Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: new Flux!

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,690

    new Flux!

    Well I picked my flux up just before Turner left for interbike, I traded in an old XCE and it took me this long to get the wheel build done and the bike assembled; well worth the wait.

    Specs:
    Frame: small raw w Kashima shock
    Fork: old 26" float 120
    Hubs: 12-14 year old King universal
    Rims: Velocity blunt 27.5
    Tires: 2.25 Schwalbe Rocket Ron front and Racing Ralph rear with tubes
    Cranks: Octolink XT run 3x9
    Trans: Sram casset, XO rear, XT front der sram chain/casset, X9 shift
    Post: Thompson
    Brakes: Hayes prime pro with 2 pc rotors
    Bar: titec hi rise carbon
    Stem: hope 50x25 deg
    seat: WTB
    weight: 27 lb 5 oz with steel casset body and no weight savings attempted.

    I took it out on a little 10 mile loop I've done on 5 bikes in the last year, I matched my best time on the first ride even though I had some assembly issues (my fault). The bike didn't feel very easy to pedal on the climbs but felt very fast on the flats and gradual climbs. Despite having less travel and a steeper head angle than any bike I've owned in a decade it handled very well bombing the fireroads and and on the few tight singletrack corners on this loop. I felt some odd things in the handling department but upon investigation the 12mm conversion axle wasn't tightened properly. so far very impressed with the way it rides.
    I do need to talk to Turner about setting up the rear brake because I'm having an issue getting it to run drag free without the 2 peace rivets on the rear rotor rubbing the post mount barrel nuts.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails new Flux!-flux.jpg  


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gmats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,169
    I just got back from Kernville where I got to rip it up with a bunch of friends. The Flux is an excellent trail bike. Loved it. Today I'll be driving back down to Turner to return the demo, those guys down there are awesome!!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,397
    Quote Originally Posted by slowrider View Post
    Fork: old 26" float 120
    Isn't that a 20mm axle to crown difference than what the frame is designed for? Are you using a tall baseplate or anything to compensate?
    Killing it with close inspection.

  4. #4
    Crazed Country Rebel
    Reputation: iheartbicycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,095
    Quote Originally Posted by FireLikeIYA View Post
    Isn't that a 20mm axle to crown difference than what the frame is designed for? Are you using a tall baseplate or anything to compensate?
    Seems like axle to crown may be an aged tool - with the changing set ups - wheels sizes and such.

    Maybe we should just talk about "ground to crown" - since this ignores changes in wheels sizes, forks and whatnot - and yet gives us exactly what we are looking for - head tube angle.
    Stupid, but sometimes witty. Occasionally brilliant. Slow and fat though.

