Results 1 to 34 of 34
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505

    2009 Nomad: Super Trail?

    I know it's yet to be released, but one thought has crossed my mind about the new Nomad: could it be built as a "Super Trail" bike? By "Super Trail" I mean:

    • Frame with Monarch 3.3 shock
    • TALAS 150mm 15QR on 1.5-to-1.1/8 headset adapters
    • Mavic Crossmax ST 15QR or EX5.1d rims laced on CK 15QR hubs with DT Comp spokes
    • XTR Components
    • Formula The One or Elixir CR Carbon brakeset (180F/160R rotors)
    • Thomson stem (100mm x 10degrees) with Easton Monkeylite XC Low Rise bars
    • Joplin R seatpost


    Got the idea? I thought about it after seeing pics of Weir's Nomad at Downieville running with a 140mm 15QR Float. It seems possible, but would it defeat its purpose? It could be easily build under 28 lbs, but would it still be capable?

    Does anyone tried something similar with the old Nomad? Any thoughts and/or ideas?
    Last edited by Black RONIN; 10-03-2008 at 11:51 PM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Surfas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    808
    For that type of bike "super trail" the BLT 2 is better.

  3. #3
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059
    Perhaps it will depend more on how and where you ride. I'd probably be fine with a BLT2 if we didn't have so many rocks and such here in my area...or my big annual 2-week trip was somewhere other than Moab. The BLT2 is a great bike, but the Nomad provides me with just a little more forgiveness and confidence when the terrain is really rough.

    Look...I've seen guys riding XC racing hardtails at Moab quite well in very gnarly terrain...but frankly, I ain't that good, and it isn't my style. So the question one has to ask themselves is how much bike they need for the given terrain and riding style they have. There are some performance differences between these two bikes, but you said you're considering a Nomad. In that case, I'd say the only issue I have with your list is the rear shock. I'm going to say this nearly every time. The Nomad is a long travel bike that performs best with a piggyback shock. When you have 6.5" of travel, bottomout control tuning by most piggyback shocks is a huge advantage. Now...if you say you don't really need that type of shock on the Nomad because the riding and/or terrain won't really require it...then you may indeed be choosing the wrong bike.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    I'm not intending to build such bike though. I was really amazed by some aspects of the new frame and how versatile it has become in the hands of Weir lately.

    Anyway, the specs above was only to illustrate what I was trying to say: is the Nomad such bike? The frame is light enough, and we are seeig more and more long travel heavy duty trail bikes around, so that's why I pulled this trigger. No doubt the BLT2 would make it better off. Just consider my post a tease.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,540
    You can build Nomad like that, and even old one would be sub 28 (I'm on the way of lightening up mine to that weight)

    The only issue I can see there is Fox 32 150. I used to have Nixon 145 on mine and once I went to Fox 36 160 it was day and night in terms on inspiring confidence going down. Out of saddle climbing improved as well along with BB height.
    With new nomad being little smaller (6" on the back vs 6.5" and steeper HA) Fox 32 150 may work quite well. Just keep in mind that Fox 32 is 15mm lower A2C compare to 36 series.
    Looking at the light fork options now, I'm curious what Manitou would have to offer for '09. For '08, Nixon at 160 looked good and TNC have good experience with it if I recall.
    I used to run tubes like you are, but then I got thorn in my wheel.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Stalk
    You can build Nomad like that, and even old one would be sub 28 (I'm on the way of lightening up mine to that weight)

    The only issue I can see there is Fox 32 150. I used to have Nixon 145 on mine and once I went to Fox 36 160 it was day and night in terms on inspiring confidence going down. Out of saddle climbing improved as well along with BB height.
    With new nomad being little smaller (6" on the back vs 6.5" and steeper HA) Fox 32 150 may work quite well. Just keep in mind that Fox 32 is 15mm lower A2C compare to 36 series.
    Looking at the light fork options now, I'm curious what Manitou would have to offer for '09. For '08, Nixon at 160 looked good and TNC have good experience with it if I recall.
    I forgot about the Nixon. The Nixon 160 TA would balance the front quite well and still get the BB high enough, maybe quite as much as the 36, and still keep the whole set lighter. NOW you gave me ideas about it!

