Results 1 to 34 of 34
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    207

    What's the difference between Burner and 5spot?

    Sorry if it's a stupid question but I'm new to Turner bikes. Would like to know more about both the frames. Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    If you're referring to the 03 and 04 Burner, the differences would be as follows:

    Burner:
    3.6" rear travel, or 4" with the Paul's Components rockers (no longer available)
    XC geometry
    no integrated BB shell/main pivot/lower shock mount machined block. Tabs used for lower shock mount.
    Weights are similar.
    Burner uses XCE style suspension in the rear with a less vertical rocker. Chain and seat stays are identical. 6.5x1.5" shock.

    Spot:
    5" of travel (actually 5.1-5.3 depending on year) and slightly less XC biased geometry
    The afforementioned one-piece machined block, with a gusset on the back.
    Horizontal rocker, lends to better pedaling, as well as other suspension qualities.
    7.5x2.0" shock.
    Different tubing set.

    Both are great bikes, with the Spot having a more advanced rear suspension (tweaked, if you will, since most bits are the same). The Burner will get you a heavy duty XC oriented bike while the Spot will get you a nice trail bike. I was told a few years ago by David Turner that the Burner is just as strong as the Spot, but just for XC riding.

    The Burner is also not made anymore. The Flux is the replacement for the Burner, but it's a lightweight XC bike with 4", not the true replacement, in anything other than travel category. Realistically, the Spot is the replacement for the Burner/XCE.

    The XCE was the predecessor to the Burner and the Spot. It more closely resembles the Spot, but with 4" of travel. It's got that one-piece block. Production of this ended and diverged into the Spot on one end and the Burner on the other.
    Last edited by Jerk_Chicken; 05-19-2006 at 08:52 AM.

  3. #3
    rr
    rr is offline
    I don't do PC
    Reputation: rr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,401
    The Burner has 3.6" of travel and uses a slightly different rocker placement/design. The 5 Spot gets 5.1" of travel I believe(slacker geometry also) and has a flatter rocker angle. I own a Burner and have ridden a buddies 5 Spot a lot, besides the extra travel the flatter rocker angle makes for a bit smoother and plusher ride IMO, the Burner does feel a little snappier on the climbs though.

    My 2 cents

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DLine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    672
    Quote Originally Posted by Juicy
    Sorry if it's a stupid question but I'm new to Turner bikes. Would like to know more about both the frames. Thanks in advance.
    3.6" and 5.3" to start. Different BB/lower shock mount, rocker angles and arms, seat tube pivot location, BB height, head tube angle (70 Burner/69 Spot), and shock length (6.5x1.5 Burner/7.5x2 Spot). There are geometry charts for both on turnerbikes.com. The tubing is the same as I understand it, and the weights are comparable with comparable shocks. The Burner was discontinued after 2004 and replaced by the Flux. Burners are always horst-links, while Spots may be horst-links or TNTs.

    Clear as mud?

    ---edit:
    This was a race and I came in third. JC says the tubing is different, but I'm not certain that's right - the stays are the same, and I was under the impression that the front triangle was the same tubing too...

  5. #5
    Bite Me.
    Reputation: cutthroat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,529
    The search tool will get you plenty of additional information - but in a nutshell:

    Burner - no longer made, 3.6" rear travel, designed for 100mm fork, fairly burly tubeset, 70 degree HT angle, designed for agressive cross country/enduro style riding, but capable of taking bigger hits and drops with a skillful rider, less expensive than the Spot - can be upgraded to 4" of travel in the back with a set of XR rockers - uses a rocker pivot located behind the seattube, so it has less of an ICT style linkage, uses a 6.5 x 1.5 inch shock.

    Spot - probably Turner's popular do it all trail bike, 5" rear travel, designed for a 130mm fork, stout but light tube set, 69 degree HT angle, can be built up as a sturdy trail bike around 29 - 31 lbs or as a lighter XC ride in the 27-28lb range, bigger diameter top tube, better performance frame over all for all mountain riding and bigger drops, uses a 7.5 x 2 inch shock, rocker pivot is located in front of the seat tube for a more parallel style linkage, now uses the TNT rear link instead of Horst linkage.