    Specialized sucks dong

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,690
    At first I just ran the fork with the stock lower race which steepened the head angle to about 70.5 deg, which is far steeper than I'm use to. For the last 30 miles I've been running a + 5mm lower bearing race, hard to notice the difference really but I like it a little better, even if it's just a placibo effect.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: marinjp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    216
    Slowrider, I am so confused by this build. First, I am guessing that the fork is too short for you to get optimal geometry and ride characteristics. I know that when I drop the talas on my 5 spot the ride quality is significantly diminished and the bike pedals "slow". But, more importantly, that frame is way too small. The amount of post and the amount stack on the steerer indicates a seriously too small frame, what was the reasoning behind this?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,690
    The frame is not too small according to Turners web site. I'm 5'6", which on the Turner size guideline for the Flux is the top of the range for the small and the bottom of the range for the medium, on top of that my legs are a mear 27" so if anyone who is 5"6" can use a small Flux it's me!, my short legs require the lowest standover available. I've been riding mountain bikes for 20 years and I'm usually on the border between sizes, in the past I allways chose the larger size, that worked out fine until about the time I turned 40 when ended up with a sore back after about a mile climb. I attempted to adapt these frames with ever shorter, higher rise stems (50mm X 25 deg Hope in the pic) and bars to achieve a more upright and thus comfortable riding position, and that helped extend my climbing endurance.
    Last year I had a sip of the 29r coolaid and had the oppertunity to buy a small Tracer 29 with a 22.5 top tube instead of the 23" I had been trying to adapt to my body type. Dispite the feeling that it was harder to crank up the steep climbs the shorter TT made my back feel much better (if not my legs). I went to an Intense demo and tested the small Tracer 275 with a 22" top tube and it was even better. The Medium Flux top tube is over 23" and it would be stupid to backtrack onto a frame size that hurt me so much. As for the seat post length at the pictured hight the limit line is more than an inch under the top of the seat tube so Thompson and Turner requirements are both satisfied. The fork was chosen for financial reasons ( I own it) and I right or wrong I have run my forks with similar spacing under the stem for 10 years. I may try an old 140 fox Talas for 26" wheels (bacause I own it) which I just removed from another bike in hopes that it will help the geometry while I save my pennies for a dedicated 27.5 fork like a loop.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    351
    I'd have to agree w/marinjp on your frame size. At least from what Im seeing on your picture. Top tube is an important number, buts its only 1 of several that make up how the bike fits and rides. Seat tube angle is VERY important on how the bike pedals, especially uphill. I know I had some back problems with a bike that had too much of a relaxed angle with the seat tube. Plus you gotta get the right fork on that bike! It's a shame you can't try a medium to compare.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,252
    Oh man, if that seat height don't tell us that your legs are long enough for a medium, nothing does. If you want to trade for a medium triangle, strip that thing down and get it back to us, we can use the small as a demo. Based on this, I am immediately changing the web site. I know you have physical issues, but there are shorter stems than you have on that bike which will largely if not completely bridge the difference in TT lengths.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,690
    Thanks for the offer; I'm running a 50mm 25 deg stem, wouldn't the stem have to be a direct mount to make up the top tube difference?

  11. #11
    Crazed Country Rebel
    Reputation: iheartbicycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,095
    Quote Originally Posted by slowrider View Post
    Thanks for the offer; I'm running a 50mm 25 deg stem, wouldn't the stem have to be a direct mount to make up the top tube difference?
    it's a 21 mil difference. The added headtube will also fix your issue with all the spacers.

    you could make up some of the TT difference with a combo of seat placement and stem.

    You could even rock an angle set - slack the thing out and shorten the effective TT and have a ripper.

    But I really think something weird is going on with your fit if you need the bars that high and the TT that short.

    You really gotta get the right fork on there. The added axle to crown is going to lift the bike, forcing you to make other changes to seat angle and such.

    And talk to Dave. He'll give you good advice and obviously wants to help you out.
    Stupid, but sometimes witty. Occasionally brilliant. Slow and fat though.

    Specialized sucks dong

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,690
    Thanks for the advice, I'll be calling Turner in the morning. The sad thing is with my body geometry and back issues I've been most comfortable on the small Intense Tracer 275 with a 22" top tube and a 70 mm X 25 deg stem, and now Turners generouse offer to allow me to trade to the medium Flux with a 23.5 top tube wich is 1.5" longer than the most comfortable bike I've tried. At least it's Turner, with customer service that goes above and beyond so I wont be forced to take a bath in turning the frame in order to get the recommended size. I may need to try one of those funky bars that sweeps back at a 20+ deg angle to shorten the reach. The 30 miles I've done on this build have been back pain free, I sure hope I can find a comfort able set up with this 23.5 TT after not finding one on the 23" TT 03 5 Spot I abandoned when this back issue cropped up.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,786
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    Oh man, if that seat height don't tell us that your legs are long enough for a medium, nothing does. If you want to trade for a medium triangle, strip that thing down and get it back to us, we can use the small as a demo. Based on this, I am immediately changing the web site. I know you have physical issues, but there are shorter stems than you have on that bike which will largely if not completely bridge the difference in TT lengths.
    Instead of changing the web site, why not just start making the frames the correct size?
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,252
    SR, if you are already running a 50mm stem.... no sense in trading for a medium. Good thing these frames have bigger posts than the first gen frames the post will be less flexy. Your set up is unique to your physical issues, so run it. The worst thing that can happen to you is you crack the frame at the ST/TT junction, but I will weld it. The worst thing that can happen to me is you will start a new trend in rider fit and I will have to radically shorten the TT on all the sizes/models. It looks like Whlr is already in line for one of the 'new style' frames, haha.

