Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,644 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What configuration will give me the lowest slackest 5" Turner? I want the geometry of the current 6" travel bikes with only 5" of travel. Ventana made a run of bikes for The Path Bike Shop that look like a ton of fun. For most of my trails I don't need 6" of travel but I like the slacker angles and low BB. I feel more connected to the bike and trail with a 5" travel bike than 6"+ travel bike. I also like to be able to stand and climb and a 5" travel bike always feels better to me..... no surprise there.

I have a 2003 rear Spot triangle to work with. I would like to keep the HL rear.

So:
'03 Spot rear to '08 RFX front w/ 5 Spot rockers? can I even do this?

'03 Spot rear to 6 Pack front tri w/ 5 Spot rockers? I have ridden this set up and really like it but would like it a bit lower.

'08 RFX with 5.5" rockers and 7.5" X 2.0" shock? Anyone tried that?

New DW link 5 Spot with 160 mm fork?

Any other suggestions?

Thanks for any and all replies.

TG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
airwreck said:
I'll get a 7.5x2 on the 08 RFX this weekend and get the numbers.
My money would be on that setup. I don't think you could lower the rear end any further (via Spot rear end/seat stays, eccentric reducers, etc) without seat tube contact at bottom out, so you may be out of luck with your Spot rear triangle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,644 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
thanks guys!

miles e said:
My money would be on that setup. I don't think you could lower the rear end any further (via Spot rear end/seat stays, eccentric reducers, etc) without seat tube contact at bottom out, so you may be out of luck with your Spot rear triangle.
Even with a shorter stroke shock?

I was thinking:
'08 Front, older HL spot rear, 5.5" rockers, and a 7.5" X 2.0" shock.

Airwreck,
Looking forward to seeing your results.

TG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
G-AIR said:
Even with a shorter stroke shock?
I'm saying that with the shorter shock (5.5" i2i @ full compression) there is no way to lower the rear end further without putting the seatstay bridge through the seat tube. I'm pretty sure the '03 Spot rear triangle would do just that, considering that it makes the bike sit lower than the '07/'08 Spot rear triangle, which is identical to the '07/08 RFX rear triangle. The 5.5 rockers would probably not help in this regard either; the RFX rockers are a hair longer, so if anything the 5.5 rockers would probably lower BB height, resulting in contact.

Push rockers may actually be a solution that would allow you to run the '03 rear triangle, as they raise the bottom bracket relative to the 5.5 rockers (not sure how they would compare to the RFX rockers). No way to know for sure without trying it though. :cool:
 

·
Wicketed
Joined
·
607 Posts
Slackerer and lowerer

Pack/rfx front and chainstays, spot seatstays and rockers, I think. It's what I'll be trying when Santa buys me a torque wrench. U-turn Lyriks on the front if the climbing is affected. I'm hoping it will have a slightly tauter climbing feel in terms of suspension squat, though with only 0.5" difference it might not be much.

There is some good info here:

