Weight difference between 05 and 09 5 Spot- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    64

    Weight difference between 05 and 09 5 Spot

    Hi guys,

    I'm looking to get shut of the 07 575 and go for a 5 Spot. I've been offered a good deal on an 05 with Horst Link but was originally planning on goinf for an 09 w/ DW Link.
    Does anyone ahve an idea of the weight differences between thes 2 frames if any at all?
    Both frames will be in Large.
    I'm sure the whole Horst vs DW thing has been done too but if anyone could sum up what benefits each design has over the other then that would help me make my mind up.
    Cheers guys!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    778
    Not sure on the weights but the dw bikes have more zipp and feel lighter even thoe they have put on weight! I have had hl,tnt and dw versions and the dw is the best

  3. #3
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    30,781
    The newer 5 spot is also a more "agressive" AM machine. More travel, slacker, really fun to ride, but possibly not the best bike for everyone. Of course it's heavier, but it's offset by the DW traits IMO. When you pedal hard, it accelerates well. The older 5 spot bogs more, especially when you're going uphill. One can live with it and it's not horrible, but the DW is a step above, so while it weighs a bit more, it makes up for it. Overall the suspension is better as well IMO, as the lighter compression tune and wheelpath absorb stuff better. I've ridden both, the new DW spot seemed a bit like a "mini-RFX", rather than more like the older spots that felt short/super quick to me.

    I guess I should also state that the old 5 spot is a very capable bike, very good for a lot of people. If you think you should have a bike that is in between that bike and the current RFX...then that is what the DW 5.5 spot is.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,022
    I had a large '05 that was right at 6.5 lbs. with RP3. Turner's website list the large '09 at 7.0 lbs., which I'm sure is quite accurate. So the '05 might be up to a half pound lighter, but that's more than made up for with the increased stiffness & travel of the '09 (you could add the 5.5 rockers to an '05 to boost the travel & stiffness, but you'll pay a ~1/4 lb. weight penalty), not to mention the overall performance leap with the DW link. The older bikes are still a great option for the prices they're going for these days, but if you can swing a DW Turner you will not regret it.

    Jayem makes some good points about the DW design, but I must say I would pick the DW Spot over the older one regardless of whether I leaned more towards XC or FR. In my experience the DW Link really expands what the bike is capable of up and down.
    ''It seems like a bit of a trend, everyone trying to make things longer over the last couple of years" Sam Hill

  5. #5
    Baked Alaskan
    Reputation: AK Chris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,810
    Miles' numbers are correct. My Large British Racing Green DW Spot came in at 6.98 pounds. My 03 was about 6.3, but that was before the seattube was reinforced in 04 if I remember correctly. My TNT Spot was 6.7-something so its gradually gotten a little burlier.

    Jayem makes great points - its more of an aggressive AM bike with more travel and a sturdier frame than previous versions, the revised geometry is better suited for longer travel forks as well. The original Spot was an XC bike with an unheard of 5" of travel when it made its debut. Now its an even better riding mountain killer. No regrets about making the switch, despite the $$$.
    The red couch has moved from Alaska to Florida...

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,789

    Yep

    I have a pair of 03 HL Turners, Spot and Pack and I agree with the idea above that the new DW Spots that I tested felt like more of a 6 Pack replacement than a 5 Spot replacement; it's way faster than the 6 Pack as a climber but after 5+ years of riding and tweeking my Spot it feels faster up the hills than the DW bike I tested on the same trail 3 days apart, but that could be familliarity. If I was the same rider now that I was when I bought my old Spot I'd be all over the DW Spot, but I get further and further from challenging myself on the scary stuff all the time so I'm leaning more towards a shorter travel bike than a longer travel one.

  7. #7
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    The newer 5 spot is also a more "agressive" AM machine. More travel, slacker, really fun to ride, but possibly not the best bike for everyone. Of course it's heavier, but it's offset by the DW traits IMO. When you pedal hard, it accelerates well. The older 5 spot bogs more, especially when you're going uphill. One can live with it and it's not horrible, but the DW is a step above, so while it weighs a bit more, it makes up for it. Overall the suspension is better as well IMO, as the lighter compression tune and wheelpath absorb stuff better. I've ridden both, the new DW spot seemed a bit like a "mini-RFX", rather than more like the older spots that felt short/super quick to me.

    I guess I should also state that the old 5 spot is a very capable bike, very good for a lot of people. If you think you should have a bike that is in between that bike and the current RFX...then that is what the DW 5.5 spot is.
    Ahh based on the comments in bold you should be banned to the naughty room as per MTN 123s latest post for mis-information, based on the same speccs of previous Spots its not slacker, only if using a longer fork above the std speccs! as per specc has more travel than 07/08 Spots pre 07s yes and BBs heights change depending on year and rockers etc

    Shock i2i and stroke is exactly the same, obviously the linkage is different! Though A2Cs of forks have changed as the rocker length grew to match ratio better and forks e.g 130mm to 140mm! 501 to 515 to 525!

