Have you seen the new Chumba bike? It's like the front triangle of an RX with the rear suspension of an ML.
mmmmmhhhhh... it could well work very differently. There are subtle nuances.
The HL pivot seems to be further down as compared to a Titus. More "NRS" like, but not that exaggerated. This affects how the suspension reacts (don't ask me how, though).
Also, you can not run the seatpost all the way in... if you happen to need it, anyway.
I like where the gussets are welded to... the neutral axis of the tubing, less stress for the tubing and arguably, less chances for craks.
What's the intended use? I figure XC-Race, 'cos for bigger stuff, CHumba has the EVO's.
I took a look at it... 4.5" travel, around 7 pounds for a M, 1700 bucks... nice indeed. It already beated the Epiphany in a review... so it could be a rival to the ML.
However, there's two tiny details that I think (and it's just a personal opinion based on pure observation and nothing solid) that could be better on the Chumba.
Main Pivot...
And HL pivots...
Looks like the ML is more solid at those areas, accounting for a stiffer frame. But it'd be nice to make a ride shootout to settle the dust down.
Am sitting here at home typing and steering at my ML, the beefy rare stays are amazing on the ML really, for a 5 inche frame, they are sturdy tough and way rugged..... So many new frames coming onto the scene. Surely all these manufacturers cannot survive, there is so so many...........................
The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"
I took a look at it... 4.5" travel, around 7 pounds for a M, 1700 bucks... nice indeed. It already beated the Epiphany in a review... so it could be a rival to the ML.
However, there's two tiny details that I think (and it's just a personal opinion based on pure observation and nothing solid) that could be better on the Chumba.
Looks like the ML is more solid at those areas, accounting for a stiffer frame. But it'd be nice to make a ride shootout to settle the dust down.
Actually, the review is weird as it says that the bike geometry does not descend very well. This is odd with a 69 HA compared to the Epi 70. Their 6" travel bike looks more interesting though.
Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun
Am sitting here at home typing and steering at my ML, the beefy rare stays are amazing on the ML really, for a 5 inche frame, they are sturdy tough and way rugged..... So many new frames coming onto the scene. Surely all these manufacturers cannot survive, there is so so many...........................
These stays were never designed for the ML. When the bike came out last year with the narrow stays, a few of us complained, and after inquiry Titus realized the Supermoto stays would also fit on the ML. The rest is history. And yes, the FR stays are awesome!
Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun
These stays were never designed for the ML. When the bike came out last year with the narrow stays, a few of us complained, and after inquiry Titus realized the Supermoto stays would also fit on the ML. The rest is history. And yes, the FR stays are awesome!
aha, that explains it, Inow know what everyone is chatting about when the talk about the FR lowers... All good, thanks for that sorg, you rock......................... I didnt really rate the Ellsworth Epi when I rode it briefly.....................Nice but, but it didnt agree with me... Liked the Id way more...
The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"
Actually, the review is weird as it says that the bike geometry does not descend very well. This is odd with a 69 HA compared to the Epi 70. Their 6" travel bike looks more interesting though.
aha, that explains it, Inow know what everyone is chatting about when the talk about the FR lowers... All good, thanks for that sorg, you rock......................... I didnt really rate the Ellsworth Epi when I rode it briefly.....................Nice but, but it didnt agree with me... Liked the Id way more...
A riding buddy has an Id that he loves. I tried it, but it just felt weird to me. The cockpit was perfect and the pedaling was awesome, but the feeling of sitting so high up was a bit unnerving. Well, that and the fact that I had approx 0" clearance between the top tube and my privates...
Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun
Have you seen the new Chumba bike? It's like the front triangle of an RX with the rear suspension of an ML.
actually, Ted (Chumba's founder) was doing Mac Strut designs -- some in conjunction with Salsa -- several years before Titus, but only as custom order frames, hence, you never saw them or heard about them. but some of us so. cal. locals have seen them.
Look, I am not trying to start a flame war. I think the Motolite is a great bike, and I am not going to take sides one way or another. I was merely making an observation from my experiences. If you disagree with me, then fine, but seriously, I'm not going to get dragged into some big debate over this. Hell, I don't even own either bike. I mean, if you guys are really so passionate about this, you should just get a Chumba XCL and a Titus Motolite, and do a side-by-side comparison and decide for yourself.
Look, I am not trying to start a flame war. I think the Motolite is a great bike, and I am not going to take sides one way or another. I was merely making an observation from my experiences. If you disagree with me, then fine, but seriously, I'm not going to get dragged into some big debate over this. Hell, I don't even own either bike. I mean, if you guys are really so passionate about this, you should just get a Chumba XCL and a Titus Motolite, and do a side-by-side comparison and decide for yourself.
I think that the Chumba looks like a great bike, and the EVO looks pretty cool. I wish them success. As for the comment on rigidity, while it might be true, I have a hard time beleiving it. The ML is a really rigid frame to begin with, and I'm not sure that I'd be able to tell whether frame X or Y was more rigid just by riding it. But bear in mind that 1) I'm just 160#, 2) a crappy rider and 3) I don't jump anything meaningful. My uneducated take is that the wheels would flex long before I could detect any flex in the frame.
Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun
Have you seen the new Chumba bike? It's like the front triangle of an RX with the rear suspension of an ML.
