Quantcast

Downcountry curious - "looking for a bike"

6thElement

Schrodinger's Immigrant
Jul 29, 2008
17,546
15,070
Did not buy A2s (yet).

Put the 180 mm rotors on. While doing so I noticed that the valve stem on the rear wheel was crooked, which only happens with tubes. Somebody here mentioned that the OEM build might have tubes and you were right! So weird.

Ganked out the tubes, slapped in some tubeless valve stems & sealant and now I’m tubeless. Post faffing & swapping weight was 29.5 lbs.

Hit the big steep line twice on the group ride yesterday. Felt much better than the first go around.
I thought oem full builds from any manufacturer were always tubes out of the box.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
20,500
10,972
AK
160 front rotors are gonna be road only soon. Current gen Sid is 180 minimum. I suspect the fox 32 will follow suit in the next iteration .
32 is a strange fork, almost no one runs one in the XC racing circuits. A few light pros, but the vast majority of expert riders are on 34s, as the 32 is a fore-aft noodle. Probably the 34, but I wouldnt be so sure about the 32. 32 should be a 3” gravel fork IMO and for XC races where you might as well be on a gravel bike.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
89,395
27,613
media blackout
32 is a strange fork, almost no one runs one in the XC racing circuits. A few light pros, but the vast majority of expert riders are on 34s, as the 32 is a fore-aft noodle. Probably the 34, but I wouldnt be so sure about the 32. 32 should be a 3” gravel fork IMO and for XC races where you might as well be on a gravel bike.
Yea, xc pros were already shifting to 34s a couple years ago. 34 step cast can still take a 160 rotor, but the regular 34 is 180.

Aren't the 32s still popular for marathon?
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
20,500
10,972
AK
Yea, xc pros were already shifting to 34s a couple years ago. 34 step cast can still take a 160 rotor, but the regular 34 is 180.

Aren't the 32s still popular for marathon?
Not round the parts I travel. Its the short smooth track where I can deal with a flexier fork, for the longer stuff I need more safety margin 80% thru the race, in stiffness and travel.
 

chuffer

Turbo Monkey
Sep 2, 2004
1,936
1,329
McMinnville, OR
So far the biggest and best difference I notice is flat ground and false-flat acceleration. The Patrol is an absolute chore to accelerate. The Spur is fun to accelerate. For long slog climbs the geo of the Patrol is actually a little more comfy.

I also built a new rear wheel using a OneUp hub, WTB KOM Light I25 rim and Sapim laser spokes. It is >450 g lighter than the OEM and wasn’t that crazy pricey.

I thought about carbon rims, BUT 1) even the cheapest crabon rims cost 75% of the cost to build the entire wheel and 2) the KOM Light is within 40 g of the Light Bicycle rims that met my specs. Other brands were actually heavier than the KOM Light.

I was (am) honestly a little concerned about its strength, however. Even with spoke tension nearly maxed out, they still feel really flexy during side loading…we’ll see I guess….

Took that wheel for it’s first ride yesterday and banged through some of our rockiest jank. Mind you this western Oregon not Utah or the western slope. The wheel and I both survived.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
20,500
10,972
AK
So far the biggest and best difference I notice is flat ground and false-flat acceleration. The Patrol is an absolute chore to accelerate. The Spur is fun to accelerate. For long slog climbs the geo of the Patrol is actually a little more comfy.

I also built a new rear wheel using a OneUp hub, WTB KOM Light I25 rim and Sapim laser spokes. It is >450 g lighter than the OEM and wasn’t that crazy pricey.

I thought about carbon rims, BUT 1) even the cheapest crabon rims cost 75% of the cost to build the entire wheel and 2) the KOM Light is within 40 g of the Light Bicycle rims that met my specs. Other brands were actually heavier than the KOM Light.

I was (am) honestly a little concerned about its strength, however. Even with spoke tension nearly maxed out, they still feel really flexy during side loading…we’ll see I guess….

