[dexter]

didnt weight my frame but shortly i should have a 38-39lbs r9 that has a super solid parts spec. r9's just get built heavily due to the owners choice. if i built mine up paying retail pricing, nothing for free, etc etc it would cost no more than say 5g's without my ti bolts. thats pretty reasonable for a light, strong as hell, great riding bike that will never let you down (its been the rider letting the bike down all last season and this off season due to stupid injuries which suck ass but thats a different topic)

 

[bikenweed]

Oh, and my Demo broke after Whistler. An engineer from SC clarified that the frames broke from side impacts. I am definitely a hack, and my jelly donut's down A-line and Dirt Merchant were most likely the cause of the break. If you consider drops less than 8 feet "gnarcore huckcore", then you could say it broke freeriding. Otherwise all it saw was a few kick outs. They claim to have fixed this problem, and hopefully have.

It's a great freeride bike, and it rocks on slow, technical trails, but high speeds aren't it's bag. And it is heavy. That means not a great race bike, at least IMO. They don't really break anywhere else besides the cold forged web, at least as far as I have seen, so if that gets fixed, game on. I looked pretty closely at a new Demo8, and the cold forging looked identical, but with more paint on it. Hmmmm. Where are you going to be racing? Demo8 for techy stuff, R9 for faster stuff.

 

[bomberboy11]

I don't like dredging up old threads, but I'm in the same debate between the Demo 8 and R9 frames right now (and maybe a newer v10). Pretty much, I ride a lot of really rocky stuff (Santa Barbara style if anyone is familiar), so I want a bike that I can charge the really crazy gnarly stuff as fast as possible. The main improvement I would like the frame to have over my current frame (Stab Primo) is the cornering ability, which is why the R9's chainstay length over that of the Demo 8 kinda scares me (17.5 vs. 16.8). Both frames have the low CG/CM going for them, but I'd like to know from riders who have spent time on both what their experiences were in those departments. Also if anyone has an R9 in SB/Socal, is there any way I could give it a quick test ride?

 

[Bicyclist]

DEMO! It's ideal for slow tech stuff (cough SB cough) 'cause of the short stays and manuverability. I don't have any problems w/ mine at speed, and I love it everywhere.

If you want an SB bike you want a Demo. In SB, bikes have to be very quick, manuverable, and still feel good on steep sketchy stuff. That describes a Demo's ride.

And a Demo 8 II is 42 out of the box, and Demos can easily be brought into the 30's w/ some money. Mine was 41.25 on a digi scale w/ a steel spring, heavy bars, and nothing expensive at all. I've put about $2000 into my Demo, and that includes the original purchase price 'cause I bought new. Once I get a new chainguide and a couple other bits like ti spring and maybe fork I hope to get into the 30's.

 

[Jeremy R]

I don't like dredging up old threads, but I'm in the same debate between the Demo 8 and R9 frames right now (and maybe a newer v10). Pretty much, I ride a lot of really rocky stuff (Santa Barbara style if anyone is familiar), so I want a bike that I can charge the really crazy gnarly stuff as fast as possible. The main improvement I would like the frame to have over my current frame (Stab Primo) is the cornering ability, which is why the R9's chainstay length over that of the Demo 8 kinda scares me (17.5 vs. 16.8). Both frames have the low CG/CM going for them, but I'd like to know from riders who have spent time on both what their experiences were in those departments. Also if anyone has an R9 in SB/Socal, is there any way I could give it a quick test ride?

As obvious by this thread, you are just going to have to find a way to ride them both. You are not going to get anything here but fan boy speak. There is so much wrong in the first page of this thread that it is painful to look at.
Good Luck.

 

[bomberboy11]

Jeremy R - that's why I just made the post to get my questions answered...

Bicyclist - Since when is SB slow or steep? In my experience, it's pretty flat in most parts and is just no brakes for most of it - ie. fast rocks. Plenty of square edged hits though which is what this next frame will need to excel with.

Weight is not a really huge issue for me as long as the weight is low. Like I said, has to corner well, and be REALLY good in the rocks and the chatter.

