Speculate OHH eight- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 43 of 43
  1. #1
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389

    Speculate OHH eight

    Since the Homers did it, so can Chumbarians.

    What would you like to see for '08?

    Changes? New models? Refinements? Where's the 29er?


  2. #2
    nerfherder
    Reputation: scruffylooking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,674
    Burly freeride recumbent that'll fit 2.5"s!

    Ok, seriously, I want a DJ bike. And I want it to say Chumba on it.

  3. #3
    Older than I feel
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,762
    XCL 29er.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CHUMBAevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,134
    thanks for posting this thread, i appreciate the feedback..
    Simple | Proven | Reliable

    http://chumbaracing.blogspot.com/

  5. #5

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    208
    XCL 29er is what I want to ride.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CHUMBAevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,134

    ..

    Quote Originally Posted by ChumbaJason
    XCL 29er is what I want to ride.
    ya..me too.

    A.
    Simple | Proven | Reliable

    http://chumbaracing.blogspot.com/

  7. #7

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    208
    Lets do it !

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CHUMBAevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by ChumbaJason
    Lets do it !
    Okay, I'll start drawing it up in Solidworks...haha
    Simple | Proven | Reliable

    http://chumbaracing.blogspot.com/

  9. #9
    shred my gnar
    Reputation: happy_ending's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by ChumbaJason
    XCL 29er is what I want to ride.
    w/ 5". intense is supposedly coming up with a 5" or 5.5" 29er but i havent seen one yet. it would be cool but a 5" 29er fork would have to come from one of the big guns to be worth it, imo.

  10. #10
    Trophy Husband
    Reputation: geolover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,011
    What's the chance of seeing a lower leverage ratio on the EVO? Maybe using a 8.5x2.5 inch shock...
    Extreme stationary biker.

  11. #11
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    What about a Evo w/27.5" wheels?????!!!!!

    OHHHH AHHHHH

  12. #12
    aka baycat
    Reputation: Ryan G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,480
    Would love to get my hands on of these! Any possibility of a custom one


  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dubjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    786
    I speculate that I will be trading in my current EVO for a new one.

  14. #14
    bbc
    bbc is offline
    Bueno!
    Reputation: bbc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    311
    I
    XCL 29er is what I want to ride.
    That's the ticket!

  15. #15
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by baycat
    Would love to get my hands on of these! Any possibility of a custom one

    Anyone know how tall the BB is on the Chumba 29er. I have a VOODOO right now and the BB is super low.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by TIMBERRR
    What about a Evo w/27.5" wheels?????!!!!!

    OHHHH AHHHHH
    I hope CHUMBA put some common sense on this. I find it so foolish

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by ChumbaJason
    Lets do it !
    Here is a challenge, XCL 29er in Titanium, up to your high standards, and affordable

    Dreams are to be dreamt

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    148
    Either a very short (3") travel racing machine or a good steel trail hardtail with an eccentric BB. ...i'm so old....

  19. #19
    nerfherder
    Reputation: scruffylooking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,674
    To hit the market sweet spot I'd say lighter EVO with the same travel and toughness. Yes, I want my cake and eat it, too.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 360shuvit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    30

    lighter XCL

    I was considering getting an XCL, but I don't want to ride a heavier bike. I currently ride a 575.

    I would like to see the XCL under 6 pounds with RP23 shock.

  21. #21
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    I think that both the Evo and the XCL could definatly go on a Diet. Especially the XCL.

  22. #22
    Trophy Husband
    Reputation: geolover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,011
    Quote Originally Posted by TIMBERRR
    I think that both the Evo and the XCL could definatly go on a Diet. Especially the XCL.
    IMO, the XCL is fine as is. If you want to buy a noodley 575 go for it. The XCL is stiff and strong and built to last.

    I don't have an issue with weight on either bike...frame weight is over rated. Unless you're a racer. Components make a bigger overall difference in complete weight.
    Extreme stationary biker.

  23. #23
    Older than I feel
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,762
    I'm with geolover. I'm no lightweight, I'm glad my XCL isn't either.

  24. #24
    Don't be a sheep
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,422
    Quote Originally Posted by 360shuvit
    I was considering getting an XCL, but I don't want to ride a heavier bike. I currently ride a 575.

    I would like to see the XCL under 6 pounds with RP23 shock.
    An XCL is less than half a pound heavier than a 575 at the same size and same shock ( 6.6lbs vs 7.0lbs) but It feels light years stiffer than a 575 so I'll take the tradeoff. If you want a light long travel bike just buy an Ellsworth and wait for it to break.
    "Do not touch the trim"

  25. #25
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by geolover
    IMO, the XCL is fine as is. If you want to buy a noodley 575 go for it. The XCL is stiff and strong and built to last.

    I don't have an issue with weight on either bike...frame weight is over rated. Unless you're a racer. Components make a bigger overall difference in complete weight.
    I agree that components are a great place to loose weight, BUT it doesn't hurt to start with a lighter frame. It's good that the rp23 lightened it up a bit. IMO another pound, or at least a 1/2 pound would really make this frame apeal to a broader spectrum of people.

  26. #26
    nerfherder
    Reputation: scruffylooking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,674
    I have two bikes and neither are under 29lbs. So I'm hardly a weight weenie. My sentiment is similar to TIMBERRRS... I just think these already awesome bikes would appeal to more people if slimmed down a bit.

  27. #27

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    208

    Yeah !!!

    WELL SAID !!!!!



    Quote Originally Posted by Rivet
    An XCL is less than half a pound heavier than a 575 at the same size and same shock ( 6.6lbs vs 7.0lbs) but It feels light years stiffer than a 575 so I'll take the tradeoff. If you want a light long travel bike just buy an Ellsworth and wait for it to break.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CHUMBAevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,134

    ..

