Foe's '05 site is up...
- Thread starter Incubus
- Start date
Nice rotors 
Hey could you find a bigger picture?
Bro, you're killing the dial up users with that attachment. Maybe just provide the link for future reference.
Anyway, looks good, but I'm not sure about that top tube bulge at the headtube. Few other notes of change:
Relaxed HA from 67.75 to 67.25
Only two travel setting instead of the three on the older models
Floating brake arm is now an *option* :mumble:
Most obvious (duh!) full length top tube
Don't have last years spec's to compare weights, but I believe the '05's are lighter
Anyway, still like their entire line up. Dead sexy....
Anyway, looks good, but I'm not sure about that top tube bulge at the headtube. Few other notes of change:
Relaxed HA from 67.75 to 67.25
Only two travel setting instead of the three on the older models
Floating brake arm is now an *option* :mumble:
Most obvious (duh!) full length top tube
Don't have last years spec's to compare weights, but I believe the '05's are lighter
Anyway, still like their entire line up. Dead sexy....
is this thing with the shock being linkage driven just for the new fly or did the previous one have that feature too?
The outgoing model had the swing-link as well. Every Foes has one for that matter.vitox said:
Pic hyperlink removed.
Dial up? What's that?surfinguru said:
I really like the Fly in Silver...
Top notch craftsmanship on their entire lineup. Props to Foes.
Top notch craftsmanship on their entire lineup. Props to Foes.
Actually the fly is the only one with a linkage driven shock, the others do have a linkage to stiffen the rear triangle though.Incubus said:
surfinguru said:Bro, you're killing the dial up users with that attachment. Maybe just provide the link for future reference.
Anyway, looks good, but I'm not sure about that top tube bulge at the headtube. Few other notes of change:
Relaxed HA from 67.75 to 67.25
Only two travel setting instead of the three on the older models
Floating brake arm is now an *option* :mumble:
Most obvious (duh!) full length top tube
Don't have last years spec's to compare weights, but I believe the '05's are lighter
Anyway, still like their entire line up. Dead sexy....
I agree. The bulge looks a little odd, - if it does not add strength I think I had prefered it was not there. Just having a feeling that it might be a weak link in a crash...on the other hand...it might prove opposit
I'll be racing the new Fly at Fontana this weekend. We'll see how it goes. Stay tuned.
thats why i dont drive a fast car, because i worry too much about the horse and buggy usersIncubus said:Dial up? What's that?
:devil:
Nice!zedro said:
Definitlely look forward to the recap there rich
That site really hates firefox 
God, that new Fly is hot
God, that new Fly is hot
really? works fine for me. Are you running 1.0?Chibo said:That site really hates firefox
God, that new Fly is hot
yeah, works fine for mezedro said:
Yeah, compiled with Athlon XP tweaks on Slackware Linux... I have to position the mouse just right for it to scroll where I want it to.
either way, off topic, sorry
:
either way, off topic, sorry
:
According to Brent, they are two pounds lighter than the '04's. I'm going to sell my mono and run one until I get cleared to race DH again. The new look in person is pretty nice actually. Sleek and simple.surfinguru said:Don't have last years spec's to compare weights, but I believe the '05's are lighter
Anyway, still like their entire line up. Dead sexy....
DH Diva said:
Is this current info? According to the new Foes site the '05 weighs 9.5 lbs. The '04 site listed the Fly as 9.9 lbs. Both size small with the floating brake.
As much as it would be nice I can't see the frame coming in at 2 lbs lighter.
As far as looks I first thought it was cool but for some reason the more I look at it the less I like it. I have been wanting to get one for a while, maybe I should get one of the 04's before they are gone.
I spoke with Brent at Interbike so that's pretty current info. The '03 cataloge (not sure about the '04, but the bikes were almost identical) lists frame weight at 10.5, and not 9.9.Salami said:
Listed frame weights are all a big game. All companies play the game, and rarely are listed frame weights entirely reflective of the true weight with all the bells and whistles. It's like listing a fork weight without the axle. It doesn't make sense, but one company does it, so the rest start doing it too.
All I can say is I've known brent for several years now and he's a straight shooter. He told me the frame weight was 2 pounds less then the previous models and from hands on experience with both the new and old frames, I believe it.
linkage looks different... I like the old style better, but thats just for the style, lighter is good.
The F1 XTD fork looks pretty sick! and with rotor, hub, brake mounts n all.
