Race bike... says who?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: h2o-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    103

    Race bike... says who?

    Okay, I have been riding my Fantom Pro 29 SL for a year now. It is a 17" and I really like the way it handles and climbs. I have been considering the Fly Ti 29 and was comparing geometry of the two. The 17.5" Fly is a "race" bike, but the angles are more slack and the wheelbase is longer when compared to the Pro SL in a 17". Why is the Fly the "race" bike?

    Wheelbase:
    Fantom 1088
    Fly 1110mm

    Head Angle:
    Fantom 71.5
    Fly 69.5

    Seat Angle:
    Fantom 73
    Fly 72.5

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TwoHeadsBrewing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,949
    Just stiffer and lighter than Aluminum, both great qualities to a race bike.
    "Got everything you need?"

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    70
    I don't believe the titanium frame is either stiffer nor lighter than the aluminum frame. But it's ride quality is much nicer due to the dampening that Ti provides.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: h2o-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    103
    My point is: Why does the Fly Ti have slack angles and a subsequently longer wheelbase? Compare the angles and wheelbase of a Moto Fly Ti with most other "mainstream" 29ers and you'll see that the Fly Ti has less steep angles and the wheelbase is longer. Why is that? Then look at the geometry of the Fantom Pro 29 SL. This frame has a more traditional geometry. I am just wondering why that is; it doesn't make sense. I am not a Moto hater. In fact, quite the contrary.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by h2o-x
    My point is: Why does the Fly Ti have slack angles and a subsequently longer wheelbase? Compare the angles and wheelbase of a Moto Fly Ti with most other "mainstream" 29ers and you'll see that the Fly Ti has less steep angles and the wheelbase is longer. Why is that? Then look at the geometry of the Fantom Pro 29 SL. This frame has a more traditional geometry. I am just wondering why that is; it doesn't make sense. I am not a Moto hater. In fact, quite the contrary.
    People who race at a level where these geometry numbers would mean the difference between winning and losing are sponsored a lot of times. Moto knows its market, and knows that most people who buy their bikes are recreational riders that may or may not race for fun. Even those that do race do so at a level where fitness is the deciding factor of the winners, not a degree or two difference in headtube angle. IMHO

  6. #6
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,198
    FWIW , compare ETT lengths .

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: h2o-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    103
    And yet those geometry numbers have become standard in the industry for a reason. Also, the Pro 29 SL does have those angles, so why not Moto's flagship 29er, the Fly Ti?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    417
    The fly ti and the gary fisher superfly have very similar angles, wheelbase etc. I don't think anybody is debating the superfly is a race bike.
    Blogging about nothing since 2005
    http://devinrides.blogspot.com/

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: h2o-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    103
    Touché... I dislike Fisher and Trek so much that I didn't bother to look at the geometry charts for their 29ers.

    I still wonder how it is that bikes with long wheelbases and slack angles are intended for race day bikes.

  10. #10
    Total Goober
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,037
    Quote Originally Posted by dmccune
    The fly ti and the gary fisher superfly have very similar angles, wheelbase etc. I don't think anybody is debating the superfly is a race bike.
    Does that take into account the G2 offset? Does that even exist anymore?
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuglio View Post
    You guys suck im all bummed now

  11. #11
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,198
    Quote Originally Posted by BigSteve in CO
    Does that take into account the G2 offset? Does that even exist anymore?


    Yes , G2 is still being used . To the OP , there is significantly more to "race" geo than the "angles" , stuff like trail and fork offset , chain stay length etc. Look at the whole picture , not just the angles .

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: globewyre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    62

    I think it is the compontent that put it in the race class

    light wieght wheelset, small block tires, flat handle bars, and light but very hard seat

  13. #13
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,267
    It's a race bike because the word race is in it's name . Marketing , just marketing .

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.