DW 5Spot + RS Revelation, worse then with Fox forks?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 52 of 52
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976

    DW 5Spot + RS Revelation, worse then with Fox forks?

    So I'm still strugling with the handling of my DW 5Spot (see here). On a previous trip, I though I had found the problem (seat too far back), but on the last ride, I found it to be a little too sketchy on downhills so I tried to do some figure-8's. Turn-in is ok, but as the bike leans the steering gets light and tries to steer too much and I have to counter-steer to compensate. This, I think, is the reason why it's so sketchy on downhills. It's hard for me to describe (also because English is not my native language) So I went to the LBS to get some answers. Turns out that the Revelation forks I have, have much more fork-rake then the Fox. According to crude measurements we did, it's 7-8mm more. Could this adversely affect the handling of the Spot?

    Anyone running the Rev's too and don't have handling issues? Apart from the different rake, the Rev's are 5mm taller then the Fox F32's at 140mm. I don't think 5mm of a2c will affect handling very much, so it must be the rake. What is the rake for which the 5Spot is designed anyways? I know the a2c should be around 515mm (why is the 2010 Spot designed for 525mm?), but the rake is not mentioned.

    Help me I want to like this bike.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,018
    Is that 140mm looks to me like you have to much negative pressure.Looks very low at the front

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndyN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,108
    Measure the amount of fork stanchion you have showing, and your head angle if you can. Your available fork travel looks to only be around 100mm, and the head angle looks pretty steep in your picture.

    Too little fork travel and/or too steep a head angle would cause the issues you describe.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,612

    steering

    You SHOULD be counter steering. A bicycle is not a car, to cause a bike to turn it must be leaned, not steered. I have a Revelation 150 on the front of my 5 Spot and it works fine. You are correct, 5mm is not going to adversely affect the handling, in fact 25mm will not adversely effect the handling! For the last 7 years I have seen every generation of 5 Spot mounted up with ALL kinds and lengths of forks. It can handle it, but you have to want and expect the results.

    The fork you have on there does look too short for some reason, and yes, the RS forks have a bit more offset which reduces trail which lightens the steering, but, nothing you will not be used to in one ride. Follow the others recomendations, they are all good.

    We will be specing the longer 150mm travel 32mm legged forks for 2010, but it don't matter if you run 140 or 150 or a bigger class fork like a 36 or a Lyric, the 5 Spot is good with them all, just different.

  5. #5
    tardcore
    Reputation: pjlama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    821
    I think you're running too much mud

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    I measured the exposed forklegs and came up with 136mm, a bit short. It is a 2009 dual-air Revelation which should have 140mm travel and doesn't come with travel adjust. I run 90 psi positive 80 psi negative, which is what RS recommends. I did notice that when I tried to release air from the fork, a lot of oil is released from the valve. Maybe the forks are defective?

    Using photoshop, I measured the headangle to be 70.4 degree. That's not right, is it?

    /edit: I must add that I am on Fox forks since the first one back in 2001 (or was it 2002?). I then came off a Rock Shox SID XC which I absolutely hated (I was shitting my pants on the downhills again, much like today). Switched to a Fox Float and the bike was fixed. Back then, I contributed it to the SID being too flexible with discbrakes (I had Hope Enduro brakes back then).
    Last edited by zonoskar; 08-15-2009 at 02:11 AM.

  7. #7
    JB.
    JB. is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    95
    Sketchy on downhills you say. Well, I'm not surprised with that stem/handlebar set up. With a cockpit that low you'll get a lot of weight over the front of the bike. As far as I can see from the picture you're running a negative rise stem with no spacers under, that's a lot of weight over your front wheel. I don't know what kind of riding you do, but for aggressive xc/AM/trail riding I'll recommend a more upright position. For climbing purposes it's good to have a lower front, so it all comes down to the correct compromise.

    Once set up correctly, the Rev should be all fine by the way.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    178
    Hi Zoni, as you know i run the rs also. I think one of the problems of the stock fork is that the rebound is not fast enough if you get several hard hits on a steep slope. The forks tends to dive in and don't come back for the next hit. This causes a over the bar feeling.

    Besides that i think that to much body weight is on the front of your wheel.
    I could be wrong but it seems that you lean to much over your bike in this configuration.
    Try a spacer under your stem or a stem with a little degree.

    If i could do it again i would have opt for a fox vanilla 15mm for trailriding. Nothing can beat the feeling of a coil!

    If you come to Limburg let me know and we can take a spin over the mtb trails.

    Cheers,

    Lucien

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    Well, I put in my old fox float, which was custom tuned to get 125mm travel. The bike feels much better this way, eventhough the forks are way too low.

    The sketchyness on downhill tracks is not so much the problem as the steeringhabit of the bike with the Rev's. I feel that even at low speeds, so the way the dampening works has no influence. What I feel with the Rev is this: I turn into a corner and when the bike starts to turn, it 'falls' over and I have to catch it. This is something none of my other bikes have ever done, so I don't like that. This behavior is almost non-existant with the fox float 125mm.

