[næstep]

link to the discussion over on empty beer: http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=327540

The August 07 issue of Mt. Biking Magazine has more than a few pages of 29-inch commentary. What caught my eye is their review of the Niner RIP9, which, I'm sure you'll agree, is almost too good to be true.

They also did write-ups on the Intense Spider, a GT and a Zion, plus a bunch of 29" forks, wheels, and tires.

Enjoy. Definitely pick a copy of the mag up if you want to send the message that their 29"er coverage is appreciated.

 

[MMcG]

Thanks for sharing Nate - but how about you providing a review of your personal RIP 9. What do you like, what don't ya like, what could be improved?

 

[næstep]

Thanks for sharing Nate - but how about you providing a review of your personal RIP 9. What do you like, what don't ya like, what could be improved?

I'm not ready for a full evaluation. Not just yet.

There is no doubt it's a fun, well rounded machine. It makes me want to pedal like hell anywhere the trail goes fast. Yet getting up the hill reminds me of my dw-link bikes, with just a touch of bob, but no pedal feedback (which *I think* I'm pretty sensitive to), and great traction.

The RIP9 is a solid climber, even with the tallish 130mm fork. I picked my frame size with the intention of running a short stem, combined with a Hopey damper to compensate. The Hopey isn't installed, and as expected, my front wheel likes to wander just a bit on the steeper climbs. But as is, it's manageable, and it doesn't take too much concentration to keep the front end planted.

Unfortunately, the White Fluid 130 (air sprung) fork isn't meeting my compliance expectations, and the coil sprung F135 must be coming by llama via some northern route, because I expected it weeks ago.

When the 135 finally arrives, I'll be able to cut the steerer to the correct length to install the Hopey, and the new fork's increased responsivness should keep me from bouncing around on the rougher of the steep climbs.

As you may or may not know, I am running a Marzocchi Roco Air in place of the stock Fox bumper. I didn't put any miles on the stock shock, so I have no basis for comparison. The Roco works well. The problem, if you can call it that, is that compared to the fork, it works too well. The bike is very mismatched when the terrain gets rough, and the 130 up front jolts me where the rear end feels great.

Because of that suspension mis-match, I just can't make a fair assessment of the RIP9's braking performance. And while it digs in and rails a clean line when the dirt is smooth, the hard front end is too tweaky to do much with on rougher cornering.

Almost as compensation (the first time out, I actually thought of it as cheating), I've got a Maverick Speedball with a remote kit installed. Where I have to throttle back just a touch for the choppy front end, my lower seating position lets me push just a little harder. Necessary? No. Crutch? Maybe. Fun? Hell yeah!

On a lark, I chose the RIP9 over my hardtail for the 24 Hours of Adrenaline at Laguna Seca in June. On the sandy, rutty singletrack descents that many were bitching about, I rocketed through without too much concern. A couple of the nastier turns slowed me down, again because the fork didn't want to play along. The final out-of-the-saddle sprinting climb was firm and not squishy at all; great power transfer as I huffed and puffed.

In many ways this bike mimics my last two 26" fullys -- my '03 Iron Horse Hollowpoint and my '05 IH MkIII. I "know" Niner's CVA suspension isn't a dw-link, but I'm having trouble sensing where they differ. Part of that I'll blame on the fork, because I feel like I haven't been able to "let it all hang out." Part I'll blame on the long stretch between when I last rode my MkIII, and when I first rode the RIP9: maybe a 7 or 8 month gap? And part of it, I'll blame on the Niner, because it isn't the same burly bike that the MkIII was. It hasn't got the same oversized pivots, and from ride #1 I sensed just a little bit of frame flex that *I'm pretty sure* wasn't on the last bike (or it could be because I was exclusively riding my hardtail for that 7 to 8 month gap).

In any case, I'm really pleased with the RIP9 so far. The bigger wheels were indeed the missing element that immediately made me regret building up my short lived MkIII. The wheel size makes enough of a difference on sketchy, bush-whacking descents, up steeper, grainy climbs, and across slithery, ankle-deep sand, that it was worth my trouble and expense to part out my custom Horse, which was truly a labor of love.

What could be improved, you ask? Get Weagle on board. Seriously. That guy doesn't just bring suspension theory to the table, he knows how to construct it. I honestly can't say the bike is missing it, but I'd love to see some gnarly oversized pivots, and a dw-link logo plastered to the chainstay. Oh, and maybe a slightly slacker seat tube angle, too.

I'll get the bike in a finished state sooner or later, and hope to get around to posting some more better prepared thoughts along with some pics. If I do, I'll share them here.

 

[MMcG]

Seems to me that Weagle isn't all that fond of the big wheels.

Nice review right there. Refresh it a bit when you get the new White Brothers on it for a few rides.