Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 59
  1. #1
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112

    Motolite with Coil rear shock...Anyone?

    I was just wondering if anyone is running their motolite with a coil-over rear shock. I did a quick search and scrolled through the Motolite set-up database but didn't spot anything. The Titus Motolite webpage states that it's available with a coil shock, but doesn't state which one. Maybe a DHX coil? That would be pretty sweet.

    I'm going to a Titus demo in a few weeks (to try out the Supermoto) and I was thinking I should take a 'Lite for a spin to see how I like it. Although, I don't want to feel like I have to pull a demo_slug and and get both of them. Thanks for any responses.

    Patrick

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    871

    Got it!!!

    Got it, but don't know if I have the right spring for it. Want to get more time on it before I say anything (I can tell you this much, it blows every other shock out of the water). Got it from Bikerbob!!! He's the man. Now I'm just waiting for the new Talas.

    Chris

  3. #3
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris9702l
    Got it...
    Got what?!? The Motolite with a coil? The ML with the DHX coil? Don't tease me, out with the details!

    And a ride report when you're ready. Thanks.

    Patrick

  4. #4
    the 36 year old grom
    Reputation: demo_slug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,726
    from the porn thread

    coil
    Titus Bike Pr0n
    and
    air
    Titus Bike Pr0n

  5. #5
    thats right living legend
    Reputation: blackagness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,378
    I've seen 2 or 3 on the board. I "was" pretty sure there was one on the bike porn thread but mabye not? But if you search here I do spacificaly remeber a blue one...

  6. #6
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    from the porn thread
    Nice find, thanks demo. I like the build that the Big boss man slapped together here:



    I'm just thinking, if I decide that a bike like the Supermoto is too much bike for everyday riding, then the Motolite could be a nice option. And not too expensive, especially relative to other ~5" bikes I've been eyeing such as the X-5 and 5 Pack.

    I figure a ML with coil rear a beefy build and incrementally adjustable-travel coil fork (Pike, or maybe even Lyric for extra stiffness) would make a pretty zippy clyde-worthy trail bike. The only thing I'd be worried about is the fairly steep geometry (relative to what I'm looking for) and it's ability to handle jumps and moderate drops. I gotta say again, though, I sure like the price. I wonder what the upcharge is for the coil.

    Patrick

  7. #7
    thats right living legend
    Reputation: blackagness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,378
    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    from the porn thread

    coil
    Titus Bike Pr0n
    and
    air
    Titus Bike Pr0n

    I found another one, but I"ve never posted a link so?

    PicSinc the ML handles moderate jumps and drops VERY well I really think you'd be impressed. And with a coil shock and thrue axel fork it might be just what your looking for.

    But then again from following your posts, you seem like a guy who woudn't minde the extra wieght and what not of a burlier bike like the traile build SM or something else.

    MBA may not be all that...but they "did" do thier SM review with the traile build, and if you hadn't seen witch bike they were reviewing you'd swear it was the ML.All the (hucker types) on this boarde seem to diagree with that application but I think it would be the bombdiggiddy.

  8. #8
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,755
    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC

    I'm just thinking, if I decide that a bike like the Supermoto is too much bike for everyday riding, then the Motolite could be a nice option. And not too expensive, especially relative to other ~5" bikes I've been eyeing such as the X-5 and 5 Pack.

    I figure a ML with coil rear a beefy build and incrementally adjustable-travel coil fork (Pike, or maybe even Lyric for extra stiffness) would make a pretty zippy clyde-worthy trail bike. The only thing I'd be worried about is the fairly steep geometry (relative to what I'm looking for) and it's ability to handle jumps and moderate drops. I gotta say again, though, I sure like the price. I wonder what the upcharge is for the coil.

    Patrick
    Patrick,

    I basically bought my motolite to after spending a second winter riding my '02 Turner RFX with 5" rockers&fork for XC. I loved the RFX, but I wanted to return it to 6/7" travel mode and heavier build for summer free-ride use and build something up for XC that would ride similar to the RFX in 5/5" mode but without the extra frame weight. The motolite was the answer and I am very happy with it (and also very happy to have my '02 RFX configured for FR use, which is really it's forte')

    So a few thoughts-
    The motolite does have steeper angles than a 5-spot or 5-pack. I played around with forks and found that a marzcchi AM-series fork adjusted to 140mm travel gave me similar handling to the RFX- about a 68-68.5d head angle.

