Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 238
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    527

    Tell me bad things about the Mach 6

    I'm dangerously close to purchasing a Mach 6. Beyond the ride quality, I want some feedback on "living with the bike." Things like annoying or quirky cable routing or cable rub, creaky suspension, bolts working free over time, fragile paint etc. if you could change aspects of the design what would they be?

    Also, how is Pivot's customer/warranty service? My other 2 bikes are from Ibis, so I may have been spoiled in this regard...

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    64
    They only bad thing I can think of is that I don't have mine yet..

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,977
    Cable routing is not the greatest and it rubs on the rear shock a little even with the standoff's. No other issues that I have seen over the few weeks I have had it.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6,315
    The M6 is pretty new. I think you can't really get a good answer to your question until the end of the summer. A lot of people are still waiting on their bikes to show up and a bunch of M6 owners won't get in many miles until the snow melts.

    The M6 has rec'd great initial reviews, but nobody can really comment on the long term performance of the bike. It's just too new.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  5. #5
    North Van/Whistler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,589
    Well I'm stretching a bit here

    - cables bulge out a bit towards the right leg close to the rear shock when the bike is compressed

    - stock Kenda tires are ****

    That's all i can really think of. Pivot's CS is good to answer the other question
    Locals' Guide to North Shore Rides http://mtbtrails.ca/

  6. #6
    Ambi-Turner
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    120
    I've had mine three weeks. Cable is rubbing paint off of shock mount. Rear tire (Nevegal 2.35 on P35 rim) is dangerously close to chainstay. I will probably run a 2.25 next. I didn't care for a lot of the stock components, but it was still a better deal to swap them out than building a frame. There is nothing that should stop any serious buyer looking for a serious trail/AM rig.

  7. #7
    Appalachian Singletrack'n
    Reputation: Endomaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,418
    Fit - As much as i wanted one, the bike just didn't fit me. The STA was too slack and the reach too short if i sized up the bike felt way too big to me. Interesting to hear about the tire clearance, the bike i rode had some sort of xc tire on the back and it had good clearance but it was a smallish tread.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,451

    Re: Tell me bad things about the Mach 6

    Quote Originally Posted by Endomaniac View Post
    Fit - As much as i wanted one, the bike just didn't fit me. The STA was too slack and the reach too short if i sized up the bike felt way too big to me. Interesting to hear about the tire clearance, the bike i rode had some sort of xc tire on the back and it had good clearance but it was a smallish tread.
    How tall are you and what is you inseam? Short or long torso?
    Which sizes did you try?
    Which bike do you ride now?
    Thanks!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    527
    Quote Originally Posted by Endomaniac View Post
    Fit - As much as i wanted one, the bike just didn't fit me. The STA was too slack and the reach too short if i sized up the bike felt way too big to me. Interesting to hear about the tire clearance, the bike i rode had some sort of xc tire on the back and it had good clearance but it was a smallish tread.
    I'm curious about this too. I'm 6'2.5" and was very happy on an XL Bronson (recently stolen, $%&#! bike thieves.) So looking at the Mach 6, an XL looks fairly comparable except I notice it has a much shorter reach (~1" shorter) despite having similar TT length. I assume this is because of the slack seat tube. Combined with the short rear end this makes me think I'll be much more over the rear wheel than I was on the Bronson. This would probably make the bike super fun and maneuverable but might also make it prone to front-end wander on climbs. Any feedback from folks who have the bike?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: swinkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    228
    - Cable routing with the standoffs rubs on the shock and knocks the o-ring off
    - Rubber chainguard on the seat stay is coming off (got the bike in October)
    - Rear shock bolt comes loose. Make sure it is torqued properly
    - Running a 2.35 Nobby Nic as a rear tire - no clearance issues

  11. #11
    Appalachian Singletrack'n
    Reputation: Endomaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,418
    I rode a large Im 6'1" average proportions i like a reach in the 17-17.5" range I refuse to ride stems over 50mm on a trail bike. I sat on an XL, I would need a dropper stem and a flat bar along with a stepladder for that frame. I came off a large Firebird for the last 4 years which my main complaint on that bike was the slack STA/short reach and its a pig.

  12. #12
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,195
    I posted a question like this a few months ago. Got next to nothing on problems.

    Ordered the bike and its just about ready to ship.

    Hope nothing nasty pops up.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    425
    Quote Originally Posted by Endomaniac View Post
    I rode a large Im 6'1" average proportions i like a reach in the 17-17.5" range I refuse to ride stems over 50mm on a trail bike. I sat on an XL, I would need a dropper stem and a flat bar along with a stepladder for that frame. I came off a large Firebird for the last 4 years which my main complaint on that bike was the slack STA/short reach and its a pig.
    This is what I'm worried about. At 6'2", average proportions I haven't been able to get on an XL 6, going to have to order it without a test fit. Coming off an XL Mojo HD which, like your Firebird, is too short. I like the fit of an XL Bronson which has a longer reach, and the stack and head tube isn't over an inch longer like on the Mach 6.

    Edit: Just saw Drewbirds post too, check out the head tube measurements, its over an inch longer on an XL Mach 6 compared to an XL Bronson.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: robertj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    397
    ~4wks on my Mach6. Killer do-it-all bike.

