XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 74 of 74
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sissypants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    698

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs

    This is a headsup that TanTan is now manufacturing the Xiamen CarbonSpeed CS-197 (from Peter Xu) after his company fell from glory (anyone have the backstory?). TanTan also has the 100mm rim molds on their shelves as of this week, and I believe the entire rim lineup is on it's way.

    I have the frame, fork, and 100mm wheelset coming my way. I plan to build up with 2XLs and keep things around 29 lbs. I'll post up here with my build when it gets together. I'm doing a few experiments with this build, but I'll save the others for a first ride review. Everything is painted in a white/rose chameleon which I think is a pretty rad colorway for a snow-specific fatbike.

    In the meantime, I do have agent pricing on everything and I'd be happy to help forum readers out.
    - Frame is $400
    - Fork is $100
    - 100mm wide wheelset with Powerway hubs is $550
    - Shipping to US is $85 for the frame alone, $135 for the frame+wheelset.
    - Single color painting is $50, chameleon painting is $80, two-color designs available.
    - Spare derailleur hanger $10
    - Front and rear axles $20
    - Headset $10

    2-year warranty, 1-2 week lead time, fast customer service, high quality paint jobs, only the best quality. I have sold numerous frames from TanTan with only a handful of issues, all of them due to some level of abuse/misuse.

    PM me if you want this frame, or get in touch with TanTan and see what they quote you.



    My apologies for starting a new thread, I probably could have bumped an old thread but didn't feel like digging them up.

    This is NOT simply a promotional listing, this is simply a note for anyone in love with a CS-197 that can no longer buy it through Peter Xu from XM Carbon Speed.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-unnamed.jpg  

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-1.jpg  

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-6.png  

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-8.png  

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-7.png  

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-fm197-100mm-width.png  

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-3.png  

    Follow me on Strava, Instagram @therealsissypants, and Facebook

  2. #2
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    If riding is more important than walking, geometry will always trump weight.

    Put differently, I don't care how much my bike weighs as long as I'm pedaling, not pushing.

    The geo on this bike you're shilling is good for hardpack -- groomed -- trails. It is not good nor even acceptable for soft, dry, marginally compacted or wind-affected snow.

    So, basically, it's a bike that fits the biggest tires going, but doesn't work very well in the conditions where those tires shine.

    Conundrum.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zerort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,108
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    If riding is more important than walking, geometry will always trump weight.

    Put differently, I don't care how much my bike weighs as long as I'm pedaling, not pushing.

    The geo on this bike you're shilling is good for hardpack -- groomed -- trails. It is not good nor even acceptable for soft, dry, marginally compacted or wind-affected snow.

    So, basically, it's a bike that fits the biggest tires going, but doesn't work very well in the conditions where those tires shine.

    Conundrum.
    I had this fram (bike). It was an absolute ripper. It was a climbing machine while sitting.

    As you can see, it was very light (even with studded 4.8" tires) and handled anything you threw at it.

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-20171117_170549.jpg

    I don't know the OP. Just posting my opinion.

    I've since sold the bike as I now ride a Norco Bigfoot VLT - yes the one that goes 20 mph.
    by Silentfoe
    I'm satisfied knowing that what I wear during my "day" job makes me more of a man than you'll ever be.

  4. #4
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    32,174
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    If riding is more important than walking, geometry will always trump weight.

    Put differently, I don't care how much my bike weighs as long as I'm pedaling, not pushing.

    The geo on this bike you're shilling is good for hardpack -- groomed -- trails. It is not good nor even acceptable for soft, dry, marginally compacted or wind-affected snow.

    So, basically, it's a bike that fits the biggest tires going, but doesn't work very well in the conditions where those tires shine.

    Conundrum.
    You seriously need an attitude adjustment.

    I know you canít stand it, but I rode this geometry for years just fine on ďungroomedĒ singletrack.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sissypants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    698
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    The geo on this bike you're shilling is good for hardpack -- groomed -- trails. It is not good nor even acceptable for soft, dry, marginally compacted or wind-affected snow.
    We need more emphasis on functionality in the fat bike world and less on magnifying glasses tearing apart decimals behind geometry numbers. This bike clears massive tires, and that's what it's all about--from the flip chip in the rear, to the shape of the chainstays, to even the seatstay design. Look, the tires on this bike will be 3 pounds apiece, what difference will a few millimeters in the chainstay make or a fraction of a degree on the HTA make when you're chugging through a foot of powder or over a drift? The biggest thing that matters is that it fits huge tires. Is there any other carbon frame that can fit these tires that costs less than $1000?

    But you have me curious. Specifically, in your *experience*, what are the differences in geometry between a bike that shines on groomed hardpack trails and one that shines on soft, dry, marginally compacted, or wind-affected snow? And what number on this bike makes you think it is "not good nor even acceptable" in challenging conditions?

