[mx_599]

i am trying to decide on new xc race bike and these are front runners

does anyone know if these are both VPP designs? looks like they both have similar head angles.

has anyone had the chance to ride both? seems like they might be similar if they are both VPP and close HA's

i am trying to find a weight on the blur...

thanks for any help

 

[derby]

Yeti's are linked, falling rate leveraged shock, monopivot swingarm. Yeti bikes, any travel, feels like very efficient balanced in pedaling for a monopivot swingarm type to me.

VPP bikes pedal more solid in platform reaction, more hardtail like in feel when pedaling hard. My opinion is that VPP is the most efficient short sprint pedaling design, best for getting the hole shot, but other designs including ASR are better in traction in looser and rough conditions. Just my impression, of course.

 

[mx_599]

Yeti's are linked, falling rate leveraged shock, monopivot swingarm. Yeti bikes, any travel, feels like very efficient balanced in pedaling for a monopivot swingarm type to me.

VPP bikes pedal more solid in platform reaction, more hardtail like in feel when pedaling hard. My opinion is that VPP is the most efficient short sprint pedaling design, best for getting the hole shot, but other designs including ASR are better in traction in looser and rough conditions. Just my impression, of course.

thanks! i am definitely keeping my mojo, but i want a dedicated xc race bike with less travel as well.

so do you think the yeti has a lot of peddle bob? or do they end up being set pretty stiff when only 4" of travel are available?

i am leaning towards the yeti with the dtswiss shock and the really light dtswiss xrc fork (like 1170grams)

however, i have nothing against the blur either. i was getting a little bit of feeling that the yeti might be more race oriented and the blur would be like a mini mojo. if i already have a mojo, i don't want a blur if it is kind of close but just a little less travel. i want a race bike!

 

[veritechy]

thanks! i am definitely keeping my mojo, but i want a dedicated xc race bike with less travel as well.

so do you think the yeti has a lot of peddle bob? or do they end up being set pretty stiff when only 4" of travel are available?

i am leaning towards the yeti with the dtswiss shock and the really light dtswiss xrc fork (like 1170grams)

however, i have nothing against the blur either. i was getting a little bit of feeling that the yeti might be more race oriented and the blur would be like a mini mojo. if i already have a mojo, i don't want a blur if it is kind of close but just a little less travel. i want a race bike!

Why not a hardtail?
I ride 2 suspension bikes and I took out the HT yesterday. The trail had roots and rocks...nothing major but the HT felt pretty good. More efficient and lighter. The suspension bike is more for 1-2' drops. What kind of trails are you going to use the Yeti for? Just wondering.

 

[mx_599]

Why not a hardtail?
I ride 2 suspension bikes and I took out the HT yesterday. The trail had roots and rocks...nothing major but the HT felt pretty good. More efficient and lighter. The suspension bike is more for 1-2' drops. What kind of trails are you going to use the Yeti for? Just wondering.

i thought about it. i think i got too spoiled with some of the comfort i feel i get from the FS. i am pretty sure i still want FS especially for these long races.

if they were only a couple hours that would be different.

i want to use the yeti for endurance events. so a mixture of all different riding i suppose. although, i think the endurance events are sometimes tamer...but not always.

 

[veritechy]

i thought about it. i think i got too spoiled with some of the comfort i feel i get from the FS. i am pretty sure i still want FS especially for these long races.

if they were only a couple hours that would be different.

i want to use the yeti for endurance events. so a mixture of all different riding i suppose. although, i think the endurance events are sometimes tamer...but not always.

Gotcha. More than 2.5hrs on a HT and my back is in pain:thumbsup:

 

[veritechy]

Have you ever considered making the mojo a light racer? I hear you can get them down to about 25lbs pretty easily...of course different bikes for different occasions.

