It does climb very well on loose surfaces, and handles babyhead cobble nicely with less random deflection than 26" wheels.
I just want to know how this thing descends.... How does it feel? Fun, lazy, etc etc
Originally Posted by rockyuphill
It actually reminds me a lot of my Slayer SXC on descents. The long front centre dimension with the big wheels and speedy steering keeps it feeling pretty safe in the bumpy descents. I still haven't tinkered with the Ride9 settings, but there's enough range there to get quite a range of feel out of the bike.
Good to know. I am so back and forth between this and the altitude..
One thing I noticed on today's ride is that the front end of this bike is glued to the ground, there's no lofting the front wheel onto stuff, or wheelie-ing up onto stuff, so it's good that it rolls over most anything you point it at, riding up or downhill. I was riding some stuff today that I usually have to be mindful on the 26" bike to avoid catching a tire in a hole and I didn't even look at the trail surface today, just rolled over stuff.
In the rain today the Avid brakes sounded like a bag of stone gerbils in a rock crusher. I think a set of XT brakes will be in the pipeline soon.
That is the trait(s) of the 29'ers I've ridden. The steamroller effect or point and shoot right over things. Personally it's one of the things I don't like about them even though it is another way to skin a cat. Also why newbies find 29'ers easier to ride. Another reason I'm on the 650B bandwagon and for me the best all around compromise....which everything is really. Pick you poison and enjoy!!
I do notice the 48mm longer wheelbase than the Element 70 MSL on some tight and twisty trails, but it's also early in the season and my skills are at about 50% so that difference might go away in time. I do like the 1/2" extra BB height over the MSL, no pedal strikes on rooty trails. It does tackle this stuff really well, even when it was as wet as it was yesterday.
I have noticed that annoying aspect of 2x10 drivetrains when you're in big ring and the two biggest cogs, if you backpedal even half a rotation, the chain drops down to the 3rd largest cog on the back so when you start pedaling forward again it takes a crunchy moment or two to get engaged and get moving. My 2x10 XTR drivetrain did the same thing when new, so maybe that will eventually go away too, but it's really annoying now.
I'm liking the play by play review on the bike. Keep em coming
Originally Posted by rockyuphill
Ok, on longer steep climbs, the CTD is showing it's value, the Climb setting does keep it from slacking out the front end and wandering about.
German Bike magazine tested 6 29ers with around 130mm travel. The Instinct was rated last of the bunch (but still got very good marks). So, is it really not as good as the Giant Trance, Cannondale Trigger, Specialized Stumpjumper, Scott Genius and Kona Satori? They criticized the Instinct for too much bobbing and for the sub-par components. They also rated it the least capable on the downhill, but I guess that was due to the tires.
Is there an on-line version available you can link to. I'd be interested to see the article. What was the rating of the bikes top to bottom?
Originally Posted by zonoskar
Here's the scores.
Cannondale Trigger: 122 points
Giant Trance: 120,5 points
Scott Genius: 116,75 points
Specialized Stumpjumper: 116,25 points
Kona Satori: 115,5 points
Rocky Mountain Instinct: 113 points
They tested the Instinct 950, which they weighed in at 13,75 Kg
I think I would agree on the 950 spec, I went for the 970 just because it was such a well spec'd bike for the money and had a Shimano drive train. I am thinking it will need to get some XT brakes as the Avid have become gerbily shaky brakes in wet conditions.
I think the only way they could accuse the Instinct of having a lot of pedal bob is if they were trying to use it in Descent mode.
After signing in and looking at the scores, all the bikes were rated as Very Good. The Instinct lost points for weight w/o pedals, and suspension efficiency but had very good pedal efficiency ratings and very good handling/geometry. It also lost points for bottle holders, which is kinda specious since you're much more likely to wear a Camelback for AM rides, and only use a WB cage for lights/batteries. It also lost points for saddle adjustability, but the 970 has the dropper post and the 950 doesn't.
It also got top marks for stiffness.
In the magazine, they bunched all those marks together under uphill, downhill and misc scores, while in the online PDF it is clear that the Instinct looses uphill points by not having bottle holders. Kinda weird, to say the least. They also test the bike stock, they don't even change the tires to their preferred ones, which is strange to me because I have never ever ridden a bike with the stock tires (except when they were any good).
