Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

101 - 120 of 156 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,599 Posts
Discussion Starter #101
Nice...I'm picking up my XL frame this week.
Enjoy

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,022 Posts
Well, had an IBIS DV9 Medium in my hands but was worried it was too short for me, just ordered the ARC Medium. Anyone made the transition from DV9 to ARC?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,022 Posts
Bought the wrong Shimano crank M8100 52mm chainline and with 34 tooth chainring there is just a millimetre between ring and CS.
Will get my new cranks M8120 with 55mm chainline next week.

hope that helps

View attachment 1910326
Does that make it unuseable you you're worried about chain suck damaging the frame? Wondering if the 52 mm chainline is better overall for 12s vs 55 mm Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Well, had an IBIS DV9 Medium in my hands but was worried it was too short for me, just ordered the ARC Medium. Anyone made the transition from DV9 to ARC?
Yes. I had the DV9 in Large with a 120mm Fox SC and 52mm offset. I am 1,85m tall, which meens the Ibis was a litte bit to small perhaps. In comparison to the 2021 Large ARC it feels smaller in all relations (reach, wheelbase and top tube) The Yeti is much more a truck and not that agile, but this is a characteristic I was looking for. Maybe I will change my opinion, when changing the fork to 130mm and 44mm offset. Besides, I built my 2021 ARC this Winter, just a few weeks before skiseason started, so I am not that used to it. By the way, I also had the old ARC from 2015. This was much more like the DV9

Prost und Servus
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,219 Posts
I have the frame box filled with all the parts to build the ARC. Just waiting on wheels to arrive. Hopefully they will come at the beginning of February. Looking forward to riding this new beast!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Picking up my medium frame this weekend. Coming from a 2018 Transition Throttle and a 2019 Kingdom Vendetta V2. Two very fun bikes. Let's hope the ARC lives up to the hype!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Yes. I had the DV9 in Large with a 120mm Fox SC and 52mm offset. I am 1,85m tall, which meens the Ibis was a litte bit to small perhaps. In comparison to the 2021 Large ARC it feels smaller in all relations (reach, wheelbase and top tube) The Yeti is much more a truck and not that agile, but this is a characteristic I was looking for. Maybe I will change my opinion, when changing the fork to 130mm and 44mm offset. Besides, I built my 2021 ARC this Winter, just a few weeks before skiseason started, so I am not that used to it. By the way, I also had the old ARC from 2015. This was much more like the DV9

Prost und Servus
Which one do you like better between the DV9 and ARC? I take it the Yeti is more compliant?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,219 Posts
New bike day! 26# with Shimano XT trail pedals. 2.6 Maxxis DHF/ Rekon tires F/R. XX1 partial drivetrain with Truvativ Stylo carbon crankset, G2 RSC brakes, RF 70 Stem, OneUp 200 dropper and 800 carbon bar, I9 Enduro S wheelset with Hydra hubs (never owned I9 stuff before), RS Pike Ultimate 130 fork, and a WTB Volt Saddle (this is a loaner while I wait on my Ti version). Size is an XL.

There is a bit too much snow up hight to ride, so I'll ride up Atalaya on the new climbing trail to see if I need to change the stem length and how it feels generally. My other bike is a SC TB4 which has more delta between the saddle height and the bar. This bike's saddle is higher than the bar, but not as much. It felt great just riding around the shop.
1912588
1912589
1912590
1912591
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,219 Posts
Hmm...has anyone experience with fitting that follows this guideline? I’m guessing that 70mm stem is way to long.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Interesting. I have heard of this measurement but haven't used it before. I just went and measured both bikes. The Tallboy 4 is almost exactly at the "correct" RAD measurement for my height and the new ARC is about 30mm too long. I have only one ride on the new ARC, while the TB4 I have almost a year on that bike. As one is full suspension and the other a hardtail, they ride quite differently. Yesterday I found the ARC climbed really, really well. My old hardtail was a Stache with an aluminum frame. It also had a carbon fork, so the ride quality of the new ARC is so much better. I will have to ride the ARC at least 4 or 5 more rides to consider the stem length and whether it is correct. Right now its a 70mm while the TB4 is a 40. The Tallboy has a longer top tube/reach (20.28" vs 19.3") but the stack heights are very close between the two (25.83" vs 28.8"). I had considered the reach difference when I decide to try the 70mm length on the ARC, but the bike rides much larger than its measurements.

We have one steep climb nearby that I rode. There are lots of almost 180 switchbacks that the TB4 feels like a semi tractor going through but the new ARC just went around with no fuss. Just like it should be. That all said, the TB4 is a magic carpet on the descents--it just floats over everything while the ARC isn't bad, its a hardtail. I feel like this combo is the perfect quiver for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
New bike day! 26# with Shimano XT trail pedals. 2.6 Maxxis DHF/ Rekon tires F/R. XX1 partial drivetrain with Truvativ Stylo carbon crankset, G2 RSC brakes, RF 70 Stem, OneUp 200 dropper and 800 carbon bar, I9 Enduro S wheelset with Hydra hubs (never owned I9 stuff before), RS Pike Ultimate 130 fork, and a WTB Volt Saddle (this is a loaner while I wait on my Ti version). Size is an XL.