The F1 XTD fork looks pretty sick! and with rotor, hub, brake mounts n all.
Yes, - the XTD is just looking awesome !!
I still scratch my head on a daily basis trying to figure out how he charges such a high price tag on a DH frame that has been around for so many years...and yes I do know that he has made many minute tweaks over the years but....
people do pay the price, right?
so why not ask as much as possible, if the number of frames sold is still high enough for Foes to continue building it.
for the record imho the DHS mono is still one of the best bikes out there
so why not ask as much as possible, if the number of frames sold is still high enough for Foes to continue building it.
for the record imho the DHS mono is still one of the best bikes out there
I think people would be surprised to know how small the profit margin really is on a high end, hand made frame like the Foes bikes. The reason the Foes bikes are so expensive is because almost everything is done in house. I think right now the only thing not done in house is paint and heat treating. It also makes costs higher when your doing all your own shock production.UiUiUiUi said:
The trade off is that quality control is much higher because they know exactly what goes in to each frame, resulting in a higher quality product to the consumer. Brent is a perfectionist and that shows in the quality of his product. Doing all your own work cost a lot of money.
But, they also try and find methods of production that will lower the price of their bikes. The new frame design of the fly was driven largely in part by the fact that the older design was so complex that it took a really long time to produce one frame, and that drives the cost up. They redesigned the frame so that it has the same ride characteristics, but is much simpler to make. This brought the consumer price down also.
Looks like a simple 'swing link' to me. Doesn't look like a linkage driven shock design.Kornphlake said:
I think what Kornphlake is saying is that the Fly is the only one that actually has a shock attached to the swing-link...
BTW... I made the ROTW page!
http://www.foesracing.com/family.cfm?view=rotw Woohoo!
BTW... I made the ROTW page!
http://www.foesracing.com/family.cfm?view=rotw Woohoo!
still looks like a small linkage to me, check out the number of bolts, it looks to be a small link attached to the rear triangle and then the bone shaped link attached to the top tube, the small link and the top tube, but what do I know, except how to make run-on sentences?!
A good example of their stellar customer service is their reaction to the pre-2002.5 flys with bottle mounts in the DT. IIRC, they replaced all of those front triangles.DH Diva said:
you should take another look, quite easy to see the shock is attached to the linkagePsychO!1 said:
Yes, your right, the shock is attached to the linkage. Does that really make it linkage driven?? Maybe I'm not understanding your version of this concept.zedro said:
What I see is the shock mounted to the linkage at the same point the swingarm is.....essentially making a swinglink. I mean, you could fasten the shock directly to the swingarm, and not change the rate at which the shock is compressed. I see the linkage as ONLY stiffening the rear end and having no effect on the shock.
If the shock was mounted to the center of the linkage, while the swingarm was mounted to it's current location......that would be more like what I think your describing.
What is your definition of 'linkage driven'??
Congrats! Thats twice now......ChainWhip said:
a shock that is driven by linkage...PsychO!1 said:
the linkage in question does alter the shock rate in much the same way it does on the Yeti ASX (among others), although the effect may not be as significant as some other linkage designs, it still exists.
if you look closer youll see the link. Its really short.....PsychO!1 said:
Zed,zedro said:
Upon closer inspection, I can see there is another mounting position for the shock on the linkage, which supports your argument. Thanks for the explanation.
I checked out the rest of the line up to see if any other models had a shock mounted to the 'swinglink', but none. Soooo, seems the more I learn, the more Zed is right.
Don't forget KornphlakePsychO!1 said:Zed,
Upon closer inspection, I can see there is another mounting position for the shock on the linkage, which supports your argument. Thanks for the explanation.
I checked out the rest of the line up to see if any other models had a shock mounted to the 'swinglink', but none. Soooo, seems the more I learn, the more Zed is right.
Yes.....Kornphlake was right from the start. But it does look just like a swinglink!! (trying to save just a little dignity)
PsychO!1 said:
Ok, ok... I can feel you on that...
You still have dignity in my book!
I own an '04 Fly w/Ti Curnutt and I love it. The new look of the '05 is not bad at all. I still love the look of the '04 and below though.
Anyone have any idea how many Flys were made with the 1.5 headtube? I have only seen one and it was being sold on mtbr.com
Anyone have any idea how many Flys were made with the 1.5 headtube? I have only seen one and it was being sold on mtbr.com