Took that wheel for it’s first ride yesterday and banged through some of our rockiest jank. Mind you this western Oregon not Utah or the western slope. The wheel and I both survived.
I cracked my front Nextie rim on my enduro bike last week in Texas (full slam into hard limestone). Replacement is $170. I feel that's fair, I got more than 8 years out of this particular one. It's i30 and 420g and beefy. I also got a one-up front hub for the build and DB spokes are coming from Nextie for me to build.

The great thing is it still held air tubeless, so I was able to keep riding last week with no worry, even with the cracked rim.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
22,090
7,349
borcester rhymes
regarding downcountry forks- anybody spend time on the new manitou stuff? I heard good things from NSMB on the R7, and now the r8 is out with even fatter stanchions. It sounds like a win-win
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
20,500
10,972
AK
regarding downcountry forks- anybody spend time on the new manitou stuff? I heard good things from NSMB on the R7, and now the r8 is out with even fatter stanchions. It sounds like a win-win
I wanted a new race fork for the upcoming season, the R8 was a contender...but I do generally dislike their spring system for making it difficult to get dialed in (can't over-pressurize and let out through the top). The Avy damped 34 is great, but the open bath makes it 4lbs or so and the newer FIT-damped 34 was harsh as F. I also lost the rebound adjuster recently on the Mezzer...but I was still thinking R8 based on the damping reviews if the price was right. Price is up at about 1K wherever I look...so I went with the Ohlins RXC M.1. I'm hoping this is well suited to rocky stuff with real damping. Given how much damping the regular Ohlins stuff seems to have, I'm optimistic. For downcountry though, I'd think the M.2 would be the hot ticket, since it goes 130 and 140mm.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
89,395
27,613
media blackout
regarding downcountry forks- anybody spend time on the new manitou stuff? I heard good things from NSMB on the R7, and now the r8 is out with even fatter stanchions. It sounds like a win-win
the R8 has the same stanchions size as the mattoc. mattoc weighs more, but has an arguably better spring and damper. the R8 seems more pure XC fork to me.

edit to add: the mattoc's travel is 110-150, R8 is 80-120. the mattoc would be stiffer than the R8 where the travel settings overlap (increased bushing overlap)
 
Last edited:

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
22,090
7,349
borcester rhymes
Thanks homies. I have my trust issues if I am after something dumb and big and with good damping. I'm looking to min/max and see if I can trim weight off the front, but I'm in no hurry. The ohlins is another looker, but manitou was interesting based on reviews.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
89,395
27,613
media blackout
Thanks homies. I have my trust issues if I am after something dumb and big and with good damping. I'm looking to min/max and see if I can trim weight off the front, but I'm in no hurry. The ohlins is another looker, but manitou was interesting based on reviews.
it certainly depends on what your goals are, what your riding style is, and how much you weigh.

like for my current build, i went with a 36 over a 34 for the same reason (stiffness over weight savings). come to think of it, that was the 36 i bought from you.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
22,090
7,349
borcester rhymes
it certainly depends on what your goals are, what your riding style is, and how much you weigh.

like for my current build, i went with a 36 over a 34 for the same reason (stiffness over weight savings). come to think of it, that was the 36 i bought from you.
THAT was a good fork. I ran it in the same manner- 130mm up front 36 with 120mm in the rear. This is much the same, but with 113mm in the rear. I just think tech has come so far that you can get away with a lighter fork with similar capabilities, and I wouldn't mind taking advantage of that
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
89,395
27,613
media blackout
THAT was a good fork. I ran it in the same manner- 130mm up front 36 with 120mm in the rear. This is much the same, but with 113mm in the rear. I just think tech has come so far that you can get away with a lighter fork with similar capabilities, and I wouldn't mind taking advantage of that
tech has definitely improved - especially with companies using larger diameter stanchions for XC forks (like the 35mm Sid), but tech can only get you so far when you're a clydesdale.

:homer: