Following MB stack...- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    339

    Following MB stack...

    I have an Evil Wrecker as my daily driver. Love the bike, so much so that I want to compliment it with a Following MB. As I am pouring through geometry charts, I have noticed that the MB has an incredibly low stack height. Its the lowest in Evil's line of bikes. Across their range, XL stacks go:

    659mm---Wrecker
    627mm---Insurgent and Calling
    617mm---Following MB

    Some other "modern-ish" stacks (again in XL)

    635mm---Sentinel
    633mm---Suggler
    639mm---SB5.5c
    635mm---SB4.5c
    664mm---Stumpjumper
    633mm---Enduro
    612mm---Fuel
    631mm---Slash
    637mm---Rallon
    660mm---Machine

    The only other freakishly low bike above is the Fuel. I am currently running 20mm spacers and 25mm Deity Mohawks on my Wrecker. If I choose Mohawks for my MB (I love the flex and damping properties above anything else I have run), then that leaves me spacing up w/ 60mm of spacers just to get an equivalent cockpit height. I could, reluctantly, run a 40mm bar, that would still leave me with 45mm of spacers. At any rate, moving the cockpit that high above the head tube, serves to shorten the reach. I cannot see a scenario where my knees stay out of the bars when executing technical turns.

    Am I missing something here? As we lengthen reach and steepen seat tubes (saddle is effectively higher), doesn't the stack "have" to increase to maintain some balance in the seated position? I get that I am an outlier due to my longer than average limbs, but it also seems that the MB is an outlier as Evil didn't moderately increase the stack height when the lengthened the reach.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    22
    Is the reach the same on the wrecker and MB? I found with longer reach I wanted higher bars to find balance. On tighter cockpit I wanted lower bars to find the balance when cornering and to be able to weight the front end. Different bike and different reach, I think small geo changes can effect where the bars feel good.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dude!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,114
    Saddle height will always be the same - it can never be effectively higher!

    Stack height tends to influenced by fork length - not always. However longer travel bikes will have higher stacks, particularly for 29ers, you run out of real estate for having a strong head tube to support the typically slacker headangle and longer travel more aggressive nature of the frame.

    Ignoring, the fork/headtube limitations, I find stack is related to front center (horizontal distance between BB and fork axle), as this determines, how much you need to balance your weight.

    Geometry is a balance between weighting the front and the rear. As many have recognized, Evil has found the right balance of longish reach (without going overboard) and a tad shorter front centers. This allows folks to have the space to move around and the ease of weighting the front.

    Ironically, I find the longer the bike and particularly the front center, the higher your bars are, as it is easier to weight the front end without overly stretching your body. The irony part, the longer bike provides stability and more reach, but then we adjust it in manner that makes it feel more like a shorter bike. It is still a long bike.

    I am guy who has spreadsheets with tons of geometry, charts, etc for me it allows to provide a mean to quantify the bikes ride behavior. However, this will only get you so far. I believe geometries are stabilizing, and that the bike company as figure out the best geometry for their size/travel bike. It is not to say there are not outliers and different preferences.

