Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    626

    2013/14 RIP 9 geometry

    Is the geometry the same on the new airformed frames as on the previous model? cause from what I see on the Niner website, it is, but then I'm reading some reviews, and they say the chainstays are 17.7cm like the RDO, the angles are more relaxed, and some other discrepancies. I'm just wondering if the new frame is gonna fit like the old one.

    Also, some reviews say that the linkage attaches using a Shimano bb tool like the RDO has, but every picture I see shows those red rounded bolts. Are these just a cap of some sort?




  2. #2
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,146
    Yes some of the reviews are so far out in there info, The hardwhere is nothing like each other.

    Yes the chain stays are shorter on the Rip9 RDO than on the new Air formed Rip9 Alloy

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    626
    Niner emailed me back that the geometry on the new airformed frame is exactly the same as the previous bike.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: albertdc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    434

    Re: 2013/14 RIP 9 geometry

    I thought the head angle was supposed to be more slack on the new version. No?

    People that have ridden both say that the new version is so much better than the old...but if the geo is the same, what accounts for the improved ride reviews?

    Something fishy here somewhere....

    Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

  5. #5
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,146
    Quote Originally Posted by albertdc View Post
    People that have ridden both say that the new version is so much better than the old...but if the geo is the same, what accounts for the improved ride reviews?

    Something fishy here somewhere....

    Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
    The new Alloy Rip9 has a nicer CVA setup on it, It doesn't bob as much & pedals better.

    With more travel it soaks up the ruff better.

    It is also lighter & with the other upsides of the new Rip9 Alloy it feels much more alive than the older 1.

    This in no way plays down how good the old Rip9 was, I loved mine, but wanted a bike that was more alive when riding between the ruff stuff.

  6. #6
    NMBP
    Reputation: gfs69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,144
    Quote Originally Posted by muzzanic View Post
    The new Alloy Rip9 has a nicer CVA setup on it, It doesn't bob as much & pedals better.

    With more travel it soaks up the ruff better.

    It is also lighter & with the other upsides of the new Rip9 Alloy it feels much more alive than the older 1.

    This in no way plays down how good the old Rip9 was, I loved mine, but wanted a bike that was more alive when riding between the ruff stuff.
    Yep, pretty much nailed it!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    626
    Quote Originally Posted by albertdc View Post
    I thought the head angle was supposed to be more slack on the new version. No?



    Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
    That's what I mean about conflicting info with some of the reviews. I know the old RIP slackened its angles sometime around 2011 or 2012, so maybe they're making these comments in referral to that.

    From my short time on the old one, I didn't feel that one bobbed much at all.

  8. #8
    NMBP
    Reputation: gfs69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,144
    I think the reviewers were confusing the carbon and alu versions a bit. The older version was excellent, but as Muzz stated well, the newer version is that much better. I rode mine in some very rocky, demanding trails recently, and the feeling I came away with was that the suspension disappeared, and just worked. Good stuff. I just read the Dirtrag review, and they basically said the same thing that I was thinking.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,668
    Anyone know what the BB height of the new RIP is? I actually own one, but I'm not sure how/where this is measured from. Interested to compare to a few other bikes...

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flip D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by muzzanic View Post
    The new Alloy Rip9 has a nicer CVA setup on it, It doesn't bob as much & pedals better.
    I've been wondering if there were any changes to the new CVA. Did they change the pivot locations or linkage, or is it just better valving? I have a 2011 Rip and really like the CVA. Just wish they would rein in those chainstays.

  11. #11
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,618
    Quote Originally Posted by albertdc View Post
    I thought the head angle was supposed to be more slack on the new version. No?
    No. You can compare them yourself here.The dimensions are tweaked a mm here and there, but the geometry is essentially the same.

    The way Niner keeps all this information readily available, even for discontinued frames, is really cool.
    "Back off, man. I'm a scientist." - Dr. Peter Venkman

    Riding in Helena? Everything you need to know, right here.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by evasive View Post
    No. You can compare them yourself here.The dimensions are tweaked a mm here and there, but the geometry is essentially the same.

    The way Niner keeps all this information readily available, even for discontinued frames, is really cool.
    I'm not sure how up-to-date the niner encyclopedia really is. I know for certain something has been updated on the RIP 9 page, but it's not complete. In August this encyclopedia had many RIP models listed on the RIP 9 page. I know this because I was researching the frame for sale from Jenson and the RIP 9 page had additional models. If you scroll forward to page 33 and review the version chart, you see much more info and the current version is not listed.

    From what I can tell, in 2011 there was a more significant geometry change. The note under headtube says it is now 1 degree slacker.

    The way I read this information it says, The geometry between the 2011+ hydro form and the current air form are very close, however the geometry from 2009-2011 are more different.

  13. #13
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,618
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander944 View Post
    I'm not sure how up-to-date the niner encyclopedia really is.
    Well, it includes the ROS9 and the airformed aluminum frames, so I think it's current. Although you're right that they haven't updated the version chart with them yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander944 View Post
    The way I read this information it says, The geometry between the 2011+ hydro form and the current air form are very close, however the geometry from 2009-2011 are more different.
    Yes, I think that's right.
    "Back off, man. I'm a scientist." - Dr. Peter Venkman

    Riding in Helena? Everything you need to know, right here.

  14. #14
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Flip D View Post
    I've been wondering if there were any changes to the new CVA. Did they change the pivot locations or linkage, or is it just better valving? I have a 2011 Rip and really like the CVA. Just wish they would rein in those chainstays.
    Everything is changed a little from what I can see & including the Shock.

Similar Threads

  1. specialized epic new geometry vs pre 2009 geometry?
    By mountainclimb in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 03:13 PM
  2. Shinobi geometry changes 2012 - 2013?
    By Paranoid_Android in forum Norco
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-22-2013, 02:18 AM
  3. 2011-2012-2013 jekyll carbon geometry changes?
    By thresh in forum Cannondale
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-13-2012, 11:54 PM
  4. 2012/2013 Slash geometry difference
    By CaRaBeeN in forum Trek
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-30-2012, 01:33 PM
  5. 2013 enduro geometry
    By stokerslo in forum Specialized
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-20-2012, 11:32 AM

Posting Permissions

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