You say that like it's a bad thing...
Good point for some about the wide shell and potential knee aches. Pretty sure I'll be fine though, I used to climb a Nicolai M-pire....
.
120+20mm does not equal 160-20mm. Or, more to a bike than how much travel it has.
- Thread starter punkassean
- Start date
You say that like it's a bad thing...
Good point for some about the wide shell and potential knee aches. Pretty sure I'll be fine though, I used to climb a Nicolai M-pire....
.
I've been riding a 6point for a couple years, I love it. with the shorter i2i it really is a mini Dh and they're cheap now the IH is no longer. Mine is about 36lbs and is a solid ride.
there was a time when a slackish 140 mm travel f/r bike seemed like something worth making happen, but with the light weight 160 mm travel forks and frames available now, i don't see the point of 140 mm setup.
my nomad2 (rocco piggyback air) / lyrik combo has 13.75 bb with realistic tires, and around a 66.5 HA. sure, in an ideal world, this bike would have a 66 HA and a 13.5 BB, but it's very damn close to ideal as it is....and works extremely well for days where i'm climbing over 5,000 vert feet. I've ridden 6 inch bikes w/ a 65 HA and they felt fine on the down but weren't ideal on the steep and long uphill climbs. but perhaps i would have reached a different conclusion w/ a different stem/bar/seat position.
my nomad2 (rocco piggyback air) / lyrik combo has 13.75 bb with realistic tires, and around a 66.5 HA. sure, in an ideal world, this bike would have a 66 HA and a 13.5 BB, but it's very damn close to ideal as it is....and works extremely well for days where i'm climbing over 5,000 vert feet. I've ridden 6 inch bikes w/ a 65 HA and they felt fine on the down but weren't ideal on the steep and long uphill climbs. but perhaps i would have reached a different conclusion w/ a different stem/bar/seat position.
Hows the durability of the 6pionts? I've been thinking about getting one, but since Iron Horse is out of business I know I'd be screwed if the frame cracked which is the reason I haven't bought one yet.
I have a Diamondback Mission and I think the new ones might be close to what you are looking for. The HA is about 67, the BB is low, and with the 2010s they made the frame a lot stiffer which is my biggest complaint about the frame.
Aye, I keep meaning to shorten one of the 5 or so Vanilla RC's Ive got lying around down to 2.25 stroke to see what it goes like in teh ASX, but its been on the "to do" list for ages!
Ahh the joys of having too many old bikes that need TLC!
Its not just your bikes that need TLC:
Ahh the joys of having too many old bikes that need TLC!
the frame is solid, mine has been running strong for 2years with only bearings needing to be replaced. I believe RS Cycles is blowing them out for $700? that's what a crash replacement at most companies would run.
I think the Nomad2 is good bike, its just not for me. For starters I'm in between sizes (M&L) and I'm also not a huge fan of the rear suspension action. I've ridden Maestro bikes and prefer the way they tend to ride. I guess I like a bike that tends to squat as opposed to jack.
what - you're saying that you don't like how it feels like a 100mm bike?
you mean hardtailwhat - you're saying that you don't like how it feels like a 100mm bike?
I waited, but now the 575 is on close out prices at jenson that makes me think of getting one of those again.
I have been riding and racing on my Tomac Snyper for the last 3 years. I have been blown away on this bikes performance all around.
-5.5 front and rear
-68.5 HA
-13.75 BB
-My build is at 30lbs even
It has a nice stiff rear end for climbing but still feels great on the decents. I have raced this bike doing lite to mid DH and its held its own. I am a 200+lbs rider and I ride my bikes hard. I have raced it at Downieville, Sea Otter, Firestone, CCCX DH, etc.
In action:
Hope this helps.
-5.5 front and rear
-68.5 HA
-13.75 BB
-My build is at 30lbs even
It has a nice stiff rear end for climbing but still feels great on the decents. I have raced this bike doing lite to mid DH and its held its own. I am a 200+lbs rider and I ride my bikes hard. I have raced it at Downieville, Sea Otter, Firestone, CCCX DH, etc.