    I don't think bike setup or dampening had any influence on this steering 'problem' as I feel this even at low speeds.

    Thanks for the input. I try to demo a Spot with a 140 or 150mm fox before I pull the trigger on a new fork.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by zonoskar; 08-15-2009 at 09:49 AM.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    58
    A touch off topic but what a cool colour - NICE BIKE!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    203
    I would say there is something wrong with your Revs. I don't know what the Stantion should be measuring, but I'm betting it should be more than 136mm if they are 140mm forks. They look like 110mm forks from your first picture.

    The Spot can still handle the head down, arse up racer position you appear to be trying, although it's not really normal for that sort of bike. I'm sure it must be the forks which are the problem...

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    I'm not going for the racer position, this is what I got from the components. I don't like it and I don't like the way the bike handles. I put the 125mm Fox on because that's what I have. I don't want to throw 1100 euro at the bike for a Fox Talas before knowing if that will fix it.

    @StevieC: The color is cool, I agree But boy, does it scratch easily.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    203
    Sorry, you mis-understand me. I think your Revs are broken, you should seek to get them looked at. Why purchase new forks when the ones you have aren't working as they should be. It will not cost you 1100euros to fix them or get them serviced.

    I referred to the racer position in regard to your bar height. It won't cost you 1100 euros to raise that!

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    58
    They do look shy of 140mm I definately agree - causing the racer position with the low front and steeper headangle too - sharp twitchy handling also probably.

    Surprised at the paint scratching easily - i was always told by turner owners that the powdercoat is hard as nailes!!??

    Ive just ordered a white one anyways so wont show the scratches hehe - but granted will probably ALWAYS look sh#t up instead

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    It could be the Rev's are broken. But the handling has been an issue ever since I got the bike. I sincerely hope the forks were OK when I bought them. I seem to remember measuring the inner legs when the fork was new and it was around 143mm. Could be that I'm now running less pressure, will check that.

    But, with the 125mm Fox, handling is fine whereas the handling with the 'broken' Rev's is awfull.

    As for the position of the bars, hmm. I like my bars to be low and I like the look of a zero degree stem I tried a 5 degree stem and with 2 spacers under the stem but didn't like the position. Handling was even worse then

    Does the bike look steep in this image? Because that was when the bike was brand new.

    Last edited by zonoskar; 08-19-2009 at 10:37 AM.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    58
    Looks slight slacker to me there - if you look at the first image at the top, the distance from the top of the fork brace (difficult to see because its muddy) to the crown looks less than the last image you posted so to me look like they can somehow lost some travel. I had a fox shock do that, internal seals failed and it 'cavitated' i was told - not sure if this is possible on Rock Shox forks - possible for an internal leak i guess.

  17. #17
    Pixie Dust Addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,352
    What can happen is similar to the "stuck down" RP3, where air leaks from the positive air chamber to the negative air chamber and sucks the fork down. The 2005 Reba on my Flux did that because there was scoring inside the stanchion that allowed air to move. Besides the geometry change, it made the front pack down on a long descent and feel like poo by the end.

  18. #18
    Never enough time to ride
    Reputation: squish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,568
    Ok, here's a question for ya. When your cornering, are you leaning in or are you turning in? Compared to an XC bike the handling is very different, they don't like to be steered, typically the like to be leaned, and getting your butt off the back of the seat helps a lot.

    With your cranks level and your weight off the back you can really drive the wheels into the ground, the level cranks also allow you to shift your weight very quickly by shifting weight from one foot to the other or by completely dropping your outside pedal if the need arises.

    Curious about your answer.

    happy trails...

    squish
    Get out and ride!

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    I never really thought about how I steer the bike. I guess it's a combination of steering and leaning. I ride bikes since I was 3, but never had someone tell me I don't know how to ride until I bought the 5Spot and came here with my problem. In fact, guys in our group always look to me for clearing obstacles and getting down steep sections before they have a go.

    The technique you describe seems to be for riding with some speed, whereas the problem I have with the bike is at low speeds (which doesn't help when riding at speed). I can't imagine you using this weight shift method to do tight figure-8's. I found riding figure-8's to be a good indicator of how a bike handles.

    I have had 'big' bikes in the past, notably the Specialized Enduro, which is comparable to the 5Spot.

    I also have had a FR bike

    And a 4x bike


    None of which exhibited the same steering habit of the 5Spot. Tomorrow, I'm going to the LBS where I bought the 5Spot. He has a demo 5Spot with the same size but with a Fox fork so I can feel if that handles better then mine. He can then try my bike to see what I'm babbling about. Then we'll see if it's my problem or not.

  20. #20
    Never enough time to ride
    Reputation: squish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,568
    Cool, let us know what you find out.

    Even when I'm riding at lower speed with the RFX or my brothers Spot, I try to lean the bike more than I steer it.

    Didn't mean to imply that you didn't know how to ride, it was just a thought and maybe something else to look at. I know when I started riding my RFX I had to pretty much relearn how to ride because it handled nothing like the XC bikes I'd been riding before, in some ways it handled better especially at speed, and at lower speeds it was a different critter.

    happy trails...

    squish
    Get out and ride!

