn square. This gives bags of clearance for the tire but not for the big ring.



    And here's the previous version... you can see the yoke is much less square.

    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    10
    Niner, please give us some input on this issue. Ain't lookin' too good, I must say...

  40. #40
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,113
    Pink-look at the previous pictures. The large ring is outside the link area and the hits are on the chainstays. It is obvious that Niner beefed these parts up substantially in order to make the Rip very stiff. Now they have a couple of contianers full of bikes that have a problem that didn't surface during testing that is actually happening in real world use. I am sure they are frantically trying to figure out what the best solution is. It might be that they give Rip buyers a 40 tooth ring. I can't immagine needing anything larger with 29er wheels and the potential to use an 11 in the rear. Even on my Jet I took the 44 off and put a bash guard on. I am a spinner, but can get up to 25 with a 32-11 so see no need for a larger ring.

    The current design optimized stiffness, short chainstay, and large tire to the limit. I would take all that and a 40 tooth limit, but some would probably complain so Niner will probably end up redesigning the rear triangle and one of those 3 items will be less optimal, but the winers will be able to get a 44 ring to work. I am led to wonder if Lance could turn a 44-11 on a Rip with 622-55 rubber.

  41. #41
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    The close-up pix are of my bike. The impact is on the yoke. The scratches on the chainstay are from the chain suck. The 2mm clearance is between the big ring and the yoke. But whatever.

    I agree with you that a 40t big ring and the current set-up would be fine. I really like what they have done with the rear triangle. The problem is finding a 40t ring that works with your particular crankset. (Ideally I'd like a 20-30-40t set-up that was guaranteed to work with the RIP and didn't involve having to compromise anything in the rear triangle design).
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  42. #42
    29ers Only.
    Reputation: Niner Bikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,170
    Guys,

    thanks for the pics and posts. We obviously hate having issues with our frames, any of them and understand your frustration. Here's the reality, it's obviously an issue and people are having problems with big ring chain suck, but we have a lot of these frames out on the market and the cases are pretty isolated. We understand the chainring gap is close, and it's really trying for us to produce prototype after prototype with no issues, and then have something like this pop up on production frames. We even built 25 or so 'pre-production' frames for Interbike last year and didn't have a single case of chain suck during the entire dirt demo using the same chainstay yoke and cranks with the same (50mm) chainline. These bikes are still out in demo fleets across the country and being ridden with no issues. It's not a case of something being different with the new frames, clearance is the same, it's a case of more people riding them in more varied situations. At any rate, we're doing everything we can to figure out this issue and solutions for it. If you are having issues with your frame, contact us and we'll take care of you and your needs. It isn't right for you to have to make concesions and additional purchases based on issues like this and we'll do what we can to make it right.

    In the case of the Air 9 not fitting a 36t chainring, we can't design our frames to work for every set up. We have to make sure they work and work well within a normal range of use, and we can't forsee every single different configuration that a given frame might be built around. For us, tire clearance was more critical than giving it up for the very small percentage of people who will run a 36t middle ring.

    Steve
    Niner Bikes

  43. #43
    trail "cleaner"
    Reputation: AZmtncycler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,351

    Ok...

    So, I was the first to report of this particular problem back in April.. One thing I suggested was if a Triple chainring is mandatory, add one more spacer on the driveside BB cup for additional clearance. I opted to just remove the 44 tooth chainring and install a bashguard. Has anyone that 'requires' a triple chainring set up done what I have suggested with the spacer??
    Attached Images Attached Images
    No dabs allowed!

  44. #44
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038
    I'd have to say the biggest problem here is - There's no commercially available 40t ramped and pinned chainrings out there. I think what Niner should do is put a warning/statement that although a normal 22/32/44 triplle can be used it isn't guarenteed and the prefered is a tripple using a 42t ring or smaller.

    For the intended purpose of the bike I think the re-design was needed and a HUGE improvement and even though there are those that say I'm anti-Niner, on this one I'd have to say non issue, just needs to be clearly stated in the literature and by dealers - I'll take better clearance and stiffness anyday!
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  45. #45
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,113
    +1 I think it is a non-issue also.

