Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Stuck between a rock and a hard place. I've narrowed my search for the ultimate FS bike down to between the Turner Burner and the Titus Racer-X. I'm more of an XC rider/racer than a full-on trail/gnarly downhill guy. Weighing in at 195lbs (with gear and CamelBak), I'm 6'3" with a 33.5" inseam. It's getting to the point where I'm going to start losing sleep over this if I don't settle it once and for all. I am strongly leaning towards a Titus Racer-X over the Turner Burner. The Burner is heavier AND bigger, and maybe too plush for me (I'd also like to use my current fork - Skareb Super 80). I want a quick and responsive bike on those technical uphills, and a bike that can still haul ass over 10-20 mile rides. My second dilemna is frame size. I've heard mixed reports - "you'd be more comfortable on an XL" or "a large will make you faster." Please share your experiences with me, good or bad. I'm ready to get this agony over with and just go ride! Thanks in advance for your insight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
Prob XL

At 6'3" your on the cusp of needing an XL on either bike. If you like short stems then XL for sure. If your running a 80mm fork get the Racer x, regular version not the x-100. It sounds like you want squirrley xc style handling and the racer x is more that way than the burner. But really you should consider going to a 100 mm fork, especially with your size. Then you could go with the racer x-100 or burner. These bikes are both excellent, to really make a choice between them that is meaningful you should test ride both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
305 Posts
sizing help

I am 6'1", 34.5 inseam and ride a large Racer X. It fits great. You seem to have a long torso, so the XL might work out better for you. Check the standover on the XL though. In the end I would gauge the fit by top tube/stem length combo more than anything else.

Can't comment on the Burner, but for $949 at Supergo, that seems like a great price for that bike.

FWIW - I love my Racer X. Climbs like crazy, complete build is under 25 lbs with discs. Had it 1.5 years and have not had to touch the bearings/bushings.

Good luck.

Dirt Pilot said:
Stuck between a rock and a hard place. I've narrowed my search for the ultimate FS bike down to between the Turner Burner and the Titus Racer-X. I'm more of an XC rider/racer than a full-on trail/gnarly downhill guy. Weighing in at 195lbs (with gear and CamelBak), I'm 6'3" with a 33.5" inseam. It's getting to the point where I'm going to start losing sleep over this if I don't settle it once and for all. I am strongly leaning towards a Titus Racer-X over the Turner Burner. The Burner is heavier AND bigger, and maybe too plush for me (I'd also like to use my current fork - Skareb Super 80). I want a quick and responsive bike on those technical uphills, and a bike that can still haul ass over 10-20 mile rides. My second dilemna is frame size. I've heard mixed reports - "you'd be more comfortable on an XL" or "a large will make you faster." Please share your experiences with me, good or bad. I'm ready to get this agony over with and just go ride! Thanks in advance for your insight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
I agree.

I have a Turner XCE (basically a 4" travel Burner) and I love it. It sounds like you want a faster more nimble XC style bike however. If that is the case then the racer-x is really hard to beat.

That being said, I'd look @ the Hammerhead/RX-100 as well. The best way to decide it to get a test ride. It's possible that one or the other will really stand out.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
Small fitting frame...

I've been on a RacerX for 4 seasons and like you I was between sizes and like you I wanted a fast XC racer. I spoke with Chris (the owner) at Titus and ran some measurements of cockpit size that consisted of TT, stem and post. In my case I decided on the smaller frame and stretched out the cockpit with a Thompson setback post and a longer stem. I also run barends to provide more of a stretched out position.

The benefit of going with the smaller frame is that it's very easy to transition in and out of the saddle and it's easy to keep your weight over the front on steep climbs. The bike also handles extremely well. The small size allows me to put/hop the bike over drops, logs and ruts. On all but the rockiest terrain, I can pick very precise lines and hold them. It's also very easy to get way off the back of the bike on the steeps.

The drawback is the fast handling of the RacerX is amplified. In fast off camber sweepers the bike will oversteer if you aren't careful. Also on fast fireroad descents the steering is twitchy.

If you truely want a XC racer the RacerX is hard to beat. That said a XC racer doesn't make a great trail bike. The 80mm fork is pretty short and the stiff rear suspension doesn't brake as well as plusher designs. For just fun trail riding on all but the smoothest trails I prefer a longer travel and slower handling ride.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Great insight...

Thanks all, I really appreciate your feedback. However, I cannot find anyone locally (San Diego) that has either bike built up in my size (L or XL), so I have not been able to test ride. It's unbelieveable, I have been to SuperGo and called all the other local shops. I'm anxious to pull the trigger and get on with building my bike, but hate to spend that money on something I haven't even ridden.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
I've never ridden a RX, but ordered one anyway due to the high reviews it's gotten. Take a look at the sizing...

Large 24.00 71.50 73.00 16.65 20.00 5.25 42.82 12.60 30.94
X-Large 24.60 71.50 73.00 16.65 20.25 6.00 43.44 12.60 31.28

..or...

http://www.titusti.com/racerx.html

You'll see there is not much diff. between the L and XL. I was on an XL Fuel...went with the XL.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top