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    I'm back from the LBS. The demo bike felt roughly the same as my bike. It was the same size (medium), with a different stem (6 degree rize), different tires and a 140mm Talas. So the forks didn't make the difference. The shop owner tested my bike and found no handling issues, it handled the way a Turner should according to him. This is in-line with the comments here. They also had a Large Spot and since the shop owner is slightly shorter then me, I tried the large one too. Conclusion: I think I may have ordered the wrong size bike. The Large Spot felt 'right'. The only 'problems' I had was that the stem was a bit short for my liking and it felt a little tall in the front, but no tipping over feeling. I'm going to try fiddling with my bike a bit, but if that doesn't work I might order a large front triangle. It'll cost me, but better that then having a bike that you don't like, right?

    The big question now is...does this make sense? Do smaller (releative to the rider) Turner bikes handle different from the bigger ones? Does having a frame that is smaller then Turner reccommends give you the handling problems I felt? The shop owner was very surprised that I wanted to test the Large Spot since he thought it would be too big for me eventhough Turner reccommends a Large for my height.

    Thanks for the input.

  22. #22
    tardcore
    Reputation: pjlama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    821
    Interesting, how tall are you?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    I'm 182cm. The shop owner is 175cm I think. I must add that I had a Rocky Mountain Flow FS before that was 16.5" with a 555mm TT and that was totaly too small, but handled fine. So I was a little surprised to find the Large Turner to handle different from the Medium one.
    Last edited by zonoskar; 08-21-2009 at 02:48 PM.

  24. #24
    Pixie Dust Addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,352
    Quote Originally Posted by zonoskar
    The big question now is...does this make sense? Do smaller (releative to the rider) Turner bikes handle different from the bigger ones? Does having a frame that is smaller then Turner reccommends give you the handling problems I felt? The shop owner was very surprised that I wanted to test the Large Spot since he thought it would be too big for me eventhough Turner reccommends a Large for my height.

    Thanks for the input.
    Yes it does. When your frame is too small, you end up having to run a longer stem, which puts your weight out over the front wheel more. This will give you that floppy feeling. I had the same problem with my medium Flux and Sultan without understanding what was going on until I rode a large for the first time last summer. All of the sudden, I went from being a little nervous about the front end tucking in underneath me in a turn to truly carving turns. I'm a couple of cm shorter than you and the large works much better for me.

  25. #25
    I dig trails!
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,539
    The Revelation has just an open chamber air spring, while the Fox (at least the floats of the last couple years) have a air chamber + coil spring combination.

    Single air chamber can "fall" into travel before the air spring ramps up. Dive, is the way I would describe it.

    Air chamber + coil, the coil has an effect on initial travel which can be more supportive with less dive.

    Did the Revelation feel like it had more dive than the Fox?

    P

  26. #26
    Amphibious Technologies
    Reputation: SCUBAPRO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,472
    Quote Originally Posted by zonoskar
    I'm 182cm. The shop owner is 175cm I think.

    I was a little surprised to find the Large Turner to handle different from the Medium one.
    Ah, you're 6 feet tall on a medium Spot; should be on a Large.
    "The best you've ridden is the best you know" - Paul Thede, Race Tech

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    Quote Originally Posted by SCUBAPRO
    Ah, you're 6 feet tall on a medium Spot; should be on a Large.
    I know... the Turner website thinks I need a Large, but both the shop owner and I thought a Medium would fit better. This based on the intended purpose and my history of bikes with a 585mm TT (Medium Spot has 584mm).

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.P
    Did the Revelation feel like it had more dive than the Fox?
    P
    They felt almost exactly the same.

  29. #29
    I dig trails!
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by zonoskar
    They felt almost exactly the same.
    Sounds like you are more on track with the sizing then

    P

  30. #30
    Never enough time to ride
    Reputation: squish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,568
    The size will defiinately have play a big factor in handling, due to weight distribution.

    Mr. P. The coil in a Fox Float is the negative spring, doesn't have much of an effect on the spring curve at all, just the stiction at the beginning stroke. The Revs are a dual air fork, where the neg spring is adjustable, and if it's pressurized much over the pos air the fork will compress into it's stroke.

    happy trails...

    squish
    Get out and ride!

  31. #31
    I dig trails!
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by squish
    The size will defiinately have play a big factor in handling, due to weight distribution.

    Mr. P. The coil in a Fox Float is the negative spring, doesn't have much of an effect on the spring curve at all, just the stiction at the beginning stroke. The Revs are a dual air fork, where the neg spring is adjustable, and if it's pressurized much over the pos air the fork will compress into it's stroke.

    happy trails...

    squish
    Doh! Looks like your right! Sorry for the misinformation. Thanks for the enlightenment. I was looking at a Float 36, now I am not.


    I guess Manitou is the only fork that has the air/coil hybrid. The system is the best of both worlds.

    P

  32. #32
    fnar fnar brrraaaaap
    Reputation: ilostmypassword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,160
    add more stem rise and riser bars.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    I used my special photoshop skills to overlay the 5Spot on top of the Enduro. The Spot seems to have much steeper angles.