    The turners have a more linear suspension feel than the motolite, given the same rear shock (i've ridden both with RP3's). This is both good and bad- the turner's seem to use more travel, but also more prone to bottoming. The motolite really ramps up (at least with an air shock) making it feel active yet firm. I think the motolite would feel great with a coil rear as it would balance out the rising rate, creating a plusher ride.

    My bikes are pretty similar in terms of stiffness which is impressive, given the motolite frame is 3lbs lighter than my '02 RFX. No question, the motolite climbs better and the turner feels plusher going down (with 5" rockers- it's a different frame with 6" rockers). With my current builds, there is about an 8lb difference between bikes.

    If you want to do a lot of hucks, the 5-pack might be a better call. I think the motolite is comparable to the 5-spot in terms of intended use. I weigh 170 and have no hesitation to huck the motolite off mid-size XC stunts drops and jumps. Titus said the ML can handle it. But I would not choose the motolite for true FR abuse, just as I wouldn't choose the RFX for XC rides with big climbs. It's been discussed here before, personally I would always prefer a lighter frame with burly parts over a heavier frame with light parts.

    The shop I bought my ML from, offered the DHX coil for a $175 upcharge over the stock float R. I think this was based on OE pricing. I went with the rp3 to create more contrast between my bikes.

    Hope there was some useful info for you in my E-rambling.

  9. #9
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    The motolite does have steeper angles than a 5-spot or 5-pack. I played around with forks and found that a marzcchi AM-series fork adjusted to 140mm travel gave me similar handling to the RFX- about a 68-68.5d head angle.
    I think that's about where I want to be, especially for technical sections and steep terrain. But I also want to be able to steepen it on-the-fly around 1+ degree to improve climbing. Although I'm sure the ML is a capable climber. Moreso than I am, at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    The turners have a more linear suspension feel than the motolite, given the same rear shock (i've ridden both with RP3's). This is both good and bad- the turner's seem to use more travel, but also more prone to bottoming. The motolite really ramps up (at least with an air shock) making it feel active yet firm. I think the motolite would feel great with a coil rear as it would balance out the rising rate, creating a plusher ride.
    A plush, cushioned ride with excellent tracking is what I'm looking for. With no pedal feedback. Given my size and inclination to get a little rough with my steed I feel that a robust shock designed for bigger hits (iow, not a Float or RP3) that has a bottom-out control is my best bet, regardless of what frame I get.

    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    My bikes are pretty similar in terms of stiffness which is impressive, given the motolite frame is 3lbs lighter than my '02 RFX. No question, the motolite climbs better and the turner feels plusher going down (with 5" rockers- it's a different frame with 6" rockers). With my current builds, there is about an 8lb difference between bikes.

    If you want to do a lot of hucks, the 5-pack might be a better call. I think the motolite is comparable to the 5-spot in terms of intended use.
    The truth is, I don't know exactly how my riding is going to evolve. So it's difficult to pick according to intended use. I'm currently on a HT, and I tend to baby it a little because I'm not sure if certain parts will hold up under too much abuse. I'd say for the riding I do currently, a Spot or ML type bike would be fine. But that means I've got to refrain from (or limit) any urban riding, DJ or higher speed technical DH stuff I might want to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    I weigh 170 and have no hesitation to huck the motolite off mid-size XC stunts drops and jumps. Titus said the ML can handle it.
    I read somewhere recently (it was an older post, though) that there was a weight limit of around 215lbs on the ML. Know I've seen at least a few posts, even recently, that were from clydes on Motolites, so maybe that's not so anymore (or never was) or pertains to the Ti or Exogrid frames.

    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    But I would not choose the motolite for true FR abuse, just as I wouldn't choose the RFX for XC rides with big climbs. It's been discussed here before, personally I would always prefer a lighter frame with burly parts over a heavier frame with light parts.
    I see your logic. I've got almost 100lbs on you, though, and I think that standard recommendations may not apply. Meaning maybe I need a heavy frame with heavy parts. As you said, I would not expect to be able to do FR on the ML (or similar), regardless of the build.

    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    The shop I bought my ML from, offered the DHX coil for a $175 upcharge over the stock float R. I think this was based on OE pricing.
    That brings the list price of the ML frame up to almost $1600. That's what the Supermoto goes for. Another $300-400 get me the 5 Pack (with DHX Coil). It's tough to decide what's the most suitable product, and then how to obtain the best value.

