My tire rubs my seat stay when my rear shock bottoms out. The paint is gone off my frame. Now, I would think that was a design flaw thinking that the tire should be at least 3mm or further away at bottom out. The tire(2.5 nevegal) and the shock(dhx3.0) are stock. I LOVE MY BIKE, does anyone have any suggestions? Santa Cruz is getting a call this week.
08 Bullit issues
- Thread starter Stench
- Start date
Nevegals are taller and wider than most 2.5s. Try a Nevegal 2.35" (which are shorter as well as narrower) or another manufacturer.
toby
toby
I sure hope you mean seat tube, not seat stay...
Why on earth do you want/need a (giant oversized) 2.5" tire on tha back of an A/M bike???? Most people dont ride that big of a tire on their DH bikes...
A good quality 2.2 (mich) or 2.35 (maxxis or kenda) will be more than enough tire for what that bike is designed for. If you want more traction, go with a sticky tread.
And being in Hi, I assume you are in the majority of the islands and see a fair amount of rain. A narrower tire with agressive tread will give more traction in slimy red clay....
Why on earth do you want/need a (giant oversized) 2.5" tire on tha back of an A/M bike???? Most people dont ride that big of a tire on their DH bikes...
A good quality 2.2 (mich) or 2.35 (maxxis or kenda) will be more than enough tire for what that bike is designed for. If you want more traction, go with a sticky tread.
And being in Hi, I assume you are in the majority of the islands and see a fair amount of rain. A narrower tire with agressive tread will give more traction in slimy red clay....
Last edited:
The only thing that keeps this statement from being ridiculous is the fact that it's the stock tire. Of course a tire that is too big will hit the frame. The frame is designed to take tires only as large as one would reasonably use on an AM/FR frame. If they made it fit ANY tire, you'd need an 100mm bottom bracket and long ass chainstays and then you'd hate your frame.
Did it come with that tire from SC or from your shop? If from SC, then they should repair the frame and give you the appropriate tire. If it's from your shop, they should pay to replace the front triangle and give you a new tire that fits. If you put the tire on there yourself, it's your own damn fault. It is not a flaw in the frame.
I think you would find that a norrower, more open tread tire would be big help. The nevegal has pretty tight spaced knobs and in my experience, likes to pack up pretty well (if you look at my location, I think you will find we ride in a lot of the same kind of wet clay goo). The nevegal just is not very well designed for soft terrain.
Something like a mich 16 in a 2.2" (you could even trim it a bit), or some maxxis swampthings, would both be better tires for the soft and wet, without giving it all away when it dries up a bit.
directly from Santa cruz:
Tires seem to vary so widely these days that we hate to give concrete numbers. 95% of 2.5” tires will fit in there, and definitely any 2.3” tires. We designed the Bullit with short chainstays (for its pivot location and amount of travel), and using a very tall tire (a kenda nevegal 2.7” for instance) can cause interference issues- especially with the DHX air shock.
I would DEFINATELY say that the kenda 2.5 is in well within the largest 5% to 2.5" tires. Seems kind of funny that SC would spec a tire that their own FAQ says might not fit......but then again, they have some suspect things written on their site.
I would DEFINATELY contact your dealer and SC and figure out who put that tire on the bike and get them to 'make it right'.
If he was talking about a nomad or a blur LT your post might make sense.
Lots of people out here in the rocky and loose west run tires bigger than that on even their AM bikes, but we aren't talking about an AM bike, we're talking about a bullit, which is freeride. You can use it for whatever kind of riding you want, but it's a 7" travel frame and should be easily capable of handling such tires, up to big sized 2.7s IMO.
Just doesn't sound like it's designed very well, it sacrifices tire size. Oh well, what can you do?
I run 2.6s for "everything", but it's nice to know I could fit some comp32s if I needed.
Last edited:
Your west is not everyones west.....Terrain in Hi (or here in Seattle) is a LOT different than the dry desert. I would also add, that the moniker FR is quite vague. It sounds cool, and many bike mfg are now building over-traveled A/M bikes and sticking the FR name on them to appeal to 3 foot droppers to flat...If he was talking about a nomad or a blur LT your post might make sense.
Lots of people out here in the rocky and loose west run tires bigger than that on even their AM bikes, but we aren't talking about an AM bike, we're talking about a bullit, which is freeride. You can use it for whatever kind of riding you want, but it's a 7" travel frame and should be easily capable of handling such tires, up to big sized 2.7s IMO.
Just doesn't sound like it's designed very well, it sacrifices tire size. Oh well, what can you do?
I run 2.6s for "everything", but it's nice to know I could fit some comp32s if I needed.
Dry rocky terrain is a good place (the place) for large volume lighter casing tires with harder compounds (although there is a reason that no one runs the comp 32...it is too big and heavy for even WC DH courses). The largest tires you will find on the WC DH circuit is 2.5s....and a handful of those guys run 2.35/2.2 in the rear. If the terrain gets wet/muddy you will find a lot of 2.2s as they just work better.
