Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst ... 111718192021
Results 2,001 to 2,023 of 2023
  1. #2001
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by dubthang View Post
    I am a long time fan of rigid forks on bikes. I ran my gen 1 N9 rigid, and then my replacement gen 2 the same way. Both had Niner carbon forks, and were great bikes. Now that I have put a DVO Diamond on the bike, the whole bike has come alive. This bike is truly designed for a big fork. If you have only ridden yours with a rigid fork, you owe it to yourself to try it with a big fork on the front. Manuals and wheelies are easier, less pedal strikes, carves corners better, etc.
    While I agree that big 130mm+ sus forks make the N9 awesome, I don't think it is just because of the suspension. I also love rigid forks, but the problem is that there is almost nothing with an A-C above 470mm. I really wish there was a 500-520mm rigid fork because it would solve the issues of pedal strikes, manualing and head tube angle.

  2. #2002
    Gigantic Hawk
    Reputation: dubthang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,511
    Quote Originally Posted by braaapbraaap View Post
    While I agree that big 130mm+ sus forks make the N9 awesome, I don't think it is just because of the suspension. I also love rigid forks, but the problem is that there is almost nothing with an A-C above 470mm. I really wish there was a 500-520mm rigid fork because it would solve the issues of pedal strikes, manualing and head tube angle.
    Indeed.

  3. #2003
    squish, squish in da fish
    Reputation: fishwrinkle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,674
    love the bike/color scheme, dub . i too agree on the a/c issue of rigid forks. i run a zombie 500 usually in the winter, but a 9mm axle won't cut it for me during the real riding season. custom i suppose is the only answer, even though i keep hoping someone would produce a robust tall fork to run up to 3" meats

  4. #2004
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by fishwrinkle View Post
    love the bike/color scheme, dub . i too agree on the a/c issue of rigid forks. i run a zombie 500 usually in the winter, but a 9mm axle won't cut it for me during the real riding season. custom i suppose is the only answer, even though i keep hoping someone would produce a robust tall fork to run up to 3" meats
    I have been wondering if there is no such on the market because there is just not enough interest or whether it is due to strength concerns - maybe a long rigid fork that does not compress under load would put too much stress on the headtube (especially for slack HT angles). Either way, it has been so difficult to find (even custom over 500mm that isn't $$$$) that I have thought about learning to weld haha

  5. #2005
    Gigantic Hawk
    Reputation: dubthang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,511
    I think the answer would be a custom ti fork like the ones from Black Sheep. You could get the a2c height right and a bit of vibration dampening.

  6. #2006
    squish, squish in da fish
    Reputation: fishwrinkle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,674
    yeah a ti truss would be sweet, but at $1500. i think 510-520mm with a tapered bottom cup, adding ~10mm would be the sweet spot for me.

  7. #2007
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,359
    Hope this is Koser.

    Just dropped the price of this beauty. Need to get ride of it as bills are pilling up

    2016 Canfield Nimble 9 PRICE DROP - Buy and Sell Mountain Bikes and Accessories
    Redding Trail Alliance - www.reddingtrailalliance.org

  8. #2008
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    173
    2015 Nimble 9 XL
    2016 Fox Float 34 140mm FIT4
    1x10 Drivetrain (X9 Type2, KMC, RaceFace NW, SLX Cassette, SLX Cranks)
    Easton EA90 XC Front
    Stan's 3.30 / Arch EX Rear
    XT Brakes (160/180)
    Ergon Saddle
    Enve DH Bars
    Ruffian Grips

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_190055.jpg

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_134303.jpg

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_134339.jpg

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_134350.jpg

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_145648.jpg

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_145721.jpg

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_145744.jpg
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_134207.jpg  

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_134241.jpg  

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-img_20161217_134252.jpg  


  9. #2009
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    349
    Anyone have a large non-boost n9 frame for sale that they'd consider posting to Australia?
    Worth asking!

  10. #2010
    mtbr member
    Reputation: babybabe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    116
    Anyone know the torque value for the rear axle assembly bolts? Not the axle bolt itself, but the four bolts, two each side, that hold the derailleur hanger and axle/brake mounts.

  11. #2011
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,432
    I am kind of interested in a N9. I am looking for something with a slightly more playful ride- short chainstays, not-so-long reach, higher BB. It will probably be singlespeed most of the time and I have a 120mm fork for it.

    I tried to calculate what the geo would look like with a 120mm fork but something still seems off. is the stack really 661mm with a 140mm fork? that seems crazy-high. knowing how I like to set up my bike, that's going to be hard to get my bar low enough. can anyone confirm those measurements, and how much it would change with a lower fork?

    also, I don't want to cram a 142mm axle hub in a boost frame. last time I checked, they didn't seem interested in getting any more non-boost dropouts for their frames, which seems like a great way to miss part of the market. anyone have luck with putting some sort of 3mm spacer between the frame and the dropout?

    they are out of stock, so I am waiting to hear if Canfield is getting any more medium frames in, so I am in no hurry.

  12. #2012
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    291
    Using the Velofuse boost kit with 2 3mm spacers and rotor spacer. Works great. Just either glue or use clear silicon to keep the 3mm spacer on wheel endcaps so there's no risk of losing them trail side if you need to take the wheel off.

  13. #2013
    Ride On
    Reputation: geraldooka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    I am kind of interested in a N9. I am looking for something with a slightly more playful ride- short chainstays, not-so-long reach, higher BB. It will probably be singlespeed most of the time and I have a 120mm fork for it.