  7. #7
    3D guy
    Reputation: gstahl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    329
    I just built up the spec you listed on a blt2 (XTR, Remote Joplin(speedball), RS Monarch, Thomsons with RF Next SL low rise, and Formula the One brakes) with Stans flow rims/CK hubs and RS revelation fork (140mm). It weighs in at 28.6 lb (Schwalbe NN 2.4/2.25 and non-titanium Time pedals).

    I think it fit your definition well. One could get lighter (26.9 lb BLT2's are in the BLT thread) or obviously heavier.

    I guess I am saying if you are want super trail then the BLT2 seems like the obvious fit.

    Going lighter would seem to be very light wheels, removing the Joplin, lighter fork and pedals (one's preference, weight, riding style). Going heavy seems to point toward beef and long travel. So I think the BLT2 fits the spot well.
    Geoff Stahl
    San Jose

    BLTc, Chameleon Single Speed, Speedvagen Road

  8. #8
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,965
    I rode the NEW Nomad at the dirt demo.

    I would say it fits the description you offer. It pedals as well as the BLT2. The demo had a remote Joplin which I used a lot in the hour I rode it. This bike is amazing.

    I love my LT2, but I will be getting a Nomad for bigger mountain riding where the slacker angles are beneficial.
    I am immune to your disdain.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    255
    If you want a 150mm Fork what about a Marz Z1, only down side is its a bit heavy, but its one mean fork and runs high and has ETA for climbs. I thought the 32 Talas was still 140mm, which i would think a bit small, but as you say maybe with the slightly reduced rear travel may work?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by indyfab25
    I rode the NEW Nomad at the dirt demo.

    I would say it fits the description you offer. It pedals as well as the BLT2. The demo had a remote Joplin which I used a lot in the hour I rode it. This bike is amazing.

    I love my LT2, but I will be getting a Nomad for bigger mountain riding where the slacker angles are beneficial.

    What was the rear shock on the demo 09 Nomad?

  11. #11
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,965
    Quote Originally Posted by mikecy
    What was the rear shock on the demo 09 Nomad?
    I believe it was a Rock Shox.
    I am immune to your disdain.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    The new Nomad is up on the SC website.

    "(...) the all-new Nomad further messes up the boundaries between trail riding and gravity performance. (...) So, what is it? A heavy-duty trail bike? The new all-mountain contender? Freeride lite? Yes." is the catching phrase, and I may be wrong, but it seems more than just a marketing ploy, at least when it is refering to the Nomad.

    So, although I know the BLT2 would make a better and more oriented trail bike, I can't shake the feeling that the Nomad, now with the new VPP linkage, lighter frameset and more friendly to air shocks leverage (I'm assuming this by comparing it with the BLT2 on a Float R, and it performs amanzingly well), could do wonders as a heavy duty trail with light yet strong components. I don't say spec'ing it with a 32 TALAS 150, but huck it up a notch with a 36, but keeping the rest pretty much the same, XTR here and there, Formulas, carbon bars, but just switching the 15QR Crossmax STs for 20mm models, or even for more strenght, going with the new SX, which are incredibly light at 1750g and still tubeless.

    I really don't know which way to go. I have my 575 set as a light trail bike, and since my Prophet is gone, I don't have a bike to serve me as a heavy duty, go-anywhere-do-anything, forgiving Enduro/AM bike. I could benefict the strenght of the BLT and still have a trail-friendly bike, but having the extra burlyness of a 160mm under 30-pound bike is something that makes you wonder. So which one? Oh boy. It's hard. It's just too damn hard.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by indyfab25
    I believe it was a Rock Shox.
    Did it perform well? What are your impressions?

