not easy, probably easier with the stock boxxer than with my shiver, but the stays are about the same as most other "normal" DH bikes. I haven't manualed anything other bikes recently, so I can't compare, but it's not one of those bikes that has short stays and just "pops" up.mtb care bear said:Jm, how easy is it to manual on the sgs pro dh?
for most bikes that is...santacruz samlls are like 20"...jm said:remember, the 19 is the "medium" sized bike. If you generally ride "medium" sized bikes (as I do because I am 5'11"), get the 19". The 17" is the "small" size bike
well im not the best manual guy but the iron horse rips in the manual dept. but thats with the boxxer team i tried the bike with a 180mm white bros dh-2 and it manualed like crap. im talking the dh trail manual off a rock face and clearing 20-50 feet of rock garden, gully, etc. NOT street manualing.Jm. said:not easy, probably easier with the stock boxxer than with my shiver, but the stays are about the same as most other "normal" DH bikes. I haven't manualed anything other bikes recently, so I can't compare, but it's not one of those bikes that has short stays and just "pops" up.
Sweet! Im not buying the bike just for its manualing power, but i was just curious as to how it manualed. But it sounds awesome!dream4est said:well im not the best manual guy but the iron horse rips in the manual dept. but thats with the boxxer team i tried the bike with a 180mm white bros dh-2 and it manualed like crap. im talking the dh trail manual off a rock face and clearing 20-50 feet of rock garden, gully, etc. NOT street manualing.
Iron Horse actually started using FSR designs in 1999 w/ the G-Spot & SGS-DH models. We started using dw-link in 2002 w/ the Mk II.5 Hollowpoint design. We have max'ed out the potential for FSR for our needs on the race course. The performance of dw-link exceeds FSR in all aspects.jamisfoes said:Iron Horse is changing their entire DH design to incorporate DW linkage in 2005. You see, the problem with Iron Horse is they can't seem to stick to a design for more than three years. Just when they've worked out all the bugs on SGS, they are moving on to a different design and come with it new bugs to be worked out. That's fine with me because it allows me to get a 2004 SGS with Specilaized patented horst link for a killer price.
First, dw-link bikes have the same number of pivots as an FSR bike! A well engineered bike in addition to proper maintence by the rider is always an important to overall longevity of pivots and parts.jamisfoes said:I don't think DW link is not that reliable of a design anyway. It costs a lot in terms of manufecturing process to get all those linkages and pivots right. You can't cut corners and try to use lesser materials because your quality is gonna suffer. I had a 2001 Iron Horse Hollowpoint with DW design. The rear end grew flexy after 6 months because the bearings link all those linkages develope play in them. More linkages you have the more bearing play effects get magnified. It also developed a crack on the y-shaped weld in the rear triangle. Keep in mind, I am speaking from my experience with the 2001 Hollowpoint. Since then, Iron Horse had three years to refine it. Neverthless, 2005 is the first year they are applying the DW linkage to their DH bikes. Who know what kinda of problem they are going to have on the first year production bike?
dw-link and VPP are extremely different in function. While both are multi-link bikes, they are about as different from each other in function as possible. Check out www.dw-link.com for more info on the function of the dw-link design. dw's expertise in engineering has been proven by his involvement in e.thirteen & Evil, this just adds to his pedigree.jamisfoes said:DW and VPP linkage on Santa Cruz bikes are very similar in linkage arrangements and number of linkages. A lot of people are complaining about the linkage creaks on the Blurs after 3 years. Do you expect Iron Horse to get it right the first year?
You are completely wrong. The decision to switch the whole lineup away from FSR was based on performance needs for the product. We found FSR to be at the end of it's usable lifespan for our needs. We needed bikes that performed better on the race course and in the woods. This included lower C of G, better pedalling performance, lower leverage ratios, stiffer rear triangles, and longer s-post insertions. All of these could be accomplished with the dw-link system but not with FSR.jamisfoes said:All I am saying is Iron Horse is changing a proven design because they don't want to pay Specialized loyalty anymore.