  4. #4
    nel
    nel is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    130
    tdc_worm yes I agree I found that the XL Following (both V1 and MB) has a low stack height especially with a 130mm fork. On the MB I changed to a 140mm fork which helped. I just measured the bar height (ie distance from the ground to the top of the grip) on my XL Following MB and XL Wreckoning and they measure the same at 109cm. The Wreck has a 35mm 0 degree stem, 800mm width and 20mm rise bar with no spacers under the stem while the Following MB has a 40mm 0 degree stem, 800mm width and 20mm rise bar with 15mm of spacers under the stem (both bikes have exactly the same Six C bar). The Wreck has a 160mm Fox 36 and the Following MB a 140mm Lyrik.
    The reach measures identical on both bikes.
    I'm 6'3 for reference.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    339
    At the risk of sounding combative, your response is either full of inaccuracies or we are separated by semantics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dude! View Post
    Saddle height will always be the same - it can never be effectively higher!
    nope. wrong. saddle distance from hub center is a function of leg length and crank arm length. saddle height is a function seat tube angle. a recumbent bike has an effective seat tube angle of 0*, and, according to my 20/20 vision, the saddle height, although imperceptible to some, is to some degree lower than the saddle on height of any mountain bike.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dude! View Post
    Stack height tends to influenced by fork length - not always. However longer travel bikes will have higher stacks, particularly for 29ers, you run out of real estate for having a strong head tube to support the typically slacker headangle and longer travel more aggressive nature of the frame.
    stack height is ALWAYS influenced by a fork length increase or decrease from the neutral geometry charts, according to trigonometry and SOHCAHTOA. Specialized uses a 105mm HT length across the board for their carbon Demo which is slacker and has more travel than our bikes. With that in mind, it appears that any longer head tubes on our 160mm travel bikes are purely to elevate the stack, not because of a strength issue. shorter head tubes are fine, but they penalize longer limbed riders because the cockpit height has to go up as the saddle height increases with steeper seat tube angles. as you add spacers and riser bars, the reach is ultimately shortened.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dude! View Post
    Ignoring, the fork/headtube limitations, I find stack is related to front center (horizontal distance between BB and fork axle), as this determines, how much you need to balance your weight.
    At the specified for length every geometry chart shows stack relative to reach. your position completely discounts the effect of chain stay length and how it impacts centering balance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dude! View Post
    Geometry is a balance between weighting the front and the rear. As many have recognized, Evil has found the right balance of longish reach (without going overboard) and a tad shorter front centers. This allows folks to have the space to move around and the ease of weighting the front.
    it is a balance, but you contradict yourself. for any given increase in reach, the front center has to increase BY THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT. you cant have longish reach without creating a longish front center, unless you steepen the head angle and/or shorten the head tube at the same time. the reach pushes the head tube forward, which stretches the front center.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dude! View Post
    Ironically, I find the longer the bike and particularly the front center, the higher your bars are, as it is easier to weight the front end without overly stretching your body. The irony part, the longer bike provides stability and more reach, but then we adjust it in manner that makes it feel more like a shorter bike. It is still a long bike.

    I am guy who has spreadsheets with tons of geometry, charts, etc for me it allows to provide a mean to quantify the bikes ride behavior. However, this will only get you so far. I believe geometries are stabilizing, and that the bike company as figure out the best geometry for their size/travel bike. It is not to say there are not outliers and different preferences.
    to the point, and according to the bikes listed above, the MB is an outlier. i realize that I am an outlier also. it seems as as if most builders deem the sweet spot in an XL to be around 630-640mm.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by nel View Post
    tdc_worm yes I agree I found that the XL Following (both V1 and MB) has a low stack height especially with a 130mm fork. On the MB I changed to a 140mm fork which helped. I just measured the bar height (ie distance from the ground to the top of the grip) on my XL Following MB and XL Wreckoning and they measure the same at 109cm. The Wreck has a 35mm 0 degree stem, 800mm width and 20mm rise bar with no spacers under the stem while the Following MB has a 40mm 0 degree stem, 800mm width and 20mm rise bar with 15mm of spacers under the stem (both bikes have exactly the same Six C bar). The Wreck has a 160mm Fox 36 and the Following MB a 140mm Lyrik.
    The reach measures identical on both bikes.
    I'm 6'3 for reference.
    Interesting. I am trying to do the math on where the MB is making up those 42mm in stack difference. stack difference according to Evils charts for a 120mm fork vs a 130mm fork is 4mm....

    +15mm spacers
    +10mm longer fork (would be +4mm 130 to 140 using Evil's math)
    +5mm axtra rise from longer stem

    That's a generous 20mm. It also doesnt take in to account axle to crown variations. What size tires are you running on both bikes? What stems are you running?