    I got criticized over the top about a previous build of mine where the chainstays were 15mm longer than standard to accommodate a bigger tire (TT FM-299B), and I ended up getting to ride an identical frame with 15mm shorter chainstays (TT FM-199B), and got Strava KOMs on trail segments with 20,000+ efforts on both. Both worked, both were fun, both shredded, both had amazing control. Even when the geometry difference seemed like such a huge change on paper, it was splitting hairs on the trail.
    Follow me on Strava, Instagram @therealsissypants, and Facebook

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bcriverjunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    312
    Any plans to produce the CS-001?
    Salsa Carbon Bucksaw- Trek Farley 8

  7. #7
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by sissypants View Post
    We need more emphasis on functionality in the fat bike world and less on magnifying glasses tearing apart decimals behind geometry numbers. This bike clears massive tires, and that's what it's all about--from the flip chip in the rear, to the shape of the chainstays, to even the seatstay design. Look, the tires on this bike will be 3 pounds apiece, what difference will a few millimeters in the chainstay make or a fraction of a degree on the HTA make when you're chugging through a foot of powder or over a drift? The biggest thing that matters is that it fits huge tires. Is there any other carbon frame that can fit these tires that costs less than $1000?

    But you have me curious. Specifically, in your *experience*, what are the differences in geometry between a bike that shines on groomed hardpack trails and one that shines on soft, dry, marginally compacted, or wind-affected snow? And what number on this bike makes you think it is "not good nor even acceptable" in challenging conditions?

    I got criticized over the top about a previous build of mine where the chainstays were 15mm longer than standard to accommodate a bigger tire (TT FM-299B), and I ended up getting to ride an identical frame with 15mm shorter chainstays (TT FM-199B), and got Strava KOMs on trail segments with 20,000+ efforts on both. Both worked, both were fun, both shredded, both had amazing control. Even when the geometry difference seemed like such a huge change on paper, it was splitting hairs on the trail.

    If you're buying this, or advertising it, because of it's "functionality" then you should really define what that means.

    I haven't said it isn't rideable, nor have I said you can't have fun on it. I've merely said that for the most challenging conditions fatbikes encounter (soft, dry, baseless, ungroomed, wind-affected snow) that geometry matters more than weight.

    If you're talking about riding on groomed trails, or dirt trails, then I have no comment, because riding the 2XL tires in those conditions is silly.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sissypants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    698
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    If you're buying this, or advertising it, because of it's "functionality" then you should really define what that means.

    I haven't said it isn't rideable, nor have I said you can't have fun on it. I've merely said that for the most challenging conditions fatbikes encounter (soft, dry, baseless, ungroomed, wind-affected snow) that geometry matters more than weight.

    If you're talking about riding on groomed trails, or dirt trails, then I have no comment, because riding the 2XL tires in those conditions is silly.
    So what are you looking for in geometry that this doesn't have?
    Follow me on Strava, Instagram @therealsissypants, and Facebook

  9. #9
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by sissypants View Post
    So what are you looking for in geometry that this doesn't have?

    The ability to ride, instead of walk, when the surface is so soft that walking is difficult.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29
    Which numbers didn't seem right to you?

    Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    32,174
    He is so full of himself he canít understand how anyone can possibly ride anything that he doesnít approve of. I would suggest ignoring him in this thread.

    I have the frame, itís great, fits large tires even in the forward position, but tires as big as J5 or 2xl require the rear position. Iíve taken it on 100 mile races in the mat-su valley, lots of new snow and soft conditions, etc. Itís better than my LaMere, which wasnít as refined or strong (developed a crack after two seasons). The one thing about the CS197 is that it doesnít have rack mounts. Most are using revelate saddle bags and handlebar bags on frames like this for bikepacking, but your options may be limited if you want to run panniers (which get in the way when you are pushing in soft conditions btw). Panniers arenít all that common in the winter, but have their purpose. These are great all around frames and I highly recommend them due to the value and versatility. The fact that mikesee hates them makes me like mine more. I wouldnít hesitate to buy another at this point. Mine is around 4 years old now.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  12. #12
    Human Test Subject
    Reputation: Volsung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,230
    Jayem you're bicycle cycling wrong if you own this bike. The millimeters are all off and it catches fire.
    You change your own flats? Support your LBS and pay them to instead.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    8
    This frame really intrigues me. Will the CS-197 frame set work effectively with the Sram Eagle 12 speed crank/cassette setup?

    Thanks,

    Hugh

  14. #14
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation: BansheeRune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Volsung View Post
    Jayem you're bicycle cycling wrong if you own this bike. The millimeters are all off and it catches fire.
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Volsung again.

    Seems Jayem and Mikesee need to settle their differences with a competition. Perhaps a best of 3...
    Then and only then can they kiss and make up!
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  15. #15
    cmg
    cmg is offline
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,349
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    ...(which get in the way when you are pushing in soft conditions btw)...
    if the geo was correct, you wouldnt be pushing
    always mad and usually drunk......

