[scepticshock]

I have a set up question, since I will be going back to the shop to exchange derailures. I am wondering about my bar choice.(Man with too much time on hands!)

Did you use a higher rise, lower rise, or the same, when you set up your RFX compared to your Spot? Did you strive for a pretty close match?

My Spot has 20 mm of spacers, and a Monkey lite XC which I think is 1.25" rise, all on a Vanilla 130 RCL.

I am Planning to get a 66 RCX2 170mm. In my build up box I have a sweet Answer Carbon OS 1" Riser. I have 70 mm 0 rise stem also, just like the Spot's. I didn't really think it out well when I bought it, but wondering if I should have gotten something higher since this is supposed to be a pedal friendly freeride bike, and possibly a shorter stem. Yet with the 170 fork a tad lower might be better. Is there anyway to tell before I actually put it together? :madman:

Both bikes are size large.
Thanks and have a great weekend!

 

[turnerbikes]

diffrnt

If you have both they should be set up differntly so that they are worth keeping both. The Spot should have a lower hand position and slightly narrower bars, lighter of course with about a cm longer or more between the seat and bar. This will completely differentiate between them. Yes the fork on the RFX will lift the front end but that is what you want, the bars to be a couple inches + above the seat. Pedal friendly yes, but more sit up also. I think that the Spot bar and seat relationship should be closer, a couple inches or less if you are going to use the Spot as more of a XC bike, which it really has always been. I am assuming that the seat heights on both bikes is the same for a starting points. With the slacker SA of the RFX you will be put into a better drop position right off the parking lot.

DT

 

[scepticshock]

Thanks DT! That was very helpful. I am rethinking my stem and bar choice right now, and may exchange it for a 50mm stem, and see what they have for a bar with more rise and a bit more width.

The Easton monkey DH bar carbon bar looks sweet, but mucho dinero!

 

[tscheezy]

My effective cockpit (saddle nose to bar clamp) is about 1/2" shorter on my 6-Pack than on the Spot. Bar height is comparable.

The slacker angles on the 6-Pack brings the bars farther back relative to the cranks (saddle too), so that when you stand up to coast or pedal, the bars feel a little more in your lap than they would on a steeper angled bike, all other things being equal. Since a lot of descending is from the standing position, you don't have to get too crazy with short stems to make the cockpit feel small on slacker bikes. I think it would make a lot of sense for manufacturers to report bb to top of head tube (c-c) horizontal distances. Comparing top tubes is not the whole picture when you are talking about AM, FR, and DH bikes.

Otherwise, what DT said.

 

[scepticshock]

My effective cockpit (saddle nose to bar clamp) is about 1/2" shorter on my 6-Pack than on the Spot. Bar height is comparable.

The slacker angles on the 6-Pack brings the bars farther back relative to the cranks (saddle too), so that when you stand up to coast or pedal, the bars feel a little more in your lap than they would on a steeper angled bike, all other things being equal. Since a lot of descending is from the standing position, you don't have to get too crazy with short stems to make the cockpit feel small on slacker bikes. I think it would make a lot of sense for manufacturers to report bb to top of head tube (c-c) horizontal distances. Comparing top tubes is not the whole picture when you are talking about AM, FR, and DH bikes.

Otherwise, what DT said.

TS- what size stem are you running on the Spot Vs. the Pack?

As of this moment I have a med. cage OX derailure, and turned in the bars for 2" aluminum risers. No bling on the bars, but cheap. They were out of stems in what I wanted so I'll wait till next week, and in the meantime weigh the feed back.

 

[tscheezy]

It is a little hard to compare the bikes directly. I have an Easton Vice 80mm/10* stem on the 6-Pack with Answer Protaper 2" rise alu bars. To achieve a relatively flat grip are with those bars, the rise portion is almost vertical, so the back sweep is the only deviation from the stem clamp area. On the 5-Spot I have a Thomson 90mm/15* stem with a Maxm MX-6 1" rise carbon bar. To achieve a flat grip area with the Maxm I have to rotate the bar pretty far forward so the rise portion actually adds to the reach somewhat (because they want to droop if I don't rotate forward). So even though the Spot's stem is only 10mm longer, there is probably another 5-10mm of reach due to the bar geometry.

