Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
holymtb
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've been riding a Hammerhead 100X - Titus Racer-X for the past six years. I broke the frame and I'm looking to transfer the parts to another frame. I used the bike for some racing and general fast XC singletrack and fireroad riding. I tend to use my Knolly Endorphin for more technical rides. The Knolly is built with a 36 in front and CCDB in back so it's my light AM ride.
My current Hammerhead set up includes a Revelation 100-130 fork, Industry nine/Stans Arch/Nevegal Small block 8 (summer) Nevegal (winter). I run a Fox RP23 in the back that gives me 4 inches of suspension in the back. Bottom line the bike is very fast and very nimble, yet it can handle rough trails.

I'd want to use the Revelation 100-130 on the Ibis and run the bike in race/fast trail bike setup. Lots of climbs, both technical and fireroads. Would probably want to use the Lopes linkage as both the Hammerhead and Endorphin are stiff frames.

Concerned that I
a) might be getting too much of an AM bike with 140 in back. I might want to use this bike for races or marathons.
b) Handling will not be quick/tight enough
c) Weight as compared to other options with less travel- Flux, Trek EX, Ellsworth Truth, Racer-X, Motolite.

Any thoughts?

Thanks
 

·
The Crow
Joined
·
946 Posts
I think I am qualified to answer this one. I've owned a Alu RX (and ML) and have raced a Carbon RX. I LOVED it. Every second of it. The razor sharp handling, the way it shot to speed, agility, weight, stiffness and it's ability to carve up trails and punch above it's weight (or should I say travel) class.
But the 100mm was a BIG limiting factor for me. It couldn't cope well enough with drops and jumps and bigger roots. So although I loved it I was constantly demoing and looking for a bike to fill the need. The problem with most 140mm bikes was:
1. Extra weight when climbing
2. Higher BB
3. Slower handling
No I didn't mind extra weight when climbing cause I knew that I was goona have to go heavier in order to get a bike to cope with drops and jumps. But I wasn't so kean on sacrificing handling and too much of my BB height. I like a bike that sits low to ground with razor sharp handling.
In the months I was looking I demoed most bikes available in South Africa that's worth looking at.
Spec Stumpjumper & Epic
Titus El Guappo
Yeti ASR-C & 575
SC Nomad, Bullet and Blur
Giant Anthem, Trance
Tomac Snyper
Felt Virtue
Cannondale Scalpel, Rush, Jeckyl (?), Prophet
Merida AM3000
Trek EX
None of them could keep up with the RX in fast technical (twist & turn) single track and didn't feel like they will be able to handle the drops and jumps the way I'd like.

ENTER THE MOJO.

Boy, oh boy. Truly the first bike I tried that's just as fast through twisty turny stuff as the RX. Maybe even faster. But throw in a couple of roots and rocks and the Mojo blasted the RX. To pieces. Then add some drops and jumps and you've completely lost the RX in your wake. And back then I was demo'ing a Large even though I ride a Med. The L was supposed to be too long for me. But in a back to back with the RX it felt better. Without PP swithed on it climb better than the RX. Less bob.

So after MONTHS of demoing LOTS of bikes I sold my RX after one ride on the Mojo.

And I don't regret it for a minute.

When I was first build the Mojo it weighed 200g more than my "race" RX. With heavier wheels, a joplin seatpost and a Rev fork. ONLY 200g!

Now to answer your questions:
a) Thanks to the DW link and the frames weight and neutral geo the bike pedals extremely well. You'll be able to race it.
b) Strap yourself in cause you'll be going faster than what you ever have. In a "deer test" the RX might be faster, but with the Mojo you'll be carrying more momentum into and over stuff so you'll arrive at corners MUCH faster than before. Now prepare yourself for razor-sharp handling.
When I first got my Mojo SL this caught me offguard. Riding well-known trails for the first time with it was unbelievable. I was going so much faster with more composure and control.
c) An ML feels acrigultural compared to the DW-Linked Mojo. The ML is a long travel XC bike than can do trail. The RX is a better bike IMO.
Not sure about the Flux, but the Mojo is a better handling bike than all of those you listed.
 

·
The Crow
Joined
·
946 Posts
Six months down the line and I have it running with a Talas 36, dropped the carbon handlebar & stem and mounted a 2.35 Nevegal in front.
And it still goes like a rocket.
Yes, it's slower on climbs, but it climbs much better than other bikes with 36 Talas' on the front.
Yes, it doesn't quite go where most other 160mm travel goes jump & drop wise BUT it goes quicker, handles & pedals better and rips 95% of the terrain the other guys do.

It's a killer bike. A bit of a freak of nature.
 

·
Trail Rider
Joined
·
914 Posts
I don't think you have to be concerned about weight as far as the SL model. The frame is under 5 lb. The regular Mojo under 6 lb. The handling with a 140 fork is excellent, but some have used a 130 mm fork, and that should increase your handling performance , as far as XC riding. My regular Mojo climbs excellent in the 140 setting on the Talas. It does do excellent in fast singletrack in the shorter travel setting(middle). The rear suspension's anti squat no bob performance is excellent, but pro pedal also gives it that XC feel that you desire.
 

·
Founder: Dirty3hirties
Joined
·
2,031 Posts
I had a HH100 as well......rode it to death for 5 years. I basically rode it too hard, bent the chainstay (replaced with FR chainstays), put on beefy wheels/tires, and a longer fork to make it more "AM". Finally, I just sold it, bought the Mojo.....loooooooooooooooove it. Love it love it love it.

BUT, for what you want, I don't think it's THEEE best tool out there. I'd take a look at the pivot mach 4 or even the 5 if you want it more "trailworthy". It's probably worth taking a look at the new Turners too. Giant's Maestro design should also be considered. I rode a trance and that thing is nimble as $hit but can handle more than the HH100.

I just don't think that a 140 travel bike is the best choice from the dozens of options out there.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
16,457 Posts
You're also looking at the new DW Link Turner 5 Spot in this class. Check out the reviews coming back from riders and the press. You're going to find different interpretations of the DW Link, depending on what the designer wanted for the ride, which seems to be a cool part of DW's involvement. He makes the DW Link exhibit characteristics the designer wants, so several competing designs might ride fairly different, while retaining the basic DW traits.
 

·
holding back the darkness
Joined
·
1,734 Posts
To address your concerns:
Weight: There are plenty of folks in this forum who have leaned the Mojo (particularly the SL) out to 22lbs.

Travel (too much): I feel that it is an obsolete notion that XC bikes need to be set up with minimal travel and that longer travel equates to inefficiency. I would contend that the mojo is a very efficient bike, and that under technical situations climbs better than my hardtail. It is not the travel that is the issue, it is the way the suspension design controls the travel, so to wonder if the mojo has too much travel for XC is a comparison of apples and oranges as the amount of travel is not the determining factor in this case.
However, as Jerk pointed out different manufacturers tailor their DW_Links differently. I have ridden the Pivot Mach 5, for example. It has a decidedly "racier" feel to it, a little stiffer in the initial travel vs. the Mojo which feels more plush.

Geometry: Setting this bike up with a 100-130mm fork should make it feel pretty responsive. I have a 140mm fork and it feels pretty tight if I drop it down into the 120mm setting. In fact, in all but prolonged fireroad climbs I leave my fork in the 140mm setting.
 
1 - 7 of 7 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