 

[SBDownhillRacer]

besides knapps castle and ramaro there are a lot of tricky rock gardens scattered through out the trails, and if one does not have the exact line through, they can be very difficult and sometimes will cause a rider to slow down to make the right adjustments.

 

[Bicyclist]

Jeremy R - that's why I just made the post to get my questions answered...

Bicyclist - Since when is SB slow or steep? In my experience, it's pretty flat in most parts and is just no brakes for most of it - ie. fast rocks. Plenty of square edged hits though which is what this next frame will need to excel with.

Weight is not a really huge issue for me as long as the weight is low. Like I said, has to corner well, and be REALLY good in the rocks and the chatter.

What I mean by steep is sudden drops and chutes where you've got to stay back, and by slow I mean not Kamikaze fast.

I guess I'm thinking of Tunnel more than anything else, but the Demo is good pretty much everywhere. It takes corners and chatter exceptionally well.

 

[SPrider]

i say you get a demo 8, hey what is this i have waitin for you ONE

 

[julian_dh]

i think there two really different bikes. all the demos i rode, 2005 ones felt like crap with the super short chainstays and it was an extremly rough and jittery ride, maby with the longer chainstays it could be better but as a downhill bike i would steer clear of it.

the sinister i heard runs like 40% sag and is a real stick to the ground race bike.

 

[Bicyclist]

i say you get a demo 8, hey what is this i have waitin for you ONE

Do it. :hot: That's a ridiculously good deal!

 

[Mike Buell]

yeah im 5.7/8. but i am also 15. sooooooo.......i still got some hieght left in me. in terms of like freeride capibilities, do i think the R9 is lacking in that department. i mean i still want to be able to rip up dominion and i think the demo would be better for that, but i will also be racing. do u think that the demo is racible for sure?

Dirt Mag a few months ago did a review on the R9 and those guys loved it for freeriding, and just about everything else. I'd say if your in a deadlock support the smaller local company.

 

[RaID]

Having only ridden the Demo it's not a plough bike but more finesse bike maybe not as much as a Turner but you cant just point and shoot over everything and expect to get away with it.

By the sounds of the comments here and the geo numbers the R9 is a more plough bike.

Youre either a finness rider, a little in between or plough rider. I think based on your type of riding and in which direction you want your riding to go the correct bike should pop out straight away. Well I know it does for me especially out of these 2 choices.

 

[SuspectDevice]

R9's run 17.2 chainstays, They haven't had 17.5" stays since the first run of 6 in '03.

As far as R9's in Socal, I know that Jeff Holt@DLX may have one, but he is a little heavier than 170. Clysdale on this board used to work for Sinister and is in Santa Barbara, but he is more like 300 pounds.

If you are looking to demo a bike it's best to send an email to Skye@sinisterbikes.com He's the sales manager, and certainly knows where all of the stocking dealers are better than I do.

There are goin to be a bunch of R9's in Peru this weekend, so you could always make the trip down there!

 

[say 10]

R9's run 17.2 chainstays, They haven't had 17.5" stays since the first run of 6 in '03.

Really? I've got an '04 and the stays are 17.5 (99% sure)..... would be nice to feel a shorter stay....I'll have to measure when I get home for sanity.

 

[nh dude]

There are goin to be a bunch of R9's in Peru this weekend, so you could always make the trip down there!

good luck mark!

 

[dexter]

well coming off of a dh9 ro an r9 turning is like a semi to a porshe. your best bet is to ride both and go from their. just make sure both are set up properly, if not they will both feel crummy

 

[vallEbikes]

Maybe the Sinister has more "soul" or whatever it is that people like to call it, but refined or attention to detail I think could very well be debated in favor of the Specialized?



Word

sinister has excellent attention to detail, they are all made by one guy, who is the best welder in the industry.

FTW used to weld for yeti, who has great bikes.

also the r9 is a refined version of the original motor head. So it is much more refined than a demo, which has been out for a year

 

[bomberboy11]

SPrider - I saw that a day or two ago. I need a medium!! ****!

