Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1281 - 1300 of 1734 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
SLX is the four piston XTR/XT design with some lower cost changes. Saints are a completely different package with forged calipers, etc that have been around for years. Zee's are the lower cost version of the Saints. BTW Saints are my favorite trail bike brakes by far.
When I changed from the guide R’s to the saints on my Rocky instinct, it totally changed the bike. So much more stopping power, could ride faster and slow down later. And never got forearm pump again. With the guides I had to be on the brakes all the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,744 Posts
I've not ridden the SLX's and can't find any direct comparison to Saint's. Have you ridden the SLX'S?
If the Saints are indeed that much more powerful I'd like to switch the calipers over before selling my other bike. I won't have the benefit of having ridden the SLX's first to compare though which doesn't make for an informed decision.
I used the SLX M675 which are few generations old now, and went to Saint M820s. I used the same spec rotor for the switch, just new. To be honest, I was a little underwhelmed by the Saints initially. I think it's more a testament to how good those SLXs that I had were rather than a negative to the Saint's performance.

I will say the difference for me is in more interesting moments where it is either very steep, or very fast, the Saints seem to have just a little bit more in reserve than the SLXs. And they look cooler, which is the most important thing 🤣
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,393 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,286
I've been on saints for the last three seasons, they're great brakes.

Best I can tell from past reading, at least the XT calipers are also machined from a forged block. The SLX's are definitely a bit different though. The caliper is about 3mm wider than my Saint caliper and that mainly seems to be for the pads retracting further from the rotor. There's also the aforementioned difference in the bleed ports which the first gen XT 4 piston do not share.

I've not ridden the SLX's and can't find any direct comparison to Saint's. Have you ridden the SLX'S?

If the Saints are indeed that much more powerful I'd like to switch the calipers over before selling my other bike. I won't have the benefit of having ridden the SLX's first to compare though which doesn't make for an informed decision.

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
The Saints have a little bit more peak power relative to the SLX/XT setups. The XT's are cast, not forged which is a last 5% improvement meaning to say it is small.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,091 Posts
These modern 29ers and tires seem to generate a lot of torque at the wheels, and brakes that previously felt strong and even skid prone, just don't feel particularly strong any longer.

Consequently I find myself expending too much physical and mental energy trying to modulate my speed. Doesn't help that I've always been a 1 index finger brake operator kind of guy all through my motorcycle days.

Solution? : Trickstuff Brakes combined with their HD rotors ordered last September!

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
just wanted to post a nice little hack that works well, actually from my friend Nick that posts on this thread.
I've been using the internal bladder and have to shove the swat up the downtube. well it can get stuck up there. Add some string.
1918793
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
These modern 29ers and tires seem to generate a lot of torque at the wheels, and brakes that previously felt strong and even skid prone, just don't feel particularly strong any longer.

Consequently I find myself expending too much physical and mental energy trying to modulate my speed. Doesn't help that I've always been a 1 index finger brake operator kind of guy all through my motorcycle days.

Solution? : Trickstuff Brakes combined with their HD rotors ordered last September!

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk
wut?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Cascade, what do you consider the ideal progression for a coil shock application? For an air shock application?
Or is this all just up to personal preference, the specific application and terrain? If so, please elaborate.
From what I've seen all the Cascade links do sort of the same thing, up progression. Am I wrong, or is your position that more progression = more better in all scenarios?
Thanks.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6920 using Tapatalk
I would say there isn't a one size fits all progression amount. It depends on how hard you are riding the bike. The ideal amount of progression would be the amount that lets you have a reasonable amount of sag while only bottoming on the largest features you hit. If you take it to the extreme of WC racing, a lot of riders are on links that put the progression well above what's already considered pretty progressive. Generally speaking there aren't many non-DH frames out there that are at the ideal amount of progression for aggressive riders, hence the existence of things like volume spacers and progressive springs.

