Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37

Thread: RFX Placeholder

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cheezwhip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    566

    RFX Placeholder

    I got this in mail this morning from a bicycle retailer:



    Conspicuously absent is?

    In any event, I purchased a Knolly Chilcotin a few years ago as a RFX placeholder (not as a gnarcore huck2flat whip but as a do-it-all trail/shore bike) - in the intervening time, we have seen "Enduro" become a hot category (though really, this is just slapping a label on the kind of riding we do by default IMO) & demand for bikes in the 150-160mm range has risen dramatically.

    Where Turner was well positioned before the turn of "Enduro" explosion with the RFX, I now find the hole in the lineup puzzling (for whatever reason, the Burner seems a little outclassed when compared on paper to the bikes in the above ad).

    This is not a rant but merely an observation (I still have my DHR & old Horst Spot) but my Chili (& maybe Warden in the future) has cemented its place in my lineup I think in large part because there was/is no comparable frame from Turner.

    Is there something in the works from Turner in this category? What would *YOU* like to see from DT & Co. here? Maybe bump up the Burner to 150mm w/ updated Geo?
    ¡Geaux Tigers! - ¡Visca el Barça!


  2. #2
    Committed
    Reputation: 1soulrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,611
    I'd like to see a carbon 160mm bike with 27.5" wheels and low/slack geo.
    Make it stout enough for abuse but light enough to use as a trail bike.
    Steep enough seat tube to be an efficient climber, with stealth routing port.
    Shortish seatstays, roomy front/center & keep the stack height low.
    External cable routing. Zero stack tapered headtube (44/56).

    Free set of enve wheel with each frame purchase.

    All of these things would make me happy.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: richiebankrupt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    67
    My placeholder was a Devinci Dixon. I had the 2006 RFX and rode it for almost 7 years. When it was time to replace it,Turner did not have anything comparable. The dixon was the closest thing to an RFX so I went with that. I even got to switch most of the parts from the RFX to the Dixon. I still have the RFX frame and is still totally ridable. It was/is a great bike. I would love to see a 160 travel aluminum frame that accepts 2.5 26in tires.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    440
    I certainly believe there is room in the line up for a Nomad-type bike more suited to heavy-AM/enduro, doesn't have to be carbon but 155-165 travel and 65-66* HA, just a bit more burly and aggressive than the Burner.

    What ever they do, I must say I'm pretty disappointed that for a brand who pioneered fs mountain bikes an eduro type bike to replace one of thier popular models is less of a priority than a rigid road bike. It's one thing to get ahead of the game with the fat bike thing and I can understand them prioritising the Khan, but I just can't see the attraction in these gravel grinder type bikes....

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kreater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    742
    have a feeling something is on the horizon.....burner ish....more travel, and some trick adjustments. just saying
    Product designer @RSDBikes.com

    "Live dangerously and you live right."
    Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    70
    I'd like to see a RFX aluminum, with 65 to 66 HA, & with 160 to 165 travel😤

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ifouiripilay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    343

    RFX Placeholder

    Not sure where Turners direction is going. I was surprised to see a fat bike come into the line up before an rfx. My 2011 spot was my rfx place holder until I picked up a warden. I still have a highline to bash but would of put my $ down for a updated rfx.
    It's kind of odd to see back in 05, 06 people frankinturner their bikes to accommodate 650b wheels and to now see that the market is nothing but that. Wish turner would came back to the forefront.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,643
    For me it was 03 5 Spot, then I added a 06 RFX, and finally a 11 5 Spot with a 160mm fork took over all FS duties. I just built a Warden a couple of days ago and so far it is the most capable of them all. I wanted more reach than a burner and a little more travel and slacker head angle don't hurt either. I couldn't size up on a burner as the seat tube and stack would have been too much for me. Warden has a short seat tube so even with my stumpy legs I can run a 150mm Reverb. 95mm head tube with an internal lower headset cup keeps the front end within reason for me. The bike feels very natural to me. If Turner had the equivalent with the DW link link a hungry rider on pizza. Carbon or aluminum isn't that important to me as I was looking for durability and crash worthiness.
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    81
    I'm really conflicted about this.. I want a 160/160 turner.. but 140/160 burner works really really well, even down stuff it really shouldnt be used for. A bike inbetween the DHR and the Burner for me atleast would probably just be sitting there.
    That said upping the fork from 150 to 160 on the burner slacked it out enough for me, i also run tokens in my pike.

    Should there be a 160/160 turner alternative, I'd like DT to do what he thinks is best but at the same time make enough room for a vivid air.

  10. #10
    Kiwi that Flew
    Reputation: deanopatoni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    603
    I love these RFX placeholder threads!.

