Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Crazed Country Rebel
    Reputation: iheartbicycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,028

    Shorter Eye to Eye on RFX?

    Anyone running something like a 7.5" x 2" on an RFX?

    Thinking I want a lower BB.
    Stupid, but sometimes witty. Occasionally brilliant. Slow and fat though.

    Specialized sucks dong

  2. #2
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,888
    7.75x2.25"- linky.

  3. #3
    Crazed Country Rebel
    Reputation: iheartbicycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,028
    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    7.75x2.25"- linky.
    Thanks. Why did I think the stroke was 2"?

    BTW - what is that saddle you're running in the pic?
    Stupid, but sometimes witty. Occasionally brilliant. Slow and fat though.

    Specialized sucks dong

  4. #4
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,888
    7.5x2.0 was stock up until 2006.
    7.875x2.25 is stock on 2007/08.

    The 7.75" avy drops the BB about 1/4" while slackening the angles slightly and not reducing travel. I think Airwreck and Keen have experimented with 7.5x2.0 shocks on 07/08 RFX's.

    The saddle is a chromag Lynx.

  5. #5
    Hisforever
    Reputation: SHAHEEB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    7.5x2.0 on the 07/08' feels great around the yard so far.

    wonder what airwreck thinks now after some time, maybe he will chime in after his ride today
    Jesus Saves




  6. #6
    Crazed Country Rebel
    Reputation: iheartbicycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,028
    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    7.5x2.0 was stock up until 2006.
    7.875x2.25 is stock on 2007/08.

    The 7.75" avy drops the BB about 1/4" while slackening the angles slightly and not reducing travel. I think Airwreck and Keen have experimented with 7.5x2.0 shocks on 07/08 RFX's.

    The saddle is a chromag Lynx.
    FM - do you have any idea what the angles end up like with your set up?

    Can you post a pic of the bike?

    I'd prefer to keep the travel where it's at - so running a shorter stroke shock may not be perfect.

    Also - what's your thoughts on going even shorter on the eye to eye?
    Stupid, but sometimes witty. Occasionally brilliant. Slow and fat though.

    Specialized sucks dong

  7. #7
    Crazed Country Rebel
    Reputation: iheartbicycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,028
    Quote Originally Posted by SHAHEEB
    7.5x2.0 on the 07/08' feels great around the yard so far.

    wonder what airwreck thinks now after some time, maybe he will chime in after his ride today
    I'd prefer not to decrease travel, but do like the feel of low bb's and slack angles!
    Stupid, but sometimes witty. Occasionally brilliant. Slow and fat though.

    Specialized sucks dong

  8. #8
    Hisforever
    Reputation: SHAHEEB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    cheers, i think we all do, but once we strike pedals we will start going back up again. i think we are super close for the rfx ideal.

    I've noticed my turners all sag to about the same BB height. each of my rigs has diff static BB heights. These are the details DT nails
    Jesus Saves




  9. #9
    Crazed Country Rebel
    Reputation: iheartbicycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,028
    Quote Originally Posted by SHAHEEB
    cheers, i think we all do, but once we strike pedals we will start going back up again. i think we are super close for the rfx ideal.

    I've noticed my turners all sag to about the same BB height. each of my rigs has diff static BB heights. These are the details DT nails
    I been riding a Foes FXR the last 4 years. If I remember right it had a 13.5" BB with 6" travel. Super slack angles.

    Takes a while to get used to a new ride.
    Last edited by iheartbicycles; 01-12-2009 at 06:25 PM.
    Stupid, but sometimes witty. Occasionally brilliant. Slow and fat though.

    Specialized sucks dong

  10. #10
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,888
    Quote Originally Posted by iheartbicycles
    Also - what's your thoughts on going even shorter on the eye to eye?
    The best info & pics I have are in that other thread.
    Angles depend so much on your fork, the geometry Turner has published seem to be based off of a short fork and skinny tires. I'd guess my head angle to be near 67 and the BB is 14.125". (was 14.5" with the stock shock & same tires & fork).

    Pedal strikes have never been an issue for me. I have changed my technique as I've come too appreciate lower BB's. Also our trails tend to be steep & smooth, not a lot of big rock here.

    I do feel like lower & slacker generally makes climbing more work.. oh well!

    lastly, Craig at avalanche mentioned he didn't think you could go any shorter than 7.75" without also reducing the stroke& travel, otherwise metal-on-metal contact might be an issue. I'm definitely curious to hear airwrecks & shaheebs reports on 7.5x2.0.

Posting Permissions

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