Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 140 of 140
  1. #1
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725

    Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock

    I have a RS Monarch Plus 7.5x2 lying around from my previous bike, which I want to try on my Phantom.
    I have a set of offset bushings on the way, with a total of 3mm offset (2+1mm).
    With 0 compression the eye2eye will be 3.35mm (1/4" - 3mm) longer than today, and with full compression the fully compressed shock will be 3mm shorter than today.
    I've checked frame clearance which seems ok.
    If the leverage ratio can be assumed constant, the travel will be 105 x (2/1.75) = 120mm.


    Any reason not to do this?

    How will the suspension work in the 3mm/3.35mm "outside" each end of the current stroke?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    Absolutely no clue, although I did query Keith on using just the longer shock and he said it wouldn't be good. If it were me personally, since you've got the shock and already ordered the bushings, I'd give it a go and get the answer for myself. You've actually got 2 problems, one being that the shock will take the kinematics outside their designed intent and two the shock may not be tuned to suit the KS link. Please report back if you try it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,423
    Banshee Phantom 29'' 2014 - Linkage Design

    This can give you some idea once you start to understand how to read the info. The way you are doing this is just adding a bit to each end of the travel and I don't see that you will notice much as far as a negative. If you use 30% sag as a constant you will be sitting at almost the same spot with the longer shock/ bushing combo when compared to the shorter stock shock. Thus, pedaling response should be the same as stock.

    I was just contemplating this exact possibility last week so I'm very interested in your journey. I'd be interested in a 120 rear/ 130 front Phantom...

    Please post specifics on the bushings you ordered. How does one bushing give more offset vs the other? Both bolts are 8mm so I'm not following why both aren't the same offset.

    What is the compression/ rebound tune on the stock Monarch for the new Phantom?

    Most every bike designer/ company is going to say this is a bad idea...if for no other reason than legal implications.

    Have fun!

  4. #4
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by titusquasi View Post
    Banshee Phantom 29'' 2014 - Linkage Design

    This can give you some idea once you start to understand how to read the info. The way you are doing this is just adding a bit to each end of the travel and I don't see that you will notice much as far as a negative. If you use 30% sag as a constant you will be sitting at almost the same spot with the longer shock/ bushing combo when compared to the shorter stock shock. Thus, pedaling response should be the same as stock.
    ^^This is what I'm thinking as well. How bad can it possibly get??
    Also, I think I have to learn some spanish..

    Please post specifics on the bushings you ordered. How does one bushing give more offset vs the other? Both bolts are 8mm so I'm not following why both aren't the same offset.
    Ordered from these guys:
    https://www.offsetbushings.com/colle...-bushings-pair

    With an 8mm bolt the max offset per bushing is 2mm, so I specified 2+1mm.

    What is the compression/ rebound tune on the stock Monarch for the new Phantom?
    Don't know, but the shock I'm gonna use is M/M

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    From all the reports and responses I've read from Banshee, on RS stuff, that's the tune you want. Curious if you also have the spec'd 184x44 shock and have or will try that so you can have a true appreciation for your "mod"?
    Quote Originally Posted by langen View Post
    Don't know, but the shock I'm gonna use is M/M
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  6. #6
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    That's good to hear!

    The bike came with the DB Inline shock, so it wont be a 100% comparison.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,423
    Lol...I don't know Spanish either. I just know how to use Google Translate! Even then I have to read it slow and make sure I know what he's saying. I really like all the work that guy has done to help us compare different bikes and platforms kinematically.

  8. #8
    Here, diagonally!
    Reputation: JACKL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,098
    Sounds doable with the offset bushings. Keep going with the modifications, and pretty soon you'll have a Prime.

    I shouldn't even mention this, but I've considered long-shocking my Prime to 150mm travel. 8.5 x 2.5 shock. I've measured it out in detail several times. Unfortunately, it involves drilling a new shock mount hole in the frame, and trimming the mount so the original hole is never usable again. XL is probably the only size with enough meat on the mount to do this. The devil is tapping me on the shoulder, but I've been wise enough not to do it....so far.
    Quote Originally Posted by noapathy View Post
    Is it blue on one side and white on the other or did you buy two of whatever that is?

  9. #9
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by JACKL View Post
    Sounds doable with the offset bushings. Keep going with the modifications, and pretty soon you'll have a Prime
    Haha

    I was actually more keen on a Prime, but since I couldn't find one in the correct size I had to go with a Phantom.
    Can't say I regret though

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    300
    Subscribing for curiosity's sake.

  11. #11
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    Bushings in da house..

    ..BUT the front bushing is 5.4 mm too narrow (2017 vs 2016 frame), so I still have to wait some more to test the setup on the trails.

    I still managed to check the shock length in a compressed and extended state, and it seems like a total offset of 4mm (I have 3 now) is well within the range of motion of the rear triangle.

    So I'll buy one more bushing with 2mm offset, to be able to run both 3mm(2+1) and 4mm(2+2) total offset.

    The waiting continues..

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,423
    So...did the shock eyelet widths change from 2016 to 2017?

    What are the correct widths?

    Thanks for doing this!

  13. #13
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    Yep..

    2016:
    25.4x8 & 40x8

    2017:
    20x8 & 40x8

    It's all on the Banshee website.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: amrayo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by langen View Post
    I have a RS Monarch Plus 7.5x2 lying around from my previous bike, which I want to try on my Phantom.
    I have a set of offset bushings on the way, with a total of 3mm offset (2+1mm).
    With 0 compression the eye2eye will be 3.35mm (1/4" - 3mm) longer than today, and with full compression the fully compressed shock will be 3mm shorter than today.
    I've checked frame clearance which seems ok.
    If the leverage ratio can be assumed constant, the travel will be 105 x (2/1.75) = 120mm.


    Any reason not to do this?

    How will the suspension work in the 3mm/3.35mm "outside" each end of the current stroke?
    i've used offset bushings in the past to get lower BB and steeper head angle,
    all in all, it is a cheap and effective hack but you can now get 185X50 Metric rear shocks which should fit without bushings

    ​The Ultimate Guide to 'Metric' Shock Sizing and the RockShox Super Deluxe - Mountain Bikes Feature Stories - Vital MTB

  15. #15
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by amrayo View Post
    i've used offset bushings in the past to get lower BB and steeper head angle,
    all in all, it is a cheap and effective hack but you can now get 185X50 Metric rear shocks which should fit without bushings

    ​The Ultimate Guide to 'Metric' Shock Sizing and the RockShox Super Deluxe - Mountain Bikes Feature Stories - Vital MTB
    The new shocks look interesting, but my idea now is to see if I can use my old shock without spending too much money.
    (Also good to have a backup shock if/when the CCDB IL dies..)