  46. #46
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,038

    Caution;  Merge;  Workers Ahead! Let's clarify.........

    ............Future Non Issue! But for those who bought the build kits with the expectation of using a tripple it's an issue for them because of the lack of a 40t big ring.

    What I would suggest for those people would be for Niner maybe to contact the guy in the 29er forum who makes the 30t and 20t rings and was talking about doing the 40t and get him to make a bunch for them, even have them lazer etched with the Niner logo. Then if Niner was nice they could give them out as a "thanks", but they could also offer them for sale and I'd bet they'd sell pretty good. Heck get him to make the complete "compact" ring set for them, etched and all.

    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy
    +1 I think it is a non-issue also.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  47. #47
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    Quote Originally Posted by AZmtncycler
    So, I was the first to report of this particular problem back in April.. One thing I suggested was if a Triple chainring is mandatory, add one more spacer on the driveside BB cup for additional clearance. I opted to just remove the 44 tooth chainring and install a bashguard. Has anyone that 'requires' a triple chainring set up done what I have suggested with the spacer??
    On XT Hollowtech II cranks at least you can't just add a spacer, or at least you can but it's not a good idea. The crank spindle is a certain length and if you add spacers the non-drive crank will no longer fit properly. The plastic tension screw does not have much thread on it, and the spindle spines will no longer be snug in the crank arm. Also the plastic tube which connects the two BB cups inside the frame will no longer mate up. I think this will apply to most external BB cranks.

    /Edit -- this would have been possible on the previous RIP9 because it had a 68mm BB and used 3 x 2.5mm spacers, one on the non-drive and two on the drive. By moving the left hand spacer over you could shift the crankset to the right by 2.5 mm. However the new version has a 73mm BB and only uses one spacer, on the drive side. There's no way to shift it over.

    With certain cranksets this may also take the chainline outside the specs of the front derailleur (on an XT crankset it would take it from 50mm to 52.5mm), meaning that the FD will no longer reliably change up to the big ring.

    Lynx is correct that there is no currently commercially available 40t pinned and ramped big chainring.
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

  48. #48
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,271
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx
    What I would suggest for those people would be for Niner maybe to contact the guy in the 29er forum who makes the 30t and 20t rings and was talking about doing the 40t and get him to make a bunch for them, even have them lazer etched with the Niner logo. Then if Niner was nice they could give them out as a "thanks", but they could also offer them for sale and I'd bet they'd sell pretty good. Heck get him to make the complete "compact" ring set for them, etched and all.
    I agree. And I suggest Niner also anodize them in various colors to match the frame colors.

  49. #49
    Supersonic Garfield
    Reputation: Trond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    554
    TA Specialites makes middle 38/40/42 ring pinned and ramped. I have a 38 on my 2009 RIP with no issues, ill take a picture tonight on the clearance

    http://cyclecomponents.com/1/sv/arti...-104-mm-2.html

    I use TA for the inner ring as well, running 28-38. Wicked setup.

  50. #50
    Out there
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,308
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx
    ............Future Non Issue! But for those who bought the build kits with the expectation of using a tripple it's an issue for them because of the lack of a 40t big ring.

    What I would suggest for those people would be for Niner maybe to contact the guy in the 29er forum who makes the 30t and 20t rings and was talking about doing the 40t and get him to make a bunch for them, even have them lazer etched with the Niner logo. Then if Niner was nice they could give them out as a "thanks", but they could also offer them for sale and I'd bet they'd sell pretty good. Heck get him to make the complete "compact" ring set for them, etched and all.
    That would be nice, or get Middleburn to OEM some maybe. I wonder if there is a problem getting to 40t with a 4-bolt set-up though? Do you have a link to the thread?
    All problems in mountain biking can be solved by going faster, except the ones that are caused by going too fast.

Page 1 of 4 1234 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
  •