Quantcast

New Whip? New toys for the dependable steed?

djjohnr

Turbo Monkey
Apr 21, 2002
3,021
1,729
Northern California

Bikael Molton

goofy for life
Jun 9, 2003
4,029
1,168
El Lay
How much did that run you?


Got the bushings in my Lyrik sized; Fluid Focus posted an after video of it on Instagram. Good to know I wasn't imagining things :D

 

bullcrew

3 Dude Approved
Got the bushings in my Lyrik sized; Fluid Focus posted an after video of it on Instagram. Good to know I wasn't imagining things :D

Not a huge fan of fluid focus they are a 5 min walk from my house...just difference of opinions..good co I'm sure.

But instructional videos are also always good...lol
 
Last edited:

djjohnr

Turbo Monkey
Apr 21, 2002
3,021
1,729
Northern California
Not a huge fan of fluid focus they are a 5 min walk from my house...just difference of opinions..good co I'm sure.

But instructional videos are also always good...lol
First time I've used them. Customer service and communication were good, no complaints. What issues have you run into with them?
 

Nick

My name is Nick
Sep 21, 2001
24,084
14,760
where the trails are
^^^ that does look like smooooooth action though.

A basic lower service on RS forks is so easy, everyone should perform them moar regularly.
My fork is always buttery after a lower drop, cleaning and fresh oil.
 

djjohnr

Turbo Monkey
Apr 21, 2002
3,021
1,729
Northern California
^^^ that does look like smooooooth action though.

A basic lower service on RS forks is so easy, everyone should perform them moar regularly.
My fork is always buttery after a lower drop, cleaning and fresh oil.
I probably do a lowers service every couple of months. This one felt sticky out of the box in comparison to the two 2019 Lyriks I had and my 2020 Boxxer.
 

slyfink

Turbo Monkey
Sep 16, 2008
9,349
5,098
Ottawa, Canada
Got my first ride in on my 165mm cranks today (down from 175). I definitely noticed I could pedal in some places I wouldn't have before, but I also definitely noticed I cant torque up the steep punchy climbs either. Like really noticed it.

I think I'll be able to adapt though. I hope.
 

jstuhlman

bagpipe wanker
Dec 3, 2009
16,711
13,060
Cackalacka du Nord
Got my first ride in on my 165mm cranks today (down from 175). I definitely noticed I could pedal in some places I wouldn't have before, but I also definitely noticed I cant torque up the steep punchy climbs either. Like really noticed it.

I think I'll be able to adapt though. I hope.
what size ring you running up front? maybe go up 2 teeth?
 

jstuhlman

bagpipe wanker
Dec 3, 2009
16,711
13,060
Cackalacka du Nord
i've run 170s + 34t on my nomad. it's been good. generally i like a bit bigger ring up front. whether the sciences back it up or not, i feel like i get moar torks; sad to have dropped from 175 but used to it now.
 

bullcrew

3 Dude Approved
First time I've used them. Customer service and communication were good, no complaints. What issues have you run into with them?
I'm sure they are a great company...
Haven't heard anything bad about how they run it...this was a local service issue and one individuals character...

Every business has some issues with someone that are off topic to the normal business...
 
Last edited:

StiHacka

Compensating for something
Jan 4, 2013
21,560
12,505
In hell. Welcome!
Very interesting thought.... That hadn't occurred to me. My front ring (32t oval) is close to being worn. A new 34 could be tried...
This is backwards. If shorter cranks give you less torque, you want to try a smaller front ring. Shorter cranks are great for faster spinning, worse for high torque mashing.
 

Flo33

Turbo Monkey
Mar 3, 2015
2,069
1,307
Styria
what size ring you running up front? maybe go up 2 teeth?
Maybe I'm missing something there, but why go up in chainring size when he is not able to get enough torque out of the shorter crank arms? A shorter lever reduces torque as does a higher number of teeth. Shouldn't he be going down instead to a 30t?

I did the same last year, went from 175 to 165 and definitely noticed the difference in required force, you have to pedal harder. But for me the benefits of less pedal strike chances outperform the higher strain for my poor legs.

edit: sniped by @StiHacka
 
Last edited:

slyfink

Turbo Monkey
Sep 16, 2008
9,349
5,098
Ottawa, Canada
This is backwards. If shorter cranks give you less torque, you want to try a smaller front ring. Shorter cranks are great for faster spinning, worse for high torque mashing.
Yeah. I was thinking this through on the shitter this morning, and I think *someone* was trying to fuck with me... :D
Maybe I'm missing something there, but why go up in chainring size when he is not able to get enough torque out of the shorter crank arms? A shorter lever reduces torque as does a higher number of teeth. Shouldn't he be going down instead to a 30t?

I did the same last year, went from 175 to 165 and definitely noticed the difference in required force, you have to pedal harder. But for me the benefit of less pedal strike chances outperform the higher strain for my poor legs.

edit: sniped by @StiHacka
My strength has always been strength. I have very large quads and calves so I can deliver lots of power. Spinning has always been my weak spot. I figure giving up a little bit of power in favour of reducing pedals strikes would be worth it. Time will tell.

I noticed two things yesterday: less ultimate power in a steep, wet, rooty climb. But I could also pedal into it later, and pedal out of it sooner. The times I'd made that particular climb previously I used momentum to get 3/4 of the way up, did a bit of a track stand, and then just torqued the fuck out of the last bit. This time, I made it to the same spot, but couldn't get the power down.

I think adapting to the shorter cranks will take some time, and entail modifying my approach to these sorts of sections. I think I can make it work, I guess I'll give it a season before making up my mind.

I liked that I could pedal in more places, and cornering was pretty cool too, as I could get on the gas sooner out of the turn...
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
19,016
9,674
AK
Maybe I'm missing something there, but why go up in chainring size when he is not able to get enough torque out of the shorter crank arms? A shorter lever reduces torque as does a higher number of teeth. Shouldn't he be going down instead to a 30t?

I did the same last year, went from 175 to 165 and definitely noticed the difference in required force, you have to pedal harder. But for me the benefit of less pedal strike chances outperform the higher strain for my poor legs.

edit: sniped by @StiHacka
Because if you use an AB oval and their chain lube, the bike will literally pedal itself from how many watts you save.