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,423
    Any updates on this endeavor?

  17. #17
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    Back again with an update:

    My original estimates wrt how much offset I could use were a bit conservative, so I've ended up with 2mm on each bushing, 4mm total. This is well within the range of motion of the rear triangle.

    The two pics attached (are meant to) show the distance between seat tube and tire, and between seat stay bridge and sest tube. Both taken at full compression.
    Tire is Minion DHR2 2.4 on a 32mm inner rim, with 650b dropouts in slackest setting.
    Sorry about the 90degree error..

    I haven't done any back to back testing against the original CCDB Inline so I can't come up with a list of pros and cons, but I can say it doesn't feel totally wrong
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-img_0454.jpg  

    Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-img_0455.jpg  


  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,423
    Ohhhh snap...

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    So curious, looks like you have loads of room, why the 650B/long drop outs? Still very interested to hear how it rides.
    Quote Originally Posted by langen
    Both taken at full compression. Tire is Minion DHR2 2.4 on a 32mm inner rim, with 650b dropouts in slackest setting.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  20. #20
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    So curious, looks like you have loads of room, why the 650B/long drop outs? Still very interested to hear how it rides.
    I'm 6'9" with a 42" inseam (with ditto high seat), so I want the rear wheel as far back as possible for not un-weighing the front wheel on climbs.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    Oh, well yeah then, makes perfect sense. I'm only 6'2" with a 35.25" inseam and I'm really close to being over the rear axle, back of my saddle comes down inline with the weld from the drop outs to chain stays.


    Quote Originally Posted by langen View Post
    I'm 6'9" with a 42" inseam (with ditto high seat), so I want the rear wheel as far back as possible for not un-weighing the front wheel on climbs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  22. #22
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    So, I've had some rides on the new setup, and I really like it.
    Trouble is, I also mounted new carbon wheels, new wider bar and an oval chainring more or less at the same time, so it's hard to say which upgrade contributes to what..

    Regardless - the "new" bike rocks, and now I wonder if I should get a 7.5x2 Inline or Inline Coil....

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: geoya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    41
    I spoke with CaneCreek and Craig from avalanche and they both discouraged trying to fit a coil on Phantom. It's optimized for progressive air shock.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,423
    Quote Originally Posted by langen View Post
    So, I've had some rides on the new setup, and I really like it.
    Trouble is, I also mounted new carbon wheels, new wider bar and an oval chainring more or less at the same time, so it's hard to say which upgrade contributes to what..

    Regardless - the "new" bike rocks, and now I wonder if I should get a 7.5x2 Inline or Inline Coil....
    I was going to go with an Inline if I had gone this route.

    Nice to hear updated feedback!

  25. #25
    Bigger is better!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by geoya View Post
    I spoke with CaneCreek and Craig from avalanche and they both discouraged trying to fit a coil on Phantom. It's optimized for progressive air shock.
    Thanks! Nice to know.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,278
    oh lord. Here is a post of mine from earlier in the year in the Phantom thread. An idea which is still wildly bouncing around in my head:

    Quote Originally Posted by Lithified View Post
    Anyone wishing they had more travel? I am thinking of building a 2017 up for an XC bike to compliment my burly Spitfire (coil shock, 160mm fork, meaty rubbers, DH brakes, etc). I hate to be a numbers guy without even riding the bike, but if this bike had 115mm of travel, I'd be all over it. With the 105mm, it has me really wondering.

    I ride in western NC (Pisgah and Dupont primarily). Thoughts?


    LOL. Thanks guys...keep the updates coming. Guessing Keith will chime in at some point to tell the pesky tinkering kids to be quiet down there! Or maybe more importantly the engineering reasons to do or not to do this.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,278
    Perhaps the best question for Keith...engineering thoughts on a 185x50 metric shock on the Phantom? Basically long stroke it.

    Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    Any more Feedback on this topic? Curious as well...

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    I've got something coming I'm going to try, if it will work, nothing offset though, but definitely not stock or I think recommended

    Quote Originally Posted by rushy41 View Post
    Any more Feedback on this topic? Curious as well...
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,423
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    I've got something coming I'm going to try, if it will work, nothing offset though, but definitely not stock or I think recommended
    Oooooooh. Pass the popcorn, please!

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    No, nothing like that Dude, just something simple, hopefully will get the parts in next week. I guess it's been just over 3 years I've had the Phantom and nothing new since besides some new wheels and PLUS stuff for my HT/Rigid, so getting a little itchy for anything new and this may or may not work and provide the scratch, we'll see.

    Quote Originally Posted by titusquasi View Post
    Oooooooh. Pass the popcorn, please!
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,278
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    No, nothing like that Dude, just something simple, hopefully will get the parts in next week. I guess it's been just over 3 years I've had the Phantom and nothing new since besides some new wheels and PLUS stuff for my HT/Rigid, so getting a little itchy for anything new and this may or may not work and provide the scratch, we'll see.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    @ langen

    Still happy with the longer shock? Any more feedback?

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    595
    Quote Originally Posted by Lithified View Post
    Perhaps the best question for Keith...engineering thoughts on a 185x50 metric shock on the Phantom? Basically long stroke it.

    Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
    the 185x50 is a Trunnion-Mount shock, so that won't work..

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    Actually, that's not 100% correct

    Quote Originally Posted by MalcolmX View Post
    the 185x50 is a Trunnion-Mount shock, so that won't work..
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    595
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Actually, that's not 100% correct
    Which exeption is there?

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    I have a project I'm working on, still not 100% sure if I'm going to go ahead with it, right now trying to source some hardware to make it work, but suffice to say, it would prove the exception
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    300
    Any updates on these endeavors?

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    Well, my project was kind of put on hold for now as it involves a bit more than offset bushings and haven't found the materials I need to do the alteration necessary, but hoping to get back to it fairly soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by greenblur View Post
    Any updates on these endeavors?
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    I've been idly considering this "problem" myself.

    What differentiates the Phantom from the Prime in terms of suspension layout? I think the rear triangle is the same, are the linkages? Is it the front triangle pivot placements? Or could it just be where the shock mounts on the down tube.

    Is never seen a technical drawing (or a prime for that matter) to check, any ideas?

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by shackleton View Post
    I've been idly considering this "problem" myself.

    What differentiates the Phantom from the Prime in terms of suspension layout? I think the rear triangle is the same, are the linkages? Is it the front triangle pivot placements? Or could it just be where the shock mounts on the down tube.

