Results 1 to 65 of 65
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178

    Initial Thoughts and Review on The Mojo HD 140 (long)

    A little background:

    I've been riding a 2010 Mojo SL for a little less than a year. I'm from Nor Cal and I've taken the Mojo all over California and Ashland. I've ridden Ashland, Downieville, SLO, Tahoe, Annadel, Santa Cruz, JMP in Oakland, etc, etc. I had it built up for more aggresive trail riding as I do a bit of climbing, but I like to rip downhill the best

    The Mojo SL was a good mule for the time being, but honestly its really just a long travel, lightweight XC machine, quite versatile but has many shortcomings as you start pushing the envelope riding downhill. Its awesome as an all-arounder and still is a great bike, but if you favor going down more than up, the HD is where its at.




    (both pics taken at Toads in Tahoe)

    Ever since the release of the HD, I've been drooling big time to get one and finally I got the call from Wade over at Spokesman Cycles in Santacruz, saying that he just received a white Mojo HD in size XL!. Wade is who I got my original SL from and like Ibis, has always done me well.

    Now originally I was holding out for the Matte Black, as it looks so sleek and sexy and I was tired of owning a white mountain bike. However I just couldn't pass up the chance at getting my hands on this HD frame and it turns out the white and black is pretty bad ass.

    When I first heard about the Mojo HD I thought that idea was interesting, but what was the point of buying a whole other frame and have the same exact travel? That was until I looked into it some more. By going with the HD140 I am using all my same parts including my 150mm Fox 32 Float. Not only that but I have a way stiffer frame, that's longer and is slacker but without much weight penalty and even more important it still has a low center of gravity due to not needing extra bottom bracket height (ground clearance) from the added travel of160mm (which is what normal Mojo HD's have) So now I'm sitting on a 28.5 ilb corner carving, singe track eating machine.



    "By simply changing out the upper shock mounts (we're calling them Limbo Chips) and substituting a shock from the Mojo or Mojo SL (7.875" x 2" travel vs 8.5" x 2.5" for the HD), travel is reduced to 140mm"

    Since my old Mojo SL shock had already been custom tuned by PUSH industries, I used that shock on the new Mojo HD frame, and kept the longer travel RP23 that came on the Mojo HD for later use if I want to step up the travel on the bike. Smart eh? And really most of the riding I do "could warrant" the extra 20mm of travel of the normal HD but really its not necessary.

    Downhill:

    Damn this thing is stiff, makes the old Mojo feel like a noodle, no wonder everyone says the Mojo is so flexy, after riding a beefy HD its pretty obvious. It is much more stable as well, like Dan said "this bike is like a missle" Thanks to the longer wheelbase, slacker head tube and seat tube angle, no longer do you have to feel like you're riding on the edge, pushing the limits when downhilling. The old Mojo was so squirrely with such a short wheelbase that it felt like the thing had a mind of its own on fast descents. The HD is point and shoot and instills more confidence and less "oh shyt" moments. Jumps and lips are easier too. On the old Mojo, with its XC geometry I always felt like I had to really pump the front and drop my ass back when hitting lips or jumping, on the HD I need less drastic body english and the bike just sucks it up. Landings are much more predictable as well, as the bike does not flex and go wherever it wants off-line. I found my major complaint with the old SL was that it didn't hold a line well, and changing directions while picking new lines never felt inspiring, as I never felt connected with the bike. The HD has completely solved these issues.

    Cornering

    is ever so sweet on this thing too; Slack(er), low, light, and stable. Even though the Head Tube angle only slackens 1 degree to 68, from the old Mojo's 69HA. But it definitely makes a difference, you can load up the frontend by putting more weight on it, without the fear of tucking the front, this was HUGE for me, I can't wait to get an angleset and get this bad boy down to a 67HA. Rear wheel Cutty slides are easier since the rear is so much more stout from the beefier links, stronger swingarm, and 12mm Through Axle. It whips out more predictably and with less effort, on demand. Out of all things improved, this by far put the biggest smile on my face, flying through turns on rails, comfortably.

    Climbing:

    Just swapping frames, I went from 27.95 ilbs to 28.5ilbs (remember this is a XL). Everything stayed the same except for the headset and cables. The first thing I noticed about the HD140 is that it feels as if there is much more antisquat built into the rear suspension. On the old Mojo SL I ran 166-170 PSI with me weighing in at roughly 180ilbs. To achieve %30 sag on the HD I'm running a hair below 150psi! I'm wondering if this has to do with the shorter shock putting the frame more into the progressiveness of the travel OR if it just has more antisquat built in. Either way the rear feels noticably more firm, less bob but also less small bump compliancy. The stiffer platform makes for better out of the saddle climbing, however I do feel as if it takes away some of the small bump characteristics that the original Mojo was so famous for. My feeling is that this is better for high speed descending as you don't blow through the travel and bottom out as easy. The compromise is that you feel a bit more from the rearend at slower speeds.

    Right now my Push'd rear Fox RP23 is tuned for plush, using a .1400 compression shim stack, Push told me back when I had it tuned that I could have it retuned even more plush by going with a .1200 shim stack. I believe this is the right direction, with the increased anti squat it would make sense that you would need even less compression valving. I might just send this shock back to Push in the near future to see the difference.

    I'm not sure if its the increase 1/2 pound of weight from the frame swap, or the reduction in plushness but the bike does seem a little more "dead" when pedaling. Almost feels like when you swap to a heavier set of tires and the bike feels a bit more bogged down. I'm thinking its from the added weight and I'm not too concerned about it but I did feel like I was not keeping the same momentum on climbs with the equal amount of output on my usual climbs. Not a huge concern for me, but it is an observation. Its not a significant difference and I'm not entering into XC races with this bike so I'm not very concerned. If I cared about that I'd take off the nearly 1000 gram front tire I'm running

    Some other things I noticed while assembling the bike was the improved cable routing, it makes so much more sense now and is more inconspicous and functional. The added downtube cable protector is a nice touch as well. The suspension links seem much, much more robust as well as just about every piece of the frame. I'm diggin the dimples in the rear chainstay to increase tire clearance and avoid tire rub there, which I used to get on the old frame all the time.

    And if you're wondering how I have Haven's on this bike since this frame uses a 12mm TA, its because my rear hub is convertible between standard QR and 12mm TA, all the new Haven's and Havocs will have this feature, which is totally awesome and works flawlessly in both configurations







    Since the slacker head tube angle felt so good, in the near future I"m going to purchase a Cane Creek Anglest so I can slacken it out one more degree to be on par with the Mojo HD160. That should really be the icing on the cake, I'll definitely update when I do.
    Last edited by Yody; 10-11-2010 at 09:55 PM.

  2. #2
    Dropshot Champ!
    Reputation: redmr2_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    Damn this thing is stiff, makes the old Mojo feel like a noodle, no wonder everyone says the Mojo is so flexy, after riding a beefy HD its pretty obvious.
    completely agreed. It's night and day.

    good review, enjoy the bike!

    perfect tire setup too, run the same on mine and its rips!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by redmr2_man
    completely agreed. It's night and day.

    good review, enjoy the bike!

    perfect tire setup too, run the same on mine and its rips!
    Please,please,please don't let this turn into another mojo flexy thread, for the love of god

    The mojo sl has an amount of flexiness that is fine for its intended uses, considering how lightweight the frame is. This HD is on a whole nother level though, huge improvement if you don't mind the added weight.

