Just out of curiosity, what size of the Glory are you referring to? I have compressed my small 06 Glory (that I still ride) without the spring and there is no tire rub with a 2.5 Highroller.
Warning to future intense M6 owners!!
- Thread starter Dwdrums00
- Start date
- Status
Just out of curiosity, what size of the Glory are you referring to? I have compressed my small 06 Glory (that I still ride) without the spring and there is no tire rub with a 2.5 Highroller.
The M1's did it. The M3's did it. The M6's are doing it. 
I was expecting news in this thread.
I was expecting news in this thread.
I don't see how anyone can be expected to be ok with it. I don't see how people can say "Well they must have missed it". If they missed something as simple as interference between the tire and frame what about something that is actually complicated like load stresses on the frame and welds itself?
I'm not doubting that it's a phenomenal race bike.... I just don't see how you can release a frame with such a simple problem to fix.
:biggrin:The M1's did it. The M3's did it. The M6's are doing it.
I was expecting news in this thread.
I had a 1st gen M3 and when it completely bottomed out it rubbed on the frame a little bit. I had to blow through all of the travel and it didn't make any noise, so I paid no mind. Everything on that frame fit tight, so I wasn't too surprised. I say don't worry about and have fun riding that sweet looking bike!
This isnt just a problem with Intense. This is a problem throughout the industry (...though significantly moreso with frame manufacturers compared to component mfgs)
The problem isnt solely that the designers are skimping in certain areas. It is that these frames aren't perfect, yet they still cost as much as they do. I understand that the perfect bike doesnt exist, or wont exist cheaply, but the number of small points that designers and manufacturers just pass right over is unacceptable.
Tire rub on a $2k+ frame is one of those things. But there are plenty of other small changes that could be made to plenty of bikes that would do away with many headaches.
For example, I am still seeing a high number of very high end frames that dont have full cable housing tabs. Or what's even worse is when the swingarm does allow for full housing but the main frame still uses open housing tabs.
Or how about swingarms that dont allow for full range of motion becasue there is rub at the pivot where the designers didnt check for interference?
How bout part specs that dont really work together?
Maybe the need for a few extra shims to take up the slop that was caused by bearing seats being machined too deep? Ooops...
Like I said, the problem isnt the small issues that could be found on a number of frames. The problem is manufacturers passing these joys on to the consumers and still charging as though the frames were made of gold. (Oh, and arguing with consumers when they ask about these small issues or claiming that the problems "arent really an issue in our opinion," isnt the best business practice either.)
The problem isnt solely that the designers are skimping in certain areas. It is that these frames aren't perfect, yet they still cost as much as they do. I understand that the perfect bike doesnt exist, or wont exist cheaply, but the number of small points that designers and manufacturers just pass right over is unacceptable.
Tire rub on a $2k+ frame is one of those things. But there are plenty of other small changes that could be made to plenty of bikes that would do away with many headaches.
For example, I am still seeing a high number of very high end frames that dont have full cable housing tabs. Or what's even worse is when the swingarm does allow for full housing but the main frame still uses open housing tabs.
Or how about swingarms that dont allow for full range of motion becasue there is rub at the pivot where the designers didnt check for interference?
How bout part specs that dont really work together?
Maybe the need for a few extra shims to take up the slop that was caused by bearing seats being machined too deep? Ooops...
Like I said, the problem isnt the small issues that could be found on a number of frames. The problem is manufacturers passing these joys on to the consumers and still charging as though the frames were made of gold. (Oh, and arguing with consumers when they ask about these small issues or claiming that the problems "arent really an issue in our opinion," isnt the best business practice either.)
The answer to problems like this are simple:
Stop being chumps and just accepting it because its "A dh bike."
Stop being chumps and just accepting it because its "A dh bike."
While not great news and hopefully they fix it. My 2002 Uzzi SLX linkage would rub the top of the tire when setup in the low bb setting during full bottom out. 6 years later and it's no worse for wear.
What I am talking about is not tyre rub, on the medium giants (at least the ones I've seen in Europe) the arch on the swing arm hits the seat tube on bottom out. Several frames around here have the paint chips to prove it.
How do you propose to stop being a chump? I don't know of ANY bike related company that hasn't had QC issues...
