Purchasing a 429c with 2013 Fox 120mm CTD. I demoed a medium with the fork and fit was great (believe it had a 100mm stem with a 6d rise and about half an inch of spacers underneath), but I prefer RockShox RCT3 forks over the newer Fox.
My race bike is a carbon 29HT with a 100mm SID RCT3. I am done racing the HT until next March and ride FS in the meantime, and was thinking of putting that SID 100mm on the 429C. I've searched for A2C between the oem Fox and the 2012 RCT3, but there seems to be some give or take in the actual measurements (Pivot lists 69.3 with a 120mm fork while Competitive Cyclist lists a 70.3 HA with 120mm fork). I believe a 100mm SID is 12mm shorter A2C which would give about half a degree steeper HA (doesn't 25mm equal 1 degree angle change?) which is fine by me if it's 69.3 on a 120mm Fox, but 70.3 plus half a degree is getting a bit too steep for my liking in a 29er trail bike. At 69.3 plus half an inch it'd feel like about a 110mm Fox, more xc-ish ala the Ibis Ripley with longer chainstays, wheelbase and taller headtube.
Not being too much of a cheapskate, but I'd rather not buy a 120mm SID RCT3; my plan was to sell the Fox and use the lighter better performing SID 100mm (to me 100mm of SID is much more usable and tunable than my 120 Fox) while the 29HT is in hibernation. Mainly posting to see if anyone has gone this route and will say "nope, half an inch shorter a2C will ruin the 429C handling no matter what you do with tires or stem or..."
Mtbr's 2016 Winter Biking GearReviews and Roundups
Results 1 to 3 of 3