Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30
  1. #1
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249

    RIP9 Geometry changes - apologies I know its been done a hundred times

    Could somebody please help here before I make a costly upgrade which proves to be incorrect.

    I'm riding a 2009 RIP9 which I'm very happy with but I'm looking for a little more bike for some Alps riding.
    I'm considering putting a 140mm fork on it. The alternative is to change to the current frame which I understand is slacker.

    According to the geo charts the 2009 HTA is 71.5 based on a 100mm fork.
    This comes from the 2009 Geometry Tech pdf which I have linked below.
    I'm currently running it with an F120 so my HTA would be about 70.5.
    If I put a 140mm fork on it I'll be at about 69.5.

    When I look at the current RIP9 geometry the Niner website states the HTA is 69.5 based on a 140mm fork.

    I understood that Niner slackened the HT angle on their new frame by 1 degree.

    So where has there actually been a change or am I getting something wrong here?

    The 2009 Geo article is here:
    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...Dmu1FVCfIY1Z2g

    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    JMH
    JMH is offline
    Sugary Exoskeleton
    Reputation: JMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,709
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugor View Post
    Could somebody please help here before I make a costly upgrade which proves to be incorrect.

    I'm riding a 2009 RIP9 which I'm very happy with but I'm looking for a little more bike for some Alps riding.
    I'm considering putting a 140mm fork on it. The alternative is to change to the current frame which I understand is slacker.

    According to the geo charts the 2009 HTA is 71.5 based on a 100mm fork.
    This comes from the 2009 Geometry Tech pdf which I have linked below.
    I'm currently running it with an F120 so my HTA would be about 70.5.
    If I put a 140mm fork on it I'll be at about 69.5.

    When I look at the current RIP9 geometry the Niner website states the HTA is 69.5 based on a 140mm fork.

    I understood that Niner slackened the HT angle on their new frame by 1 degree.

    So where has there actually been a change or am I getting something wrong here?

    The 2009 Geo article is here:
    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...Dmu1FVCfIY1Z2g

    Thanks in advance.
    The hydroformed RIP 9 with tapered headtube that takes an integrated headset (the older model) is one degree steeper than the newer model that takes an internal headset. A newer model will have a 70.5 HA with a 120mm fork, or 69.5 with a 140mm (it's not truly a degree, more like .7 or .8)

    The PDF linked is likely incorrect, Niner started recommending a 120mm fork when they brought out the hydroformed/tapered frame that you have. That frame has a 71.5 HA with a 120mm fork.

    So if you buy a newer frame you will be at 70.5. If you put a 140mm on yours you will also be around 70.5 but with a higher BB and handlebars.

    If you really want to play with head angle I suggest you get the newer frame and pick up the FSA Orbit Option that fits it. You can try 69 with a 120mm fork. It was too slack for me that way, but your trails are steep in the alps!

    JMH

  3. #3
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by JMH View Post
    The hydroformed RIP 9 with tapered headtube that takes an integrated headset (the older model) is one degree steeper than the newer model that takes an internal headset. A newer model will have a 70.5 HA with a 120mm fork, or 69.5 with a 140mm (it's not truly a degree, more like .7 or .8)

    The PDF linked is likely incorrect, Niner started recommending a 120mm fork when they brought out the hydroformed/tapered frame that you have. That frame has a 71.5 HA with a 120mm fork.

    So if you buy a newer frame you will be at 70.5. If you put a 140mm on yours you will also be around 70.5 but with a higher BB and handlebars.

    If you really want to play with head angle I suggest you get the newer frame and pick up the FSA Orbit Option that fits it. You can try 69 with a 120mm fork. It was too slack for me that way, but your trails are steep in the alps!

    JMH
    Thanks heaps thats cleared it up. So the Geo file I was reading was incorrect and it should read based on a 120 fork instead of 100.

    I take it the FSA Orbit works with a tapered steerer and head tube.

  4. #4
    Laker and a Trail Blazer
    Reputation: Broncstad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    722
    Quote Originally Posted by JMH View Post
    The hydroformed RIP 9 with tapered headtube that takes an integrated headset (the older model) is one degree steeper than the newer model that takes an internal headset. A newer model will have a 70.5 HA with a 120mm fork, or 69.5 with a 140mm (it's not truly a degree, more like .7 or .8)

    The PDF linked is likely incorrect, Niner started recommending a 120mm fork when they brought out the hydroformed/tapered frame that you have. That frame has a 71.5 HA with a 120mm fork.