In action:
Hope this helps.
Last edited:
That bikes looks pretty rad! Too bad the longest top tube is a 22.5. I need at least 23 and would prefer 23.5. Bummer because otherwise it could be the ticket.
You might dig the other bike I'll be bringing along on Saturday....I "might" let you sit on it.
I'm stoked to ride, can't wait!You might dig the other bike I'll be bringing along on Saturday....I "might" let you sit on it.
LOVE this idea / special edition! What fork are those geo numbers with? I prefer my RFX's suspension and stiffness over Ventana's (owned a Bruja previously) but if I was buying now I think I could "settle" to get the Path's geo, no problem. Nice bike! I'd love to ride one.
Your first paragraph hit the nail on the head and was the reason I never bought an "all-mountain" bike.
All-mountain really means a bike that decends poorly because it's too tall and climbs poorly because it is too heavy and has too much travel. Trying to get the best of both worlds really gives you the worst of both.
Look at the Intense 6.6
Tall, steep, heavy, and wallowing around in 7" of travel.
Then look at the Intense SS. They took the same bike and said F' BB height. Let's just make decend well. Well, they made the perfect all-mountain bike.
All-mountain really means a bike that decends poorly because it's too tall and climbs poorly because it is too heavy and has too much travel. Trying to get the best of both worlds really gives you the worst of both.
Look at the Intense 6.6
Tall, steep, heavy, and wallowing around in 7" of travel.
Then look at the Intense SS. They took the same bike and said F' BB height. Let's just make decend well. Well, they made the perfect all-mountain bike.
The geometry is listed with a 140mm fork.
Did your Bruja have quad bearings? This bike feels as stiff as my old 6pack, but then again I'm not a big guy.
I agree completely, I'm also waiting on the Sect.
To tide me over, I've been riding a Pitch and it's a really fun bike for sure.
the b.b. measures 13.7 with a 2.3 chunder up front and a 2.35 highroller outback and the Pike at 140 (67 HA).... this actually ended up being plenty low for me even with 170 cranks I'm still tagging stuff when I'm sprinting occasionally.
It has slightly more travel then I wanted and the seat tube is slightly longer then I wanted, the travel I've gotten use to and kind appreciate it now because I can run a lil sag and still push into the bike. The seat tube is a non issue turns out the standover is great and I don't even lower my seat enough for it to be a issue (keep the saddle between my knees.)
good luck, you might want to look into a pitch (cheap) just to hold you over till the sect comes out.
p.s. those ventennas look sweet, I just fall in the middle of the top tube sizing.
To tide me over, I've been riding a Pitch and it's a really fun bike for sure.
the b.b. measures 13.7 with a 2.3 chunder up front and a 2.35 highroller outback and the Pike at 140 (67 HA).... this actually ended up being plenty low for me even with 170 cranks I'm still tagging stuff when I'm sprinting occasionally.
It has slightly more travel then I wanted and the seat tube is slightly longer then I wanted, the travel I've gotten use to and kind appreciate it now because I can run a lil sag and still push into the bike. The seat tube is a non issue turns out the standover is great and I don't even lower my seat enough for it to be a issue (keep the saddle between my knees.)
good luck, you might want to look into a pitch (cheap) just to hold you over till the sect comes out.
p.s. those ventennas look sweet, I just fall in the middle of the top tube sizing.
Last edited:
voreis was right. If my trance was 2 degrees slacker, so 67*, I would say it was the best bike in the world.
Also, a ton of you are posting 6 or 7 inch bikes with 68.5* HA. thats not slack. That's the problem. Also, people want to be able to climb their bikes, and maybe relatively quick. Adjusting sag and making your suspension soft to obtain the right angles is a half assed solution for a half assed bike (unless air shocks had better low speed tuning options, then you could possibly dial out pedal bob and have a ****ty dead feeling suspension).
some one please make a 4'' bike with good angles.