 

[mx_599]

Have you ever considered making the mojo a light racer? I hear you can get them down to about 25lbs pretty easily...of course different bikes for different occasions.

i do have a mojo and its pretty light.

i was just thinking a more dedicated second race bike with less travel would be better.

figured i could use the mojo as an all-arounder and to "train" on.

if i had to do it over maybe i would have just went with the 4" race bike but when i got the mojo i didnt know i was going to lean towards the endurance events.

 

[veritechy]

If you have a mojo near 25lbs that's a really nice bike.
Would you just want to drop the front end with something like a TALAS? Can you also adjust the rear suspension? I only ask because my Titus allows changing rear travel from 5" to 4". If you can adjust both then you'd be able to change the travel from 5" to 4" and have a nice handling bike.

Another thought: If you are comparing the Yeti ASR you'd probably need to consider a Blur XC. It's more of a 4" travel bike than the regular Blur or LT. It also has a different head angle, is lighter and feels more responsive. As noted above the Blurs have VPP, making them have less bob.

 

[Jayem]

While both would be fine, IMO a 29er hardtail smashes an XC-race 26er. It will roll over stuff as good or better, will be as light or lighter, will carry momentum better, provide more traction uphill, and so on. For longer travel applications in steeper terrain the maneuverability of the 26er still reigns supreme for me, but you can spend a lot of $$$ on a 26er XC FS bike to go "fast", or spend a lot less on a 29er hardtail that will go as fast or faster.

 

[mx_599]

If you have a mojo near 25lbs that's a really nice bike.
Would you just want to drop the front end with something like a TALAS? Can you also adjust the rear suspension? I only ask because my Titus allows changing rear travel from 5" to 4". If you can adjust both then you'd be able to change the travel from 5" to 4" and have a nice handling bike.

Another thought: If you are comparing the Yeti ASR you'd probably need to consider a Blur XC. It's more of a 4" travel bike than the regular Blur or LT. It also has a different head angle, is lighter and feels more responsive. As noted above the Blurs have VPP, making them have less bob.

as far as i know, the mojo is not really made to lower. the back will be set at 5.5" even if you use a fork with less travel. the bike is paid for and it is nice, live and learn i suppose.

yes, i meant the carbon blur xc, sorry i was not specific. it still seems like it is inbetween a 4" racer and my mojo...i almost feel like they would be too close and i really would be wasting money. i believe the SC blur xc was 105mm rear and 100-120mm fork...i know those are very close to the yeti, etc

honestly, the trek top fuel 9.8 is appealing too. i couldn't tell if you can buy frame only on that one or not. it will be tough choice between the yeti, SC blur, or top fuel. another thought ran through my mind...is yeti resting on older technology? i am sure it is a great bike, but isn't essentially unchanged since 2004?

i'd hate to decide on a yeti and then they totally redo bike in 2011 and i miss out on it. i would hope to get at least 2-3 yrs out of this new bike and if i use it for racing mostly the parts should hold up well.

actually, trek looks like it might have one of the best fitting frames for me based on TT length.

tough decisions, oh well i appreciate your input. i am sure either one of them will be great as long as the motor is good.

 

[mx_599]

While both would be fine, IMO a 29er hardtail smashes an XC-race 26er. It will roll over stuff as good or better, will be as light or lighter, will carry momentum better, provide more traction uphill, and so on. For longer travel applications in steeper terrain the maneuverability of the 26er still reigns supreme for me, but you can spend a lot of $$$ on a 26er XC FS bike to go "fast", or spend a lot less on a 29er hardtail that will go as fast or faster.

yes, i agree with everything you say. i just don't think i could tolerate a HT for 12 hr, 24 hr, 50mi, or 100mi events that i am going to do more of this year. i am pretty sure my butt and back would feel it too much.

i scouted out enough races that i think i can do, maybe 5-7, and having a dedicated bike for these events would be worth the money to me. especially if i could get 15-20 races over 2-3 yrs on it with little investment in parts if it is reserved for racing only as much as possible.

i do like some of those 29ers HT! i even thought about the GF superfly 100...but i don't know. leaning towards the top fuel, blur, or ASR xc 4" travel 26er bikes mentioned above at this point.

thanks for reminding me that i want a 29er HT too

 

[veritechy]

...is yeti resting on older technology? i am sure it is a great bike, but isn't essentially unchanged since 2004?

