Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,958

    Motolite BB height

    Hey, just curious as to what peoples real-world BB heights are coming in at?

    I just measured mine- it's a little jacked up thanks to 2.25" gaex sturdies and my 140mm AM SL- 14.5"!


  2. #2
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189
    Great idea for a new thread.

    I just measured I'm at 13.69 with my Fox Talas 130 fully extended. Just like the chart said.

    Tires: Blue Groove 2.1 UST Front / Maxxis CrossMark 2.1 UST out back.

  3. #3
    thats right living legend
    Reputation: blackagness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,378
    Quote Originally Posted by dulyebr
    Great idea for a new thread.

    I just measured I'm at 13.69 with my Fox Talas 130 fully extended. Just like the chart said.

    Tires: Blue Groove 2.1 UST Front / Maxxis CrossMark 2.1 UST out back.

    I'm running a nev 2.1 right now I'd rather wait till I get my prefered 2.35 back on there. But I'll go see what I get. I imagen it's the same as duly's.

  4. #4
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,958
    It seems crazy that big tires and an extra inch of travel raised my BB a full inch! Wow.

    I was bummed about it, but then I had a great ride yesterday on the ML- A good friend & riding buddy of ours got married saturday, so we all opted for an easy day of shuttling- we did a great local XC descent twice, dropping about 6000' total on technical XC trails. The motolite did great, I was very happy with it. Another bonus is that my AM SL is finally broken in, suddenly it feels totally coil like! except it's much lighter and has better resistance to big hits.

    Well, the thing that got me thinking about BB height originally was looking at the preliminary El Guapo numbers. Based on what has been said so far, I could swap all my parts directly over from my motolight, gain 20mm of travel, yet my BB would actually drop 3/4".

    Another way to look at it- if you run the forks Titus suggests, the motolite and El Guapo will have the same BB height, about 13.75". Pretty typical for a 130mm travel bike but kind of low for a 160mm bike, imho. Low being good, for XC use- not so hot for super-techy east coast type stuff with fallen trees and ledgy rocks.

    Interesting.....

  5. #5
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189
    One other consideration. The El Guapo has 160mm of travel, so at 25% sag for both bikes the BB would actually be lower on the Guap than the ML.
    Last edited by dulyebr; 07-19-2006 at 05:35 AM.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    220
    Off-topic: I'm also running 2.25 Geax Sturdies, on DT 4.1 rims. The rear tire BARELY clears the seatstay bridge - close enough that it's been completely stripped of paint from little rocks the tread grabs. Is yours super-close on clearance, too? Or is it just me and my skinny rim?

  7. #7
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189
    I was looking at some of the other 5" trail bike frames out there, and the ML has one of the highest BBs. Really only the Specialized Carbon Stumpjumper at 13.74" is higher; interestingly the aluminum version is quite a bit lower. The 5 Spot is at 13.25", but I hear people complaining all the time the BB is too low, which causes poor clearance for the pedals. The Yeti 575 is close at 13.5, but you really have to go to 6"+ travel light FR bikes like the Nomad, and 6.6 before the BB gets to the height of the MotoLite.

    It's ironic that with such a high BB the ML handles so damn well. So with the Moto you get great handling AND great clearance. NICE!
    Last edited by dulyebr; 07-19-2006 at 09:26 PM.

  8. #8
    thats right living legend
    Reputation: blackagness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,378

    Ineresting!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by dulyebr
    fficeffice" />>>
    I was looking at some of the other 5" trail bike frames out there, and the ML has one of the highest BBs. Really only the Specialized Carbon at 13.74" is higher; interestingly the aluminum version is quite a bit lower. The 5 Spot is at 13.25, but I hear people complaining all the time the BB is too low, which causes poor clearance for pedals. The Yeti 575 is close at 13.5, but you really have to go to 6"+ travel light FR bikes like the Nomad, and 6.6 before the BB gets to the height of MotoLite.>>
    >>
    It's ironic that with such a high BB the ML handles so damn well. So with the Moto you get great handling AND great clearance. NICE!>>

    Wow great stuff duly! And it's amazing the ML's ability to absolutly rail corners! I personely have never been on a bike that even comes close in that department.

  9. #9
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,958
    Quote Originally Posted by Suicider
    Off-topic: I'm also running 2.25 Geax Sturdies, on DT 4.1 rims. The rear tire BARELY clears the seatstay bridge - close enough that it's been completely stripped of paint from little rocks the tread grabs. Is yours super-close on clearance, too? Or is it just me and my skinny rim?
    Weird- are you running UST or the normal versions? I'm running 2.25 UST sturdies on mavic XM819's and the clearance is fine....not great but thats a big tire! Certainly no paint rubbing.

    As for BB's, seems like higher BB's are great for some types of terrain and not for others. I think 13.75" is perfect but mine's jacked up to 14.5" with my big tires and fork, honestly I can feel that on off-camber descents where I am trying to keep my weight as low as possible. On the other hand, it's nice for rocky technical XC on flat or rolly terrain...