    I'm keen for a 150-160/160 Turner too. I used to think that it "had to be carbon", but I cant really justify its extra $$$ premium over aluminium. Its not like the extra 3/4lb will make much difference to me, nor the theoretical extra stiffness etc. Even the great bike reviewer KRob said in one of his posts that he is over the 'it must be carbon' requirement for future bikes (I respect his opinion as he has ridden all of the bikes on the list above).

    For me it all comes back to "must be a Turner" as the bushings just work so well. I've got two DW Turners and they are almost 'maintenance free' for this la-zy-ass Kiwi living in the UK. As for what DT brings to market we all know its his choice on where he wants to put 'his' money, however I am surprised that Turner have taken so long to get back into the 160mm market....a market that they once ruled. (For the record I would consider a Warden if the Turner never comes).

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    32
    I am surprised that the fat & cross bikes are out before a 150 -160mm +bike,not sure how many of these frames will be sold but I am sure the 150mm travel bike is a large market!

  12. #12
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,643
    For me the Burner is close but needs some tweeking. I hope the Knolly turns out to be as good as a Turner.
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ifouiripilay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    343

    RFX Placeholder

    My thoughts exactly. Dt said he stopped rfx production because of sales and many other factors I'm sure. I don't see fat bike sales surpassing a rfx.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: flipnidaho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,426

    My RFX placeholder....

    Still one of my favorite bikes...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails RFX Placeholder-img_2036.jpg  


  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cheezwhip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    566
    While I would prefer to see a carbon frame, if push came to shove (if I could only pick one) I'd choose carbon wheels over frame every time.

    For me, the impact of carbon wheels is greater than a carbon frame.
    Last edited by cheezwhip; 3 Weeks Ago at 01:50 PM.
    ¡Geaux Tigers! - ¡Visca el Barça!


  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by ifouiripilay View Post
    My thoughts exactly. Dt said he stopped rfx production because of sales and many other factors I'm sure. I don't see fat bike sales surpassing a rfx.
    I think the old RFX and the 5spot were so close they split the buyers, there would need to be sufficient gap between the Burner and the new-RFX to make it worth while (similar to Bronson and Nomad, perhaps). I agree though, in the current market my uninformed opinion is that it's hard to imagine a FS fatbike (or even the fatbike + the cx bike together) outselling a long, slack and low enduro machine.

  17. #17
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,624
    Most placeholder talk! You may get old waiting for a RFX We shall see what Dave and the guys have up their sleeves.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by flipnidaho View Post
    Still one of my favorite bikes...
    That's a slick looking bike!
    Killing it with close inspection.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    538

    RFX Placeholder

    10-20mm more travel on the burner would be nice but I don't think I really need it. With the Vengence set @ 150 it's great I keep wondering about bumping it out to 160 though.

  20. #20
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,643
    160mm forks are what is specced on trail/AM bikes now so I think that's where the Burner will go. The Flux covers XC/trail so there is plenty of seperation there. I gotta say though that the KK floored me as I was expecting the Burner to updated. Of course I was also surprised at how quickly 650b took over.
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    81
    No reason to not put a 160mm front on the burner, slackens it out just a bit too. have it on mine and i'm really pleased with its downhill capabilities

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: HubbaMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    871
    wow, yet another RFX thread.

    I doubt anything will change on the Burner for this season, didn't we see a revised version late last year with new tubing but TB said the geo was identical to the previous version?

    I've enjoyed my RFX as my weekly ride for 13yrs now and would love to replace it with another one, but clearly that ain't happening. I have no doubt that with the right geo he'd sell tons of them.

    If I knew there would be a burlier Burner (or an RFX) with better geo around the corner I might wait a bit longer (kreater care to share?). I'd even put money on it now for this summer, but so far I'm planning on pulling the trigger on a new bike for 2015 in the next week or so. It won't be a Turner but I have no doubt I'll have a blast on it.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by HubbaMan View Post
    I doubt anything will change on the Burner for this season, didn't we see a revised version late last year with new tubing but TB said the geo was identical to the previous version?
    Yep, new tubing, same geo and travel etc. Looks like a pretty raked out 67* to me though!


  24. #24
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,643
    I just got back from ride #4 on my Warden and it seems perfect for my area. Dave could do something in that vein and have a big winner.
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: HubbaMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Bickle View Post
    I just got back from ride #4 on my Warden and it seems perfect for my area. Dave could do something in that vein and have a big winner.
    Are you riding it in the slack (66Deg) setting?

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. no placeholder here
    By grundy in forum Turner
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-06-2011, 02:27 PM
  2. The legendary RFX placeholder!
    By stealthcorp in forum Turner
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 09-14-2011, 01:35 AM
  3. My RFX Placeholder....
    By be350ka in forum Turner
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-30-2011, 12:17 PM
  4. Is my Chilcotin placeholder too much you think?
    By rscecil007 in forum Knolly
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-13-2011, 08:41 AM
  5. Delirium Placeholder
    By Blofeld in forum Knolly
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 04-14-2011, 12:49 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
  •