[Jerk_Chicken]

This is a review I made about the differences I found between the Burner and the Flux. I'm posting it for those looking to make the jump from the Burner to the Flux. Overall, I feel the Flux is a significantly better performer than the Burner, all things being equal, including the shock. I'm interested in hearing your Burner -----> Flux thoughts.

Here goes:

"We went back upstate for an extended run and my first with the
Flux. I also got to hit my normal trails and see what the differences
were.

I noted the Flux excelled in almost every condition when compared to
the Burner.

Over stutter bumps and roots, the Flux was more controlled, this is
despite the stiffer feeling I got from riding. By comparison, I
frequently changed the rebound settings on the Burner during rides.
Our terrain changes radically, so the easily reached knob was handy. The
Burner had a tendency to throw me up on rebound a bit, then I'd have to
dial it down, then bring it back up later in the next section. The
Flux controlled the bumps and the roots better, giving the feeling of
better tire contact with the rear and better forward motion. I also felt like
there wasn't as much chain feedback, but I could be wrong.

On descents, the rear end controlled the bumps and water bars well, and
had less of a tendency to sidestep. Very controlled over these really
poor conditions we have here. It was also noted that it was easier to get over large obstacles, perhaps the lighter front triangle is the reason. The lower bb would make it harder, so it must be the explanation. I took the long downhill to the parking lot at Blue. Got tons of speed going, railed around the rough, rocky turns and more in control. Still, the oddity remains that it felt like there was more control and less motion in the rear over the terrain.

Climbing mild grades was another stong suit for the Flux. The rear end
didn't move under pedaling very much and while the weight savings may
have helped, it wasn't really too perceivable. I can't say it didn't
help over long climbing distances, however. I also found that I was
able to weight the rear end differently. Maintain climbs with my
weight back and use more of my legs in the motions. I also had more of that
"snappy" feeling i the back and I felt like there was more of a
connection between the pedals and the terrain.

Where I did see the Burner excel (all things being equal) was on steep,
rooted, worn out climbs with sand, as everything is out here.
The Burner was a bit smoother, but offered more traction. This may have
been responsible for the "overpowering the rear tire" comment I previously made [to the original recipient] . I took some air out of the rear tire and that slight
weakness became a wash. The Burner's rear end was more active, so
maybe that attenuated some of the torque. The Burner did have a tendency to
allow me to get stopped up on the obstacles on the steep uphills, like
that crack in The Slab. This weekend at Sprain, I was able to power
over the obstacles that wasn't so easy before, while at the same time,
I had a bit less pedal clearance. I guess it just takes time change the
riding style bit and get used to the new frame's characteristics.

The psychological/subjective aspect is a bit different. I actually
liked the bit of activity with the Burner's rear end. It was oddly
smoother and cushier with the Float R PP (while I know the Flux was
designed more closely to match the RP3), but that was the first ride.
The second one where I saw how much more controlled it was over the
Burner over the bumps sold me. It's a bit of a deceiving feeling to
feel the stiffer rear end, while its handles the bumps and tracks
better. Another friend with a Flux and I are going to swap shocks to see how
different they make the bike feel and handle.

Overall, this is a significant improvement over the Burner, once again.
There are subtle differences in all, but they make for a completely
different and better ride. "

As far as geometry goes, I used a 110 stem on my Burner and it felt a wee bit short, but not enough to complain or feel bad. I used this same stem on the Flux and saw the geometry as perfect. Remember the TT on the Flux is slightly longer.

The summation between the two I normally feel is the rear end of the Flux offers more control over the terrain. The rear shock is easier to set up. Getting full travel is just as easy as on the Burner, but the rebound settings are more tolerant of radical changes in terrain. The Burner had a more "fluid", smoother feel in the travel, but less connected to the trail in what I felt in the pedals. The rear end was more likely to bob under power, while the Flux barely moves. I can lean into turns faster and finesse it better, especially on climbs. Not to say the Burner was bad, but I think the Flux is 150% the bike the Burner was. I still loved the feeling of the Burner though, but I got used to the Flux and glad I have it.

 

[JTBAZ]

Nice review. The big difference I noticed is the Flux's rear hooks up better than the Burner rear. The Flux's suspension is more responsive than the Burner. The Flux also feels quicker than the Burner. The Burner felt a little "beefier" than the Flux.

 

[AzSpeedfreek]

I feel that the rides between the two are almost equal. The Flux is 3/4 of a pound lighter (for an XL). They both climb about the same. The Burner Frame was stiffer (torsionaly as in main frame twist) though and I do miss that. The longer top tube on the Flux makes a good difference for me. I do think that the Burner tracked better in the rough nasty stuff though due to its torsionaly stiffer frame.

They are both so close it is really hard to say which one might be better.