    Is never seen a technical drawing (or a prime for that matter) to check, any ideas?
    I was curious and had some time to kill. Looking side by side, looks like same rear triangle but a different upper link to accommodate the longer shock. Hard to to tell on lower link. FWIW, also looks like front triangles are the same dimensions, except for head tube length.

    So it's possible that a Phantom is a short-shocked Prime. Got a hunch there's more to it. Continually wonder if a Prime would be better for Enduro racing. But I place well on my "tiny" little Phantom and people are always amused to hear how little travel it has.

    For next gen, it makes sense to move the Phantom and Prime to 120 and 150ish, if only to keep with similar bikes. Or go 105, 130, 160 and have three models.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,278
    Quote Originally Posted by greenblur View Post
    So it's possible that a Phantom is a short-shocked Prime. Got a hunch there's more to it. Continually wonder if a Prime would be better for Enduro racing. But I place well on my "tiny" little Phantom and people are always amused to hear how little travel it has.
    Nahhhhh not quite that easy. Check out the tube diameters on the bikes. Way thicker tubing on Prime. I'd sh!t a pickle if not way different geom as well, esp around the shock.

    Depending on your terrain, I have no doubts a Phantom rips in your local Enduro series. For me personally a Prime would crush compared to a Phantom but that's in chunk town with limited flow.


    Quote Originally Posted by greenblur View Post
    I
    For next gen, it makes sense to move the Phantom and Prime to 120 and 150ish.....
    Ya I've been saying the same thing for a while. 135 on the Prime made loads of sense when they debuted the bike. Ground breaking at the time.


    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rocket88R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by langen View Post
    So, I've had some rides on the new setup, and I really like it.
    Trouble is, I also mounted new carbon wheels, new wider bar and an oval chainring more or less at the same time, so it's hard to say which upgrade contributes to what..

    Regardless - the "new" bike rocks, and now I wonder if I should get a 7.5x2 Inline or Inline Coil....
    Langen,

    How is the "travel" upgrade working out after 8 months or so?
    _______________
    Schwinn: 1999 46 Banger-21"

    Banshee: 2015 Phantom-L

    Guerrilla Gravity: 2018 Shred Dogg-M

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    300
    My warranty is almost expired, so I'll fess up and say I did it as well. I swapped the stock 184x44 DBinline for a 190x50 DBinline w/ offset bushings. Running a 130 fork for both setups.

    It gives a little more skoosh over rough ground. Best thing it did was balance out the F/R travel a bit. In 105mm mode with a 130 fork, you got a little of the stapler effect like you do on long travel HTs.

    I haven't hit the back of the ST on any compressions. There is a FD cable mount that is really tight to the linkage but there is no contact.

    Its cool but not life changing.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rocket88R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    179
    Greenblur,
    Many thanks for that. I maybe putting a Phantom together soon. I plan to put my Fox 34 140mm on the front. I will ride it for a while but I think I will end up with the travel mod. It makes sense to me.
    _______________
    Schwinn: 1999 46 Banger-21"

    Banshee: 2015 Phantom-L

    Guerrilla Gravity: 2018 Shred Dogg-M

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rocket88R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    179
    Greenblur,

    Your offset bushings:
    Brand?
    How much offset?
    Both ends or just one, if so which end?

    Thanks,
    _______________
    Schwinn: 1999 46 Banger-21"

    Banshee: 2015 Phantom-L

    Guerrilla Gravity: 2018 Shred Dogg-M

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    300
    https://www.offsetbushings.com/colle...-bushings-pair

    3mm offset in both sides. That gets you the 6mm you need from 184 to 190.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by greenblur View Post
    My warranty is almost expired, so I'll fess up and say I did it as well. I swapped the stock 184x44 DBinline for a 190x50 DBinline w/ offset bushings. Running a 130 fork for both setups.

    It gives a little more skoosh over rough ground. Best thing it did was balance out the F/R travel a bit. In 105mm mode with a 130 fork, you got a little of the stapler effect like you do on long travel HTs.

    I haven't hit the back of the ST on any compressions. There is a FD cable mount that is really tight to the linkage but there is no contact.

    Its cool but not life changing.
    Going to try this!

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    Last week I replaced the stock shock (Monarch RT3) on my '14 Phantom with a 190x50 Manitou Mcleod - swap was succesfull. You have to check the clearance on your bike though. Try if a 190mm shock has enough room - some people in German forums mentionned that they had clearance issues with the FD - mount (that can be filed down easily if you are running 1x ). With offset buhings you also have to check if the seat bridge touches the seat tube when the shock is fully compressed - let all the air out and doublecheck. On my L clearance is tight (only 1 offset bush ) but no probs.
    First ride will be this weekend....

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    35
    I've been following this thread for a bit and I just put a monarch 190mmx51mm on my 2015 phantom and with no offset bushings I don't hit the FD cable stop. But at full compression the top linkage hits the seat tube. For those that have tried this setup with offset bushings, which way are you installing them?

    Right now it looks like I might just need a single 1 or 2mm offset bushing to make the new shock 192x53 so this linkage doesn't hit.

    Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    That sounds strange- fully compressed your shock should have the same length as a184x44 shock......

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    35
    Or does the extra 1mm in the stroke length of the monarch make that difference for the linkages to hit.

    Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    first feedback after 2 days of riding with a 190x50 mm Manitou Mcleod shock instead of a RS Monarch RT3 184x44mm:
    - I like it, feels good
    - it's not a day and night difference, the Phantom is a bit more stable in gnarly sections
    - in my view pedal efficiency or the snappy feel of the Phantom are not compromised
    - I decided to use the new shock without offset bushings ( clearance between seatstay bridge and seatstay would be too tight otherwise for my liking)
    - geometry is fine (BB height is now 33.5 mm - installed a -1 degree angleset to keep the headangle slack
    - suprised about the performance of the Mcleod, a very good shock in my opinion

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    I have one of the first Phantoms (2013) in large. Has anybody tried the 190x50 trick with one of these? Did anything change between the model years that would affect things?

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    Mine is a 14 model in L - so geometry should be the same....
    But the exact position of the FD cable stop may not be exactly the same....
    But it shouldn't be a big issue....

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    No, you have a 2014 Phantom, as that's the first year they were available and no, no changes were made on them until the redesign with fully hydro-formed TT and new 2 position geo, which is the current model.

    Quote Originally Posted by shackleton View Post
    I have one of the first Phantoms (2013) in large. Has anybody tried the 190x50 trick with one of these? Did anything change between the model years that would affect things?
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    My bad, memory has been shot since baby arrival.

    Thanks for the advice.


    How much extra vertical travel does this yield? Crude maths of (105/44)x50 gives 119mm but the wheel path isn't straight line vertical. Anybody calculated this properly?