    I tried to calculate what the geo would look like with a 120mm fork but something still seems off. is the stack really 661mm with a 140mm fork? that seems crazy-high. knowing how I like to set up my bike, that's going to be hard to get my bar low enough. can anyone confirm those measurements, and how much it would change with a lower fork?

    also, I don't want to cram a 142mm axle hub in a boost frame. last time I checked, they didn't seem interested in getting any more non-boost dropouts for their frames, which seems like a great way to miss part of the market. anyone have luck with putting some sort of 3mm spacer between the frame and the dropout?

    they are out of stock, so I am waiting to hear if Canfield is getting any more medium frames in, so I am in no hurry.
    Stack is fairly high with a 140 fork. Im guessing you are looking at a medium given the stack you quoted? Have you put all the numbers into the geo calc site? https://bikegeo.muha.cc With a 120 fork the stack drops quite a bit from the 661. I would enter stack and reach manually and reset the app by re entering one of the chosen numbers. I run mine with a 120 but I also have an angle set installed which wont help you with measurements.

    Ive run spacers before and did not have any issues.

  14. #2014
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,432
    I tried it with the bike geometry muha site and I am not 100% certain I trust that. When you plug in Canfield's numbers, it yields different reach and stack numbers than what Canfield claims. Why do those numbers differ? I don't know who to believe.

    it looks like I need a -30, 44mm slammed stem (I have a Flatforce with those dimensions) and a flat bar to get it low enough. I know what works for me and a wish the head tube was not so darn tall, but I might be alone in that.

  15. #2015
    Ride On
    Reputation: geraldooka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    I tried it with the bike geometry muha site and I am not 100% certain I trust that. When you plug in Canfield's numbers, it yields different reach and stack numbers than what Canfield claims. Why do those numbers differ? I don't know who to believe.

    it looks like I need a -30, 44mm slammed stem (I have a Flatforce with those dimensions) and a flat bar to get it low enough. I know what works for me and a wish the head tube was not so darn tall, but I might be alone in that.
    Ya thats why I suggest you manually enter in the reach and stack the sites estimates are never correct. I have found the results match up to bike cad or rattlecad close enough though.

  16. #2016
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,432
    Thanks for the insight. I know it seems pretty nerdy, but I have a pretty good idea of what works for me and it would be hard to throw a leg over that bike.

    It looks like they base their numbers on a 551mm a-c fork, 140mm of travel. Is that an unsagged fork? Most of the bike geometry I am comparing it to use the sagged fork. I can probably figure out the difference but I wish the industry would just pick a standard basis measurement.

    edit- here's what I got.

    unsagged 140mm fork vs 25% sag

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-nimble9-140-sag.jpg

    based on that, here's a sagged 120mm fork, which ends up with a 500 mm a-c

    Canfield Nimble 9 build thread!-nimble-9-120-sag.jpg

    considering that, the Nimble 9 is probably not for me. but it's good to have data to look at.
    Last edited by mack_turtle; 3 Weeks Ago at 07:30 AM.

  17. #2017
    Gigantic Hawk
    Reputation: dubthang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,511
    Mack, are you against buying a used frame? The earlier N9 frames are what you are after since they were designed around a 120mm fork and are pre-boost.

  18. #2018
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,432
    I should start looking for a pre-boost N9. What year was non-boost and had a 44mm head tube?

  19. #2019
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Raleighguy29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,143
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    I should start looking for a pre-boost N9. What year was non-boost and had a 44mm head tube?
    Pre 2018 frames


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  20. #2020
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,432
    I think a lot of the first few N9s had 34mm headtube, 10x135 dropouts, and we're super heavy. Probably 2016?

  21. #2021
    Upcyclist
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,062
    I just bought a used 2016 which was right before they went to boost in '17. Scroll down to see the '13-'15 #s.

    http://canfieldbrothers.com/archive-frames
    Cool heads prevail

  22. #2022
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,432
    Derp. That's what I needed. Thanks!

  23. #2023
    Gigantic Hawk
    Reputation: dubthang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,511
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    I think a lot of the first few N9s had 34mm headtube, 10x135 dropouts, and we're super heavy. Probably 2016?
    The very first N9's had the 34mm head tubes. These are the ones that had issues with down tube cracks forming at the gusset. The gen 2 frames were the heavy ones. These are easy to spot because of the hydroformed top tubes. I had/have both of these frames. Every frame after these are what you are looking for (minus the boost frames). The gen 2 can be had with either 135 or 142 rear dropouts. The gen 2 was a blast to ride as it was very throwable. The current frame is more stable due to the longer reach. If you can't find what you are looking for, and want to settle for a gen 2, I could be persuaded into letting mine go to help out another fellow rider.

Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst ... 111718192021

Similar Threads

  1. Jones steel diamond frame or Canfield Nimble 9
    By Clink in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 11-02-2012, 10:27 PM
  2. Canfield Nimble 9?
    By Professor in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 254
    Last Post: 09-23-2011, 08:17 AM
  3. Canfield One - building thread
    By jetmotor in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 06-23-2010, 08:33 PM
  4. Canfield Bros Nimble Nine
    By Fly Rider in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-24-2010, 07:39 AM
  5. Canfield Nimble 9 29'er, get your pedal on!
    By pajak in forum Canfield
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-17-2009, 06:10 PM

Members who have read this thread: 66

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2018 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.