The stock Conti's definitely don't cut it unless they get RaceSport or ProTection spec tires for the German market. The Black Chili rubber Conti's make it a completely different bike than with the standard rubber X-King/Mountain King combo.
It's been years since I mounted a water bottle cage, or even used a water bottle lighting battery mount, when ever people complain about having no place to mount bottles on anything but an XC race bike, I always think they live someplace that is always dry and has no cows near trails.
What's interesting and not well represented in their overall scoring system is the bikes that get wildly different scores for the uphill and downhill and the total still ends up high. The Cannondale and Kona get the lowest scores for uphill and the very highest scores for downhill. That gives them a high overall score without really indicating that they are not as well rounded for AM use, but maybe closer to a light duty freeride bike.
how's the clearance with the 2.2's?
A couple of other views of the clearance with the MK 2.2 II's in the chainstay yoke. Lots of room for a 2.4" there.
Do you agree with the magazine about the pedal efficiency and suspension efficiency scores? Does it really bob under power? I ask because they also say that the Element 970 bobs, bit I never noticed such a treat in my bike.
If you tried riding a steep uphill in Descent mode it does bob (it can wallow badly in that situation), but in Trail mode there is no significant noticeable pedal bob. I still think a lot of reviewers don't understand that "pedal bob" specifically refers to the chain tension under pedal pressure compressing the rear suspension, I think a lot of reviewers see the shock linkage moving while they are climbing and call that pedal bob. On that basis reviewers would be claiming forks have pedal bob. That is the suspension reacting the vertical component of rider weight shift while pedaling, and it's what keeps the rear tire driven into the ground while climbing rough surfaces.
In Trail mode the Instinct 970 climbs as efficiently as my 26" Element as far as pedal input goes. I do feel the Instinct's 8 pounds of extra weight over my 26" carbon wheeled bike on a climb, and I have a wheel change coming to help fix that. :-)
I haven't had a chance to try the bike on a fast rough descent or a long technical descent yet, on the shorter lower speed technical descents the Instinct feels really stable. But the 970 has a dropper post where the 950 doesn't so that wouldn't be an apples to apples comparison.
I demoed the bike below a couple weekends ago at the SE Bike Expo and really liked it but in my haste to get another bike I forgot to check the tire clearance. Thanks for the info.
We had a lot of rain leading up to that weekend so the trails were a mess. I'd also prefer an XL instead of the L that I rode but I was able to get a pretty good feel for the bike. I wish I'd had dry trails and the right size though.
Dry trails? Hmmmmmm. I can't quite remember that
So much for bare ground
We were just about getting down to bare ground in the woods.....then this happened over the last 48 hours. No biggie, snowshoeing today and some XC skiing tomorrow before it starts melting next week.
This is the first bike I've ridden with the CTD remote. I liked being able to quickly toggle between the suspension modes. It took some getting used to though...there's a lot going on with these handlebars:
I never used the dropper post on this bike or any other that ridden. I know some people swear by them but I haven't found a need for one yet. It's nice that Rocky specs one though. This is a great spec for the price.
The sense I had that the length of the Instinct 970 felt like my 2007 SXC wasn't far off, the large Instinct has a 1158mm wheelbase, the large SXC has a 1160mm wheelbase.
I just weighed the DT M1.6 wheels, with just the standard rim strips in place, no axles, rotors or cassettes, they are a chunky 2010 gms (930 F/1080 R).
And now for something very different. Our team is supported unofficially by RM. This bike will be raced in the BME and half of the NAET. So it must be lightweight for pedally bits, but also be solid for jump lines....
2013 RM Instinct 970 in custom raw
Enve AM rims w/biggest Hans Dampfs avail
XTR Trails with magura storm sl rotor upfront, Kettle Cycles Ceramic/Carbon rotor in rear
Point One stem 50mm in raw
Enve DH 31" bars
XO DH crank
North Shore Billet XO spider
Straitline silent guide
Wolf Tooth XX1 10 spd chainring ( 34T )
XX rear cassette
Fox switch mounted inverted where front shifter would live on lesser bikes. : )
Reverb left under throw switch taken from my Slayer and mounted on the left side.
KMC gold chain to match ma' grill
Twenty6 platforms w/Ti axles
Weight without pedals is 27.5lbs Currrently riding in the second slackest setting and loving it.
And don't hate on my happy face seat.