 

[ilfreerider]

just my 2 cents regarding the demo 8 -
with alot of bikes i felt that there are some tradeoffs for every positive thing :
demo 9 , plush as hell but very heavy and sluggish.
dhr ,very sharp but sketchy at "plowing mode".
wilson ,stable at speeds but a tad sluggish in the corners.
gemini dh ,very snappy and manuverable but a pain to keep in a straight line at speeds.

and so on.

with the demo 8 ,i feel that the bike is very good at all areas :
plows well in any terrain , corners amazingly ,easy to jump and bunnyhop ,pedal pretty good for a fsr bike ,has an average weight and all in all has a great feel to it.
i just dont have anything negative to say about it ,whereas with every other bike i rode ,there was always that little somthing that i wished was different.


a side note - to many pepole say stuff about a bike based on numbers - "the short 16.7 inches cs makes it feel sketchy etc etc...
nobody says ït just feels sketchy ,period. whats with that?

 

[rigidhack]

a side note - to many pepole say stuff about a bike based on numbers - "the short 16.7 inches cs makes it feel sketchy etc etc...
nobody says ït just feels sketchy ,period. whats with that?

A lot of people say "it feels sketchy" or "it sux." The numbers at least give a reason as to why this might be.

I have not spent any time on the Demo, and limited time on the R9, but the R9 sure was nice. I disagree that it feels steep. I hopped on (which felt more like "in") and felt pretty much right at home (which is rare for me).

 

[bomberboy11]

Okay, so I took it upon myself to figure out if the R9 is just really damn long or the Demo 8 is just really damn short. Here's some geometry comparisons (R9, Demo 8, new V10, Stab Primo, 303, DHR, Sunday).

Chainstay
R9 - 17.5
Demo 8 - 16.8
V10 - 17.5
Stab Primo - 17.5
303 - 17.6
DHR - 17.5
Sunday - 17.25

TT (For med/large framesets where applicable)
R9 - 23.5
Demo 8 - 23.0/23.8
V10 - 23.23/24.21
Stab Primo - 23.8/24.7
303 - 23/24
DHR - 21.5/22.6
Sunday - 23.5/24.5

BB
R9 - 14.5
Demo 8 - 14.4/15.1
V10 - 14.8
Stab Primo - 15
303 - 14-15
DHR - 14.6
Sunday - 13.9 (**** that's low...)

HA
R9 - 67
Demo 8 -66/67.5
V10 - 67.5
Stab Primo - 65.8
303 - 66-64
DHR - 65
Sunday - 65

And a big thanks to Specialized for providing their dimensions in metric just to make things difficult.

So, coming off my Stab, the R9 will have the same CS length (probably shorter once it sags with the different wheelpaths), pretty much the same TT since I'm on a medium Stab now, lower BB, and steeper HA.

The Demo 8 would have shorter CS and TT lengths than the Stab, so I would probably feel like I was riding a BMX bike (may or may not be a good thing - I'm 6'1 so this might feel really awkward), and the HA/BB would be about the same but maybe slightly steeper on the HA.

The purpose of comparing the other frames was to just to see how long the R9 was compared to the rest of the mainstream DH frames - conclusion: not much, if at all. It would be nearly identical geometry to the new V10. The length difference is negligable, and if anything, I would say that the Demo 8 is really on the short side instead of the R9 being a limo (looks are certainely deceiving - looking at the R9 it seems extremely long probably because it's so low). In fact, the R9 seems to be spot on for having high speed stability and cornering ability. Now I just have to determine how that pivot point will behave in the really rocky stuff.

Another thing that interested me was the shock rate progression Sinister advertises on the website. The Demo 8 is progressive as well, starting at 3.3:1 and declining linearly to around 2.8:1. If anything I would like the first few inches of travel to have a really high leverage ratio that drops down quickly like that of the V10's to keep it plush and progressive. I know there are people on this board who are really mechanically inclined like myself: anyone have any insight into this or perhaps a leverage curve? Also, how do the 3 lower shock mounts on the rocker plate affect the leverage? Normally this kind of thing is obvious but I'm having a hard time making sense out of this one..

 

[SuspectDevice]

Okay, none of those R9 numbers are right at all


Chainstay, 17.2
BB 14.25
Headangle 66
Wheelbase 66.5" (the shorties are 65")

Those numbers are with a 8" boxxer dropped all the way in the crowns.

