Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    247

    El Terremoto questions??

    Hey guys, I was hoping I could rack your brains for some opinions. First off, I haven't read a lot of feedback about the Terremoto, are you guys totally happy with them? Wish you had done something different or any "lesson learned" advice? I have an Intense 5.5 which I am very happy with except for the rear suspension, I just can't get it "perfect" which in my mind is having it's rear suspension climb and descend very well. I am on my 4th and final rear shock choice, if this doesn't do it I am gonna cut my losses. Does the Terremoto have that snappy chain tension feel to it? I do like that power to the ground feeling that my VPP delivers. I know they are obviously vastly different and VPP uses more chain tension but, I am wondering if this bike delivers a possitive feel under acceleration? Would you call it quick bike? Does anybody happen to know the frame weight for any size with/without rear shock? I would really appreciate anything you guys have to say. Peace.

  2. #2
    IPAs make me wanna puke.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,605
    You should talk with unfluid one. He used to ride an Intense 6.6 and now rides a Terremoto. He can help you with your questions.

  3. #3
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    9,578
    Quote Originally Posted by woogie11
    P delivers. I know they are obviously vastly different and VPP uses more chain tension but, I am wondering if this bike delivers a possitive feel under acceleration? Would you call it quick bike? Does anybody happen to know the frame weight for any size with/without rear shock? I would really appreciate anything you guys have to say. Peace.
    Terremoto does not feel as quick accelerating compared to a VPP and is definitely not what I'd call "snappy." Propedal/platform helps quite a bit in this regards but a VPP can achieve that feeling without the aid of shock damping.

    On the other hand, TM likes to ride deep in its travel and feels considerably "plusher" than the Intense. It's also a heckuva lot stiffer.

    I did fine shock tuning to be finicky and couldn't get it to feel right until I went up 50lbs on the spring to prevent bottoming and had the DHX-C Push tuned.

    My medium with DHX-C is 8.5 pounds on the nose, so take away about a pound & a half for shock and I'd guestimate frame weight right at 7 lbs.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Bling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,589
    So what coil spring do you use now?
    I am 180 with gear and got a 450 which is way to soft and as I might treat myself with a ti....

    I believe we are about the same weight.
    Former Homer...Ventana convert: extreme poseur!

  5. #5
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    9,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Bling
    So what coil spring do you use now?
    I am 180 with gear and got a 450 which is way to soft and as I might treat myself with a ti....

    I believe we are about the same weight.

    I'm about 175 all geared up and run a 550.

    I EASILY bottomed the 500 on drops over 3 foot, and the 500 was wallowy, cornered poorly and generally felt mushy. The 550 stock was much better but I continued to bottom until it was Push tuned. I spoke with Sherwood about Terremoto's suspension curve and he agreed that 550 is more appropriate for the way I ride. TM's rate falls at end stroke, which is an odd characteristic for a big travel bike. Most bikes in the category have rising rates at end stroke to prevent bottom out. I'm thinking perhaps SG counted on people turning up the bottom out resistance on the DHX to compensate, but it didn't work for me.

    I'm looking forward to trying a Roco air in the spring.
    Last edited by The Squeaky Wheel; 12-28-2007 at 08:50 AM.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Bling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,589
    Thanks very much squeak, that was very helpful.
    Former Homer...Ventana convert: extreme poseur!

  7. #7
    011100000110111101101111
    Reputation: unfluid one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,247
    I liked my 6.6 and I didn't really have any major issues with it. When I first switched to the T'moto, i noticed 2 things off the bat, a pro and con. The 6.6 accelerated and was a more efficient climber. It didn't bob as much (still bobbed a bit) and I could get off the line faster. The moto was a bit more sluggish and I had to change my climbing style on the smooth uphills so I wasn't bobbing so much. No big deal.Now that I'm used to the bike, climbing is fine for me. On the techie climbs, the difference is less noticeable for me and if anything, the stiffness of the moto helps.
    The other thing I noticed was that the moto felt a helluva lot stiffer in the rear triangle. Nothing supremely wrong with the 6.6, but I definitely felt the quad-bearings coming into play. big big plus. But this depends on the type of rider you are..

    I'm completely happy with the switch,
    and so far no bouts of envy for another 6" frame.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    247
    Thanks for the reply guys, I would appreciate any more feedback. Specifically how well the bike works with a non platform air shock, I am thinking of running an Evolver ISX6 on it. On Ventana's website it's angles appear to be measured with a 545mm AC height, if I were to run a 520mm Pike I think the angles would still be good but, do you believe the BB height would be too low? I have no idea what -25mm AC height does to BB height. Any more input would be appreciated. Peace.