    Only complaint I have on these tires, is that the 50a durameter rubber doesn't last at all, this is my 2nd mutano 2.2 and the knobs keep getting to the point where they look like they're gonna tear off. Sliding the rear doesnt' help but I just don't think these things are any good for hardpack or rocks. The 2.3 WW isn't as bad but you can see signs of deterioration on the outer knobs too, just not as bad.

    Oh and thanks, my thoughts are a little scatter brain but I don't have all night to compose a masterpiece
    Last edited by Yody; 10-11-2010 at 09:29 PM.

  4. #4
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,764
    Nice bike!

    Great review too.

    I take that you were not able to gain bottom travel as easily as the SL?

    That much lower psi with the same 140mm travel, shock, and build has me thinking it is both stiffer vertically and less rising, more linear rate in shallow to mid travel than the SL and C.

  5. #5
    Dropshot Champ!
    Reputation: redmr2_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,134
    Same problems with my mutanos. A few have actually come off! What did you do with the sl frame?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by derby
    Nice bike!

    Great review too.

    I take that you were not able to gain bottom travel as easily as the SL?

    That much lower psi with the same 140mm travel, shock, and build has me thinking it is both stiffer vertically and less rising, more linear rate in shallow to mid travel than the SL and C.
    I've bottomed it out just as often as the SL, however it feels as if there is way more midstroke support, so it bottoms out with way more resistance. Feels much more controlled, like its just barely using full travel where the SL you could FEEL it bottoming. I suppose you could say that is the same as not bottoming as easily.

  7. #7
    GUIDANCE COUNSELOR
    Reputation: NoahColorado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,645
    How's the BB height? Are you striking pedals often? I'm curious how much (if at all) an Angleset will further drop the BB.

    Just realized the Angleset requires a straight 1 1/8" steerer, I was planning on using a tapered. Hmmm, what to do.
    Last edited by NoahColorado; 10-12-2010 at 09:27 AM.
    NOAH SEARS
    MRP - VP of Business Development
    Pivot Cycles - Team Rider

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by NoahColorado
    How's the BB height? Are you striking pedals often? I'm curious how much (if at all) an Angleset will further drop the BB.

    Just realized the Angleset requires a straight 1 1/8" steerer, I was planning on using a tapered. Hmmm, what to do.
    Yeah I'm getting pedal strikes on rocky terrain, I used to get them on the SL also, just a small compromise in my book like anything else.

    Yup angleset requires the 1 1/8" which is exactly what I have I dont' think that it will lower the BB much at all, possibly a tiny bit, but I was wondering about that as well. If anything that will be a good thing, just gotta watch those pedals more often.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Also just got off the phone with PUSH, they're going to be testing a Mojo HD soon enough, so I'll get some solid feedback on what diretion to go with the shock. One thing they did mention is that so far they've found the Mojo HD to be perfect for a coil shock, in fact they said it almost seems MADE for a coil.

  10. #10
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    One thing they did mention is that so far they've found the Mojo HD to be perfect for a coil shock, in fact they said it almost seems MADE for a coil.
    That's great news! The Vivid they are selling looks to be the route I'll be going.
    Did they mention when they think they'll be able to put together a kit for it?

  11. #11
    Village Idiot
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    Also just got off the phone with PUSH, they're going to be testing a Mojo HD soon enough, so I'll get some solid feedback on what diretion to go with the shock. One thing they did mention is that so far they've found the Mojo HD to be perfect for a coil shock, in fact they said it almost seems MADE for a coil.
    Coil shock for the 140 would be awesome
    **** Looking for a Sram 9.0SL rear hub *****

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    45
    Hi Yody
    Nice bike.
    I have an Mojo SL and I'm thinking on the HD 140.
    One question: I have the Easton Haven wheels and the rear one is QR. How did you convert them to 12mm?
    Last edited by biclas; 10-12-2010 at 01:59 PM.

  13. #13
    GUIDANCE COUNSELOR
    Reputation: NoahColorado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,645
    Quote Originally Posted by equinox
    Coil shock for the 140 would be awesome
    Don't spoil my ultimate trail build!
    NOAH SEARS
    MRP - VP of Business Development
    Pivot Cycles - Team Rider

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    A little background:

    I've been riding a 2010 Mojo SL for a little less than a year. I'm from Nor Cal and I've taken the Mojo all over California and Ashland. I've ridden Ashland, Downieville, SLO, Tahoe, Annadel, Santa Cruz, JMP in Oakland, etc, etc. I had it built up for more aggresive trail riding as I do a bit of climbing, but I like to rip downhill the best

    The Mojo SL was a good mule for the time being, but honestly its really just a long travel, lightweight XC machine, quite versatile but has many shortcomings as you start pushing the envelope riding downhill. Its awesome as an all-arounder and still is a great bike, but if you favor going down more than up, the HD is where its at.




    (both pics taken at Toads in Tahoe)

    Ever since the release of the HD, I've been drooling big time to get one and finally I got the call from Wade over at Spokesman Cycles in Santacruz, saying that he just received a white Mojo HD in size XL!. Wade is who I got my original SL from and like Ibis, has always done me well.

    Now originally I was holding out for the Matte Black, as it looks so sleek and sexy and I was tired of owning a white mountain bike. However I just couldn't pass up the chance at getting my hands on this HD frame and it turns out the white and black is pretty bad ass.

    When I first heard about the Mojo HD I thought that idea was interesting, but what was the point of buying a whole other frame and have the same exact travel? That was until I looked into it some more. By going with the HD140 I am using all my same parts including my 150mm Fox 32 Float. Not only that but I have a way stiffer frame, that's longer and is slacker but without much weight penalty and even more important it still has a low center of gravity due to not needing extra bottom bracket height (ground clearance) from the added travel of160mm (which is what normal Mojo HD's have) So now I'm sitting on a 28.5 ilb corner carving, singe track eating machine.



    "By simply changing out the upper shock mounts (we're calling them Limbo Chips) and substituting a shock from the Mojo or Mojo SL (7.875" x 2" travel vs 8.5" x 2.5" for the HD), travel is reduced to 140mm"

    Since my old Mojo SL shock had already been custom tuned by PUSH industries, I used that shock on the new Mojo HD frame, and kept the longer travel RP23 that came on the Mojo HD for later use if I want to step up the travel on the bike. Smart eh? And really most of the riding I do "could warrant" the extra 20mm of travel of the normal HD but really its not necessary.

    Downhill:

    Damn this thing is stiff, makes the old Mojo feel like a noodle, no wonder everyone says the Mojo is so flexy, after riding a beefy HD its pretty obvious. It is much more stable as well, like Dan said "this bike is like a missle" Thanks to the longer wheelbase, slacker head tube and seat tube angle, no longer do you have to feel like you're riding on the edge, pushing the limits when downhilling. The old Mojo was so squirrely with such a short wheelbase that it felt like the thing had a mind of its own on fast descents. The HD is point and shoot and instills more confidence and less "oh shyt" moments. Jumps and lips are easier too. On the old Mojo, with its XC geometry I always felt like I had to really pump the front and drop my ass back when hitting lips or jumping, on the HD I need less drastic body english and the bike just sucks it up. Landings are much more predictable as well, as the bike does not flex and go wherever it wants off-line. I found my major complaint with the old SL was that it didn't hold a line well, and changing directions while picking new lines never felt inspiring, as I never felt connected with the bike. The HD has completely solved these issues.

