Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 71
  1. #26
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,520
    Quote Originally Posted by b_mann View Post
    Turner needs to come up with something truly innovative. For dog's sake, stop nipping at the heels of the "competitors" and get back to tinkering in the garage. It's too bad the dw_Link didn't work out like he expected, but what can you expect when the product doesn't deliver as promised?

    I know you got it in you Dave!

    Signed,

    PROcore

    PS: This is still one of the best machines around; just wish I cold get me hands on a horst link!
    Nice try. I like the Old School sticker! You need to spend some time (not a couple rides) on a DW Turner. Eventually you'll see the light Bryan

  2. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    124
    Yeah, I thought the DW-Link is working out great? That's the main reason I'm considering one. That's coming from a Pivot 429...

  3. #28
    Nothing can stop me now
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by Crash-VR View Post
    Yeah, I thought the DW-Link is working out great? That's the main reason I'm considering one. That's coming from a Pivot 429...
    It is if you actually ride one... Quite well in fact.

    Bobo

  4. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    427
    I haven't ridden any other suspension design that works as well over rough terrain for a shorter travel bike. Having gone back to a 4-bar HL, also a good design, I am looking forward to returning to the dw.

  5. #30
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Excelerator View Post
    With the exception of a very few homers who have superb skills, a four-bar linkage is much more forgiving if you tend to be more aggressive on the DH. Although, the HD would make a damn good compromise. Lets hope that the Spot gets a serious makeover with the inclusion of the 650b burner in the lineup.
    If looking for a 160 bike I bet the HD is killer. I have a good buddy that went from an Uzzi with 180 Totem to the HD Van front and rear and says is its leaps better all around, FWIW.

    The 12 Spot is pretty dialed. At this point I'm not sure what I would change about it. For a 140 bike it doesn't get any stouter or more capable up and down the mtn.

    Those trails in your new vid would be a fun test for it


  6. #31
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Excelerator View Post
    Well, when the when John from X-Fusion stopped in he had his pick. When asked what he preferred, it was the HD hands down. The Spot is a great go-to for the Enduro stuff, but for pure fun factor I'd say I'd say the HD is slightly more compliant.
    I haven't ridden an HD myself but from what I've seen and heard I'm not sure I could argue with that statement

    I haven't heard great things about the HD suspension in the 140 mode - apparently it changes quite a bit. At 160 it's supposed to be practically identical to the Spot but with 20mm more travel.

  7. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nybike1971's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,834
    Quote Originally Posted by LncNuvue View Post
    I haven't ridden an HD myself but from what I've seen and heard I'm not sure I could argue with that statement

    I haven't heard great things about the HD suspension in the 140 mode - apparently it changes quite a bit. At 160 it's supposed to be practically identical to the Spot but with 20mm more travel.
    Apologies for the non-Turner content but I just spent a week riding an Mojo HD 160 in Sedona after being on a Chilcotin for the whole season and if I were to do it again, I would probably chose the HD. The Chilcotin is a much more planted frame and for gravity duty dominates but if you pedal around and to the top before pointing the bike down, the HD is one of the best all-around frames I have had the pleasure to ride. The suspension is supple and responsive, pedal feedback in the granny is a non-issue (unlike the Banshee Spitfire I rode for the past two years), and the geometry is dialed.

    A friend (DBAD here on the boards) has been riding a DW 5 Spot with 650b wheels and swears by it. I'll have to hit him up for a test ride. I am really curious to feel the difference in implementation of the DW link between Ibis and Turner.

  8. #33
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,520
    Quote Originally Posted by nybike1971 View Post
    Apologies for the non-Turner content but I just spent a week riding an Mojo HD 160 in Sedona after being on a Chilcotin for the whole season and if I were to do it again, I would probably chose the HD. The Chilcotin is a much more planted frame and for gravity duty dominates but if you pedal around and to the top before pointing the bike down, the HD is one of the best all-around frames I have had the pleasure to ride. The suspension is supple and responsive, pedal feedback in the granny is a non-issue (unlike the Banshee Spitfire I rode for the past two years), and the geometry is dialed.

    A friend (DBAD here on the boards) has been riding a DW 5 Spot with 650b wheels and swears by it. I'll have to hit him up for a test ride. I am really curious to feel the difference in implementation of the DW link between Ibis and Turner.
    I'm a kool-aide drinking believer in the DW. I rode Double H in Sedona last month and the Spot was absolutely perfect for those trails. My buddy was on an HD and he killed it out there too.