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sissypants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    698
    Quote Originally Posted by sciguy View Post
    This frame really intrigues me. Will the CS-197 frame set work effectively with the Sram Eagle 12 speed crank/cassette setup?

    Thanks,

    Hugh
    I put my bets on it that it will. I'll be building my 21" CS-197 up with 2XLs and a 12-speed setup (not SRAM or Shimano though . That will be the ultimate test! If a 0mm offset chainring on a 197mm spindle crank doesn't clear the tire on 50T I'll be trying a 3mm offset chainring flipped backwards. Pics in a month.
    Follow me on Strava, Instagram @therealsissypants, and Facebook

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by sciguy View Post
    This frame really intrigues me. Will the CS-197 frame set work effectively with the Sram Eagle 12 speed crank/cassette setup?

    Thanks,

    Hugh
    Works great with the Eagle and Dub crankset.

    Going to move the chip forward this winter to see the difference.

    Anyone used a Robert axle to run an on rack?

    Anyone fitted a Mastodon to this frame?

    Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by sissypants View Post
    I put my bets on it that it will. I'll be building my 21" CS-197 up with 2XLs and a 12-speed setup (not SRAM or Shimano though . That will be the ultimate test! If a 0mm offset chainring on a 197mm spindle crank doesn't clear the tire on 50T I'll be trying a 3mm offset chainring flipped backwards. Pics in a month.
    OK now you've got my attention. If not Sram or Shimano who who makes what you're intending to go with.

    Thanks for the quick and intriguing reply.

    Hugh

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    8
    Thanks akgrimace. That's just what I wanted to hear.

    Hugh

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,386
    Quote Originally Posted by BansheeRune View Post
    Seems Jayem and Mikesee need to settle their differences with a competition. Perhaps a best of 3...
    Then and only then can they kiss and make up!
    It is nearly Festivus...

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,386
    Quote Originally Posted by akgrimace View Post
    Which numbers didn't seem right to you?
    Exactly, and why?

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sissypants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    698
    I've got nothing to do with this geo bicker battle. The geometry should NOT be the dealbreaker for this frame, but the numbers are going to be unique because of huge tire clearance.

    There are no lighter or cheaper frames for those who need max flotation. If you want rack mounts, get some other fork. Straps, Velcro, backpacks, and saddle bags work in a pinch.

    As always, I'll review ride characteristics thoroughly. I've spent a lot of time on the old TanTan FM197 setup (very fun) and the ICAN SN04 (too heavy to be fun), and some time on a Trek Farley, Salsa Beargrease, Borealis Crestone, and SE [email protected], so I have a broad perspective for unbiased comparison. I'll ride all snow conditions, as well as dry singletrack, beach, gravel, and ice.

    I went with three experimental products for my build kit:

    1. Crankset: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32944570591.html. This comes with a shimano crank arm interface, something not to be found on other fat cranksets. I have a Shimano crank arm power meter I want to run. We'll see how it fares.
    2. Drivetrain: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000287775569.html. I'm nervous about shifting quality, but the cassette range and weight is promising. I'm fully prepared to get a GX Eagle shifter/derailleur in the worst case scenario.
    3. Chainring: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32951266074.html. Why pay more?

    XT brakes, silicone grips, a riser carbon bar, chameleon bottle cages, ultralight carbon seatpost, and Spesh Power look-alike saddle round out the build kit.
    Follow me on Strava, Instagram @therealsissypants, and Facebook

  23. #23
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    32,174
    On a fatbike, I like sram, because they have the derailleur catch. This prevents the derailleur from trying to jam your studded fat tire into the chainstay when installing the wheel.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    18
    Can't we all just get along? Sigh.

  25. #25
    arc
    arc is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by sissypants View Post
    I put my bets on it that it will. I'll be building my 21" CS-197 up with 2XLs and a 12-speed setup (not SRAM or Shimano though . That will be the ultimate test! If a 0mm offset chainring on a 197mm spindle crank doesn't clear the tire on 50T I'll be trying a 3mm offset chainring flipped backwards. Pics in a month.
    I'm running a Race Face Turbine cinch crankset with the wide bottom bracket on a large frame, 11 speed Onyx rear. I use a flipped offset chainring. My tire has a bit of runout on it and it rubs slighty where the wobble is worst.

    Also use a Mastodon year round with a 29x3 wheelset for dirt. Good frame.

  26. #26
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    He is so full of himself he canít understand how anyone can possibly ride anything that he doesnít approve of.

    Classy.

    Your ignorance of the conditions I've described is one thing, but turning this into a personal beef is another. Knock it off.

