why get a Mach5.7 or 6 over a Ibis SL-R or Yeti SB?
I've narrowed down my next bike to a Mach 5.7 or 6, ibis sl-r or yeti sb95. No racing, just fun technical xc riding. I'm going to try to demo them all but it maybe difficult to find the right size. Plus it's hard to draw conclusions from one test ride. What's your choice and why?
Here is the list
1) Mach 6 - I own one...Pedals really well and can handle the big stuff and is easy to toss around
2)Mach 5.7 coverted to 27.5 - same as above maybe a little cheaper to buy
2) IBIS - tied with above and can't say a bad thing about them, know people with them and they like the ride
3)Yeti Sb95 - ? IDK....don't know enough about the bike....
I only own a Mach 6 and haven't ridden any of the other bikes in your list. It's a great bike for techy terrain. I live and ride coastal BC trails...so tight, twisty, steep and techy with traction issues half the year.
Originally Posted by dmo
For that riding the M6 is great because:
- short CS and shorter TT = short WB for a very manoeuvrable bike
- DW-Link = efficient climber and excellent descender - both at slow pick your way down speeds and at faster smash and dash speeds
- short CS and slack HTA = playful bike on steep terrain
- carbon frame + pike + carbon wheels = precise steering/handling
I have some nit picks about the bike I've discussed in my build thread, but to be fair they are less important items that don't impact the great ride.
You are talking about technical XC which can mean a lot of different things. The Mach 6 is an efficient 6" travel bike, but if you aren't riding really rough, steep chunky terrain it could be overkill.
I would strongly suggest reading the vitalmtb review of the ibis slr before making a decision. They found some very disturbing durability issues.
I own an SL-R (2 years old) and a Mach 6 (a month old). I love the SL-R - it's light and responsive, but still enough travel and composure to do some pretty gnarly stuff.
I got the Mach 6 because I was starting to regularly do more gnarly terrain than my usual Bay Area riding - Sedona, Downieville, Utah - and I wanted something slacker, and stiffer in the fork (34mm vs. 32 on my SL-R build). Plus I was curious about larger wheels, and was not interested in 29ers.
I thought that with the Mach 6 I would still ride the SL-R on my local trails. But I've become accustomed to the nicer rollover of the big wheels, so find myself riding only the Mach 6 (and although it is 4 lb heavier than the SL-R, I don't mind riding it day to day).
I'd say that if you are really set on getting a 26er, then either the 5.7 or the SL-R (or an HD/HDR if you want to go beefier) are great bikes. But my opinion is that if you are buying a new bike (and not a >6" travel gnar bike) then 27.5 wheels is the way to go.
I have a feeling I'm going to get rid of the SL-R and get either a light 29er (Ripley?) for the local riding when I care more about efficiency than playfulness, or a lighter purpose-designed 27.5 when more models become available - something like a Santa Cruz 5010/Solo, but with a DW link. :-)
Hope this helps, and good luck!
Just a suggestion - get a a light XC wheelset with light tires and a custom suspension tune on the Mach 6...bling it out a bike to save some weight. You'll have a bike that is within a couple pounds of your possible 2nd bike that is very efficient and a swap of wheels and you are smashing and dashing in more rugged terrain.
Originally Posted by DaveBro
You'll end up spending less, doing less maintenance and having a better experience in both modes with the $$ spent on a suspension tune.
Not a bad idea. I was already thinking about taking the plunge on carbon wheels. That and a few other changes could drop a little weight and make the bike even more playful. Gonna think about that, thanks.
Originally Posted by vikb
The Mach 6 I think is the new standard for 650b frames. It's build great, correctly from the ground up for this newfound tire size. And they did it right to accommodate the bevy of tires out there. The low Bb height means it can lean and rail into a corner like a dh rig, the 66 slack head angle means its stable at light speed like captain kirk's commands on the starship enterprise before it reaches the speed of light. theres a buttload of tire clearance for all tires. i've got mine on Derby carbon 650b mammoth rims. my 2.4 tire looks like a friggin motocross dirt ripper now.
Average weight for this class of 150-165mm travel bikes. Mine weighs in at 6.4lbs on the Parkie (are they Korean? ha).
I also have the 5.7c. Much more XC, it is not as stable at speed and jumps, but likes to caddled just a bit more. after all, his big brother the mach 6 was designed for new breed of riding...enduro. The little brother 5.7 came more from trail-riding days before racing on trails was a raging event. he was born just a little too early but he's better for mellow trails, 3ft jumps okay too. he can go bigger but he doesn't land as solidly as his big bro mach 6.
now the slr. good ride also but more XC than the two aforementioned pivot frames. it's angles are not as aggro since he's built for comfortable climbing not ripping downhills at....well, "Mach" speeds. well, after all this is not a fair comparison. comparing the Pivots would have been better with the HD. now thats a fair one my son.
We Ride In God's Country!
By homey in forum 29er Bikes
Last Post: 08-27-2013, 09:23 AM
By Hokidachi in forum All Mountain
Last Post: 07-08-2012, 09:07 PM
By manchvegas in forum All Mountain
Last Post: 02-03-2012, 06:11 PM
By cwkrause in forum Yeti
Last Post: 01-18-2012, 11:04 PM
By cwkrause in forum Ibis
Last Post: 01-15-2012, 11:35 AM