X2. External cup would be fine.Since we are wishing for things, I wish there was an angleset bottom cup that worked with tapered steerers.
I think that's in the works. That's the same HT size as the 2011 Turner 5 spot and Sultan (44mm), and I've read Anglesets for the 44mm HT should be coming out soon.
K9's system is inferior IMO to CC's because it relies greatly on the cups being aligned perfectly.
When I ordered my Tapered HT kit the other day, guy I talked to said they're going to do those. It'll have an external lower cup...Since we are wishing for things, I wish there was an angleset bottom cup that worked with tapered steerers.
because 99% of us wont benefit from slacker angles like the top pros would or can push their bikes to the limit that slacker angles would be needed.
i don't believe that for a second! i've had the pleasure of buying pro's ex bikes which were customly slacker than production versions out on the market! was i riding as fast as them, no. but it def opened up my riding style to new limits which on the standard production frame i would be eating crap! for example, i had a banshee pyre an upgraded to a spitfire! which bike do you think i'm going faster on bro? the numbers help out alot....
Apples to oranges. It's not like you just went to a Pyre with a slacker head angle.
if this product was out, i would've never spent my hard earned cash on the spitty! i would've been happy with the pyre with a bit more slack up front!
Yes! Hope this happens.So you didn't want the tapered headtube? 2 travel/geo settings, iscg mounts? Only slacker ha?
another example, Specialized picks up Sam Hill to ride there demo bike. an he gave his input on what he wanted an now most of there line of dual bikes are all slacker an lower. an the demo 8 is the race bike to get! what it only took them only 10 yrs to figure this out. come on man!
thats all i wanted, the extra half inch of travel which i did not need, what does that do? i had to end up spending $1500 bucks for a 1 degree change in the head angle, an 2mm bb height difference. the spifire on the high setting is nearly same numbers as the pyre! an the tapered headtube, i'm still using a 1/8 steerer tube fork. could've went without that as well.
send that over the blackohio...you want the yaw?! you can't handle the yaw!!!!
Man you are so wrong I don't know where to start.
i never said i was the whole bike market first of all. i just happen to know what i like an what works for my style of riding! the pyre was a fantastic bike which in my opinion was def not your typical xc geo! the tapered headtube is a great idea, but i felt it is not necessary for me since i'm not a fatass! i just wanted alittle less steepness up front an would been happy with what i had! an as far as i can see buddy, looks as though Dirt has alot of people wanting these anglesets! i guess there not the whole bike market either eh!
Just call the boys up and ask for it. They were going to give me one for my Remedy a while back to try out. I know they have made a few for testing and should already be in production by now.Since we are wishing for things, I wish there was an angleset bottom cup that worked with tapered steerers.
dudemanguy, I think you're missing the point. A) people like adjustable geometry, this gives it to them. B) people like *their* bikes. This allows them to keep their bike (the example I used was a Racelink) which might be outdated geometry-wise, but still has great features. Another example might be the GT IT-1. Could have been a great bike, but it was heavy and steep...slacken it out a little, and it could still be a great bike.
indeed! offset cups + short shock (~8" travel) and the numbers might be in the ballpark...
watch who the **** you call dumb dip****! an to each there own as far as what they like! i just prefer the options versus the standard. an as far i can rekon, you ride a racelink which means you are one that lets the bike run you, versus you run it! keep on trucking with your badself, an stick with your numbers! oh an i live on the east coast as well brah, an yet to have any problems climbin our short hills up with a slacker HA!
where did you call you dumb?
you're obviously doing it wrong, he just said you can't climb with a 65* HA. I ride all kinds of trails with my 65.5 ha trail bike and there's no way i would go back to a steeper bike and i certainly don't have any problems on flat trails, seated climbing, standing climbing or anything. it's pretty easy to learn how to ride a slacker bike in all situations.
My last two trail bikes have both been pushing 65 degress. I'm a masher climbing so I can just stand up, get over the front end and go. And they really do feel better descending that way.
Funny you mention the prophet. My current XC/Trail/All-Mountain/Over-Mountain bike is a '07 prophet with a -1.0 angleset. 66* HA for the win! I love it this way. Add a 140mm fox talas with travel adjust/lockout and my old bike just found a whole new life. with a $100 upgrade, I have a bike that can do almost anything.
Never called you a dumb sh!t, but it's quite fitting now that you mention it. What I said, if you bothered to read it, was that options are great, extremes with no adjustability are not. I ride a Sunday, and am adding an angleset this year because I think it will bring my older bike, which I like and already own, up to date with newer race geometry. I'm buying the kit, which I'm excited about because it will allow me to run 63.5*, which is pretty bleeding edge, and 64.5*, which is closer to what I'm used to, as well as 64*, which is probably what I'll leave it at forever....but it gives me OPTIONS, which is where "the industry" should move to (and is).
Jerkstore, I didn't say you CANNOT climb with a 65* hand angle...I'm suggesting that it may not be worth it. Just as a 69 or 67* angle is a compromise for DH stability, 66 or 65 is a compromise on uphill stability. Nobody in this forum worries about "attacking" the climbs, so it's not worth the argument, but the *ideal* for a *trailbike* should be somewhere in the middle, since a *trailbike* goes up and down.
Sandinyourvajayjaybwich, I think Dudemanguy and Jerkstore have a point. I don't have any issue on tech climbs with my 66 headangle. I go up and down as aggressively as I did on my steeper bike. The only time steeper would help would be if your flopping around like a flaccid penis but thats not my issue. Traction and looping out tend to stop me more often. I think the slacker helps there as the weight of the front wheel is further forward. As mtn biking progresses bikes do seem to be getting slacker so the "middle" you speak of may be slacker than your personal preference. Which makes them two right. You have a point too regarding the adjustability. You guys are just arguing over different angles(<--get it) of the general discussion.