Also, a ton of you are posting 6 or 7 inch bikes with 68.5* HA. thats not slack. That's the problem. Also, people want to be able to climb their bikes, and maybe relatively quick. Adjusting sag and making your suspension soft to obtain the right angles is a half assed solution for a half assed bike (unless air shocks had better low speed tuning options, then you could possibly dial out pedal bob and have a ****ty dead feeling suspension).
some one please make a 4'' bike with good angles.
Jamis Parker?
L/18”
14.45/367=CENTER of BB to TOP of TT
23.82/605=EFFECTIVE TT LENGTH
68˚=HA
73˚=SA
16.85/428=chainstay
44.45/1129=wheelbase
1.50/38=fork raake
13.07/332=BB Height
4.72/120=headtube
29.84/758=standover
It's 4" rear travel but a bigger fork could be out on it.
Just sayin.........
L/18”
14.45/367=CENTER of BB to TOP of TT
23.82/605=EFFECTIVE TT LENGTH
68˚=HA
73˚=SA
16.85/428=chainstay
44.45/1129=wheelbase
1.50/38=fork raake
13.07/332=BB Height
4.72/120=headtube
29.84/758=standover
It's 4" rear travel but a bigger fork could be out on it.
Just sayin.........
They already did, it's called the Blur 4X!
My ndiza was probably the most fun bike I've ever owned.
I'm holding out for the Sect as my next bike. Evil said they are shooting for a March release.
I'm holding out for the Sect as my next bike. Evil said they are shooting for a March release.
I cant wait for the SEct and/or Division as well
Hi, this is Doug from Corsair.
It seems like you are recognizing a number of issues concerning what you need in a bike that Corsair has also considered to be important. A couple quick points:
Corsair frames are available with an adjustable headtube angle. This means that this topic is not a point of discussion. You can pick between three different headtube angles which almost nobody would disagree with as being the three most common options. Also, you can select the amount of fork travel you prefer while maintaining a particular HT angle.
With all of our frames we are working to achieve high quality suspension along with super efficient pedaling.
In the case of the Marque, it has a rearward axle path and 2:1 leverage ratio. This results in very tuneable travel and it is a suspension system that allows for fantastic traction.
The use of our idler pulley technology results in next to no pedal feedback/chainpull/chaingrowth. As well, the idler pulley is attached to the swingarm. This results in downforce to the swingarm during pedaling.
The other common topic discussed concerning the Marque is the BB height. We made a very specific choice concerning the amount of travel on this bike and it surrounded the BB height. Generally, lower BB height is better. It offers a lower center of gravity which results in a more stable, controllable ride. While it is popular to offer a 160mm travel bike, we found we could offer a bike with superior suspension performance with less travel. (read above about axlepath and leverage ratio) So in the end, we feel like the Marque performs as well or better than most 160mm travel bikes with only 5" of travel with three components working together, axlepath, leverage ratio, and lower bb height.
Thats it for the moment.
Doug
It seems like you are recognizing a number of issues concerning what you need in a bike that Corsair has also considered to be important. A couple quick points:
Corsair frames are available with an adjustable headtube angle. This means that this topic is not a point of discussion. You can pick between three different headtube angles which almost nobody would disagree with as being the three most common options. Also, you can select the amount of fork travel you prefer while maintaining a particular HT angle.
With all of our frames we are working to achieve high quality suspension along with super efficient pedaling.
In the case of the Marque, it has a rearward axle path and 2:1 leverage ratio. This results in very tuneable travel and it is a suspension system that allows for fantastic traction.
The use of our idler pulley technology results in next to no pedal feedback/chainpull/chaingrowth. As well, the idler pulley is attached to the swingarm. This results in downforce to the swingarm during pedaling.
