Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    73

    Who has got the lightest Burner here??

    Hi all!

    First off, would like to say hi as this is my first post here but have been a long time mtbr.com visitor.. Anyway, I'm patiently awaiting arrival of my small Turner Burner frame and just curious what everyone's setup is like? I'm currently riding a Stinger and have had it since 01. Great bike and still enjoying it actually. Just wanted to move up to a bit more travel and couldn't pass up the Supergo deal! I got in on their last small with the Fox Float RL, so I can't wait!
    It would be intersting, at least to me, to see what everyone has setup with their Burners? Please post what you got and total weight please. I'm out to beat all of you.. j/k! BTW, pictures would be nice. Thx.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,344
    Mine is 28.5 pounds. If I went to lighter tires and wheels, pedals, and seat, it could easily be 26 pounds. Given I am 225pounds, it is plenty light for me.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    73
    "Honestly, I don't think the Turner goal is absolute lightness, even with the Stinger. I think it's all about the ride."

    Yeah I hear you. But i've always been a weight weenie I guess. I just get a kick at building superlight bikes hence my screen name.. I had the Santa Cruz at sub 22. Actually have an Ellsworth Sub 22 at 19lbs. built up with Extralite parts etc. I'll be sure to post my rig once it's built up. I'm looking to building it up to sub 24 with pedals. Should be a fun project!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    15

    These are not meant to be 21 lb full suspension bikes.

    Mine is 26.5lb with Slime tubes and 2.4" tires, so basically everything else is really light, carbon bars,seatpost. If I didn't live in AZ I could run light tires/tubes with my Ti Speedplays and I'm sure it would be 25lb (still not a feather) but it rides like a much lighter bike. All of this equipment came of my Small ID which didn't have enough standover clearance for me (Small Ellsworth ID, with Romic (Ti Nitride coated shaft) Frame is now for Sale!)
    Attached Images Attached Images

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    985
    My Burner is a little over 28 lbs. with the following build:

    Frame L with Fox Propedal
    Fox TALAS
    Sram X.9 RD
    XT FD
    XT Hollowtech crank
    Mavic 717 rims with XT hubs
    Thompson post
    Thompson stem
    Chris King headset
    Easton EA 50 handlebars
    Sram X.9 shifters
    Avid Mech brakes
    Avid Ti brake levers
    WTB saddle
    Kenda Blue Grove tires
    Slime Tubes
    Shimano 515 pedals.

    The only component I may swap out is the wheelset - I might go with something ligther. However, I like the way the bike rides at the current build.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    985
    Building a "light" bike does not ensure the optimal ride. A bike's optimal ride should be based on "best weight". I have built several bikes where my goal was to build the bike as light as possible. I learned that a bike can be built too light in that it looses elements of its ride quality. There seems to be a weight range, "best weight", where the ride quality is optimal. My Burner, at 28 lbs, seems to be in that "best weight" range. I could probably reduce the Burner by a pound, but I am not sure if the reduction in weight would result in an improvement in the ride quality. I really like how the bike handles as built!

  7. #7
    Motion activated
    Reputation: Steve71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,999
    The lighter/weaker the rider is, the lighter they can go without compromising performance.
    That's the great thing about building up your own bike. But if you're really lite you might as well start with a different frame as you'll under tax the Burner most of the time.

    Just some thoughts.....

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    985
    I would agree . . .The size/weight of the rider effects the "best weight" for optimal bike performance.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    73
    Nice ride cytocycle! Some of you guys make me laugh..tho

    "The lighter/weaker the rider is, the lighter they can go without compromising performance."... "A bike's optimal ride should be based on "best weight".

    All understood,..but spare me the lessons please.. Isn't the Burner in itself designed to be a x-country frame?? And in case you guys didn't realize that the sport of mountain biking, especially x-country, does involve a lot of climbing. I believe the art of building a x-country frame for any builder is the balance between optimal ride with the least weight right?

    "But if you're really lite you might as well start with a different frame as you'll under tax the Burner most of the time."

    Really?? Why do people then buy the Burner over the 5 Spot? It wouldn't be because the Burner has less travel would it?? Remember I do have lighter bikes. My post was regarding the Burner. And why is Turner coming out with the Nitrous frame at the end of the year? Hmmm.

    Folks, I am not preaching that lightweight is the absolute nirvana at any cost. But I think everyone agrees that the freedom of building that perfect ride, for yourself, should have the strength for the descents with the possible lowest weight for the climbs. That is all I am out to do on the Burner. Is to build it with the lowest weight that I can build it to for my own riding needs period.