    So if you buy a newer frame you will be at 70.5. If you put a 140mm on yours you will also be around 70.5 but with a higher BB and handlebars.

    If you really want to play with head angle I suggest you get the newer frame and pick up the FSA Orbit Option that fits it. You can try 69 with a 120mm fork. It was too slack for me that way, but your trails are steep in the alps!

    JMH
    I am now riding a newer version and this explains why my bike rides different. Is this the only difference between the older version and the newer version?

  5. #5
    JMH
    JMH is offline
    Sugary Exoskeleton
    Reputation: JMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,709
    Yes, that was the only change. The head angle got slacker which made the wheelbase a bit longer.

    Sadly, the ORBIT Option only works with a straight steerer. I think this is the one I have: ORBIT OPTION T1 - NR.67 I don't know why they give the outside diameter (which could change depending on headtube thickness) instead of the inside diameter like everyone else does.

    I think the new Aheadset is available that will work with a tapered steerer but I haven't looked... anyone know?

    I prefer the FSA model for two reasons: no extra gimbal for the bearings to sit in. The FSA bearings are actually conical to fit the conical cup. I have had fewer noises with this design. Also the FSA has a regular stack height instead of adding 5-6mm for the upper gimbal.

    JMH

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    138
    There is a guy on the turner forum that makes offset external cups that will slacken the head tube 1.5 deg. This is designed for the RIP9 with integrated headsets and tapered steer tube.



    It will add 19mm of stack height and unfortunately I do not have enough steer tube,

  7. #7
    Laker and a Trail Blazer
    Reputation: Broncstad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    722
    What about the rp23? The functions seem the same and the appearance is different. Have these changed at all, mechanically?

  8. #8
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Edit sorry misread the question. Nothing to see here!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeThreads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    51
    Hugor.

    I've been looking into this very closely over the last little while, and while a 140mm fork would change your HA, all of the available 140mm forks have a greater axle offset which will negate much (maybe all) of the HA change.

    It seems to come down to a figure called Trail (only just learned about this myself).



    Now... from here it gets purely into numbers and I don't have any real world riding experience with this


    By the numbers, Trail for the following setups are:

    Jet9, 80mm fork, 63.2mm
    Jet9, 100mm fork, 67mm

    Older RIP9, 71.5 Deg HA, 120mm fork, 76.8mm
    Older RIP9, 70.5 Deg HA, 140mm fork, 76.3mm

    Current RIP9, 70.5 Deg HA, 120mm fork, 83.7mm
    Current RIP9, 69.5 Deg HA, 140mm fork, 83.3mm

    WFO9, 140mm fork, 86.8mm

    These numbers were calculated using 2011/2012 Fox fork data.

    Now I know that the 140mm fork will change BB and bar height which will effect things, but to my way of thinking (and I'll be happy for others to add real world input) I really only see the 2012 Fox 34 140mm shock (for example) to add more travel and not actually change much in terms of stability.
    Last edited by BikeThreads; 01-19-2012 at 07:07 PM.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeThreads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    51
    Now following on, as UnderPar noted, Saar Ofanaim.net Head Angle Set makes external bearing "cups" that allow you to change the HA by a certain amount.

    By the numbers (and again I don't have any real world riding experience with this) changing the HA on an older RIP9 by 1 Deg and keeping the 120mm fork, Trail will be changed from 76.8mm to 83.7mm which is just under the WFO9 with a 140mm fork and similar to bikes like the Trance for example. And with a 1.5 Deg change in HA Trail becomes 87.2mm.

    So, as I was also looking longingly at a new 140mm fork, I am now actually thinking that just changing my HA will do more for me than changing to a longer fork (I'm after more stability, not travel).

    And once again, I'd be very happy for others with real world experience in this to make comment.

    Ta,

    Paul.

  11. #11
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by BikeThreads View Post
    Now following on, as UnderPar noted, Saar Ofanaim.net Head Angle Set makes external bearing "cups" that allow you to change the HA by a certain amount.

    By the numbers (and again I don't have any real world riding experience with this) changing the HA on an older RIP9 by 1 Deg and keeping the 120mm fork, Trail will be changed from 76.8mm to 83.7mm which is just under the WFO9 with a 140mm fork and similar to bikes like the Trance for example. And with a 1.5 Deg change in HA Trail becomes 87.2mm.