The leverage positions only change the intial leverage ratios markedly. The mid-stroke and ending stroke pretty much stay the same. There is a slight increase in travel over the 3 positons, about a 1/4" so obviously there is a little change at the end of the stroke. The bike is very soft in the initial stroke, and firms up noticably at sag height. FTW calls it riding on the "pillow".

I will point FTW over to this thread and he will fill you in more fully.

 

[Unimog]

I rode a R9 with an avalanche rear shock and found it to have great feeling and working rear suspension, it was amazingly plush initially, but ramped up nicely. It handled rough, rocky, rooty trails easily.

 

[bomberboy11]

Okay, none of those R9 numbers are right at all


Chainstay, 17.2
BB 14.25
Headangle 66
Wheelbase 66.5" (the shorties are 65")

Those numbers are with a 8" boxxer dropped all the way in the crowns.

That's interesting. I pulled those numbers straight off the website for the R9 - could be outdated and an older version, but the shorter chainstay and even lower BB is certainely a little more promising.

The wheelbase is 66.5"??? Um? I thought wheelbases should be around 45-48 inches. Maybe you meant 46.5"??

Thanks for the referral. I'd like to see what FTW says the sag should be since I've seen a variety of numbers thrown around for it. Smart to have the leverage drop right around that point as well.

 

[bballe336]

That's interesting. I pulled those numbers straight off the website for the R9 - could be outdated and an older version, but the shorter chainstay and even lower BB is certainely a little more promising.

The wheelbase is 66.5"??? Um? I thought wheelbases should be around 45-48 inches. Maybe you meant 46.5"??

Thanks for the referral. I'd like to see what FTW says the sag should be since I've seen a variety of numbers thrown around for it. Smart to have the leverage drop right around that point as well.

Yeah he means 46.5. And for sag most of the guys run 40-60 percent sag.

 

[SuspectDevice]

DOH!

Yes, lots of things on the website need to be updated.... A whole new site is in the works.

 

[bomberboy11]

So I'm dragging this thread up yet again. I'm still stuck between the Demo 8 and R9 choices. It looks like the R9 wheelbase is 46.5 for the newer ones and the Demo 8 wheelbase is 46.6 for the medium and 47.4. The geometry on the Demo seems to be totally whack (meaning the TT/CS/WB numbers don't really add up right), so it seems like the cockpit of the bike is just positioned way forward from where the BB is. In any case, I don't plan on sitting much, so the medium Demo and the R9 seem to have almost the same wheelbase but with shorter chainstays on the Demo.

My reason for dragging this thread up again is that the deciding factor between these frames, since I can get them both for nearly the same price, is how each suspension setup will handle in the rocks. I know the R9 is a lower pivot, which is usually not the best thing for rocks and better for corners, but is cited almost always to be a plow bike. With all that said, I'm looking for input from people who have experience on either one or both in really fast rocky stuff (think Santa Barbara again) and can comment on the suspensions behavior over sharp hits at high speed. My riding style is kind of plowing while pumping through the rocks as well, so I guess a mix of plowing as well as finesse (maybe I'm better sticking with my Stab Primo if that is better at that technique than either of these bikes??). So like I said, I'm looking for input based on the behavior of the suspension, regardless of the geometry of either frame.

 

[bballe336]

Well the R9 Isn't a heavy frame, it just has a lot of travel. So depending on how you set it up the bike could be finnessed or plowed. The R9 handles rocks very well. Where I ride it is all rocks and there are 2 guys with R9's. The bike seem to handle very well. And when you are running 4-5 inches of sag the bike will pretty much just float over things like you are on a pillow.

