Keystone has been Pistol whipped. The coil sprung Pistol has been fucking awesome; I've done xc rides with 6k - 8k of climbing, and take the same setup to Keystone. Quantity of wheel size with some quality of suspension travel is pretty versatile.
Pat yourself on the back for correctly guessing the name inspiration.Some folks would present the same argument for Megadeth. Even if you hated everything Slayer made after Seasons in the Abyss, there's still more good material than most bands have produced.
That list you made....one of those band names is on the list for future possible bike name inspiration already
Mostly the "park". Altho we did a lap over to Cougar Ridge and down to Minturn in lieu of 2 Elk. It was cool, but 2 Elk is better. Lots of downed trees FYI.
This seems to be the theme on ALL trails that are even slightly "off-the-radar" this year. I really should ride Two Elks some time to its conclusion in Minturn. Have always climbed up the China Bowl service road to hit Cougar or Matterhorn...
Heh. I've *looked* down Old 9 off the service road before...
There is a big section of "why 140mm travel" in the press release sent to the media outlets. Here's the summary:
And that's not the only bit of that trail that will make you pucker. So goodHeh. I've *looked* down Old 9 off the service road before...
but why do you mount the shock to the down tube? Wouldn't it make more sense to mount it to the DT/ST junction, and make some space for a water bottle? Isn't the middle of the DT one of the weakest spots on that tube? Is it to control leverage rate and reduce bushing movement at the eyelet?I was trying to explain Old 9 to somebody. All I could come up with was, "steep, unsustainable, fun, probably not there anymore..."
I was under the impression that Norco just changed the pivot location on the front triangles. No stocking shops around to verify first hand.
The Smash is designed as the "29er Megatrail", and has leverage curves designed for such, with traction and small bump compliance expected from a longer travel bike. The travel (140) is also longer than the long stroked Pistol (130), as well as Plush/Crush are tuned for two different leverage curves on The Smash purely for ride tuning, whereas on the Trail Pistol, it's also used as a 29/27+ change.
Wheel durability: There's no denying that 29er wheels/tires get heavier for a given strength. I've had many pinch flats and rim dents on all wheel sizesSo this news release had me revisit your website. I'm looking for a trail bike. As I see it, from GG, I'm either looking at this or the Shred Dogg. I think your Ride 1 Build Kits offer exceptional value. Really amazing. So here's some questions for you.
I'm skeptical of 29rs mostly because of the weight of the wheels and durability. My main problems with tires are pinch flatting them when riding through rough terrain (rock gardens). I have settled on 26"x2.3 DD tires on my current ride (2013 Mojo HD). DD casings seem to provide the right "ride feel" in corners, and protection from pinch flats. Going to 29x2.3 in DD casing would add about 150-200g in rotational weight between the rim and the tire right? Seems like a lot. You've ridden both, what's the main difference between them? I ride on the east coast. there's lots of everything: roots, rocks, mud, short climbs, short descents. Our trails aren't really purpose built biking trails so there's lots of janky momentum robbing corners. Another issue I think I might have with 29rs in wheel stiffness. I'm heavy. I weigh 220lbs, and I ride relatively aggressively. I'm worried I'll be putting lots of stress on them leading to frequent loosening etc. I don't really ever want to own plastic rims, I've broken too many rims to ever want to consider paying upwards of $500 just to replace a rim. All this to say, I'm willing to throw down some coin to try a 29r to see for myself what all the fuss is about and whether the tradeoffs are worth it for me. But I'm still trying to get a better sense of the weight and durability tradeoffs.
Speaking of rims: when I google DT Swiss M1700, it points to the XM481 rim. Is that the one you're using?
This one is just a general question really... I'm no engineer, but I've read enough marketing copy to think I know a little about stuff
And finally, do you ship to UPS stores? I'd be willing to drive to the border, unbox and build, maybe even go for a ride, and then drive home...
Recently, I've been running a 29x2.3 DD rear tire, and added Huck Norris after a rim smash. CushCore is next on the list of things to try, but any of the foam tire inserts help with pinch flatting, and with what I've ridden so far, my preference lies with EXO casing and foam insert, rather than DD casing and only air/sealant inside. A 29x2.4 Ardent with CushCore is about the same weight as a 29x2.3 Minion DD, for reference.
Yeah, folks have actually been asking us for a little taller BB heights, and with the intended purpose of smashing rough terrain, that BB height makes sense. If you use eccentric bushings to lower it, you'd just need to check bottom out clearance between tire and seat tube.
Holy jeez... thanks for the response! I think the Shred Dogg is the bike I'm looking for then...Wheel durability: There's no denying that 29er wheels/tires get heavier for a given strength. I've had many pinch flats and rim dents on all wheel sizes
The wheels we use have the XM481 rim for 29ers, and the EX511 rim for 27.5". We agree on preference for high end aluminum rims over carbon.
Shred Dogg/27.5 vs The Smash/29: The Shred Dogg is better in tight corners, The Smash is better for keeping speed over rough and straighter lines. With your described terrain, the Shred Dogg seems like the way to go. If you want to experiment with larger diameters, the 27.5x2.6 tires are halfway between 27.5x2.3 and 29x2.3 in diameter, and still ride close enough to "normal" sizes. The Shred Dogg fits those (and up to 27.5x2.8").
Shock mount location: there are pros/cons with every layout. Using a vertical shock makes water bottle mounting easier, but it also makes for high loads in the rocker pivot through the seat tube, often limiting seat post insertion depth, the rocker itself experiences higher loads, along with the bearings in the rocker. The approximately horizontal shock orientation makes for low loads on the rocker link, rocker bearings, and seat tube, and sends rear wheel loads directly from the rear axle through a solid structure to the shock, and then into the largest diameter, strongest and stiffest tube in the frame. The downtube gives a substantial amount of torsional stiffness in the front triangle, so feeding shock loads into it is what I saw as a consolidation of structural efforts per say. If we need to put high loads somewhere, and want a big downtube for torsional stiffness, combine them. Over a couple iterations, the shock mount to DT interface has been refined where the required wall thickness increase to handle shock loads is very minimal compared to what it would need to be if the shock loads were fed into the BB.
Shipping: yep, can do that.
I'm 173 cm, so 5' 8.5" or thereabouts, with short legs and a long torso and arms. A medium 27.5" Megatrail felt huge and was ultimately too long for me. I'd go with a small in your shoes. I'm on a medium 2016 SC 5010 for instance, if you want to look up the geometry of that, and am very comfortable with the medium on that frame design/sizing scheme.
