[MW]

Hi all.

Any Flux owners running 2.3" Nevegals, Specialized Resolutions, or Conti Verticals (or another 2.3" tire) who can post pics of tire clearance at the chain and seatstays?

Turner specs 2.3" as a max width for the Flux, and I've read elsewhere (here and here) about the "massive" clearance on these frames... but I also noticed that few builds in the Flux Setup thread include 2.3" treads out back.

I'm considering a Flux, but I'm wondering how well the frame fits a larger tire... any comments?

--MW

 

[cowdog]

The flux has ample room for larger tires. No problem. Unfortunately, no pics.

 

[elmadaleno]

I used a pair of 2.35 HighRollers with no problem. :thumbsup:

 

[cactuscorn]

can-o-worms time. though a 2.3 will fit fine with room for mud even, not sure why ya wanna run such a big tire in that frame unless yer a reeeeeeeeealy big guy. sorry, no pics. hell... i dont even have my flux anymore but ill fix that soon enough. outstanding, even incredible bike. get it!

these arent great but they might help some. 2.1 larson tt and 2.1 fire xc pros on a flux. had a better one but it crops itself when i post. wierd....

 

[xjbebop]

"ample room"..absolutely!:thumbsup:

 

[xjbebop]

...ignore the defective green sticker on cc's bike...

 

[cactuscorn]

thanx. that was taken on day 1 and i didnt know the rules yet. i am so sorry folks!

 

[MW]

can-o-worms time. though a 2.3 will fit fine with room for mud even, not sure why ya wanna run such a big tire in that frame unless yer a reeeeeeeeealy big guy.

This is why I like the MTBR forums: there's always someone stirring the pot. :thumbsup:

At 6'2"/200lbs (without gear), I don't think I'm "reeeeeeeeealy" big... but sure, I'll take higher volume tires and run a lower pressures for my weight. That's a perk.

Really though, I'm looking at wider tires for the same reasons "little people" run them: better traction for technical climbing, improved cornering stability at speed, the ability to roll rocks and downhill chutes with less attention to lines... and, again, the improved small-bump compliance that comes with lower tire pressures.

If I understand your question, though, I guess this seems right at home for a 5-Spot ... but maybe out of place on the race-able, XC-oriented Flux?

Hmm... maybe.

I think the ideal bike for where and how I ride is a 4"-travel trailbike. I don't want the handling of a short-travel race bike, but I really don't _need_ 5" for 90% of my saddle time. So... take the geometry and relaxed handling of a 5-Spot or SC Heckler, lose an inch or so of travel, and drop a pound from the frame: that's what I'm looking for. Of the frames I'm shopping--still on paper, mind you--the Flux comes closest to delivering.

Since the folks at Turner suggested I'd do well with a Flux, 115-25mm fork, and sub-100mm stem, I've gotta think I'm on the right track. I just wanted to make sure the Flux wouldn't stick me with 2.1" tires.

Of course... I could follow conventional trailbike wisdom, go with a 5-Spot, and live happily ever after. Nothing wrong with that.

--MW

 

[miles e]

I just wanted to make sure the Flux wouldn't stick me with 2.1" tires.

Absolutely not. The rear end of the Flux was identical to the Spot through '06 (the Spot is changed for '07). The only possible reason you might have to run a smaller tire on the Flux than the Spot would be seattube clearance (at full compression), but I don't know if that would even be an issue. The tire clearance is outstanding on either bike: I ran 2.35 Fat Alberts on my Flux on occasion with no issues, and regularly used 2.5 Nevegals/Blue Grooves on my Spot.

I would suggest you at least consider a tire that leans towards the light/fast side of things. The Vertical Pros and Resolutions would qualify, but probably not the 2.35 Kendas. Schwalbe Nobby Nic 2.4's might be a good option too.

 

[Random Drivel]

I'm 6'3" and 250 and feel right at home on an XL Flux. I run a 2.1 on the back, but will be switching to a larger tire out back, I'll see if I can't post a pic. Hard to beat the Flux in the 4" travel category.