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    Not really - around 120 mm I calculated roughly as well. I didn't want to overanalyze that thing - picked a longer shock for cheap and just did a couple of rides. I could always go back but I won't - I like it.:-)

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Any updates on the ride and comparison between the 2 shock lengths?

    My DBairIL needs a service and I could get it upped to 190x50 at the same time.......

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    I can't help with the Inline - the McLeod in 190x50 works great and frame clearance is ok.
    I like the way it rides but I changed a couple of other things (130 mm fork instead of 120 mm, -1 degree angleset, new tires) so it's hard to say what contribute to what. I will not go back to 184x44, me personally I don't see negatives.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by neil_240 View Post
    I've been following this thread for a bit and I just put a monarch 190mmx51mm on my 2015 phantom and with no offset bushings I don't hit the FD cable stop. But at full compression the top linkage hits the seat tube. For those that have tried this setup with offset bushings, which way are you installing them?

    Right now it looks like I might just need a single 1 or 2mm offset bushing to make the new shock 192x53 so this linkage doesn't hit.

    Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
    this right here , my brain gets boggled when I think about which way to orient the offset bushings , so which way is correct ? facing inward or outwards ?

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    300
    Outwards. You need to make the eye to eye longer to jump from 184 to 190 length shock.

    Offset bushings are normally used to slacken a bike when using the correct length shock. For that, you point them inwards. It mimics a slightly compressed shock, which slackens HA, STA and lowers bb.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by rushy41 View Post
    I can't help with the Inline - the McLeod in 190x50 works great and frame clearance is ok.
    I like the way it rides but I changed a couple of other things (130 mm fork instead of 120 mm, -1 degree angleset, new tires) so it's hard to say what contribute to what. I will not go back to 184x44, me personally I don't see negatives.
    I also installed an angleset, so I pretty much have a 120mm Prime. I love it but I had some initial problems dialing in the fork and front tire pressures. It's so much more stable at speed it encourages you to go faster, which in turn means you're running into shit faster. I've had to go up in pressure on both fork and tires to compensate.

    I should probably jump to a Prime but I'd only be gaining 15mm of travel. A 145-150ish Prime would get my money.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    After more than 2 months of riding I can honestly say that long-shocking the Phantom was a good idea - I really enjoy it. This bike has always been fast but it's even faster now - crazy fun! Destroyed a wheeset in a high alpine trail - center, shit happens!:-)

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    Installed McLeod today. No offset bushings,just file 1mm down from FD cable stopper. Was immpressed with McLeod while parking lot test
    Tomorrow will take phantom for proper trail ride

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Nice, please report back! What tune did you go for (assuming that they come in different tunes, not exactly clear from the online shops.....)

    Ta,

    S

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by shackleton View Post
    Nice, please report back! What tune did you go for (assuming that they come in different tunes, not exactly clear from the online shops.....)

    Ta,

    S
    As I find out on mtbr suspension forum, McLeod has only one tune and 2 cans. Standard and King can.
    The tune it has perfectly matches phantom's kinematics.
    Fully open IPA position gives nice bottomless coil like fill with nice progression in the end. Bike fills like my CB Riot with coil shock, but more stabile due to longer chainstays.
    First impressions- I was blown away how this shock performs compare to rs monarch, how each IPA click is changing riding characteristics...
    Need to ride more, to get a full picture.
    Later,I'll report back...

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    I have had the same experience the Mcleod is a really underrated shock! And escpecially for the Phantom it is perfect, with spacers you can go from 190x50 to 184x44 or something in between perfect!

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Cheers! Now I just need them to come back into stock in the UK...............

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    What are you talking about, CRC has them in stock for the Phantom, I'm personally waiting for them to get the size for my Prime.
    https://www.chainreactioncycles.com/.../rp-prod129744

    Quote Originally Posted by shackleton View Post
    Cheers! Now I just need them to come back into stock in the UK...............
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    OK, thanks, they do now but didn't last night. No need to be quite such a dick about it though.

    They have been out of stock for weeks and I haven't had the restocking notification that I subscribed to.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    So where exactly was I dick about it, they've been in stock since sometime last week when I was looking for one for the Prime.Maybe if you're really interested you'd do like me and others and regularly check back because you know that modern "smart" mail programs/sites will often send stuff like those notifications to spam, or junk or other such mailboxes.

    Quote Originally Posted by shackleton View Post
    OK, thanks, they do now but didn't last night. No need to be quite such a dick about it though.

    They have been out of stock for weeks and I haven't had the restocking notification that I subscribed to.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    What are you talking about, CRC has them in stock for the Phantom, I'm personally waiting for them to get the size for my Prime.
    https://www.chainreactioncycles.com/.../rp-prod129744
    Be careful with CRC. They are selling '15 McLeods (look at decal graphics and rebound knob colour) 2015 mcleods may have obsolete ifp pistons.
    Cheap new mcleods are on german bike24.de now

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    What are you talking about,
    Not the phrasing I would use if I were helping someone. Rather rude in fact.

    And they were showing up as out of stock last night, and on Friday. As in I looked at the website. Like you patronizingly suggested.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    I'm personally waiting for them to get the size for my Prime.
    BTW,what can size are you planning to use on Prime? Standard or high volume king can?

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    I'm debating that right now, the King Can is 1/2 the price of the shock, so thinking I'll just order the regular version and see how it goes, if I find it lacking, then I might give the KC a go and see if that helps after I've exhausted all tuning options with the regular can.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vadim0791 View Post
    BTW,what can size are you planning to use on Prime? Standard or high volume king can?
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Any updates from the long shock testers? Comparisons between with and without offset bushings?

    Crc have 190x50 mcleod back in stock.......

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    98
    I have only used the long shock with offset bushings. I thought it worked very well and the offset bushings kept the geometry of the bike almost the same. The extra travel was nice when hammering through rock gardens. It still has the feel of being connected to the trail like with 105mm of travel but just a little less. If you're wishing your phantom had a little bit more travel it is worth it. You will also have a back up shock or can adjust the bike based on where you are riding.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by shackleton View Post
    Any updates from the long shock testers? Comparisons between with and without offset bushings?

    Crc have 190x50 mcleod back in stock.......
    So far,so good
    140mm MRP Stage/190x50 McLeod no offset bushings.
    I was so impressed how McLeod works, so I build Prime with 200x57 McLeod also.
    For shuttle days will use MRP Raze,if mcleod will start packing

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Hi Vadim and Chris,

    Thanks for the replies, any head angle changes that you made to make up for the longer shock? Which rear wheel position do you use?

