Geometry question.- Mtbr.com

1. ## Geometry question.

Two bikes. Will they be similar based on this geometry?

2. Maybe------geo does take into consideration the dynamics of the rear suspension which can make a large difference-----and you do not state if the shock/fork are the same----could also generate a sizable diff. Note one bike (suspect large TB4) has a pretty short ETT--could be a bit cramped

3. ish. the major differentiation between the two is the seat tube length. That's what is causing the delta in ETT.

4. Originally Posted by minimusprime
ish. the major differentiation between the two is the seat tube length. That's what is causing the delta in ETT.
Seat tube length has no effect on ETT. HTA of a degree difference will cause the biggest difference on these bikes from the data given IMO.

5. Originally Posted by dahowe
Two bikes. Will they be similar based on this geometry?
yes.

6. +1. Based on geo, they will be very similar. As mentioned, there are variables other than geo that can make them different.

7. Originally Posted by scottzg
yes.
What if one is a hardtail and the other FS...

8. Originally Posted by David R
What if one is a hardtail and the other FS...

What if one is a motorcycle and the other is a spaceship? Let's assume OP isn't an idiot.

9. Appreciated. Lol.

10. I think similar. The 65.9 hta, shorter wheelbase, lower BB will be snappier.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

11. They are similar. By the way, I rode today with a bunch of guys who could tell every number on their bikes, and asked me what numbers in mine; of which I had absolutely no idea. On the trail I smoked them all, on a bike I was riding the first time.

So don't worry about these numbers. If these are two existing bikes, ride the two, look at them two, seek for the better price of them. You probably can't go wrong.

12. I could not agree more. Call me surprised when I compared them.

13. Originally Posted by scottzg
Let's assume OP isn't an idiot.
This is the internet, I'm not sure that's a fair assumption to automatically make. (no offence OP )

But now that you've lifted the curtain and unveiled these two mystery bikes we no longer need to assume that all other factors are equal and maybe people can give you a better idea of how similar these two bikes are.

I haven't ridden either, but obviously they're going to be "pretty similar" compared to another bike that is more differenter, but you've probably worked that out yourself I imagine (presuming Scottzg's assumption was correct); they're both modern mid-long travel carbon 29ers that fit well in the "do all" grey area between trail bike and enduro race bike. The Ibis has a touch more travel but I think you'd find the biggest difference between them wouldn't be the geometry but the kinematics of the rear suspension. The Ibis DW link should be a little firmer under pedalling and will sit higher in its travel, and the Hightowers VPP a bit more plush and active under power which could be an advantage on technical climbs where traction becomes an issue, or may be seen as inefficiency on smoother gravel/road climbs.

14. Santa Cruz and Ibis setting the new mainstream geo standards. Love the short seat tubes in size L, allowing my 30" inseam self to size up.

The MegaTower's extra standover clearance would be like icing one the cake for me, comparing based on the geo chart. I've learned to appreciate how much of a role that plays in reducing penalty for failure, when taking risks like riding elevated skinnies (low speed stuff where you gotta dismount).

15. The two geometries are really quite close with the exception of maybe the wheelbase; same fork with a slightly different shock. Yet one is often reviewed as a capable “playfull” LT trail bike the other is often reviewed as a “big bike” and a “big hit” enduro that has to be pushed. VP vs DW I guess. Quite remarkable.

16. Perspective. Marketing. Opinions. One mans stable and plush is anothers sluggish and boring, nimble and playful can just as easily be viewed as twitchy and scary.

17. The Ripmo feels more like the Hightower LT than the Megatower. The degree slacker head angle is significant, maybe not for XC trails but definitely for steep DH. There's also the difference in rear travel 145 vs 160mm. The MT will sag deeper in rear slacking the head angle out even more. Then there's the two flip chips on the MT. The shock position can be lowered making the HTA even slacker and the BB even lower. The chainstay can be lengthened another 10mm which also gives it more stability and DH oriented geo. The shock is also mounted very low giving extra stability (lower Cg). And that's just the geo.

18. Originally Posted by jeremy3220
The Ripmo feels more like the Hightower LT than the Megatower. The degree slacker head angle is significant, maybe not for XC trails but definitely for steep DH. There's also the difference in rear travel 145 vs 160mm. The MT will sag deeper in rear slacking the head angle out even more. Then there's the two flip chips on the MT. The shock position can be lowered making the HTA even slacker and the BB even lower. The chainstay can be lengthened another 10mm which also gives it more stability and DH oriented geo. The shock is also mounted very low giving extra stability (lower Cg). And that's just the geo.
You are right. Thx

19. Originally Posted by David R
Perspective. Marketing. Opinions. One mans stable and plush is anothers sluggish and boring, nimble and playful can just as easily be viewed as twitchy and scary.
“Often”

20. The nuances of geo is one thing, but the nuances chassis rigidity and suspension kinematics play a big role in how the bike handles and interacts with the rider.

Testing two different bikes with similar geo highlights all the other things people don't think about, since they're not listed on a spec sheet in a simple understandable manner.

#### Posting Permissions

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