    Cornering

    is ever so sweet on this thing too; Slack(er), low, light, and stable. Even though the Head Tube angle only slackens 1 degree to 68, from the old Mojo's 69HA. But it definitely makes a difference, you can load up the frontend by putting more weight on it, without the fear of tucking the front, this was HUGE for me, I can't wait to get an angleset and get this bad boy down to a 67HA. Rear wheel Cutty slides are easier since the rear is so much more stout from the beefier links, stronger swingarm, and 12mm Through Axle. It whips out more predictably and with less effort, on demand. Out of all things improved, this by far put the biggest smile on my face, flying through turns on rails, comfortably.

    Climbing:

    Just swapping frames, I went from 27.95 ilbs to 28.5ilbs (remember this is a XL). Everything stayed the same except for the headset and cables. The first thing I noticed about the HD140 is that it feels as if there is much more antisquat built into the rear suspension. On the old Mojo SL I ran 166-170 PSI with me weighing in at roughly 180ilbs. To achieve %30 sag on the HD I'm running a hair below 150psi! I'm wondering if this has to do with the shorter shock putting the frame more into the progressiveness of the travel OR if it just has more antisquat built in. Either way the rear feels noticably more firm, less bob but also less small bump compliancy. The stiffer platform makes for better out of the saddle climbing, however I do feel as if it takes away some of the small bump characteristics that the original Mojo was so famous for. My feeling is that this is better for high speed descending as you don't blow through the travel and bottom out as easy. The compromise is that you feel a bit more from the rearend at slower speeds.

    Right now my Push'd rear Fox RP23 is tuned for plush, using a .1400 compression shim stack, Push told me back when I had it tuned that I could have it retuned even more plush by going with a .1200 shim stack. I believe this is the right direction, with the increased anti squat it would make sense that you would need even less compression valving. I might just send this shock back to Push in the near future to see the difference.

    I'm not sure if its the increase 1/2 pound of weight from the frame swap, or the reduction in plushness but the bike does seem a little more "dead" when pedaling. Almost feels like when you swap to a heavier set of tires and the bike feels a bit more bogged down. I'm thinking its from the added weight and I'm not too concerned about it but I did feel like I was not keeping the same momentum on climbs with the equal amount of output on my usual climbs. Not a huge concern for me, but it is an observation. Its not a significant difference and I'm not entering into XC races with this bike so I'm not very concerned. If I cared about that I'd take off the nearly 1000 gram front tire I'm running

    Some other things I noticed while assembling the bike was the improved cable routing, it makes so much more sense now and is more inconspicous and functional. The added downtube cable protector is a nice touch as well. The suspension links seem much, much more robust as well as just about every piece of the frame. I'm diggin the dimples in the rear chainstay to increase tire clearance and avoid tire rub there, which I used to get on the old frame all the time.

    And if you're wondering how I have Haven's on this bike since this frame uses a 12mm TA, its because my rear hub is convertible between standard QR and 12mm TA, all the new Haven's and Havocs will have this feature, which is totally awesome and works flawlessly in both configurations







    Since the slacker head tube angle felt so good, in the near future I"m going to purchase a Cane Creek Anglest so I can slacken it out one more degree to be on par with the Mojo HD160. That should really be the icing on the cake, I'll definitely update when I do.

    Yody - nice write up.. how tall are you - it will help me with my frame size selection I like the geo of the XL. thanks

  15. #15
    gnuH
    Reputation: kiwirider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by dbuilt
    Yody - nice write up.. how tall are you - it will help me with my frame size selection I like the geo of the XL. thanks
    You could have said that without repeating the entire original post. Just saying...
    A green bird with a red body. We could look it up in a book. Or we could look up

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by dbuilt
    Yody - nice write up.. how tall are you - it will help me with my frame size selection I like the geo of the XL. thanks
    I'm 6'2"", even if I was 6" I'd buy an XL. I'm currently running a 70mm stem and feel like its the shortest I can go.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by biclas
    Hi Yody
    Nice bike.
    I have an Mojo SL and I'm thinking on the HD 140.
    One question: I have the Easton Haven wheels and the rear one is QR. How did you convert them to 12mm?
    Its a newer style hub, I believe 2011 hubs should start coming with it. Not %100 sure on that but I know the 2010 wheels don't have that option.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4
    Yody - thanks for excellent mini comparison review indeed. Have been longing for someone to made & report the comparison, as I've been slowly saving up to go for the SL. The new HD140 option is a nice problem to have, and your review help to nail the decision.

    How much of climbing efficiency loss would you have estimated in your typical trail? You mention not significant but appreciate some rough figure if possible. I'm pretty bad with climbing uphill among my buddies, though thoroughly enjoying the downhill :-)..

    Would the HD140 take the Fox RPL or DT Swiss shock with lockout as in SL? or just the standard RP23 only?

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    I'm 6'2"", even if I was 6" I'd buy an XL. I'm currently running a 70mm stem and feel like its the shortest I can go.
    thanks that what I thought XL it is

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by dolp2898
    Yody - thanks for excellent mini comparison review indeed. Have been longing for someone to made & report the comparison, as I've been slowly saving up to go for the SL. The new HD140 option is a nice problem to have, and your review help to nail the decision.

    How much of climbing efficiency loss would you have estimated in your typical trail? You mention not significant but appreciate some rough figure if possible. I'm pretty bad with climbing uphill among my buddies, though thoroughly enjoying the downhill :-)..

    Would the HD140 take the Fox RPL or DT Swiss shock with lockout as in SL? or just the standard RP23 only?
    Not too bad, but with the slacker geometry your positioned farther over the back wheel and I think this has something to do with the feeling of less efficiency. If you do a lot of standing out of the saddle, I think this bike could actually be better considering it bobs less.

    I'm running a heavier set of tires, not the worst but Im sure with a lighter set it would feel faster for sure, I could easily drop nearly a pound of weight if I went with a set of 600 gram tires like a WTB mutano 2.4 non tcs. Plus climbing is all about the person pedaling, all of these bikes pedal awesome. Again if you're more of a climber the SL is an awesome bike that descends really well, but if you want the next level downhilling the Mojo HD is where its at.

    Not sure on the shocks, but you don't need a lockout or a propedal on these bikes, that won't do anything for you.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    226
    Yody, I see your running the haven wheelset on the HD. I didn't realize that the havens where compatiable with a maxle. Is there a conversion you're running?

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    21

    The best review

    Sorry drinkwat read the whole post.(And if you're wondering how I have Haven's on this bike since this frame uses a 12mm TA, its because my rear hub is convertible between standard QR and 12mm TA, all the new Haven's and Havocs will have this feature, which is totally awesome and works flawlessly in both configurations)
    The most informative reveiw I have read and has made my mind up about what wat to go 140HD

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    642
    I'm curious to hear people's reasoning on going HD140 over 160. Is it mostly a decision based around the fork, ie. you already own a 32 and don't want to upgrade forks as well, is it to keep some weight down(again with a lighter 32 vs. 36), is it slightly quicker handling that you are after?

