Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,679 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
the Moto-Lite is not going to be obsolete. After a few months of riding my EG at Demo in NoCal I took out the old trusty, my TiML.
1. The first thing I noticed was the weight. Don't let anyone tell you that 6.5 lbs. dosen't make a difference. I felt like I was on a road bike, I guess, never ridden one. I never got tired on the ride and it was a nice pace that we rode, as well. So, the weight is definately advantage ML.
2. The tech/super steeps were not as balanced as the EG. I was, once again, moving my ass to the front of the seat in order to keep the wheel on the ground and even in the 160mm on the EG it feels more grounded.
3. The ST was relatively the same on both bikes. The advantage goes to the EG due to the tires 2.4 Big Betty vs. the 2.25 Racing Ralph's and the shorter wheelbase. It corners and rails as well as the EG and was just as nimble as I remember.
4. AIR. No comparison. This is where the EG has the full boat. When I was going off anything over 3' I was completely uncomfortable compared to the EG. The ML has a "twitchy" feeling in the air in comparison to the solid feel of the EG.
5. Climbing, in general. The ML does better due to the weight and longer stem on the numbing uphills.
6. All in all, the ML has it's category locked up. It is the perfect bike for those who ride serious XC and like to go on some techy ST and a good DH Trails.

For instance, my buddy Ortho, has no need for the EG. He is a stud on the climbs and rails on the DH but isn't really into anything over 3'. The TiMl of his is perfect for him. I, on the other hand, like a little more aggressive trail riding as my forte' so I utilize the extra that the EG provides and know now that I can turn to old trusty when I ride with him. :thumbsup:

p.s. just my .02!:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
I pretty much agree with everything you said. Though I don't own either bike, i rode a demo ML last summer for almost 2 months and right now i am riding a demo EG. I have taken both bikes to virtually all the same trails. The EG definitely gets the nod for steep and technical climbs, even at 160, as well as obviously for technical singletrack. I don't do many drops, but i've done a few on the EG that i would never even consider trying on the ML. The main drawbacks with the EG are its low BB and the added weight. With the build i have (CC DB steel coil shock, 36 VAN RC2 and Atomlab DHR wheels), its about 8 lbs heavier than the ML which is really noticeable on extended climbs and fast, rolling singletrack.

I still cannot decide which i would pick if i had to choose between the two.

thumb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
Dominator, thanks for the awesome write up. I must admit I've been somewhat taken away with all the hype over the EG. Not hype in a bad way I mean, that bike looks truly awesome. I'm no huckster, and if I'm more than 3' off the ground something is tragically wrong or soon will be. But I find myself wanting a little more help on the downhills (making me contemplate a move from my ML to the EG). I agree with all you've pointed out about the ML. I was thinking the relaxed geometry and added travel would really help me descend better, but I really don't want to give up the weight or "XC'ness" of the ML. I think I would be better served by gaining a little more skill instead of buying easier downs if that makes sense. Anyway, great comparison. For now I think I'll put down $20 for an instructional DVD on cornering and descending and save myself the $4k move to the EG.
 

·
Paper or plastic?
Joined
·
10,620 Posts
Question of a potential future EG owner who also happens to ride Demo (at least used to, not much lately): does the bike need travel adjustment for climbing? On the ML, I swear by the Talas adjustment, however, the one time I rode an EG, the bike felt like it would stay planted even when riding at full travel. Feedback is much appreciated. The potential EG would be on the lighter end of things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,679 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
A question for the Gods. I, myself, am a firm believer in the travel adjust. I use the 130 on all climbs in Demo except for the very top of Sulphur, I drop it too 100. There are many, on this board, that swear that it does nothing but when it gets above 25% I drop the travel. I swear that bike was made for Demo. I think you could get that thing down to sub 30 with no problem. I have big tires, AL bars, Acid 2's Joplin etc. that are heavy. Let me know when you get it and we'll go tear up the forest, figuratively of course.
 