    The only thing/nit I can think of is some cable rub near the top of the rear shock body. Cable rub is one of those things that is easily solved with some protective tape if desired.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    527
    Quote Originally Posted by robnow View Post
    This is what I'm worried about. At 6'2", average proportions I haven't been able to get on an XL 6, going to have to order it without a test fit. Coming off an XL Mojo HD which, like your Firebird, is too short. I like the fit of an XL Bronson which has a longer reach, and the stack and head tube isn't over an inch longer like on the Mach 6.

    Edit: Just saw Drewbirds post too, check out the head tube measurements, its over an inch longer on an XL Mach 6 compared to an XL Bronson.
    Yep, sounds like we're in about the same boat. I'm not that worried about the longer HT, as I was running my Bronson with a 160mm fork and had ~1" spacers, up-angled stem and lo-rise bars. So I think a slammed stem on the Pivot w/150mm fork should work OK; probably still go with lo-rise bars.

    For the reach, note that the effective TT length is about the same, but the seat post is more slack on the Pivot. So the Pivot moves the rider back relative to the wheels, putting you more over the rear wheel. This is what I'm wondering about; with that diff. plus ultra-short stays, will it be a challenge to keep the front down on steep climbs?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Joel RW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    310
    I'm happy with mine, the paint decals on the top tube are a bit delicate and the shock rub is an issue. Here's a few things I did.



    Make your cable as short as possible should look nice and straight like this



    It will still rub against the top of the shock but shouldn't touch the frame, if you bend and rotate the outer you can direct the movement, haven't touched mine since.



    The shock mount pictured may need to be greased and hopefully it won't develop play but this is just a theory



    ardent race 2.25 pictured, previously ran high roller 2.35 which would touch the frame occasionally, the marks you can see are just mud, theres no real damage apart from some small rub marks.



    Clearance underneath



    XL frame, rear brake cable stop you can see under the top tube is completely useless, the cable kept falling out. I wrapped both cables in a self bonding rubber tape, protects the frame nicely and stops that long cable from touching.
    Pivot mach 6!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6,315
    Thanks for the pics...can you take the decals off the M6?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    98
    Here's an alternative (better) cable routing for the Machs. Maybe not as photogenic as the Pivot routing, but much more functional when the suspension is working. No cable rub whatsoever.

    When I purchased the bike, my lbs mechanic asked me if I wanted the "Pivot routing" or the "Good routing"...


  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6,315
    I would prefer external cable routing, but I couldn't bring myself to use zipties on a M6.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    527
    Quote Originally Posted by Joel RW View Post
    I'm happy with mine, the paint decals on the top tube are a bit delicate and the shock rub is an issue. Here's a few things I did.
    Hey Joel, can you post a couple pics of your complete bike? I haven't found a ton of pics of the XL size, which is a bit different than other sizes with the split TT/HT. Is the useless brake line routing issue unique to XLs? Is there a way to run RD cable in unbroken housing? With the amount of mud I ride in that'd be preferable. Is your Pike 150mm or 160?

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,961
    Bottom bracket is too low.
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrwhlr View Post
    Bottom bracket is too low.
    That's funny. I've read M6 reviews that report it having a way low BB and others that talk about it having a high BB.

    My current bike has a 14" BB so the M6 is lower than it with no rider. I understand DW link sits higher its travel than other suspension designs so there may not be a practical difference between two bikes with different BB heights.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,451
    My converted 650b TRc with a 140mm 26" fork has a BB of 13.4", unsagged. I rarely get any pedal strikes, it's just right for my usual trails.
    I get more of them on my SC TB with a 120mm fork.
    On M6 3h demo I got a few, nothing really bad, but still... M6 has a 13.6" BB. I actually like the fact, since I was afraid the M6 BB would be too high. It seems to be perfect for SoCal riding.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,977
    BB is personal preference. I have my Enduro which is 13.1" to my HD at 13.8" with the M6 in the middle. They all ride well and have different advantages and disadvantages.

  25. #25
    swag ho Administrator
    Reputation: francois's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    18,693
    This is a good thread since I'm reviewing the bike.

    BB height I think is a bit high for the modern rally bike. 13.0 to 13.3" make awesome handlers an this bike is at 13.6". But it does give it extra rock clearance for folks who live in rough terrain. I ride in Norcal so I'd much rather have 13.1"

    Cable routing... ay caramba. It's clean but it has to deal with all that suspension movement.

    Decals - holy moly there's a lot of them. 27.5, 155 mm travel, 650b do not have to be decals.

    Seat tube angle is slack at 71.5. The modern bike is much better off with a 74 degree seat angle to make the pedaling position ideal. And since 99% of these bikes will have a dropper post, the seat is out of the way anyway during descending.

    fc
    IPA will save America

Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Things Fitting Perfectly Into Other Things...
    By CHUM in forum Off Camber (off topic)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-23-2014, 06:54 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-13-2013, 11:04 AM
  3. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 09-27-2013, 02:55 PM
  4. Mach 4 and Mach 5.7 Frame Weights? (Alloy)
    By ccarbot in forum Pivot Cycles
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-07-2013, 05:58 PM
  5. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-18-2013, 11:44 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
  •