Turner-vs-IronHorse????
- Thread starter ride
- Start date
Def go with the turner, Its an exotic race bike and has been proven as so. The SGS is a fine choice but seems as more of a budget friendly bike. Granted Hill, and Rennie won on the SGS I would still go for the turner, lower BB, They made it lighter this year and the low Center of gravity is almost unmatched plus u have to option of getting the remote DHX 
DHR gets my vote......
I can't say much about the IH since I've never ridden one (although DW & IH seem to have a great thing going - MadCatz lends a great deal of credibility), but the DHR has been a great bike for me (Eric Carter, Maxxis, Team Honda/Turner gives credibility here as well).
Honestly, both have been ridden at the highest level to great success so you really can't go wrong either way - but, here's some things that are great on the DHR:
1) Dave Turner, Casey & Co: great customer service! (not to take away from Todd & Co. at IH)
2) Low Center-of-Gravity on the DHR
3) Simple, yet effective use of single-pivot/swinglink design
4) Corners like mad
5) '04 DHR w/ Romic pedalled awesome - '05 w/ DHX (dunno - haven't really had time on it yet)
Honestly, both have been ridden at the highest level to great success so you really can't go wrong either way - but, here's some things that are great on the DHR:
1) Dave Turner, Casey & Co: great customer service! (not to take away from Todd & Co. at IH)
2) Low Center-of-Gravity on the DHR
3) Simple, yet effective use of single-pivot/swinglink design
4) Corners like mad
5) '04 DHR w/ Romic pedalled awesome - '05 w/ DHX (dunno - haven't really had time on it yet)
Heheheh... I guess mine doesn't count neitherride said:
mobius said:
Ditka
I mean Ditto
where do you race?
where you ride?
are you a finess rider or a Kovarik type?
are you good looking?
where you ride?
are you a finess rider or a Kovarik type?
are you good looking?
so you live in the PW?ride said:
Heck...there should be PLENTY of DHRs there to try. Seek one out and test it out - make sure you like the fit an feel.
Thre is also this guy named Nate that had (might still have it) an SGS...he races up there. You might be able to try his?
I just can't find a small DHR to Ride.
And am a bit hesitant of cause I
don't know if it will fit as good as the sm IH.
and I don't know if it will hold up all year.
I'm totally capable of maintaining my bike
all year, but don't have access to a
factory riders support.
And am a bit hesitant of cause I
don't know if it will fit as good as the sm IH.
and I don't know if it will hold up all year.
I'm totally capable of maintaining my bike
all year, but don't have access to a
factory riders support.
A nice DHR is by far the best DH bike I have ever ridden...I haven't spent a ton of time on one, but more than just bouncing around on one. I own an SGS expert....I love that too, but I like the lower faster feel of the turner.
If you're riding Whistler a lot then get something that has a reasonably high BB. There's not that many DHR's up here in the PNW probably because the DHR is so very RACE oriented. The rocky rooty nature of the riding here will mean you'll be cursing as you cranks/pedals hit.
First, you gotta ride a DHR in your size before you buy one, especially since you already know the SGS fits well and generally feels good.
Assuming the fit is good and you like the ride qualities of both, it becomes a question of cost, anticipated maintenance, and CS. I don't have much ride time on either but I would think you can expect more maintenance issues with the SGS, especially with all the additional pivots and linkages. Plus with the new DW bikes I don't know how long you'll be able to get replacements if you need 'em. Sure the SGS is a proven design but still, based on friends' experiences I would think you'd have less issues with the Turner.
Of course, you could probably by two SGS's for the money and have an extra parts bike!!
Assuming the fit is good and you like the ride qualities of both, it becomes a question of cost, anticipated maintenance, and CS. I don't have much ride time on either but I would think you can expect more maintenance issues with the SGS, especially with all the additional pivots and linkages. Plus with the new DW bikes I don't know how long you'll be able to get replacements if you need 'em. Sure the SGS is a proven design but still, based on friends' experiences I would think you'd have less issues with the Turner.
Of course, you could probably by two SGS's for the money and have an extra parts bike!!
the small DHR is REALLY small compared to other bikes in it's class. I really can't say anything about the SGS since I never rode one before. Like I was telling Instigator today - I really liked my DHR. Solid, stiff, handles well, fit me like a glove, corners like it's on rails BUT (here is my only gripe) the rear wheel travel is a love and hate things...the wheelbase gets shorter as it goes through its travel, which is awesome in corners - but doesn't feel as good when you hit hard edge obstacles at speeds (like roots, rocks, etc..)...it feels like landing on the edge of a sidewalk after a huckride said:
Other than that, the bike is one of the best I've ridden. Turner's CS is also top notch!I would really like to have spent time on an SGS tho...everyone I've talked to that owned one, liked theirs (04 SGS)
And as others said, the pimp factor is much higher with the Turner. 
