[Jase76]

But it's nothing like it with sag factored in. Having done a few runs on the M3, it's not quite what I'd call "full on race bike" either, the bar height thanks to headtube length is super high, the BB doesn't feel as low as the claim (I'm pretty sure the actual vs claimed numbers don't line up either) and the head angle could afford to be slacker. This is all corrected in the M5 at least on paper, and by doing so they've obviously admitted there was an issue with the previous generation's geo chart.

Anyway, the Socom as said already has a hunk less travel than the M3 so once you recalculate the figures after sag the numbers are going to be significantly different. It's hard to define what constitutes freeride geo and DH geo when there's a huge amount of variation in DH tracks over different locations and levels of competition (ie. local vs national vs WC), but to call the Socom a full on race bike would be off the mark for most definitions of the term.

That's not to say you can't use it as one (our local series' elite winner rode one to victory) but on paper it's not perfect.

Fair points all, however the bike is not a freeride bike, simple as that. It was not designed as one nor is it warranted to be ridden as one either.

By your definitions any bike could be a freeride bike william, given that point you may as well say I can freeride a road bike. Its an extreme example but true none the less. What makes your bike a freeride Glory are the components not the frame geo, I'm pretty sure the frame is the same as the Glory DH.

Udi your points on the M3 not being a race bike are ludicrous! What you are saying is that for you it wasn't as "racey" as say a Sunday? Thats personal preference mate not an evaluation of the bikes characteristics.
As for the M5/6 geo changes, well bikes evolve. The setup on the M3 was done a long time ago. I'm not sure who did the testing for the proto frames but there are a lot of things different now, not the least are the courses the bikes are raced on. Changing these things in not an admission that the M3 is inferior just that there are different requirements for a DH bike these days.

 

[Kntr]

But it's nothing like it with sag factored in. Having done a few runs on the M3, it's not quite what I'd call "full on race bike" either, the bar height thanks to headtube length is super high, the BB doesn't feel as low as the claim (I'm pretty sure the actual vs claimed numbers don't line up either) and the head angle could afford to be slacker. This is all corrected in the M5 at least on paper, and by doing so they've obviously admitted there was an issue with the previous generation's geo chart.

Anyway, the Socom as said already has a hunk less travel than the M3 so once you recalculate the figures after sag the numbers are going to be significantly different. It's hard to define what constitutes freeride geo and DH geo when there's a huge amount of variation in DH tracks over different locations and levels of competition (ie. local vs national vs WC), but to call the Socom a full on race bike would be off the mark for most definitions of the term.

That's not to say you can't use it as one (our local series' elite winner rode one to victory) but on paper it's not perfect.

Exactly.




I run mine with a 66 so the headangle in perfect for FR and the BB height is spot on. Check out the Intense forum on MTBR. There are a ton of people doing the exact same thing as I am. There are people all over the world running a front derailer on a Socom and using it as a do all bike. As for FR, I dont go big to flat. All my drops are to good trannys. I hope I dont break it, but for now its holding up. I guess next year will be the real test when I hit BC/resorts and the Shore.

My last 3 bikes were;
2006 Fly
2005 Big Hit
2002.5 FLY

I can tell you this. The Socom feels way more FR/Trail than any of those bikes. I also went with a size smaller than recommended (SMALL) because we ride tight techy trails around here. Im 5'9" and it fits the exact same as all the other 3 bikes Ive had and they were all mediums. Ive ridden a lot of bikes and the Socom fits me perfectly for what Im using it for..... everything.

With my I9s and lighter tires/tubes its 38ish.
With my Azonic Outlaws and DH tires its 41ish.

 

[MattP.]

42.8# now. Hoping to get it to 40# with I9 laced to 823, UST tires, Ti Coil, I-Beam, direct mount stem, and Ultegra cassette. Hopefully

 

[Jase76]

Exactly.




I run mine with a 66 so the headangle in perfect for FR and the BB height is spot on. Check out the Intense forum on MTBR. There are a ton of people doing the exact same thing as I am. There are people all over the world running a front derailer on a Socom and using it as a do all bike. As for FR, I dont go big to flat. All my drops are to good trannys. I hope I dont break it, but for now its holding up. I guess next year will be the real test when I hit BC/resorts and the Shore.

My last 3 bikes were;
2006 Fly
2005 Big Hit
2002.5 FLY

I can tell you this. The Socom feels way more FR/Trail than any of those bikes. I also went with a size smaller than recommended (SMALL) because we ride tight techy trails around here. Im 5'9" and it fits the exact same as all the other 3 bikes Ive had and they were all mediums. Ive ridden a lot of bikes and the Socom fits me perfectly for what Im using it for..... everything.

With my I9s and lighter tires/tubes its 38ish.
With my Azonic Outlaws and DH tires its 41ish.