  9. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,312

    face lift

    What SHOULD become of the 5 Spot, obviously the Burner is going to be confusing and in retrospect I should have just called the 140mm x 27.5 bike "5 Spot" and be done with it. But others here gave compelling arguments for a new/old model name and the rest is history. So, not wanting to throw the name away and seeing that there may be some kinda market, albeit shrinking market for a 26 'trail bike' what do ya'll think should happen to 5 Spot because for the life of me I cannot come up with any ideas that are worth pissing a pile of money away on. Maybe I should jack the travel up to 160 and call it the RFX?! haha, sorry couldn't resist.

    DT

  10. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,312

    Wtf?

    So a bike for sanitized (IMBA) trails or a bike for old skul trails.... need to stay focused on which is what?

    Fix the hangers?

    142mm ?

    Old news

  11. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: G-AIR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,400
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    What SHOULD become of the 5 Spot, obviously the Burner is going to be confusing and in retrospect I should have just called the 140mm x 27.5 bike "5 Spot" and be done with it. But others here gave compelling arguments for a new/old model name and the rest is history. So, not wanting to throw the name away and seeing that there may be some kinda market, albeit shrinking market for a 26 'trail bike' what do ya'll think should happen to 5 Spot because for the life of me I cannot come up with any ideas that are worth pissing a pile of money away on. Maybe I should jack the travel up to 160 and call it the RFX?! haha, sorry couldn't resist.

    DT
    Why don't you bump the travel up to 150 and make it your enduro racing/AM bike? It seems like enduro racing is becoming quite popular.

    I have to say the 27.5 wheel size has been thrown at us with little explanation from manufacturers. Is it just another alternative? I understand its suppose to role better than 26", BUT.... (with all other things equalIs) it more trail oriented? is it more DH oriented? Is it better for a light weight trail bike or burly AM bike?

    Where do you see the Burner fit into your line? It looks like it would be great for the sanitized IMBA trails.

    Any chance at making a light weight trail ripper in place of the Flux? Bike like the Blur TrC, ASR-5, Bandit...seem to be doing well. This is where I think 27.5 would be awesome.

  12. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    427
    I wondered about the Burner nomenclature for what seems to be the progression of the 5 Spot. The Burner would be better suited for an xc rocket like a 4" travel carbon 27.5 or 29r. But, aside from marketing considerations, people that ride your bikes don't buy them because of a cool frame names but keep the classics. The progression of wheel sizes and frame material will make some more room.





    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    What SHOULD become of the 5 Spot, obviously the Burner is going to be confusing and in retrospect I should have just called the 140mm x 27.5 bike "5 Spot" and be done with it. But others here gave compelling arguments for a new/old model name and the rest is history. So, not wanting to throw the name away and seeing that there may be some kinda market, albeit shrinking market for a 26 'trail bike' what do ya'll think should happen to 5 Spot because for the life of me I cannot come up with any ideas that are worth pissing a pile of money away on. Maybe I should jack the travel up to 160 and call it the RFX?! haha, sorry couldn't resist.

    DT

  13. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    192
    Here's my take on face lift for Spot.

    Bump the rear travel to 160mm and be able to handle 180/160 fork via replaceable dropout or flip chips on rockers. Should be able to handle 26 or 27.5 tires. Drop the "5" and just call it Spot. We need some adjustability on frame geo.

    Leave the Sultan for XC and Burner for trail and bump the Spot for AM.

    Would be nice to drop that funky elevated chain stay.

  14. #39
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,520
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    What SHOULD become of the 5 Spot, obviously the Burner is going to be confusing and in retrospect I should have just called the 140mm x 27.5 bike "5 Spot" and be done with it. But others here gave compelling arguments for a new/old model name and the rest is history. So, not wanting to throw the name away and seeing that there may be some kinda market, albeit shrinking market for a 26 'trail bike' what do ya'll think should happen to 5 Spot because for the life of me I cannot come up with any ideas that are worth pissing a pile of money away on. Maybe I should jack the travel up to 160 and call it the RFX?! haha, sorry couldn't resist.