    The saddle on the 5Spot is a bit further back, the handle bars are a bit higher. But the biggest difference is the head angle. I guestimate it is 70 on the Spot, 68 on the Enduro (which is the specified head angle of that bike).

    So the fix woudl appear to be a Fox 36 but is that correct?

  34. #34
    how heavy are you ??
    Reputation: Scottay5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,041
    get a 36 and raise the bars with spacers will handle like a dream then.... a saddle up configuration will yield poor results....
    What does Marsellus Wallace look like, A BIT*H?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,355
    Quote Originally Posted by zonoskar
    I used my special photoshop skills to overlay the 5Spot on top of the Enduro. The Spot seems to have much steeper angles.



    The saddle on the 5Spot is a bit further back, the handle bars are a bit higher. But the biggest difference is the head angle. I guestimate it is 70 on the Spot, 68 on the Enduro (which is the specified head angle of that bike).

    So the fix woudl appear to be a Fox 36 but is that correct?
    Actually, I am a bit shocked at how well they overlay. Sizing is everything on a bike, no matter the suspension design. Get the correctly sized bike and I bet you would be a happy camper.
    Last edited by Vespasianus; 08-22-2009 at 12:04 PM.

  36. #36
    I'm more of a dog person
    Reputation: unclekittykiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    864
    Quote Originally Posted by zonoskar
    I know... the Turner website thinks I need a Large, but both the shop owner and I thought a Medium would fit better. This based on the intended purpose and my history of bikes with a 585mm TT (Medium Spot has 584mm).
    Sounds like it's time for u to find a new shop. If the owner couldn't figure out that you needed a large at 6ft tall, then I suggest you deal with someone else from now on. That's a pretty basic (and expensive) mistake.

  37. #37
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,546
    DW 5Spot + RS Revelation, worse then with Fox forks?
    <hr style="color: rgb(183, 183, 183);" size="1"> So I'm still strugling with the handling of my DW 5Spot (see here). On a previous trip, I though I had found the problem (seat too far back), but on the last ride, I found it to be a little too sketchy on downhills so I tried to do some figure-8's. Turn-in is ok, but as the bike leans the steering gets light and tries to steer too much and I have to counter-steer to compensate. This, I think, is the reason why it's so sketchy on downhills. It's hard for me to describe (also because English is not my native language) So I went to the LBS to get some answers. Turns out that the Revelation forks I have, have much more fork-rake then the Fox. According to crude measurements we did, it's 7-8mm more. Could this adversely affect the handling of the Spot?

    Anyone running the Rev's too and don't have handling issues? Apart from the different rake, the Rev's are 5mm taller then the Fox F32's at 140mm. I don't think 5mm of a2c will affect handling very much, so it must be the rake. What is the rake for which the 5Spot is designed anyways? I know the a2c should be around 515mm (why is the 2010 Spot designed for 525mm?), but the rake is not mentioned.

    Help me I want to like this bike.
    Rake shouldn't make any difference and not something you should notice to the degree you're finding not on a 5"rig anyway, I think its more to do with setup and what you're basing it on with previous rigs which you're too stiff in comparing, you may have a fork problem like others have said though I wonder!

    Start with setup and go back to basics of the bike not previous bikes, this is detrimental imo! They are not all the same and static #s should only be a guide not a rule, it seems you're very much the rule!

    I measured the exposed forklegs and came up with 136mm, a bit short. It is a 2009 dual-air Revelation which should have 140mm travel and doesn't come with travel adjust. I run 90 psi positive 80 psi negative, which is what RS recommends. I did notice that when I tried to release air from the fork, a lot of oil is released from the valve. Maybe the forks are defective?

    Using photoshop, I measured the headangle to be 70.4 degree. That's not right, is it?

    /edit: I must add that I am on Fox forks since the first one back in 2001 (or was it 2002?). I then came off a Rock Shox SID XC which I absolutely hated (I was shitting my pants on the downhills again, much like today). Switched to a Fox Float and the bike was fixed. Back then, I contributed it to the SID being too flexible with discbrakes (I had Hope Enduro brakes back then).
    First add more positive air if you haven't already, or reduce negative air, not all pumps are accurate and that's only a guide, normally 10pst difference is right on with the dual air system on RS forks in my experience but air pumps can be misleading! It could still be a fork issue but start by checking that and adjusting it!

    Photo shop would not be what I'd trust but depending on tires, specc's etc can have a bearing on the numbers, DT says approx, use an angle finder to be accurate!

    You need to compare apples for apples SID is an XC race only fork, what Fox were you comparing and then its not relevant except you may prefer Fox's damping over RS, I'm the opposite especially in that frame range!


    Well, I put in my old fox float, which was custom tuned to get 125mm travel. The bike feels much better this way, even though the forks are way too low.

    The sketchyness on downhill tracks is not so much the problem as the steeringhabit of the bike with the Rev's. I feel that even at low speeds, so the way the dampening works has no influence. What I feel with the Rev is this: I turn into a corner and when the bike starts to turn, it 'falls' over and I have to catch it. This is something none of my other bikes have ever done, so I don't like that. This behavior is almost non-existant with the fox float 125mm.

