View Poll Results: Which do you think will happen????

Voters
87. You may not vote on this poll
  • Go overseas. With tapered and X-12.

    24 27.59%
  • Go overseas with Full 1.5 HT and NO X-12

    13 14.94%
  • Stay USA but with Full 1.5 HT No X-12

    25 28.74%
  • Stay Usa with original proto spec and hope it gets built. Someday?!?!

    25 28.74%
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 49
  1. #1
    VooDoo user.
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,394

    Compromise or not (DW RFX)

    Needless to say I'm Bummed to hear about the RFX.
    If DT lowered prices by going overseas and got rid of some of the Foo Foo extras (ie Tapered and X-12) would you still buy one?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Tiles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    413
    who is riding the proto? That's what I'm really wondering about....

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,252

    Rfx

    I will have the RFX back from DW this week. He was playing with it for awhile, low mounted front derailer turned into a mud pile in his neck of the woods. Putting 142 would not increase or decrease the cost to me, tapering would, but this is no bike for tapered HT anyway. The way this bike is slowly, ever so slowly developing, would be to a 1.5 straight HT. On the subject of rear axle the way this bike is so much more GNARCORE than the old ones it would have to be 150mm to be worthy of those of that class, up to 13 riders now. Promising.

    Really, this bike is not in the same league as the old RFX, the old RFX in various forms is closer to the new 5 Spot in rigidity and geometry when similarly equipped in shock and fork. So naturally the proto RFX takes on a more GNARCORE attitude. But, who really needs it, shouldn't the poll be on either a GNARCORE RFX/Highline, or a slacker slightly longer travel RFX/5Spot? If the old RFX was so popular than maybe the that is all that is needed, but pedaling better, and slacker and lower as the current style dictates. yes yes, ISCG and 142x12 for more gnarcore, but not too GNARCORE as that will just make it appealing to the very few in the world.

    DT

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    144
    Yes a slacker longer travel RFX/Spot please.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    985
    Another vote for the slacker slightly longer travel RFX/5Spot

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    928
    Yup slightly longer travel lower Spot/rfx, ideally via rockers and/or the rear end so that it can be retrofitted into the current dw-spot.
    Hear no evil. See no evil. Speak no evil. (Do it !?!)

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wormvine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,163
    Would it be completely offensive to offer US made models and Asian made ones? Sort of like the factory models from other manufacturers. I want the low maintenance features of Turners with the dw-link design but draw the line @ around $1600 for a bike frame. I have to many other hobbies.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: G-AIR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,381
    Slacker and longer Spot please and go overseas while you are at it. I think for a lot of riders the 170 mm rear travel falls into a dead zone. If riders need that much travel why not go for a true DH or FR frame. Most riders don't need that much travel and will stick with the 140-160 mm frames. It turns into a jack of all trades, master of none.

    I think for Turner bikes to make a significant come back you have to drop the price. Overseas seems like the only way to do this. You will never compete with the Nomad, Enduro, Rune, Reign, etc.... with such high prices. If you could produce a Spot/RFX in the 150-160 mm travel range for $1800-$2000 I think it would out sell the Nomad 2:1. Sure a few would ***** and complain for a while but I think most would be happy if the price came down significantly. I personally think SC bikes are way over hyped and expensive for what they are. I don't know how Giant can sell the Reign X frame for $1450 and SC charges $2150 for the Nomad. I guess it is all about marketing.

    Like I was saying before:
    True AM Spot

    I think the market is ready for a slacker/lower Spot. Riders have figured out they really like the slacker geometry, but they don't need over 6" of travel.

    I hope to see Turner Bikes progressing well into the future. Good luck with all future endeavors.

    TG

    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes
    I will have the RFX back from DW this week. He was playing with it for awhile, low mounted front derailer turned into a mud pile in his neck of the woods. Putting 142 would not increase or decrease the cost to me, tapering would, but this is no bike for tapered HT anyway. The way this bike is slowly, ever so slowly developing, would be to a 1.5 straight HT. On the subject of rear axle the way this bike is so much more GNARCORE than the old ones it would have to be 150mm to be worthy of those of that class, up to 13 riders now. Promising.

    Really, this bike is not in the same league as the old RFX, the old RFX in various forms is closer to the new 5 Spot in rigidity and geometry when similarly equipped in shock and fork. So naturally the proto RFX takes on a more GNARCORE attitude. But, who really needs it, shouldn't the poll be on either a GNARCORE RFX/Highline, or a slacker slightly longer travel RFX/5Spot? If the old RFX was so popular than maybe the that is all that is needed, but pedaling better, and slacker and lower as the current style dictates. yes yes, ISCG and 142x12 for more gnarcore, but not too GNARCORE as that will just make it appealing to the very few in the world.

