Headshot Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Rather than load up the stem length thread, here's a fresh start for a discussion on bike geo with particular reference to the new flava of the month, trail/enduro bikes... I love Vital MTB bike reviews. They hammer the bikes, tell you if they break them, and publish the manufacturers explanation for failures. This review is interesting because it shows how a bike company can go overboard with the next big thing, - long front center and TT. It confirms a few things I have picked up from riding my shorter trail bike and from other reviews and pro rider comments in interviews... http://www.vitalmtb.com/product/guide/Bikes,3/Mondraker/Foxy-Carbon-RR,14525#product-reviews/2010
Capricorn Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 yep, i was pretty happy they slammed the longer TT fad. Its too often been punted as a panacea when in reality there other considerations often personal to a rider that defines a great geometry.
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 While I like the Mondraker philosophy, this is a case of it going a bit too far... Longer than even the new reign, which I'd consider as long... 1cm longer ETT, 4.2cm longer reach (on a Large) That's loooong. Reign is 65cm TT, 45.8cm reachFoxy RR 66cm TT 50cm reach
MrJacques Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Mondraker probably went a bit too far with the long top tube geo, but that was an XL test bike as well. Currently my bike's shortish top tube is forcing me to run a long stem and it would probably be better for me to have a longer TT and shorter stem. So... everything in moderation
GoLefty!! Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Its all about the front centre and placing the wheel far enough ahead of the rider to ensure stability on steep descents. Long ETT and short stem is not an answer, its an option with pitfalls depending on what you need from the bike.
GoLefty!! Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 maybe someone would like to alter his position in the other thread.... just saying
LazyTrailRider Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Slight hijack: Forgetting about all the scientific numbers for a second... It's amazing how far bike geometry and setup has come in a few years. I took a spin on the first 2015 Demo 8 in the country yesterday. Oh. My. @!#$. To say I was blown away by the combo of slack head angle, light weight and efficiency of the Ohlins, would be an understatement. The thing feels like a super plush BMX bike which wants to be popped off every single bump in sight. Unbelievable.
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 maybe someone would like to alter his position in the other thread.... just saying No, I still maintain that a short stem is more beneficial than a long stem, and that we should be on 40-70mm stems. There are clearly times, though, when dimensions and an attempt to implement longer front centres & reaches can go too far. In this case it's the reach & front-centre just being too far ahead, IMO. I mean - on the Large, that's a 40mm longer ETT than my Reign X, but with a 90mm longer reach. That would be like putting a 130mm stem on my bike, and yet keeping the bar width the same. Far too big. Even on the Medium, I'd need to put a 100mm stem on my bike to replicate the same dimensions from a reach perspective. 411.3mm (as it's set up now) vs 478mm on the Mondraker... Assuming I keep the same stem on the Mondraker, that is. With the standard Mondraker stem you could subtract 10mm from those differences. That's still huge.
GoLefty!! Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 I say the damping has really made it hard to discern between bikes. Get that right and any bike will be great.
Headshot Posted February 11, 2015 Author Posted February 11, 2015 Sounds good eve if it is a spesh :-) there is a theory that we all ride MTBS that are too small for us. The Mojo suspension bloke in the UK has a custom Nicolai with radical geo. Nicolai offer bikes with varying wheel sizes eg sixers with 650 front wheels etc... From what i have read, sometimes between the lines, many of the new long slack enduro bikes like the 2015 Reign are stable and fast and good on steeps stuff but fall a little short where it comes to popping off stuff and jumps where a shorter bike bike my older Reign is probably more fun. I am happy with my set up in most cases but a taller slacker front end would make the ultra steep stuff like the very top of DH 1 at Tokai a bit easier. Thats only 1% or less of my riding distance wise but it can also be where you lose many seconds...
GoLefty!! Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 No, I still maintain that a short stem is more beneficial than a long stem, and that we should be on 40-70mm stems. There are clearly times, though, when dimensions and an attempt to implement longer front centres & reaches can go too far. In this case it's the reach & front-centre just being too far ahead, IMO. I mean - on the Large, that's a 40mm longer ETT than my Reign X, but with a 90mm longer reach. That would be like putting a 130mm stem on my bike, and yet keeping the bar width the same. Far too big. Even on the Medium, I'd need to put a 100mm stem on my bike to replicate the same dimensions from a reach perspective. 411.3mm (as it's set up now) vs 478mm on the Mondraker... Assuming I keep the same stem on the Mondraker, that is. With the standard Mondraker stem you could subtract 10mm from those differences. That's still huge. so you agree the answer is specific to the bike and the rider and not the blanket answer you sold it as. a 40-70mm stem may not work for a rider and bike combination and what they want to get out of the bike. Are you suggesting that one should ignore other considerations in bike fit and handling and simply size a bike so that one ends up at your magic stemlength.At least we know you're putting it out there and trying to compensate
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 so you agree the answer is specific to the bike and the rider and not the blanket answer you sold it as.I always said that though. Get sized up. Choose a frame that's fitted to your dimensions and intended use while considering a stem size of between 30&70 mm. That's what I was saying between all your accusations of bs and propaganda and so on.
GoLefty!! Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Ok so the stem size range is getting bigger now....I get it. Get of jail free cards on this one. why is 80 mm and 90 or even 100mm too long for an XCM or XCO bike?
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Ok so the stem size range is getting bigger now....I get it. Get of jail free cards on this one.Jeepers. 30 to 70 vs 30 to 60. Earth shattering. Maybe it was just my fat fingers hitting 7 instead of 6 on my phone. Edited. 30 to 60mm
Iwan Kemp Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Jeepers. 30 to 70 vs 30 to 60. Earth shattering. Maybe it was just my fat fingers hitting 7 instead of 6 on my phone. Edited. 30 to 60mmfor what type of bike? The interwebs is for free and all, but in all humbleness and with great respect for both of your opinions can you not either discuss this over there, over a beer or let it be.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.