  27. #27
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    32,174
    Naw, I think people are done with your bs, the bike works just fine in those conditions. Just like how you have said and time again how ANC trails are ďgroomedĒ because evidently you rode an XC ski trail up here one time. Iím going to go out on a limb and say that pushing a bike in 2 feet of fresh snow isnít high on most peopleís list and if it does happen itís going to suck whatever bike you are on. The bike rides just fine in soft snow, measured against any other modern fat bike. You have blown this way out of proportion. Yes, Iím calling your original post BS.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  28. #28
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Naw, I think people are done with your bs, the bike works just fine in those conditions. Just like how you have said and time again how ANC trails are ďgroomedĒ because evidently you rode an XC ski trail up here one time. Iím going to go out on a limb and say that pushing a bike in 2 feet of fresh snow isnít high on most peopleís list and if it does happen itís going to suck whatever bike you are on. The bike rides just fine in soft snow, measured against any other modern fat bike. You have blown this way out of proportion.

    Like I said, your ignorance is impressive.

    I've been riding Alaskan winter trails for over 20 years. Not just the (mostly human) groomed town stuff but lots of backcountry riding. More than 10,000 miles worth. By any standard I think that qualifies as more than 'an XC trail one time'.

    You're welcome to keep twisting my words around and inventing contexts ("pushing through 2' of snow") that I've never mentioned. Those that are interested in how the bike actually rides will probably be smart enough to disregard your ignorance and snark.

  29. #29
    cmg
    cmg is offline
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,349
    anyway, as previously asked, which numbers dou you believe are wrong? and why?
    always mad and usually drunk......

  30. #30
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by cmg View Post
    anyway, as previously asked, which numbers dou you believe are wrong? and why?

    You can't pull one number out and say that it's "right" or "wrong". It's the way the whole package goes together.

  31. #31
    cmg
    cmg is offline
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,349
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    You can't pull one number out and say that it's "right" or "wrong". It's the way the whole package goes together.
    but you can say a bike wont work without explaining why?
    always mad and usually drunk......

  32. #32
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    794
    Nice frame, have one at the office, but my (good, olde proto) 2XLs didn't fit, unfortunately. Not even close.
    Too bad, since replacing my 1900g alloy frame with this one would have gotten the 2XL bike into the 9kg range.

  33. #33
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by cmg View Post
    but you can say a bike wont work without explaining why?

    There are two ways I can answer this:

    First, if I made the mistake of throwing out a number to criticize, that number would become the rallying point for everyone that disagreed with me, whether they'd ridden that geometry or not.

    Put it this way: If I ask you what your favorite tire is, a knot of people will eventually appear to tell you how that tire is terrible, whether they ride in your neighborhood/conditions or not.

    Second, note that I'm not trying to sell you anything here, while the OP has made a point of saying that he *is* selling these. He has something to gain by convincing you that this bike is the bees knees. What am I gaining by convincing you that it isn't?

    I've spent the last 24 years intensely experimenting with a series of custom snowbikes, spending my hard earned $$$$$ to learn about and develop geometry that works for riding soft, unconsolidated, dry, baseless and drifted snow, because that's what I get in my backyard. *Any* bike can work on hardpack, including the one being discussed here. The difference between a bike like this and something developed to float in the worst conditions imaginable is small but significant, with the end result that one will be rideable in these worst-case conditions, and the other will not.

    So, to answer the question that I put forth, what I'm gaining by pushing for geometry that works is that eventually I'll be able to buy an inexpensive, widely available frame that actually works where I want to ride it. And so will you.

    It's nice to be able to buy a custom frame but not everyone has that option. I'd like to spend less on a new bike and use the money saved to go somewhere cool/remote to ride it.

  34. #34
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation: BansheeRune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,620
    I think Mike is saying that the overall geometry doesn't work optimally in the Espen style snow, ya know, the waist deep powder.

    Frankly, the majority of fat riders aren't into that kind of challenge, regardless.
    Too many fatties were offered since fat went production but were bastardized commuter frames with horrific geometry for off road let alone off piste snow riding. That lead to piss poor sales numbers and makers that no longer offer fat.

    Sissypants, geometry is not the deal breaker so much as it is a decision maker... For some, the numbers look good, for others, the numbers are not ticking the boxes. That's cyclists in any discipline, fat or non fat. URL for reference would also be helpful...
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    675
    Hey Mikesee,
    Not trying to fuel the fire here but rather gain some knowledge. Would you be willing to post the geometry of you latest revision on deep snow bike or point me to where you maybe already have?
    Thanks.
    =========================================
    Minnesota Off Road Cyclists www.morcmtb.org

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,433
    I bought one last year. I bought it as a cheap bike to run the 2XLs on.

    Quality is meh at best.
    The clunky proprietary chip and rear axle...and the rear brake mount leave a LOT to be desired.

    Geometry is basically a bad copy of the 2014 Borealis Echo....with a few variances in the wrong directions.

    The fork is fairly flexy and uses a clunky proprietary axle.