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Black RONIN
    The new Nomad is up on the SC website.
    There is anodized black option available, but no anodized slate. Wasn't it supposed to be the other way around? Just an error on the web site?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: al_bullit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    467
    SC have seemingly only updated the intro text and nothing else with regard to the Nomad. I wouldn't pay any attention to geometry, colour, etc for now until they update it all (even the pic is the old one ATM still).

  16. #16
    emtb.pl
    Reputation: krolik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    879
    They did update the builder tho - there were no jalapeno color ever before plus the bike there is indeed the new nomad:P i bet it's just a mistake with the black instead of slate.
    I still don't know what shock hardware it will use. CaneCreek assures me the CCDB that is in the process of creation as we speak will fit my LT2 as well as Nomad2 without any mods except spring - which means 22x8 but I have no other confirmation. So going back to topic my Nomad will NOT be under 30lbs:P I still am looking for sth that could suit it more than my 36talas. something more plush and in 1.5". something with spring swimming in oil. But I need travel adjustment with my 650B wheel so 36van is unfortunately out of question. and lyrik would be cool if not the infamous bushing problems. but I might consider it again.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,066
    edited....

  18. #18
    graps the nettle
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    481

    bzzzzt!

    Quote Originally Posted by al_bullit
    SC have seemingly only updated the intro text and nothing else with regard to the Nomad. I wouldn't pay any attention to geometry, colour, etc for now until they update it all (even the pic is the old one ATM still).
    wrong. check again. all updated now...
    hold my beer...

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: al_bullit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    467
    Quote Originally Posted by MtotheF
    wrong. check again. all updated now...
    It was correct at the time I wrote it You could just say its now all been updated. Meh, Americans, so rude

    Also, when you say "all updated", you might ask your web monkey to look atthe FAQs, which, err, as I type, are still the old ones. I quote "There are no ISCG mounts on the Nomad, so you will need an ISCG adaptor or a bb mount guide." Brits, we're pedants.

  20. #20
    graps the nettle
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    481

    pedants

    Quote Originally Posted by al_bullit
    It was correct at the time I wrote it You could just say its now all been updated. Meh, Americans, so rude

    Also, when you say "all updated", you might ask your web monkey to look atthe FAQs, which, err, as I type, are still the old ones. I quote "There are no ISCG mounts on the Nomad, so you will need an ISCG adaptor or a bb mount guide." Brits, we're pedants.
    love that word. pedantic. you said it, not me. thanks for the heads up on the f.a.q. things round here are sort of a barely controlled endo most of the time.
    hold my beer...

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    I've been looking at the geometry charts of both BLT2 and Nomad2, and I got very confused, so I'd like some help to understand and choose the right size for my next bike and actually from that choosing the right bike, the Nomad or the BLT2.

    I must start saying I was not familiar to SC geometry until I started paying more attention to the charts after reading many here saying that SC bikes tend to be smaller than other brands', so I wanted to check it out and now I understand why.

    Anyway, being 5.67 feet tall and considering my current ride, which is a size M 575 and is a perfect fit for me (on a 100mm x 6-degree stem with a medium-rise 660mm wide bar), both Nomad and Blur will be very small if I consider the same size Medium, so I should fit way better on a Large for that matter. But the curious fact is that, if we only go down with the numbers, the Nomad seems to be more "trail" than the BLT. The BLT is smaller in almost every aspect, so no wonder they call it a mini-DH bike. And it's here where lies my doubt.