How do you propose to stop being a chump? I don't know of ANY bike related company that hasn't had QC issues...
fwiw my 08 glory 0 doesn't do that (yes, i tested at full bottom out without spring)
There is a huge difference between QC, and a flawed design. Bottoming out your tire is a flawed design. No argument about it.
To stop being a chump is easy. Go after the companies that screw this stuff up. If I pay close to 3g for a frame that has a flaw in it, I send it back. If you pay for a TV that can't turns into a blurred mess on action scenes, do you keep it or return it?
Large Uzzis had shock->top tube contact also. I believe most new Intense models come with this sort of issue.
Turner Highline, SXTrail, Ironhorse 7point... lots of frames have had design-failures built into model year 1.
In the MTB industry, it is called "customer prototyping."
It's the follow-up that counts... in the Turner, Spec and IH examples, replacement parts were sent free of charge (as far as I know).
-r
Turner Highline, SXTrail, Ironhorse 7point... lots of frames have had design-failures built into model year 1.
In the MTB industry, it is called "customer prototyping."
It's the follow-up that counts... in the Turner, Spec and IH examples, replacement parts were sent free of charge (as far as I know).
-r
Well, my buddy started this post, and I am the other test and tuner he refers to in the initial post, so its about time for me to chime in!!
I dont like speaking for anyone else, but there is a consensus between my buddy and I that this bike does most things very well. Unfortunately, that doesn't negate the facts of a significantly lower BB than advertised and the tire rubs if you breathe hard on the rear suspension!!!
I want to illustrate my frustrations through a comparison between Intense bikes and BMW automobiles. Both Intense and BMW are high end in their respected industries and clearly the automobile industry is exponentially larger; however, If I were to buy a brand new 2008 BMW M5 for top dollar (just like I paid top dollar for a "high end" Intense M6) and the tire rubbed the inner fender every time I turned the wheel all the way......... I, nor anyone else, would ever accept tire rubbing in a brand new car that is such a high end piece of equipment. Additionally, if BMW told its customers that the tire rubbing was an acceptable trade off for having a performance car they would be out of business in seconds, yet Intense can call it a DH bike and say the tolerances are tight and back away. I don't understand???? Intense is a high end bike and many of the people in this very post are letting them off the hook for something that truly isn't right??
Just food for thought.......
I dont like speaking for anyone else, but there is a consensus between my buddy and I that this bike does most things very well. Unfortunately, that doesn't negate the facts of a significantly lower BB than advertised and the tire rubs if you breathe hard on the rear suspension!!!
I want to illustrate my frustrations through a comparison between Intense bikes and BMW automobiles. Both Intense and BMW are high end in their respected industries and clearly the automobile industry is exponentially larger; however, If I were to buy a brand new 2008 BMW M5 for top dollar (just like I paid top dollar for a "high end" Intense M6) and the tire rubbed the inner fender every time I turned the wheel all the way......... I, nor anyone else, would ever accept tire rubbing in a brand new car that is such a high end piece of equipment. Additionally, if BMW told its customers that the tire rubbing was an acceptable trade off for having a performance car they would be out of business in seconds, yet Intense can call it a DH bike and say the tolerances are tight and back away. I don't understand???? Intense is a high end bike and many of the people in this very post are letting them off the hook for something that truly isn't right??
Just food for thought.......
well, i'm skeptical to see if intense will fix the problem....because the dropouts are removable, proprietary, and made in house, they could redesign them to fix the problem, and mail them out to everyone who bought an M6 thus far.....i have a feeling they are going to just tell people its no big deal
Tire buzz usually means your going fast......i like it when it happens....
yeah, by retooling the dropouts they could also fix that too....they could set the BB where they want it, and get rid of the tire buzz......13.34"bb is just retarded.....especially on a bike with that much travel
damn....are you serious?...i like my bottom bracket low, but that's ridiculous.....
Hell yeah man.
My demo 8 is about 13.8 or so.......I'd love to have it under 13.5.
I could rail corners sitting down and enjoying some coffee.
yeah, but a half inch lower with an inch and a half more travel than your demo?.....on average, you bb would be sitting 1.25" lower....that'd be nutty......
Nah they only get about 8.5" of travel before the wheel stops on the seat tube anyway.