    Both are execellent bikes, but the general opinion here is that the Spot is a more capable bike overall, but a bit heavier and less XC oriented, and not quite as quick a climber as the Burner. I have one of each.
    When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. ~H.G. Wells

  6. #6
    Bite Me.
    Reputation: cutthroat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,529
    Wow - 4 responses in less than 4 minutes - I guess we slammed Juicy pretty hard
    When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. ~H.G. Wells

  7. #7
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Oh, can we not call the more horizontal rocker "ICT Style"? We should be called TE's rocker "DT" style, in actuality, shouldn't we?

  8. #8
    rr
    rr is offline
    I don't do PC
    Reputation: rr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    Oh, can we not call the more horizontal rocker "ICT Style"? We should be called TE's rocker "DT" style, in actuality, shouldn't we?
    Well, you do have to give TE some credit there, there's someting to the ICT design as far as ride quality, guess DT proved the chainstay pivot is not as crucial as the rocker placement also.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    207
    Hahaha... 'clear as mud'... absolutely. So it'll probably be better off getting a Flux than a Burner? They stopped production on the Burners in 04 and the Flux came out in 05?
    Yeah, I was pretty impressed by the quick and detailed replies!

  10. #10
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Isn't the "AB" listed as prior art in the ICT patent???????

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DLine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    672
    Quote Originally Posted by rroeder
    Well, you do have to give TE some credit there, there's someting to the ICT design as far as ride quality, guess DT proved the chainstay pivot is not as crucial as the rocker placement also.
    Hello can of worms.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DLine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    672
    Quote Originally Posted by Juicy
    Hahaha... 'clear as mud'... absolutely. So it'll probably be better off getting a Flux than a Burner? They stopped production on the Burners in 04 and the Flux came out in 05?
    Yeah, I was pretty impressed by the quick and detailed replies!
    I think there's more of a gap in use between a Flux and the Spot than the Burner and the Spot, mainly because of weight. The Flux is lighter than the Burner by a half pound, which distances it more from the Spot than the Burner. The Flux is more specifically XC, while the Burner was more XC/Trail, if we want to get into labels that really don't mean much.

    What is the terrain you'll be riding? Rough and technical, or smooth and swoopy?

  13. #13
    Bite Me.
    Reputation: cutthroat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,529
    "ICT", "TNT", AMP, TE, DT - please - just shoot me now!
    When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. ~H.G. Wells

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    207
    Sh*t... I already have a Stumpy FSR and I shouldn't even think about getting another bike but I'm itching to try a Turner. No point getting another 5 inch travel when I already have one? Turner bikes are just gorgeous man.... Maybe I'll just sell my stumpy. Hehe...

  15. #15
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    What you might notice is great about Turners is how well they use the travel. It's easy to set up and the quality of the travel makes it feel like there's more than there really is.

  16. #16
    falling off since 1975
    Reputation: nick3216's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    161
    /polite cough before adding mud to the waters

    some Burners had an integrated machined BB-shell/shock mount, or are we not going back that far?

  17. #17
    falling off since 1975
    Reputation: nick3216's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    Isn't the "AB" listed as prior art in the ICT patent???????
    yep, along with a load of high-grade bull about why it's not as 110% efficient as the ICT

  18. #18
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Weren't those the first Burners with that? Then DT changed the design to the "tri-block" after the mains were ripping off.

  19. #19
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,132
    I believe the Spot was DT's first production bike that used butted tubing. The XCE and Burner used straight guage. I'm pretty sure all three frames were of very similar strength overall.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  20. #20
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikezilla
    I believe the Spot was DT's first production bike that used butted tubing. The XCE and Burner used straight guage. I'm pretty sure all three frames were of very similar strength overall.
    I might be wrong in my assumption here, but I am looking at a 2000 Turner catalog, and the Stinger and O2 used Elite tubing, which was butted. All models have "custom drawn seat tubes". So I think they were butted, at least until back then. Additionally, I heard a DT interview where he introduced the V.2 Burner in 03 and said "fewer butted tubes" to get the prices down, so I'm working with the assumption there was butting prior to this.

  21. #21
    falling off since 1975
    Reputation: nick3216's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    161
    First burners had a BB shell arrangement similar to the Flux.

    Mine's a '96 (?) and has a machined block:


    clicky makes biggy.