  9. #9
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    9,578
    Quote Originally Posted by woogie11
    Thanks for the reply guys, I would appreciate any more feedback. Specifically how well the bike works with a non platform air shock, I am thinking of running an Evolver ISX6 on it. On Ventana's website it's angles appear to be measured with a 545mm AC height, if I were to run a 520mm Pike I think the angles would still be good but, do you believe the BB height would be too low? I have no idea what -25mm AC height does to BB height. Any more input would be appreciated. Peace.
    I haven't ridden my TM without a non-platform shock but I have ridden other Ventanas without platform damping and I'd say the wallow on initial acceleration is more pronounced - which sounds like it is opposite of what you are looking for.

    Also, i think running a Pike on Terremoto is less than optimal. If Pike is the fork of choice, I'd suggest looking at El Ciclon instead of Terremoto.

  10. #10
    198
    Reputation: RSutton1223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,804
    Quote Originally Posted by The Squeaky Wheel
    Also, i think running a Pike on Terremoto is less than optimal. If Pike is the fork of choice, I'd suggest looking at El Ciclon instead of Terremoto.
    +1

    The TM is designed around a 160mm fork (Lyrik or something like that). If you through a 140mm fork on that frame, you are going to mess with the geometry in a way the bike was not intended for. The Ciclon is a perfect match for the Pike, and is actually designed around the Pikes A2C.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    247
    Well the bike is designed around a 545mm AC height which is more like a Totem. A Lyric and 36 are both around 535mm AC, while a Pike is 522mm. So if everybody is happy with 36's and Lyrics on there, I feel that 13mm less AC height wouldn't adversly affect the traits of the bike. The Terremoto has 6 n the rear so I feel that a Pike might be a good choice (especially since I have one), the only thing I am concerned about is BB height, I think a Pike would put the HA/SA at +1 which are both still good angles. I think I could further tune the geo by using a 7mm headset race if I felt it was still too steep. The only thing I am concerned about is what the BB height would be. Lemme know what you guys think.

  12. #12
    198
    Reputation: RSutton1223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,804
    Quote Originally Posted by woogie11
    Well the bike is designed around a 545mm AC height which is more like a Totem. A Lyric and 36 are both around 535mm AC, while a Pike is 522mm. So if everybody is happy with 36's and Lyrics on there, I feel that 13mm less AC height wouldn't adversly affect the traits of the bike. The Terremoto has 6 n the rear so I feel that a Pike might be a good choice (especially since I have one), the only thing I am concerned about is BB height, I think a Pike would put the HA/SA at +1 which are both still good angles. I think I could further tune the geo by using a 7mm headset race if I felt it was still too steep. The only thing I am concerned about is what the BB height would be. Lemme know what you guys think.
    Axle to crown on the Lyrik is 545mm at 160mm.
    The Totem is 565mm at 180mm.

    The Terremoto is designed around a 160mm fork. The Pike is not a match for that frame. You can call Sherwood and ask. Depending on riding style, you might be better off with a Ciclon. I can attest for the amount of abuse a Ciclon can take...and it feels perfect with a Pike. You are going to steepen the angles with a Pike on a Terremoto.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    247
    ****!!! You're right. I guess I need a Lyric...

  14. #14
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    9,578
    Quote Originally Posted by woogie11
    ****!!! You're right. I guess I need a Lyric...
    There ya go !!!!!!!!!

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: G-AIR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,381
    If you want Snappy, Light, and to use a PIKE, why don't you look at the El Ciclon. It sounds more like what you are looking for. It will be stiffer than the 5.5, climb better than the Moto, and I will go ahead and say it......will be a much better descender than the 5.5.

    If you are going to be riding the same trails and in the same manner as you ride your 5.5, I think the Moto would be a bit more bike than you bargained for. If you want to push your riding and start to go bigger then the Moto starts to make sense. The 5.5 is really just an XC bike with 5" of travel. The Moto is a big step towards the AM/FR from the 5.5. I think the Ciclon lands right in the middle.

    Just one persons opinion, so take it for what its worth.

    Enjoy the ride.

    TG

  16. #16
    ajr
    ajr is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    753
    We have a set of 160mm 08 Nixon forks on a Terremoto. They are light, stiff, and perform really well.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,890
    FWIW, Push Industries brought a whole different level of pedalling efficiency to my X-5/6. It was much more lively/snappy after that.
    Propedal is custom valved by them, and the PP knob on my DHX became a compression dampening knob.

Posting Permissions

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