    I don't think bike setup or dampening had any influence on this steering 'problem' as I feel this even at low speeds.

    Thanks for the input. I try to demo a Spot with a 140 or 150mm fox before I pull the trigger on a new fork.
    This makes no sense other than that it suggests to me you're way off base!

    1: You're on a DWL frame, its anti squat for starters, very important and will affect dramatically the balance of the fork if not setup differently to previous rides!

    2: A 125mm fork will sag less especially when ridden to a 140mm fork for the given correct sag, this will effect the ride characteristics as a fork that has more travel and incorrectly setup or has a problem with it will have an effect on the HA and ride height, as when ridden the fork is moving all the time so this will alter as you corner or force the spring to return and compress! A shorter travel fork will have less impact on this so this can be very misleading, and the HA will remain more constant or alter less.

    These are not very good comparisons or tests you're trying o use to diagnose imo, very misleading!

    DW like any bike but imo even more so needs to be setup with the correct sag in the rear first, if you get this wrong then you will have a more fwd riding position and the whole concept of DW is to take advantage of the anti squat properties while achieving ultimate pedaling and bump compliance without compromise! If this is off then setting the fork ride height is gonna be a struggle and it will affect the handling of the front end, way more than offsets or rake of forks and lengths A2Cs!

    If it was me, I would be looking at having my fork with slightly less sag, stiffer until I had the rear dialed, because the DW pedals so well it will should not affect climbing or pedaling and then work from there on the fork, but since Ive not tried it, I may be off but in my experience it what works best for me, I'll dial it back from there until there's a good balance between front and rears, I prefer a slighlty I mean slightly saggier rear to front, but I usually ride the fronts hard no matter the bike and Im a heavier rider so it works for me and geo is maintained better in corners, jumps etc!

    But imo you need to get someone else to do some diagnostics to do some comparisons not the same LBS, like a Doctor sometimes you need a second opinion to verify the first opinion and then another! Doing the same thing expecting a different result won't get you any joy with ya new rig!

    I am of the same opinion as others it seems to me you should be on a large frame, I myself have enjoyed a medium 5Spot [tnt] for some years, but if I was going onto a DWL Spot then it would be the large and I would maintain my short stem wide bar config, the older L Spot[HL,TNT] was just a little too big for my style DTs reconfigured it right imo!

    I'm basing this on ya stem, seat height seat post which is also a setback design, ya should do some stack and reach measurements! But be wary of what you are comparing it too!

    Ya need to stop comparing with ya old Fox, as I said above there's many misleading facts coming from your testing, either the Rev is broken and has been from the start which is not impossible, things do get through! If unsure get it checked, it should be covered under warranty, but I''m still not convinced personally!

    I never really thought about how I steer the bike. I guess it's a combination of steering and leaning. I ride bikes since I was 3, but never had someone tell me I don't know how to ride until I bought the 5Spot and came here with my problem. In fact, guys in our group always look to me for clearing obstacles and getting down steep sections before they have a go.

    The technique you describe seems to be for riding with some speed, whereas the problem I have with the bike is at low speeds (which doesn't help when riding at speed). I can't imagine you using this weight shift method to do tight figure-8's. I found riding figure-8's to be a good indicator of how a bike handles.

    I have had 'big' bikes in the past, notably the Specialized Enduro, which is comparable to the 5Spot.
    The Enduro is not comparable to the Spot, I'm not sure where ya got that from, not that model Enduro maybe the ealrier version, but still imo inbetween those too models, especcially with your specc, it could be with a 160mm fork etc, that Enduro was based around 150mm of travel and with different #s, travel does not determine a bike comparison, the Spot is not a BottleRocket for example also 5.5 inches or rear travel!

    Even if ya running the fork with less travel, I guess that is a Talas 36 on there, as said the geo is quite different, the angles in both bikes should put you centered in the bike or over it, the Enduro more so, especially with the speccs ya got there!

    You're really lost me with ya testing and comparisons, no wonder ya off base imo and not enjoying what the bike/frame should deliver! compare the database or more experienced Spot riders here that went DW earlier and yours is off!

    Also those bikes you show by design have inherent squat qualities due to there linkages especially the Enduro, Intense, I hated that poo brown fork and shock wasn't much better!

    None of which exhibited the same steering habit of the 5Spot. Tomorrow, I'm going to the LBS where I bought the 5Spot. He has a demo 5Spot with the same size but with a Fox fork so I can feel if that handles better then mine. He can then try my bike to see what I'm babbling about. Then we'll see if it's my problem or not.
    Well they wouldn't for ya have those bikes pretty well setup for there purposes, simple! That Tazer looks wierd now but that's what they were like huh, ah back then!