    Not dissing the decision at all, just curious. And if you were getting a new fork anyway would you again go 140 w/ 32 or 160 w/ 36. Comments are open to anybody.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    21

    Two for One

    Build kit XT 3X10 Fox Talas 160 for the size and strength and drops to120 for Climbing 140 rear with RP23 for the majority of my riding but 160 DHX Air for the bigger stuff. 203 mm Hope 4 spot brakes (Because they are smik)Price and weight not an issue.
    I weigh about 260 with gear so strength over weight saving.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    642
    Thor, thats what I mean, why are you even bothering with the 140? What advantages are you looking for in the 140 setup? Strictly quicker handling?

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by robnow
    Thor, thats what I mean, why are you even bothering with the 140? What advantages are you looking for in the 140 setup? Strictly quicker handling?
    Can't answer for him but here are my reasons

    1 Has a lower bottom bracket
    2. less travel is more responsive
    3. uses lighter components
    4. can use existing components
    5. some people might like the 68 degree HA over the 67 for quicker handling on flatter terrain, personally I want the 67.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starship303's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    292
    I have been wondering this too.

    I was thinking of starting from scratch (not using existing hardware) on an HD140 build (with RP23) along with the 160 limbo chips and a coil shock (Fox DHX, RS Vivd, Elka? Bos? ...).

    Fork wise i was thinking a Fox 36 Talas 180 with a 1 1/8 steerer (for future CC Angleset), obviously dropped to 140mm when the bike is run in 140 guise with the RP23. The KEY is though that this may be in 140 guise most of the time.

    Still not sure if its just better/easier/cheaper to get the HD160 and run a 160mm fork up front and not have the heavier fork with two different travels, 2 limbo chips and 2 shocks, as the HD in 160mm mode is still pretty efficient for trail riding, and still a capable mini DH machine. BUT is an HD160 with a coil shock and 180 fork much better on the downs and possibly worth the extra cost/weight?

    I am also yet to be sold on the 2011 36 Talas 180 actually making for a good 140mm fork. Anyone have or seen any feedback on this issue?

    Of course, it would be great to be able to demo an HD160 and an HD140... but being in Australia thats never going to be an option.

    Hmmmm

    *

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by starship303
    I have been wondering this too.

    I was thinking of starting from scratch (not using existing hardware) on an HD140 build (with RP23) along with the 160 limbo chips and a coil (Fox DHX, RS Vivd, Elka? Bos? ...).

    Fork wise i was thinking a Fox 36 Talas 180 with a 1 1/8 steerer (for future CC Angleset), obviously dropped to 140mm when the bike is run in 140 guise with the RP23. The KEY is though that this may be in 140 guise most of the time.

    Still not sure if its just better/easier/cheaper to get the HD160 and run a 160mm fork up front and not have the heavier fork with two different travels, 2 limbo chips and 2 shocks, as the HD in 160mm mode is still pretty efficient for trail riding, and still a capable mini DH machine.

    I am also yet to be sold on the 180 Talas making for a good 140mm fork.

    Hmmmm

    *
    I'd just buy a Mojo HD140 and a seperate downhill bike, sounds overly complicated and will be compromising in both situations.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    21
    ronbow just because a 160mm bike is a bit of an overkill for most of my riding and the trails here in Sunny Western Australia. I know what you mean just buy one Bike would be the ducks guts but the MOJO has the options I was Going to Start off with the 160 and try it.Again we skippys are not going to get a demo MOJO HD any where and at $3990 AU Clams its a big risk if its not quite right for the rider with out testing. Thanks Yody best review on a Mojo I have read as it describes your thought process and reasons for the build.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starship303's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    I'd just buy a Mojo HD140 and a seperate downhill bike, sounds overly complicated and will be compromising in both situations.
    Yeah I agree that my proposed build may compromise the HD140's trail prowess somewhat, but at the moment i have a trail bike and a DH bike (see sig) and am looking at cutting down to just one dually.

    Besides, i've recently come to the conclusion (admission?) that my Nicolai is completely overkill for me, though I would still love to have the option of a slack, fast shredder for the odd park/DH days.

    *

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    21
    TYPE Travel Size HTA HTL STA STL TTE SO WB CSL SP BBH

    Specialized Enduro 2009 150 L 67 128 71.9 483 620 762 1177 421 30.9 356

    NOMAD Carbon 160 XL 67 145 71.5 505 629 739 1171 442 30.9 355
    NOMAD Carbon 160 L 67 130 71.5 470 603 739 1143 442 30.9 355

    MOJO HD 160 XL 67 134 71 533 624 770 1156 435 31.6 350
    MOJO HD 160 L 67 118 71 482 605 760 1134 435 31.6 350

    MOJO HD 140 XL 68 134 72 533 622 760 1156 435 31.6 343
    MOJO HD 140 L 68 118 72 482 602 750 1128 435 31.6 343

    MOJO 140 XL 69 145 73 533 620 795 1126 429 30.9 336
    MOJO 140 L 69 130 73 482 600 787 1105 429 30.9 336

    Heckler 150 XL 69 149 72 520 622 764 1138 434 30.9 343
    Heckler 150 L 69 129.5 72 482.6 597 762 1110 434 30.9 343

  32. #32
    T.W.O.
    Reputation: mimi1885's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,172
    Nice bike Yody
    Great review, and insight. I'm planning to do the similar thing having 2 shocks and add a chip. May be 2 sets of wheels too. Good to know that you have no problem using all of the travel.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    642
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    Can't answer for him but here are my reasons

    1 Has a lower bottom bracket
    2. less travel is more responsive
    3. uses lighter components
    4. can use existing components
    5. some people might like the 68 degree HA over the 67 for quicker handling on flatter terrain, personally I want the 67.
    Yup, these were the answers I was looking for, thanks Yody. Great review BTW.

    I'll concur on the size as well. At 6'2", ~35 inseam, I'm happy with the XL. Using 70mm stem now and would like to try 55-60.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4
    Yody - thanks for your earlier answer. appreciate that.

    robnow - there are definitely more than just 1 vector influencing the final decision, and wud be balancing act among several vectors including types of trail..

    Example, 160 wud be overkill for the type of trails one ride. Logical choice is SL 140 (or lower but too bad no SL 120)....Now why not HD 140 then. Cost a little bit more & with only ~1 lbs heavier penalty, one get SL on steroid with firmer/stiffer body+rear, future proof option of upgrading to 160 when graduated to next level (nice), slacker HA, lighter wheelset + fork if no need for 160 etc...Matching a RS Revelation 150-120 fork on it wud be quite perfect.

    I guess you can also ask why not just get HD160 but slapped it with lighter wheelset+fork (eg 150/32) setup, Yody's answer #1-3 are the main reasons. Either way, HD 140 seems to be the answer for such middle path....

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by starship303
    I have been wondering this too.

    I was thinking of starting from scratch (not using existing hardware) on an HD140 build (with RP23) along with the 160 limbo chips and a coil shock (Fox DHX, RS Vivd, Elka? Bos? ...).