·
Paper or plastic?
Joined
·
10,620 Posts
Dominator13 said:
A question for the Gods. I, myself, am a firm believer in the travel adjust. I use the 130 on all climbs in Demo except for the very top of Sulphur, I drop it too 100. There are many, on this board, that swear that it does nothing but when it gets above 25% I drop the travel. I swear that bike was made for Demo. I think you could get that thing down to sub 30 with no problem. I have big tires, AL bars, Acid 2's Joplin etc. that are heavy. Let me know when you get it and we'll go tear up the forest, figuratively of course.
That's what I suspected, although I rode a Maverick Durance with a Lyrik set at 160, an I never felt the need to lower the fork at Skeggs on some steep stuff. I figured that the longer stays on the EG would keep the front more planted than on the shorter ML. Hmm, so many decisions. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,115 Posts
Great comparison Dom. Yeah, when it comes right down to it, for 90% of the trail that most folks ride, the ML is perfect. Not that the EG won't do fine on it as well.... but generally you give up some snappiness and sharpness when you add that extra weight and cush.

Although I love the super chunk and ledgy, droppy stuff, I've found that for much of what I ride, my HH100x works better....I've even found some new love for my HH100x lately when I was forced to ride it on Porc Rim and Moore Fun this spring. Surprisingly capable. Now for the other ten percent......No doubt, bring on the big bike

Thus my quandry in this thread. Can't I get one bike that really would do it all for me?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,115 Posts
zorg said:
The do it all bike does not exist. Everything is a compromise of some sort.
True. I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek, but I would like to come a bit closer to a "one-bike" for me than I am now.

I recently did a race that is an ''enduro" format where you climb at your own pace and then they time you on 6 mostly downhill sections. The catch there is "mostly" (there is flat and climbing sections on each of the timed trials).... and the fact that eventhough they don't time you on the climbs you still have to do them (5400' worth). I've done the race on my 4" HH100x and my 6.75" Intense 6.6 and I'm definitely faster on the steep rocky downs on the 6.6 (duh) it's about a wash or maybe a bit faster on the HH on the twistier, smoother, downs. The climbing is much easier on the HH (double duh). Something in between the two that has some of the advantages of both bikes might be better for me on that race.

The other thing that has been motivating me to look into a do-it-all bike is Intense's new adjustable travel trail bike (6.25 lb frame adjustable from 5 -6 inches). There are some rides for which one bike or the other is the clear favorite... but there are many rides where neither is ideal and something like that might be the ticket.
 

·
Paper or plastic?
Joined
·
10,620 Posts
Sounds to me that any of the 5-5.5" bikes out there would fit your bill. They all have pluses and minuses. I tried the Spot, Durance, BLT2, Yeti 575 (new model) and of course my ML. My favorite all around the Durance because of the plush ride and light frame. The Spot is also very plush and a great technical climber. Hated the Yeti (too harsh), and the BLT2 lacked in plushness as well, but was a great bike overall. The ML (in the medium size and above) is supposedly close to a Spot but a bit firmer. Mine (small) has okay plushness and is a good all around bike. Mojo looks pretty cool too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
zorg said:
Sounds to me that any of the 5-5.5" bikes out there would fit your bill. They all have pluses and minuses. I tried the Spot, Durance, BLT2, Yeti 575 (new model) and of course my ML. My favorite all around the Durance because of the plush ride and light frame. The Spot is also very plush and a great technical climber. Hated the Yeti (too harsh), and the BLT2 lacked in plushness as well, but was a great bike overall. The ML (in the medium size and above) is supposedly close to a Spot but a bit firmer. Mine (small) has okay plushness and is a good all around bike. Mojo looks pretty cool too.
As a happy Ellsworth Epiphany owner, i could definitely recommend that one as well as an alternative. In my experience, it is more plush and a better climber than a similarly set up ML.

I've never felt the need to adjust the travel on the rear and my coil- U-turn Pike covers the whole spectrum up front.

thumb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,115 Posts
zorg said:
Sounds to me that any of the 5-5.5" bikes out there would fit your bill.
Well, not exactly. None of those bikes are designed around a 160mm TA fork or have 67.5 degree HA like the Intense trailbike nor are they able to go 6" in the rear.... yet also able to convert to 5.5" in the rear and 140 up front. Nice versatility...and at 6.25lbs quite a bit lighter than my 6.6.

I'm not going to be hucking anything over 6 feet... but I am going to be going down some super chunky steep Goat Camp/Cocheese/Holbert/Boneshaker/Upper Body Bag type stuff (all after climbing to the top) and the slacker HA and 160 TA fork would be preferable.