    I do feel that if I go with a ML then I probably will eventually want to get a bigger hit bike. Which is why I'm leaing towards a slightly longer travel do-it-all. We'll see how I feel after test riding.

    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    Hope there was some useful info for you in my E-rambling.
    Absolutely, it's all very helpful.

    Patrick
    Last edited by PCinSC; 06-21-2006 at 10:08 PM.

  10. #10
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,644
    Agreed with FM... seems like you are looking for something with more travel than both the ML and 5 Spot.

    I'd say some more abuse ready HT like the Evils, a Turner RFX or a Titus Supermoto.
    Check my Site

  11. #11
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Warp
    Agreed with FM... seems like you are looking for something with more travel than both the ML and 5 Spot.
    Yeah, it does.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warp
    I'd say some more abuse ready HT like the Evils, a Turner RFX or a Titus Supermoto.
    I've got a Kona Hoss HT and I have no questions about the frames ability to handle some abuse. It's some of the components that I'm leary of. For me to have more confidence in it I'd want to get higher quality hand-built wheels, a thru-axle trail-worthy fork (a la Pike), heavier-duty cranks, and more powerful brakes. With the $ I'd drop on those upgrades I'm most of the way to a strong, funtional, but not-blinged out Motolite. Plus, I definitely want a dualie to take alleviate some of the abuse my body takes.

    Turner RFX: The shock leverage ratio (3:1) is a little high for a guy my size and I'd be concerned about the shocks performance and durability. Otherwise, it's a good option (and I am considering the 5 Pack, Turners RFX/Spot combo).

    The Supermoto: From an abuse standpoint, I'm quite sure the 'moto could handle anything that I dish out. It's the geometry that concerns me a little, in terms of general trail riding. Its got a 67* head angle with a 150mm fork. In my area there is a decent amount of climbing and I'm just concerned that even with an adjustable travel fork that it will be a big struggle to ascend on. This aspect of this bike concerns me more than the heavier weight of the frame with a coil shock.

    I am excited to be able to get to ride these bikes on real, local trails so I can stop speculating and start deciding.

    Thanks for your input.

    Patrick

  12. #12
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,755
    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC
    Yeah, it does.
    Turner RFX: The shock leverage ratio (3:1) is a little high for a guy my size and I'd be concerned about the shocks performance and durability. Otherwise, it's a good option (and I am considering the 5 Pack, Turners RFX/Spot combo).
    Thanks for your input.

    Patrick
    I totally relate- if I could tweak the design on the motolite, really the only thing I would change is I would go to a thicker butted head tube. I think the rear and and the rest of the front triangle could handle a 6" fork, and the geometry would be perfect. That would open up our fork selection to include adjustable 6" forks that currently might be a stretch for the motolite, especially fo rlighter riders.

    The 5-pack is really a cool bike- I love my RFX. In 5" mode, it could handle serious true FR trails (I took it to the northshore in 5+5" mode and was quite happy), yet still had geometry that worked great for XC trail riding. Like a motolite with lots of extra beef. in 5" mode the frame is 2.5:1, I ran a #100 lighter spring than with the 6" rockers.

    Another bike that might be worth considering is the Cove Hustler....

  13. #13
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,644
    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC
    Yeah, it does.

    The Supermoto: From an abuse standpoint, I'm quite sure the 'moto could handle anything that I dish out. It's the geometry that concerns me a little, in terms of general trail riding. Its got a 67* head angle with a 150mm fork. In my area there is a decent amount of climbing and I'm just concerned that even with an adjustable travel fork that it will be a big struggle to ascend on. This aspect of this bike concerns me more than the heavier weight of the frame with a coil shock.

    Thanks for your input.

    Patrick
    Pike with U-Turn?
    Zoke's are taller for the same travel.

    That would drive your geometry to acceptable levels for pedaling (we have a lot of that crap around here too.. )

    Just check for BB height issues.

