Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    61

    More proof that Turners are ahead of the times?

    Like some of you, I spend more time than I should on mtbr -- reading about new trends, drooling over new (and outrageously priced) bikes.

    One of the newer bike trends seems to be trail bikes with 125mm rear travel and a 140mm fork with a not too slack, not too steep 67 degree HA. Bikes like the new Transition Scout and Yeti SB5. On paper, these bikes seem like they would be perfect for my riding style and the terrain on my home trails (he says, while wiping the drool from his mouth).

    But then I got to thinking. My 10 year old HL 5-Spot (still my primary ride -- thank goodness I had the foresight to buy a durable bike that would actually last more than 3-5 years) has 125mm rear travel. And several years ago, when it was time to replace the fork I got a 150mm Revelation (My plan was to reduce the travel to 140mm but since it didn't change the axle-to-crown, I figured why bother). So, out of curiosity, I went an measured the HA and.....yep! Approximately 67 degrees.

    Which may explain why after every time I ride, I find myself asking "why was it you think you needed a new bike again?"

    It also brings up the question: Is Dave really this far ahead of his time? Or, as Ancient Alien theorists might propose: Is he in communication with advanced mountain biking beings from another world?

    Yeah, ok. Enough time wasted. Back to work....

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wilks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,726
    If your HL spot had a way steeper seat tube angle with said fork and longer reach plus lower BB as well as being made from plastic it would be ahead of its time. Not bashing just saying. I've owned 5 Turner frames and my son loves his DW Spot.

  3. #3
    roots, rocks, rhythm
    Reputation: Dawgprimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    545
    I agree with you KCogar!
    That is why I am still riding my 08' RFX (and my 00' RFX) and love riding it with no desire for a new frame.
    I am sure the new ones are better but just a bit better.
    The original design of the 5 spot was one of the best designs to come out and was as you say a head of its time. IMHO.
    It is durable, easy to maintain and it works!
    Now I need a KK!! As long as it is not going to be super $$!!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    339
    King Khan seems to be continuing the trend of being ahead of the times, but they missed the boat on the Nomad/Freeride/new-RFX type of bike big time. I guess you can't catch every wave...

  5. #5
    on the flats
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    330
    Now they are runnin a deal for $1000 off xt build bikes. Wish I woulda known this was commin. $3999 is an amazing deal!
    i only ride for fun.

  6. #6
    The Bubble Wrap Hysteria
    Reputation: mtnbiker4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,248
    Quote Originally Posted by David R View Post
    King Khan seems to be continuing the trend of being ahead of the times, but they missed the boat on the Nomad/Freeride/new-RFX type of bike big time. I guess you can't catch every wave...
    They sure did miss that 150mm - 160mm travel wave. But to there credit, I am not sure they could have captured it without a carbon frame which is much more costly from a development stand point then aluminum.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    150
    I got a garage full of Turners and a couple of Yeti's I got recently (SB66C and a ARCc)
    I love the Turners still, but I am absolutely fanatical about the Longer TT on the Yeti SB66.
    The Switch works pretty damn well , maybe not as well climbing as the DW but decent in the saddle. On DH the Yeti is a bit better, IMO, but that could be the Push tune I did for the shock.
    That said the simplicity of Turners designs and grease ports and quality of details is simply awesome.
    I got into many heated discussions with Dave and others over the 27.5 wheel thing and stick to my premise that 26/27.5 are not different enough to bother with in a purchasing decision other than the industry is forcing everyone to migrate to 27.5. But my experience with my HT Yeti 29er (ARCc) makes me Jonesing for a 29er replacement for my SB66c.
    I don't need 6" of travel for what I do, really. But the SB66c geo rocks, with the only negative being the front end wanders a bit when I get climbing steeper stuff.

    I am hoping DT's next bike is a AM 29er with slacker HTA with a tapered HT , Burner length TT and nice steep STA in aluminum or Carbon either way, it would be my next bike.