    DT
    I'm not all that into e-engineering but the evolution of the Spot is important to me given that I love the bike and it's my do-it-all go to bike. Here are two options to consider:

    Carbon (discontinue aluminum)
    Full Tapered Head Tube
    Travel 150mm
    Head Angle 67* Based on a 535mm A-C (Fox 34 set at 160mm) with EC Headset. This bike isn't designed for a 32mm fork.
    BB Height 13.5" with 2.2 Trail Kings as a baseline
    All other geometry and features to be the same as they currently are.
    Same suspension curve as the Spot

    Or, to get a little more separation from the Burner:

    Carbon (discontinue aluminum)
    Full Tapered Head Tube
    Travel 160mm
    Head Angle 66.5* Based on a 545mm A-C (Fox 36 set at 160mm) with ZS Headset.
    BB Height 13.75" with 2.2 Trail Kings
    All other geometry and features to be the same as they currently are.
    Same suspension curve as the Spot

    This is your rough Trail/Enduro/AM/(FR for those who want to over build it, wouldn't get caught up in pleasing the FR crowd, like you said they don't buy expensive bikes) bike that can compete with the current Spot, Mojo HD and Nomad C. It's not an over built tank like the prototype RFX. It pedals great, can climb all day and descend like a beast over nasty terrain without feeling like a mack truck or dragging pedals down the trail. Keep the cockpit tight to reign in the wheelbase (like the current Spot) which will enhance control in tighter technical terrain. Still baffled by the Burner's TT but need to ride one, might change my tune

  15. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    781
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    What SHOULD become of the 5 Spot, obviously the Burner is going to be confusing and in retrospect I should have just called the 140mm x 27.5 bike "5 Spot" and be done with it. But others here gave compelling arguments for a new/old model name and the rest is history. So, not wanting to throw the name away and seeing that there may be some kinda market, albeit shrinking market for a 26 'trail bike' what do ya'll think should happen to 5 Spot because for the life of me I cannot come up with any ideas that are worth pissing a pile of money away on. Maybe I should jack the travel up to 160 and call it the RFX?! haha, sorry couldn't resist.

    DT
    Just bump the spots travel up 150-160 mm to mach the 150-160mm Fox 34 forks & longer toptubes with internal droperpost ,also a carbon spot to replace my carbon pivot

  16. #41
    ~~~~~~~~
    Reputation: airwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,794
    David, sounds like you should just start building custom bikes...

    The big problem right now is market saturation.

  17. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,865
    Quote Originally Posted by airwreck View Post
    The big problem right now is market saturation.
    Are you referring to Turner's extensive lineup of 5-5.5" travel bikes?

    Here's what it needs to look like:
    -100mm carbon Czar & Sultan for 29"ers
    -120mm carbon Flux & Burner for 650b
    -160mm carbon Spot/RFX & DHR for 26"

    Done.

    Five years ago Turner had six (6!) 26" bikes and the Sultan. No reason the market couldn't support six distinct models spanning three wheel sizes today.
    A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

  18. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    124
    I agree with making the spot a direct competitor for the Mojo HD and the Nomadc. I think that's where the market will continue to support 26" wheels.

  19. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,340
    Seriously? Everyone wants a CF frame??? Doesn't really interest me. I'd rather see incremental improvements on a proven Al bike. Maybe start out with a CF rear tri rather than risking the farm on tooling for an entire bike.
    whatever...

  20. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nybike1971's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,834
    Quote Originally Posted by LncNuvue View Post
    I'm not all that into e-engineering but the evolution of the Spot is important to me given that I love the bike and it's my do-it-all go to bike. Here are two options to consider:

    Carbon (discontinue aluminum)
    Full Tapered Head Tube
    Travel 150mm
    Head Angle 67* Based on a 535mm A-C (Fox 34 set at 160mm) with EC Headset. This bike isn't designed for a 32mm fork.
    BB Height 13.5" with 2.2 Trail Kings as a baseline
    All other geometry and features to be the same as they currently are.
    Same suspension curve as the Spot

    Or, to get a little more separation from the Burner:

    Carbon (discontinue aluminum)
    Full Tapered Head Tube
    Travel 160mm
    Head Angle 66.5* Based on a 545mm A-C (Fox 36 set at 160mm) with ZS Headset.
    BB Height 13.75" with 2.2 Trail Kings
    All other geometry and features to be the same as they currently are.
    Same suspension curve as the Spot

    This is your rough Trail/Enduro/AM/(FR for those who want to over build it, wouldn't get caught up in pleasing the FR crowd, like you said they don't buy expensive bikes) bike that can compete with the current Spot, Mojo HD and Nomad C. It's not an over built tank like the prototype RFX. It pedals great, can climb all day and descend like a beast over nasty terrain without feeling like a mack truck or dragging pedals down the trail. Keep the cockpit tight to reign in the wheelbase (like the current Spot) which will enhance control in tighter technical terrain. Still baffled by the Burner's TT but need to ride one, might change my tune

    I couldn't agree more with what Lance posted.