I have a very hard time believing that your average weekend warrior A/M rider needs larger (wider/taller/more volume) tire than WC DH riders moving at an average approaching 40mph....
If you look back a few years, 3.0s were the norm (well not racing ever)...fortunately most people have woken up and realize that with the newer compounds and tire constructions, you dont need a huge, heavy, slow tractor tire to get traction.
Soft/wet organic clay with wet roots is death with big ballony hard compound tires..it is really that simple and that is why companys make differnent tire compounds.
Personally, I would NOT call the bullet a true FR bike in any way shape or form, and it would not hold up to what is widely considered FR up here (30+ foot gaps, 15 foot drops...basically DH with gigantic jumps with huge consequences.
Just because it has lots of travel (too much for its build strength IMO) does not make it a FR bike...the fact that it comes with an air shock stock should be a good indication that it is not up to full FR type riding.
As a comparison (I will use turners as I know you know them).. 06 RFX != freeride, yet is most likely more overbuilt than the bullet. Highline = Freeride and it is an 11.5 pound frame(heavier than the DHR).
Last edited:
Um, maybe it's because your average weekend warrier is not a WC DH rider?
You're about 1.5lbs off on the highline weight.
Last edited:
really?
http://www.turnerbikes.com/08highline.html Turner lists the large at 11.2 last time I checked, that was pretty close to 11.5......
Unless you are talking about w/o shock...then yes, 10 is about correct..but that is still as heavy as or heavier than the vast majority of current DH bikes....and that is my point, a FR bike is a big, burly, super heavy duty, drop it off of the roof 10+ lb frame (IMO). The new bullet is no where near that description.
not sure I understand the tire thing....people who ride slower on easier terrain need larger tires??
I do agree with you, that the frame has pathetic tire clearance for either big 'ol tires, or for mud. My point was not to dispute that, just that given the OP's terrain, I think he could find a better tire.
Last edited:
:huh:
A bullit should not be rubbing on any 2.5 tire, this is obviously not the place to ask your question because people will question your intelligence of running a stock tire that came with your bike, and jump on the bash SC bandwagon.
probably the most popular tire for DH/freeride bikes I can't believe it is rubbing the seatpost. I also think Nevegals are allright in the mud, not the best but definately better than a highroller.
Hope after taking it to the dealer this gets resolved.
probably the most popular tire for DH/freeride bikes I can't believe it is rubbing the seatpost. I also think Nevegals are allright in the mud, not the best but definately better than a highroller.
Hope after taking it to the dealer this gets resolved.
Sorry, I never said it was not a great bike. I own one and love it. I guess it just comes down to terminology. Whether you see FR as 'free to ride anything'...or you look at FR as more the 'huck your meat' side of riding...big north shore stuff..
For me, the 06 pack/rfx in either 5 or 6" mode makes a great all mountian bike. It goes up well, can be ridden for longer trail rides, and I can have some fun and get some air on the way down....I can even drop the front down to 115 and have a non-serious jumper or pump track play-mobile.
If I were going to do 15' drops and huge gaps all day however, I would not do that on the (post 02) Pack.
That is my point, the bullet is not a DH/FR bike...just because it has a lot of travel does not make it so. I think it should still clear, but it is in no way 'unheard of' for a 7ish" all mt (light fr??) bike to have clearance issues with large tires. He11 the M6 has the same issue and it IS a DH bike.
As does everyone.
I dont think anyone is 'bashing SC' but if they OEM'd the tire are they not responsable for making sure it would fit???
I've done some decently gnarly stuff on an 03 RFX (w/ a DHX air to boot), and I'm 230lbs and have yet to have a problem in 2 years of riding it. In fact I'm selling my DHR because I had just as much fun (maybe more?) on my RFX at DH places.
To each his own I guess, but I'm starting to learn that "less is more" in a lot of ways.
I have no problems with taking it off 6 to 8 footers aand 20+ foot doubles/tables all day and occasionally bigger (mostly because I know how DT builds bikes), but I dont think it would like repeated 15+ foot drops to harsh rooty rocky g-out landings.
There are certianly places the pack is more fun (I ride it in 5" mode almost all the time for the same reason) than something bigger.....but I think that is sort of my point as well...travel alone does not tell you enough, or dictate the use of the bike.
The bike biz has fully embraced the 'more is better' mentality when it comes to travel, with many 'light trail' durable bikes sporting 5 or 6 inches of travel. For this reason, I think it is very easy to mis-assume a bike is more beefy than it is. Just because a bike has 7" of travel does not mean it was not made for 'comfy trail riding' (see ellsworth).
