• 09-03-2010
    i.a.n.
    Fly Ti Team 29er owners, chime in please!
    I'm looking at this bike pretty hard and I've got a question regarding the geometry numbers. Now I'm not big on making assumptions based strictly on the geometry of a frame, but on paper this bike seems puzzling. It's got a fairly long top tube, long wheel base, and less then steep head angle at 70 degrees. Although the chainstay is really short.

    I've only got a few months on a 29er, so my experience is limited, but I'm curious what more experienced 29er owners think of the Fly Team's handling characteristics compared to previous 29ers they've owned.

    Thanks
  • 09-07-2010
    DFYFZX
    I just bought the frame/fork a couple weeks ago but haven't got to ride it yet. Still waiting on my wheels to show up:( I did, however, buy a 70mm stem just in case the reach with my usual 90mm stem was too much. I'm coming off of a Scott Scale 29er and the headtube on that bike was 69.5 degrees and I have no complaints. I'm going to be running the Moto with a Niner carbon fork so my head angle will be about 71 degrees. I've also got a 80mm travel White Brothers fork on standby which will keep the head tube around 71 degrees. I don't think I'd read too much into it. The few reviews I've read about the Ti Team have been golden with no quibbles whatsoever. If you decide to get one, maybe be prepared to buy a shorter stem and maybe a different seat post. Most geometry "issues" can be gotten around but some can't. Good thing it has short"ish" chainstays;)
  • 09-08-2010
    Varaxis
    It's basically G2 geometry minus the extra fork offset which emulates a slacker head angle.

    http://fisherbikes.com/bike/model/superfly

    http://www.motobecane.com/29/ft29xx.html#geo

    I'm on a GF Rig and definitely feel that the top tube is long, so in turn I'm now a follower of the short stem and wide handlebar trend. I pre-ordered a moto a size smaller, which is actually recommended for my height which helped justify the new purchase because apparently my GF Rig was the wrong size this whole time.

    I'm going to see if I can get away with a 90mm stem to better weight the front on the super steep 30+% grade 50 ft climbs. I'm putting on a 660mm handlebar too, since I'm sold on wider handlebars.
  • 09-08-2010
    i.a.n.
    Why use the G2 geometry without using the G2 fork offset? Kind of defeats the purpose of the G2 geometry, no?

    I've always been a proponent of long top tube, short stems and wide bars. I won't go any longer than 80mm and use bars in the 27-28 inch wide range. For me this set up is a great balance for climbing and really stable descending.
  • 09-08-2010
    DFYFZX
    A lot of G2 owners like the way it rides but others think it's too twitchey. I've NEVER read about someone hating G2 geometry with a "normal" offset fork;) I'm looking forward to getting mine built up and will leave a ride report when I do;)
  • 09-08-2010
    Varaxis
    People consider G2 too twitchy? Really? First I've heard of that.

    My GF Rig is very behaved and controlled rather than twitchy. Here's the link to the short stem and wide handlebar trend. I'm running 50mm stem and 711mm bars right now. I actually never had a problem with my front end lifting on my Rig, but that's cause it's SS and I mash out of the saddle and pull up on the bars to weight the rear on climbs. My 26" wheeled Schwinn Homegrown had that problem though, with a relatively short stem, but it was a super lightweight bike overall and I hadn't worked on my climbing technique much yet coming from FL with light rolling hills to NY with steep hills and mtns.
  • 09-09-2010
    FishMan473
    I too will be putting a Niner carbon fork on my Fly Team when it arrives. The Axle-to-Crown is shorter than the stock 100mm fork, but I thought I heard somewhere that the Niner forks have more offset/rake.... so it should be a good match then?
  • 09-10-2010
    FirstStateCamber
    I own a GF paragon and bought the XX version of Moto's Fly29. Its a very nice bike, build quality is up there with the best of them, worth every penny. It rides great, very predictable and i too have changed the stem to a slightly shorter version and swapped out the Ritchey bars for ones with about 2" more in width and more sweep. Mine is a small and has a taller standover then the GF. I have a 30" inseam and wasnt sure how this would fit but its perfect.
  • 09-16-2010
    FishMan473
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DFYFZX
    I just bought the frame/fork a couple weeks ago but haven't got to ride it yet. Still waiting on my wheels to show up:( I did, however, buy a 70mm stem just in case the reach with my usual 90mm stem was too much. I'm coming off of a Scott Scale 29er and the headtube on that bike was 69.5 degrees and I have no complaints. I'm going to be running the Moto with a Niner carbon fork so my head angle will be about 71 degrees. I've also got a 80mm travel White Brothers fork on standby which will keep the head tube around 71 degrees.