OGRipper said:
I'm really trying to stay out of this...ride said:
dude im on an 03' sgs team dh and love it to death (i know what your thinking its an 03' but i bought the frame brand new). i unfortunatlly dont have any time on the turner cause well know body down here has them in there shops and im to poor to pay the heavy shipping charges. also in the sgs deffence it rails better than any bike i have ever tested and ridin. built with the right componets and with experiance then the bike will huck with you threw the week and race with you on the weekend. so my vote goes to the sgs and i just love the 4 bar linkage. and the 5th element even though romic shocks are pimpness too. so good luck with your decision man.either way you get a raw bike outa it.
I talked with him at the US Open about spring weights on his DHR.ride said:
I think I remember him being the same as me, about 5'10 or so.
He was on a medium DHR with a 450 spring weight. I raced a small
DHR all year, and next year, I am going back to a medium. I can ride either at 5'10, but I need the longer wheelbase, so I won't crap my pants as hard on super high speed stuff. As far as durability, I raced the whole season on my DHR, and the only thing I did to it was replace the rear shock bushings twice. The new Sunday is sick too. I got a buddy who rode them both at Interbike, and he still can't decide which one he wants.
like i said raw bike either way and hard decision. maybee the best thing you can do is talk to an unbiased person which one he would get sometimes thats the only way that you can do these things. even though its hard to find an unbiased person who has experiance with both the bikes. 
Oops missed that part about how the $$$ doesn't really matter. In that case you need to ride a DHR that fits (or figure out that there isn't one that fits) and just make the call based on which one gets you the most stoked to go rip it up. There are so many intangibles it's hard to say what will be best for you. As for the BB, last time I was in Whistler there just wasn't that much techy rocky stuff where a low BB would be a liability, but still you might like the slightly higher BB on the SGS.
What are you riding now and what do you like/dislike? What would you change? The answers might help you decide.
What are you riding now and what do you like/dislike? What would you change? The answers might help you decide.
I am thinking you cant lose with either. If you have the possibility to get on either for free, take a shot at riding them both and see what you like. Ive spent time on an 04 DHR and the 04 SGS and they are both very capable bikes. As a rider on either of the frames, you are going to be the integral cog in winning.
dw
dw
That's an interesting question, and both bikes have their high points.
IH SGS
-Great rear suspension design, pedals well and works great with a Fox DHX.
-FSR
-Stock 5th element doesn't impress me.
-Brakes well, doesn't have too much interaction between the braking and suspension.
-As far as customer support, IH has done everything that I've asked of them so far (for me and another that I've warrentied for someone).
-Quality is ok, what I'd expect with a mass produced frame. Build quality is great, but overal quality is just "ok" in the long run it seems. There seems to always be a couple issues with their bikes that are taken care of in the next year.
Turner
-Stiffer rear suspension design, solid rear triangle, big pivot.
-Linkage actuated single pivot, pedals well, but I like the FSR rear suspension on the IH better all around.
-Can possibly take an 05 fox DHX, that is if they make the remote thing that the are supposed to. Bike is pretty good with a romic.
-Floating brake available I believe.
-Great quality and CS.
I would probably go with the Turner, it uses a linkage that acheives something similier to what my Cheeta did, and it's fairly simple and clean, I appreciate that. The stiffness is also something that I value a lot, in fact I'd take the stiffer linkage actuated suspension over the FSR for this reason alone. The FSR isn't super "flexy", but when you ride a frame with superior stiffness, it's hard to go back.
The IH are great bikes with great builds for the most part, turners are great if you got the cash, and they have some features that one may value more or less.
IH SGS
-Great rear suspension design, pedals well and works great with a Fox DHX.
-FSR
-Stock 5th element doesn't impress me.
-Brakes well, doesn't have too much interaction between the braking and suspension.
-As far as customer support, IH has done everything that I've asked of them so far (for me and another that I've warrentied for someone).
-Quality is ok, what I'd expect with a mass produced frame. Build quality is great, but overal quality is just "ok" in the long run it seems. There seems to always be a couple issues with their bikes that are taken care of in the next year.
Turner
-Stiffer rear suspension design, solid rear triangle, big pivot.
-Linkage actuated single pivot, pedals well, but I like the FSR rear suspension on the IH better all around.
-Can possibly take an 05 fox DHX, that is if they make the remote thing that the are supposed to. Bike is pretty good with a romic.