    Anyone could give me more info about it? Are you guys getting a size up to get the bikes a little more trail-oriented, and when wanting a more gravity-oriented bike, get the right size spec'ed by SC? Because if I get a size M Blur it will be very small and the cockpit will be very short, but it will still keep the steep HT angle at 69 degrees on a 515mm A2C fork, which would put me a bit forward on downhills, unless I'd choose a 545mm A2C fork, so the HT angle would slack a bit and push me back a little on the bike, am I right? So if I want a more trail-oriented BLT2, I have to go with a Large and so I'd be stretched all over the bike in a comfortable position to attack and be more balanced over the bike. Is anyone getting my point? The same with the Nomad, if I want it to be more trail or gravity oriented, I have to choose either a size or another to get the most of it in that particular intended style.

    I'd like to know if anyone took these numbers in consideration to have his/her bike more trail or DH-ish. Because if I go with a slacker angle bike, there's no point getting the BLT and then it totally worths going to the Nomad. But I even think the Nomad would do a better trail bike if we lower the HT angle with a 150mm fork, or simply setting a 36 at 130mm to get advantage of the steeper HT angle, so that's probably why Weir used a Nomad with a 15QR 32 Float and not a Blur LT in Downieville (ok, the guy is crazy, but it seems to make sense, doesn't it?). So I am assuming that, in both ways, the Nomad, in numbers, defeats the BLT2 in both trail and DH set-up. Please, note I'm not sure of it and just trying to figure out how it would actually work. Could anyone discuss it further?

    Thanks!
    Last edited by Black RONIN; 10-07-2008 at 05:15 PM.

  22. #22
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Black RONIN
    I've been looking at the geometry charts of both BLT2 and Nomad2, and I got very confused, so I'd like some help to understand and choose the right size for my next bike and actually from that choosing the right bike, the Nomad or the BLT2.

    I must start saying I was not familiar to SC geometry until I started paying more attention to the charts after reading many here saying that SC bikes tend to be smaller than other brands', so I wanted to check it out and now I understand why.

    Anyway, being 5.67 feet tall and considering my current ride, which is a size M 575 and is a perfect fit for me (on a 100mm x 6-degree stem with a medium-rise 660mm wide bar), both Nomad and Blur will be very small if I consider the same size Medium, so I should fit way better on a Large for that matter. But the curious fact is that, if we only go down with the numbers, the Nomad seems to be more "trail" than the BLT. The BLT is smaller in almost every aspect, so no wonder they call it a mini-DH bike. And it's here where lies my doubt.

    Anyone could give me more info about it? Are you guys getting a size up to get the bikes a little more trail-oriented, and when wanting a more gravity-oriented bike, get the right size spec'ed by SC? Because if I get a size M Blur it will be very small and the cockpit will be very short, but it will still keep the steep HT angle at 69 degrees on a 515mm A2C fork, which would put me a bit forward on downhills, unless I'd choose a 545mm A2C fork, so the HT angle would slack a bit and push me back a little on the bike, am I right? So if I want a more trail-oriented BLT2, I have to go with a Large and so I'd be stretched all over the bike in a comfortable position to attack and be more balanced over the bike. Is anyone getting my point? The same with the Nomad, if I want it to be more trail or gravity oriented, I have to choose either a size or another to get the most of it in that particular intended style.

    I'd like to know if anyone took these numbers in consideration to have his/her bike more trail or DH-ish. Because if I go with a slacker angle bike, there's no point getting the BLT and then it totally worths going to the Nomad. But I even think the Nomad would do a better trail bike if we lower the HT angle with a 150mm fork, or simply setting a 36 at 130mm to get advantage of the steeper HT angle, so that's probably why Weir used a Nomad with a 15QR 32 Float and not a Blur LT in Downieville (ok, the guy is crazy, but it seems to make sense, doesn't it?). So I am assuming that, in both ways, the Nomad, in numbers, defeats the BLT2 in both trail and DH set-up. Please, note I'm sure of it and just trying to figure out how it would actually work. Could anyone discuss it further?