    DT

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gmats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,169
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    SR, if you are already running a 50mm stem.... no sense in trading for a medium. Good thing these frames have bigger posts than the first gen frames the post will be less flexy. Your set up is unique to your physical issues, so run it. The worst thing that can happen to you is you crack the frame at the ST/TT junction, but I will weld it. The worst thing that can happen to me is you will start a new trend in rider fit and I will have to radically shorten the TT on all the sizes/models. It looks like Whlr is already in line for one of the 'new style' frames, haha.

    DT
    Aloha SR,

    I was just out in CA a few weeks ago and visited the guys down at Turner. The awesome guys there allowed me to demo several bikes over two weeks. The first Flux I had was a medium with a 90 mm stem. I'm 5'-5" and have been riding a small 2007 Spot with 70mm stem for several years now. So the Med was great but a bit stretched out for me with technical trail riding up in Palos Verdes. I swapped the stem for a 60mm and the bike felt much, much better. The 2nd Flux I demoed for almost a week was the small with a 70mm stem. I rode that bike on the weekend up in Kernville. This bike with its shorter travel and larger wheels was as capable as my Spot for technical up and down trail riding. I'll post a full write up some time soon, I got off the plane and have been going nuts with work (in a great way). Just so ya know, the new flux with less travel, larger wheels is lighter than my Spot by about 3lbs (24.5lb) and is just as capable as my 2007 Spot with Horst rear, 27.5 front/26 rear, Magura Thor fork. Thanks again to the guys and especially Dave for all the information, insight and Aloha.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,690
    Thanks for the answer, I wouldn't worry about me starting a new trend, how many short, fat 49 year old guys with bad backs are out shopping mountain bikes?

  17. #17
    Wicketed
    Reputation: swan lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    437

    have you read singletrackworld forums???

    Thanks for the answer, I wouldn't worry about me starting a new trend, how many short, fat 49 year old guys with bad backs are out shopping mountain bikes?
    I get the feeling they're the main demographic

    I know Mr Turner has got a vested interested in making sure the most people are comfortable on his bikes, but what a top bloke for the offers he has made on this thread.
    'I've got a bike, you can ride it if you like. It's got a basket, a bell that rings, and things to make it look good' - Syd B

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SteveF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,419
    There are ways to shorten the reach on a bike if you can't go any shorter on the stem. A bar with more back sweep can shorten your reach by as much as 2-3cm. Say, a 17-degree Salsa bar or something similar....

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,252
    good point Steve, and those bigger sweeps are good for old wrists too.

    Sherwood at Ventana will build custom frames, paint them custom and ship them direct, most of the time in less than a month!

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,690
    True, Turner comes by his rep for good customer service honestly. If DT had told me he had serious structural concerns with my set up I would have had to go with the medium and try to use one of the 20+ degree funky looking bars to moderate the reach. I have installes a 140mm Talas from a 26" bike as a stopgap until I can buy a dedicated 27.5 fork and it's now hitting it's geo number.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SteveF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,419
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    good point Steve, and those bigger sweeps are good for old wrists too.

    Sherwood at Ventana will build custom frames, paint them custom and ship them direct, most of the time in less than a month!
    Heh, yeah-I've been riding 12 degree plus sweep bars for quite a few years now--going back to any single digit swept bar is agony after a mile or three...

    Sold my Bastardo to buy the Burner...I have no regrets.

Similar Threads

  1. Flux 27.5
    By H2oChick in forum Turner
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 07-10-2014, 06:06 AM
  2. Fox Flux $44.98
    By Hanzo90802 in forum Where are the Best Deals?
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-29-2012, 12:04 PM
  3. Welcome to the AM Flux
    By cheb in forum Turner
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 10-03-2011, 05:02 AM
  4. fox flux, $55
    By b-kul in forum Where are the Best Deals?
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-08-2011, 05:00 PM
  5. 130-140 on a Flux?
    By The Hookler in forum Turner
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-11-2011, 06:53 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
  •