    Fork wise i was thinking a Fox 36 Talas 180 with a 1 1/8 steerer (for future CC Angleset), obviously dropped to 140mm when the bike is run in 140 guise with the RP23. The KEY is though that this may be in 140 guise most of the time.

    Still not sure if its just better/easier/cheaper to get the HD160 and run a 160mm fork up front and not have the heavier fork with two different travels, 2 limbo chips and 2 shocks, as the HD in 160mm mode is still pretty efficient for trail riding, and still a capable mini DH machine. BUT is an HD160 with a coil shock and 180 fork much better on the downs and possibly worth the extra cost/weight?

    I am also yet to be sold on the 2011 36 Talas 180 actually making for a good 140mm fork. Anyone have or seen any feedback on this issue?

    Of course, it would be great to be able to demo an HD160 and an HD140... but being in Australia thats never going to be an option.

    Hmmmm

    *
    I am in almost the same position starship- I live in oz too, and was thinking about the 160 coil at the rear with the talas 180 at the front, i will keep my old mojo shock and get some limbo chips to run it at 140 in the rear for trail days- my concern is that- i can't demo the hd, and how the fork will work mostly being run at 140...with the aussie dollar as good as it is I am tempted to see if cambria bike will send me one and save myself a thousand bucks!

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: edenger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    566
    Hmmph.... now you've done it. Was perfectly happy w/ my Mojo but now I must have a Mojo HD! great review

  37. #37
    _____
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    365
    Great review. Much better than any of the magazines. Does the xl HD feel like a bigger bike compared too the xl SL? I'm 6'5 and bought an xl SL last year to hold me over while I wait for an xl matte clear HD. I just put the new 750mm easton carbon dh bar on which really opened up the cockpit for my lanky body (as well as stiffened up the front compared to the easton xc carbon bars. XC parts = flex). I know the top tube dimensions are nearly identical but I'm hoping the extra wheel base helps too.

  38. #38
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,010
    Quote Originally Posted by SiO2
    Great review. Much better than any of the magazines. Does the xl HD feel like a bigger bike compared too the xl SL? I'm 6'5 and bought an xl SL last year to hold me over while I wait for an xl matte clear HD. I just put the new 750mm easton carbon dh bar on which really opened up the cockpit for my lanky body (as well as stiffened up the front compared to the easton xc carbon bars. XC parts = flex). I know the top tube dimensions are nearly identical but I'm hoping the extra wheel base helps too.
    I have an XL Mojo and XL HD160. The first thing I noticed on the HD was the longer wheelbase. The cockpit size feels about identical to me.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug
    I have an XL Mojo and XL HD160. The first thing I noticed on the HD was the longer wheelbase. The cockpit size feels about identical to me.
    Exactly

  40. #40
    screamer
    Reputation: budgie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,316
    And how about standover & front end height? On paper the HD looks pretty similar in height to the SL, with the shorter, slacker head tube to counteract a longer 160mm fork. Does it feel the same in practice? And with a 150mm fork in 140 mode is it noticeably lower than the SL?
    On heavy rotation: White Lung: Deep Fantasy

  41. #41
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,010
    Quote Originally Posted by budgie
    And how about standover & front end height? On paper the HD looks pretty similar in height to the SL, with the shorter, slacker head tube to counteract a longer 160mm fork. Does it feel the same in practice? And with a 150mm fork in 140 mode is it noticeably lower than the SL?
    Take a look at my post here:
    http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?...&postcount=199
    Download both pics and quickly flip between the 2. Heights are identical in almost all aspects. Tires on HD160 now are bigger than in the pics, but both pics have specialized 2.0 tires on them. I imagine the HD140 could sit a little lower than the SL in the front.
    On steep climbs I much prefer the HD now. My Mojo just has such a light feeling front end that I cannot keep the wheel on the ground. It could just be the additional 3lbs of fork/tire on the front of the HD. It's at the point where I may reduce the Revelation travel from 150 to 140 on the Mojo to see if that helps.

  42. #42
    flow where ever you go
    Reputation: noshortcuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,519
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug
    My Mojo just has such a light feeling front end that I cannot keep the wheel on the ground. It could just be the additional 3lbs of fork/tire on the front of the HD. It's at the point where I may reduce the Revelation travel from 150 to 140 on the Mojo to see if that helps.
    Light front is not a frequent complaint with Mojo.

    I have been on a Mojo since first production and all my riding includes steep steeps. I've been on a 150mm fork the whole time and run both 26" and 650b" front wheels. I've run 70mm-110mm stems. The only lightness I ever got in the front was when I first tried the 70mm stem . It made the front a bit light (though it stayed on the ground). However, with the stem/handlebar a bit lower, there's no lightness. I'm 5' 7.5" on a small frame. I don't know the difference in AC length between Revelation and DtSwiss - that may also make a difference?

    Maybe the HD is well planted due to the longer wheel base? Still, you should be able to get the Mojo fitted to ride without a light front on steeps.
    Last edited by noshortcuts; 10-17-2010 at 12:36 AM.

    "I must not be crazy because I'm seriously questioning my sanity"

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    79
    I'm planning a bike purchase and am still torn between the SL and the HD140. My regular trails are rough, rocky, rooty, hilly eastern singletrack (Avalon in MD). Lots of short bumpy technical climbs followed by short bumpy twisty descents (I climb for the descents, that's where the thrill is for me.) Very few drops, jumps, or really big hits, although I do enjoy that style of riding and expect to spend a few days a year at lift-served bike parks or bigger mountains. I'm looking for one bike to do it all. I demo'd a classic Mojo a few weeks ago and loved it. I will not have an opportunity to demo an HD140 or HD.

    Here are some quick pros and cons of the HD I've gleaned from the helpful reviews here:

    HD 140 pros: Stiffer, more stable, tracks better on descents, buy an extra shock and fork and you basically have 2 bikes - a 140 trail bike and a 160 mini-DH rig

    HD 140 cons: heavier, less small bump compliance, slightly less agile climbing, pricier, wait time

    So there are tradeoffs. I would be curious to know if the the differences in small bump compliance (part of what I liked so much about the Mojo I demo'd) are subtle or really significant.

    Anyway, here's a question for the HD 140 (or 160) owners who are also former SL/Classic owners: Are there times when you wish you had the old SL/Classic back? Or are you finding that, for your style of riding, the pros of the HD outweigh the cons in comparison to the SL? Or if you own both a SL/Classic and an HD, are you finding that one bike spends a lot more time time in the garage while the other is out on the trails?

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Never wish I had the SL back, ever

  45. #45
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,010
    Quote Originally Posted by trenchDiggr
    Anyway, here's a question for the HD 140 (or 160) owners who are also former SL/Classic owners: Are there times when you wish you had the old SL/Classic back? Or are you finding that, for your style of riding, the pros of the HD outweigh the cons in comparison to the SL? Or if you own both a SL/Classic and an HD, are you finding that one bike spends a lot more time time in the garage while the other is out on the trails?
    When I ride my classic I find myself wishing for the HD, even when climbing. When on the HD I never wish for the classic. Both are great, but the HD is where the fun is at for me.

    You really want the HD, but are trying to convince yourself (with your weak list of cons ) that the SL is right for you.