With most mfg not listing true weights, the 'how beefy is this frame really going to be' question is not that easy to always answer.
i could be wrong but could it be spoke tension? Wheel is flexing when you bottom or corner making the tyre rub your seatstays?
Okay, thanks for feedback. All I was thinking is that my tire, 2.5 nevegal that came with the bike from Santa Cruz, should not hit my frame. Even if I bottom the shock. Besides the new m6, what other bike have you heard of that does that? To me it just doesn't seem right. I'll call SC tommorrow.
The nevegal works great in all conditions. The red clay that was spoke of never gets mushy, it gets hard and is like riding on ice. We also do an 18 mile ride on volcanic rock. I've seen these rocks rip tread off intense tires and shred your skin. I personally never had good luck with maxxis tires. I usually lean towards michelins.
Thanks for the input and I'll post what SC replies.
HIT IT!!!
The nevegal works great in all conditions. The red clay that was spoke of never gets mushy, it gets hard and is like riding on ice. We also do an 18 mile ride on volcanic rock. I've seen these rocks rip tread off intense tires and shred your skin. I personally never had good luck with maxxis tires. I usually lean towards michelins.
Thanks for the input and I'll post what SC replies.
HIT IT!!!
Last edited:
The Bullit is definitely a FR bike. Heck, it defines the term. It always has since it's inception. I think it should fit a 2.5 at least. I'm thinking that is a bummer if they designed it too narrow in the back.
That is strange, I have had maxxis 2.7 mobsters, and kenda kinetics 2.6 on my bullit with no problem. I have never rubbed my seat-post, if anything my seat actually hits the tire first.
Really, you shouldn't be bottoming that hard anyway, maybe put more pressure/change coil on the shock. Call santa cruz, their customer service is great, they have always helped me in the past.
My .02 is that the Bullit should fit a 2.5 - any 2.5 - easily.
No one uses the terminology the same but IMO there is FR and FRX.
FR is what it always has been - go anywhere, do anything with a focus on jumps, drops and DH while still being able to climb when required. Clearance for 2.5 should be a minimum, if not 2.6 or 2.7 even. Some people like me prefer a huge volume single ply tire over a tiny, super heavy DH tire for this riding.
FRX has little ability to climb based solely on the weight/travel of the equipment and is mostly focused on DH and huge cliffhucking and jumps. These bikes should fit at least the Michie 2.8 if not a Gazzy 3.0 (not that anyone uses it anymore).
Bike designers always struggle to find balance between tire clearance, seat tube angle and BB height, especially on bikes that need to be climbed. Let's not get started on false advertising - whole other topic.
No one uses the terminology the same but IMO there is FR and FRX.
FR is what it always has been - go anywhere, do anything with a focus on jumps, drops and DH while still being able to climb when required. Clearance for 2.5 should be a minimum, if not 2.6 or 2.7 even. Some people like me prefer a huge volume single ply tire over a tiny, super heavy DH tire for this riding.
FRX has little ability to climb based solely on the weight/travel of the equipment and is mostly focused on DH and huge cliffhucking and jumps. These bikes should fit at least the Michie 2.8 if not a Gazzy 3.0 (not that anyone uses it anymore).
Bike designers always struggle to find balance between tire clearance, seat tube angle and BB height, especially on bikes that need to be climbed. Let's not get started on false advertising - whole other topic.
Last edited:
Okay, got my reply from Santa Cruz. FIRST of all, my warranty is in effect. What that means I'm not sure. However, SC rep was PISSED when he found out the bike was sent to me WITH a 2.5 tire. He said they spec a 2.35. Nice. Awesome customer service!
Also, I was also told that the shock mount on the front triangle MAY be 3mm forward than where it should be. Apparently some were welded wrong or something. Not sure but they are taking care of it. Just so everyone knows, I like this bike so much I could deal with the rubbing if I had too. It just didn't seem right. Thanks for the opinions and if anyone comes to Maui, lets go ride.
Also, I was also told that the shock mount on the front triangle MAY be 3mm forward than where it should be. Apparently some were welded wrong or something. Not sure but they are taking care of it. Just so everyone knows, I like this bike so much I could deal with the rubbing if I had too. It just didn't seem right. Thanks for the opinions and if anyone comes to Maui, lets go ride.
My bullit.2 is a late 2007 model and came with a Nevegal 2.5 from SC. I like a fatter rear tire setup and I get tons of rub on my seat tube, as you've mentioned. I had not heard about the 3mm shock mount difference. What do you mean "they are taking care of it?". I have read this was a problem with the bullit and just decided to deal with it.
Another flaw with this bike is the 68/73mm BB on a 150mm rear. In order to shift to 135mm Dropouts I can see the need for the smaller shell, but chainline is somewhat of an issue on this bike. SC should have done better with such a classic. Don't get me wrong I love this bike, but there could definitely be some improvements on the improved design.
Last edited:
Honestly, I'm surprised the warrantied it. Good work from them, though.