  22. #22
    Bite Me.
    Reputation: cutthroat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikezilla
    I believe the Spot was DT's first production bike that used butted tubing. The XCE and Burner used straight guage. I'm pretty sure all three frames were of very similar strength overall.
    This myth keeps rearing it's ugly head BZ - the Burner and the XCE both used butted tubesets, I just think they weren't as manipulated as the O2 Easton versions.
    When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. ~H.G. Wells

  23. #23
    rr
    rr is offline
    I don't do PC
    Reputation: rr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Juicy
    Sh*t... I already have a Stumpy FSR and I shouldn't even think about getting another bike but I'm itching to try a Turner. No point getting another 5 inch travel when I already have one? Turner bikes are just gorgeous man.... Maybe I'll just sell my stumpy. Hehe...
    The Stumpy FSR rides very nice, a buddy has the 4" version and it feels similiar to my Burner, more of a progressive feel than the 5 Spot and other newer Turner designs.

  24. #24
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,132
    Quote Originally Posted by cutthroat
    This myth keeps rearing it's ugly head BZ - the Burner and the XCE both used butted tubesets, I just think they weren't as manipulated as the O2 Easton versions.
    Hmmm, I don't know where I got that crazy idea then.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    600

    go for the spot

    i had the stumpy fsr 2003 before my 5-spot. there is no comparison, get the spot. the stumpy climbs alot quicker, but it doesnt inspire confidence like the spot. the spot makes you a better rider period.

  26. #26
    \|/Home of the Braves\|/
    Reputation: RedRocker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,927
    ...unless you want to keep the longer travel stumpy and can find a used Burner as more of an XC bike. Since they weigh about the same, pedal about as efficiently (IMO), and the Spot can do more I'd choose it if cash wasn't an issue. Heck, I did do that come to think of it.
    Big hoopy.
    Turner Sultan / On One Inbred

  27. #27
    ... I guess you won't be
    Reputation: jokermtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,938
    just to cornfuze things...here's my 1999 Burner....straight gauge tubes, machined BB yoke, and a whopping 2.8" of rear travel, and it definitely is not decended from the XCE, it pre-dates it......it was one tough bike in it's day....
    and no, my dog has not gotten bigger since that photo was taken....
    shazzzat!

  28. #28
    Rolling
    Reputation: lidarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,110
    Quote Originally Posted by jokermtb
    that is ugly....even for a Turner...what were you thinking???

  29. #29
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,942

    turner history

    ok kids, heres the real deal. well at least some of it.

    the original production burner was made in '95 and can be seen in the 1st pic. its the one in back with the red bits and had a bridge from the down tube to the seat tube supporting the lower shock mount. it had 2.75" of travel but a 3.6" rocker was made for the d/h crowd and can be seen in the 2nd pic. they were a hard part to find at the time and as far as i know was not produced after '95. production of the burner ended in '98, being replaced by the o2 in '99 but was reintroduced in '02 i think and ran through '04 when it was once again replaced, this time with the '05 flux. edit: if ya look close, ya can see a small gusset wrapped around the botom of the headtube to the downtube in the first pic. this factory mod was done to fix cracks that developed on frames that were bein raced in d/h events such as this one.

    the 2nd year burner was produced in '96 and had a machined section supporting the shock, b/bkt and swingarm. this was done to reduce weight and increase lateral stiffness as well as provide better allignment of the chassis, not to cure breakage as mentioned before. the only serious breakage issue was in the headtube area which was cured also in '96 with a substancial gusset. both these mods can be seen in pic 1 on the bike with the blue bits and also more clearly in the 2nd pic . edit: it also got a new, stronger headtube.

    the xce was introduced in the '98 model year and was made through '02 like the one in the 3rd pic. it used the same rocker geometry as the 3.6" burner rocker but was made much lighter and stronger. in '99 it got a 4" rocker. this chassis stayed basically the same till its demise in '03 i think when it was replaced by the 5 spot.

    other notable turners. my notes and those of mk and nick3216 show this all to be accurate. anything im not pretty sure of has a "(?)" following the date in question:

    Original Turner - '93 a short travel soft tail he brought to mammoth for the classic kamikaze manufacturers d/h race and won with. only 1 made (?).
    Twin Turner - '96 (?) a 3.6” burner tandam if you will. only 1 was made by sportech for dt and his ex. it now lives in the uk and is still ridden.
    Stinger - '98 - '01. just shy of 3". cancelled due to propriatary shock issues. way cool bike if ya ask me.
    Burner D/H - '97. 3.6". a stepping stone to the afterburner.
    Afterburner - '98 - '99. a great 7" d/h bike but not good enough.
    DHR - '00 (officially) - present. 7.6" originaly. replaced the afterburner and has been refined through the years. now a 8.5" bike.
    02 - '99 - '02. a super light 3.1" version of the burner.
    RFX - '98 - '02. maybe the first semi unbreakable 5" freeride frame known. made with 6" in '00 on. shut down due to low sales.
    5 Spot - '03 - present. turners best selling frame. the perfect trail bike?
    6 Pack / RFX - '04 - present. a pure work horse, do it all frame now re badged as the re born "RFX". xc and big hucks, heres yer ride.
    Flux - '05 - present. weeeeeeeee! the new burner? hardly! a way better unit with faster geometry. lighter too! xc and epic ride fun here.
    Nitrous - '05 - present. skinny assed xc racers only need apply. land based speed mobile.
    Highline - '06 - present. the new mega huck platform built for and tested by folks who go huge. really, really huge.

    who built my turner?

    "94 - Ventana built the 1st 150 turner's, later to be dubbed the burner my mountain bike action. quality work spured growing sales leading a new vendor.
    '95 - FTW (frank the welder). frank waddington, one of the first big named welders for hire in the industry, welded the early barracuda's, yeti's and turners's.
    '96 - '02 - Sportech took the burner and its offspring to new levels of performance, quality and innovation with features like the machined b/bkt assembly.
    '03 - present - SAPA now makes the entire line with in house tubesets and others comming from different vendors depending on the model, all from the usa.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by cactuscorn; 06-14-2006 at 12:02 PM.
    No, I'm NOT back!

  30. #30
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,132
    ..nm..
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  31. #31
    falling off since 1975
    Reputation: nick3216's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by cactuscorn
    stinger - '98 - '01. just shy of 3". cancelled due to propriatary shock issues. way cool bike if ya ask me.
    burner d/h - '97. 3.6". a stepping stone to the afterburner.
    afterburner - '98 - '99. great 7" d/h bike but not good enough.
    dhr - '00 (officially) - present. 7.6" replaced the afterburner and has been refined through the years. now a 8.5" bike.
    o2 - '99 - '02. a super light 3.1" version of the burner.
    rfx - '98 - '02. maybe the first semi unbreakable 5", 6" in '00, freeride frame. shut down due to low sales.
    5 spot - '03 (?) - present. turners best selling frame.
    6 pack - '04 (?) - present. a pure work horse, do it all frame. now re badged as the re born rfx.
    flux - '05 - present. weeeeeeeee! the new burner? hardly! a way better unit.
    nitrous - '05 - present. xc racers only need apply. land based speed mobile.
    highline - '06 - present.
    Great history and dang near almost complete...

    You missed out the 3.6" travel Twin Burner.

    Turner Tandem?

  32. #32
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,942
    good call. only a few were made, not sure how many and possibly only 1. the tandam was built by ventana for dt and his ex if i have my facts straight. it now resides overseas. lucky bastards. theres also the first turner that proceeded the burner. looked alot like the early bmc's. its in the history sticky.
    No, I'm NOT back!

  33. #33
    MK_
    MK_ is offline
    carpe mañana
    Reputation: MK_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    7,162
    Quote Originally Posted by DLine
    3.6" and 5.3" to start. Different BB/lower shock mount, rocker angles and arms, seat tube pivot location, BB height, head tube angle (70 Burner/69 Spot), and shock length (6.5x1.5 Burner/7.5x2 Spot). There are geometry charts for both on turnerbikes.com. The tubing is the same as I understand it, and the weights are comparable with comparable shocks. The Burner was discontinued after 2004 and replaced by the Flux. Burners are always horst-links, while Spots may be horst-links or TNTs.

    Clear as mud?

    ---edit:
    This was a race and I came in third. JC says the tubing is different, but I'm not certain that's right - the stays are the same, and I was under the impression that the front triangle was the same tubing too...
    The tubing between the 5 spot front triangle and Burner is different. The tubing on both the Burner and the Spot is butted, but the actual material is higher quality on the Spot, at least this is per Casey when I called and asked. Indeed the rear triangle is the same.

    _MK
    .
    "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
    -- Einstein, Albert

  34. #34
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,942
    i finally got off my ass and fixed the history nick. the twin is now in it. thanx for the input.
    No, I'm NOT back!

Posting Permissions

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