    Random thoughts here...
    Check my Site

  14. #14
    the 36 year old grom
    Reputation: demo_slug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC

    The Supermoto: From an abuse standpoint, I'm quite sure the 'moto could handle anything that I dish out. It's the geometry that concerns me a little, in terms of general trail riding. Its got a 67* head angle with a 150mm fork.
    XL supermoto. personaly I thought that the 67* HA is wishfull thinking. I think it is steeper. maybe they are factoring in some 1.5 headset spacer thingy. I had to put a 40 on mine to get it raked out... and its still way steep compared to a demo9 or any "DH" race bike.

    when I had a travel adjustible fork ( sherman firefly) the SM climbed as good as my ML.

    an XL SM with a 36 tallas 2 and you would be set for anything.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,675
    If I were building a burly trail bike Motolite... I'd go coil shock and Coil Pike and some decently burly wheels and go just about anywhere. That sounds like the perfect do anything bike. Of course I'm disregarding the clydesdale issue and whether you should get a Super Moto or not..... but really if you're not going to be hucking 6 footers all day the ML built like this would handle just about anything even for a big guy.


    What about waiting for the new Moto-X, Quasi-Moto or whatever they're going to call the new 6inch trail bike? I think that's hot.

  16. #16
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    I totally relate- if I could tweak the design on the motolite, really the only thing I would change is I would go to a thicker butted head tube. I think the rear and and the rest of the front triangle could handle a 6" fork, and the geometry would be perfect. That would open up our fork selection to include adjustable 6" forks that currently might be a stretch for the motolite, especially fo rlighter riders.
    Maybe we're really just talking about the upcoming 6" trail bike from Titus, what's it called? The "Bushwacker Sixty" or something.

    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    The 5-pack is really a cool bike- I love my RFX. In 5" mode, it could handle serious true FR trails (I took it to the northshore in 5+5" mode and was quite happy), yet still had geometry that worked great for XC trail riding.
    That's cool, I'd like this bike to be able to handle that type of riding (you know...for when my skills actually improve to the point where I can do that type of riding ).

    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    Another bike that might be worth considering is the Cove Hustler....
    I'd be interested in trying it out. I don't think I'm going to make it up to the NS before I buy this bike, though.

    I am hoping to take a trip out to Whistler after I get this bike. The wife has already, sort-of, semi-agreed to a Whistler vacation, lured by the offer of a week at the Four Seasons. Although I don't know what kind of $ is going to be left for any kind of vacation after this bike purchase.

    Patrick

  17. #17
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    XL supermoto. personaly I thought that the 67* HA is wishfull thinking. I think it is steeper. maybe they are factoring in some 1.5 headset spacer thingy. I had to put a 40 on mine to get it raked out... and its still way steep compared to a demo9 or any "DH" race bike.
    Interesting. Have you ever measured the HA to get a real-world number?

    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    when I had a travel adjustible fork ( sherman firefly) the SM climbed as good as my ML.
    Even more interesting. Climbed as good...but what? I sense there's a but there. Heavier, obviously. Geometry makes it potentially less "flickable" on the trail. Although, the WB on the Supermoto isn't all that long, so it probable is pretty mobile. Cool.

    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    an XL SM with a 36 tallas 2 and you would be set for anything.
    XL would be huge. I'm a big boy, but not very tall (not really short either...5' 11"). I'm thinking medium, because I'd like a shorter cockpit.

    36 Talas: Air scares me. Maybe I shouldn't be frightened, but I am. If with a solid, non-budget build I'm thinking more like a Lyrik coil U-turn. Or if I go all out then I'd get the coil U-turn Totem.

    Thanks for your input.

    Patrick

  18. #18
    the 36 year old grom
    Reputation: demo_slug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC
    Interesting. Have you ever measured the HA to get a real-world number?



    Even more interesting. Climbed as good...but what? I sense there's a but there. Heavier, obviously. Geometry makes it potentially less "flickable" on the trail. Although, the WB on the Supermoto isn't all that long, so it probable is pretty mobile. Cool.



    XL would be huge. I'm a big boy, but not very tall (not really short either...5' 11"). I'm thinking medium, because I'd like a shorter cockpit.

    36 Talas: Air scares me. Maybe I shouldn't be frightened, but I am. If with a solid, non-budget build I'm thinking more like a Lyrik coil U-turn. Or if I go all out then I'd get the coil U-turn Totem.

    Thanks for your input.

    Patrick
    I thought I read you were 6'2".... sorry my bad.

    no medium for you.