 

[cactuscorn]

well you guys all know how i feel by now. the flux is far superior as jerk says. and the burner is more stout as freek says. one thing i didnt mention before in my reviews is somethin chicken man said about rebound on the burner. compared to the flux the diff is huge in the flux's favor. this might have to do with the liniar rate of the burners design vs the more riseing rate of the flux. as dt tells it, this was intended for a few reasons, platform dampers being one of them. anyway, the rebound on the burner always seemed to have a bit of a split personality and did indeed get pretty close to a diving board feel at times where the flux is far more controlled in its feel accross the board. on the same rocky, fast and swoopy trails where a series of bigger knocks can be had within yards of some g outs and rollers, the burners rebound setting, no matter which of the 4 dampers ive run on it so obviously its not the shock, seemed to need to be compromised for the lesser/middle of the 2 evils, get tossed otb or pack up the rear end. the flux has the right balance for me without givin up plushness or rebound performance. now thats engeneering progressing with the breed.

 

[rmac]

Good stuff. I have been running my Burner with the RP3 for a year and I can overwhelm the rear in continuous v. rocky stuff (which I ride every time!). The Burner's stoutness is very cool though, small drops onto jagged off-camber rock gardens don't phase this frame at all, it drives right through (but occasionally tries to buck me off ).

 

[Rouleur321]

Kind of funny comments on the Flux's stiffness. All Ive ever heard is that this baby is a rock-solid platform. Can any of youze elaborate on that issue?

 

[Bikezilla]

Great review JC, it's cool to see another test done on our local trails .

 

[FXRob]

Nice report! A question for those burner owners who have switched to different shocks in the rear.....is it worth it to say go from the Fox RL to the RP3? I was pretty impressed with the Fox RL on my first ride on the Burner Monday......probably won't upgrade anytime soon but you know how UGI goes. With the $1k I saved by buying a Burner I could get a Push'd RP3 sometime down the line

 

[Jerk_Chicken]

Initial thoughts

The post above was after comprehensive riding on the Flux, whereas what I will post below are the intial thoughts:

"Now I know why Turner said he wouldn't go back to the XCE style
suspension geometry. This thing pedals nearly like a hardtail with the
Propedal R. At first I thought I had too much air in it, but then I
saw the sag was correct and the suspension was moving with the trail. But
hammer and barely anything happened. Amazing difference for such
subtle differences in the two bikes.

The transition from the Burner to the Flux was intuitive. There was nothing overly different in feel, except there was more comfort in the TT area. It felt stiffer in the back,
which is counterintuitive because it has my old rear end and a lighter
front end. Must be that more horizontal (can we call it anything else
but what that other guy calls it?)rocker? It also climbs better and
feels like more power goes to the rear wheel. I overpowered the rear
tire a few times. And at the cornering limit, it was odd in that it
seemed to be less on the edge of wiping out. "



To speedthrills:
In my riding, which you may be familiar with, I have not noticed front triangle flex in the Flux. At your weight, you will not, either. It's a stout frame and it's obvious lots of work went into it. The Flux is the summation of lots of subtle changes that coupled together make a great ride. Simply look at the rocker's pivot block and compare it to the Burner and you'll see. All in all, the Flux vs. Burner is another example of the refinement strategy Turner uses to make great rides.

 

[rmac]

Nice report! A question for those burner owners who have switched to different shocks in the rear.....is it worth it to say go from the Fox RL to the RP3? I was pretty impressed with the Fox RL on my first ride on the Burner Monday......probably won't upgrade anytime soon but you know how UGI goes. With the $1k I saved by buying a Burner I could get a Push'd RP3 sometime down the line

Every now and then I think about picking up a used Fox RL and getting it Pushed to compare to the RP3 - I suspect the Pushed RL will outperform the straight RP3.

 

[Jerk_Chicken]

I'm looking to borrow a friend's RP3, along with a nonPP Float to see how the Flux handles it. The way I see it, the Burner needs platform to work best, while the Flux doesn't.

 

[cactuscorn]

you might be suprised pal. not too long ago i posted about usin a non pp float rl in place of my inop rp3. not all bad but a big diff.

 

[Jerk_Chicken]

Could you elaborate on what you found?

I'm kind of used to the "smoother" ride of the Burner, so I was wondering if my shock's valving is a bit off.

 

[cactuscorn]

i cant find that post to save my life so, for you pal, ill re do it as best i can.

when my rp3 went tango uniiform i tossed on new non pp float rl i had on the burner for a few months before i got the flux so i had some time on it and thats relevent here. what i noticed is this change mimicked the burner feel onto the flux. very very plush but without the rebound issue weve all described here. interesting huh? same trails, same conditions, similar setups on both bikes within 3 months of eachother. anyway, my impression was that the rl made the flux feel just like a faster, better handeling version of the burner and id put that down to the longer t/t and shorter stays. so yeah, its the shock, but also its just as much a geo thing. everythings a sum of its parts ya know. now to compare it all to a dhxc 5.0 and a 66 rc on a '02/'04/'05/'06 rfx/pack/spot w/ 2.5's! kidding.

edit: btw, i much prefer the rp3 to the rl, not that i didnt like the rl mind you. its just not as confidence inspireing as the rp3 nor is its climbing traits as good. i just luuuuuv to flick my little blue knobs!

 

[cactuscorn]

id say ive seen azspeedfreeks xl flux flex the ft triangle somethin fierce and a bit on my med too. niether of us felt this as a issue on the trail, even the same trail so id have to say its no biggie even though it scares the hooey out of me to see it in a static enviornment. did ya order it yet or are ya just gonna keep talkin bout it till next krismiss? sheesh! ya sound like me fer gawds sake!