Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,059 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi Great job at keeping us all informed. Firstly I would like to know why in the current MB-action you test a switchblade with 133mm (5.25) rear travel and only 100mm travel in front. Is it not customary to have equal travel front and rear? And what does this do to the geometry? Secondly, I currently have a Switchblade and have upgraded to 133mm (5.25”) in the rear (Platform pushed float R), what would be a better fork up front? , a 100mm or a 130mm Minute 2 How will each fork change the handling of the bike with only 5.25” in the rear? Thank for all the advice. DH
Duncan/mbaction.com - 7/14/2004 10:07:45 AM

A. RC: I tested two Switchblades--one set up with less travel and lighter components--the secons was outfitted as a long-stroke trailbike. The idea was to show that the Titus was designed to be extrememly versitile. Titus uses two different swing-links to keep the Switchblade chassis riding level, depending upon the fork you choose. For those who are upgrading to a different-length fork, the rule of thumb is one inch of fork equals one degree in the head and seat angle. A longer fork makes the bike slacker and vice versa. I would suggest that you go for the 130mm manitou fork and run more sag if you don't like the slightly slower steering
 

·
Registered Dietitian
Joined
·
1,732 Posts
so, as always, dip$hit RC didn't even answer your question correctly....

DH_WP said:
Hi Great job at keeping us all informed. Firstly I would like to know why in the current MB-action you test a switchblade with 133mm (5.25) rear travel and only 100mm travel in front. Is it not customary to have equal travel front and rear? And what does this do to the geometry? Secondly, I currently have a Switchblade and have upgraded to 133mm (5.25") in the rear (Platform pushed float R), what would be a better fork up front? , a 100mm or a 130mm Minute 2 How will each fork change the handling of the bike with only 5.25" in the rear? Thank for all the advice. DH
Duncan/mbaction.com - 7/14/2004 10:07:45 AM

A. RC: I tested two Switchblades--one set up with less travel and lighter components--the secons was outfitted as a long-stroke trailbike. The idea was to show that the Titus was designed to be extrememly versitile. Titus uses two different swing-links to keep the Switchblade chassis riding level, depending upon the fork you choose. For those who are upgrading to a different-length fork, the rule of thumb is one inch of fork equals one degree in the head and seat angle. A longer fork makes the bike slacker and vice versa. I would suggest that you go for the 130mm manitou fork and run more sag if you don't like the slightly slower steering
.... seeing as how his 5.25" test bike had a 100mm fork, giving it a steeper head angle than the norm.

You can run between 100-130mm forks with the 5.25" link. I run a 130mm Manitou Minute 2 and feel the steering is just fine. I wouldn't really want only 100mm of fork up front anyway, just not enought travel for my riding, and I like kinda neutral steering (not too quick).

Is your SB a 2003 or newer? This may make a difference...

Tommy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,059 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I have a 02 SB

tommyrod74 said:
.... seeing as how his 5.25" test bike had a 100mm fork, giving it a steeper head angle than the norm.

You can run between 100-130mm forks with the 5.25" link. I run a 130mm Manitou Minute 2 and feel the steering is just fine. I wouldn't really want only 100mm of fork up front anyway, just not enought travel for my riding, and I like kinda neutral steering (not too quick).

Is your SB a 2003 or newer? This may make a difference...

Tommy
But with 5"25 and 100 infront will the stearing not be very twitchy ?
I am thinking of going for a Minute 2 130 , or maybe one of of the new floats with 100/130
stillnotto sure what would be the best.
 

·
Registered Dietitian
Joined
·
1,732 Posts
I would find it too twitchy at 100mm...

DH_WP said:
But with 5"25 and 100 infront will the stearing not be very twitchy ?
I am thinking of going for a Minute 2 130 , or maybe one of of the new floats with 100/130
stillnotto sure what would be the best.
... your tastes may vary.

Again, what model year is your SB?

TR
 

·
Do It Yourself
Joined
·
5,720 Posts
tommyrod74 said:
... your tastes may vary.

Again, what model year is your SB?

TR
He has a 2002.

I think the infinite adjustability between 100mm-130mm of the Minute 1:00 is well worth the slight weight penalty. That way you can dial it in to your taste or particular riding conditions at the moment.
 

·
Registered Dietitian
Joined
·
1,732 Posts
I agree...

Homebrew said:
He has a 2002.

I think the infinite adjustability between 100mm-130mm of the Minute 1:00 is well worth the slight weight penalty. That way you can dial it in to your taste or particular riding conditions at the moment.
... the adjustability of the Minute 1 is great if you don't know which you'd prefer.

I asked about the SB model year because, on my 2003 SB, I can use either of the two front shock mounting holes (on the seat tower) to vary the head angle/ bb height as well. I settled on using the upper/forward mounting hole (the one Titus says to only use with the TALAS rear assembly) and found it raised the BB by about 1/4", while steepening the head angle enough to give slightly quicker steering with the 130mm Minute 2. No clearance issues or anything with this setting, shock air pressure settings remained constant (Pushed AVA). This setup works a little better for the tight woodsy stuff around here (central NC), while the recommended setup works a little better for Pisgah with the long downhills. Subtle, but definitely noticable.

Not sure if this is possible with the 2002 and previous SB.

Tommy
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top