At 6'2"/200lbs (without gear), I don't think I'm "reeeeeeeeealy" big... but sure, I'll take higher volume tires and run a lower pressures for my weight. That's a perk.
If I understand your question, though, I guess this seems right at home for a 5-Spot ... but maybe out of place on the race-able, XC-oriented Flux?
--MW

 

[cactuscorn]

the flux does fine in the rough. just dont treat it like a spot on drops and impacts, youll be golden. at 200, id consider that big, just shy of really big so ya have my blessing on the 2.3's. that and a dollar will get ya 4 quarters. enjoy!

 

[S-Works]

the flux does fine in the rough. /QUOTE]

Oh yeah!

 

[MW]

Hi all.

Thanks for the first-hand feedback: 2.35s on a Flux = no problem. :thumbsup:

I would suggest you at least consider a tire that leans towards the light/fast side of things.

Yeah, the Resolutions would probably get the nod anyway: the guys at my LBS pick 'em as one of the better 2.3" USTs for around here. I have 2.1" Nevegal USTs on my hardtail right now and I do like them... but I don't love 'em enough to convert a 2.3" set.

the flux does fine in the rough. just dont treat it like a spot on drops and impacts, youll be golden. at 200, id consider that big, just shy of really big

Just shy of really big, huh? Hmph. Never would've thought myself a clyde until I started talking with cyclists again. Weird(os).

No worries about treating the Flux like a Spot... if my riding actually warranted a Spot, it'd probably be at the top of my list (tied with a Heckler). That said, it's still easy to rationalize: "Ah, what the he!!, I should get the burlier bike just in case."

Then I think of the hours I spend climbing, and the Flux starts looking like an angel bathed in golden light as dawn breaks over the Swiss Alps (cue violins for Also Sprach Zarathustra). Something like that, anyway.

I run a 2.1 on the back, but will be switching to a larger tire out back, I'll see if I can't post a pic.

That'd be great. Seems like it's a non-issue, but I'd still like to see the pic if you ever get around to it.

S-Works: Love that shot. I actually found your photo-thread for that trip once before... pretty amazing stuff.

Thanks again for all the feedback... you Turner folks are awfully friendly, and I appreciate your time with my questions.

--MW

 

[cactuscorn]

S-Works: Love that shot. I actually found your photo-thread for that trip once before... pretty amazing stuff.

--MW

that was one of the final rides on tina before i was forced to sell her. she went out in grand style thanx to the frendly folks i met here who invited me out to the front range for a little fun before everything went to shyt. 1 month later, she looked like this...... pics taken 1/2 hour apart. focking roof racks!

 

[jokermtb]

judging by Conti's ancient and even recent tire releases, I'd say you'd probably be safe with a Conti 7.5 on you Flux......those tires run anorexically skinny! Comon Germans, ever hear of the proper English Metric system, full of 15/64th's and stuff like that to churn your grey matter! ha!

Flux? if you have to run a fattie, than why are UUU on a flux....? you just answered your own question.

fyi - I have conti vertical pro 2.3's on my SS and they are skinny biotches.....but nice xc tires. My Spot wouldn't even know they were there....and a Flux, maybe a little wink wink.....howz ya fathzah!

 

[MW]

pics taken 1/2 hour apart. focking roof racks!

Dude, that hurts to look at... don't we have moderators on these forums? They should regulate pics like that.

What are you riding now?

--MW

 

[MW]

Flux? if you have to run a fattie, than why are UUU on a flux....? you just answered your own question.

Like I said earlier, for the handling I'm after, "conventional wisdom" would have me looking at a 5-Spot or a Heckler. I would like to demo a Spot... and maybe that'll make the sale over a Flux? We'll see.

Not much market for non-racing, trail-rated 4" bikes, I guess... which is weird to me: seems like a good fit for most of my riding. <shrug>

Anyway... tire widths: some brands run honest, some narrower. Just wanted to make sure a Flux could fit an honest 2.3" if I decide to go that route.

Thanks again for the feedback.

--MW

 

[Juan Speeder]

Not much market for non-racing, trail-rated 4" bikes, I guess... which is weird to me: seems like a good fit for most of my riding. <shrug>

That's because the trails have changed They're way rougher than they used to be, and thus require more travel.

Duh.

 

[cactuscorn]

Dude, that hurts to look at... don't we have moderators on these forums? They should regulate pics like that.

What are you riding now?

--MW

so true. the mods are slackin and i should be banned for snuff shots like that.

gots me one of these but soon ill have another flux and even sooner, 1 of these: