Sinister r9 question

Discussion in 'Downhill & Freeride' started by freakrock, Jan 3, 2008.

  1. freakrock

    freakrock Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    Messages:
    431
    Location:
    Santiago de Chile
    My pdc 825 is almost sold, and i'm looking for a frame to replace it.
    my budget allows me to buy something up to 1300.
    I'm strongly considering a v10; it is one of my favourite bikes but i don't know if i'll find one in decent shape for the money i've got; besides, i would like to try something else...
    i've always liked the looks on the r9, and never readed anything bad about it, so it seems like a good option.
    Coming from a 13.8" BB bike, i'm a little bit concerned about the 14.75" height claimed on sinister's site. I've read that the bike is designed to ride with about 40% sag. Is that true? that would make it low enough for me, i think.
    Are the angles shown on sinister's site measured with the shock mounted in the middle position? How much do these change when mounted in the other holes?
    Test riding one isn't an option because there aren't any r9s in my country.
    I'll love to hear anything you have to say about the bike... i used the search function but i couldn't find much usefull info.
     
    #1 -   Jan 3, 2008

    Please register to disable this ad.

  2. jcook90

    jcook90 Turbo Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    3 / 0
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,211
    Location:
    Connecticut
    The different holes in the rocker arm don't have any effect on the geometry of the bike in an unweighted situation, they just change the progressiveness/stiffness of the rear suspension, which could in turn affect the geometry. The upper hole is the stiffest and I believe less progressive setting, the lower hole being the opposite. Because of the progressiveness of the suspension, you can run %40 sag and be fine.

    http://www.sinisterbikes.com/sbforum/index.php might also want to join that forum, FTW I'm sure would be happy to help
     
    #2 -   Jan 3, 2008
  3. fred.r

    fred.r Dwangus Bogans

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    845
    The geo on Sinisters site isn't 100% correct. The bike is slacker and lower. My BB measures 14" exactly un-sagged. And I think the head angle is around 64 now (could be wrong on this one, haven't measured mine).
    As for how the bike handles; It's very long, so getting over the front end on this bike really helps in the corners. I don't notice any squat or pedal feed back really. The progressive nature of the bike is awesome. Soaks up the little stuff and the big stuff great without having to run much high-speed compression at all. I run quite a bit of low speed on it though. Pedals okay, but not great.
    Over all it's a great bike, and I would recommend it to anyone looking into a new DH rig.
     
    #3 -   Jan 3, 2008
  4. Jensen

    Jensen Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Messages:
    248
    Location:
    UC/SLO,ca
    Exactly what Fred said. My R9 also has a BB height of a hair over 14" unsagged, while the HT angle is within a degree of his numbers. they take a bit to get dialed in, but once you do, they haul ass. They are long, but so is a v10. Coincidentally i was on a v10 before going to the R9, and the r9's suspension in mounds better. To me, the v10 always felt like you were way to far into the travel, and to linear for my liking. The leverage ratios were also a little wack if you ask me, i think intense was a litter better with their design, but thats my opinion. The R9 is very progressive, especially in the middle hole. im running a romic right now with a 300 lb spring and the bike FLOATS over **** like you wouldn't believe, like no other bike i have ridden, can't imagine how it will be when my roco shows up. Also, i think the 2nd poster may have his info backwards, i BELIEVE that the top hole is the softest, having the most leverage on the shock, and the opposite for the lower hole, but i have never left it mounted in either of those holes for more than a couple hours. IF you want any specifics, PM me and ill see if i cant help ya out.
     
    #4 -   Jan 3, 2008
  5. McGRP01

    McGRP01 beer and bikes

    Rep/Likes:
    4 / 0
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    7,797
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    No, he was correct. Bottom hole is softest, top hole firmest. I just got a '07 R9 w/ DHX5.0.
     
    #5 -   Jan 3, 2008
  6. freakrock

    freakrock Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    Messages:
    431
    Location:
    Santiago de Chile
    thank you all for the info you've given me :D
    has the r9 changed something through the years?
     
    #6 -   Jan 3, 2008