The other common topic discussed concerning the Marque is the BB height. We made a very specific choice concerning the amount of travel on this bike and it surrounded the BB height. Generally, lower BB height is better. It offers a lower center of gravity which results in a more stable, controllable ride. While it is popular to offer a 160mm travel bike, we found we could offer a bike with superior suspension performance with less travel. (read above about axlepath and leverage ratio) So in the end, we feel like the Marque performs as well or better than most 160mm travel bikes with only 5" of travel with three components working together, axlepath, leverage ratio, and lower bb height.
Thats it for the moment.
Doug
Doug,
have the idler pulley issues been sorted? I've read a few things here and there of people more or less exploding the stock pulley, and having issues with getting the front shifting/chainline working properly, and the noise from the chain passing through the stay "tunnel" or whatever it's called.
That is the #1 issue that has kept me from checking into a Marque frame, and that I've yet to see one in person anywhere.
The idea of setting up a short front and rear travel bike to have a nice low BB and a 66* or so head angle really appeals to me just as a short/slack/burly trail bike, even though I'm not a DH guy.
I really, really like my Specialized Pitch with its 66* head angle (with a Lyrik) but would love to have a bit lower/less overall travel/shorter chainstays and wheelbase - all things that the Marque setup would give me.
have the idler pulley issues been sorted? I've read a few things here and there of people more or less exploding the stock pulley, and having issues with getting the front shifting/chainline working properly, and the noise from the chain passing through the stay "tunnel" or whatever it's called.
That is the #1 issue that has kept me from checking into a Marque frame, and that I've yet to see one in person anywhere.
The idea of setting up a short front and rear travel bike to have a nice low BB and a 66* or so head angle really appeals to me just as a short/slack/burly trail bike, even though I'm not a DH guy.
I really, really like my Specialized Pitch with its 66* head angle (with a Lyrik) but would love to have a bit lower/less overall travel/shorter chainstays and wheelbase - all things that the Marque setup would give me.
Take a look at the Sinister Gruitr. Lots of people running those with a Lyrik up front. If it does not exactly fit the bill, call up Frank and see if he can make you a custom one. Pretty much guaranteed you won't break it.
Don't read too much in to the top tube. It has a 73.5 degree seat tube angle.
I'd like to have a rip on one.
what do you mean? if the top tube is too short, you have to run a longer stem, which screws up steering feel and affects the way your bar-weighting translates to the front tire contact, etc.
if I'm going to climb anything on the bike, I want nothing to do with bikes that have a top tube shorter than 23.25"
what if the bike has a 23.8 TT but a seat angle of 69 degree.
something to think about - TT length is not the holy grail of measurements.
Doug,
have the idler pulley issues been sorted? I've read a few things here and there of people more or less exploding the stock pulley, and having issues with getting the front shifting/chainline working properly, and the noise from the chain passing through the stay "tunnel" or whatever it's called.
scrublover, Yes, we now have a new idler pulley that is working quite well.
have the idler pulley issues been sorted? I've read a few things here and there of people more or less exploding the stock pulley, and having issues with getting the front shifting/chainline working properly, and the noise from the chain passing through the stay "tunnel" or whatever it's called.
scrublover, Yes, we now have a new idler pulley that is working quite well.
Can you post pics of the new bike? The Marque is on my shortlist to replace my 6point pretty soon but i've heard some of the same issues.
Top tube measurement is a fairly useless number when looked at independently of the other variables. it really doesn't give you a very good picture of how the bike is going to ride other than when you are seated, and even then it is pretty limited. You can adjust your seat/seatpost as well with either a layback post/head or just sliding the seat along the rails to change your effective seat tube angle and top tube length without screwing up you steering feel. It will affect you front tire contact though. You need to look at all the factors(head angle, front centre, fork length, head tube length) to get a better picture of how the bike will fit. The more important figure for how the bike is going to ride is the distance from the top of the head tube to your bottom bracket.