    I'm back from the LBS. The demo bike felt roughly the same as my bike. It was the same size (medium), with a different stem (6 degree rize), different tires and a 140mm Talas. So the forks didn't make the difference. The shop owner tested my bike and found no handling issues, it handled the way a Turner should according to him. This is in-line with the comments here. They also had a Large Spot and since the shop owner is slightly shorter then me, I tried the large one too. Conclusion: I think I may have ordered the wrong size bike. The Large Spot felt 'right'. The only 'problems' I had was that the stem was a bit short for my liking and it felt a little tall in the front, but no tipping over feeling. I'm going to try fiddling with my bike a bit, but if that doesn't work I might order a large front triangle. It'll cost me, but better that then having a bike that you don't like, right?

    The big question now is...does this make sense? Do smaller (releative to the rider) Turner bikes handle different from the bigger ones? Does having a frame that is smaller then Turner reccommends give you the handling problems I felt? The shop owner was very surprised that I wanted to test the Large Spot since he thought it would be too big for me eventhough Turner reccommends a Large for my height.

    Thanks for the input.
    As I suspected with the Fork confirms the rake and setup, so its like we said "setup and frame size"!

    Yes different sizes will be different for a given rider of height and weight and setup is always key, stem seat post, cranks, etc and dependent on how you want to ride it, some people like a smaller frame for given application and regardless will run the right size bar stem seat post setup, e.g. not run a long stem or compensate for to small a frame!

    Either way is detrimental, too big and short stem is just as bad, the delima for us who are in the middle of sizes or get caught!

    And comparing apples for apples, I think ya got lost by using older designs HL, Sps comparing with DW design and the new Turner sizing! LBS will always fall back on what they feel safe with which is usually out of date, modern designs are leaning to longer TTs that's why the Eff TT is really not as relevant these days and understanding reach and stack is far more important, and the ride you want from a given frame!

    For me I see this all the time here, people want their RFX to ride like their flux or HL to pedal as well as their Spot, they are different frames, they can perform well in ntheir given design which is why they are designed that way, but they will always be different cause they are and they should be setup accordingly otherwise ya on the wrong bike!

    Drives me insane how people want everything to be the same or expect it to be!

    Now that frame only manufactures seem more accessible to people this is more and more common people want all bikes to be the same, your comparisons and photo shop bear this out, its just bizarre and wrong, anyone in this situation needs to be open minded, be prepared to experiment beyond what you think you know and work to the frame you choose that you think works to your ride style and what you think what type of rider you are!

    This is even more surprising since you have been a good range of rigs and seem to have had the others quite will dialed in. I think ya just gor some unfortunate advice, I know its hard on a frame purchase like this one all ya want is it to be right!

    I'm 182cm. The shop owner is 175cm I think. I must add that I had a Rocky Mountain Flow FS before that was 16.5" with a 555mm TT and that was totaly too small, but handled fine. So I was a little surprised to find the Large Turner to handle different from the Medium one.
    I mean youre 182cm and the shop owner is 175cm and you say you both tested the medium it felt good for him so he recomends it and so you use this as a basis for comparison, hello, hes way shorter than you, probably in arm and leg length as well, no wonder ya got off base, I'd seriously be looking at a new LBS or expecting him to sort this out for you if he wants continued business, long stem fixes and setback posts are not a good answer on 5"s above it does not work on modern geometry, they get away with it with OEM specc bikes and generally most unknowegdeable public caus ethey don't know what they don't know, and like a Doctor put trust and faith in them, a decent LBS would set you up in a wind trainer and measure you out with specc to suit the bike to get the right reach and stack, this is different on each bike of varying travel it has to be, and an LBS should know this is they know there stuff?

    I just don't get where ya coming from with the handling of a medium frame vs a large frame of course it will be different, its so simple one is smaller, one is larger, size affects handling otherwise we would all be on a one size frame fits all like baseball caps Sorry dude but its just sounds so out there your statement, not from someone who has had the bikes you've had before

    I know... the Turner website thinks I need a Large, but both the shop owner and I thought a Medium would fit better. This based on the intended purpose and my history of bikes with a 585mm TT (Medium Spot has 584mm).
    This means nothing based on the bikes you're comparing the DW Spot ver too, EFF TT is only one component! and in this case its wrong!

    Even your photo shop overlap of Spot on Enduro shows the Enduro is a bigger bike, longer wheelbase, larger frame for given size whatever size that is for the Specchy! but the numbers are going to be different, different manufacturer, different type of bike, that's nearly a 5year old design for one and it has way different characteristics to DWL?

    The saddle on the 5Spot is a bit further back, the handle bars are a bit higher. But the biggest difference is the head angle. I guestimate it is 70 on the Spot, 68 on the Enduro (which is the specified head angle of that bike).

    So the fix woudl appear to be a Fox 36 but is that correct?
    Are you SERIOUS!

    Geez Zono, ya just not getting it, huh? none of these things you're comparing are helpful to your situation adding a 36 will only compound your problem further, ya started by saying a 125mm fork is what worked best and now ya want to go 20mm longer in travel than the 140 that felt so bad, seat position is different, course it is different posts for a starter, different angles as I said earlier! Man you're all over the place dude!

    YOU HAVE THE WRONG SIZE FRAME unfortunately, you need to get this guy to take some responsibility before its too late or sell you will have to sell the medium and get a large!

