Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    983

    Pivot Firebird review on Pinkbike

    HERE!


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davemk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    415
    Good Job on the review! I think one of the best things about Pink Bike reviews are the comments at the bottom, too funny.

  3. #3
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,535
    Quote Originally Posted by davemk
    Good Job on the review! I think one of the best things about Pink Bike reviews are the comments at the bottom, too funny.
    They are hilarious! I think a lot of people skim the contents then post. That happens too on mtbr to be fair

  4. #4
    I do what I want
    Reputation: Guy.Ford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,014
    I wish....
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinkbike
    It uses a 12 x 135 mm rear axle in the name of stiffness
    I guess it could be confusing to tell the diff between a DT Swiss RWS 10 skewer and a 12mm axle?? Still quick check of the specs from the Pivot site wouldve told you it 10x135, I wish it did have a 12mm rear end, but eh, guess thats what the Phoenix is for!!!

    Edited: because Im an @sshat
    Last edited by Guy.Ford; 10-16-2010 at 08:53 AM.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: davemk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by Guy.Ford
    Is it that hard to tell the diff between a DT Swiss RWS 10 skewer and a 12mm axle?? I wish it did have a 12mm rear end, but eh, guess thats what the Phoenix is for!!!
    I noticed that too, I think that most people (even if they know nothing about the firebird), can tell that it does not have a thru axle in the pics. I also thought it was interesting that they thought that 13.85" was a low BB height.

  6. #6
    I do what I want
    Reputation: Guy.Ford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,014
    Quote Originally Posted by davemk
    I noticed that too, I think that most people (even if they know nothing about the firebird), can tell that it does not have a thru axle in the pics. I also thought it was interesting that they thought that 13.85" was a low BB height.

    Yeah PB reviews have always IMO been a wee bit spoty. Whatevs, at least they reviewed it,Ive been waiting for a review from up north, while not all that I had hoped for still had bit of good info.

    Now can we get someone worthy to review the Phoenix already!!! Im really curious about this beast, all I really need is frame weight!!
    Guy.Ford

    I'm not really an @sshole, I just act like one online.

  7. #7
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    926
    Not like mtbr reviews are any better.

    Someone recently did a Rocky Mountain PRO REVIEW and listed in his complaints how he couldn't get the wheel in and out of the dropouts.

  8. #8
    ZEN RIDER!
    Reputation: Mt.Biker E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    720
    cons: no water bottle
    Life in every breath

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    983
    Quote Originally Posted by Guy.Ford
    Typical Pinkbike stupidity....

    What a bunch of asshats!!! REALLY?? Is it that hard to tell the diff between a DT Swiss RWS 10 skewer and a 12mm axle?? I wish it did have a 12mm rear end, but eh, guess thats what the Phoenix is for!!!
    That was my typo. sorry.

  10. #10
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,535
    Quote Originally Posted by Mt.Biker E
    cons: no water bottle
    Not to pick on you but why are people always so surprised that this is picked out? Do you guys not go on long long rides where a 3l bladder isn't enough? Do you not use cage holders for batteries for night lights? EDIT because i was getting snarky. Maybe its just a BC thing but lots of us will pedal 5 - 6 - 7" bikes for long rides and we need that extra water bottle for a variety of reasons
    Last edited by LeeL; 10-15-2010 at 07:59 PM.

  11. #11
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,535
    oh wait _ I see you're from CT. So my question probably didn't make any sense to you

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: crank1979's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,545
    I don't mind the Firebird not having waterbottle mounts. I'll take a second bladder on long ride if I think I'll need it. My light batteries don't fit in bottle cages so that's not a problem for me but it was something I thought about when buying the lights. Not having bottle mounts on the Mach 5 is about the only negative I can think of for that bike.

    I thought the 13.8" bb height was good and reasonably high. I've got a review on here somewhere but it's pretty positive because I rate the Firebird better than the Nomad I had and than the Nomad 2 I tested.

    With two testers it's easy to see how the same bike may suit some riders beter than others. A mate who has tested my Firebird loved everything except that it wasn't 'poppy' enough for him, whereas I think it pops off stuff really well with the DHX Air.

    Found my review.