    Ta,

    S

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    129
    I have been using the 190x50 McLeod as well - 130 mm fork, slackest setting and a
    - 1 degree works components angleset to bring BB height and headangle back in line.
    No offset bushings - but that may be different from frame to frame.
    Setup works flawlessly - can only recommend it....

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Right then. Shock ordered, wish me luck!

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by shackleton View Post
    Hi Vadim and Chris,

    Thanks for the replies, any head angle changes that you made to make up for the longer shock? Which rear wheel position do you use?

    Ta,

    S
    No head angle change,but thinking to go with -1 and drop fork travel from 140mm to 130mm
    Using long (27,5) dropouts in slack position.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Shock fitted. Needed 2mm offset bushing. Found that a stone had already crushed the front der cable stop so not much left to foul there...... !

    Any suggestions for base rebound settings for the mcleod before I head out?

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    So first ride with the mcleod.

    Did 12 back to back runs down our local DH/enduro tracks swapping between 190x50 mcleod (2mm offset) and 184x44 dbair IL (6 runs with each).

    No real difference on smooth flow stuff but in the rooty, rocky high speed stuff with braking bumps the mcleod felt more composed and smoother. The dbair got me down but I felt more rattled and tired. Strava suggests 5-15 seconds faster across the board for a ~3 min run with the mcleod.

    Bike also felt more balanced with the suspension at 120r/130f.

    Have to see how long term goes but so far I think that it is a better bike if you do choppy trails.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    I'm looking to do this to my Phantom as well. Anyone running the McLeod on a Medium frame with no offset bushings?

    FYI - I am running 27.5 30mm ID rims with 2.8 tires, and plan to keep it that way but I still want to be able to run 29x2.4 as well. I don't mind cutting off the FD cable stop if I have to.

    Thanks!

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    I'm looking to do this to my Phantom as well. Anyone running the McLeod on a Medium frame with no offset bushings?

    FYI - I am running 27.5 30mm ID rims with 2.8 tires, and plan to keep it that way but I still want to be able to run 29x2.4 as well. I don't mind cutting off the FD cable stop if I have to.

    Thanks!
    Nobody?

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Not on a medium frame but my large 2014 needed the front der stop removing (or crushed by rock in my case) and 2mm of offset bushings. It is all very close to manufacturing and frame tolerances so I think that it will be specific to your frame.

    I tested it before mcleod purchase by drilling holes in some 10mm wooden battens and putting it in in place of the shock. 188mm was the longest I could get in even with my rock crushed front der stop. Shorter than that and the top linkage hit the seat tube at full compression (i.e. if the holes in the wood were less than 138mm (140mm for compressed shock minus 2mm for offset bushing)).

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by shackleton View Post
    Not on a medium frame but my large 2014 needed the front der stop removing (or crushed by rock in my case) and 2mm of offset bushings. It is all very close to manufacturing and frame tolerances so I think that it will be specific to your frame.

    I tested it before mcleod purchase by drilling holes in some 10mm wooden battens and putting it in in place of the shock. 188mm was the longest I could get in even with my rock crushed front der stop. Shorter than that and the top linkage hit the seat tube at full compression (i.e. if the holes in the wood were less than 138mm (140mm for compressed shock minus 2mm for offset bushing)).
    Thanks Shackleton. That's a great idea. I can make a shock mock-up tool. I guess it would be a length of material with 2 holes being 190mm apart and another tool with holes 140mm away from one another.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    91
    Yep, pretty much!

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    Thanks Shackleton. That's a great idea. I can make a shock mock-up tool. I guess it would be a length of material with 2 holes being 190mm apart and another tool with holes 140mm away from one another.
    So did you test this out, and if so how did it work?

    Thinking of trying a Mcleod on my M frame instead of servicing the current shock...

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by JScoot View Post
    So did you test this out, and if so how did it work?

    Thinking of trying a Mcleod on my M frame instead of servicing the current shock...
    I did not test it out yet. Maybe this weekend I'll give it a try.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    I did not test it out yet. Maybe this weekend I'll give it a try.
    Ok sure. Any updates would be appreciated. I'm a simple man, and I'd be most likely to try it if I don't have to mess with offset bushings and such.
    I guess the other issue could be the top linkage making contact with the ST?
    I've only got what looks like < 10mm of clearance there at full compression now.
    Last edited by S​​usspect; 05-06-2019 at 05:18 AM.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Sorry JScoot, I did not have a chance to try this out yet.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    Sorry JScoot, I did not have a chance to try this out yet.
    No problem man, no obligation... thanks for the reply, and if/when you do test this out give us an update, it'll be useful information.

    Right now I'm just in the thinking-it-through phase.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    I took my shock off last night and using a tape measure, tried to see if a 190mm long shock would fit. The swingarm bottoms out on the front derailleur cable stop almost immediately after going past the 184mm stock length.

    It also looks like if you cut away the cable stop, you still would run into trouble with the swingarm itself touching the frame near the lower linkage. Hard to explain.

    I think for Medium frames, you would need at least one 3mm offset bushing, plus cut the cable stop off.

    I've decided that I'm fine with the stock rear travel. I have to make a decision now to have my CC DB iL rebuilt, or buy a new shock. The Db iL is the new version, and it's lasted 2 years.

    Any opinions on $200 rear shocks that are good for the Phantom?

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    I took my shock off last night and using a tape measure, tried to see if a 190mm long shock would fit. The swingarm bottoms out on the front derailleur cable stop almost immediately after going past the 184mm stock length.

    It also looks like if you cut away the cable stop, you still would run into trouble with the swingarm itself touching the frame near the lower linkage. Hard to explain.

    I think for Medium frames, you would need at least one 3mm offset bushing, plus cut the cable stop off.

    I've decided that I'm fine with the stock rear travel. I have to make a decision now to have my CC DB iL rebuilt, or buy a new shock. The Db iL is the new version, and it's lasted 2 years.

    Any opinions on $200 rear shocks that are good for the Phantom?
    I've had the same debate with myself about buying new vs. rebuilding. I hate that we live in a throwaway society, but a brand new shock is often not that far off the cost of a full rebuild, if you pay someone to do it. Is this the Cane Creek you have?

    https://www.jensonusa.com/Cane-Creek...AaAmJ8EALw_wcB

    Jenson says only one left, hopefully they get more!
    Last edited by S​​usspect; 05-06-2019 at 05:19 AM.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    39
    Phantom V1 size M works with 190/50 shock if you cut the cable stop for the FD off and grind about 2 to 3 millimeters off of the edge of the swingarm in the spot where it would hit the seattube.
    Then no offset bushings are needed.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by JScoot View Post
    Hmmm... even though the newer frames don't have the FD stop, I'm probably in the same boat if it's going to make frame contact.