    I'm 6' even...... on the dot, measured at the doctor office with no shoes or socks... I meet lots of guys that are 2 inchs shorter then me and claim to be 6 foot. they get mad at me when I say I'm 6 foot even........

    the supermoto already comes with the correct FR geometry. no need to go down a size.

    the large SM is almost too small for me. I have to run atleast a 90mm stem so that I can sprint out of the sadle climb without my knee pads hitting my handle bars. nothing wrong with a 90mm stem, but it does look wierd with a 40.

    large is better>>>>>>>>

    you actually get 4-5 inches of seat post adjustment room on the large. the medium you only get 3-4 inches to play with. I'm a seat post droper... 4 inches is the most you'll get with a Gravity dropper post and I already get that. and 4-5 inches works for me.


    SM geometery>>>>>>>>>

    with a 5 inch fox fork they quoted the SM in 2005 at a 70 HA* , MBA tested it and called it mistake proof. including its ablity to climb. with a 5 inch fork the SM climbs like a goat.


    the only but is the weight of my agro trail bike build and my love of 1400g tires. and the ML pedals more snappy.

    when I had the firefly locked down the supermoto had better geomtry for climbing then my ML ( a got a vanilla on the front of my ML). I was more likly to clean a section on my SM. but I would be cashed afterwords due to the 40 pounds of bike and the DH tires.

  19. #19
    the 36 year old grom
    Reputation: demo_slug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,726
    this is day one with my supermoto. poor little zoke. that was the end of 30mm stantions for me. and zokes.



    first day with the firefly, huge improvment!


    2 busted fireflys later manitou sent me a travis. huge improvement!


    now I got a fox40. even better!!!.


    but take a look. the geometry isn't very slack with the smaller forks.

  20. #20
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Warp
    Pike with U-Turn?
    Zoke's are taller for the same travel.
    Or something like the RS Lyrik (I seem to be a little stuck on that fork, don't I?). I like the idea of thicker than 32mm stanchions and the ability to dial down to 115mm travel would probably work out OK for climbing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warp
    That would drive your geometry to acceptable levels for pedaling (we have a lot of that crap around here too.. )
    The only thing I don't like is that if I have to run the fork at ~130-140mm travel to get the geometry I desire (specifically HA) for general trail riding then the front end and rear end will have quite different amounts of travel (rear has "170mm of earth leveling travel that will make 5 foot drops feel like your rolling out of your driveway" according to Titus). I just wonder if the bike will feel unbalanced in some way because of that.

    IOW, when paired with the 170mm of rear travel is 130-140mm of fork travel enough to "level the earth"?


    Quote Originally Posted by Warp
    Just check for BB height issues.
    BB height with Fox 36 Talas is 14.65". I'd be willing to bet that it's still around or above 14" even with 130mm travel. Just a guess, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warp
    Random thoughts here...
    Good ones, thanks.

    Patrick

  21. #21
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    no medium for you.
    Hmmm. That's the size that the boys at Speedgoat indicated was "reserved" for me at the upcoming Titus demo. Their choice, not mine. They just asked for my height and then assigned the bike. I agree with them, though, and I explain why below.

    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    I'm 6' even...... on the dot, measured at the doctor office with no shoes or socks... I meet lots of guys that are 2 inchs shorter then me and claim to be 6 foot. they get mad at me when I say I'm 6 foot even........
    I hear ya'. There are so many people (well, just guys really) that say they are taller than 6' that are shorter than me. When I point this fact out and I share my height with them they get very upset. It's an ego thing, I think. I don't understand. Well, I guess I do understand a little because I'm actually not 5' 11", I'm 5' 10.75". So I "round up" also.

    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    the supermoto already comes with the correct FR geometry. no need to go down a size.
    I see your point. But here's my dilemma. Going a bit OT here:

    The HT I currently ride has a 20" ST and a 24" Effective TT. The ST is fine, although standover is minimal, 32" and I have an inseam of ~33.5"; it hasn't been an issue yet.

    The TT is too long. I feel stretched out. I get hand pain. In general, the bike just feels too big. To help remedy this I installed some "comfort" grips and a 90mm stem with a 16* rise (original stem was 110mm with 12* rise). The stem is sitting as high on the (un-cut) steerer of my Reba fork as it can go to give me a more upright posture. It's helped a little, but not a lot. Maybe a shorter stem (75mm, or even 60mm) would be better. But I digress.