Hey Kanter, you have made a really good point there. With your set-up it would be possible to do everything on that frame. But back to the original point by TGR thats not what its for.

But its your bike and I'm just some dude on the net, I wouldn't presume to tell you what to do with your equipment.

Have fun on it, I know i have fun on my Socom.

 

[Udi]

Fair points all, however the bike is not a freeride bike, simple as that.

Udi your points on the M3 not being a race bike are ludicrous! What you are saying is that for you it wasn't as "racey" as say a Sunday? Thats personal preference mate not an evaluation of the bikes characteristics.
As for the M5/6 geo changes, well bikes evolve. The setup on the M3 was done a long time ago. I'm not sure who did the testing for the proto frames but there are a lot of things different now, not the least are the courses the bikes are raced on. Changing these things in not an admission that the M3 is inferior just that there are different requirements for a DH bike these days.

Where did I say the socom was a freeride bike? Nice work putting words in my mouth. I just said your definition of it as a "full on racebike" was probably off the mark. Seriously my only whine (from when I rode it) if any is that the static head angle is too steep, and unlike say a v10 where you have copious amounts of sag to compensate for that, it doesn't. So regardless of whether you want to define the M3 as a racebike or not, the Socom isn't the same thing like you were making it out to be. Static geometry figures aren't the only factors when comparing bikes.

As for the M3 - not an evaluation of the bike's charactersistics? Actually you'll find I did just that. I said the headtube length is off the charts (CK's bike had a 1.5 headtube to get the bars low like any real DH bike - another "admission" of an issue whether you'd like to call it that or not) and made comments on the BB height and head angle. Very tangible evaluations, in use, of the bike's characteristics. Preference - maybe so, but you'll find most serious racers will share my opinions on low bb's, slack ha's, and low bar heights.

And on the M5, I think you'll find there's been no significant changes to DH courses in general between the release of the M3 and M5 (we're talking a couple years tops here, not ten), so logic would indicate that the changes were improvements to the design that could have been made at any point in that timespan rather than ones to cater for changing courses.

 

[Jase76]

Where did I say the socom was a freeride bike? Nice work putting words in my mouth. I just said your definition of it as a "full on racebike" was probably off the mark. Seriously my only whine (from when I rode it) if any is that the static head angle is too steep, and unlike say a v10 where you have copious amounts of sag to compensate for that, it doesn't. So regardless of whether you want to define the M3 as a racebike or not, the Socom isn't the same thing like you were making it out to be. Static geometry figures aren't the only factors when comparing bikes.

As for the M3 - not an evaluation of the bike's charactersistics? Actually you'll find I did just that. I said the headtube length is off the charts (CK's bike had a 1.5 headtube to get the bars low like any real DH bike - another "admission" of an issue whether you'd like to call it that or not) and made comments on the BB height and head angle. Very tangible evaluations, in use, of the bike's characteristics. Preference - maybe so, but you'll find most serious racers will share my opinions on low bb's, slack ha's, and low bar heights.

And on the M5, I think you'll find there's been no significant changes to DH courses in general between the release of the M3 and M5 (we're talking a couple years tops here, not ten), so logic would indicate that the changes were improvements to the design that could have been made at any point in that timespan rather than ones to cater for changing courses.

Eh? Words in you mouth? I was referring that statement to other posters above yours, william et al.

Whether you believe courses have changed over the life of the M3 or not the fact remains that the bike has a different set of requirements to meet with the new design.
You state that C.K had a 1.5 headtube on his team bike, a lot of manufacturers customise bikes for their pro's. Heck some even design a whole new series of frames around their preferences!

What I was really trying to say is that a bike cant be all things to all people, you say the headtube length is too high and the BB is not as low as claimed, well I know people who think they're spot on. Some even think the BB is too low!

 

[xy9ine]

Fair points all, however the bike is not a freeride bike, simple as that. It was not designed as one nor is it warranted to be ridden as one either.

the socom has the standard intense 2 yr warranty, no? i'd argue that its a great freeride bike, moreso than a pure dh rig even (based on the reviews of my socom riding non-racing buddies). granted, its silly arguing semantics when there's genre overlap like this. a bike like this blurs the boundary between dh & fr (which is a pretty ambiguous term these days anyways). use it however makes you happy.

 

[Jase76]

Intense-"So how'd you break this Socom FRO frame?"

Rider-"Oh, you know...just Freeriding."

Intense-"Ok now...Bye bye then..."

Rider-"WAAAAAH"

I'm not an Intense employee, and i'd actually like to think that wouldn't happen and they'd hook you up anyway. But its pretty clear they sell it For Racing Only.

I guess that would depend on what you class as freeriding/racing DH, as you say the lines pretty blurred these days.