    Thanks!
    It depends on the feel of the bike you want. The new Nomad is obviously more slack. It puts you further behind the pedals. I am 5'10" and ride a large LT2. I would not go medium. If I were your size, I would go medium with both. I'll be getting a large Nomad as well. The Nomad2 I rode was a medium and felt great, but of course a bit cramped.
    My LT2 setup has me with a 110mm stem. It fits great. I love it. Large would seemingly be too big for you.

    It seems with SC bikes that geo numbers don't really mean much unless you are going form SC bike to SC bike. It is about feel. Try before you buy...right? That would tell the tale better than anything.
    I am immune to your disdain.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    62
    black ronin,
    i've been considering both the 575 and the blur lt2 as a replacement in the next couple of months. i rode both yesterday and they are great bikes. M 575 and L LT2 fit, felt, and measured out the same. i'm 6'1"... 6'2" on a good day, and will be going with a L 575 or XL LT2. could feasibly go smaller on either but i want to be comfortable and not risk feeling cramped.

    i would go with a nomad. the lt2 and 575 are way too similar to have both. if you're looking at building the 575 light and nomad on the heavier fr/dh side, i would go with the 32 talas 15qr on the yeti and 36 talas t/a on the nomad.
    Last edited by newpos; 10-07-2008 at 07:42 PM.

  24. #24
    just rub some dirt on it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    293

    ... and if we just ...

    Quote Originally Posted by TNC
    The BLT2 is a great bike .
    I knew you would come around.
    No paper mache bikes allowed.

  25. #25
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Black RONIN
    Did it perform well? What are your impressions?
    It felt great. But then again...it was only an hour!
    I am immune to your disdain.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    Unfortunately I can't test them, so I can only rely on the honest feedback all of you can give me, so I thank you very much in advance.

    Yes, I was seriously thinking about the BLT2, but more and more people (besides a lot of reviews too) keep telling me to go for the Nomad instead, because the 575 and the Blur are very similar. And I'm already getting a 15QR TALAS 140 for my 575!

    So should I go for a Medium and get a shorter cockpit to benefict on the downhills or should I go for a Large and be more stretched over the bike and minimize any issue with a shorter stem and a riser bar? What [size] characteristics make of the Nomad a more versatile AM bike for most conditions and trails? Anyone here got a bigger size to seize this matters, or got the right size and aided it with a longer stem and wider bars?

    And those who already tested the new bike, the Monarch can be considered a good shock for such bike? And is the DHX5 Air finally a good option?

    EDIT: I tried to use a converter to measure my height in feet/inches, but I think I messed up something. I am 173cm tall, and according to SC sizing chart, I'm equivalent to 5'8".

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Black RONIN
    Unfortunately I can't test them, so I can only rely on the honest feedback all of you can give me, so I thank you very much in advance.

    Yes, I was seriously thinking about the BLT2, but more and more people (besides a lot of reviews too) keep telling me to go for the Nomad instead, because the 575 and the Blur are very similar. And I'm already getting a 15QR TALAS 140 for my 575!

    So should I go for a Medium and get a shorter cockpit to benefict on the downhills or should I go for a Large and be more stretched over the bike and minimize any issue with a shorter stem and a riser bar? What [size] characteristics make of the Nomad a more versatile AM bike for most conditions and trails? Anyone here got a bigger size to seize this matters, or got the right size and aided it with a longer stem and wider bars?

    And those who already tested the new bike, the Monarch can be considered a good shock for such bike? And is the DHX5 Air finally a good option?

    EDIT: I tried to use a converter to measure my height in feet/inches, but I think I messed up something. I am 173cm tall, and according to SC sizing chart, I'm equivalent to 5'8".

    What is your inseam?