    Back to the Supermoto. The TT of the L is 23.75". That's only .25" less than my current TT. My feeling is that I need to go with a .5" to 1" shorter TT, in addition to running a shorter length stem in order to get the cockpit feel I'm looking for. That's why I feel the Medium 'moto (with its 23.25" TT) would be a better fit. The 18.5" ST length should be fine as well. Or would the large with an even shorter (60, 50 or even 30mm) stem give the same effect? I don't know.

    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    large is better>>>>>>>>

    you actually get 4-5 inches of seat post adjustment room on the large. the medium you only get 3-4 inches to play with. I'm a seat post droper... 4 inches is the most you'll get with a Gravity dropper post and I already get that. and 4-5 inches works for me.
    I see your point here. But it muddies the water further.


    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    SM geometery>>>>>>>>>

    with a 5 inch fox fork they quoted the SM in 2005 at a 70 HA* , MBA tested it and called it mistake proof. including its ablity to climb. with a 5 inch fork the SM climbs like a goat.
    Was that with the shorter travel rockers as well? Just curious.


    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    the only but is the weight of my agro trail bike build and my love of 1400g tires. and the ML pedals more snappy.
    I'm on 940g tires (plus tubes..you're running tubeless IIRC) and I thought they were heavy for a trail tire.

    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    when I had the firefly locked down the supermoto had better geomtry for climbing then my ML ( a got a vanilla on the front of my ML). I was more likly to clean a section on my SM. but I would be cashed afterwords due to the 40 pounds of bike and the DH tires.
    So better technical climbing ability, but heavier and possibly less efficient and therefore more tiring. Did I interpret that correctly?

    Patrick
    Last edited by PCinSC; 06-22-2006 at 06:37 PM.

  22. #22
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by blackagness
    I found another one, but I"ve never posted a link so?
    Open the post you would like to link to in a separate browser window (or tab if using Firefox). Right mouse click on the address bar of that window and then left click "copy".

    Switch back to the browser window with the "reply to thread". Above the text box of the reply to thread window left click on the "insert link" button. It looks like a little globe with a chain link underneath it.

    Right click in the text space that appears then scroll down and left click "paste". Left click OK. A big long mess of brackets and web addresses should appear in the text box. The text of the post or thread address that you linked to will be highlighted. If you just start typing you can rename the link. If you don't want to rename it just hit preview post and see if it worked. Your link will appear underlined and should be active (IOW, if you click on it that webpage opens) in the preview. If all is good then submit reply.

  23. #23
    thats right living legend
    Reputation: blackagness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,378

    Heres The Pic Anyway...

    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC
    Open the post you would like to link to in a separate browser window (or tab if using Firefox). Right mouse click on the address bar of that window and then left click "copy".

    Switch back to the browser window with the "reply to thread". Above the text box of the reply to thread window left click on the "insert link" button. It looks like a little globe with a chain link underneath it.

    Right click in the text space that appears then scroll down and left click "paste". Left click OK. A big long mess of brackets and web addresses should appear in the text box. The text of the post or thread address that you linked to will be highlighted. If you just start typing you can rename the link. If you don't want to rename it just hit preview post and see if it worked. Your link will appear underlined and should be active (IOW, if you click on it that webpage opens) in the preview. If all is good then submit reply.


    This is pro the first one I ever saw.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  24. #24
    long standing member
    Reputation: PCinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by blackagness
    Heres The Pic Anyway...
    Pics are good. That thing sure does look pretty beefy with the big coil shock mounted at the rear. Oh man, that sounded pretty bad.

    Thanks for posting.

    Patrick

  25. #25
    the 36 year old grom
    Reputation: demo_slug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by PCinSC


    The HT I currently ride has a 20" ST and a 24" Effective TT. The ST is fine, although standover is minimal, 32" and I have an inseam of ~33.5"; it hasn't been an issue yet.

    The TT is too long. I feel stretched out. I get hand pain. In general, the bike just feels too big. To help remedy this I installed some "comfort" grips and a 90mm stem with a 16* rise (original stem was 110mm with 12* rise). The stem is sitting as high on the (un-cut) steerer of my Reba fork as it can go to give me a more upright posture. It's helped a little, but not a lot. Maybe a shorter stem (75mm, or even 60mm) would be better. But I digress.
    short travel rockers don't change the geometry. but yeah the test was with the 5.7'' RP3 linkage. which might have a little too much leverage ratio for a big guy.

    thats a weird set up. but my advice sucks because I keep flip flopping on my set up.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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