    Keep ya FORK!

    unclekittykiller is bang on imo, ya got some bad advise and follow up diagnostics and its killing ya, ya can't force a round peg into a square hole, and you are riding a round peg buddy unfortunately!

    Hope this has got through, if ya re read your posts and I been through his thread about 5 times to understand where ya coming from, ya can see ya been sent down the wrong trail, hope ya get it sorted, like Lance says its not about the bike!



    I dig the full blue as well though, it looks killer the full color look yo, good luck
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  38. #38
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,546
    DPost ugh...
    Last edited by trailadvent; 08-30-2009 at 11:51 AM.
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    Quote Originally Posted by trailadvent
    Hope this has got through, if ya re read your posts and I been through his thread about 5 times to understand where ya coming from, ya can see ya been sent down the wrong trail, hope ya get it sorted, like Lance says its not about the bike!
    Thanks for the comments. After riding the large 5Spot, which handled ok, I put my 105mm stem back on with 6 degree rise. Added some sag to the rear (I'm now at 19mm) maybe a bit too much. I reduced the sag and negative pressure on the forks (sag is about 20mm) In this config, the Medium Spot handles the same as the large one. I'm waiting for the LBS to get me a quote on a large front triangle and decide then. The reason for the Fox 36 is to achieve a HA more comparable to the Enduro (which I agree with you had too much squat and the forks were rubbish). I guess I'm comparing the Spot to my older bikes because that's what I know handled fine. Static measurements are indeed not very usefull if the sag levels are different, but the static values are measured more easily

    This weekend I took my RacerX out on the same track I went with the Spot the weekend before and I must say, the RX also wandered around on the steep tarmac climb, so that is one handling trait of the Spot I must discount.

    The only thing is, I don't understand why my Revelation could be broken. Normally, there is 140mm of exposed forklegs (I did have a bit too much negative pressure before, so I decreased that). The lowers go all the way up to the crown when the fork is deflated. Fork movement is smooth. It just looks short in the photo's and the HA of the bike looks very steep with it (almost as steep as with the 125mm Fox fork).

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wilks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,364
    Firstly 7 cm is a big difference - almost three inches! so like others said your lbs guy is off his rocker if he thinks you both need the same sized frame ! secondly at 23.6" the DW link size large Spot is 0.3" shorter than the prior models - and most at your height would have been on a large with a 23.9" top tube - DT would have told you in a split second to get a large on an 08 or 09 spot - Finally, if you ride the Revelation fully open try it with a little compression - they do tend to dive a little so tune it out and make sure the negative air is about 5 psi less than the positive.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    The shop owner could also have been 178cm, I didn't remember his exact height. He was just a little shorter then me.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,612

    Help

    Looks like you have had some great help in figuring out your set up. If you run into any problems getting the triangle you want or assembly questions drop us a line.

    DT

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: antonio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by fatboy66
    Hi Zoni, as you know i run the rs also. I think one of the problems of the stock fork is that the rebound is not fast enough if you get several hard hits on a steep slope. The forks tends to dive in and don't come back for the next hit. This causes a over the bar feeling. . .
    I found the same exact slow rebound issue today with my new Rev when carving through fast, rooty turns. I recently started running a 2010 Rev Race set at 130mm (previously running an '07 Pike 454 at 130mm), took the bike out for it's first real ride with the new Rev, and found the same steering issues that the OP was having.

    Starting from the middle, I incrementally turned the rebound knob throughout the course of the ride until it ended at full fast. By the end of the ride the steering felt pretty good, but I'm pretty bummed at the idea that it might feel even better if I had another click or two of less rebound to play with.

  44. #44
    Pixie Dust Addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,352
    Too much rebound damping and packing on successive hits is one of the issues that PUSH addresses with their RS factory tune.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Digger90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    236
    FWIW, I am a 'tweener' : right at the top of Turner's recommended size for a Medium / right at the bottom of the recommended size for a Large.

    I've ridden both sizes and ended up buying the Large for the exact same reasons you stated - it felt waaaay better. Better reach, better steering, better overall feel.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,189
    Hi Mate, don't own a Turner but I do have a DW bike, a Mojo.

    Is it possible that the issue is will the suspension balance front and rear. I always underestimated the relationship of the fork to the shock and treated them as separate entities until I go some pretty good advice from the UK Push agent. It sounds like to me that you are running different sag front to rear and possibly slower rebound in the front too. The RS forks tend not to be superfast but the RP23 needs loads of rebound damping clicks as the first 5 or so do very little. I had similar handling issues and it was solved by re-setting up the bike and eventually getting the RP23 Pushed. I love the DW on the Mojo and imagine that the Five Spot is excellent too. Measure your sag front and back. Shock measure whilst seated and for whilst in attack position. Try to get them the same. I have Lyriks on my Mojo and I run about 5 click from fully open on the fork (sometimes more) and about 1-2 clicks from fully closed (slowest) on the RP23. I also run about 30% sag which is a touch more than recommended but the bike tracks and grips really well.

    Thats my 2 cents.

