Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 75
  1. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by andy f View Post
    You might want to consider having a tire with a more durable casing and better grip ready to go. This bike seems like it's going to be capable of easily exceeding what a sub 500 gram XC race tire can handle.

    I really like the 29" Nobby Nics for my SS but am thinking Hans Dampf might be better with such an aggressive machine.
    I agree that the Rocket Rons just seem too flimsy...but, I have been running the 2.4 26er Rocket Rons tubeless on my current Altitude for the last 3 years, and I have had no issues other than needing to buy new tires on a regular basis (they wear out fast).

    But maybe with the new Altitude and the slacker setup I will want to ride it a little more like a downhill rig, so I will probably try some different rubber options after the Rocket Rons wear out, which shouldn't take long! I did decide on the Syncros TR1.0 Wheels vs. going with another set of the Stan's Crest / DT240 / DT SuperComp that I have been using. Having said that, I have had no problems with the Crests either...but I thought they might be just a bit too flexy for the new bike.

  2. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    Skidad, looking at the X-Fusion now, seems like a sweet fork. Getting 160mm of travel with 545 Axle to Crown would be great. The only issue for me is the weight (4.4 lbs). I know I probably shouldn't care but I want to try to keep the bike as close to the weight of my current Altitude if I can. Might not be possible though... Altitude Weigh-In

  3. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: islander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    729
    Crests? Heck, even on my Element I went Arch Ex.
    NSMBA Member

  4. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by islander View Post
    Crests? Heck, even on my Element I went Arch Ex.
    Actually I have a Crest 650B up front (no Arch EX in 650B) and XTR-975 in the back.

    Pic: Altitude Weigh-In

  5. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by skyak View Post
    Actually I have a Crest 650B up front (no Arch EX in 650B) and XTR-975 in the back.

    Pic: Altitude Weigh-In
    Stan's NoTubes ZTR Arch EX 650b 32H Disc Rim - Pro Bike Supply

    Altitude deserves a wider rim that a Crest.

    Pacenti TL 28 is nice with reasonable weight. New American Classic Race 650B is stupidly light with a 28mm outer width and 24 inner width. I assume you can get just the rim but the wheelset is light and a bit pricey.

    American Classic 27.5in/650b Wheelsets – Interbike 2012 - BikeRadar
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  6. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    Skidad...that Arch EX is actually a 29er wheel...that is just a Pro Bike Supply mistake I think. For now I think you can only get the Crest or Flow. I bet the Arch will be out soon though.

    Those American Classic are nice...too bad I already bit the bullet and ordered some Syncros TR1.0 wheels. Unfortunately they are the same inner width as the crests. I agree that it would have been nice to get wider ones! I did look at the Enve AM wheels, but it just doesn't "feel" right to spend $3K on a set of wheels.

  7. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    Questions...on the Rocky Ride9 Website page, is the seat angle graphic display backwards?

    At the same time that the seat angle number is decreasing, it graphically shows the angle getting steeper? Am I confused?

    Also, at Setting 6, when it says that there will be 10.26mm of BB Drop, this means lower by 10.26mm, correct?

    Ride 9 || Rocky Mountain Bicycles

  8. #33
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,880
    I believe the BB Drop numbers are all absolute referenced to axle height rather than relative to an original BB drop value. A negative (-) BB drop value should indicate that the BB rises above axle height.
    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

  9. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by skyak View Post
    Questions...on the Rocky Ride9 Website page, is the seat angle graphic display backwards?

    At the same time that the seat angle number is decreasing, it graphically shows the angle getting steeper? Am I confused?

    Also, at Setting 6, when it says that there will be 10.26mm of BB Drop, this means lower by 10.26mm, correct? YES

    Ride 9 || Rocky Mountain Bicycles
    You are a bit confused as was I so I contacted Rocky. I was reading the chart backwards. A negative reading indcated on the BB height is actually higher (I thought it was lower). Slackest HA and SA setting has the lowest BB height. The steepest HA and SA result in the highest BB height (exactly what I wanted)

    SA and HA go slacker or steeper together in unison. You can't have one go one way and the other go another. Make sense??

    Some interesting reading here about the Ride Nine system and one guys view of what Rocky claims about some of their technology. Get ready for some seat time with this web site. A bit overwhelming and a little hard to understand at times but quite interesting. Not sure I liked the results for the new design.

    Scroll down a bit for the Altitude

    linkagedesign.blogspot.com.es/search/label/Rocky%2 0Mountain - Translator
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  10. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by rockyuphill View Post
    I believe the BB Drop numbers are all absolute referenced to axle height rather than relative to an original BB drop value. A negative (-) BB drop value should indicate that the BB rises above axle height.
    Yup, that's it.

    Something I noticed on the Ride 9 chart vs someplace else on the Rocky site (maybe specs). Ride 9 chart mentions a +- 10mm variance in BB height and the other was a +- 7mm varience. Not a huge difference I know but now I wonder which is correct?

    Running some #'s I figured the highest BB height is close to 14". Nice option to have if you live in New England rocks like me. Really like my 650 Jamis Dakar but it's just to low for me to live with so it's gonna go this winter at some point (probably just the frame).
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  11. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    Do you see what I mean about the seat angle graphic being backwards?