 

[Shortbus]

why thanks for the props on the Imperial, I, too, had one before the SL and sold it and I know how that feels =)
They're pieces of art, so i figured I'd powdercoat mine to look like one.

 

[Gopher]

this is my current downhill do everything ride till i actually need a dh bike again sometime around june.
07 Intense Tazer works finish its sweet and 33.4lbs with tons of junky parts still on it like the 06 drop off 4 reduced travel and ghetto front wheel and cranks and guide but eh it works.

 

[William42]

the glory DH is not the same frame, but you're arguing that "on some bikes, components make it more 'freeride' while on other bikes it doesn't?"

geo wise the soccom sounds perfect for FR. If i had the dough i woulda done something quite similar to Kanter, but i work at a shop and couldn't justify buying a soccom over a glory 0 at EP. I also agree with Udi that theres alot more to it than static geo. what makes a frame "FRO?" I'm kinda new to downhill I guess, but the fact that "its a lightweight frame" doesn't seem very convincing, since you could want a lightwight frame for freeride for equally valid reasons. static geo? quite similar to alot of "freeride" bikes out there, and you could easily make it more so with a build such as kanter. I guess I just see the "FRO" as marketing hype - if you wanna claim the frame isn't build for heavy hits, thats fine, but it doesn't sound like thats what kanter is doing at all, so arguing that the soccom is a bad choice for him is still dumb.

he likes the bike better than anything else, it has good angles, he has fun on it, and he uses it less for race and more for "freeride" applications. I guess I just don't see the problem...

anyway, sorry to go off topic!

 

[hick_huckster01]

if you turn your bars 180 degrees/x-up it does your tire hit the crank /foot, if not how much clearance is on them. Thanks!

 

[Gopher]

not much my foot gets stuck when i x my natural way so i ethier have to switch platform or x the other way

 

[Kntr]

the glory DH is not the same frame, but you're arguing that "on some bikes, components make it more 'freeride' while on other bikes it doesn't?"

geo wise the soccom sounds perfect for FR. If i had the dough i woulda done something quite similar to Kanter, but i work at a shop and couldn't justify buying a soccom over a glory 0 at EP. I also agree with Udi that theres alot more to it than static geo. what makes a frame "FRO?" I'm kinda new to downhill I guess, but the fact that "its a lightweight frame" doesn't seem very convincing, since you could want a lightwight frame for freeride for equally valid reasons. static geo? quite similar to alot of "freeride" bikes out there, and you could easily make it more so with a build such as kanter. I guess I just see the "FRO" as marketing hype - if you wanna claim the frame isn't build for heavy hits, thats fine, but it doesn't sound like thats what kanter is doing at all, so arguing that the soccom is a bad choice for him is still dumb.

he likes the bike better than anything else, it has good angles, he has fun on it, and he uses it less for race and more for "freeride" applications. I guess I just don't see the problem...

anyway, sorry to go off topic!

Hey thanks.

I use my Socom for everything. I DH race it, FR, and epic XC. Ive done 15+ mile XC rides on it a lot before the snow. The biggest drop the bike will ever see will be about 10ft to perfect trannys. According to the Specialized and PUSH suspension data, a bike will see greater forces on fast hard hits (DH) as compared to slow big hits (FR-drops). Yes, FR is way harder on a bike with drops to flats and the occasional opps, but Im thinking the Socom will be fine. I guess we will see next summer. If it breaks, Ill see if Intense will help me get a Uzzi. If they wont, Ill get a different frame and keep riding. Im not scared.

 

[cheetaprowlerDH]

why thanks for the props on the Imperial, I, too, had one before the SL and sold it and I know how that feels =)
They're pieces of art, so i figured I'd powdercoat mine to look like one.

youre going to kill me! i' drowning in
again, awesome bike

 

[mattmatt86]

quit it with the Imperial pics you're making me miss mine

 

[Abstrakt51]

MattP, clean looking Blindside.

 

[haromtnbiker]

I gots a few new parts!!!

Juicy 7's:

Taco for the e.13 lg1:

 

[Dogboy]

Brakes look good Craig! Hose length looks perfect

 

[duck]

I haven't got an exact weight, but its around 39-40 lbs.

 

[dump]

I gots a few new parts!!!

Juicy 7's:

Taco for the e.13 lg1:

love the look of this ride.

 

[ss_storm]

My VP Free,
I weigh in at 175lbs so I am runnin XC components, and a 888 up front.
Bike weighs 37lbs

 

[GPERKINS]

 

[SamB]

Sick Morewood. My Balfa doesn't quite compare to that but here it is with a few new bits

 

[intensem1]

That balfa is sick.I have always loved the look of those frames.What does it weigh?

