Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    MC MasterShake
    Reputation: woodyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,881

    Quasi-Moto vs. Moto-Lite vs. El Guapo

    I've been riding my Quasi for a couple of years now. While I do love it I can't help to wonder how the Moto-lite would feel and if it could improve my riding. My type of riding is New England gnarl. My home trails are very technical with short steep rollers, drops (most to flat), & other scary stunts. There isn't much flow in these trails so you really appreciate gobs of quality suspension, but from time to time I'll go up north to much smoother flowy trails and I'll get on some long flat climbs. The Quasi is great on the gnarl but terrible on the long haul climbs. My Quasi is built up as a tough "All Mountain" kind of bike (see build below). It probably weighs around 32/33 lbs. I run it as a 6x6 and the front end tends to wander during the tech climbs. During the long climbs it just doesn't feel right at all. Standing up and hammering just feels ackward so I can only do it in short spurts. Sitting and spinning feels like I'm on a beach bike despite cranking the seat up and dropping the fork down. I also feel like I'm hauling up a pile of free weights on this bike.

    I'm wondering if the Moto-lite (or the El Guapo for that matter) would be a better fit for me. I'm satisfied with my tech skills and I'm on the fence on wether I want to push myself to do the bigger scary drops. I definitely want to ride longer and harder than I do now. I find that 3/4 of the way into my ride I stop making climbs and I start taking panty lines because I'm too tired. I know a new frame won't solve my lack of training but it may help a good bit. I also don't like getting spanked by my buddies while do the longer flatter climbs.

    How much weight would I loose by going with a Moto-lite+RP3? How X-country orientated is the Moto-lite? How would the El Guapo compare? Any other comments?

    Bike Setup:
    03/04 Quasi XS
    Vanilla RC shock - PUSH'd
    Marz AM1 (6")
    DT 5.1 w/Hadley's
    Kenda 2.35 f&r
    Easton Carbon Monkey XC
    Thompson stem and seatpost
    Avid Juicy 5's 185 f&r
    Time Atac pedals
    XT everything else

    Rider Setup:
    160lbs w/gear
    5'4"
    Ride dirt 3x a week
    Ride road 2x a week
    Run disc 4x a week

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Braids's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    811
    It sounds like you would be better suited to the Motolite and you've already talked yourself into it anyway.
    I think the new six inch bike from Titus will be more akin to the Quasi you currently have than the motolite. I've seen no published numbers for the new six inch bike so I could be totally wrong but I suspect with six inches of travel it's going to be 69 or less head angle, longer than motolite wheelbase, high bottom braket (it looks higher than 14" in the pics without sag) chainstays are probably going to be longer than the motolite too. The new six inch bike will probably be lighter than your quasi though. I suspect it'll suck for climbing but be fun for technical sections and pointing down and keeping your hands off the brakes. In my mind, it's a CO, AZ, NM, Utah trail bike and not an east coast trail bike.
    Last edited by Braids; 07-18-2006 at 01:50 PM.

  3. #3
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,886
    I own a motolite, used to own a switchblade, in mind they are fairly similar- both are sort of AM/XC bikes, perfect for long technical XC rides, not really meant for FR use.

    Comparing the motolite to the Guapo is interesting- they have the same BB height, 13.75", although thats with a fox 130 fork on the motolite and a fox 160mm fork on "the guap".

    IMHO, 13.75" is pretty low for a 160mm bike (in a good way)- compare that to 14.5" on my Turner RFX. Lower means quick on corners, confidence inspring on steep descents due to low center of gravity, but also less clearance for fallen trees, rock gardens, etc. I always consider "worst case scenario" when looking at BB heights- what will it be when the suspension is bottomed? i.e. 13.75" - 160mm = something like 7.5", then 175mm cranks are like 6.75" long, so if you bottom the guap, your pedal could be less than an inch from the ground.

    Of course people rarely bottom their suspension while pedaling, so ity's a moot point but worth considering. That with the target weight of less than 7lbs say to me that the Guapo will be a long travel trail bike, rather than a light free-ride bike.

    You might consider a Motolite with a longer fork, this will give you a higher BB which might be good if you ride typical slow rocky east coast terrain.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GIG EM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    but also less clearance for fallen trees, rock gardens, etc. I always consider "worst case scenario" when looking at BB heights- what will it be when the suspension is bottomed? i.e. 13.75" - 160mm = something like 7.5", then 175mm cranks are like 6.75" long, so if you bottom the guap, your pedal could be less than an inch from the ground..
    trying to pedal over a log while bottomed out would be a nice trick I'll give $10 for a video of that.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Braids's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    811
    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    Comparing the motolite to the Guapo is interesting- they have the same BB height, 13.75", although thats with a fox 130 fork on the motolite and a fox 160mm fork on "the guap".
    Did I miss a post with numbers?

  6. #6
    MC MasterShake
    Reputation: woodyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,881
    Yeah, you did. This is from Titus Jeff:

    "Hi guys,

    Here's a little bit of info that I can share with you about the new six inch bike. For the record, the name Buck-60 was an internal name of the prototype, designating the amount of travel the bike had. For production you will see this frame with the moniker "El Guapo".

    Frame weight should land about 6.8 lbs. The Prototype weighed 7lbs even with rear shock but with no butted tubes, and none of the machined parts were as light as the production units will be. The bike should very easily be the light weight, high strength leader of the pack. Rear shock will most likely be a custom tuned, large air volume, 2007 FOX RP23, although the design has accommodations for a coil shock as well. Rear travel is 160mm. Angles are 68 head, 71.5 seat angle (with a 160mm travel FOX 36). Chainstay length is 17.25” and BB height is 13.85”. Although it is still a 4-bar Horst-Link bike, this one does not share ANY of the pivot points or the travel path philosophy of our other FS bikes. As with all Titus bikes, the linkage and shock tuning are designed to be the class leader in pedaling efficiency and climbing performance. The new pivot locations and travel path enable the El Guapo to really shine on the high speed, big hit stuff as well.