 

[verticult]

I can only tell you how the R9 was developed and what I was thinking and how I still think. I want to win races and be competitive. I can make the bike any way I want. I don't care what is "popular" (beyond trying it just to see) and I don't care how many frames I can fit on a boat. I don't care how they cost to produce. Short stays are "fun". they feel fast. Balanced weight distribution is far more important. Short stays are great for wheelie drops. cool, buy a demo and go freeriding. short stays require a wider BB that causes a slightly less effecient spin, the seat mast would have to be closer to the front of the bike, leg extension is very important if you must sit to pedal on longer courses (yes, I admit I have to sit sometimes) the R9 has very low unsprung weight (the part of the suspension that moves is light) this makes the suspension work better. the head angle is a great "average" for sport and expert courses from east to west. Sure it's cool if a pro wins on a R9 but it's far more important if you do. The R9 has very even weight and traction distribution. this means you may not have to "dab" your foot on that slick off-camber turn. is this important? yes, it is very important. High enough BB to pedal through turns, low enough to pedal FAST through turns. (remember narrow too) Whats important to me is fast from "OK Frank, you got 5 seconds" through me telling myself I can turn the cranks one more time and hearing those words over the screaming coming from my legs and lungs. Walk the course with me and lets talk about lines and where we can shave a second or two. What matters to you? did I spend a hundred hours on a computer designing the frame? no, more like a few thousand. Finite material analysis, no, but isin't it funny that my bike weighs the same as those that did but breaks less? Sorry I don't know what profit margin some mail order shop makes but you could wake anyone who works here at 3am and they will know my downtube is alcoa 6061 drawn 1-3/4"X.083. Some one posted "it's a plow bike" I wonder where that comes from because simply looking at ad hype or doing a couple of runs on someone elses set-up is a gross over simplifcation of what it takes to improve your personal performance. Granted, some bikes are better in tight situations and some at 50 MPH but you need a bike that can be tuned and adapted to the conditions of your situation. I can't make anyone understand what we went through when we shortened the rear 1/4".. it took weeks of thought and many heated arguments and OK, it's better 1/4" shorter. I still have my longer swing arm if I need it (you can borrow it if you need it) I don't know what else I can tell you or how much you can read of this raving but I wanted you readers and racers to know what we are about.. Now I got some f***king bikes to weld.. out.. F

 

[dexter]

I can only tell you how the R9 was developed and what I was thinking and how I still think. I want to win races and be competitive. I can make the bike any way I want. I don't care what is "popular" (beyond trying it just to see) and I don't care how many frames I can fit on a boat. I don't care how they cost to produce. Short stays are "fun". they feel fast. Balanced weight distribution is far more important. Short stays are great for wheelie drops. cool, buy a demo and go freeriding. short stays require a wider BB that causes a slightly less effecient spin, the seat mast would have to be closer to the front of the bike, leg extension is very important if you must sit to pedal on longer courses (yes, I admit I have to sit sometimes) the R9 has very low unsprung weight (the part of the suspension that moves is light) this makes the suspension work better. the head angle is a great "average" for sport and expert courses from east to west. Sure it's cool if a pro wins on a R9 but it's far more important if you do. The R9 has very even weight and traction distribution. this means you may not have to "dab" your foot on that slick off-camber turn. is this important? yes, it is very important. High enough BB to pedal through turns, low enough to pedal FAST through turns. (remember narrow too) Whats important to me is fast from "OK Frank, you got 5 seconds" through me telling myself I can turn the cranks one more time and hearing those words over the screaming coming from my legs and lungs. Walk the course with me and lets talk about lines and where we can shave a second or two. What matters to you? did I spend a hundred hours on a computer designing the frame? no, more like a few thousand. Finite material analysis, no, but isin't it funny that my bike weighs the same as those that did but breaks less? Sorry I don't know what profit margin some mail order shop makes but you could wake anyone who works here at 3am and they will know my downtube is alcoa 6061 drawn 1-3/4"X.083. Some one posted "it's a plow bike" I wonder where that comes from because simply looking at ad hype or doing a couple of runs on someone elses set-up is a gross over simplifcation of what it takes to improve your personal performance. Granted, some bikes are better in tight situations and some at 50 MPH but you need a bike that can be tuned and adapted to the conditions of your situation. I can't make anyone understand what we went through when we shortened the rear 1/4".. it took weeks of thought and many heated arguments and OK, it's better 1/4" shorter. I still have my longer swing arm if I need it (you can borrow it if you need it) I don't know what else I can tell you or how much you can read of this raving but I wanted you readers and racers to know what we are about.. Now I got some f***king bikes to weld.. out.. F

what he said. i love my whole slew of sinisters

 

[Fulton]

The R9 is a great east coast bike. Infact it's a great bike for anything. Ask anyone who rides one. Plus specialized can't touch the CS or quality of Sinister. FTW is arguably the best welder in the indsutry.