    The choice between the two is fairly simple for me:
    Mojo Classic if:
    -it's a high mile ride with lots of climbing
    -it's a XC race day

    Mojo HD if:
    -all other rides

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,349
    Great review Yody....good input as usual. I was a little surprised when you were initially kinda lukewarm on the 140 option...sounds like you found what you're looking for.

    I'd like to add to your list of HD140 "Pros" the following:

    #6 Ideal chassis for the ultimate 650b trail / all-mountain bike...plenty of clearance for all available tires (according to early reports anyway) without shock shimming & lug trimming, and a bb height that should be just about right for most folks with the larger wheels. The option of going with new tapered steerer fork, or staying with a straight steerer and being able to play with the head angle is really sweet as well. I hope to be setting one up that way next year.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug
    You really want the HD, but are trying to convince yourself (with your weak list of cons ) that the SL is right for you.
    Yeah, nice call. Ordered the HD 140 from my LBS. Black, XT kit, TALAS 32 upgrade, all else stock. Now I wait.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    I'm starting to think the small volume can on the standard mojo shock is too progressive combined with the newly designed rear suspension on the HD. I think the original feeling of it being a little too firm is not in the compression valving but more so in the volume of the air can. From what I can tell the Mojo HD gets progressively stiffer in the end of the travel, which is why PUSH was saying it will work so well with a Coil. If this is true I don't see the need for the small volume air canister. I think these 2 aspects combined are making the rear suspension feel almost a little too firm in some aspects. It's still a hoot to ride and there are some aspects I enjoy out of a firm, non wallowy, non bottoming out rear suspension but I think I might try a high volume air can for fun soon enough.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardboiled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    750
    how much sag are you running? you haven't been able to find a sweet spot with better early stroke feel without compromising the end stroke feel?

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by hardboiled
    how much sag are you running? you haven't been able to find a sweet spot with better early stroke feel without compromising the end stroke feel?
    about %25-30 percent sag. It feels great but it just barely feels like a 140mm bike, has a lot of midstroke support and a very firm bottom. I think I could make due with something just a bit more plush, I'm thinking a shimmed High Volume can will do the trick, shouldn't cost much so if I don't like it, no big deal.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardboiled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    750
    you got nothing to lose by trying a slightly lower pressure and bumping sag up to 35%. I think in general with dw/maestro/similar suspension designs 30-35% sag is the normal range. especially considering the firm platform feel that seems build into the bike I would think a bit more sag would be desirable.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    267
    Hey Yody, any chance that you are a lighter rider? I've heard that the low volume cans are more resistant to movement for lighter riders, so if you have to eat a big breakfast to tip the scales at 150lbs . . . maybe that's part of why it feels firmer? The small volume might feel more compliant to bigger riders ...

    That being said, I've never tried a high volume can. Sheesh, I've never even tried a mojo! Sacrilege, I know, but I just put an order in 1.5 weeks ago at my LBS for a black mojo HD 140 and I'm patiently awaiting it - and salivating over everyone else's mojos on these forums!

    Let me know what you think -

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,440
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    I'm starting to think the small volume can on the standard mojo shock is too progressive combined with the newly designed rear suspension on the HD. I think the original feeling of it being a little too firm is not in the compression valving but more so in the volume of the air can. From what I can tell the Mojo HD gets progressively stiffer in the end of the travel, which is why PUSH was saying it will work so well with a Coil. If this is true I don't see the need for the small volume air canister. I think these 2 aspects combined are making the rear suspension feel almost a little too firm in some aspects. It's still a hoot to ride and there are some aspects I enjoy out of a firm, non wallowy, non bottoming out rear suspension but I think I might try a high volume air can for fun soon enough.
    You might enjoy lowering the boost valve pressure to 200.
    H

  54. #54
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,764
    Quote Originally Posted by hanssc
    You might enjoy lowering the boost valve pressure to 200.
    H
    He has a PUSH tuned RP23, tuned for the Mojo SL. No boost valve, but it was probably tuned with more progressive damping and higher gas pressure than the HD 140 likes.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by derby
    He has a PUSH tuned RP23, tuned for the Mojo SL. No boost valve, but it was probably tuned with more progressive damping and higher gas pressure than the HD 140 likes.
    Correct, and the more I ride it the less concern I have about the extra firmness. I still want to try a high volume can for fun, I'm thinking a shimmed hv might be good. Having a bike that doesn't bottom and wallow is really nice, but I do miss the feeling of a nice plush ride

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardboiled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    750
    Got my HD 140 built up and have two shakedown rides under my belt so I figured I'd give my preliminary thoughts.

    I'm coming off of a Horst link 5 Spot that I've had for 3ish years on and a Giant Reign X that I had for a little less than a year. the 2010 ReignX is an awesome bike and it was fun riding a "big" bike for awhile, but it turned out it just wasn't quite what I was looking for. for me, fast=fun. I like to ride fast up and down. The RX was fast going down but with the exception of the handful of true DH trails in the area it wasn't any faster than the 5 spot on most of the descents I regularly ride. I had it built up at sub 31 pounds w/ coil shock and 170 Lyrik solo air (otherwise the same build as my HD), and the dw-knockoff Maestro suspension gave plenty of antisquat that made it feel like a surprisingly efficient climber for a 170/170 bike. that said, the 66.5* headangle and the overall plush suspension feel was not conducive for climbing fast. you could sit and spin and keep a mellow pace all day, but it really wasn't a bike that I wanted to hammer on.

    so I decided I wanted to "downsize" back to a trail bike. I demo'd the HD in the 160mm trim and decided to give the HD 140 a go. the HD I demo'd was setup quite firm in front and rear, giving the bike a "racy" but not particularly plush feel. I figured this was done to make the bike appeal to riders who are more on the XC side of the spectrum but want to try a bigger bike. nonetheless, I wanted a bike that was going to be fast so I figured if the suspension was firm that would be OK and I could always have Push work their magic to dial in the feel for exactly what I was looking for.

    Given all that, I was very pleasantly surprised when I got my HD 140 out on the trail for the first time. running 15mm of sag (~30%), the bike pedals great but does not sacrifice plushness when pointed downhill, it feels supple and smooth with just the right amount of support throughout the stroke. that was a nice surprise after my experience on the demo HD (160). the frame feels solid and stiff, no major difference that I've noticed so far from the RX. another pleasant surprise has been that I'm not missing the Lyrik (too much). I've still got it laying around in case the Revelation that is currently mounted doesn't work out, but I think the Rev is going to be just fine. the quality of the travel is great, plush but supportive, not diving in corners but eating chunder comfortably. it could be totally mental, but the tapered steerer makes it feel plenty stiff to me so far. I haven't done any true DH yet, where obviously the Lyrik would be preferable, but considering the weight savings I'm very happy with the performance of the Rev.

    between the carbon frame, the move from a 35mm fork to 32mm and the coil shock to air, I dropped 3 pounds off the weight of the RX and am sitting at sub 28 right now. the HD 140 is far more pedal friendly, I hammered up one of the longer climbs around this morning and topped out in 56 minutes compared to ~60 minutes when I did it last week on my 5 spot (it was about a 70min climb on the RX).

    with respect to geometry, I think ~67.5-68* is my sweetspot for a trailbike. most of my local norcal trails aren't steep enough to necessitate slacker angles, and despite contrary opinions that I've read here on MTBR, it definitely affects pedaling in conjunction with bike weight and the amount of suspension and tune of a bike. the funny thing is, one of my niggles about the RX was that I wasn't really comfortable getting over the front end, how I typically like to DH. I think it was partly due to the massive headtube and long fork that put the bars higher than I like. the short headtube on the HD and the shorter fork makes getting over the front end super easy and it feels very confident when pinned and really driving the front end. after I've got a month or so of ride time I'll update my review but so far everything is going swimmingly!