    I take ya wurd for it on how it rides though
    Couldn't resist

    06
    <link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CBrad%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsoht ml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" images="" smilies="" redface.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Embarrassment" smilieid="2" class="inlineimg"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" images="" smilies="" redface.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Embarrassment" smilieid="2" class="inlineimg"></o:smarttagtype><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:FGHVJB+HelveticaNeue-Light; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-alt:"Helvetica Neue"; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-formatther; mso-font-pitch:auto; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:KUFZBR+HelveticaNeue-Condensed; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-alt:"Helvetica Neue"; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-formatther; mso-font-pitch:auto; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:EYXPVD+HelveticaNeue-BoldCond; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-alt:"Helvetica Neue"; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-formatther; mso-font-pitch:auto; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} p.Pa1, li.Pa1, div.Pa1 {mso-style-name:Pa1; mso-style-next:Normal; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; line-height:12.05pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:FGHVJB+HelveticaNeue-Light; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} span.A0 {mso-style-name:A0; mso-style-parent:""; mso-ansi-font-size:8.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:8.0pt; font-family:FGHVJB+HelveticaNeue-Light; mso-bidi-font-family:FGHVJB+HelveticaNeue-Light; color:black;} p.Pa2, li.Pa2, div.Pa2 {mso-style-name:Pa2; mso-style-next:Normal; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; line-height:12.05pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:FGHVJB+HelveticaNeue-Light; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} span.A4 {mso-style-name:A4; mso-style-parent:""; mso-ansi-font-size:6.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:6.0pt; font-family:KUFZBR+HelveticaNeue-Condensed; mso-ascii-font-family:KUFZBR+HelveticaNeue-Condensed; mso-hansi-font-family:KUFZBR+HelveticaNeue-Condensed; mso-bidi-font-family:KUFZBR+HelveticaNeue-Condensed; color:black;} @page Section1 {size:595.3pt 841.9pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> Frame Specifications <o></o>
    Weight <o></o>
    7.3 lbs. w/ coil <o></o>
    6.5 lbs. w/ air<o></o>
    Travel 5.3” <o></o>
    Head Angle (H) 69°<o></o>
    Seat Angle (B) 73.5° <o></o>
    Chain Stay Length (D) 16.9” <o></o>
    Seat Diameter Height (E) 27.2 mm <o></o>
    BB Axle to 13.25” <o></o>
    Crown 501mm <o></o>
    Sizes Available <o></o>
    Top Tube Seat Tube Head Tube Rec’d Rider Wheelbase Standover Standard <o></o>
    <st1></st1>
    Sm 22.2” 14.5” 4” < 5’6” 43” 30” Black Ano, Blue Ano<o></o>
    Med 23” 17” 4” 5’6”-5’10” 43.8” 31” <o></o>
    Lrg 23.9” 19.5” 5” 5’10”-6’1” 44.7” 32” <o></o>
    XL 24.8” 22” 6” 6’2”-6’4” 45.6” 33” <o></o>
    XXL 24.8” 24” 7” 6’5”+ 47.3” 34”

    07
    http://www.turnerbikes.com/2007/spot.html
    08
    http://www.turnerbikes.com/08fivespot.html
    • Frame Specs:
    • Travel: 5.5"
    • Head Angle: 69°
    • Seat Angle: 73°
    • Chainstay: 16.9"
    • BB Height: 13.6"
    Geometry based on a fork axle-to-crown height of 515mm.

    DW 09
    http://www.turnerbikes.com/010/010spot.html

    geometry ::. { Listed geometry based on a 525mm axle to crown fork with a 26"x2.3" tire, acceptable fork travel range: 130-160mm }