    I've had the same debate with myself about buying new vs. rebuilding. I hate that we live in a throwaway society, but a brand new shock is often not that far off the cost of a full rebuild, if you pay someone to do it. Is this the Cane Creek you have?

    https://www.jensonusa.com/Cane-Creek...AaAmJ8EALw_wcB

    Jenson says only one left, hopefully they get more!
    I have this one. It's listed on sale for $375, but when you go to the product page it's $475. I don't see why the one you linked wouldn't work though.

    https://www.jensonusa.com/Cane-Creek...-Il-Rear-Shock

    I called Cane Creek and they want $160 for the rebuild, plus shipping both ways. But I've done that before, and the shock lasted 2 years. Most people would say that's acceptable but I'd like to see how the bike performs with a different shock. Maybe one that can be serviced by a home mechanic.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by niknaim View Post
    Phantom V1 size M works with 190/50 shock if you cut the cable stop for the FD off and grind about 2 to 3 millimeters off of the edge of the swingarm in the spot where it would hit the seattube.
    Then no offset bushings are needed.
    Excellent niknaim! I was looking at it again last night and thought the same thing.

    I was thinking maybe grind the 2mm off of the ISCG tab. Thoughts on that?

    Thanks!

    Edit - I re-read your post and it appears there is a different spot than I am seeing that needs grinding.

  101. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    Excellent niknaim! I was looking at it again last night and thought the same thing.

    I was thinking maybe grind the 2mm off of the ISCG tab. Thoughts on that?

    Thanks!

    Edit - I re-read your post and it appears there is a different spot than I am seeing that needs grinding.

    This is what I am talking about:



    Upper edge is obligatory, lower part also grinded a little for the looks.

  102. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by niknaim View Post
    This is what I am talking about:



    Upper edge is obligatory, lower part also grinded a little for the looks.
    Thank you niknaim. I will likely pull the trigger on the McLeod shock in the next day or 2. Will post up when I get it installed.

  103. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    McLeod is installed, and I did not have to grind anything on my shock linkage to fit my Medium frame.

    How much sag should I run with the increased travel? Also, what does everyone do with the compression lever? Should I run it in number 1 all the time, or swap depending on terrain? Where I live it's very short climbs and descents.

    Thanks!

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    I ended up setting sag at 25%, so about 12.5mm. This was equal to about 105psi for my 175lbs.

    First ride last night and wow is this shock plush! I initially rode with the IPA lever in #1 position so it was just soaking up all the trail chatter and the rear wheel was sticking to the ground.

    I eventually started messing with the other IPA settings to get more pedal platform for standing and mashing. 2 and 3 are better for all around trail riding.

    I'm going to have to get a remote lever now.

  105. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Still watching this post with interest, though I don't have much to offer on the shock settings. Looks like you're off and running with it though.

    I'll be interested in your thoughts on how it changes the phantom's overall ride quality, where can you feel the differences etc. Also, if you ended up using offset bushings or not...

    On another note, I demoed a Kona process 153 last week on our most rugged local trail, as I was curious how (lots) more travel would affect my riding experience. I was surprised to find that I barely noticed the extra travel. I used it, but wasn't blown away by it. And when I got back on my phantom, I liked the overall body positioning and trail feel even more. Go figure.

    Anyway when I do replace my current shock I might try the 190... so keep the updates coming!

  106. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Second ride last night. I'm using mostly IPA settings 2 and 3. I open it up for extended downhill sections which, in my local area are only about 10-20 seconds long. And I use #4 if we're climbing, also very short distances. I really would like to install a bar mounted remote lever. I feel like this shock would really benefit from that.

    I can definitely feel the plushness when I'm pedaling hard, but I don't mind. It is worth it when the going gets rough and my back wheel is firmly planted. The bike sits much taller now, so I'm thinking of putting my 175mm cranks back on, currently running 165mm. I'm also probably going to swap my dropouts to the low setting, currently in high. Keep in mind, I am running 27.5x2.8 wheels/tires. I do switch to 29 wheels for bike park days.

    I did not use any offset bushings, mostly because I did not want to pay for them, and the shock fit so why bother, right?

    My fork (fox 34 140mm) now feels like crap in comparison to the rear end. The bike feels unbalanced, and I really want some of the same plushness up front.

  107. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    You may want to give Avalanche Suspension Tuning a call and ask about the AVY cartridge, heard they really are awesome.

    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    .........My fork (fox 34 140mm) now feels like crap in comparison to the rear end. The bike feels unbalanced, and I really want some of the same plushness up front.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  108. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Thanks Lynx. I would love to buy an Avy cartridge, but $449 just for the cartridge!

    I ride with guys that have it and they say nothing but good things, plus Avalanche is in my home state. Still, I can't justify it right now.

    I've been messing with the volume reducers and I thought it was decent. Until I installed the McLeod.

  109. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    Wow, didn't realise it was that expensive, must be why I haven't gone for one yet, must have looked and saw the price and erased it from my mind How old is your Fox, is it one of the newer ones, 2017> or older ones? If it's an older one, might be worth tracking down one of the new air springs, they do make a major improvement over the older air spring and how the fork works and feels.

    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    Thanks Lynx. I would love to buy an Avy cartridge, but $449 just for the cartridge!

    I ride with guys that have it and they say nothing but good things, plus Avalanche is in my home state. Still, I can't justify it right now.

    I've been messing with the volume reducers and I thought it was decent. Until I installed the McLeod.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  110. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Wow, didn't realise it was that expensive, must be why I haven't gone for one yet, must have looked and saw the price and erased it from my mind How old is your Fox, is it one of the newer ones, 2017> or older ones? If it's an older one, might be worth tracking down one of the new air springs, they do make a major improvement over the older air spring and how the fork works and feels.
    My Fox is from 2011, but I had it rebuilt by Fox a couple years ago. They updated the internals to a Fit RLC damper. It also has Kashima, so it's a quality fork, but it needs a service, and possibly tuning.

  111. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,083
    Ouch, yeah, they've done some major improvements on the air spring since then, sometime around 2017 they introduced the retrofit air spring for 2014 and up models, not sure if it would fit an older model. So if your fork wasn't upgraded to that, it would be a major improvement.

    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    My Fox is from 2011, but I had it rebuilt by Fox a couple years ago. They updated the internals to a Fit RLC damper. It also has Kashima, so it's a quality fork, but it needs a service, and possibly tuning.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  112. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    I can definitely feel the plushness when I'm pedaling hard, but I don't mind. It is worth it when the going gets rough and my back wheel is firmly planted. The bike sits much taller now.
    Sounds like the new shock performs a lot better than the one you pulled off. As a bystander, it's hard to separate how much of your enthusiasm is coming from the better performance of the McLeod, and how much may be coming from the small increase in available travel. Do you feel like the extra ~ 15mm is a big factor in how nice the ride is? My bike rides kind of low (pedal strikes) with 27.5+, so lifting it a touch wouldn't hurt my feelings.