What you're saying makes sense on paper, but how they measure that 9.5" could vary (ie: is that the trace of the axle path, or a vertical displacement?). I'm not sure you can be certain how they compare in real life......at least I can't. That said, I'm dying to ride an M6, mostly because of what people are coming up with for BB heights. To this day I've still never ridden a bike that I thought the BB was 'too low'. Obviously with a dh bike, I think there is such a thing but I've certainly never ridden it. A half inch lower than a sunday doesn't seem to me to be too outlandish. Especially since sundays move through their travel pretty easily. But I'd disagree with the outright statement that 13.4ish is too low for a dh bike as a blanket claim.
Totally agree! I've ridden a bike with a sub-14 inch BB, and although it cornered awesome in the right conditions, I think overall it was a slower bike on a lot of courses because you were so restricted in where you could pedal.
the easiest fix is a 2.0" rear tire and some 145mm cranks.
You're welcome.
You're welcome.
hence the reason that it is the geometry asked for by some of the best racers in the world and not your average joe. Those guys carry so much more speed that the inability to pedal in certain places is negated. That being said, while i appreciate a company's efforts to supply the demand for bikes indentical to the factory rigs it remains to be determined if this is a good idea for all consumers. fact of the matter is, 90% of the guys who buy the M6, Sunday, etc. might actually be better off on a bike that is not designed around the handling skills of the most gifted 1-5% of riders.
If iron horse decided to release a Sunday with Sam's actual geometry (1/8" lower bb and massively slacker head angle) it would sell out in an instant, but most of the buyers would actually be slower on a bike like that. There's an article in the newest Dirt about the Athertons and Commencal on just this subject. commencal said that even if all their factory guys could agree on the same geometry (they can't, Cedric has a substantially shorter swingarm and theirs is so long the designer doesn't understand how they can even ride it) they wouldn't release it because the average consumer would find it cumbersome and likely unrideable.
It's a balance between giving the consumer what they want and what they actually need or are capable of riding.
Exactly my point. I remember trying to pedal my Sunday through a smooth fire road-esque corner at Bromont during the Canada Cup race a few years ago, and when my pedal hit the ground I was catapulted into the dirt so hard I thought I was in France.
Understatement.
You need to learn how to carry more speed. I recomend taking your brakes off for your windrock trip. If you survive, you will be ready for the Bromont World Cup.
No really, I had a former pro XC guy tell me that's how he learned to corner faster. So I tried it on my XC bike at the local trail (really flat trail) and it worked. Resist the urge to touch the brakes. When I watched Kovarik in practice at the US Open a few years ago, he was carrying insane speed through the first woods section after going under the lift. Like 10+ mph faster than any other pro and he wasn't pedalingAnyway, I agree that some pro bikes would be not consumer friendly. Personally, I would trade the low bottom bracket for improved cornering over the high bottom bracket to pedal. I would not accept a bike that the tire hit the frame on a regular basis.
Thats bullsh!t in my opinion.
A frame of that caliber should not do that. I'm glad I kept my V10.
A frame of that caliber should not do that. I'm glad I kept my V10.
You need to learn how to carry more speed. I recomend taking your brakes off for your windrock trip. If you survive, you will be ready for the Bromont World Cup.
Anyway, I agree that some pro bikes would be not consumer friendly. Personally, I would trade the low bottom bracket for improved cornering over the high bottom bracket to pedal. I would not accept a bike that the tire hit the frame on a regular basis.
Wicked idea, I'm going to try that next time I go to Plattekill. :biggrin:
i don't think you'd be too pumped on a bike with a 13.34" bb with almost 10" of travel.....most pros really wouldn't be.....kovarik is a strange bird in terms of bike setup.....
additionally, sam's sunday isn't much different from stock....longer downtube, about 1deg slacker,....there was a write up about it in dirt a while back explaining the differences between his bike and a stock one......nothing drastic.....putting the M6 and the sunday in the same category and saying they are too racy for the average consumer is kind of ridiculous......the average consumer can ride a stock sunday, but, i don't think they'd fare well on a bike like the M6.....
just for fun i measured everything on my turner in contrast with sam's bike as listed in Dirt....
sam's numbers listed first, mine second....