Slight tangent about those... the reason they are not identical to a different linkage is because they only affect end of stroke ramp. You can get identical bottom out resistance with them, but small bump and mid-stroke will be lacking in comparison. You also get a much larger variation in rebound speed between top and bottom of travel. This is especially the case with the Megneg. It sucks you in to having rebound being too slow at top of travel or too fast at bottom of travel because of the very large pressure differential. How rebound affects ride quality is something that should maybe receive more attention than it does. If rebound is too slow the bike won't track well, but if it's too fast it'll feel unsettled. Having equal rebound speeds at top and bottom of travel would be the perfect scenario, but obviously that isn't easily attainable.

Back to progressive links, for those that are trying to balance things with volume spacers, over-springing, or excessive damping, our position is that a progressive link is better in all scenarios. Pedaling is largely unaffected. If you actually get into it on paper it's better for horst link bikes, but in practice that isn't noticeable at all. If you are running ~30% sag, have no volume spacers installed, your damping is in a reasonable range, and you aren't having issues with riding deeper in the travel than ideal or bottoming out then I'd say a progressive link would be less of a benefit. It wouldn't really do harm, but a certain level of aggression is needed to get the most out of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,497 Posts
^Good read. I typically find 2 circuits (H/L) on the rebound side greater in gaining performance than on the compression side. Would also say that's the biggest difference noticed in custom built/tuned shocks I've used in the past is just how much better the rebound does it's job.

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
Anyone try a mullet set up with a 650b rear wheel (standard Maxxis 2.4ish tire) with the stock 29er link in steep/high settings?

Seems to me, you'd end up with a set up very close to a 29er rear wheel in the slack/low settings. With 650b wheel in steep/high settings, should end up at around 63.5 HA and around 333mm bb height, right?

Of course, Williams Racing mullet yoke would fix this, but in the meantime that seems like it'd be a pretty sweet set up for bike parks/jumps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
Anyone try a mullet set up with a 650b rear wheel (standard Maxxis 2.4ish tire) with the stock 29er link in steep/high settings?

Seems to me, you'd end up with a set up very close to a 29er rear wheel in the slack/low settings. With 650b wheel in steep/high settings, should end up at around 63.5 HA and around 333mm bb height, right?

Of course, Williams Racing mullet yoke would fix this, but in the meantime that seems like it'd be a pretty sweet set up for bike parks/jumps.
I am running a mullet link with 27.5 wheel. it has same geo as 29er. This bike is already incredible low and that (to me) would just be too crazy low. Even in high settings, bike would be about 7 mm lower than the low setting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
I’m on day 3 in St George. So far I’ve ridden the EXT with the mullet link and 29” wheel. I also ended up swapping to 170mm cranks. With the added 10mm of BB height in this setup and the shorter cranks I’ve purposely tried to hit my crank arms and haven’t. So far I’ve ridden guacamole, zen, and barrel. Pretty good mix of chunky XC tech, and higher speed downhill with a few doubles and bigger drops. No issues with the EXT bottoming with the mullet link either. IMO this is how the bike should have came. I switched back to the air shock to feel the difference today and plan on riding some harder stuff out East. I’ll probably spend one more day here and then head to Southern California for Sun-Wed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
How are the people who are using shimmed 31.6 dropper posts liking it? I can save half a pound easily and get an updated dropper by doing it but if its going to creak or have negative side effects then I wont do it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,091 Posts
Streetdoctor, you are starting to pique my interest in the Mullet link in conjunction with a 29" wheel with the frame in maybe the slack and low position.

By chance have you measured before and after chassis dimensions using a phone app and a yardstick just to get an idea where the Evo ends up after these mods?

Also, is there more than one company making Mullet links and is there a difference between them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
I am running a mullet link with 27.5 wheel. it has same geo as 29er. This bike is already incredible low and that (to me) would just be too crazy low. Even in high settings, bike would be about 7 mm lower than the low setting.
The move from 29 to 27.5 drops the BB 12mm and slackens all angles by about a degree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1281 - 1300 of 1734 Posts
Top