[yangpei]

I was thinking of building up a long-travel (6-7 in) trail bike that was relatively light (32-34 lbs). I was looking at the Foes Inferno (7.5lb frame) or a Titus Supermoto FR (? weight). Does anyone have experience with either - good or bad? Thanks.

 

[Jm.]

I doubt very many people have an Inferno yet, but it is an interesting bike, it is ultra-stiff, and if it's anything like my FXR i think it would make a good bike...

 

[Paul J]

7.5lbs?

I was thinking of building up a long-travel (6-7 in) trail bike that was relatively light (32-34 lbs). I was looking at the Foes Inferno (7.5lb frame) or a Titus Supermoto FR (? weight). Does anyone have experience with either - good or bad? Thanks.

Taken from Foes website: Weights listed on DHS Mono above include shock, rear hub and floating disk brake kit; Fly and Inferno weight includes shock and floating brake kit; all models size small weight.

7.7lbs w/ rear shock & floating brake kit? Right............

 

[Jm.]

Taken from Foes website: Weights listed on DHS Mono above include shock, rear hub and floating disk brake kit; Fly and Inferno weight includes shock and floating brake kit; all models size small weight.

7.7lbs w/ rear shock & floating brake kit? Right............

no. Their weights are way off. They don't include the shock or something (even though they claim otherwise)... The FXR is definitely heavier than listed, with the fox shock its around 7.5-8, the inferno is probably around 9, since the fly is just about 11...

 

[Secace]

I also own an FXR but have to assume the ride quality on an Inferno would be very similar.I use my FXR for XC riding and extreme trailriding and with each type I swap between different wheelsets,stem,and move between 6 and 8 inch discs with a floating caliper on the rear using the 8 inchers. My bike on the digital Rapala fish scale is 28# 6oz. in XC trim and 33# flat with the heavy-duty stuff. You should be able to hit your target weight with careful component selection no problem even though the Inferno is in the hole from the start.

 

[cmeride]

I was thinking of building up a long-travel (6-7 in) trail bike that was relatively light (32-34 lbs). I was looking at the Foes Inferno (7.5lb frame) or a Titus Supermoto FR (? weight). Does anyone have experience with either - good or bad? Thanks.

just received my INFERNO frame today ..it took about 2.5 months to get it though from lbs. I'll let you know how she rides later.

 

[Structure]

Have you riden the VPFree?

Hi Tony. How's riding? You coming up to SLO soon?

I haven't riden the VPFree, but I noiticed that CBO in town has several. At least you'd be able to get an idea how they feel. I don't imagine it will be easy to find a built up Inferno to check out. Cool looking bikes though.

 

[ScottW]

No way on that weight

As other have said there is no way the Inferno is 7.5 lbs. My Med FXR with Curnutt and Ti spring is just under 8. When I got the bike I weighed it on 2 different postal scales (with steel spring) at 8 lb 2 oz. Right now it prob sits at 31 lbs. That being said these are great bikes and if you want even more travel the Inferno would be very nice. I know that Fat Tire Cycles in Albuquerque NM has 2 ano grey Inferno frames, if you call them they'll let you know the weight.

It really pisses me off that Foes intentionally lies about the weight of their bikes. I know that everyone does it but it's still BS.

Heres some info from their website posted in 2003:

Calling all weight weenies!
03/21/2003 - For all you fun-lovin' gram counters, we've found a discrepancy in our listed catalog weights regarding the FXR. Listed at 6.7 lbs. with shock, that is the correct weight - without shock. We apologize to anyone who noticed this weight discrepancy rather than the exceptional ride of the frame, masterful craftsmanship, and flawless welds; we hope you can handle that extra weight added by the shock without losing sleep. Now go ride and quit e-mailing us!

So if you're upset that your frame weighs over a pound more than they claim just shut up and accept it. Of course the website still lists the incorrect weight.

Ok, got that off my chest

 

[SSINGA]

I was thinking of building up a long-travel (6-7 in) trail bike that was relatively light (32-34 lbs). I was looking at the Foes Inferno (7.5lb frame) or a Titus Supermoto FR (? weight). Does anyone have experience with either - good or bad? Thanks.

I was looking at the Inferno earlier this year before getting my Moment and the Guys at GO-RIDE told me that the inferno was closer to 9 - 9.5 lbs with the carnutt shock. With that weight it will be tough (read expensive) to get a build that will get you to 33lbs and still have the durability that a 7.5" travel frame deserves.

If you are truely looking for a Trail bike that can handle some air and drops but isn't a big-hit freeride type you might consider the Moment (mine was 8lbs with the DHX and 600lb steel spring) or possibly the new Turner 6 pack. Ventana has a few nice models as well.

Another note about the 2 choices you listed you need to consider is the limited amout of seatpost adjustment. Not a big deal on shorter travel bike but IMO when you want to lower the seat to do DH or technical runs you need to have more than 2-3" of adjustment.

 

[rr]

Another note about the 2 choices you listed you need to consider is the limited amout of seatpost adjustment. Not a big deal on shorter travel bike but IMO when you want to lower the seat to do DH or technical runs you need to have more than 2-3" of adjustment.

Is this really an issue?, I mean if your buying a frame like the Inferno are you going to be running full leg extension like on a CC bike?, probably not so lowering the saddle another 2-3" for techy stuff or steep downhills is probably more than enough. I'm running about 1/2" less leg extension on my FXR than I did on my Truth because I wanted a more upright position and the 2" or so of post adj. is plenty for the rocky technical trails and the steeper technical stuff we ride. The guys on big hit bikes we ride with never have their posts all the way up so if they lower them it's not that much.

