Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,029 Posts
It was their XC mount. Front forks were the normal 2 - 3 inch travel variety.

The Klein URT were a love/hate thing with few inbetween. Had a quick ride on one, but that was about it, and it wasn't my flavor - but knew a few people with 'em and they loved 'em.

JmZ
 

·
just 1 more
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
gotboostedvr6 said:
Saying i just loved mine would be an understatement.
To this day i still think it was faster then my Replacement EX9 frame
It defiantly climbed much faster hen you were out of the saddle.
The main claimed advantages to a URT are it locks out when you stand and drivetrain not affected by suspension action. (And, the lack of multiple links, pivots, etc.) If you can get used to a URT's other quirks they're a decent ride.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
gotboostedvr6 said:
Saying i just loved mine would be an understatement.
To this day i still think it was faster then my Replacement EX9 frame
It defiantly climbed much faster hen you were out of the saddle.

Yes I to was ( still am) a big fan of the Mantra..I still to this day get people who say to me CF I can not belive the sh!t you did on that Mantra...Truth be told I've not had that bike since 1999 and have had at least 25 maybe even 30 bikes since than, but have not been able to find that same fun factor.....Yes Sir Pinguwin you are correct I do still owe you all a photo of my Adroit.;) (but what if nobody like's it?):cryin: CF.......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,079 Posts
CRAZY FRED said:
Really? I did not know this...Doesn't this seem weird given what the market had ( or didn't have) for long travel forks back then? Thanks for the reply gotboostedvr6....CF.
Actually, it makes a lot of sense to have more travel in the rear than the front. Your weight distribution is more to the back so put the travel where your body weight is. Your arms are also great shock absorbers so they need to be added into the equation. My favorite full suspension bike was one that was designed around a 4" fork and had 5" in back. The suspension was very nicely balanced.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Huh?

ssmike said:
Actually, it makes a lot of sense to have more travel in the rear than the front. Your weight distribution is more to the back so put the travel where your body weight is. Your arms are also great shock absorbers so they need to be added into the equation. My favorite full suspension bike was one that was designed around a 4" fork and had 5" in back. The suspension was very nicely balanced.
Bro I don't want to turn this into some big pissing match BUT! "Your arms are great shock absorbers so they need to be added into the equation"? That just might be the [email protected] dumbest thing I've ever heard..Do many 20+ foot drops do ya? I'm guessing NOT...Also big difference between a 4"front and 5"rear and a 2-3"front and SIX/SEVEN inch rear which is what this thread was all about to begin with...."Is this right" a six in.Mantra? Hey just for the record how much travel do your arms have? Two? Three? six?....So next time I get on my rigid Adroit or my rigid 29er SS I'll actually be riding a what? 2" 3" bike?:rolleyes:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
hollister said:
there's the crazy fred we've all come to know and.... um, know
O com on you can say LOVE now can't you? Truth is I've not had any beef with anyone in months..Iand don't want to start now I just didn't agree with that reply..That is ok isn't it? BTW I get the whole using your arms and bent knees to take up some of the blow when jumping,droping or what have you BUT adding your arms in as travel?:skep: CF.
 

·
VRC Illuminati
Joined
·
17,655 Posts
CRAZY FRED said:
Bro I don't want to turn this into some big pissing match BUT! "Your arms are great shock absorbers so they need to be added into the equation"? That just might be the [email protected] dumbest thing I've ever heard..Do many 20+ foot drops do ya? I'm guessing NOT...Also big difference between a 4"front and 5"rear and a 2-3"front and SIX/SEVEN inch rear which is what this thread was all about to begin with...."Is this right" a six in.Mantra? Hey just for the record how much travel do your arms have? Two? Three? six?....So next time I get on my rigid Adroit or my rigid 29er SS I'll actually be riding a what? 2" 3" bike?:rolleyes:
Way to pop off to one of the nicest, most knowledgeable people on this forum. Classic! :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,079 Posts
CRAZY FRED said:
Bro I don't want to turn this into some big pissing match BUT! "Your arms are great shock absorbers so they need to be added into the equation"? That just might be the [email protected] dumbest thing I've ever heard..Do many 20+ foot drops do ya? I'm guessing NOT...Also big difference between a 4"front and 5"rear and a 2-3"front and SIX/SEVEN inch rear which is what this thread was all about to begin with...."Is this right" a six in.Mantra? Hey just for the record how much travel do your arms have? Two? Three? six?....So next time I get on my rigid Adroit or my rigid 29er SS I'll actually be riding a what? 2" 3" bike?:rolleyes:
Boy, that doesn't even deserve a reply, but like you I'll just drop this bit. Ride a bike, any bike, with your elbows locked out, arms fully rigid. Then ride it and allow your elbows and arms to go with the flow. Suspension. Maybe not mechanical suspension, but your arms are isolating the shock from the rest of your body.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
ssmike said:
Boy, that doesn't even deserve a reply, but like you I'll just drop this bit. Ride a bike, any bike, with your elbows locked out, arms fully rigid. Then ride it and allow your elbows and arms to go with the flow. Suspension. Maybe not mechanical suspension, but your arms are isolating the shock from the rest of your body.
I agree with you 100% as I just posted a min.ago.But that's not how you were saying it before..You made it sound as if someone was riding a 5' bike you may as well call it a 6-7"bike because of your arms...That was it, that was all. CF....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,267 Posts
CRAZY FRED said:
I agree with you 100% as I just posted a min.ago.But that's not how you were saying it before..You made it sound as if someone was riding a 5' bike you may as well call it a 6-7"bike because of your arms...That was it, that was all. CF....
At some point the suspension your body gives IS a quantifiable factor. And its probably something over 2"..unless you have T-rex arms...I already can tell you have T-rex tact

;) :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,079 Posts
CRAZY FRED said:
I agree with you 100% as I just posted a min.ago.But that's not how you were saying it before..You made it sound as if someone was riding a 5' bike you may as well call it a 6-7"bike because of your arms...That was it, that was all. CF....
It might have read like that, but it was in reference to the feel of the bike that has more travel in back than front.
 
1 - 20 of 46 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