    It broke on the seat stay on it's second ride.

  37. #37
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    32,174
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    I bought one last year. I bought it as a cheap bike to run the 2XLs on.

    Quality is meh at best.
    The clunky proprietary chip and rear axle...and the rear brake mount leave a LOT to be desired.

    Geometry is basically a bad copy of the 2014 Borealis Echo....with a few variances in the wrong directions.

    The fork is fairly flexy and uses a clunky proprietary axle.

    It broke on the seat stay on it's second ride.
    Reading his original post:
    The geo on this bike you're shilling is good for hardpack -- groomed -- trails. It is not good nor even acceptable for soft, dry, marginally compacted or wind-affected snow.

    So, basically, it's a bike that fits the biggest tires going, but doesn't work very well in the conditions where those tires shine.
    Itís seems more like heís just being a **** for the point of being a ****, because thatís some extremist hyperbole to claim itís for hacks and itís not acceptable for riding. Maybe for him, but I could pick apart any bike as not being perfect. The bike does fine in soft conditions. Mike is blowing this way out of proportion.

    Last winter a borealis seat tube snapped on a ride, went off like a gunshot. So Iím not so convinced which bike is the ďqualityĒ one.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    499
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Nice frame, have one at the office, but my (good, olde proto) 2XLs didn't fit, unfortunately. Not even close.
    Too bad, since replacing my 1900g alloy frame with this one would have gotten the 2XL bike into the 9kg range.
    Anybody tried the normal 2xl's on 105 rims? Wondering if that would clear on this frame?

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Overkill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    471
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    You can't pull one number out and say that it's "right" or "wrong". It's the way the whole package goes together.
    Really, what are the optimal geo numbers you have settled on the max float in your dry powered conditions? I donít have conditions like that in my area, but I am really curious what conclusions you have come to - or at least what direction the geo numbers have gone for max float.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: El_Topo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    Anybody tried the normal 2xl's on 105 rims? Wondering if that would clear on this frame?
    According to another member they do not.
    Looking for fairly priced 17.5" Farley EX 8/9.8 in Germany or neighbouring countries. Frame only or whole bike, TIA!

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    499
    Quote Originally Posted by El_Topo View Post
    According to another member they do not.
    Thanks, appreciate it. I've got bud and lou on the 105 nextie on my Yampa and if you go to nearly flat pressure it rubs. Very rarely have had to do that so looks like the yampa lives on. Till i find an affordable way to fit a bigger tire at least.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: El_Topo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    Thanks, appreciate it. I've got bud and lou on the 105 nextie on my Yampa and if you go to nearly flat pressure it rubs. Very rarely have had to do that so looks like the yampa lives on. Till i find an affordable way to fit a bigger tire at least.
    You're welcome.
    The new Surly ICT probably isn't what you are looking for but if you keep on reading a few more posts below the one I linked to, you will find that the ICT fits 2XLs on 105mm fine (while offering a very low Q-factor with the right cranks if that is of importance to you).
    Looking for fairly priced 17.5" Farley EX 8/9.8 in Germany or neighbouring countries. Frame only or whole bike, TIA!

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,433
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    Anybody tried the normal 2xl's on 105 rims? Wondering if that would clear on this frame?
    At low psi (2-4psi, which is high for what you'd run this tire at)...it was snug but rideable on a 100mm rim. I only rode it once with this tire on dry trails...at 5 psi...and it was very snug.

    As far as geo....2 things stood out for me:
    B/b height:With the 2XLs on, the b/b was very high...which makes the saddle high...so you have a high center of gravity while trying to balance at slow speeds ( which is all soft snow riding) and makes getting on in soft snow a challenge (even with a dropper).
    BUT...a lower b/b would make the bike useless with tires smaller than 2XLs. It becomes a one trick pony....but it is very good at that trick

    And the longish chain stays are far from perfect.

    I replaced the broken carbon frame with a RSD Mayor that was on blow out sale.
    It has the same issues, geo wise. But it uses a non proprietary axle (Maxle)and a standard brake mount. The fit and finish is also much better that the CS197...which had a sloppy seat tube/seat post fit, a sloppy headset mold and a chinsy headset and derailleur hanger( all common traits on cheap Chinese frames)

    They are both usable....but not optimal.
    I bought these frames knowing that...but could not see throwing money at a custom frame like a Meriwether ( I was very close to writing a check). Here in New England...we don't get deep powder often...and it doesn't stay that way long. If I lived somewhere where the snow was deep and soft, I would spend the money.
    The RSD did allow me to ride on a few soft days last winter when everyone else would be walking a good chunk of the day. I think I used the 2XLs around 10 times last winter( and only really needed them 5 or 6 times)...the rest of the time, different tires and or bikes were used( I ride almost every day)

    10 years ago...we were riding Pugsleys with Endomorphs...the good old days weren't that great.

