Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
204 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I can sum it up in one sentence: The 5.5 does everything the tracer did, but better!

The two bikes are so similar that I was completley comfortable on the 5.5 by half way through my second ride. And I was clearing steep technical downhills that I wouldn't have dreamed of on my Tracer.

I could feel the extra weight on the climbs, but I'm not sure if it was the ~2 lbs heavier bike (mostly fork+disk brakes+heavier wheels), or the 4 lbs of gut that I added while waiting for the frame. :)

I will check in with more info later, no time right now. But I just wanted to say This bike is FANTASTIC!

By the way, the Nixon Platinum (mine's a 2005) seems a perfect fit for this bike. I haven't had any issues with it so far. The new Fox with 145mm travel should also be good.
 

·
on my 3rd wind...
Joined
·
1,827 Posts
mtnmasher said:
I can sum it up in one sentence: The 5.5 does everything the tracer did, but better!

The two bikes are so similar that I was completley comfortable on the 5.5 by half way through my second ride. And I was clearing steep technical downhills that I wouldn't have dreamed of on my Tracer.

I could feel the extra weight on the climbs, but I'm not sure if it was the ~2 lbs heavier bike (mostly fork+disk brakes+heavier wheels), or the 4 lbs of gut that I added while waiting for the frame. :)

I will check in with more info later, no time right now. But I just wanted to say This bike is FANTASTIC!

By the way, the Nixon Platinum (mine's a 2005) seems a perfect fit for this bike. I haven't had any issues with it so far. The new Fox with 145mm travel should also be good.
How's frame lateral stiffness compared to Tracer? I guess it would seem stiffer since you have beefier components (i.e. wheel, fork, handlebar, & etc) than Tracer? If you can only compare frame vs. frame...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
Does this mean if I go from a 5.5 to a tracer I will be dissapointed? The 5.5 is damn stiff mind. Bikes don't improve that much nowadays imo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
204 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
it's stiffer, no doubt about it...
I agree. It is noticably stiffer, although in my case, the fork accounts for a huge amount of the improvement. The fork on my Tracer was a 2000 SID, which isn't in the same league as a Nixon.

Does this mean if I go from a 5.5 to a tracer I will be dissapointed? The 5.5 is damn stiff mind. Bikes don't improve that much nowadays imo.
I don't think I could go back and be happy. The small increase in weight is more than made up for by the increased travel and stiffness. And now that I have had more time on the bike, I agree with others who have said it handles better. And the disk brakes? After the first two rides I could never go back.

There is one strange thing though, and I'm not sure if it's my imagination or not. The 5.5 rear suspension doesn't seem quite as supple over the small chatter as the Tracer, even with propedal turned off. But I don't know if it is fair to compare a RP23 that isn't broken in yet to a rear shock with 5 years on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
938 Posts
mtnmasher said:
I agree. It is noticably stiffer, although in my case, the fork accounts for a huge amount of the improvement. The fork on my Tracer was a 2000 SID, which isn't in the same league as a Nixon.
You had a SID on your tracer? That's just wrong! No wonder the 5.5 does better on the downhills. I bet it would suck, too, if you slapped old Sid on there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
204 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Yup, had it on there for five years. Wasn't into downhills much, mosly aerobic climbing. SID is what Excel Sports recommended in 2000, and I'm not the type to replace something that isn't broke. One good thing about it though, I would add air at the beginning of the season, and forget it for the rest of the season. It went five years without a problem, never seviced.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top