  28. #28
    Busted!!!
    Reputation: mxracer33x's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    472
    Quote Originally Posted by TNC
    Perhaps it will depend more on how and where you ride. I'd probably be fine with a BLT2 if we didn't have so many rocks and such here in my area...or my big annual 2-week trip was somewhere other than Moab. The BLT2 is a great bike, but the Nomad provides me with just a little more forgiveness and confidence when the terrain is really rough.
    Coming off a nomad and onto a BLT2 I agree with this statement 200%. A blur has no forgiveness when compared with a Nomad. Although, from a fellow Nomad rider who just returned from interbike, the new Nomad is plush-no-more. I know he was deeply disappointed, and hoped it was due to the Rock Shox 3.3 shock. We shall see.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by mikecy
    What is your inseam?
    Around 30.25 inches.

  30. #30
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Black RONIN
    Around 30.25 inches.
    BR, I think you're agonzing too much over this decision. Heck, I'm 56 years old, and I can pedal a Nomad around all day...and I'm no Weir. If you're looking for an XC race bike, then obviously look elsewhere. Mine weighs 32.4lbs., and it's pretty easy to live with. I ride it as a plain trail bike or the gnarliest places in Moab. That's why they made the bike...you can ride it anywhere without busting a gut. Since you have a lighter bike in the 575, it seems like a logical decision. And if the new Nomad is supposed to be better than my '06, then it's that much easier to decide. It's one of the best all-around bikes ever built, and if they improved it, then it's amazing.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Black RONIN
    Around 30.25 inches.
    For a 09 Nomad, you are a size medium. I wouldn't go large, as it will feel too big.

    I'm similar height as you 5'8.3" (173.5cm) but longer inseam (33") and presently ride a medium 08 Heckler. Yes, it does feel cramped for XC, but I run a 50mm/0 deg stem on it. Toptube on the Heckler is 22.5".

    The 09 Nomad will have a 22.8" toptube and I plan to run a 70-80mm/0-5 deg rise stem on it. I have a medium on order and hope it will have a good fit, but I won't know till I try it.

    What I can say though, having tried a friend's large 08 Nomad, is that for all-mountain riding, for us a large would be too big. In other words, if the medium don't fit well then we should look for other brands.

    Just my 2c.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    Mike and TNC, thanks for all the input. I know I was becoming annoying over this, but I couldn't afford to go wrong with it for a number of reasons. First, economically, this crash in the economy is making all imported stuff prices hit the roof, and the currency for the Real to the US Dollar is currently 2.2 to 1, what before was 1.57 to 1, so do the math. Considering that with all the importing taxes and shipping a Nomad frame comes around for US$3700 , now it will cost me a bit more due the currency rise. Another fact is that I simply can't test ride any of them, and having only my current ride as a base, I was worried indeed, because I'd be stuck with a $6000+ bike that won't fit me.

    The official importer in Brazil is leaving me behind, and they don't know when they will recieve the new frames, both Blur and Nomad. So I'll buy directly from some online dealer (unfortunately, Competitive Cyclist doesn't send items to BRazil, so I'm looking elsewhere). Possibly I can have a friend of mine buying it from CC and them send it to me, but let's see.

    Anyway, thank you so much everyone for taking time to help me solve this. Then a Medium Nomad it is! One last thing: should I consider the Monarch? So far, I haven't hear any complaints (in fact, I've hear NOTHING about it at all... ), so I must assume it's a good shock, since SC is now spec'ing it. I won't FR it, only average jumping and agressive riding. OTOH, I was seriously considering the DHX5 Air since with the new VPP design, it will probably come around the old issues and also it is more adjustable compared to the coil version, because I know I'd have trouble finding different coil options around here if the standard coil wasn't enough. And of course, the DHX would give me more confidence to go bigger when I want.

    Thanks again.

    Ed

  33. #33
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059
    BR, I think the reason SC offers shocks like the Float or Monarch on bikes like the Nomad is the pricepoint and weight issue it reflects on builder site and the bottom line price. But I will continue to stand by the fact that I don't think they are a "good" shock choice for this bike. Will it work on the Nomad, yes. Heck, the Nomad is such a good bike that perhaps one could stick a Walmart bike shock on it, and might find it to work...LOL!