    DFYFZX: had a chance to ride this set-up yet? I'm thinking of pulling the trigger on the Niner fork today, but I'm going to get a headset in there with a 5mm taller stack height to try to keep the HT angle a bit closer to original. What do you think of the way yours rides?
  • 09-17-2010
    DFYFZX
    I literally just got done building it up and plan on riding tomorrow. I'll leave a ride report when I get back;)
  • 09-18-2010
    DFYFZX
    I hate Missouri! The weather was fine for most of the day and as soon as I get home from running errands it decides to drizzle, then rain, then storm, then HAIL! On the day I'm supposed to take my maiden voyage??? Figures...
  • 09-19-2010
    dirtrider7
    I ride a size Large with 130mm stem. Putting a shorter stem on a bike to compensate for perceived improvement in handling response versus a longer stem for proper fit...is poor judgement. Stem length is all about tuning in the proper front to back CG on the bike which also affects turn in and power transmission. Weight back with shorter stem does not flatter turn as many think.
    A 46mm offset Reba versus 51mm G2 + 100 versus 80mm shock travel and associated sag for a GF accounts for what turns out to be a small incremental difference in response compared to a G2 bike. As mentioned, this is preferred by many and not unappreciated. I find both geometries just fine and quickly acclimate to either.
    I love the handling of the Moto replete with long stem to dial in my fit. I didn't want a XL with even less standover and longer wheelbase. In summary, bike geometry trumps stem length in handling.
    A last note. Many find the Moto Fly Ti 29er less than stiff. I believe this is a bad rap.
    This is the most compliant hardtail I have ever ridden and therefore doesn't have the bone jarring stiffness of an Al bike...a very good thing. I feel no measurable flex of the BB when hammering out of the saddle with my 200 lbs. To me the Moto Fly is the best hardtail for the money period...same price as a GF Paragon but no comparison in ride quality.
    Hope that helps.
  • 09-19-2010
    Varaxis
    What dirtrider7 said makes a lot of sense.

    I sigh when people criticize the head tube angle of a bike or a top tube length but don't mention other specs such as the wheelbase, but I don't really want to get into a geeky discussion about it since I don't consider myself an expert. It takes a lot of knowledge to understand how to design a good handling bike. Just copying numbers won't do.

    The wheelbase plays a huge role in whether a bike rides like a smooth and stable land shark/cruiser or a twitchy agile BMX like bike. Long chainstays, long top tube, and slack head angle would make for a long wheelbase. Take a bike like that and ram it into a 8" rock or log and you'll notice it doesn't really want to launch off of it for some air. That's one of the major differences in 26ers and 29ers that people notice right away and why people say, why don't people jump 29ers (besides the wheels being weaker). It's also a reason why most 20" and 24" BMX bikes feel more agile than many 26" bikes and why touring bikes, recumbent bikes, and choppers feel more like land sharks.

    There are the types of people that find it fun to get air off anything possible, there are the folks that like to go fast through rocky sections and want their wheels to stick to the ground without the need for massive travel suspension on both ends, and there are folks that are in between or that want it all. There are people who choose suspension for comfort and those who choose it so fast rough descents are exhilarating instead of scary. There are those that tried FS and hate it. Knowing the nuances of geometry and frame design will allow you to choose a bike well suited to your tastes. It's something people who have gone through multiple bikes, finding what what they like and don't through experience, pick up on and study for their next purchase.

    A shorter stem definitely does change how a bike controls and fits, though obviously it won't be as much of a change as a frame size change, hence why I'm going down a size and seeing how it rides with a normal sized stem. It's easier to fit someone to a bike that's designed for a rider smaller than them than it is to fit a smaller rider on a larger bike. I'm in between sizes at 5' 7", so this time I'm opting for smaller.

    Regarding HTA and G2 offset, read: http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=343777. It talks about 29ers needing steeper HTA to match handling of 26ers, but that creates problems with toe overlap, so they instead slacken the HTA and increase fork offset/rake to provide the same quick steering characteristics. GF FAQ says that it's fine to use a fork without G2 offset on a G2 geo frame, it just won't have the same quick handling characteristics.

    The center of gravity with rider position in mind also plays a huge role in how bikes handle as well. You can't just spec geo thinking super short chainstays = more agile (longer chain stay = more comfortable and compliant), steeper HTA = quicker steering, 16" seat tube for riders 5"3 to 5"7, lower BB = better handling... the geo for one thing affects the others and added altogether, you may get a totally different result than what you planned. I'm genuinely intrigued by some custom built bikes, like jnc's ByStickel (link link).

    I haven't really done too much research on geometry since I'm coming from a bike with similar geometry, a GF Rig which is my first 29er, and I'm simply upgrading. I not expecting to be blown out of my mind. I don't expect the Ti to be as compliant as a FS nor think alu is bone jarring stiff; maybe a super large tubed Cannondale of old age, but not my Schwinn Homegrown or GF which have much smaller diameter tubing. I'm just simply "gambling" and looking to try something new and experience it for myself. I like to keep an open mind and see things for myself in real life, so I'll be skeptical of all the hearsay until I try it.
  • 09-21-2010
    DFYFZX
    I don't know why anyone would think this thing is "flexy"! It climbed like Sir Edmond Hillary and was every bit as stiff as my Scott Scale was. I was riding it rigid so I didn't feel a whole lot of the mythical "Ti compliance" but I'm going to go out in a few days with my suspension fork and see what happens. I really enjoyed it! Highly recommended;) The only thing I hated about the ride was the fact I tackled a Level 5 Black Diamond after two weeks off on my maiden voyage on my first rigid ride. HAHA! That was ill advised in hind sight...