It gets pretty complicated when you really look at all the variables. I run a straight post on each bike. The shorter stem and non-forward reaching bars on the Pack, combined with the shallower angles ends up making the front center of the bike (from the cranks to the bars) shorter than the Spot despite the fact that the Pack has a longer tt for the same size frame (large in each case). Once you sit down, the slacker seat angle of the 6-Pack still gives you a reasonable cockpit length for pedaling.

The 6-Pack was a sort of difficult bike for me to fit. It took a while, and it is still developing. Partly because it took a while to get my attitude adapted to a FR bike with a FR position, and partly because I tried to apply what I understood about XC fit to a FR bike's angles. It does not translate precisely.

 

[.Danno.]

I've got a large Spot set up as more of an XC bike, and a medium Pack for FR. For me a FR bike should have a shorter top tube, a short seattube - so I can get the seat completely out of the way, and a quite short stem. For the Pack/RFX my focus was on tight, steep techo, and jumping, not grinding out major miles, or flat out DH speed. I've got to admit though that by using a lockdown fork, and staying forward on the seat I can still climb some super steep stuff with it.

I run wide 1.5" riser bars on all my bikes and I always leave a lot of steerer tube on my forks so I can play around with height by moving spacers between being on top of or under the stem.

 

[scepticshock]

I expect I will need to go through the mental adjustments to FR setup as well, from all those years of XC.

My last few experiences with medium sized FR bikes left me wanting a bigger frame. I can see how a smaller frame lends itself to jumping, but have a harder time seeing how it helps you get behind the front wheel in techie downhill. At least with me I found I couldn't run a shorter stem, which is important.

 

[Enel]

I think that the Spot bar and seat relationship should be closer, a couple inches or less
DT

Do you mean a couple inches or less above or below the saddle?

 

[.Danno.]

I expect I will need to go through the mental adjustments to FR setup as well, from all those years of XC.

My last few experiences with medium sized FR bikes left me wanting a bigger frame. I can see how a smaller frame lends itself to jumping, but have a harder time seeing how it helps you get behind the front wheel in techie downhill. At least with me I found I couldn't run a shorter stem, which is important.

For me the shorter top tube and stem allow me to more easily pull up the front of the bike for a bunny hop or lofting off a ledge type drop. The long stem, XC position makes both really hard for me. I also like the centered steering of a short stem. I run a 45mm on my Pack and DH bike.

The longer wheelbase bikes with short stems work fine for me on super steep stuff, so that's not a major factor except if the terrain is tight. Longer bikes are definitely more stable at speed, and because of that my DH bike is a large with a 46+ inch WB.

My medium Pack actually replaced a large Bullit. They basically had the same body position when standing, which was my #1 concern. The large Pack however, was quite a bit bigger than the large Bullit. The most important measurement for me on bike size is from the center of the BB to the center of the HT measured along the downtube - credit to Kidwoo on that.

I'm sure I'd be OK with a large Pack, and really short stem, but I'd hate the long seattube.

 

[turnerbikes]

Yep

A Spot with a bar more than 2" above the extended seat height is more of a light FR relationship and if the bar is lower than 2" from seat leather, than we got ourselves a long travel Nitrous. IMO. Of course injuries and useage vary widely, but that is how I position the bikes in my mind then the 'puter screen when drawing them up. My questions a couple months ago about bar seat relationship seemed to bear that out, with exceptions to every rule of course!

 

[.Danno.]

...with exceptions to every rule of course!

Yeah, I was one of those. I swear I've got my bar really high on my Pack now. So high I can practically manual it just leaning back, but the end of the grips are still 1" below the top of my raised seat. There are 1.5" of spacers under the stem (med Pack, I'm 5'11")

Long legs and long arms.

It's also probably why I really hate riding downhill with the seat up, and why I like to drop it way down