Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 129
  1. #76
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,515

    The Stealth Burner

    Quote Originally Posted by 1soulrider View Post
    I have an angelset on my Spot that slacks out the ha to almost the same 66.5 that the Burner sits at. Slack bikes make me happy. The Burner has a 5mm shorter stem and 750mm bars vs the 730mm bars on the Spot.
    Switching between the two bikes is comfortable, the fit is similar enough that there is no feeling adjustment time.
    The Burner's geo & build rewards weight forward aggressive riding, and this is just how I prefer to ride.
    Thanks for the feedback. My spot is 66.5 as well and rewards an aggressive position just as you describe. From what you're saying it sounds like the burner lends itself to that style even more so - very good to hear. The proto burner I hopped on didn't seem quite as slack as my spot and the shock felt a little firmer or poppier launching around, bunny hopping and manualing which could actually be a good thing IMO. What's your opinion on the suspension so far? I'm looking forward to getting some trail time on a production model.

    Keep the feedback and burner stoke flowing 1sr.

  2. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,857
    Thanks for the updates 1sr. Any hunches yet on which is faster (5 spot or Burner).... say like for Super D or Enduro?

    Oh, and how do they compare in weight?

  3. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    259
    The current spot does come with a volume reducer installed that makes the spring rate more progressive, whether the burner does or not, I'm not sure, but there are options for tuning the factory shock yourself.

  4. #79
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,515
    Quote Originally Posted by AlienRFX View Post
    The current spot does come with a volume reducer installed that makes the spring rate more progressive, whether the burner does or not, I'm not sure, but there are options for tuning the factory shock yourself.
    Thanks. I've tweaked on my RP23's from PUSH tunes to shims, etc. I always tend to come back and prefer the more linear feel of the large can with low compression and a mediumish rebound for aggressive trail riding. I lose some of the playfulness but the rear end tracks so darn well at speed. I'm thinking/hoping the Burner might provide that great tracking while adding some more playfulness and pop. Either way, I'm stoked on the Spot as it is.

  5. #80
    Committed
    Reputation: 1soulrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,593
    Quote Originally Posted by LncNuvue View Post
    Thanks for the feedback. My spot is 66.5 as well and rewards an aggressive position just as you describe. From what you're saying it sounds like the burner lends itself to that style even more so - very good to hear. The proto burner I hopped on didn't seem quite as slack as my spot and the shock felt a little firmer or poppier launching around, bunny hopping and manualing which could actually be a good thing IMO. What's your opinion on the suspension so far? I'm looking forward to getting some trail time on a production model.

    Keep the feedback and burner stoke flowing 1sr.
    The demo I rode didn't feel nearly as sorted as my Burner does. I know they had an issue with improper shock tune on the demos. By contrast the stock Fox cdt that came on my Burner felt better than any Fox air shock I have ridden to date. The suspension characteristics on the Burner are superb; this is the most dialed feeling DW link bike I have yet ridden.
    The Spot has always been stellar, but this feels like the next generation.

  6. #81
    Committed
    Reputation: 1soulrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,593
    Quote Originally Posted by KRob View Post
    Thanks for the updates 1sr. Any hunches yet on which is faster (5 spot or Burner).... say like for Super D or Enduro?

    Oh, and how do they compare in weight?
    The two frames weigh almost exactly the same amount, bigger wheels/tires could push the Burner past the Spot in terms of build weight.
    It is a little early to make strong statements about which bike is faster, but I am very impressed with the Burner at this point.

  7. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by 1soulrider View Post
    I'm on the Float set (right now) at 150. I have heard less than stellar reports about the 34 talas, and don't find the travel adjust necessary.


    So you had issues with corrosion on a enve wheelset? Could you elaborate on what happened?

    Oh congrats on the new frame btw, I'm sure you will enjoy it,.
    Thanks

    Just getting the Burner built up now. I went with the float and am considering the CCDB air or just using the CCDB Coil that I have. Sounds like you are enjoying your CCDB Air with the burner.

    Nice Burner!! The Northrop Grumman edition is sick.
    Last edited by RiverSurfer; 02-07-2013 at 01:24 PM.

  8. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: edbraunbeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    325
    Quote Originally Posted by wheatgerm View Post
    Great lookin' bike. Look forward to your feedback on the ride.

    Was this one of the pre-production frames with the low BB? I thought I read that those frames' BB was ~12.75" with Nevegals or something.
    I'm might have a Burner for our NC ride.

  9. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    938
    Quote Originally Posted by edbraunbeck View Post
    I'm might have a Burner for our NC ride.
    Sweet! Hope you get it by then!

  10. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chasintrane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by 1soulrider View Post
    The two frames weigh almost exactly the same amount, bigger wheels/tires could push the Burner past the Spot in terms of build weight.
    It is a little early to make strong statements about which bike is faster, but I am very impressed with the Burner at this point.
    1SR, since your rim busted, have you been back on your Spot? I was just curious about what it was like to go back to the Spot for a while. Are there some things you actually like better about the Spot? Does the Burner do it better for you in every category? Thanks for your input. I've got a Burner coming from the next batch, but I'm still on the fence about going Burner or Spot.

  11. #86
    Committed
    Reputation: 1soulrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,593
    Quote Originally Posted by Chasintrane View Post
    1SR, since your rim busted, have you been back on your Spot? I was just curious about what it was like to go back to the Spot for a while. Are there some things you actually like better about the Spot? Does the Burner do it better for you in every category? Thanks for your input. I've got a Burner coming from the next batch, but I'm still on the fence about going Burner or Spot.
    My Spot has been seeing regular use with the Burner down for the moment. The Spot is a great bike and I have been enjoying it immensely, but I do miss my Burner. I think you made a great choice in ordering a Burner and don't think you will regret going in that direction. two-seven-five is more fun than I expected it to be.