If we take a 30" seat height and compare the 73.5 degree seat tube angle to that of a nomad that has a 71.5 degree seat tube angle you'll see that the 2 degree difference makes a 1" difference in effective top tube length.
I guess I'll never understand the whole "I need a 12" BB and 63° HT angle on my 5" bike to descend". While I'm exaggerating there, the idea is that if you go too far, you limit the versatility of the bike. How many people are looking for "mini" DH bikes vs people looking for good all-around bikes? In the past we just used to call the gravity-oriented more "all around" bikes "freeride", and we realized they wouldn't work quite as well on the downhill. I can understand slightly lower BBs as we make gains in technology, use slightly smaller rings up front, and so on, but most people's "ideal" bike that is mentioned is just too limiting for the terrain. It will work great as a mini-DH bike on smoother DH stuff, and with some skills it can work fine on bigger DH stuff, but it will suck everywhere else, more than it has to.
5" of quality travel is where I might agree with this thread, although there are so many examples of "not" quality travel that it's almost pointless to bring up an arbitrary number in terms of travel. 5" of linkage controlled travel with a coil shock does not feel like 5" of high-pivot travel with an air shock. Unfortunately the industry will always be driven by light weight, but I think the "quality" aspect of the travel is hugely variable.
This is from our ride yesterday (not me, but I took the pic). 14" BB is fine for a 6" bike. I won't discount that there are some cool bikes in this thread and I'd like to take them on certain runs, but I sure hope those manufacturers have done the economics of offering such bikes. Out here in the West, we got rocks. This thread also started out as one-person's idea of the perfect bike, but yesterday on the climb out to (Goat Camp in Phoenix) I killed most of our group on my 47lb highline. One person's "do everything" bike will always be somewhat different from the next.
5" of quality travel is where I might agree with this thread, although there are so many examples of "not" quality travel that it's almost pointless to bring up an arbitrary number in terms of travel. 5" of linkage controlled travel with a coil shock does not feel like 5" of high-pivot travel with an air shock. Unfortunately the industry will always be driven by light weight, but I think the "quality" aspect of the travel is hugely variable.
This is from our ride yesterday (not me, but I took the pic). 14" BB is fine for a 6" bike. I won't discount that there are some cool bikes in this thread and I'd like to take them on certain runs, but I sure hope those manufacturers have done the economics of offering such bikes. Out here in the West, we got rocks. This thread also started out as one-person's idea of the perfect bike, but yesterday on the climb out to (Goat Camp in Phoenix) I killed most of our group on my 47lb highline. One person's "do everything" bike will always be somewhat different from the next.
Attachments
Last edited:
Hopefully it has appropriately "light" compression and rebound tuning, otherwise it would result in exceptionally harsh travel. How is the travel "tunable"? It would seem with a low leverage rate that each click of the adjuster would have a bigger effect and it would be harder to fine-tune it.
Ummm... yeah if you go too far of course you'll limit the versatilty of a bike, but that doesn't mean current industry standards (67* or 68* HA, 14"ish BB) are the best compromise either.
How does a 65* HA and 13"ish BB limit a rider's ability to climb to the top of a trail? I think the point here is that DHers typically will be willing to sacrifice a bit of "tight, twisty, seated climbing" ability for downhill stability. This is the Downhill forum.....
I think it's pretty apparant from all the posts here endorsing lower, slacker trail bikes, and how few have chimed in with your point of view, that there is some interest in bikes differing from what's commonly being served currently.
I live as west as you can get and not get wet, and we don't have much for rocks. We do have a sh!t ton of drifty turns through the trees. Low and slack will almost always win here.
.
quoted for the truth..
that's why I like riding here so much. And don't think we don't do that much climbing - during a 12 mile ride here you do close to 3k of climbing - but equal amount of descending.
it also depends what suits your riding style - I (like many) like slack and low. but it's definitely not for everyone.