 

[SSINGA]

Is this really an issue?, I mean if your buying a frame like the Inferno are you going to be running full leg extension like on a CC bike?, probably not so lowering the saddle another 2-3" for techy stuff or steep downhills is probably more than enough. I'm running about 1/2" less leg extension on my FXR than I did on my Truth because I wanted a more upright position and the 2" or so of post adj. is plenty for the rocky technical trails and the steeper technical stuff we ride. The guys on big hit bikes we ride with never have their posts all the way up so if they lower them it's not that much.

For me this is important and I wanted to point this out to yangpei to help him make his decision. I like to be able to get full leg extension and a few seconds later slam the post to the clamp

 

[rr]

For me this is important and I wanted to point this out to yangpei to help him make his decision. I like to be able to get full leg extension and a few seconds later slam the post to the clamp

Thats cool, I read the same thing over on the Turner forum and was wondering how many out there actually use that much post adjustment.

 

[artsn]

All the time.

I have a RFX and I have to climb to my downs. Trying to climb on a lowered post for any length of time sucks. Im not saying it can't be done. But for me it sucks.

 

[rr]

I have a RFX and I have to climb to my downs. Trying to climb on a lowered post for any length of time sucks. Im not saying it can't be done. But for me it sucks.

I agree, but thats not my point, my point is the adjustability of the post on an interupted ST design is enough for climbing and descending-unless you want to go from full extension to all the way down like SSINGA. I would think most riders who lower their saddles for a difficult descent or technical section are not lowering them too much because you still want to pedal while seated but want the saddle out of the way while standing.

Anyway, I was just questioning whether this is really an issue to consider when buying a bike because you still get enough(at least enough for most) post adj. with a design like the Foes.

 

[SSINGA]

I agree, but thats not my point, my point is the adjustability of the post on an interupted ST design is enough for climbing and descending-unless you want to go from full extension to all the way down like SSINGA. I would think most riders who lower their saddles for a difficult descent or technical section are not lowering them too much because you still want to pedal while seated but want the saddle out of the way while standing.

Anyway, I was just questioning whether this is really an issue to consider when buying a bike because you still get enough(at least enough for most) post adj. with a design like the Foes.

This is really only an issue when you start taking about long travel trail/freeride bikes. I have about 8.5 inches of exposed post at XC height and like to take about 1/2 of that out for technical runs with limited pedaling. There are seatpost that are a post within a post to allow interrupted seat tube design better adjustibility too.

My example of why I like There is a trail locally that has a "playground" area consisting of a few short DH runs, a dual course with three 4' gap jumps and a couple of rock gardens and rock drops. The trail also has a good network of trails that get you in and out of this area. A guy I ride with has a FXR and he can maybe get 3 inches of adjustment out of his post which isn't really enough so he has to carry an extra post or suffer on the trails.

 

[artsn]

I agree

Maybe if all you are talking about is climbing to the top and descending. The Foes limitation is no big deal. But on a bike with 7.5 in of travel I want to be able to ride singletrack up and down, ride the lifts and shuttle, dirt jump, and probably some urban. If you ride a wide variety of terrain a interrupted design wont cut it. I had a SLX and ran into this problem first hand. Sold it for my RFX and haven looked back.

 

[andy f]

This is really only an issue when you start taking about long travel trail/freeride bikes. I have about 8.5 inches of exposed post at XC height and like to take about 1/2 of that out for technical runs with limited pedaling. There are seatpost that are a post within a post to allow interrupted seat tube design better adjustibility too.

My example of why I like There is a trail locally that has a "playground" area consisting of a few short DH runs, a dual course with three 4' gap jumps and a couple of rock gardens and rock drops. The trail also has a good network of trails that get you in and out of this area. A guy I ride with has a FXR and he can maybe get 3 inches of adjustment out of his post which isn't really enough so he has to carry an extra post or suffer on the trails.

There have been high quality telescoping posts (Axiom and others) on the market for a few years now.

 

[rr]

Maybe if all you are talking about is climbing to the top and descending. The Foes limitation is no big deal. But on a bike with 7.5 in of travel I want to be able to ride singletrack up and down, ride the lifts and shuttle, dirt jump, and probably some urban. If you ride a wide variety of terrain a interrupted design wont cut it. I had a SLX and ran into this problem first hand. Sold it for my RFX and haven looked back.

I don't dirt jump but I wouldn't dirt jump on a 7.5 inch bike anyways. We ride a pretty good variety of terrain here on the front range and I definitely lower the saddle regularly, but I have not found it neccessary to lower it that much. There's a lot of riders out there on these types of bikes doing everything you mentioned without a problem.

 

[artsn]

but why

Agreed there are some nice telescopic seatposts out there. But why have to get one. Why not just buy a design that allows you to slam the post if you need to? Maybe Im a fool but I dirt jump with my 6 in RFX all the time and I run that seat pretty low. Maybe things are different on the front range.

 

[rr]

Agreed there are some nice telescopic seatposts out there. But why have to get one. Why not just buy a design that allows you to slam the post if you need to? Maybe Im a fool but I dirt jump with my 6 in RFX all the time and I run that seat pretty low. Maybe things are different on the front range.

Things aren't different here and I don't think an interrupted ST design limits a rider from riding all kinds of terrain. If I wanted to ride the same bike for all the stuff your talking about, I wouldn't be thinking I need a bike with a full ST, I would choose the design that works best for me and if I need to have 2 posts to ride DH one day and climb the next so be it. Most riders are more user specific anyways and wouldn't ride the same bike for trails and FR/DH/DJ.