bar height - 40" vs. 40.6"
wheelbase - 46.25" vs. 46.4"
downtube - 26.25 vs 26.4"
chainstay - 17.25 vs 17.45"
head angle - his is listed as 63.75, and i know mine measured between 63.5 and 64(couldn't get a super accurate read)......
bb height - i think his is around 13.75, not sure.....mine is 13.85....
dirt didn't list his top tube.....bummer
all in all everything on my bike is about the same, but a smidge longer, taller, etc.....i'm a couple inches taller than him though, so it's all relative.......i certainly wouldn't rate myself as a super fast rider, but i definitely like the angles of this bike more than anything else i've ridden.....
sam's numbers listed first, mine second....
bar height - 40" vs. 40.6"
wheelbase - 46.25" vs. 46.4"
downtube - 26.25 vs 26.4"
chainstay - 17.25 vs 17.45"
head angle - his is listed as 63.75, and i know mine measured between 63.5 and 64(couldn't get a super accurate read)......
bb height - i think his is around 13.75, not sure.....mine is 13.85....
dirt didn't list his top tube.....bummer
all in all everything on my bike is about the same, but a smidge longer, taller, etc.....i'm a couple inches taller than him though, so it's all relative.......i certainly wouldn't rate myself as a super fast rider, but i definitely like the angles of this bike more than anything else i've ridden.....
IC: you seem pretty adamant about this. I'm curious. Have you ever ridden a bike that you thought had too low a bb? Something you thought after riding it, that hindered its performance?
yeah, i've ridden my old old dhr with a shortened shock....i little too low....and my buddy had a demo that was a little low for my liking......my last DHR i drilled a touch too low(13.5").....i think another factor was my damping.....my old bikes had way too little compression damping, and just sat too deep in the stroke.....i think i running proper suspension, i could go down to 13.5....see the DHR has an inch and a half less travel than the intense, so i don't see it posing an issue......i dunno......so many damn variables....i found on bikes that sat too low i scrubbed my inside pedal when hugging turns or taking inside lines......it wasn't a chainguide, rock smashing issue though.....
Low is nice. But some people like higher bb
because of different riding style (pedal), or in some cases to be able to pick up the front a bit easier.
Agree ^, I think there´s more to it than static bb - f.i. how you like your shock setup. Avarage rider probebly likes a really soft ride, while a faster rider want a harder compression for stability in corners (and bike) and pedalperformance - which will allow a lower static BB.
(Edit: BB - bb)
because of different riding style (pedal), or in some cases to be able to pick up the front a bit easier.Agree ^, I think there´s more to it than static bb - f.i. how you like your shock setup. Avarage rider probebly likes a really soft ride, while a faster rider want a harder compression for stability in corners (and bike) and pedalperformance - which will allow a lower static BB.
(Edit: BB - bb)
That has little to do with BB height though. That's your BB width.
73mm BB's for the win...
73mm BB's for the win...
Well you've touched on something else here.....
With something like that dhr drill mod, you slacken the bike as well as lower it obviously. This gives your bike a more rearward bias as far as weighting. A greater percentage of your weight is being transferred to the back of the bike, so you'll be compressing the same shock spring more. The suspension doesn't behave any differently on a dhr when you do the drill mod, you just end up putting more pressure on the rear end. A heavier spring (with lightening up the front spring) would have been better than screwing with the compression damping. DHRs in particular are crazy progressive towards the end of their travel. I ran into this with my demo 8 as well. I went up 50lbs in spring weight to get the bike to ride balanced with a 64 deg head angle. It still had too much of a rearward bias for me so I just stuck and 7 inch fork on it and forgot about it.
But back to my point........I rode dhrs for 4 years. I never did the drill mod on mine because I liked the head angle with an 8" fork, but I rode two that had the mod. I LOVED the change in bb height......but like you felt it put too much on the rear end when pumping, landing etc....
But I think what you've said points again to preference. You've ridden something that you felt crossed the line in what a low bb should be. I haven't. So that intense bb number looks like heaven to me.
that's ironic....i did the same thing, i switched to a 7" 888 fork and went up 50 lbs in my rear spring.....funny you should mention that......
anyway, you're probably right.....with the proper suspension setup and if all other angles are giving the bike a balanced feel, you can get away with a super low bb
- Status