    So for those that still want to play, please feel free and be proud to post your "lite" ass Burner and give yourself a pat in the back for your own creation. I'll be sure to post mine when I'm done building it. Otherwise, move on to the next post.

  10. #10
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,135
    Quote Originally Posted by sc_slite
    "But if you're really lite you might as well start with a different frame as you'll under tax the Burner most of the time."

    Really?? Why do people then buy the Burner over the 5 Spot? It wouldn't be because the Burner has less travel would it?? Remember I do have lighter bikes. My post was regarding the Burner. And why is Turner coming out with the Nitrous frame at the end of the year? Hmmm.
    Answer: Price

    The way I read the Turner catalog and website, the Burner is attempting to get a high performance botique frame into a price point Turner has traditionally spent little time in. ($1395 MSRP vs. $1895) Perhaps the Nitrous will be much lighter, but it might be +$1800 too. That still leaves the Burner in a good place, especially if the blowout sales continue...$995 wow!

    BTW nothing wrong with wanting a light bike or light build. Not everyone rides super rough technical trails. Not everyone is 170+ pounds. Lighter riders, smoother riders, smoother trails and racing all can benifit from light builds...personally I and my needs fit into none of those categories, hence my 32 pound 5 Spot.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  11. #11
    Motion activated
    Reputation: Steve71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,999
    Quote Originally Posted by sc_slite
    "The lighter/weaker the rider is, the lighter they can go without compromising performance."... "A bike's optimal ride should be based on "best weight".

    All understood,..but spare me the lessons please..

    Don't get you knickers in a knot mate, that comment was directed at JTBAZ and was in support of building a lighter bike. I.e. JTBAZ's 28lb build is good for his weight/intended use. But if you're 130lb and don't squat 300lb, then you can get away with lighter components, in-fact it's the sensible choice, right?


    Quote Originally Posted by sc_slite
    [B]
    "But if you're really lite you might as well start with a different frame as you'll under tax the Burner most of the time."

    Really?? Why do people then buy the Burner over the 5 Spot? It wouldn't be because the Burner has less travel would it?? Remember I do have lighter bikes. My post was regarding the Burner. And why is Turner coming out with the Nitrous frame at the end of the year? Hmmm.
    I don't have a clue what you're talking about.....

    I was just arguing against myself, reasoning though why or why not it makes sense to build a light Burner. Just thinking out loud, "Just some thoughts......".

    No need to get so defensive, I'm sure your bike will be sick-o .

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    73
    Hey sorry for the misunderstanding. For some reason I took those as directed to me. Anyway, it's all good that we all agree in the end. Again point well taken.

  13. #13
    Motion activated
    Reputation: Steve71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,999
    No harm done. Looking forward to seeing it built up @24lb.

  14. #14
    dispensing truthiness
    Reputation: Wilco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    88

    dunno, but...

    Mine might be the heaviest! I don't have that accurate a scale so this may not be exact, but my large burner is around 29.5 pounds. I could easily shed a pound in the wheels / tires / pedals but I can't really think of anything else that I'd go lighter on (considering the cost/strength factors).

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DLine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    673

    Fat Burner

    My large is 28ish - with a boat anchor for a fork (RS Psylo - 4.3lbs). Mostly XT build, Avid mec discs, with Truvativ Stylo Cranks and heavy Time pedals. Lots of room to save weight if I decide to pour money into it. But, it rides great - so why bother.

    OR, I could just ride naked and shave about 4 pounds off. That'd get me to 24. Speaking of shaving, if I shaved off all of my bodyhair, I'd probably be another 4 pounds lighter (part gorilla). 20lbs! The picture just keeps getting prettier. And all of this can be done for ZERO cost (shaving cream and razors are already part of my overhead)! I should let Davide in on this - he seems to want to get his Spot to road bike svelteness.

    A heavier bike gets you in shape faster. Ride with rocks in your Camelback if you get that Burner under 25lbs. Or drag your lazy, no-bike-riding friends in a cheap plastic sled behind it on the climbs.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    366

    Mine is about 25lbs

    Mine is pretty light and the thing is I don't think I have anything stupid light on my bike. Works like charm....just did a 24 hour solo race with it and not one problem.

    Large Burner
    Fox Float RL Fork
    King/317 wheelset
    Kenda Karma Tires
    SLR Saddle
    Thomson Post
    FSA carbon Bar
    FSA Team carbon Crankset
    FSA OS115 stem
    XTR Shifters/Derailleurs/disc brakes

Similar Threads

  1. Burner vs Stumpy FSR
    By Broke-Biker in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-31-2004, 08:09 PM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-03-2004, 01:32 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
  •