    Quote Originally Posted by ChumbaJason
    WELL SAID !!!!!

    word up!
    Simple | Proven | Reliable

    http://chumbaracing.blogspot.com/

  29. #29
    nerfherder
    Reputation: scruffylooking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,674
    An all mountain 29er would be interesting. I'm not a part of the 29er movement but purely from a market standpoint it seems to be a good niche to jump onto. There are plenty of short travel FS 29ers. Need some 5+. Not too many manufacturers ready to take that plunge but probably some buyers that are ready. But fork selection is still limited...

  30. #30
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    What about Asymetrical chainstays? They seem to be all the rage.

  31. #31
    jones'in
    Reputation: venom600's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    917
    Quote Originally Posted by TIMBERRR
    Since the Homers did it, so can Chumbarians.

    What would you like to see for '08?

    Changes? New models? Refinements? Where's the 29er?

    Something in between the Evo and the F5. I'm on a Giant Reign X right now and I'm in love w/ it's geometry. I think the Evo is plenty burly enough to be ridden like my Reign X, but the angles are a smidge too steep. Add an inch of travel and slacken it out just a bit and I'll be in line for the Evo "X" in '08.

    --Ben
    \m/ (>.<) \m/
    For Sale: Revox ISX 10.5x3.5

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardway's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    768
    An Evo with a 1.5" headtube.

  33. #33
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by hardway
    An Evo with a 1.5" headtube.

    I propose 2 Evos. A freeride version (EVO "X") w/7+" of travel and a 1.5" ht, and the Evo AM w/6-6.5" of travel and a standard 1 1/8 ht.

    I would also like to offer up my services as "test monkey" for any new models.


  34. #34
    jones'in
    Reputation: venom600's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    917
    Quote Originally Posted by TIMBERRR
    I propose 2 Evos. A freeride version (EVO "X") w/7+" of travel and a 1.5" ht, and the Evo AM w/6-6.5" of travel and a standard 1 1/8 ht.

    I would also like to offer up my services as "test monkey" for any new models.

    Weeerrrrdd!! Count me in!
    \m/ (>.<) \m/
    For Sale: Revox ISX 10.5x3.5

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardway's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    768
    An Evo with the 1.5" headtube and a rear thru axle.
    Not sure I need/want 7" of rear travel though. I also wouldn't want the geo any slacker, but I do a lot of trail riding with my rig and don't really like my bikes slacked out too much, somewhere between 68 and 69 degrees seems like my sweet spot.
    Great thread btw, TIMBERRR.
    Last edited by hardway; 08-07-2007 at 08:30 PM.

  36. #36
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by hardway
    An Evo with the 1.5" headtube and a rear through axle.
    Not sure I need/want 7" of rear travel though. I also wouldn't want the geo any slacker, but I do a lot of trail riding with my rig and don't really like my bikes slacked out too much, somewhere right around 68 degrees seems like my sweet spot.
    Great thread btw, TIMBERRR.
    Thanks for the props.
    I don't need 7+" of travel either. Thats why there needs to be 2 versions or another whole model altogether. I like the idea of a thru axle for the rear. That would make the already solid rear completley stiff.

  37. #37
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by RAPIT
    I hope CHUMBA put some common sense on this. I find it so foolish
    Did you say the same thing about 29ers?

    I think there might actually be a market for the 27ish wheels. Especially for the more radical riders out there.

    We'll see

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CHUMBAevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,134

    ...

    Quote Originally Posted by TIMBERRR
    I propose 2 Evos. A freeride version (EVO "X") w/7+" of travel and a 1.5" ht, and the Evo AM w/6-6.5" of travel and a standard 1 1/8 ht.

    I would also like to offer up my services as "test monkey" for any new models.

    What should the seat angle be, and head angle for the 2 bikes?
    Simple | Proven | Reliable

    http://chumbaracing.blogspot.com/

  39. #39
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by CHUMBAevo
    What should the seat angle be, and head angle for the 2 bikes?
    For the Evo X a 67 degree HT for the fun stuff, and a 72 degree ST for climbing.

    I think the current angles on the AM Evo feel darn good.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardway's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    768
    Originally posted by TIMBERRR
    For the Evo X a 67 degree HT for the fun stuff, and a 72 degree ST for climbing.
    67 is too slack, imo, but I'm still looking at it as a do it all bike (I know we're talking fr/dh Evo here). I just like my bike to be a little more responsive

    If it were 67 degrees based on a 180mm fork (Totem), that might work out as long as the BB wasn't too low with the fork set around 160mm. Then I could use it like that and still have another gear to throw it into if I just want to ride down something insanely steep.

    On another note, I'd sure like to try out one of the new AM Evo's and see how that new seat tube angle feels. Allan, are you guys still going to do any demos in nor cal?

  41. #41
    locked - time out
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,389
    My thoughts are based on more freeride than AM for the EVO X. I was looking at another bike that sports 7" of travel but can still be pedaled.

    I don't think most of us are ready for a 7" trail bike. 6-6.5" seems to be just right for AM and light FR.

  42. #42
    Trophy Husband
    Reputation: geolover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,011
    Quote Originally Posted by TIMBERRR
    I don't think most of us are ready for a 7" trail bike.
    Titus Supermoto.
    Extreme stationary biker.

  43. #43
    jones'in
    Reputation: venom600's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    917
    Quote Originally Posted by CHUMBAevo
    What should the seat angle be, and head angle for the 2 bikes?
    Head Angle should be around 67, Seat Angle is fine at 72-ish. Both based on a 180mm fork. Bump it to 6.5-7" of travel....and ship it w/ a coil-over rear shock.
    \m/ (>.<) \m/
    For Sale: Revox ISX 10.5x3.5

Members who have read this thread: 0

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 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.