    Now...if a cheap frame came out with low b/b and shorter stays....I would grab one for the few times I use the 2XL tires

  44. #44
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by tedsti View Post
    Hey Mikesee,
    Not trying to fuel the fire here but rather gain some knowledge. Would you be willing to post the geometry of you latest revision on deep snow bike or point me to where you maybe already have?
    Thanks.

    My current bike is on it's 5th season. Custom by Whit @ Meriwether. Search using those terms and you'll find at least one thread on it.

    It could stand to be updated a bit, but it's still miles better in soft/unconsolidated than any off the shelf bike.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Overkill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    471
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    The ability to ride, instead of walk, when the surface is so soft that walking is difficult.
    Your position on the geometry of this bike is a little wacky IMO - why would any mass produced bike Manufacturer design their geometry for the 1% of people to ride instead of walk in the conditions you describe?

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Overkill View Post
    Your position on the geometry of this bike is a little wacky IMO - why would any mass produced bike Manufacturer design their geometry for the 1% of people to ride instead of walk in the conditions you describe?
    In this case...the manufacturer just poorly copied an existing design...and tweaked it a little.
    But I agree with you on the 1 % part....but people do want these big 2XLs...even if it's just for the look-at-me factor. You just make a fairly large compromise when taking a current design, and tweak it to fit tall tires ( if you've been around a while, you will remember when 29ers became mainstream...there were plenty of hack designs that were less than good).
    But as I said above, tweaking the geo for these big tires will make these 1 trick ponies.
    Catch 22

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Overkill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    471
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    In this case...the manufacturer just poorly copied an existing design...
    But I agree with you on the 1 % part....but people do want these big 2XLs...even if it's just for the look-at-me factor
    Ya, I understand this geo is just copied - Iím not sure about the ďpoorlyĒ part though? Iíve ridden quite a few different bikes and this particular bike rides really well from my experience.

    Iím convinced the 2XL thing is just an internet fascination - especially this forum. I barely even see people use 4.8s as their general tire choice. Iíve been fatbiking around 200+ hours a year for the past 8 seasons in a pretty high traffic area that has snow for 5-6 months per year. I personally use 4.8 as my main tires as my immediate trails I frequent the most donít see much traffic - sometimes itís just me burning a track in.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Overkill View Post
    Ya, I understand this geo is just copied - Iím not sure about the ďpoorlyĒ part though? Iíve ridden quite a few different bikes and this particular bike rides really well from my experience.

    Iím convinced the 2XL thing is just an internet fascination - especially this forum. I barely even see people use 4.8s as their general tire choice. Iíve been fatbiking around 200+ hours a year for the past 8 seasons in a pretty high traffic area that has snow for 5-6 months per year. I personally use 4.8 as my main tires as the area I ride doesnít see much traffic - sometimes itís just me burning a track in.
    It rides like a bike. The carbon layup on the one I had was...well, I got what I paid for. And the axle/chip/brake mount were hack design and machining...and proprietary .Again...I got what I paid for.

    And I will agree on the big tire fascination...to a point.
    Snow is different every where.
    Last year...I was able to ride stuff with the 2XLs that the tried n true Bud and Lou had me walking. Tested back to back. Not often...but it happened. And I was glad to have the big meats.
    We had a winter here a few years ago where the snow wouldn't set up for weeks. The only place to ride was groomed sled trails...and even those were 3 mph grinds with the Bud nLou( they are usually like road riding). It would have been a day of walking with Endomorphs....or any 3.8 tire ( which was the more common size just a few years ago)
    I would have loved to have the big Vees...and a bike that would fit them ( no matter how much was compromised in design)

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Overkill View Post
    Ya, I understand this geo is just copied - Iím not sure about the ďpoorlyĒ part though? Iíve ridden quite a few different bikes and this particular bike rides really well from my experience.
    .
    And...to be totally honest....if the CS197 didn't break after 16 miles.....I might have kept it and put up with the less than desirable stuff to use when real big tires were needed, which is what the RSd is for.
    But it did.
    And I wouldn't recommend one without a big caveat.
    I honestly thought I'd take the RSD out a few times during the summer....but it never happened. I guess it's time to pull it out and freshen up the Orange Seal in the tires....just in case winter happens.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Overkill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    471
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    It rides like a bike. The carbon layup on the one I had was...well, I got what I paid for. And the axle/chip/brake mount were hack design and machining...and proprietary .Again...I got what I paid for.