  8. #8
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,586
    Lower, slacker, and longer would be good.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,308
    As much as I love the idea of the super long TT of the future,,, ie, 24.5" for a medium etc, I REALLY worry that most will not be able ride them, around corners at least. Last summer I bought a Syntace 44mm force stem and rode a large Burner with flat bar, the reach was the same as my medium and longer stem. With the long front it straightlined like a scalded cat, but in tight turns my already sketchy skill level was unable to commit to the front wheel in the skid rut on the inside and drift the rear wheel on the outside. Moderate turns were faster if rough for sure. Nimble? Flickable? Playful? No, more stable rock eating speedster that req'd a serious commitment to the put head over front axle to smear the rear tire. (Bob Hannah!) I hear from riders EVERY DAY that are on current TT's and running 50-60s already, and are freaked about getting 'stretched out', as in between sizes and going Up a size and Down a stem length. Check out the video when Mondraker released the Forward geo: Fabien can float the rear wheel to the outer edge of the trail a LOT, by doing this he is able to get the long bike around a tighter turn. All super riders can do this, but alas, most of them get paid to ride and don't buy Turner Bikes so I wonder... a long growing trend and one that is not going away is that many enduro / trail riders don't want ANY forward bend to the spine. Most of the aggressive riders on Turner Bikes already run 50s and 60s and to add 20-25mm more reach without any other changes means that the spine will be pulled forward.. In contrast look at the SC line, very short across the board, seems to have about $40+ million a year in happy customers lining up and with a modern HA, the wheelbases are just enough to keep most of the riders behind the front wheel most of the time haha

    things that rattle thru my head when riding....

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,865
    It's just like anything- people catch the crest of a wave and think it's going to keep going in that same direction forever. Longer top tubes, lower bottom brackets, slacker head tube angles- these were all sorely lacking five or six years ago. Most manufacturers have adequately addressed these by now, but still some people drone on about "longer, lower, slacker", as if a point of diminishing returns could never be reached.
    A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    74
    My '08 RFX in XXL is long enough. Not low and not slack, but I don't miss it at all as it has just enough stack for my tall body. Otherwise I surely would get trouble with my back. I always wonder how it works with those "modern" low front ends. Wouldn't people get pain in their back or neck or wouldn't they make full days in the saddle. Also stability at speed or steep downhills is good enough for me, while it can also still take a corner. More slackness is not on my wishlist. Probably it is indeed ahead of its time.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wilks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,726

    More proof that Turners are ahead of the times?

    Fair points Dave - so how about a 27.5 150 or 160mm frame - same top tube lengths as the flux with a 13.4 BB and 66 or 66.5 head tube angle made of plastic ? Or don't you want to have a direct competitor to the Mach 6 or HD3 crowd ? And if you don't just tell us and we'll stop dreaming.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,308
    We aborted the last protos due to the Top tubes being too short!! Now it's OK to have Burner length top tubes?! Before that, the previous RFX project was scrapped due to the death of 26" wheels. Argh..

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    150
    I think their are limits. The Burner geo is pretty spot on. If DT can continue that idea in a 29er and make it burly enough to use the 34 or a 36 Fox 29er fork then I think the target is met.
    On my XL Yeti SB66c. The TT length 25.9 in is on the money with a 65mm stem. If I had to nitpick I would say the HT length could be taller as I run too many spacers and a 35mm riser bar to get it up a bit.

    The key to specifying longer TT's is getting the standover low enough so you can get a smaller than typical frame to adjust backwards from previous shorter TT designs.
    I think Turner's bell crank/upper link system of activating the shock is limiting the standover in their frame designs. I wonder if DT agrees?

    I know that I would be riding a 2XL Turner frame in past designs if the standover was lower. This issue led me to trying the Yeti to get off of the 100-120mm stem lengths on the XL Turners I have had(5 spots) . The short 50-70mm stems and slack HTA really make a difference on decents.

    Maybe Dave needs to stop designing for humans and focusing on bikes for us Gorillas?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wilks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,726

    More proof that Turners are ahead of the times?

    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    We aborted the last protos due to the Top tubes being too short!! Now it's OK to have Burner length top tubes?! Before that, the previous RFX project was scrapped due to the death of 26" wheels. Argh..
    Good use of deflection Dave and way to not answer the question

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: freebiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    657
    So the new rfx will have 27.5 wheels? Bichin

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bullit_cn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,600
    There would be a chance that the 27.5RFX will be scrap because the new KK is so much fun to ride...
    When trails gets tougher, Just stand up and deliver.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gmats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,289
    This is a great thread. I know this to be true because even though I own a great 27.5 Flux, I still ride my 2008 5 Spot modified with a HL rear and 27.5 front with a HA of 68 degrees. Love it, still a super fun tight trail bike.