    And is the McLeod the ~ $220 version that I've seen on Chain Reaction? If so I'm surprised, in a good way, that it feels that much better than the pricey Cane Creek you were running previously. I've got the cheaper CC shock and I've been pretty happy, maybe ignorance is bliss...

  113. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375

  114. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Yes, that's the shock.

    I'm not sure what is the reason for my liking the new shock. It could be a little bit of both. I'll admit, I did not mess with the settings of the DBiL much, I just went with the recommended settings from CC.

  115. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    Yes, that's the shock.
    Ok cool. One last question, did you have to do anything with mounting hardware... did the stuff you had on your frame fit with the McLeod, or did you have to source some bits elsewhere? Thanks in advance.

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by JScoot View Post
    Ok cool. One last question, did you have to do anything with mounting hardware... did the stuff you had on your frame fit with the McLeod, or did you have to source some bits elsewhere? Thanks in advance.
    Good question. I did not have to buy anything. All of the hardware I had for the Cane Creek fit the McLeod perfectly.

    I do need to source some new rubber seals that were on the old hardware, but they are just to keep the dirt out of the shock hardware, and the old ones are fine for that.
    Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-mcleod.jpg

  117. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Fantastic. Shock ordered. Hoping to have the same result, with all the bushings and bits swapping over. Wish me luck, and thanks for the help.

  118. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Very cool! Let us know how it works out, and good luck!

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    Very cool! Let us know how it works out, and good luck!
    All hooked up and had my first ride today. Very nice. I'd agree with everything you said about the shock, plusher than the Cane Creek I was running. On today's ride, I never used the full travel, so really was just riding within the designed range of motion, but it was smoother.

    Longer shock lifts the rear, as mentioned above. I compensated by flipping the chips into the slack setting (I only have two to choose from, and had been in steep with 27.5+ wheels). Early impression is the new shock works well with the 140mm fork I put on a few months ago; now I'm curious how the 29ers might ride. I pulled them off right after I got the longer fork, because things felt a little too slacked out (was in slack chip position at the time).

    If I have one observation about the impact on geometry, it's that long-shocking probably makes the most sense when we're running a longer fork too. I feel like I've been able to keep the basic angles close to the original.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-img_20190505_105706.jpg  


  120. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by JScoot View Post
    All hooked up and had my first ride today. Very nice. I'd agree with everything you said about the shock, plusher than the Cane Creek I was running. On today's ride, I never used the full travel, so really was just riding within the designed range of motion, but it was smoother.

    Longer shock lifts the rear, as mentioned above. I compensated by flipping the chips into the slack setting (I only have two to choose from, and had been in steep with 27.5+ wheels). Early impression is the new shock works well with the 140mm fork I put on a few months ago; now I'm curious how the 29ers might ride. I pulled them off right after I got the longer fork, because things felt a little too slacked out (was in slack chip position at the time).

    If I have one observation about the impact on geometry, it's that long-shocking probably makes the most sense when we're running a longer fork too. I feel like I've been able to keep the basic angles close to the original.
    Awesome! Glad you like the shock. I'm always nervous about giving my opinion on stuff, especially suspension, since it really is subjective.

    I may swap my flip chips to the slack setting as well. Currently in steep.

  121. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Vadim0791 View Post
    So far,so good
    140mm MRP Stage/190x50 McLeod no offset bushings.
    I was so impressed how McLeod works, so I build Prime with 200x57 McLeod also.
    For shuttle days will use MRP Raze,if mcleod will start packing
    8+ months on long shocked phantom.
    No more thoughts to return to stock monarch. Mc Leod is on of the best working,troublesfree shock I ever owned.
    Now thinking about dropping fork travel to 130mm and installing -1,5 WC head set.Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-img-20190612-wa0022.jpg
    Same time experimenting with wife's short shocked (200x50) prime.140mm fork and dropouts in steep settings.
    Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-img-20190612-wa0023.jpg

  122. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    I recently picked up a new 2017 V2 Phantom (Medium) to replace my 2015 V1, which had the McLeod long shock conversion. The new frame came with a Rock Shox Monarch, and I really wanted to give it a try because I had never run that shock before. But I just couldn't resist putting the McLeod on the new frame.

    Same procedure as my Medium V1 frame, trim the front derailleur cable stop using a cut off wheel in a die grinder. I had to press out the upper shock spacer from the Monarch and press it into the McLeod because the V2 frame has a smaller upper shock mount spacing.

    Just bumping this thread for anyone else that wants to long shock their V2 Phantom. I'm so glad I installed the McLeod. Can't wait to finish my build!

  123. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375


    I've been running my long-shocked phantom as a 29er for over a year. Love it in that mode. Just a few days ago I thought I'd try 27.5+ again, but this time I left it in the slack setting. I figured that the long shock and 140mm fork has raised the bottom bracket enough to do this...

    It actually feels really balanced, and I've ridden it through some very rocky trails now with minimal pedal strikes. Probably slackens the bike out a little more too. I like it!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-20200726_100540_hdr.jpg  


  124. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Nice bike! That's my go-to setup. 140mm fork, 27.5x2.8 tires and slack setting.

    Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-banshee-small.jpg

  125. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    Nice bike! That's my go-to setup. 140mm fork, 27.5x2.8 tires and slack setting.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Banshee small.jpg 
Views:	33 
Size:	110.4 KB 
ID:	1351919
    Nice. I like the look of Kashima on black.

    I have to edit what I said about trying the 27.5 in the slack setting.... I looked at what I said a year ago and saw that I was doing the same thing then. And here I was thinking I had a new idea. I guess the more forgetful I get, the more "new ideas" I get to have ha.

  126. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    My long shocked mullet 29+/27,5+ phantom'15
    130mm travel fork, 190x50 mcleod, -2 wc angle set, long dropouts at steep settings.
    Phantom with offset bushings and longer shock-20200621_184223.jpg

  127. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by Vadim0791 View Post
    My long shocked mullet 29+/27,5+ phantom'15
    130mm travel fork, 190x50 mcleod, -2 wc angle set, long dropouts at steep settings.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200621_184223.jpg 
Views:	27 
Size:	262.6 KB 
ID:	1353027
    I'm running a mullet myself in low with a 130mm fork and was thinking about doing the long shock install. Did you use bushings at all? Any reason why you went with the -2 angle set?