I was alluding to the fact that I feel the Yeti is older technology by just mentioning the Blur had VPP
I feel it is more efficient IMHO. OK, let the flaming begin

Another cheaper option might be to go with the aluminum Blur XC. It's about a lb heavier, but a very nice and light bike.

 

[Jayem]

yes, i agree with everything you say. i just don't think i could tolerate a HT for 12 hr, 24 hr, 50mi, or 100mi events that i am going to do more of this year. i am pretty sure my butt and back would feel it too much.

i scouted out enough races that i think i can do, maybe 5-7, and having a dedicated bike for these events would be worth the money to me. especially if i could get 15-20 races over 2-3 yrs on it with little investment in parts if it is reserved for racing only as much as possible.

i do like some of those 29ers HT! i even thought about the GF superfly 100...but i don't know. leaning towards the top fuel, blur, or ASR xc 4" travel 26er bikes mentioned above at this point.

thanks for reminding me that i want a 29er HT too

Well, you could make it easier on yourself by picking a decent 100mm fork, I'd do a Fox F29 if I had to do it over, but a Reba is descent too, and maybe a suspension seatpost That again would make it far outclass a 26" XC bike IME. If you're riding the 26er you'll be struggling against the smaller wheels in a race, due to constant accelerations. Every pedal stroke is an acceleration, and 29 just seems to be a magical number where you can keep your speed up and every pedal-stroke seems to add more to the last one, whereas you seem to slow down more in between the "impulse" when riding a 26er. I usually ride a heavier AM or damn heavy FR bike, but I also have a 29er hardtail (actually it's rigid right now). The fact that it is rigid right now causes me to swear a lot, and I am going to get that fixed, but it wouldn't be hard to change it, and again, it simply stomps all over 26er XC FS bikes. It was a hardtail when I raced it last, but it was crazy passing all those guys on the long downhill (1500 vert) on my hardtail. I came in at 7th and was obviously pretty fast overall, but I made up a lot of time on that downhill...on a hardtail, which would have been rediculous a few years back IMO. The only reason I'm being a little more vocal about this is because you said the purpose was for racing. The point is to go as all-out fast as possible, and if there is some way to have that and some sort of comfort at the same time, then that is great. If it's not possible, then it kind of makes racing pointless, either from the comfort or from the speed/time point of view. You'd be better off in that case with a more trail-orientated bike. The ultimate may be an XC-FS 29er, and there are quite a few decent ones to choose from these days. 29ers have a long ways to go in many mountain bike segments or subcatagories, but the day of the 26 XC bike has passed IMO/E, unless you are small that is...

 

[mx_599]

I was alluding to the fact that I feel the Yeti is older technology by just mentioning the Blur had VPP
I feel it is more efficient IMHO. OK, let the flaming begin

Another cheaper option might be to go with the aluminum Blur XC. It's about a lb heavier, but a very nice and light bike.

thanks

i know some might say just go test ride all 3. it just never seems that easy though. i am not sure there are ops to test ride. i am sure i'd be happy with any one of them. the trek top fuel is looking good too

 

[mx_599]

Well, you could make it easier on yourself by picking a decent 100mm fork, I'd do a Fox F29 if I had to do it over, but a Reba is descent too, and maybe a suspension seatpost That again would make it far outclass a 26" XC bike IME. If you're riding the 26er you'll be struggling against the smaller wheels in a race, due to constant accelerations. from the speed/time point of view. You'd be better off in that case with a more trail-orientated bike. The ultimate may be an XC-FS 29er, and there are quite a few decent ones to choose from these days. 29ers have a long ways to go in many mountain bike segments or subcatagories, but the day of the 26 XC bike has passed IMO/E.