  21. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,865
    Quote Originally Posted by steadite View Post
    Seriously? Everyone wants a CF frame???
    I used to be 100% against carbon, but right now I could go either way; aluminum should be cheaper, perhaps more impact resistant, and hopefully US made, carbon could be lighter/stiffer/stronger. You have to figure carbon is gradually taking over the market though, and by the time a completely redesigned Spot was out a >$2.5k aluminum 26" bike might not move a whole lot of units.

    Plus, four years of asking/begging/cajoling DT to build a 160mm aluminum bike have gotten us nowhere, might as well try a new angle.
    A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

  22. #47
    dlc
    dlc is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    205
    Would like to see straight tapered head tube across the board for angleset options.

    29er=
    Czar- 100mm carbon race bike (Hifi, tallboy)
    Sultan-130-140mm 67* heavy trail / big guys enduro ( new banshe prime, covert, wfo)

    650b=
    Burner- what it is, sick trail do it all bike
    Eventually a carbon 160mm mojo nomad killer.

    26"=
    SPOT- 150-160mm adjustable geo based around 66*hta, and would be nice to see changeable dropouts to run 650.
    DHR- DH race bike

  23. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    So a bike for sanitized (IMBA) trails or a bike for old skul trails.... need to stay focused on which is what?

    Fix the hangers?

    142mm ?

    Old news
    I wonder if reading this stuff drives you insane, pisses you off, or helps in any way.

  24. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bullit_cn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    what do ya'll think should happen to 5 Spot because for the life of me I cannot come up with any ideas that are worth pissing a pile of money away on. Maybe I should jack the travel up to 160 and call it the RFX?! haha, sorry couldn't resist.

    DT
    wtf!
    are you kidding me?!
    But I think the timing is just right,
    But the time you are ready with that RF*ckinThing,
    I will be ready too
    When trails gets tougher, Just stand up and deliver.

  25. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sugardare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    77

    Spot's Future?

    I'm also not a big carbon fanatic, but it is a nice option to have if you lean that way. Might there be a reason not a whole heckuva lot of people run carbon cranks? They aint cheap for one. And I'd prefer a ding over a chip. My fricken pricey Easton Havoc bar has a really nice scar in them. I've been considering the Burner on rides lately, but then, I can't get over the cost to get into a Burner, and do I really want a larger wheel? I mean, my RFX does everything and more, whereas my Flux, sure it's light and beats the crap out of me, but, well, it's not going anywhere now that it's a collectible.

    As far as the 5 Spot, or Turner Bikes, goes, I would like distinct options. I dig the idea of the 6 bikes over three ranges, totally dig it! (Czar, *****en name). Anyway: 5 Spot: Drop the 5, and bump the travel. Done. The Spot becomes the "little-er" RFX.

    But what's really missing? In all seriousness, a hardtail. Why not??? My SS (26!) is so much fun to ride, and it makes my RFX feel so plushy and smooth.. and that's where I'd get a "twosevenfive" - HT. Flick it, run it, jump it, race it!!. Would this fill the gap of super lightweight XC as well? Possibly so. But on the other hand, so many newcomers to the sport aren't going XC or AM, some are using their bikes for jumping, park, etc. Hmmm... a 275 "Chameleon" style Turner??? Or 29 endurance racer? Why are all these hardtail racers suddenly popping up? Because they're fun and affordable. So, why not? Alloy, even carbon, hardtails are cheaper to build (no licensing, aka more profit), and helluva lot of fun to ride. Dave, fill the gaps where there ARE gaps, not millimeters. It doesn't have to have suspension to be a Turner - just the DT touch. There needs to be a Turner represented at any type of event...even CX.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 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
  •