  19. #19
    Outcast
    Reputation: Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,476
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    We aborted the last protos due to the Top tubes being too short!! Now it's OK to have Burner length top tubes?! Before that, the previous RFX project was scrapped due to the death of 26" wheels. Argh..
    Ha Ha Ha! Dave, You have just come up with yet another excuse why you won't make a new RFX.
    It's okay to just come out and say you don't WANT TO, ever, ever again. Really. It's your company, do what you want.
    ****

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,308
    Oh, I WANT to, but the challenges for a company this size is immense... Maybe we should do a Kickstarter!!

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gmats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,289
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    Oh, I WANT to, but the challenges for a company this size is immense... Maybe we should do a Kickstarter!!
    I've been there (to Turner). I remember Dave saying

    1) He spent $1000's to do the RFX prototypes and the availability of the 27.5 components made the RFX not worth it. Not for a frame that was going to only sell to a few enthusiasts.

    2) He had loads of 5 Spots sitting there on the racks and said he hadn't sold any in the last bunch-o-months. He didn't say 26" was dead but said he rode the 27.5 and it was superior compared to the 26".

    3) So he said unless people are wanting to buy the 26" stuff, it was tough to put more $$ into development of the RFX and was seeing the severe decline of the Spot.

    Dave, I hope I didn't speak for you. Just wanting to state info from what I heard and see out there.

    Again, thanks for your time when I visited last year as well as your incredible insight.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wilks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,726
    We're after a 27.5 RFX type bike not 26

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    555
    I don't mean to derail the discussion but could you put me at ease regarding the 25.9 TT and fitting your 6'3" body - do you have the saddle moved forward as far as possible to balance out the short chain stays and get weight over the front? The 6.2" HT is massive relative to industry standards so I assume you like a more upright position as I do with all the spacers and riser bars? Personally, I don't like low either because of pedal strikes and don't believe the jive about learning how to pedal - tell that to somebody riding through rocks everyday!

    Quote Originally Posted by chasejj View Post
    On my XL Yeti SB66c. The TT length 25.9 in is on the money with a 65mm stem. If I had to nitpick I would say the HT length could be taller as I run too many spacers and a 35mm riser bar to get it up a bit.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    I don't mean to derail the discussion but could you put me at ease regarding the 25.9 TT and fitting your 6'3" body - do you have the saddle moved forward as far as possible to balance out the short chain stays and get weight over the front? The 6.2" HT is massive relative to industry standards so I assume you like a more upright position as I do with all the spacers and riser bars? Personally, I don't like low either because of pedal strikes and don't believe the jive about learning how to pedal - tell that to somebody riding through rocks everyday!
    Saddle is midway on the rails. I have an uncut steerer with about 40mm of spacers and a 30mm riser bar. I was riding a 10mm riser with 30mm in spacers and found it to be too low for comfort on all but steep climbing. I have a longer upper body and arms with shorter legs. Envision a gorilla in lycra.

    That said. I have always needed longer TT on every bike to stretch out the lower back. It just feels correct.

    When Dave announces he will build custom bikes I will be first in line.

  25. #25
    Pixie Dust Addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,312
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    Oh, I WANT to, but the challenges for a company this size is immense... Maybe we should do a Kickstarter!!
    This is a Kickstarter I could get behind. Though I'm thinking along the lines of a next generation Sultan with a little more travel, and shorter chainstays.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. how many turners are out there.
    By shupack in forum Turner
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 11-01-2014, 10:24 AM
  2. A Tale Of Two Turners
    By Travis Bickle in forum Turner
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-13-2014, 08:44 AM
  3. Are Turners fun?
    By Mr. 68 Hundred in forum Turner
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-29-2013, 07:58 AM
  4. Value of Dated Turners
    By karatemonkey in forum Turner
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-01-2012, 12:55 PM
  5. Two XL Turners for you
    By morganfletcher in forum Turner
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-06-2011, 04:57 PM

Posting Permissions

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