    <table class="geometry" align="left" border="1"> <tbody> <tr> <td class="geom"> </td> <td class="geom">xs</td> <td class="geom">sm</td> <td class="geom">md</td> <td class="geom">lg</td> <td class="geom">xl</td> <td class="geom">2xl</td> <td class="geom">all</td> <td class="geom"> </td></tr> <tr> <td class="geom">a: virtual tt</td> <td class="geom">21.5</td> <td class="geom">22.5</td> <td class="geom">23.0</td> <td class="geom">23.6</td> <td class="geom">24.2</td> <td class="geom">25.1</td> <td class="geom">g: head angle</td> <td class="geom">69°</td></tr> <tr> <td class="geom">b: seat tube</td> <td class="geom">13</td> <td class="geom">15</td> <td class="geom">17</td> <td class="geom">19</td> <td class="geom">21</td> <td class="geom">23</td> <td class="geom">h: seat angle</td> <td class="geom">73°</td></tr> <tr> <td class="geom">c: head tube</td> <td class="geom">3.5</td> <td class="geom">3.9</td> <td class="geom">4.5</td> <td class="geom">5.3</td> <td class="geom">5.9</td> <td class="geom">6.6</td> <td class="geom">i: chainstay</td> <td class="geom">16.9</td></tr> <tr> <td class="geom">d: stack</td> <td class="geom">22.1</td> <td class="geom">22.5</td> <td class="geom">23.1</td> <td class="geom">23.8</td> <td class="geom">24.4</td> <td class="geom">25.1</td> <td class="geom">j: bb height</td> <td class="geom">13.7</td></tr> <tr> <td class="geom">e: reach</td> <td class="geom">14.4</td> <td class="geom">15.3</td> <td class="geom">15.6</td> <td class="geom">16.0</td> <td class="geom">16.4</td> <td class="geom">17.1</td> <td class="geom">bb shell</td> <td class="geom">73mm</td></tr> <tr> <td class="geom">f: standover</td> <td class="geom">28.4</td> <td class="geom">28.9</td> <td class="geom">30.2</td> <td class="geom">31.0</td> <td class="geom">32.0</td> <td class="geom">33.0</td> <td class="geom">seat post</td> <td class="geom">30.9mm</td></tr> <tr> <td class="geom">frame weight</td> <td class="geom">6.5</td> <td class="geom">6.7</td> <td class="geom">6.8</td> <td class="geom">7.0</td> <td class="geom">7.1</td> <td class="geom">7.3</td> <td class="geom">head tube</td> <td class="geom">1.125</td></tr> <tr> <td class="geom">rec'd rider size</td> <td class="geom">4'11-5'2</td> <td class="geom">5'3-5'6</td> <td class="geom">5'7-5'10</td> <td class="geom">5'11-6'1</td> <td class="geom">6'2-6'4</td> <td class="geom">6'5 +</td> <td colspan="2"> </td></tr></tbody></table>
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  8. #8
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    30,781
    Quote Originally Posted by trailadvent
    Ahh based on the comments in bold you should be banned to the naughty room as per MTN 123s latest post for mis-information, based on the same speccs of previous Spots its not slacker, only if using a longer fork above the std speccs! as per specc has more travel than 07/08 Spots pre 07s yes and BBs heights change depending on year and rockers etc

    Shock i2i and stroke is exactly the same, obviously the linkage is different! Though A2Cs of forks have changed as the rocker length grew to match ratio better and forks e.g 130mm to 140mm! 501 to 515 to 525!

    I take ya wurd for it on how it rides though
    Couldn't resist
    Well, many more people built up the old spots with 140mm of travel, whereas 150-160 is far more common for the new spot. It's not going to be a 65 HT angle obviously, but with the official "ok" for 160mm, a newer spot is going to usually be slacker. That was my main consideration for saying what I did. My point was that it's evolved in it's usage and construction. First 5", then 5.5", longer forks, etc.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  9. #9
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Well, many more people built up the old spots with 140mm of travel, whereas 150-160 is far more common for the new spot. It's not going to be a 65 HT angle obviously, but with the official "ok" for 160mm, a newer spot is going to usually be slacker. That was my main consideration for saying what I did. My point was that it's evolved in it's usage and construction. First 5", then 5.5", longer forks, etc.
    I hear ya I knew what ya meant, I was teasing since saw MTNs post

    Just playing devil's advocate since he mentions HL Spot and the DWL both I'd assume he is not thinking about similar specc or if so then these facts are very important!

    Which is why based on the numbers alone most are the same hence referencing to the slackness, but ya right many have gone with the longer a2c forks since the 07s 5.5 rocker spot and DW even though A2C is 515 for the 5.5 and 525 for the DW the 69 HA remain based on static speccs DT provides!

    DT approx a degree for every inch of increased travel, so 67deg is about what you;d get with a DW with 160mm of travel!

    Ah note on the weights of he 06 model Spot with air shock, that is based on the DHX air not the RP3 or 23 it is now too!

    I'd be in your camp though if doing a DW spot Lyrik Uturn and MXtune coil rear shock none of this air poopy stuff that's for Flux's and Sultans! or even more radical trying a 29er ta RS fork with 29er front wheel and std rear wheel ta 10mm That would be a cool experiment, not relevant to the weight q but thought I'd through it out there as a random ,
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


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.