  7. #7
    nel
    nel is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    130
    Sorry I just re-measured the bar heights more accurately using a spirit level to keep the bike straight and the bar height from the ground on my Wreckoning is actually 106cm while the Following MB is 103.5cm.

    Wreck stem has no spacers and MB has 15mm spacers.

    Both bikes have the same bar and tyres and both have the same Race face Turbine R stem although the Wreck is 35mm and MB is 40mm length.

    So I reckon you would have to run around 40mm spacers under the stem on the MB with a 140mm fork if you want the bar height to match the Wreck - if you run the same bar and stem on both bikes.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by nel View Post
    Sorry I just re-measured the bar heights more accurately using a spirit level to keep the bike straight and the bar height from the ground on my Wreckoning is actually 106cm while the Following MB is 103.5cm.

    Wreck stem has no spacers and MB has 15mm spacers.

    Both bikes have the same bar and tyres and both have the same Race face Turbine R stem although the Wreck is 35mm and MB is 40mm length.

    So I reckon you would have to run around 40mm spacers under the stem on the MB with a 140mm fork if you want the bar height to match the Wreck - if you run the same bar and stem on both bikes.
    Thanks so much for re checking that! That verifies where the other @25mm are hiding, haha.

    My only guess for such a low stack is that it was a way for Evil to minimize the impact on WB and front center when extending the reach, as they did on the MB.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dude!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,114
    Quote Originally Posted by tdc_worm View Post
    Thanks so much for re checking that! That verifies where the other @25mm are hiding, haha.

    My only guess for such a low stack is that it was a way for Evil to minimize the impact on WB and front center when extending the reach, as they did on the MB.
    For a medium sizing as thats what I generally ride and is in my spreadsheets. The Wreckoning is ~0.5inches longer in reach when normalized to a common stack height.The front center is longer by 1 inch on the Wreckoning. Based on earlier comments it makes sense that you would want the bars higher for the Wreckoning.

    I use to set my bike up similarly - bar height, etc between different bikes, however particularly with the longer geometries, I use this as a starting point, but then adjust stem, spacers, etc until I find the correct position. Some of this I can't explain, one measurements that has helped the most in this is the diagonal from the BB to the bars, I find this gets me to the position much quicker, it took me some time before I figured out this measurements, but it works the most. This measurement is the hypothenuse of the stack and reach.

    For example, I love the Calling geometry, as soon as I got on it - everything clicked. Owing to delays, I got an HD4. This was a hard bike to set-up for me, the reach felt too short, but the front center was long. In the end, I raised the bars up a bit, but the key element was actually going to 55mm stem. I know - yikes - old school - 55mm, but the steering, weight etc feel very balanced and it doesn't feel like a 55m stem. FYI, I do prefer a 50mm stem (search the Vital website, they have an article on preferred geometry that suits a 50mm stem). As I rode a lot of bikes over the last few years, this confirmed what I was figuring out for myself. Another example, I owned a Firebird, but I could never find a good position on that bike - I tried everything - different stems, stack heights, bar widths, etc, and in the end I just learned is was too long for me. The bike was fun, but every set-up seemed to narrow in on one riding characteristic and couldn't find a set-up that worked for everything. This is why I got the HD4 as it is shorter.

    Last thing, between the HD4 and the Calling - the set-ups are different but the weight balance is the same so going between the two bikes is easy.

    Good luck with figuring this out, just thought I provide some input on my experience.

Similar Threads

  1. Following vs Following MB
    By bcall8 in forum Evil Bikes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-22-2018, 07:31 AM
  2. Evil Following - Size Large Headset Stack Height?
    By frontier2k1 in forum Evil Bikes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-23-2017, 07:48 AM
  3. new following thread - Uprising Vs Following
    By Dude! in forum Evil Bikes
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 06-09-2015, 08:38 PM
  4. Stem with ~30mm stack height?
    By Haggis in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-25-2011, 03:20 AM
  5. 2010 55 TST Air - Shim Stack Mod?
    By judd1980 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-04-2011, 05:51 PM

Members who have read this thread: 6

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.