    So, as I was also looking longingly at a new 140mm fork, I am now actually thinking that just changing my HA will do more for me than changing to a longer fork (I'm after more stability, not travel).

    And once again, I'd be very happy for others with real world experience in this to make comment.

    Ta,

    Paul.
    Thanks heaps for that.
    I have heard of trail but have not looked too much into it to be honest. I'm going to do a bit more reading then reread your post.
    I take it you are having the same thoughts as myself i.e. slackening your RIP a little.
    Obviously an angleset is the cheapest and easiest way to go.
    I'll check your link above, but I've not found one that is compatible with integrated headsets, tapered headtubes and tapered steerers.
    A few google searches has revealed that Cane Creek were planning to issue them last May. There is a small penalty in stack height. There's a thread on this in the DH/FR forum.
    I haven't seen them for sale anywhere though.
    If anyone has some info would be great.
    Last edited by Hugor; 01-21-2012 at 01:30 AM.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: schnee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    851
    I'm riding an XL RIP 2010 with a 140mm fork and it's awesome.

    Way better behaved on the steep ups and downs than the L RIP 2009 with either the 120 or 140 fork. Part of that is because I'm 6'-3" (right on the top of the envelope of the Large size) and not terribly coordinated so the bigger bike just feels much better. I definitely benefit from the longer wheelbase, and being able to run a slammed-down 70mm stem and keep a decently sized cockpit.

    I think the Large (by that I mean 'smaller for me') 2009 RIP was more fun on fast, flowy, flatter singletrack. I didn't have to worry so much about super chunky rocks in the terrain I rode it in before so it was definitely an XC-like ride. The steering was by no means twitchy, but almost laser-precise. Here in NorCal I'm encountering steeper stuff and the slacker angles feel a lot more sure-footed.

  13. #13
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by UnderPar View Post
    There is a guy on the turner forum that makes offset external cups that will slacken the head tube 1.5 deg. This is designed for the RIP9 with integrated headsets and tapered steer tube.



    It will add 19mm of stack height and unfortunately I do not have enough steer tube,
    I have come across these:

    NEW - 1 5 Degree EC44 - ZS56 - To Suit Tapered Steerer Tube Forks

    I am a technical idiot.
    Before I buy this is somebody able to confirm that it will fit the 2009 (1st gen hydroformed) RIP9.
    Mine has the FSA integrated headset, a tapered steerer F120 and a tapered headtube.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeThreads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    51
    Hugor,

    No, that one won't fit.

    We have the same frame Gen and need an IS compatable system.

    WC are working on one at the moment but Saar (see my link to him above) has them.

  15. #15
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by BikeThreads View Post
    Hugor,

    No, that one won't fit.

    We have the same frame Gen and need an IS compatable system.

    WC are working on one at the moment but Saar (see my link to him above) has them.
    Thanks.
    That Saar website looks like its written in Hebrew or something.
    Aside from the fact that I can't read most of it, its not the kind of website I feel comfortable entering my credit card details into!!

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeThreads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    51
    Fare enough Hugor.

    I have not bought anything from him, but he does have a very good customer service rep on the forum.

  17. #17
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by BikeThreads View Post
    Fare enough Hugor.

    I have not bought anything from him, but he does have a very good customer service rep on the forum.
    I emailed works components today.
    They (Rick) very quickly replied that they were currently working on an angleset for the RIP9 with an integrated headset and that it should go on sale in about a month.
    I am an extremely excited individual.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    138
    Hugor - Did Rick say if they are making it for tapered or straight steers?

  19. #19
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by UnderPar View Post
    Hugor - Did Rick say if they are making it for tapered or straight steers?
    They already make them for straight steerers and tapered steerers with regular (i.e non integrated) headsets.
    My email asked him for whether they had or could make an angleset for a tapered headtube and steerer with an integrated headset.

    He replied "Were working on a headset for IS headtubes right now as it happens.
    We should have first prototypes ready by the end of the week, if fitment goes well they should be out for sale in the next month or so."

    He suggested I keep an eye on their facebook page for when they are available. I'm extremely keen and being based in the UK right now I think I'll go this way.

    I also emailed Snar as recommended by bike threads above. He supplied the same diagrams and info as above.