 

[duck]

My Wilson got some new minnon DHF super tackys.

 

[richy_a2r]

Sick Morewood. My Balfa doesn't quite compare to that but here it is with a few new bits

your ride is so much better.

 

[SamB]

That balfa is sick.I have always loved the look of those frames.What does it weigh?

Cheers, it weighs in at around 42-43lbs with DH tubes. Might try out some lighter tubes and see how they go.

your ride is so much better.

Haha thanks, its not quite as bling as that though

 

[dirtdigger]

I'm thinking about building some frames and just finished the first production prototype frame,the weight all built up is 37 lbs with dh tubes, tyres and azonic outlaw wheel set with solid uncut out rockers.
just need to work on getting some C.N.C.ed rockers made up

 

[Eren]

hmm whats the geometry and travel? i may be interested

 

[Cannon]

My new ride for 2008, at the moment at 16,8kg (37.038lbs)
When finished(Ti Spring, air side in the fork again, E13 LG1, Selle Italia SLRTT/Tune Seatpost, modified Shimano XTR Crank (to fit the 83mm BB) and CB Acid Pedals the weight should be at about 15,8-16kg (34.833-35.274lbs) keep you up to date, will post a picture hangin´on the scale.....

Wish you a happy new Year, Cannon

 

[Udi]

That looks sweet Cannon. Have you measured any of the geometry figures yourself? I'm interested in BB height, WB length, CS length, and HA if you are able to measure them.

That's really light too for the current build, what's the frame/shock weight on it?

 

[dhmike]

nice ride cannon .

 

[Cannon]

Hi Udi, i´m going to measure the geometry after new years eve because the bike is in my shop....
The funny thing is that the BB height is at 35,7cm but the bike corners very similar to a Sunday....
Had a couple of Sunday riders who said that it is at least as good as the Sunday but i can´t say this for sure, i had not enough time on a Sunday yet.
The rear travel is 19cm, the head angle is a little bit on the steeper side but i like it very much.
One thing is that the bike forces you automatically in the right position, it is ridden pretty much over the front wheel.
Therefor it´s much grip on the front wheel, cornering is like it´s the easiest thing on earth.
The rear suspension does virtually not compress in hard cornering sections, you go throu fast like hell.
My first impression was that the rear wheel does exactly what it should, no more,no less....
The wheelbase ei a little shorter, so it´s agility is perfect but it´s not nervous on high speed sections.
After the first couple of rides the bike went to my suspension tuner...
The complete suspension is made by MotoPitkan, it´s a very smart and perfect working suspension center here in Austria.
The internals of the fork were totally stripped and replaced by a self eng1neered closed cartridge system that knocks the hell off.....
The shock is custom valved and shimmed to my personal needs, keeps the rear wheel where it should be and works nearly not noticeable, with this suspension you can do what you should...concentrate on the track.
Another nice thing is that the bike is super silent, the only thing you hear are the tires on the ground.

Keep you informed, Cannon

 

[Superdeft]

My new ride for 2008, at the moment at 16,8kg (37.038lbs)
When finished(Ti Spring, air side in the fork again, E13 LG1, Selle Italia SLRTT/Tune Seatpost, modified Shimano XTR Crank (to fit the 83mm BB) and CB Acid Pedals the weight should be at about 15,8-16kg (34.833-35.274lbs) keep you up to date, will post a picture hangin´on the scale.....

Wish you a happy new Year, Cannon

Is that really going to stand up to a full season of racing. Not because of the overall weight, but won't you have to replace the seat, or post, pedals, cranks at least once?

 

[_*sTiTcHeS*_]

what mods did you do to get the 83mm xtr?

 

[Cannon]

Is that really going to stand up to a full season of racing. Not because of the overall weight, but won't you have to replace the seat, or post, pedals, cranks at least once?

NO, had similar setups the last years, no problem...

XTR mod will be shown when it´s done, do not want to say too much at the moment......

Greetings, Cannon

 

[Superdeft]

I'm really excited to see the mod, I want to put XTs or Hones on the m3.

 

[Stickler]

XTR mod will be shown when it´s done, do not want to say too much at the moment......

Greetings, Cannon

I've been thinking about making some 83mm XT cranks for the Sunday. Being a welder/fabricator I'm thinking of lengthening the spindle 10mm in the middle (100% weld with backer strip in joint)-- TIG weld. The problem will be clamping the spindle straight to prevent warping during cooling.

Curious to see how you did it.

 

[dirtdigger]

hmm whats the geometry and travel? i may be interested

Hi Eren,
the geometry with a 520mm fork and 6.7" travel:-
AH 66.5 degs
wheel base of 1168mm
chain stays are 445mm
BB hight of 335mm
seat tube 74 degs
150 x 12 rear hub

Laters Scotty