    And I will agree on the big tire fascination...to a point.
    Snow is different every where.
    Last year...I was able to ride stuff with the 2XLs that the tried n true Bud and Lou had me walking. Tested back to back. Not often...but it happened. And I was glad to have the big meats.
    We had a winter here a few years ago where the snow wouldn't set up for weeks. The only place to ride was groomed sled trails...and even those were 3 mph grinds with the Bud nLou( they are usually like road riding). It would have been a day of walking with Endomorphs....or any 3.8 tire ( which was the more common size just a few years ago)
    I would have loved to have the big Vees...and a bike that would fit them ( no matter how much was compromised in design)
    I hear ya. Iím up in Quebec and am very dedicated to fatbike riding. I likely ride 8-15 hours per week all winter, regardless of conditions, so Iíve encountered quite the extremes. Iíll agree that snow is different everywhere. Iím lucky that dry snow is pretty rare Here - there is almost always a solid base if we do get dry snow. I think this ultimate float thing is super niche and really doesnít apply to many people.

    The other option is to just not ride on the worst days that require the ultimate float setup. Iím sure youíll agree, those days really arenít that fun when you are just barely riding. It can be a fun challenge but we could also just ski or snowshoe the trails to break them in.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Overkill View Post
    I hear ya. Iím up in Quebec and am very dedicated to fatbike riding. I likely ride 8-15 hours per week all winter, regardless of conditions, so Iíve encountered quite the extremes. Iíll agree that snow is different everywhere. Iím lucky that dry snow is pretty rare Here - there is almost always a solid base if we do get dry snow. I think this ultimate float thing is super niche and really doesnít apply to many people.

    The other option is to just not ride on the worst days that require the ultimate float setup. Iím sure youíll agree, those days really arenít that fun when you are just barely riding. It can be a fun challenge but we could also just ski or snowshoe the trails to break them in.
    Oddly...in 2015....when we got snow in New England every 2-3 days and it never set up...I did a hut-to-hut ride in Quebec with some friends.
    I was dreading it the entire drive up.....but the snow was amazeballs!
    Riding on the fluffy sled trails when I got home was sad.

    OH....and there is no "other" option....lol

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Overkill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    471
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    And...to be totally honest....if the CS197 didn't break after 16 miles.....I might have kept it and put up with the less than desirable stuff to use when real big tires were needed, which is what the RSd is for.
    But it did.
    And I wouldn't recommend one without a big caveat.
    I honestly thought I'd take the RSD out a few times during the summer....but it never happened. I guess it's time to pull it out and freshen up the Orange Seal in the tires....just in case winter happens.
    Yep, these China bikes are definitely a bit of a dice roll with the fit and finish. I ditched the headset and put in a proper cane creek in right away. For the rear end, I agree the dropout chip is a little janky. My Lou, D5 fit no problem in the short position so Iíll never touch it. I had no issues with it after a full season of use - around 250 hours of snow only. Itís the best climbing and cornering bike Iíve owned for snowriding. I only ride tight single track with lots of short steep climbs and it excels in these conditions. Iíve yet to ride with anyone who has better float and can make it up steep climbs better than me. It helps Iím only 140 pounds, but the bike is definitely not holding me back.

    The Quebec riding is super nice up here - except for those -30 Celsius days!

  53. #53
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    32,174
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    My current bike is on it's 5th season. Custom by Whit @ Meriwether. Search using those terms and you'll find at least one thread on it.

    It could stand to be updated a bit, but it's still miles better in soft/unconsolidated than any off the shelf bike.
    Do you store it behind glass and how much does it cost a common person to touch it?
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  54. #54
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Do you store it behind glass and how much does it cost a common person to touch it?

    Just let me pee in your mouth one more time and then you can touch it. The bike, I mean.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sherwin24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    450
    Ha! That is the best thing I have ever read on these forums.

  56. #56
    Rocking on a Rocky
    Reputation: RockyJo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,524
    One thing I learned from this is geometry is hard.
    :thumbsup:It doesn't matter what I ride as long as I ride it Rubber Side Down●~●.

  57. #57
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Overkill View Post
    Your position on the geometry of this bike is a little wacky IMO - why would any mass produced bike Manufacturer design their geometry for the 1% of people to ride instead of walk in the conditions you describe?

    So your position is that they should make a bike that fits 5.2" tires for people to ride on gravel and bike paths?

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,433
    Quote Originally Posted by RockyJo1 View Post
    One thing I learned from this is geometry is hard.
    Geometry?
    I thought we were discussing geology! Scratch all my comments above.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Overkill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    471
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    So your position is that they should make a bike that fits 5.2" tires for people to ride on gravel and bike paths?
    Wow, quite an asinine comment! For a guy with so much experience and knowledge you really sound like a fool in this thread.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: x3speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    562
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    So your position is that they should make a bike that fits 5.2" tires for people to ride on gravel and bike paths?
    This is a perfect summary of the opposing arguments. Mike is the expert here, do some reading on that. Mike, escape with your sanity! Your advice is appreciated.
    Too many bikes, not enough time...