    DT

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    392
    Yep I've said it before, the 5-Spot is getting outdated, so It's time to move on. I like 44mm Headtubes and BB30, slacker geo and more travel.... And make sure that all sizes are coil Friendly.

    But the world still needs an RFX.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    392
    Take a look a this article... Link

    44mm Headtubes looks good and simple, are cheap to made, and now you can use a tapered fork with them.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    536
    this is my point too. people are yelling and screaming that you don't need a 6" bike and it is overkill, etc. so why is it that when i get on 67 degree HT nomad i feel so much safer and it's much easier to go through the chunkier more dangerous stuff? nearly every off fireroad, single track i go to has a place where i need that extra help so i don't "walk a bike".

    Quote Originally Posted by G-AIR
    I think the market is ready for a slacker/lower Spot. Riders have figured out they really like the slacker geometry, but they don't need over 6" of travel.
    TG
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Compromise or not (DW RFX)-983602.jpg  


  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: flipnidaho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,409
    If the old RFX was so popular than maybe the that is all that is needed, but pedaling better, and slacker and lower as the current style dictates.

    Yep...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,252

    HT dims

    Hmm, I think I heard about that 44 thing months ago! That was the brain child of Sean from Vertigo custom frames up in Oregon. Glad CC is taking the ball and running with it, no one else he talked to would listen. But when CC heard about it they knew it was the cool stuff.

    DT

  14. #14
    VooDoo user.
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,394
    I vote for a more RFX/Highline type Bike. Basiclaly what the Proto is minus the Tapered HT.

    The 5spot already covers the Trail/ Am spectrum. We need the next step up.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndyN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,118
    160mm Spot. HA right around 66.5 w/Fox 36. 13.75" BB. Slightly longer WB than the existing 140mm model. Toptube .25" shorter than existing models, and shorten the headtube back to pre-dwspot length.

  16. #16
    _dw
    _dw is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by tald
    Yup slightly longer travel lower Spot/rfx, ideally via rockers and/or the rear end so that it can be retrofitted into the current dw-spot.
    Making different rockers for a dw-link bike will just make it ride worse. Changing travel etc.. requires a complete redesign to get the performance that riders expect.
    dw★link
    Split Pivot
    @daveweagle -Twitter

  17. #17
    _dw
    _dw is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by AndyN
    160mm Spot. HA right around 66.5 w/Fox 36. 13.75" BB. Slightly longer WB than the existing 140mm model. Toptube .25" shorter than existing models, and shorten the headtube back to pre-dwspot length.
    A hair lower BB for me, and I have long arms and like short stems so I will take the long TT, but that sounds like a FUN bike all in all!
    dw★link
    Split Pivot
    @daveweagle -Twitter

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    928
    Drats. Just jumped on the DW spot bandwagon. Maybe I should have waited for the 2011 Spot. Se la vi.
    Hear no evil. See no evil. Speak no evil. (Do it !?!)

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,480
    Lower, slacker 5 spot / RFX. Something that competes directly with the nomad, firebird etc.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndyN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,118
    Quote Originally Posted by _dw
    A hair lower BB for me, and I have long arms and like short stems so I will take the long TT, but that sounds like a FUN bike all in all!
    Don't tell me, tell DT!

  21. #21
    Outcast
    Reputation: Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,436
    Lower, slacker spot; travel can be reduced to under 140mm as long as it's a hot bike. Variable head angle. Something like this:



    I haven't purchased a frame brand new since 1998, this one might break that trend.
    ****

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    674
    67 degree HA, 1.5HT, 160-170mm rear travel, 7 pound aluminum frame. I already have a bike like that but I will buy a Turner RFX if it came out close to those specs and MSRP $2300 or less for the frame.

    I was one of those who asked about a carbon 5spot at the Turner demo last month at Bootleg.

  23. #23
    VooDoo user.
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,394
    Quote Originally Posted by smithrider
    Lower, slacker 5 spot / RFX. Something that competes directly with the nomad, firebird etc.

    Firebird has more travel. How would a 160 Spot be able to keep up.
    I think the original RFX-DW is the Bees Knees!!!

  24. #24
    Outcast
    Reputation: Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,436
    Quote Originally Posted by TIMBERRR
    Firebird has more travel. How would a 160 Spot be able to keep up.
    'cause it's not about how long your johnson is, but how you throw it around.
    I tell you what, you get your bird, I'll ride that banshee shown above, and we'll race down schoolbus. Try to keep up with me.
    ****

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade
    'cause it's not about how long your johnson is, but how you throw it around.
    I tell you what, you get your bird, I'll ride that banshee shown above, and we'll race down schoolbus. Try to keep up with me.
    What he said!

Page 1 of 2 1 2 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
  •