  10. #10
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,690
    Quote Originally Posted by dulyebr
    [COLOR=black]Really only the Specialized Carbon at 13.74" is higher
    LOL!!!! I just read a review of the Stumpjumper Carbon on a Mexican Mag and they complained about low BB height!!

    They also put it as one if the best (if not the best) bike in the world... Tell me about biasing and not having ridden a Titus!

    They mainly rated the bike on bling and the suspension performance of the Inertia Valved suspensions on the Stumpy. But we know suspension is nothing if handling ain't good.

    I can lend them my Swithcblade so they know better.

    You never know what STIFF means until you ride a Titus (or get in jail with Uncle Bubba )...
    Check my Site

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craigstr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,330

    Mine is...

    I finally got my Minute 3 back from the guys at GarageWorks and wow, it is PPPPLLLLLUUUUUSSSSSHHHHHHH!!! Thanks Steve and Tracy, good work. I only had a tape measure and I got 13 3/4 inches which is pretty close to the 13.68 posted on the Titus sight with a 130mm fork. It was probably a little taller when I had the Kenda Nevegals on it, I just switched to a Maxxis LUST Ignitor 2.35 front (actually 2.16) and LUST HighRoller 2.1 rear(actually 1.97). I know the front tire is shorter because when I rolled it out to calibrate my Computer/HR, it was 5/8 less in length. These tires seem small but they seem to hook up well and they are faster than the Kenda's.

  12. #12
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189
    I measured mine again with the my Rockshox Pike. With the U-Turn dialed down to 127mm (where I plan on keeping it most of the time) the BB is 13.76 - perfect!

  13. #13
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by craigstr
    I just switched to a Maxxis LUST Ignitor 2.35 front (actually 2.16) and LUST HighRoller 2.1 rear(actually 1.97). I know the front tire is shorter because when I rolled it out to calibrate my Computer/HR, it was 5/8 less in length. These tires seem small but they seem to hook up well and they are faster than the Kenda's.
    I'd be interested to hear more details about your riding impressions of the Maxxis USTs versus the Nevegals with Stans if you have anymore to share...

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GreenBonty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by dulyebr
    Great idea for a new thread.

    I just measured I'm at 13.69 with my Fox Talas 130 fully extended. Just like the chart said.

    Tires: Blue Groove 2.1 UST Front / Maxxis CrossMark 2.1 UST out back.
    How do you measure this?, loaded or unloaded?.
    Ground clearence is very important to me and even though my 575 has an unloaded high BB, I feel that I clear less rocks than I did on my HT. This may have to do with other dimensions as well (wheelbase?), but so far the promise of high BB did not translate into better performance. In rock gardens where you have to pedal without hitting the ground it's even more complicated since suspension action also controls ground clearence and further complicates the meaning of BB numbers.

  15. #15
    thats right living legend
    Reputation: blackagness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,378
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenBonty
    How do you measure this?, loaded or unloaded?.
    Ground clearence is very important to me and even though my 575 has an unloaded high BB, I feel that I clear less rocks than I did on my HT. This may have to do with other dimensions as well (wheelbase?), but so far the promise of high BB did not translate into better performance. In rock gardens where you have to pedal without hitting the ground it's even more complicated since suspension action also controls ground clearence and further complicates the meaning of BB numbers.


    I bieleve that BB hieght is measured unsaged. The BB hieght on the ML is very good I hardly ever hit my peddles.

    But also I hate a high BB, it makes a bike corner like $hit and hard to control. The ML BB hieght falls smack in the middle of perfect, for me.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craigstr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,330

    Duly

    I'll let you know more tomorrow afternoon, were going on a 25 mile+ ride all above 8000ft in Tahoe. This will be the first ride with the tires and the 130mm fork together, I have few rides on the tires but it was in 4x4 mode.

  17. #17
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenBonty
    How do you measure this?, loaded or unloaded?.
    Ground clearence is very important to me and even though my 575 has an unloaded high BB, I feel that I clear less rocks than I did on my HT. This may have to do with other dimensions as well (wheelbase?), but so far the promise of high BB did not translate into better performance. In rock gardens where you have to pedal without hitting the ground it's even more complicated since suspension action also controls ground clearence and further complicates the meaning of BB numbers.
    Yes, you measure from the middle of the bottom bracket to the ground with bike unladen.

    At 13.5 inches, the Yeti 575 does have a relatively high BB, but the MotoLite is a bit higher at 13.68 with the same fork. Also, the 575 has more more travel, and consequently more sag. At recommended sag (25%) the ML BB height would be about 12.4" vs. the Yeti at 12.1"; about 9mm difference.

    Having a higher BB is a mixed blessing. Too high and the bike can seem awakward, too low and you end up bashing your pedals. When I used to lower my fork to 100mm of travel for climbing, which put my BB at 13.25, it felt really low to me.

Posting Permissions

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