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,386
    For those interested in the Meriwether's geometery:

    https://meriwethercycles.com/2013/12...nstay-fatbike/

  62. #62
    trail gnome
    Reputation: ray.vermette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    Anybody tried the normal 2xl's on 105 rims? Wondering if that would clear on this frame?
    I have 4.8 Bud & Lou on 105 Nextie rims on this frame and the clearance is adequate. You might be able to squeeze a slightly wider tire in the front, but I wouldn't try it in the back.
    Mountain bikers are generally a rational bunch...until someone moves a rock on our favorite trail and we lose our minds - LMN

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: El_Topo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by joeduda View Post
    Anybody tried the normal 2xl's on 105 rims? Wondering if that would clear on this frame?
    According to a fellow comrade that seems to build a lot of bikes, it doesn't.
    Looking for fairly priced 17.5" Farley EX 8/9.8 in Germany or neighbouring countries. Frame only or whole bike, TIA!

  64. #64
    trail gnome
    Reputation: ray.vermette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCheesehead View Post
    For those interested in the Meriwether's geometery:

    https://meriwethercycles.com/2013/12...nstay-fatbike/
    Thanks for the link. The article refers to mikesee and gives the geometry details that other people asked for.
    Mountain bikers are generally a rational bunch...until someone moves a rock on our favorite trail and we lose our minds - LMN

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,386
    Here is a comparison of the geometry of the frame in question and the Meriwether based on the article. (It appears to compare to the 19.5" frame)

    XMCS-197 now available from TanTan, fits 2XLs-meriwether.jpg

  66. #66
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCheesehead View Post
    Here is a comparison of the geometry of the frame in question and the Meriwether based on the article. (It appears to compare to the 19.5" frame)

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	meriwether.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	32.5 KB 
ID:	1291005

    The Meriwether you linked to was Whit's personal bike. The post you linked to is from 2013.

    Lots of changes since. Undoubtedly more evolution to come.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,386
    ^^^Mike, you seem to be pretty evasive about either giving the geometry that you find so superior or providing a link to it. Frankly I don't get it. You apparently have some knowledge, why not share? Clearly several here would like to learn.

  68. #68
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCheesehead View Post
    ^^^Mike, you seem to be pretty evasive about either giving the geometry that you find so superior or providing a link to it. Frankly I don't get it. You apparently have some knowledge, why not share? Clearly several here would like to learn.

    Not being evasive at all -- I said it was out there. You searched, you just found the wrong link.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,386
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Not being evasive at all -- I said it was out there. You searched, you just found the wrong link.
    Again, useless, evasive reply. Clearly you could easily provide the link, but would rather act the jackhole. I am surprised anyone that would read this thread would ever do business with you. Have a great day.

  70. #70
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCheesehead View Post
    Again, useless, evasive reply. Clearly you could easily provide the link, but would rather act the jackhole. I am surprised anyone that would read this thread would ever do business with you. Have a great day.

    So much name calling in this thread. Did that make you feel better?

    And people should avoid my wheel building business because I've voiced a considered opinion on niche frame geometry why exactly?

    if you really wanted to know about the Meriwether's geometry you'd get better at searching the internet.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,386
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    So much name calling in this thread. Did that make you feel better?

    And people should avoid my wheel building business because I've voiced a considered opinion on niche frame geometry why exactly?

    if you really wanted to know about the Meriwether's geometry you'd get better at searching the internet.
    There was no name calling in my post.

    People recognize you as an expert and seem to value your opinion. You go on to knock the geometry but won't say what you find better.

    As far as business, I do business with people that I find helpful, not evasive and rather condescending. I expect others do the same. When people ask me questions in areas where I am an expert I answer them, not just say "Google it".

  72. #72
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,753
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCheesehead View Post
    There was no name calling in my post.

    People recognize you as an expert and seem to value your opinion. You go on to knock the geometry but won't say what you find better.

    As far as business, I do business with people that I find helpful, not evasive and rather condescending. I expect others do the same. When people ask me questions in areas where I am an expert I answer them, not just say "Google it".

    You should re-read your post. By my math, "jackhole" = name calling.

    I've written for years on geometry of snowbikes for soft snow. Here's one -- which predated the Meriwether: Big Wheel Building: Snowbike geometry.

    You're welcome.

  73. #73
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation: BansheeRune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,620
    To quote the late George Carlin, what we have here is a "Prick waving contest".

    Stow the attitudes and be kewl, why don't we.
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,386
    One being said to "act the jackhole" is not the same as being called a jackhole. Sorry, not math, english.

Similar Threads

  1. TanTan FM-299B - A new, ultralight 29+ frame
    By sissypants in forum 26+/27.5+/29+ Plus Bikes
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 3 Weeks Ago, 01:25 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 3 Weeks Ago, 12:43 AM
  3. TanTan FM08 - First Build
    By supermoto65 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-16-2019, 10:00 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-17-2015, 07:32 AM
  5. Hope 197+ XD XX1 Driver end cap fail
    By bdundee in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-16-2014, 02:53 PM

Members who have read this thread: 155

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.