  13. #13
    dog
    dog is offline
    sit! stay!
    Reputation: dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,102
    overall i thought it was a good review... the review was based on the fox 36 "170" (shimmed 180), too... (wish i could test one)

    i've been riding mine for a year and a half and agreed with the vast majority of what they said... (based on the previous posts they rode them on some sweet terrain, too)...

    one thing i didn't recall reading (i may have missed it ) that i like about the FB is its balanced manners off the ground...
    i need to develop my crashing skills...

  14. #14
    crash and burn at 45
    Reputation: drydirtrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    250
    great reviews as always. I think thier review is spot on
    COMBA fan boy card holder #1.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    865
    When I first started riding the FB I had a bunch of pedal strikes too. It doesn't seem to be a problem for me anymore though, for whatever reason. Could be because I'm running a bigger rear tire and a little less sag now, could be just getting used to the bike. For a while I thought about getting shorter cranks but now its not a big deal.

    The front derailleur gadget was a problem at first - I bought mine used and the spring was broken on it. After big hits I'd lose the ability to shift in the front. I used rubber bands on it at first, and then I ended up getting the new type with the coil spring. Mostly its fine but sometimes the front derailleur cable rubs on it and it makes a racket, mainly when its muddy.

    No other problems with the FB - love the geometry and it does climb extremely well. Great bike for long rides. You guys had me going with the 12mm thing - I was wondering if they'd switched to the syntace 142x12 rear axle like on the RFX. Nope, still regular dropouts. My '09 is still up to date!

  16. #16
    I do what I want
    Reputation: Guy.Ford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,014
    Quote Originally Posted by Mt.Biker E
    cons: no water bottle

    Yeah I agree, total BS no water bottle mount, not like there isnt room in the front triangle. If i bought a FB that would be the first thing my LBS would do put in bottle bosses. I fing hate camelbaks!!
    Guy.Ford

    I'm not really an @sshole, I just act like one online.

  17. #17
    I do what I want
    Reputation: Guy.Ford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,014
    Quote Originally Posted by Brodiegrrl
    That was my typo. sorry.
    Aw see now why'd ya have to go an make it all personal!! Now I feel terrible and have to edit my post. Sorry for the asshat comment, it was uncalled for, simple mistake.

    Other than the typo, great review guys!!! Ive been thinking alot about how cool it would be to see a review from either PB or NSMB.
    Guy.Ford

    I'm not really an @sshole, I just act like one online.

  18. #18
    I do what I want
    Reputation: Guy.Ford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,014
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeL
    Not to pick on you but why are people always so surprised that this is picked out? Do you guys not go on long long rides where a 3l bladder isn't enough? Do you not use cage holders for batteries for night lights? EDIT because i was getting snarky. Maybe its just a BC thing but lots of us will pedal 5 - 6 - 7" bikes for long rides and we need that extra water bottle for a variety of reasons

    !!!!WERD!!!!
    Guy.Ford

    I'm not really an @sshole, I just act like one online.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gticlay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,593
    Great review guys. I like how you both did the review and that they didn't agree in all circumstances (one said pedal strikes, one said it was no issue for example). Seemed kind of odd that the picture was of a 160mm Fox (lowers don't go below the axle) but the review said 170. The link takes you to the 2010 Fox forks, not the 2011's.

    Anyway, great job and I think it's a fair review.

    I would like to know what sort of sag you were running on your Float 180. I haven't had very good luck running 25% and have had to set it up with less. I found the opposite on the Lyrik, I had to run way less psi than they recommended.
    "It looks flexy"

  20. #20
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,535
    Quote Originally Posted by crank1979@optusnet.com.au
    That was a really good read. Thanks for that

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    983
    Quote Originally Posted by gticlay
    Great review guys. I like how you both did the review and that they didn't agree in all circumstances (one said pedal strikes, one said it was no issue for example). Seemed kind of odd that the picture was of a 160mm Fox (lowers don't go below the axle) but the review said 170. The link takes you to the 2010 Fox forks, not the 2011's.

    Anyway, great job and I think it's a fair review.

    I would like to know what sort of sag you were running on your Float 180. I haven't had very good luck running 25% and have had to set it up with less. I found the opposite on the Lyrik, I had to run way less psi than they recommended.
    Hey, thanks!

    That was an editorial change. I had the 160 Float on it before Lee broke it, then the 160 VanR until I got a Lyrik 170 Solo Air DH which I kept on it and really like it on this bike.

    Lee rode it on less technical trails.

Posting Permissions

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