-Floating brake available I believe.
-Great quality and CS.
I would probably go with the Turner, it uses a linkage that acheives something similier to what my Cheeta did, and it's fairly simple and clean, I appreciate that. The stiffness is also something that I value a lot, in fact I'd take the stiffer linkage actuated suspension over the FSR for this reason alone. The FSR isn't super "flexy", but when you ride a frame with superior stiffness, it's hard to go back.
The IH are great bikes with great builds for the most part, turners are great if you got the cash, and they have some features that one may value more or less.
Yeah nothing beats riding both before choosing but there is something you should take note of. The SGS bikes of the same size will have a shorter front end than the turners. If you're on a small sgs and like it, I think the turner would feel a little long for you. I've only ridden a large 03 sgs but it felt like it fit and I'm only 5'8". I think the front triangles were similar numbers between 03 and 04. It's kind of what some people used to call and east coast geometry, ironically similar to the 02 and earlier turners. Those things felt like unstable little gnats to me at speed. I'm certainly more a fan of the newer turners. Don't know about the beefier 04 swingarms but I thought the 03 rear ends on the sgs bikes were noodles compared to my turner. If you're looking for a little flicker bike, my vote would be the IH. Fast, stable race thing, go with the turner.
I disagree, the 03 and later IHs do not have "east coast" geometry. They have wheelbases and chainstay lengths in line with most mainstream DH bikes. The top tubes are also not shorter than others. The SGS bikes actually run a little large for people, IE I usually ride a medium but I'm on the upper-end of medium, and the SGS DH bike "medium" is 19", and it feels it in every way. I have a friend that's a few inches shorter and he feels that it's too big for him (I'm 5'11"). The medium SGS feels great to me.kidwoo said:
They definitely do not have "east coast" geometry, which was short top tubes, short chainstays, and generally short wheelbases.
I've ridden both and decided to go the DHR when it came to parting with the cash. The 2 year frame warranty combined with the added bling of the DHR (only 2004 DHR I know of in my state) sealed it for me. Realistically though, you may as well flip a coin as they're both awesome bikes and whichever one you get will keep you happy as long as you size it properly.
same here...ChainWhip said:Heheheh... I guess mine doesn't count neither
(I do find the "exotic" comments of the DHR pretty funny, around here it's pretty much 45% SGSs, 45% DHRs and 10% V10s.
ink: )
Check the IH website. The 03 medium tt measurement on the sgs frames (virtual as drawn) is 22" Turner's medium which is what we're comparing here is listed as actual is 21.5 but you and I both know turners seat tube sits pretty low. The measurement of virtual on mine is more like 23+. Check wheelbases too. Iron horse medium is 42.7 vs turner's which is 45.6. Given the chainstay of an IH is 0.5" shorter, the wheelbase is still longer on a turner even without that half an inch. That extra length in the turner comes from somewhere else.......like what's left, the front of the bike.Jm_ said:
Call it whatever you like, but the front end of 03 IH sgs bikes were shorter than turners of the same sizing. They ride that way too.
Edit: I just checked the 04 IH specs and they did change the dimensions of the front triangles. So my comments on the 03 frame are irrelevant.
The 03 frame specs were wrong for most of the year (03). IH had the 02 specs on the site for most of 03, so it was difficult tracking down the right numbers. A lot of people said to not give the IHs a chance because they had that "east coast" geometry. IH would have done themselves a favor by making the geometry available.kidwoo said:
Iron Horse has not had that "super short" "east coast" geometry since 2002.
The 03s and 04s have the same geometry, 46" wheelbase for a medium, 17.5ish chainstays, etc.
east coast east coast east coast
You know how it felt?
east coast east coast east coast east coast
The word coast looks funny after you type it a few times.
east coast east coast east coast east coast
Maybe I rode a medium and thought it was a large because he said it was and that was backed up by IH published numbers when I went to look? That's my guess.
east coast east coast east coast
Funny how much that seems to annoy you. Even if I'm completely wrong which I may very well be.
east coast east coast east coast
You know how it felt?
east coast east coast east coast east coast
The word coast looks funny after you type it a few times.
east coast east coast east coast east coast
Maybe I rode a medium and thought it was a large because he said it was and that was backed up by IH published numbers when I went to look? That's my guess.
east coast east coast east coast
Funny how much that seems to annoy you. Even if I'm completely wrong which I may very well be.
east coast east coast east coast
Good point. Still there to this very day too. Might have given a guy the wrong impression.............like me. Still felt like the front end was shorter than my bike.......diving a lot on stuff I ride all the time.Jm_ said:
east coast
