Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,713

    New question here. Increasing the travel on Carver to 120mm, STumpy 140mm and Enduro 29 to 160mm

    Hello

    Short and concise. Would you like to have the travel increased from Enduro 29 155mm uneven to even 160mm like on its 26er brethren?
    Same goes for Stumpjumper 29 and Carver 29.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidcopperfield View Post
    Hello

    Short and concise. Would you like to have the travel increased from Enduro 29 155mm uneven to even 160mm like on its 26er brethren?
    Same goes for Stumpjumper 29 and Carver 29.
    No. 155mm of travel isn't uneven unless you're talking about even/odd numbers specifically. Using the same travel for a 29er as a 26 would make the 29er handle significantly different than it's intended design.

  3. #3
    Dirt Junkie
    Reputation: Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    432

    Cool-blue Rhythm

    I really don't think that 5mm on the 155mm will make any significant difference in the way the bike handles or preforms. That being said, I don't think it's a cost effective mod solely for the extra travel unless you're going to replace/upgrade the fork anyway. Then, I wouldn't alter the "new" fork to the shorter travel. Any weirdness in handling you may experience can be taken care of with preload or sag adjustments. Seriously, find a ruler and look at 5mm, it's virtually nothing. You can lose or gain 5mm or more with air pressure in your tire.

    140 or 120 I wouldn't jump to 160mm. I wouldn't increase by more that 10mm max. Once again, not really worth the cost for the travel increase by itself. I would only do it if it's an upgrade to the fork in general, and you got a good deal $$$$.

    Just my opinion.

    Rock
    How can anyone who's been riding as long as I have, be so slow???

  4. #4
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    13,697
    Meh. I'm not a big guy. 29ers have high front ends. More and more travel makes more and more of a battle for me to get "my" riding position. I guess the Enduro and Stumpjumper aren't supposed to fit that way, but the Carve's still an XC bike, isn't it? So if I had one, I'd want to be able to make it fit me.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,713
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrwSwitch View Post
    Meh. I'm not a big guy. 29ers have high front ends. More and more travel makes more and more of a battle for me to get "my" riding position. I guess the Enduro and Stumpjumper aren't supposed to fit that way, but the Carve's still an XC bike, isn't it? So if I had one, I'd want to be able to make it fit me.
    Check upside down riser and get your handlebar back in place!
    Low Top RDO

    Anyway give me nagtive reputation, but write positive Striving to get all bricks red.

  6. #6

  7. #7
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    13,697
    I don't think I repped you.

    Actually I did once set up a bike with inverted risers. Works... okay. The angles are a little funny.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,713
    Always 29ers used to have less travel than its 26 brethren. Why? Hypothetically 26er DH bike has 225mm rear travel and 29er version has 170mm come on.
    Let's make homogenious models.

    What about Enduro-like front derailleur?

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    80
    Somewhat related, I agree with OP. I put a 120mm Fox 29 Float CTD on my 2012 S Works Epic, stock 100mm front and rear. Never liked the fork on our rocky/rooty trails w/ poor small bump absorption at low speed and worse high speed absorption with bigger stuff.
    New fork made a world of difference in control at low and high speed, didn't affect steering or handling adversely at all. This is an awesome trail bike now. Rode a Camber recently and mine beats it hands down.
    Don't feel any need for more travel in rear either, really well balanced now.
    No doubt some here will respond that I should have bought a more trail oriented bike in the first place, but there is a simple answer to that. The difference between a 23 & 27 lbs. bike on our ultra steep climbs is so sweet it was a no brainer.
    Just my 2 cents.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dan4jeepin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    261
    I'm guessing you're really not a fan of the new Kona Process line up.

    111mm, 134mm and 154mm of travel.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,713
    Let's assume that someone hardcore AM rider- light FRider "desaddles" Enduro 26 with 165mm travel and gets only 155mm. It works but this hypthothetical person wants exactly 165mm not 155mm.
    Stumpjumper also ought to have 140mm in the rear like a 26er. Shorter CS and new dreailleur play nice together to allow this. It is possibl

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-16-2013, 06:30 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-10-2013, 05:34 PM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-22-2013, 02:11 PM
  4. 2011 trek fuel ex7, 140mm, 160mm travel?
    By drivengsxr1000 in forum Trek
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-27-2011, 03:29 PM
  5. 120mm or 140mm travel for Intense 5.5?
    By Birefringence in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-12-2011, 02:34 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
  •