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pmanfred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    86

    Fork Choice Float 140 or Talus

    I am Close to ordering an HD 140 and am looking for feedback re: fork choice.

    Currently leaning towards a F32 Float 140 but am wondering if the F32 Talas would be a better choice.

    How often do you find yourself reducing your TALAS travel on steep and long climbs to keep the front end down / from wandering etc.

    Do you think that the Float 140 would be a good choice.

    All feedback would be appreciated.

    Paul

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,440
    Quote Originally Posted by pmanfred
    I am Close to ordering an HD 140 and am looking for feedback re: fork choice.

    Currently leaning towards a F32 Float 140 but am wondering if the F32 Talas would be a better choice.

    How often do you find yourself reducing your TALAS travel on steep and long climbs to keep the front end down / from wandering etc.

    Do you think that the Float 140 would be a good choice.

    All feedback would be appreciated.

    Paul
    150mm travel is sweet on that setup...

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by hanssc
    150mm travel is sweet on that setup...
    What he said

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    267

    My review of the HD140, in Matte Black

    I'm nowhere near as eloquent as Yody, so forgive me my grammatical errors and weak syntax as I put forth my review of this unique machine. Without further ado... my review of my 2010 Ibis Mojo HD 140 in size medium, Matte Black.

    A little background....

    I've been riding mountain bikes for about the last 12 years. I started out on a much modified Trek 930, then longed significant hours on a 2001 Stumpjumper S-works Hardtail, 2006 Rocky Mountain Element 30, 2008 Stumpjumper FSR Pro, 2010 Trek Remedy 9.9, 2010 Trek Fuel EX8, and 2009 Stumpjumper 29er Expert Carbon hardtail. The majority of the ride time has been on the Rocky, which is my lightly built race bike, but I've put in at least several dozen hours on each of those other bikes. I've also done some trials riding on the side. My local East Coast (North Carolina) trails are quite rolling and moderately technical, very tight and twisty compared to the west coast.

    I'm 5'6" tall, with disproportionately long legs. I'm athletic, and weigh about 130-135 lbs in the buff. Just so you know, my body type is the kind that doesn't like 29ers, and they're not so hot for the trails I ride anyway. IMHO. YMMV. Acronyms are lame.

    I've put about 20-30 hours on the bike, and I feel like that's enough to go ahead and lay down some thoughts.

    The Build....

    Back in October, I purchased a matte black Mojo HD140 from Cycling Spoken Here in Cary, NC. I got an XT build kit with a 110 headset upgrade, Talas fork upgrade, and Joplin Remote upgrade. These are pretty solid parts and I'm happy with the build; I did not have the money to go for an all-out custom build, as this bad girl had already vacuumed out my wallet. Because I insisted on getting the Matte Black color, I had to wait almost 3 months to get the bike. But once it arrived in all of its glory, it was totally worth it. I changed the handlebars and stem out to Easton Haven carbon gear, converted my wheels to tubeless, and slapped my trusty Time ATAC XS pedals on there. All told, the bike weighs in at 27.65 lbs. Not too shabby!


    So I want to restrict this review to the frame itself as much as I can, but really I am reviewing a bike. And part of what makes a great BIKE, at least when you're buying a stock build kit, is ... well... what the stock build kit includes. And here I will say that I am VERY happy with the gear that Ibis puts on their bikes. I'm not a huge Shimano fan, but the 10-speed dynasys XT stuff has worked flawlessly ... makes me squirm in my SRAM boots, because I really didn't think Shimano could make a drivetrain as slick as X0. The Formula brakes are part of what really separates this bike from the rest of the pack; if you've never ridden them, you'll never know but they are lightweight, demonstrate perfectly linear modulation, and are immensely powerful. The Mutano tires are lightweight and large volume, which is how I like 'em (altho I still think Speed Kings are better tires, wompwomp). The Flow rims are a PERFECT choice for an HD; they totally match the attitude of the bike, and the wide rims help make your large volume tires look even more fatty. The addition of a Joplin seatpost is the icing on the cake. Kudos to Ibis!

    There are many nice touches with the build itself; the links match the nipples on the wheels, which (normally) match the headset (mine got mixed up in an ordering snafu, but the error is being resolved). The brakes were appropriately bled out of the box, and the wheels rolled straight and true. But enough about the build, right... let's get on to the good stuff...

    The Frame...

    Drop... dead... SEXY! It is GORGEOUS! I know, I know, you're thinking man, this guy has totally swallowed the Ibis kool-aid. Well, yes and no. Yes, I totally have, and I admit there is some cognitive dissonance when you spent $4700 on a bicycle. How could you not like it? Well, that's why I say no. I spent 2.5 MONTHS waiting for this bike. I had so much buyer's remorse by the time it showed up that I was almost ready to just go ahead and get RID of it. But no, it got here and it really is the sweetest looking ride that you've ever laid eyes on.

    Dear reader, if you've never laid eyes on a Mojo, much less an HD . . . this is a SERIOUS bike. The tubes are exquisitely laced with carbon, which shows up oh-so-nicely with the matte finish. Which, I should add, is VERY matte. It's hard to appreciate that in the pictures, and it's a very impressive look in person. The tubes are THICK, solid feeling. Nothing like my Cannondale Supersix roadbike, where you can press the walls with your thumb and watch them deform. Nope, you could press on this frame all day and the only thing you'd do is break your thumb. The downtubes are fatter than a Niner's. You can't wrap your hands around the chainstays. The tapered headtube is equivalent to a 24oz beer bottle, and my favorite part . . . the most forward part of the chainstay, near the bottom bracket . . . is a veritable WALL of carbon. It's a gorgeous, gorgeous bike. My regular riding buddies have recent new rides as well... a Niner RIP 9 and a Specialized Epic 29er, and they all agree that THIS is the bike that makes people drool on trails.

    Nice touches on the frame . . . the cutouts for the tires, the anodized links whose pivots are cleverly tucked into the seatstays, the metal Ibis headbadge, the rear thru-axle, the hideaway cable routing, and the carbon housing guides . . . I could go on. Okay, I will! The subtle paint job that gives a sense of speed, even while it's just laying against a tree. The cable guard to protect the down tube and cables. The single seat/chainstay strut on the non drive side. The sexy swoops of the shock support strut... told you I could go on!

    But what you REALLY wanted to hear... how it rides!

    The climbing...