Sinister can't touch Specialized's lifetime warranty...

curious, in reference to the mba article that talked about the R9 being "east coast";

When did "east coast" change from shorter wheelbases, shorter stays, higher bb height, and steeper angles to ultra slack and ultra long?

Isn't the R9 geometry basically mirroring all of the "west coast" bikes, or maybe to put it better; "everyone else".??

exactly what I was thinking.

 

[JRogers]

Way too much talk about this.

Have you ridden both frames? If not, then just pick one randomly. How it feels when you ride it is the most important part, so if we skip that, then there's not a whole lot to talk about.

The Demo and the R9 are both high quality. Both can win races. Both ride well and have people who love them. Both are well constructed, have no glaring errors, have good companies behind them. Simply, the choice doesn't matter too much.

 

[bballe336]

Sinister can't touch Specialized's lifetime warranty...



exactly what I was thinking.

Specialized will not build you a custom demo if you break yours. There is only 1 R9 that has ever been broken. The owner was given a reinforced frame as warranty replacement. And for the geometry thing: if you had read what Frank said you would realize he spent tons of time and built a bike with numbers that work. The bike is built in a way that feels good and rides well not in a way that makes it super popular.

 

[bomberboy11]

Well I didn't get too much feedback about the suspension handling through the rough stuff, but it seems like the R9 might be able to run a bit more sag than the Demo which will eat up the rocks easier and slacken out the bike a bit. I'm toying with the idea of getting my Avalanche resized to 9.25" in length to make it slightly slacker and lower, but I'll probably ride it with the 9.5" for a while first.

I like this FTW guys attitude. I would really personally rather ride one of his bikes than something mass produced as long as it's going to hold up to non-stop beatings and there's a good customer friendly company behind it, and it seems like Sinister fits that just fine. I'm good at breaking bike parts including frames, and if that record of only one R9 being broken is true, that is far better than the Demos record so far. I would be curious to know how many Demo/R9 frames have been produced and how many have been broken (already know the # of broken R9's obviously) for comparison.

 

[bballe336]

Well I didn't get too much feedback about the suspension handling through the rough stuff, but it seems like the R9 might be able to run a bit more sag than the Demo which will eat up the rocks easier and slacken out the bike a bit. I'm toying with the idea of getting my Avalanche resized to 9.25" in length to make it slightly slacker and lower, but I'll probably ride it with the 9.5" for a while first.

I like this FTW guys attitude. I would really personally rather ride one of his bikes than something mass produced as long as it's going to hold up to non-stop beatings and there's a good customer friendly company behind it, and it seems like Sinister fits that just fine. I'm good at breaking bike parts including frames, and if that record of only one R9 being broken is true, that is far better than the Demos record so far. I would be curious to know how many Demo/R9 frames have been produced and how many have been broken (already know the # of broken R9's obviously) for comparison.

Basically the guy who broke the frame is over 300 pounds. Real tall and just a huge dude. Jamie Ford will be riding for sinister this year on an R9. He breaks more frames than anyone I have ever met and he has told me that he is confident that the R9 will hold up. You will NOT break an R9.

 

[bomberboy11]

I'm 175 lbs and I can break most anything if I put my mind to it. This sounds like a challenge.

 

[bballe336]

I'm 175 lbs and I can break most anything if I put my mind to it. This sounds like a challenge.

There are plenty of guys bigger than you who have no trouble with their R9's. Jamie Ford does 30 foot drops for fun, races semi pro, and has broken multiple DH frames. Basically if he isn't having trouble I don't think you will.

 

[dexter]

bomberboy, the best part about the sinister is when at proper sag, the angles and bb height are perfect, it slacks out and feels moneyyyyyyy

 

[dexter]

and ps my r9 survived a failer 360 atempt over a 20x15'er