    Does anyone know how much of a change to geometry the long shock makes without the offset bushings?

  128. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by crembz View Post
    Does anyone know how much of a change to geometry the long shock makes without the offset bushings?
    I don't, but it's a good question. I've just assumed it comes close to balancing out the 140 fork I've got up front. Maybe someone with the math skills will chime in.

  129. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by S​​usspect View Post
    I don't, but it's a good question. I've just assumed it comes close to balancing out the 140 fork I've got up front. Maybe someone with the math skills will chime in.
    Same here. I do know that the rear travel goes to almost 120mm with the shock change. Not exactly what you're looking for, but maybe it will help with the calculation.

  130. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    498
    Trying to understand what change it makes to the sta and hta of you don't use the offset bushings. According to what I've found each mm of offset at the bushing = .25* change to the sta & hta.

    That would mean by not using the offset bushings and the shock being 6mm longer than stock you'll be making the bike 1.5* steeper (unsagged) at both the HT and ST.

  131. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by crembz View Post
    Trying to understand what change it makes to the sta and hta of you don't use the offset bushings. According to what I've found each mm of offset at the bushing = .25* change to the sta & hta.

    That would mean by not using the offset bushings and the shock being 6mm longer than stock you'll be making the bike 1.5* steeper (unsagged) at both the HT and ST.
    That makes sense. So, with the shock at 6mm longer, I'm running about 2mm more sag (probably 30% sag), which only leaves 4mm longer or 1* HA change when sitting on the bike. In my case, my 140mm fork with a 30mm longer A/C than spec essentially negates that, so I'd be back to 67.5* in slack setting.

    I am curious about how getting even slacker would change things. Thought about an angleset, but the free way to try this out would be to run it as a mullet. May try that soon.

  132. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by S​​usspect View Post
    That makes sense. So, with the shock at 6mm longer, I'm running about 2mm more sag (probably 30% sag), which only leaves 4mm longer or 1* HA change when sitting on the bike. In my case, my 140mm fork with a 30mm longer A/C than spec essentially negates that, so I'd be back to 67.5* in slack setting.

    I am curious about how getting even slacker would change things. Thought about an angleset, but the free way to try this out would be to run it as a mullet. May try that soon.
    I've run my bike as a mullet before, and did not like it for general trail riding. It was way too floppy in the front when riding slow stuff.

    It was pretty good for DH trails.

  133. #133
    fraid of heights
    Reputation: stiingya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    What kind of bottom bracket heights did the long shock give?

    Seems like there will be some variance to the answer since some needed offset bushings and some don't, seems like most did a 130mm fork but a few 140mm.

    I saw a couple people using anglesets to slack out the bike, was that to drop the bike back down and lower the BB?

    thanks!

    the 140mm/120mm mullet looks like fun!!

  134. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    825
    Quote Originally Posted by stiingya View Post
    What kind of bottom bracket heights did the long shock give?

    Seems like there will be some variance to the answer since some needed offset bushings and some don't, seems like most did a 130mm fork but a few 140mm.

    I saw a couple people using anglesets to slack out the bike, was that to drop the bike back down and lower the BB?

    thanks!

    the 140mm/120mm mullet looks like fun!!
    I have the long shock, no offset bushings. Medium V2 frame, 27.5x2.8 Nobby Nic tires/wheels. 140mm fox 34 fork. I measured my BB height today and it's about 330mm. That's with dropouts in slack/low mode.

    Hope that helps!

  135. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    I have 140mm fork. With 29ers (2.5F/2.3R) I measured about 13.5" BB height (342mm); in mullet mode with a 27.5x2.8 rear tire it came down to about 13 3/8" (339 mm).

    *I personally guarantee these measurements are accurate within a range of 10mm*

    I ride some trails with lots of rocks. I'm used to the 29er BB height, and got a few pedal strikes while adjusting to mullet. In other words, BB height seems just right to me, long-shocked with the 140 fork.

  136. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by crembz View Post
    I'm running a mullet myself in low with a 130mm fork and was thinking about doing the long shock install. Did you use bushings at all? Any reason why you went with the -2 angle set?

    Does anyone know how much of a change to geometry the long shock makes without the offset bushings?
    Sorry for late reply
    as somebody mentioned above, long shock is making HTA and STA 1.5 steeper.
    So with -2 angleset and dropouts in neutral position, I'm getting almost same geometry as phantom has with normal shock and dropouts in a slack mode. (In my case with 130mm fork HTA is ~67)
    Mullet I'm usually running with dropouts in a steep mode.
    Geo remains the same as running 29 wheels with dropouts in a neutral mode.
    And if I want to make my phantom a mini-prime, I'm running it with 29 wheels and dropouts in a slack mode. (130mm fork 66,5HTA, lower BB)
    P.S. I'm not running offset bushings.

  137. #137
    fraid of heights
    Reputation: stiingya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Thank you for the replies, very good info!!

    Thanks!

  138. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Circumstance has pushed me into riding a mullet setup for the past few weeks (broke the axle on my 29er rear). I have actually come to like it this way, not for any "flickability" or whatever the promotional term is for mullets (don't notice that), but simply for the slacker angles. (I'd rather not have the slacker seat tube angle, but I'm okay with it, just sliding forward a bit more on steep climbs). I'm using it for general trail rides, with both ups and downs, chunky sections etc... dare I say I like it better like this? Totally takes the pressure of fixing my old wheel.

    My only problem now is I could kind of use a new wheelset, and don't know if I can commit to the extent of buying new mullet. If/when I end up with a different bike it would likely not transfer over.

  139. #139
    fraid of heights
    Reputation: stiingya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    I'm surprised you don't feel a difference in the way the bike carves with the smaller rear wheel. But for sure the slacker front end and lower bottom bracket are part of the total feel mullets bring.

  140. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by stiingya View Post
    I'm surprised you don't feel a difference in the way the bike carves with the smaller rear wheel.
    Oh, is that what what "flickable" means... I always thought it had something to do with maneuverability in the air ha.

    So I'd have to think about that the next time I ride... but the Phantom has always been pretty great at carving/cornering as a 29er.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-09-2016, 08:39 AM
  2. Offset bushings kits, DU bushings, and shock bolts questions
    By turky lurkey in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-15-2015, 07:35 AM
  3. Offset shock bushings
    By Tsetse in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-09-2013, 08:18 AM
  4. Offset shock bushings
    By OldHouseMan in forum Ventana
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-05-2012, 10:22 PM
  5. offset shock bushings
    By grantw9066 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-23-2011, 09:30 PM

Members who have read this thread: 87

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 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.