http://http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=409681
 

·
~~~~~~~~
Joined
·
5,937 Posts
some numbers with 2.5 minions. I used the measured HT angle off the stanchions.

Stock with 06 66sl set at 170. HT 67.5, BB 14 3/8.


7.5 x 2 rear shock. fork at 170. HT, 66.5 and BB 13 3/4.


I rode it with the fork at 160.


Ride report. Firstly, no complaints from me on the stock setup, despite coming off a low slack old RFX and mixing my ride time with a DHR. Had to run a old VanRC since I pulled the RP3 off the spot only to discover it was stuck down. The spot's RP3 is not a HV can either, not sure what difference that makes.

Was a greasy ride, which is good reason to go low, but nothing spectular was realized handling wise. Hit my pedal on a couple landings. Sure is a lot easier to get on and off the bike with the seat jacked.

I have no idea what the travel, axle path, leverage ratio, etc. is with this shock and am interested to hear what others think these changes have done to all that. Also curious what difference a hi volume versus reg. can has on the RP3 in this application.
 

·
Bite Me.
Joined
·
4,531 Posts
I crunched the numbers when I was playing around with my new RFX - I recall that running the stock 6.4 rockers with a 7.5 x 2 shock yielded 5.7 inches of travel - you already figured out the BB and HTA. With the 5.5 rockers on the stock 2.25" shock - I got 6" travel and the BB dropped to 14.2 with a Maxxis AdVantage 2.4 up front and a Geax Sturdy 2.25 in back - all that was with a Zoke 55 ETA 160mm fork and the 06 rear end. The 5.5 rockers with a 7.5 x 2 shock would yield the stock 5.5 inches of travel, but the BB would drop even more. I think the lowest BB would be achieved running a Spot SS, 5.1 rockers and a 7.5 x 2 shock.

(I missed out on an '06 Flux/Spot rear end on Ebay by a dollar - I was not happy.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,472 Posts
airwreck said:
some numbers with 2.5 minions. I used the measured HT angle off the stanchions.
Yo Aiwreck! Thanks for the info.

I'm not positive, but because forks have rake (offset), measuring the head angle off the stanchions may not give you a correct measurement. If the offset is all in the drop-outs, then your measurements are good. But I think there is offset built into the crown as well.

I am mainly curious about using a 7.5x2 air shock with the Talas fork set to 130mm, as a quick & cheap way to lighten, lower & firm up my RFX for the occasional buff XC trail ride. I'll probably borrow a shock this spring and do some experiments. I'm especially curious as to what the head angle would be with the 7.5 shock and a 130mm fork. If you have any thoughts based on your ride let me know.

I think you guys are correct with the travel. A general leverage ration of 2.84:1 would yield 6.39" with a 2.25 shock, and 5.68" with a 2" stroke shock.
 

·
carpe mañana
Joined
·
7,309 Posts
Keep in mind, that unsagged BB and sagged BB look a little different for different rockers. For example, a 6Pack with 5 spot rockers will have a lower BB unsagged, but a taller one, sagged.

_MK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
This is a very intresting thread. I am about to pull the trigger on a left over 08 Spot, and use the parts from my current ride on it. I have a 7.5x2.0 DHX coil and a 145mm Manitou Nixon. But a part of me want to get the RFX just incase I decide to go bigger in the future. What I am getting out of this thread is that I could Spotify the 08 RFX by using my 7.5x2.0 DHXC and 145mm fork. I would get a bike with similar geometry to the Spot which is perfect for 95% of my riding. But it would be a beefier frame that could handl more abuse than the Spot. Also, in the future I could go back to a large stroke shock and fork if I need a 6.5 bike.

Whatca think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,472 Posts
Tim Mailloux said:
But a part of me want to get the RFX just incase I decide to go bigger in the future. What I am getting out of this thread is that I could Spotify the 08 RFX by using my 7.5x2.0 DHXC and 145mm fork. I would get a bike with similar geometry to the Spot which is perfect for 95% of my riding. But it would be a beefier frame that could handl more abuse than the Spot. Also, in the future I could go back to a large stroke shock and fork if I need a 6.5 bike.

Whatca think?
Thats exactly why I chose the RFX over the spot. Other things to consider:
an 08 rfx frame is about the same weight as an '09 spot, given the same shock
The RFX is already an incedibly versatile frame- with a moderately light build it's perfect for rough XC.
The only thing you might consider is ditching your coil DHX, IMHO the sweet combo would be a coil 7.875x2.25 and an air 7.5x2.0 to choose between, based on the trail du jour. That way you lose weight and travel with the shorter set-up, or gain suspension quality and weight with the longer travel set-up.

But... I haven't tried the 7.5 shock on the RFX so take my opinioon with a grain of salt ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
FM said:
Thats exactly why I chose the RFX over the spot. Other things to consider:
an 08 rfx frame is about the same weight as an '09 spot, given the same shock
The RFX is already an incedibly versatile frame- with a moderately light build it's perfect for rough XC.
The only thing you might consider is ditching your coil DHX, IMHO the sweet combo would be a coil 7.875x2.25 and an air 7.5x2.0 to choose between, based on the trail du jour. That way you lose weight and travel with the shorter set-up, or gain suspension quality and weight with the longer travel set-up.

But... I haven't tried the 7.5 shock on the RFX so take my opinioon with a grain of salt ;)
What do you think a 145mm fork would do to the RFX geo with a 7.5 x 2.o shock. As long as it would be no steeper than 69 I may go this route.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
Should be slacker than 69 deg.
I just put a 7.5x2 shock on my '08 RFX and adjusted the Marz AM fork to 145 just to see.
Measured the head angle at approx 67.5.

Removing the shock and letting the stay rest on the seat tube, the shock mounts are 140mm apart.
So the stay will probably hit the frame under full compression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,472 Posts
highroller said:
Removing the shock and letting the stay rest on the seat tube, the shock mounts are 140mm apart.
So the stay will probably hit the frame under full compression.
Won't be a problem, based on my experience....
7.875 (-) 2.25 = 5.625" i2i at full compression (142.875mm)- stock
7.5 (-) 2.0 = 5.5" i2i at full compression (139.7mm)

I am running an avalanche 7.75x2.25", thats also 5.5" i2i at full compression with no interference issues after a good season of riding. If you are undersprung or go big enough to eek 2mm of flex out of the frame, you might possibly get a small dent... otherwise, no problem. Do watch your seat QR though!

Head angle should be plenty slack with a 145 fork....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
I emailed Turner about any warranty issues with putting a 7.5x2.0 rear shock on the RFX. This was the jist of the responce 'We don't recommend a compressed eye to eye of anything shorter then 5.625' . But he did not answer my warranty question. I emailed him back asking about any warranty issues.

If Turner will not void the frame warranty on the RFX running a 7.5x2.0 rear shock I am going to order one over the Spot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,472 Posts
I know some people have reported intereference issues, even with stock shocks, on turners and other brands... usually with Fox shocks. Might be loose tolerances or maybe something to do with the bottom out bumper.

My avy is 5.5" i2i when fully compressed and it's been fine... but it's an avy and you know Craig was especially careful with the dimensions since he knew I was using it to lower the bike without reducing the travel. So I guess anytime you plan something different than the stock length, it's probably a good idea to test it out real good... low-volume air is probably safer than coil here too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
FM said:
Thats exactly why I chose the RFX over the spot. Other things to consider:
an 08 rfx frame is about the same weight as an '09 spot, given the same shock
The RFX is already an incedibly versatile frame- with a moderately light build it's perfect for rough XC.
The only thing you might consider is ditching your coil DHX, IMHO the sweet combo would be a coil 7.875x2.25 and an air 7.5x2.0 to choose between, based on the trail du jour. That way you lose weight and travel with the shorter set-up, or gain suspension quality and weight with the longer travel set-up.

But... I haven't tried the 7.5 shock on the RFX so take my opinioon with a grain of salt ;)
Hmm, interesting FM, thanks for the post. In the spring I might look at going air on the RFX or maybe trying to lower the travel a bit to put a bigger gap in between it and the Highline, I'm afraid they are going to have a too much overlap. Maybe not though.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top