    Seriously though, most any bike with over 6" of travel almost needs, but at least certainly benefits greatly from, a piggyback shock with sophisticated bottomout tuning. Look at real off road, high performance, long travel, dirt motorcycles, and you'll just about never see anything but piggyback shocks. Increased oil volume and the added tuning features make long travel much more effective either on a dirt motorcycle or a high performance, long travel, bicycle like the Nomad. If weight is that critical a component in this issue, then the BLT2 might be a better choice.

    I use a Manitou ISX-6 air shock on mine, but SC doesn't off that shock as an option. I wish RS would jump into the mix with a piggyback air shock to compete. I'm still leary of the DHXA, but frankly I haven't gotten to ride one of the latest versions to see if they've improved the weak mid-stroke.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Black RONIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by TNC
    BR, I think the reason SC offers shocks like the Float or Monarch on bikes like the Nomad is the pricepoint and weight issue it reflects on builder site and the bottom line price. But I will continue to stand by the fact that I don't think they are a "good" shock choice for this bike. Will it work on the Nomad, yes. Heck, the Nomad is such a good bike that perhaps one could stick a Walmart bike shock on it, and might find it to work...LOL!

    Seriously though, most any bike with over 6" of travel almost needs, but at least certainly benefits greatly from, a piggyback shock with sophisticated bottomout tuning. Look at real off road, high performance, long travel, dirt motorcycles, and you'll just about never see anything but piggyback shocks. Increased oil volume and the added tuning features make long travel much more effective either on a dirt motorcycle or a high performance, long travel, bicycle like the Nomad. If weight is that critical a component in this issue, then the BLT2 might be a better choice.

    I use a Manitou ISX-6 air shock on mine, but SC doesn't off that shock as an option. I wish RS would jump into the mix with a piggyback air shock to compete. I'm still leary of the DHXA, but frankly I haven't gotten to ride one of the latest versions to see if they've improved the weak mid-stroke.
    Despite the core reason of this thread on how could a Nomad be build light enough to be a "super trail", what intrinsically would suggest it to be somewhat a light bike and how that extended to most of the discussions posted inhere, I'm not caring that much about weight itself and more about how to get the most of the bike itself now. Of course, if I can choose lighter components to achieve a lighter package, it is fine, but not critical. At least on such bike.

    Just to mention, I think the purpose of the thread was supposedly reached, since we could discuss what an ideal "super trail" would possibly be, that being either a Nomad or a Blur. It happens I discovered that the Blur would be a better trail bike, and apart geometry and size issues - but all solved now! - it would be remarkably similar to my 575, what led me directly to reconsider the Nomad as my heavy duty bike.

    Initially I considered the Blur because of the opinions of my friends and other riders, that having a Nomad would probably be overkill for most of our trails. Since I wanted a stronger bike, the common sense then was picking up a Blur (or even a Heckler) and size it up with some heavy trail oriented specs and go for it, so I could benefict from a mid travel trail bike on a harder package. But I was constantly wondering what if I want to go bigger?

    That's what I should thank all you guys for. After reading the posts, I realized that I could go for the Nomad instead and not having it as the title of my post suggested, but the way it is meant to be, a true AM bike, and have an even more forgiving bike like you mentioned before, which would take way better all the punishment I'd throw at it. All the impressions and opinions were crucial for me to decide on what ride and what size to go, so all of you were great sharing your experiences. I really apreciated that, specially you TNC, who gave me a big shake on that matter!

    Now regarding the rear shock, I am a bit suspicious on the Monarch. It may be a fine shock, and even suitable for those who want to build the ultimate trail bike (wow, that's even more than a super trail! ) but probably a piggyback shock would be a better choice like you stated, if intending to make it more versatile, and that's just that what I want. But about the DHX-A, the mid-stroke is said to be substancially improved on all 09 Fox shock and fork models, so I'm tempted to go for it and see what happens.

Posting Permissions

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