hmmm, i did not know you liked the 29ers that much. well i dont know. have you had the chance to ride the superfly 100?

i guess i was under the impression the 29ers would be worse for races that might require a lot slow go slow go transitions. however, many of these longer events are more constant so that might not be an issue

 

[veritechy]

Well, you could make it easier on yourself by picking a decent 100mm fork, I'd do a Fox F29 if I had to do it over, but a Reba is descent too,

Some good ideas there Jayem. I didn't even think of the suspension seatpost.
+1 on the Reba too. I had the f100rlc and I like the reba even more. Price of the reba is also a LOT less.

 

[Jayem]

hmmm, i did not know you liked the 29ers that much.

I don't think they'll take over all segments, but eventually 650b will fill the gaps that 29 can not fill. Dealers and manufacturers will be selling/building 26ers for a quite a while longer, and of course they'll want to sell these to any and everyone, but I've tried to keep up with 29ers for years, there are a lot of advantages if "going fast" is a primary concern.

Or think about it this way, you had a Mojo right? You could build up a 26 wheeled mojo as a XC race bike, light race components, and so on. It would end up a little slacker, but it would still pedal oustanding, and due to the low frame weight it would be pretty darn competative IMO. You could easily have that thing at 25lbs or so, and something like a AS-R or Blur XC would weigh what, 24.5lbs. A few pounds of difference never makes a real difference when riding, things like geometry make a bigger difference, and eventually yes, a bike does get too heavy. The point is that many AM bikes pedal "pretty damn good" these days compared to bikes of a few years back, the 3-4" 26 XC FS bikes aren't really going to pedal any better anymore. The primary advantage would be slightly (but ever so slight) lighter weight, and steeper geometry or more climbing-orientated geometry. While these could be beneficial in a race, a decent 29er hardtail makes a much bigger difference comparatively. If one had the money, a high end 29er XC FS bike could be even better, but the weight can balloon pretty fast, not that it's impossible.

If I ride my 26er, I have to pedal like mad in and out of the turns to try and keep up with the 29er guys. If I ride my 29er I coast through the turns and have fun watching the 26er guys try and pedal their a$$ off to keep up with me (either that or I have to keep hitting the brakes cause they are in front of me). This isn't due to better or worse riders, it's just what the wheels do. You add that up over time and over rocks and such and it makes a pretty huge difference.

I'd say moving into the AM catagory you don't have very many good 29er options yet, and you have to watch the travel and geometry closely because the bikes can get long and obtuse pretty fast as the travel increases. That's why 29ers will have trouble taking hold as long as we are riding crazy trails that require more travel. The question becomes (for DH riding): Are we riding trails designed for the bikes, or bikes designed for the trails? There's stuff that I ride on my DH/FR bike that I'd never want to ride on a 29er, no matter how much travel it had.

On the subject of travel, lots of 29er supports love to say how "3 of travel on a 29er is like 5" of travel on a 26er". I highly disagree with this. I'll still say that the 29er rolls through stuff faster (because it doesn't slow down as much), but 3" of travel feels like 3" of travel to me, regardless of the wheel-size. I am not as afraid of endoing or getting hung up, but you are correct that a hardtail is not a FS bike and it's going to jar you more (especially with my rigid setup).

 

[mx_599]

i plan on keeping my mojo.

i was hoping for a 23-24 lb mojo and a maybe a 20 pound 4" FS 26er race bike that i was thinking would maybe be stiffer and more efficient.

this was my initial goal anyhow before starting this thread. i was thinking there would be enough difference...i don't want to end up having 2 similar bikes. that would be a waste and not my intent.

ever ride the superfly 100? know anyone who has? feedback?

i am sort of stuck on FS as you can probably tell.