  47. #47
    Snapper
    Reputation: johnd663's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    489

    gidday NZL

    Hi NZL

    nice to see you over here in the warm glow that is the Turner Forum. Those damn South Africans gave us a beating, it is up to you guys now.

    Good advice on the sag and suspension set up. You have a great set of forks there and l am sure you can get them to work well for you. Anything the Fox forks can do the RS can do (if not better). So OP get you sag and rebound right. Maybe run a little extra compression in the fork and speed up the rebound. So your frame is a little on the small side..................... so you have to run a slightly longer stem or put your seat back a bit on the rails. At 6.5 l know all about trying to make frames fit.
    Try reducing the travel on you Revs to around 135, put those spacers under your stem to rise your bars alittle, set up the fork settings and let her rip. You might find you are in a more relaxed and comfortable position and for f*ck sake enjoy yourself / relax. It aint the forks mate.

    Good luck

    JD

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,189
    Yeah mate, the SA's don't travel too well so here's hoping.

    Forks, so many good ones out there. My selection of RS over Fox came down to the simple fact that I can service them v easily. Some grease, some oil, a soft rubber mallet ans syringe and a 5mm allen key. Keeps them running mint esp as I live and ride in "sunny" Scotland

    Further to my previous post, I am almost certain what you describe is suspension set up related. I messed about with mine and got similar results.
    Make sure you keep that PP lever off unless you like riding fire roads and as a rule, avoid setting sag with too much damping on the forks and shock ie I tend to remove rebound and compression damping and set sag, then adjust the settings. Avoid idiotic carpark tests. They will tell you absolutely nothing. Every d$%ks around in carparks before rides, why? Select a piece of trail that you can session and do multiple runs. Once you've got it dialled, stick your fingers in your ears anytime one of you buddies comments on you setup in "carpark" conditions. Let them be the morons ( sorry a bit harsh I know )

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zonoskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    976
    Quote Originally Posted by nzl62
    Avoid idiotic carpark tests. They will tell you absolutely nothing. Every d$%ks around in carparks before rides, why? Select a piece of trail that you can session and do multiple runs. Once you've got it dialled, stick your fingers in your ears anytime one of you buddies comments on you setup in "carpark" conditions. Let them be the morons ( sorry a bit harsh I know )
    That's good advice when setting up the suspension. The problem I had was with steering, which could be easily felt when doing figure-8's in the carpark. So it's not always idiotic

    But I have it sorted now. Together with the LBS we found 8mm of extra travel in the Rev's (cut the top-out bumper and removed a shim that seemed to do nothing). That combined with less sag on the forks and a longer stem did the trick. I also put all the spacers under the stem and flipped it so it's still low at the front to make the bike climb ok. I don't understand the need for those high-up-in-the-air front-ends, I don't like the position one bit and it makes for worse climbing IMHO. The trails I ride have steep uphills that I need to negotiate.

    Just came back from a trip to Malmedy and the bike absolutely flew over ruts and roots. On root-infested climbs you feel the pedal kickback somewhat, but that I can get used to. I brought my ContourHD camera with me so I'll upload a few clips in the next weeks. But first, we (from dirty-pages.net) head out to the eurobike show for 4 days of demo-ing bikes and wandering around the bikeshow trying to spot the new stuff. Hopefully, DT will be there

  50. #50
    fnar fnar brrraaaaap
    Reputation: ilostmypassword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,160
    Quote Originally Posted by zonoskar
    That's good advice when setting up the suspension. The problem I had was with steering, which could be easily felt when doing figure-8's in the carpark. So it's not always idiotic

    But I have it sorted now. Together with the LBS we found 8mm of extra travel in the Rev's (cut the top-out bumper and removed a shim that seemed to do nothing). That combined with less sag on the forks and a longer stem did the trick. I also put all the spacers under the stem and flipped it so it's still low at the front to make the bike climb ok. I don't understand the need for those high-up-in-the-air front-ends, I don't like the position one bit and it makes for worse climbing IMHO. The trails I ride have steep uphills that I need to negotiate.

    Just came back from a trip to Malmedy and the bike absolutely flew over ruts and roots. On root-infested climbs you feel the pedal kickback somewhat, but that I can get used to. I brought my ContourHD camera with me so I'll upload a few clips in the next weeks. But first, we (from dirty-pages.net) head out to the eurobike show for 4 days of demo-ing bikes and wandering around the bikeshow trying to spot the new stuff. Hopefully, DT will be there
    higher rise stem and spacers were suggested way back.........great that you have fixed it up

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,189
    figure of 8 drills aren't idiotic but bounce bounce in the carpark is, glad you've found a solution, everything is a compromise

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Kasper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by 2TurnersNotEnough
    Yes it does. When your frame is too small, you end up having to run a longer stem, which puts your weight out over the front wheel more. This will give you that floppy feeling.
    Good point! Here's a visual comparison between a Medium Spot and a Large Flux.
    I'm not sure that it illustrates anything but I don't think this thread has enough pictures

    You need to be on a Large by the way
    Cheers - Kasper



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.