    Is like a rocketship. Or a goat. Or maybe a snowleopard. Look, I can't make enough analogies to say that this thing just CLIMBS. My go-to steed was a Rocky Mountain Element 30, which had a medium compression/medium rebound tune Fox RP2 shock on there. I ran 120 psi in that shock, and had 100mm of rear wheel travel. When I got the HD140, I figured - I expected - that the Ibis would bounce MORE than the Rocky. I was planning on accepting this as part of the sacrifice when you buy a long-travel trail bike. After all, the Ibis has a low compression/low rebound RP23 and more travel, right? That means more bouncey and less uppey, right?

    WRONG. My first few rides demonstrated, with jaw-dropping rapidity, just how much more efficient this bike is on the uphill. It hardly bobs at all with the pro-pedal off ... I can't notice it while I'm pedaling, only when I look down and see the 1-2mm of shock stroke movement. On my rocky, I can FEEL it. So this bike... climbing MACHINE. Most efficient full susp bike I have ever been on. So even tho this bike is a good 2-3 lbs heavier and has 50% more travel than my race rig, I actually feel FASTER uphill on the Ibis than I do on the Rocky because it is just that much more efficient.

    I wish I had more experience on VPP/CVA suspensions so I could tell you more about those in comparison, but I just don't. I can tell you one thing, tho. This thing eats up any FSR/fauxbar linkage that I've ever tried. It feels like a hardtail uphill, except that it has gobs of traction. Speaking of which...

    I know a lot of people talk about how the Ibis can just claw up hills with perfect traction. I dunno what to say about that. I'm a seated climber with a quick, smooth spin so to be honest, I rarely lost traction with my Rocky Mountain or with my FSR (which had a broken brain shock so it had no damping - in other words, fully active and VERY responsive). So on the Ibis, I haven't noticed any improvement in traction because, well, I never had much trouble with this before. Sorry dudes.

    The Descent!

    And I really do get to put an exclamation mark on that, because as much fun as I had climbing this bike - the smiles only got wider when I turned downhill. Til I got a bug in my mouth, anyway. And here's where the review has to get a little fudgey. This is a whole new bike for me. It KILLS downhills. And I dunno if it's the ridiculously overbuilt carbon frame, the flow rims, the giant tires, the vise-like brakes, the thru-axles and that sweet Talas, or WHAT. All I know is that, as a WHOLE, the bike beats me. The angles are just steep enough to let you slice through the twisties, yet just slack enough to tackle moderately steep downhills w/o having that "ZOMGWTFBBQ going over the bars now!" feeling. The frame is just SO stiff that, even pushing it hard @ 20mph into the vertical berms at Warrior Creek and Dark Mountain, I never felt a loss of traction.

    The only thing I DID notice was an immense swell of confidence in my loins. Yup, downhilling this bike makes you feel like THE MAN. Being able to huck several foot jumps with ease in the middle of your run, watching your buddies behind you pick their way around the ruts, gullies, and g-outs that you just flew through . . . yea. It's sick.

    Two notes: The mutano tires require you to commit. Counter-steer and DROP that front end into the turn, put your weight into it and adopt an aggressive downhill posture, and the tires will dig in. If you *****foot, they feel somewhat... vague. And the second note is that the Joplin seatpost is awesome. I know, I know. Reliability be damned, it really helps this bike come into it's own.

    So in conclusion . . .

    I love this bike. It's the best bike I've ever ridden. It's a total machine. But it's like a knife; you have to use it for the right purpose. You don't field-dress a deer with a pocketknife, and you don't do surgery with a bread knife. You pick the right tool for the right job. The fact that you're reading this review makes me think that you're looking for a trail/all-mountain bike. This bike, as I built it up, is probably not a race bike. Sure, you could lace some 355 rims on there, throw a pair of maxxlites on there, ditch the Joplin and put XX on there, and you'd probably have a 23-24lbs bike. But then I'd be like - why are you buying an HD, get the SL. And then, why are you buying a bike with 5.5" of travel?

    This is a burly bike, my dear reader. This is not the featherweight race bike of your dreams. It is somewhat heavier, very much beefier. Yes, it is flickable, but it is not flickable like my S-work hardtail 26er was. Yes, that suspenion is quite plush, and the climbing is a sweet spot for me - I love to earn my turns - but it's not a bike that weighs 22 lbs. If you're looking for that bike, then you need to look for an SL, and if you're going to RACE it a lot, then you might want to consider a shorter-travel bike.

    But if you want a fun bike, a trail bike, an enduro-type bike, a bike that you can ride all day long, a bike that could easily jump farther and higher than YOU probably can, a beautiful machine . . . this is it.

    Going back to my knife analogy . . . this Ibis is like the badass leatherman of bikes. You could probably do just about ANY job with this bike, and it would do it well . . . from racing XC to downhilling, to racing downhill. Hehe. I'll stop with the word play.

    If you want one, go ride one. Or just order the damn thing. You may pay $4700, and you may wait 2.5 months, and you may freak out when everyone else is getting their new bikes and all you have is a receipt and a weight in your chest. But it's TOTALLY worth it; you won't regret it. Now stop reading this, go ride your bike, and if you want a great knife, what I think is the best knife for me . . . get an Ibis.

    One last thing...

    Ibis customer service is second to none. Seriously, you could not have a more helpful, approachable, friendly bike company on the planet. They respond immediately to emails and phone calls, and you get to talk to people like the CEO, the engineer, and the designer if you call them. They also resolve issues with lightning speed, and with the default attitude being "the customer is always right". Even if they aren't right. That's kinda nice. My LBS mucked up the headset on my bike, and got a black one instead of a red on to match the links. Psh! Ibis corrected the problem immediately and overnighted the appropriate part to my LBS. Bam, done.

    Hope the review is okay, sorry about the wordiness!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Initial Thoughts and Review on The Mojo HD 140 (long)-img_5593_2.jpg  

    Initial Thoughts and Review on The Mojo HD 140 (long)-img_0154_2.jpg  

    Initial Thoughts and Review on The Mojo HD 140 (long)-img_5604_2.jpg  

    Initial Thoughts and Review on The Mojo HD 140 (long)-img_5608_2.jpg  

    Initial Thoughts and Review on The Mojo HD 140 (long)-img_5621_2.jpg  


  61. #61
    flow where ever you go
    Reputation: noshortcuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,519
    Dacarbon, No need to worry about eloquence - excellent review! Thanks for sharing!

    "I must not be crazy because I'm seriously questioning my sanity"

  62. #62
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,764
    Brilliant writing! Thanks! Sweet ride too ..

    BTW, I don't think DWL has more traction than a good HL or monopivot either. It just puts out more forward power that you have to be more easy into the pedals on gravely to keep the same grip. Kind of like how it's easier to burn out of a parking lot with 250 hp compared to 150hp - not that I've ever done that of course!

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    267
    Yea, that's a good way to describe the feeling. Much more of the pedal power goes into pushing the bike forward, rather than bobbing up and down ... which means being a little more aware on climbs, especially if you're rocking the granny gear as I am known to do ... on occasion ;-)

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jmacovei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    225
    Mojo HD 150 Float RLC 140 rp23

    an all around awesome bike........create your own review by riding one! i am sold on this!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Initial Thoughts and Review on The Mojo HD 140 (long)-hd140b.jpg  


  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jmacovei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    225
    Did you ever coil your 140? and what coil fork did you get as a 150?

Members who have read this thread: 1

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.