  12. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    linkagedesign.blogspot.com.es/search/label/Rocky%20Mountain - Translator[/QUOTE]

    Thanks for the link. Interesting comment on the 'smoothlink' effect of moving the shock to the top tube..."The Smoothlink (HL) only makes sense when combined with a link horizontal, as the Slayer or the old Altitude, in which the percentages were around 50%".

    Not that I understand what he is saying, mind you.

  13. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by skyak View Post
    Do you see what I mean about the seat angle graphic being backwards?
    Ok, I think I see it. Really hadn't noticed those things moving ha ha. The I would have seen the BB height go up in the first place.

    Anyway, go by the #'s and ignore the little circles moving
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  14. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Thanks for the link. Interesting comment on the 'smoothlink' effect of moving the shock to the top tube..."The Smoothlink (HL) only makes sense when combined with a link horizontal, as the Slayer or the old Altitude, in which the percentages were around 50%".

    Not that I understand what he is saying, mind you.[/QUOTE]

    Basically saying Rocky's claims about the smooth link design works with the older rocker style suspension with vertical shock not the new setup. I've not ridden and older style but have 2 of the new ones. An Element and the new Instinct. Both felt harsh to me. Could be just setup but as much as I'm loving this new Altitude I'm a bit concerned. Looking forward to more reviews and the MTBR shootout before I decide later this winter.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  15. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    So after much deliberation I have decided to go with a German-A Excite 650B Fork (150mm travel) for the Altitude, as they now offer a tapered version. Taking a bit of a leap of faith, as there are really no reviews of this fork. Hope it works out! If anyone has any experience with the fork let me know

    german:A. - lightweight bike engineering since 1995

    The Excite 650B 150mm has an axle to crown of 545mm (vs 544.5) for the stock Fox, so I will be keeping the geometry as close to stock as possible.

    I was very keen on the Magura TS8...but I just couldn't rationalize the 530mm axle to crown length.

  16. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Holy crappola, some serious and interesting engineering going on in that fork.

    I'm sure you've done the homework but I'm not seeing 545 A/C listed anywhere.

    Hard to understand or read between the lines on the web site. What is the exact fork you are getting and the features it's going to have? What's the deal with the travel adjust and how does it work and what range does it have? Carbon steerer tube?

    Dude you are going to have one VERY blingy Altitude....and the most expensive. Can't wait to see it all pulled together so I can drool on my keyboard.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  17. #42
    orthonormal
    Reputation: andy f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,036
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    Holy crappola, some serious and interesting engineering going on in that fork.

    I'm sure you've done the homework but I'm not seeing 545 A/C listed anywhere.

    Hard to understand or read between the lines on the web site. What is the exact fork you are getting and the features it's going to have? What's the deal with the travel adjust and how does it work and what range does it have? Carbon steerer tube?

    Dude you are going to have one VERY blingy Altitude....and the most expensive. Can't wait to see it all pulled together so I can drool on my keyboard.
    Expensive for sure but likely still less than msrp on an S-Works Stumpy or a Remedy 9.9
    The glass is twice as large as it needs to be

  18. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    212
    This new frame seems tempting. I am just curious about weight...wondering if it can be 25lb when said and done.

  19. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by jesse101 View Post
    This new frame seems tempting. I am just curious about weight...wondering if it can be 25lb when said and done.
    From my post #16 and this was directly from Rocky for 2 of the carbon models

    790 MSL 12.25kg/27.25lbs

    770MSL 13kg/28.75lbs

    Look through the specs to see where you might lose some weight
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  20. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    Actually the Xcite forks are not priced that bad.

    For a 650B, 150mm travel (adjustable), tapered, 15mm Axle, Boost Model they charge just under $900 US (website prices include 19% German tax). That is way cheaper than what the stock Fox 650B fork goes for here in Canada.

    Then you can add additional options like compression adjust (lockout), carbon steerer, carbon tubes, etc.

  21. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    266
    In terms of weight savings the biggest gains can probably be had via the fork, seatpost and tires. That's 2lbs at least I would guess. With a few other odds and ends, 25lbs is probably reasonable.

  22. #47
    orthonormal
    Reputation: andy f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,036
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    From my post #16 and this was directly from Rocky for 2 of the carbon models

    790 MSL 12.25kg/27.25lbs

    770MSL 13kg/28.75lbs

    Look through the specs to see where you might lose some weight
    Are those weights without pedals?
    The glass is twice as large as it needs to be

  23. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by andy f View Post
    Are those weights without pedals?
    Hmmm, good question. Rocky didn't say but since the bikes are sold without pedals I'm gonna assume it's that way.

    I'd be overjoyed to see 25lbs with the carbon frame and perfectly happy at 27-28 since I'm already pushing around a 30+ lb bike.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  24. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    212
    Quote Originally Posted by skyak View Post
    In terms of weight savings the biggest gains can probably be had via the fork, seatpost and tires. That's 2lbs at least I would guess. With a few other odds and ends, 25lbs is probably reasonable.
    thats good to hear.

  25. #50
    orthonormal
    Reputation: andy f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,036
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    Hmmm, good question. Rocky didn't say but since the bikes are sold without pedals I'm gonna assume it's that way.

    I'd be overjoyed to see 25lbs with the carbon frame and perfectly happy at 27-28 since I'm already pushing around a 30+ lb bike.
    28 lbs. including pedals sounds great to me for a 6" travel bike. I can't see giving up the dropper post, sacrificing stiffness in the fork, or running less capable tires to make it lighter.
    The glass is twice as large as it needs to be

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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