The Bionicon Edison is close (as is the Endorphin) but I wasn't totally enamored with that adjustable system on the Super Shuttle I rode last year at Interbike. Maybe I need to add the Edison onto my list for this year.

Perhaps a 5inch 29er like the Lenz Lunch Box or 5.5 29er, or some future 650b 5incher would be the ticket once the fork/rim/tire choices catch up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,721 Posts
Dominator13 said:
A question for the Gods. I, myself, am a firm believer in the travel adjust. I use the 130 on all climbs in Demo except for the very top of Sulphur, I drop it too 100. There are many, on this board, that swear that it does nothing but when it gets above 25% I drop the travel. I swear that bike was made for Demo. I think you could get that thing down to sub 30 with no problem. I have big tires, AL bars, Acid 2's Joplin etc. that are heavy. Let me know when you get it and we'll go tear up the forest, figuratively of course.
I don't think The El Guapo really needs travel adjust. Low and long wheelbase keeps the front end planted. In my minds eye, it comes down to how light the front end gets during the climb. My Supermoto needed travel adjust to do my local trails, for example most of my attempts at a particularly steep hill ended in a wheelie. Travel adjust keeps the front wheel down and the bike tracking straight. If I had better fitness… I could probably push a higher gear and get out of the saddle to hold the front down, but such is life when I've eaten "a few" too many Cheese burgers.

But I've come to the conclusion that I should use travel adjust sparingly. I make a point of not using travel adjust on fire road climbs. It sounds silly but I'm convinced that my bike rolls faster with more weight bias on the rear tire. Maybe It could be the front suspension absorbing forward motion

….or maybe the tires have a rolling resistance saturation point. The rear tire is already saturated and taking weight off the front reduces its rolling resistance. Or could be tread pattern. or ??
 

·
thats right living legend
Joined
·
6,360 Posts
Exact;ey...

demo_slug said:
I don't think The El Guapo really needs travel adjust. Low and long wheelbase keeps the front end planted. In my minds eye, it comes down to how light the front end gets during the climb. My Supermoto needed travel adjust to do my local trails, for example most of my attempts at a particularly steep hill ended in a wheelie. Travel adjust keeps the front wheel down and the bike tracking straight. If I had better fitness… I could probably push a higher gear and get out of the saddle to hold the front down, but such is life when I've eaten "a few" too many Cheese burgers.

But I've come to the conclusion that I should use travel adjust sparingly. I make a point of not using travel adjust on fire road climbs. It sounds silly but I'm convinced that my bike rolls faster with more weight bias on the rear tire. Maybe It could be the front suspension absorbing forward motion

….or maybe the tires have a rolling resistance saturation point. The rear tire is already saturated and taking weight off the front reduces its rolling resistance. Or could be tread pattern. or ??
100% correct AS ALWAY"S Demo! I think the long stay's must leave you without "much" need for travel adjust. I've felt the climbing turn a bit sluggish lowering the fork on other bikes, but it was mostly suttle, so much that I could of even thought it was in my head sometimes. NOT! with the Guapo however. The INSTANT I drop the fork even to 130, it feels like I may as well just dropped an anchor.
 

·
thats right living legend
Joined
·
6,360 Posts
Pisgah was a different story though, but Pisgah's a different kinda place. 10 miles up, 4 miles down, and there were some super steep sections where I was grabbing for anything I could get my hands on... including travel adjust, which I finally did need to get the front down in some extreme situations. Even had to bring her down to 100mm, once or twice.
 

·
Big Mac
Joined
·
4,989 Posts
blackagness said:
Pisgah was a different story though, but Pisgah's a different kinda place. 10 miles up, 4 miles down, and there were some super steep sections where I was grabbing for anything I could get my hands on... including travel adjust, which I finally did need to get the front down in some extreme situations. Even had to bring her down to 100mm, once or twice.
You came to my neighborhood and you didn't look me up? Damn, I thought we was tight and everything. I am hurt. Thanks a bushel!:D
 

·
"El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,889 Posts
demo_slug said:
I don't think The El Guapo really needs travel adjust. .... In my minds eye, it comes down to how light the front end gets during the climb.
Agreed!!

Also, the EG was designed around a 160mm...

Most other Titus, except the Racer X were thought to use different travel settings and configurations. Compromises had to be made.
 
1 - 20 of 24 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