Well if using swing link is imitation then all of the bikes mentioned here are...well imitations. Swing link is a good design that dates back to beginning of FS MTB. Chumba put swing link together with a horst link and it rides nice. Super beefy chain stay and seat stays. ML looks like it only has beefy chain stays with little tube seat stays and no hostlink. The swing link rockers on the chumba are BEEFY, nice large of CNCed piece of art. Another thing I like about the XCL is the lower BB and center of gravity, 13.5 BB height.
I can only say this because I rode it before they came up with the new production model, my buddies have couple of the XCLs back when they were custom. It rode NICE, plush and feels like it has more travel than 4.25. Very stiff and climbs really well but unlike other XC bikes it decends really nice also. Great XCish AM bike.....and loves technical stuff, not your average fire road loving XC rig.
Almost bought one......then the EVO came.......
"Didn't your doctor tell you to stop smoking and drinking?" George Burns "Yes but they all died"
Look, I am not trying to start a flame war. I think the Motolite is a great bike, and I am not going to take sides one way or another. I was merely making an observation from my experiences. If you disagree with me, then fine, but seriously, I'm not going to get dragged into some big debate over this. Hell, I don't even own either bike. I mean, if you guys are really so passionate about this, you should just get a Chumba XCL and a Titus Motolite, and do a side-by-side comparison and decide for yourself.
For someone who dosn't own either bike, and doesn't even want to discuss the matter, that sure is a pretty defenit statment. But whatever, if you say that's just your opinion I'll respect that.
But I can hardly imagen another bike "in it's class" to even be possible , that it could be stiffer in any "persevable" way, than the ML. Yet I've never been on one, but if it is, I'd sure like to give her a run. Which I suppose is entirly possible if that's an "honest" conclusion that at least one person could come to.
This was a very good thread, I folllowed it when it started, then didnt go back. Have elso been watching that Chumba frame and bike etc. Very interesting. Ever since I saw it way back, I have not liked it asthetically. I know, that shouldnt be the reason to purchase a bike, but never the less, it is still an important component... The look has not grown on me.....
Reading about the frame etc, I dont think it is comparing apples with apples the ML and the Chuma XCL. I think the Chumba is a burly 6 inch strong AM frame, could be wrong, but seems that way to me.....
I guess we watch this space....
The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"
What I will say with re: the XCL is that I took it up to the San Gabriels and rode some gnarly trails on it and never felt sketchy once. It is suprisingly strong and stiff, and the geometry appears to be really dialed in. Like Duke777, I was very close to pulling the trigger, but then the EVO came out and as they say, the rest is history. I don't think any XCLs have made their way outside of California, or very few, why not call Chumba and see if you can get a demo at a shop going - and settle the speculation with personal experience? They are a really personable company, I've called them and bugged them many a times. : P
Well if using swing link is imitation then all of the bikes mentioned here are...well imitations. Swing link is a good design that dates back to beginning of FS MTB. Chumba put swing link together with a horst link and it rides nice. Super beefy chain stay and seat stays. ML looks like it only has beefy chain stays with little tube seat stays and no hostlink. The swing link rockers on the chumba are BEEFY, nice large of CNCed piece of art. Another thing I like about the XCL is the lower BB and center of gravity, 13.5 BB height.
I can only say this because I rode it before they came up with the new production model, my buddies have couple of the XCLs back when they were custom. It rode NICE, plush and feels like it has more travel than 4.25. Very stiff and climbs really well but unlike other XC bikes it decends really nice also. Great XCish AM bike.....and loves technical stuff, not your average fire road loving XC rig.
Almost bought one......then the EVO came.......
Yeah the ML chainstay's are alot beefier than the seatstay's, but it does also have a Horst link...
What I will say with re: the XCL is that I took it up to the San Gabriels and rode some gnarly trails on it and never felt sketchy once. It is suprisingly strong and stiff, and the geometry appears to be really dialed in. Like Duke777, I was very close to pulling the trigger, but then the EVO came out and as they say, the rest is history. I don't think any XCLs have made their way outside of California, or very few, why not call Chumba and see if you can get a demo at a shop going - and settle the speculation with personal experience? They are a really personable company, I've called them and bugged them many a times. : P
If one comes along I'll giver a go. I would' be interested to know how stiff I'd find her to be. I'd bet based on your post, it's up there...
It does? My bad, I didn't see it. I even saw a few in person and checked it out. I guess it's not as pronounced as the HL on the XCL.
Well... the HL (though rather obvious, not flaming you, bro!) on Titus bikes is not as pronouced as on the Chumba's. The Chumba's go lower relative to wheel axle, as compared with a Titus.
If exaggerated as in NRS's, the chain tension may interact with suspension... but I don't see it happening much on the Chumba.
It will certainly have a different feel and ride to a ML. While the basic suspension scheme may be the old known Mac Strut, they may ride very differently.
I also have a hard time imaginating the XCL stiffer than the ML at the rear (see my post below stating build differences)... but if Spicymag has ridden both, I have to give him some credit until someone comes with a more thorough test.
More credit giving.... Carnetorta is right... I couldn't get concrete dates, but I saw a Salsa bike from back '95 / '96, that the rear is basically identical to the XCL and supposedly was made by Chumba's Ted Tanouye. I'm not sure if Chris was making a full Susser by then or how it was.
However... neither Ted nor Chris were the first to use the Mac Strut design... but hey, they just made it better!!!
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by zorg
And yes, the FR stays are awesome!
I guess it's not as pronounced as the HL on the XCL.