  12. #87
    Committed
    Reputation: 1soulrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,593
    Here is a quick video I tossed together of Burner riding. I had expected to have a lot more footage to edit from but then the wheel failure happened. Still it isn't too bad, it may be almost watchable even.

    Burner Ridin from 1soulrider on Vimeo.


  13. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,243
    MTBR would be bleeping all my adjectives away if I wrote what I felt about riding the 'inland empire' of SoCal after seeing the lovely trails up there. The Sierra foothills RULE, I can hardly wait for Downieville again. Nice socks too!

    DT

  14. #89
    It's carbon dontcha know.
    Reputation: 6thElement's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,685
    I know I'd prefer the Niner Jet9RDO I had for the climb to the top at D'Ville on my visit last year, but I'd definitely enjoy giving my Burner a run to the bottom.
    Rolling on 29", 650b, 8.3" and 23mm

  15. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,243
    I raced the Burner last year and loved it, I cannot think about any way to go faster (legally) up or down the mountain on the same bike. My Burner was under 27lbs with dropper post. My challenge in 2012 was a slew of flats like I can never remember having, except the time I was in Big Bend of Texas getting attacked by mesquite thorns. In Dville somedays I had a couple, and on both race days I flatted. Now, one would wonder why I just did not pump the tires to stupid levels and deal with a little sketch, and to this day I cannot give a good answer! 5-7psi higher would have probably done the trick and I would not have lost the time of flats but for some reason I was bumping pressure in pre-rides in 1-2 psi increments and the razor sharp rock of that mountain kicked holes in my tires every day. This year there are vastly more choices in 275!!!! Not sure I will ride the Burner again though, may try something new to keep learning and testing, I know, it's a tough job but someone has to do it.
    DT

  16. #91
    ~~~~~~~~
    Reputation: airwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,759
    That's some good looking dirt.

    Thanks for all the good info in this thread, especially for the rear shock, I want to work on getting my Burner dialed for jumping and shredding and since this is my first dw I need to be pointed in the right direction.

  17. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,781
    Too much anti-squat is what broke your wheels.
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  18. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ctopher63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    My challenge in 2012 was a slew of flats like I can never remember having, except the time I was in Big Bend of Texas getting attacked by mesquite thorns.
    The Stealth Burner-bbsp.jpg

  19. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    273
    is that something new made of carbon?

    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    I raced the Burner last year and loved it, I cannot think about any way to go faster (legally) up or down the mountain on the same bike. My Burner was under 27lbs with dropper post. My challenge in 2012 was a slew of flats like I can never remember having, except the time I was in Big Bend of Texas getting attacked by mesquite thorns. In Dville somedays I had a couple, and on both race days I flatted. Now, one would wonder why I just did not pump the tires to stupid levels and deal with a little sketch, and to this day I cannot give a good answer! 5-7psi higher would have probably done the trick and I would not have lost the time of flats but for some reason I was bumping pressure in pre-rides in 1-2 psi increments and the razor sharp rock of that mountain kicked holes in my tires every day. This year there are vastly more choices in 275!!!! Not sure I will ride the Burner again though, may try something new to keep learning and testing, I know, it's a tough job but someone has to do it.
    DT

  20. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,243
    there is no plan for a carbon Burner. Look at the weight of my bike, carbon would not help me, only training will! At my age and training plan I am a contender for nothing so I might as well play with different toys at the race.

    DT

  21. #96
    nocturnal oblivion
    Reputation: stumblemumble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,309
    WTF is carbon?
    "...like sex with the trail." - Boe

  22. #97
    MK_
    MK_ is offline
    carpe mañana
    Reputation: MK_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    7,131
    Were your rims within the ERD spec or was ERD smaller than expected? I'm wondering if the thickness was out of spec. I'm still debating getting a set of these and I'm trying to compile a list of things to watch out for.
    One thing you should also be aware of is the rapid corrosion of aluminum when in contact with carbon fiber; you can find a lot of info and discussion about the topic (it's come up initially with Enve rims). The I9 spokes won't last more than a season or two inside of a carbon rim (it certainly doesn't look like this has been a factor in this failure).

    _MK
    .
    "No man goes before his time -- unless the boss leaves early."
    -- Marx, Groucho

  23. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    273
    I didn't think a carbon Burner especially since you said you won't ride the Burner again. However, I was thinking a carbon 29er race bike or something of that sort. I thought that was the rumor so thought I would dig a bit

    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    there is no plan for a carbon Burner. Look at the weight of my bike, carbon would not help me, only training will! At my age and training plan I am a contender for nothing so I might as well play with different toys at the race.

    DT

  24. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,781
    Quote Originally Posted by fitnessgeek View Post
    I didn't think a carbon Burner
    That would be a mojo hd.
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  25. #100
    Committed
    Reputation: 1soulrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,593
    Quote Originally Posted by MK_ View Post
    Were your rims within the ERD spec or was ERD smaller than expected? I'm wondering if the thickness was out of spec. I'm still debating getting a set of these and I'm trying to compile a list of things to watch out for.
    One thing you should also be aware of is the rapid corrosion of aluminum when in contact with carbon fiber; you can find a lot of info and discussion about the topic (it's come up initially with Enve rims). The I9 spokes won't last more than a season or two inside of a carbon rim (it certainly doesn't look like this has been a factor in this failure).

    _MK
    The ERD was in spec, they have modified the layup on these hoops now to include extra material in the spoke bed. I am not the only one who has had this problem.
    The corrosion issue was brought to my attention earlier in this thread, when I built the wheels I was not aware of it though. That’s ok, I don't expect the hoops to hold up that long.
    Hope I'm joking...

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 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
  •