There is a bit too much snow up hight to ride, so I'll ride up Atalaya on the new climbing trail to see if I need to change the stem length and how it feels generally. My other bike is a SC TB4 which has more delta between the saddle height and the bar. This bike's saddle is higher than the bar, but not as much. It felt great just riding around the shop. View attachment 1912588 View attachment 1912589 View attachment 1912590 View attachment 1912591
Nice ride! How tall are you?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,219 Posts
The chainline is very tight between the chainring and the outside edge of the chainstay. When the LBS built it up I wonder if they used a spacer and if so, what size. Small stones have spun around the inside of the chainring a few times and sooner or later a larger one is going to get in there and cause some damage. I am going to fit a 2mm or 3mm spacer on the drive side of the crank to give it a little more clearance plus I'll put a little bit of clear tape underneath the whole area to add a bit of protection. All other things being equal, the bike is amazing!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
The chainline is very tight between the chainring and the outside edge of the chainstay. When the LBS built it up I wonder if they used a spacer and if so, what size. Small stones have spun around the inside of the chainring a few times and sooner or later a larger one is going to get in there and cause some damage. I am going to fit a 2mm or 3mm spacer on the drive side of the crank to give it a little more clearance plus I'll put a little bit of clear tape underneath the whole area to add a bit of protection. All other things being equal, the bike is amazing!
What crankset are you running? The ARC is specced around a 55mm chainline, which is 3mm more outboard than traditional boost cranksets. A lot of boost cranks ship with 52mm chainline.

e.g. the new Shimano XTR Cranksets m9100 and m9120 are both only offered with a 52mm chainline, which is going to be very very tight on the ARC. Only the Deore, SLX and XT series even offer a 55mm crankset. It's a common misconception that the difference between the XX00 series and XX20 series is chainline - this is incorrect. The third digit indicates an increase in Q-Factor. Note that the Q-factor is not consistent across each level - XTR has an intentionally tigher Q-Factor than XT/SLX/Deore to support a more 'racey' feel. For shimano cranks, the changes in chainline are variable across each product line, and do not always align by model number.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,219 Posts
What crankset are you running? The ARC is specced around a 55mm chainline, which is 3mm more outboard than traditional boost cranksets. A lot of boost cranks ship with 52mm chainline.

e.g. the new Shimano XTR Cranksets m9100 and m9120 are both only offered with a 52mm chainline, which is going to be very very tight on the ARC. Only the Deore, SLX and XT series even offer a 55mm crankset. It's a common misconception that the difference between the XX00 series and XX20 series is chainline - this is incorrect. The third digit indicates an increase in Q-Factor. Note that the Q-factor is not consistent across each level - XTR has an intentionally tigher Q-Factor than XT/SLX/Deore to support a more 'racey' feel.
I have a pair of Truvativ carbon Stylo 55mm cranks on it. The backside of the chainring is close to the chainstay and there is nothing to be done about it. I took it down to the shop and they already have a 3mm spacer installed and that is as far as it can go. I added a piece of clear frame tape behind to help prevent possible damage from stones being sucked up the drawn through the chainring.

What I find interesting is that there is no possibility of running a 34 tooth ring on this bike. A hard tail should always have the possibility to run a 34 tooth ring. But to make a bike capable of running up to 2.6 tires with short stays means compromises had to be made and I guess tight clearances and the inability to run a larger ring are some of them.

Nevertheless, its a great bike. Good think I live where running a 34 tooth front ring is not necessarily the best option. We have BIG climbs here. Its easy to do 7K vertical in less than 15 miles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
I have a pair of Truvativ carbon Stylo 55mm cranks on it. The backside of the chainring is close to the chainstay and there is nothing to be done about it. I took it down to the shop and they already have a 3mm spacer installed and that is as far as it can go. I added a piece of clear frame tape behind to help prevent possible damage from stones being sucked up the drawn through the chainring.

What I find interesting is that there is no possibility of running a 34 tooth ring on this bike. A hard tail should always have the possibility to run a 34 tooth ring. But to make a bike capable of running up to 2.6 tires with short stays means compromises had to be made and I guess tight clearances and the inability to run a larger ring are some of them.

Nevertheless, its a great bike. Good think I live where running a 34 tooth front ring is not necessarily the best option. We have BIG climbs here. Its easy to do 7K vertical in less than 15 miles.
I'm running a 34 tooth chain ring with my Shimano 8120 cranks. No problem. Enough space between frame and chainring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
I'm running a 34 tooth chain ring with my Shimano 8120 cranks. No problem. Enough space between frame and chainring.
How is the shifting? I don't feel super great about Yeti's choice to spec a 55mm chainline on this bike.... I might try out a 52mm crank/chainring in order to compare the two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,219 Posts
The lead mechanic at the LBS built the bike for me. I requested the Stylo crankset and presumed he would know what chainline to order. It now appears (after my investigation) that he put on the 52 chainline crankset, hence the close fitting chainring to the stay. Yeti specs the 55mm chainline, as you all know. Should I require the LBS to put the correct spec'ed crankset on the bike? The wider chainline will make more cross-chaining in the higher gears. It works well now. I am only concerned about small stones getting sucked behind the chainring and damaging the stay. The mechanic told me there is no difference in spindle lengths between the 52 and 55mm setups. Is that correct?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
The lead mechanic at the LBS built the bike for me. I requested the Stylo crankset and presumed he would know what chainline to order. It now appears (after my investigation) that he put on the 52 chainline crankset, hence the close fitting chainring to the stay. Yeti specs the 55mm chainline, as you all know. Should I require the LBS to put the correct spec'ed crankset on the bike? The wider chainline will make more cross-chaining in the higher gears. It works well now. I am only concerned about small stones getting sucked behind the chainring and damaging the stay. The mechanic told me there is no difference in spindle lengths between the 52 and 55mm setups. Is that correct?
On sram/truvativ cranks, the chainline is determined by the chainring, not the crankset. You should be able to have the LBS swap the chainring over to a 0mm offset ring and you'll be all set at 55mm. The ring you have installed is a 3mm offset if you are currently at 52mm.

I'm trying to figure out if people prefer the 52mm over 55mm. Even though it has less clearance, it should shift better with a boost hub.



Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using tiny.cc/Mtbr_android_app
 
101 - 120 of 156 Posts
Top