    We're currently expecting delivery of the first production run around early December, but that is subject to change. That's all I can share for now, but keep your eyes open for more details at Interbike."

  7. #7
    Nightriding rules SuperModerator
    Reputation: crisillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    20,759

    yep

    Quote Originally Posted by Braids
    Did I miss a post with numbers?
    Yeah, here's the post with the numbers

    The new Titus trailbike.

    Cheers,
    Cris

  8. #8
    MC MasterShake
    Reputation: woodyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,881
    I forgot to mention that I broke 3 Loco-Moto's before upgrading to the Quasi. I wonder if the Moto-Lite is any stronger than the Loco-Moto? Another question is will the El Guapo come in XS? The XS Quasi fits me real well, I don't think I'd like a small.

  9. #9
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189
    ...and the answer is





    El Guapo with a LyriK two-step.
    Last edited by dulyebr; 07-18-2006 at 05:28 PM.

  10. #10
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    7,773
    Quote Originally Posted by dulyebr
    ...and the answer is





    El Guapo with a Lyric two-step.
    If the guys breaks Loco Moto one after the other, the El Guapo is definitely the answer.
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    383
    Damn, why didn't you post this thread before I ordered my motolite. Perhaps I should have held on for the new 6 inch trail bike.

    Anyhoo, I will be picking my ML up in a day or two so I guess I'll find out for myself.

    Still looking forward to it though

  12. #12
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    7,773
    Quote Originally Posted by mikey74
    Damn, why didn't you post this thread before I ordered my motolite. Perhaps I should have held on for the new 6 inch trail bike.

    Anyhoo, I will be picking my ML up in a day or two so I guess I'll find out for myself.

    Still looking forward to it though
    Look, the ML is an awesome bike and can take some abuse, but it's by no means a FR bike either. My bike will last for ever since I got neither skills nor cojones to take it to the limit, and at the other end of the spectrum, FM likes to jump with his ML.

    The bike pedals very well, has a great geometry and is really stiff, which all together makes for a great bike. You won't be disappointed, but it's not a hucking bike. Titus got the Supermoto for that.
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  13. #13
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,886
    I think Titus had some durability issues with the loco-moto that were due to MFG defects (my buddy went through this).... maybe not a good indication of whether somebody needs a beefier bike or not.

    I made sure to clear my intended use with Titus before buying the motolite- they assured me the motolite could handle frequent small and mid-size jumps and drops, as well as rough XC. I'm not too worried about it.

    The guapo will be heavier, plusher, probably won't climb quite as well.... the geometry looks good to me so far. But it's a ways off, the bike industry changes quickly, never any point in waiting for next years bikes- better to wait and see IMHO. I am glad I waited a year before buying the motolite! Tire clearance went up and prices went down.

  14. #14
    screamer
    Reputation: budgie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,128
    Taking a look at your build, I'd say that if you are happy with that parts spec, then you'd probably be happy with the ML. If you needed 6.1 rims and a thru-axle fork to ride the way you do (or the way you want to), then you might be into El Guapo territory (guessing, based on what we've heard about the bike). I haven't ridden in New England for a while, but from what I remember I think the ML would be absolutely killer on that terrain. It loves tight, twisty, techy stuff.
    Not quite sure what a tall A-C fork like the AM1 would do to an XS/S motolite geometry, though. It might really chopper it out. You might want to check with Titus on that one....

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Braids's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    811
    Quote Originally Posted by crisillo
    Yeah, here's the post with the numbers

    The new Titus trailbike.

    Cheers,
    Cris
    I remember that post now. I'm so used to numbers being presented in tables instead of paragraphs so it slipped my mind.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    169
    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    I own a motolite, used to own a switchblade, in mind they are fairly similar- both are sort of AM/XC bikes, perfect for long technical XC rides, not really meant for FR use.

    Comparing the motolite to the Guapo is interesting- they have the same BB height, 13.75", although thats with a fox 130 fork on the motolite and a fox 160mm fork on "the guap".

    IMHO, 13.75" is pretty low for a 160mm bike (in a good way)- compare that to 14.5" on my Turner RFX. Lower means quick on corners, confidence inspring on steep descents due to low center of gravity, but also less clearance for fallen trees, rock gardens, etc. I always consider "worst case scenario" when looking at BB heights- what will it be when the suspension is bottomed? i.e. 13.75" - 160mm = something like 7.5", then 175mm cranks are like 6.75" long, so if you bottom the guap, your pedal could be less than an inch from the ground.

    Of course people rarely bottom their suspension while pedaling, so ity's a moot point but worth considering. That with the target weight of less than 7lbs say to me that the Guapo will be a long travel trail bike, rather than a light free-ride bike.

    You might consider a Motolite with a longer fork, this will give you a higher BB which might be good if you ride typical slow rocky east coast terrain.
    Please don't start a flame war on me, but just for the records, supposing that fork is compressed 160mm, head tube angle would be around 60 degrees and bottom bracket should be 160mm * sin(60) lower or 13.75" - 138.6mm = 8.3". If both fork and rear shock are fully compressed, then it would be something like 13.75" - 160mm * sin(68) = 7.9", though.
    Last edited by Tavinho; 07-19-2006 at 07:31 AM.

Posting Permissions

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