  20. #20
    JMH
    JMH is offline
    Sugary Exoskeleton
    Reputation: JMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,709
    I have been fiddling around with my RIP 9, it's the newer IS design. I rode it for a while at 120mm and liked it. This summer I also used an Orbit Option to get a 70 head angle and REALLY liked it. I then installed a 130mm fork (tapered, so no HA adjust) and I don't love it, even though the HA should be close to the same.

    So now I am going back to the Orbit Option (-1 this time) and the straight steerer to get 69.5 with the 120mm fork. Yes, I am a bit bored.

    JMH

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeThreads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    51
    Hi JMH.

    Pity Re. the 130mm fork.

    I wonder if the 130mm had a different axle offset vs. your 120mm which may have changed your Trail. Was the 130mm twitchier?

    I'll be very interested to see what you think of your 69.5Deg/120mm set-up.

    Paul.

    PS. What 120mm and 130mm forks are you running?

  22. #22
    JMH
    JMH is offline
    Sugary Exoskeleton
    Reputation: JMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,709
    Quote Originally Posted by BikeThreads View Post
    Hi JMH.

    Pity Re. the 130mm fork.

    I wonder if the 130mm had a different axle offset vs. your 120mm which may have changed your Trail. Was the 130mm twitchier?

    I'll be very interested to see what you think of your 69.5Deg/120mm set-up.

    Paul.

    PS. What 120mm and 130mm forks are you running?
    BT -

    I have a few Rebas of varying vintage. One is a 130/140 with a tapered steerer, the other is a 80/100/120 with a straight steerer. Both have the same offset.

    I think I was feeling the height of the front end more than the steering characteristics. It certainly wasn't bad, it just didn't feel right. Ironic really because I loved the 140mm Reba on my older RIP with the steeper head angle.

    But like I said, I think maybe I just have the Winter Fiddles.

    JMH

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeThreads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    51
    Hugor,

    As noted in the Which 140mm fork for a RIP? thread, here are some calculated Trail numbers for different forks,

    For a Gen 2 RIP9 frame with 71.5 Deg HA & 120mm fork

    Fox 120mm/32, offset 44mm, trail 76.83mm

    For a Gen 2 RIP9 frame with 70.5 Deg HA & 140mm fork

    Fox 140mm/34, offset 51mm, trail 76.32mm
    RS 140mm/Rev, offset 46mm, trail 81.62mm
    Marz 140mm/44, offset 44mm, trail 83.74mm
    WB 140mm/Loop, offset 46mm, trail 81.62mm


    For a Gen 3 RIP9 frame with 70.5 Deg HA & 120mm fork

    Fox 120mm/32, offset 44mm, trail 83.74mm

    For a Gen 3 RIP9 frame with 69.5 Deg HA & 140mm fork

    Fox 140mm/34, offset 51mm, trail 83.25mm
    RS 140mm/Rev, offset 46mm, trail 88.59mm
    Marz 140mm/44, offset 44mm, trail 90.73mm
    WB 140mm/Loop, offset 46mm, trail 88.59mm


    So, as you can see above, just changing to a 140mm fork does not mean you are actually going to gain much in Trail, you need to also look at the forks offset.

    (Note to whoever: The change in HA for each Gen frame above is caused by the different overall length of the 120mm vs. 140mm fork and not by physically changing the HA)
    -
    BikeThreads.com.au
    T-Shirts and stuff for fellow bike nuts.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nickbm3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugor View Post
    They already make them for straight steerers and tapered steerers with regular (i.e non integrated) headsets.
    My email asked him for whether they had or could make an angleset for a tapered headtube and steerer with an integrated headset.

    He replied "Were working on a headset for IS headtubes right now as it happens.
    We should have first prototypes ready by the end of the week, if fitment goes well they should be out for sale in the next month or so."

    He suggested I keep an eye on their facebook page for when they are available. I'm extremely keen and being based in the UK right now I think I'll go this way.

    I also emailed Snar as recommended by bike threads above. He supplied the same diagrams and info as above.
    Any updates from Works Components yet?
    "That's a niiiiiiiice biiike boy! That a Huffy!?"

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeThreads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    51
    Nothing from WC that I've seen or heard, but on a same but different note, I received my HAS from Saar the other day and it is a very nice looking unit

    I'll post some photos etc once I get it all together but at the moment I'm a bit short on free time
    -
    BikeThreads.com.au
    T-Shirts and stuff for fellow bike nuts.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-02-2012, 07:52 PM

Posting Permissions

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