Picked up the final parts from Larry at Mountain High Cyclery on Friday. Spent Saturday morning finishing the build out. Sunday hit the trails atn Buffalo Creek to break it in easy. I was so pumped up it felt like the bike was pedaling itself. I can't get the grin wiped off my face!
Super-Moto Ready to Ride
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
The SPV allows it to pedal and climb efficiently, particularly while seated which is all I ever do anymore. No pedal bob on the first ride, which was a mellow break-in ride. Descending is better than my old Quazi-Moto, more stable and confidence inspiring. The final weight is unofficially between 30-32 lbs which was my target build out. I'll get it weighed hopefully within the next couple weeks. I'm taking it out to do a more technical climb with tight switchbacks and exposed rocks tonight. I fully expect my grin will become permanent!yangpei said:
Geometry?
30-32 lbs.? Wow, now I better understand why they discontinued the Quasi.
If I remember your previous thread you're running 7" in the rear. Any idea what the geometry is with 7" rear and the DUC up front? I believe the DUC has a very low AC height for it's travel class.
Do they make a link with adjustable travel or do you need different links for different travel amounts?
Bike looks great.
30-32 lbs.? Wow, now I better understand why they discontinued the Quasi.
If I remember your previous thread you're running 7" in the rear. Any idea what the geometry is with 7" rear and the DUC up front? I believe the DUC has a very low AC height for it's travel class.
Do they make a link with adjustable travel or do you need different links for different travel amounts?
Bike looks great.
TrailDude said:
Joined
·
6,037 Posts
Cool looking bike.
I'd be interested to hear more qualitative comparison between your old Quasi and the SM.
I'd also like to hear how you built out your Quasi. From the pics, it looks like you've got the SM in 7" rear-susp mode, but I'm not sure.
I've a QM built up at about 32# as an aggro trail bike and I absolutely love it, just wondering how things compare, ya know?
I'd be interested to hear more qualitative comparison between your old Quasi and the SM.
I'd also like to hear how you built out your Quasi. From the pics, it looks like you've got the SM in 7" rear-susp mode, but I'm not sure.
I've a QM built up at about 32# as an aggro trail bike and I absolutely love it, just wondering how things compare, ya know?
Joined
·
1,456 Posts
SB rear?
If I recall from your earlier post, you are running a SB rear on your Super-moto, correct? Can you still run the 6 or 7 inch travel rear or does the SB rear limit you to the 5+ inches settings? After having ridden your bike a few times, how does the rear feel in terms of lateral rigidity? I talked to a few guys from Titus and nobody knew if your claim that the SB rear was stiffer than the SM rear was true or not. Thanks.
If I recall from your earlier post, you are running a SB rear on your Super-moto, correct? Can you still run the 6 or 7 inch travel rear or does the SB rear limit you to the 5+ inches settings? After having ridden your bike a few times, how does the rear feel in terms of lateral rigidity? I talked to a few guys from Titus and nobody knew if your claim that the SB rear was stiffer than the SM rear was true or not. Thanks.
The '99 Quazi was XL with a tall seat tower built out with a '02 Z1 FR SL in front and '04 Swinger 4-way in the back. The rest was King, Thompson, Raceface (square taper), SRAM, Avid mech & Hugi hubs. The older Quazis didn't have all the extra head tube gussets or the ovalized tubes. My Quazi rode a little rougher than the SM because of the air shock in the back. It was always a good climber and seemed to get better with the SPV shock. From what I can tell the SM is at least its equal on climbing and I expect the SM to exceed in the decending because of the extra inch in both the front and rear.bear said:
The biggest difference I ran across was the BB height on the Quazi was 16 inches verses the 14 inches on the SM. The saddle on the Quazi is higher than the bars by around 2 inches. With the SM the seat is level with the bars and because of the lower effective height of the Maverick up front the SM is tilted slightly forward so the seatpost and head tube angles are closer to that of the current Quazi. I was wondering if the slacker angles were going to be a challenge in the technical stuff but that seems to be a moot point now.
The SM rear is definately set up in 7" mode. I took pictures and emailed them to Titus and they confirmed the setup. I couldn't ride tonight as planned because of the foul weather moving through the Denver area tonight. Tornado & T-Storm warnings all over the eastern half of the state. I hoping to get back out on the trail after work on Thursday.
Yep, it's running in 7" mode with the SB rear. Tell the guys at Titus to talk to Alan. He told me that the SB rear is a bit lighter and bit stiffer than the SM rear. The lighter part I can understand with fewer welds and less material. As a Clydesdale even the hint of flex can be exagerated when riding rough trail or the occasional launch off a ledge. I didn't have trouble with my old Quazi which had the same shaped chain stays as the SB, not like the current Quazis with the wider opening for beefer tires.yangpei said:
Not sure about the extent of the geometery changes due to the DUC32 but the angles are not as slack which is good for the trail riding I do. Depending on the rocker/shock combo you install the bike can be run at 5 / 5.8 inches or 6 / 7 inches. I can adjust my travel from 7 to 6 inches by changing the shock to the other holes on the rocker.CJH said:
Joined
·
1,456 Posts
Tire clearance?
How's the tire clearance witht he SB rear? I'm guessing you can only run up to 2.3 or 2.4 inch rubber (not that you need to run bigger). Do you have a pic of your tire clearance? Also, how much weight do you save by using the SB rear? Sorry so many Q's. I'm thinking strongly about building up a Super-moto. I would probably go with one of the new 6in SC forks coming out in 2005. Thanks.
How's the tire clearance witht he SB rear? I'm guessing you can only run up to 2.3 or 2.4 inch rubber (not that you need to run bigger). Do you have a pic of your tire clearance? Also, how much weight do you save by using the SB rear? Sorry so many Q's. I'm thinking strongly about building up a Super-moto. I would probably go with one of the new 6in SC forks coming out in 2005. Thanks.
Sorry, I don't have any pic of the rear tire clearance but there not much in this configuration. I'm running a 2.3 tire and I'd guess there's about a quarter inch to the frame available on each side. If tire clearance is importance then get the stock SM rear end. It just weighs a bit more.
Joined
·
1,456 Posts
TrailDude
I hope you are enjoying your new ride. I was wondering if you ever got an actual weight. I am about to pull the trigger on a med Super-Moto FR and was wondering if it was possible to hit a target weight of 32 lbs with a coil shock and reasonable build. I will probably run a Nixon Elite or Firefly Plus (both are a little heavier than your Mav), Hayes Hydraulics (a little heavier than your mech discs), Chris King / 819 wheels, XTR fr/rr. 32 may be a bit optimistic on my part, but I wanted to get an idea. I would guess the med frame is a tad lighter than the XL. Thanks for your time.TrailDude said:
Joined
·
1,456 Posts
Thanks
Thanks for getting back to me. I usually just weigh my bike with a household scale. I zero the scale first, then I weigh myself without the bike, and lastly I weigh myself holding the bike. I can usually get a pretty accurate weight by subtracting my weight from the weight of me holding the bike. Saves unnecessary trips to the LBS! Thanks again. Happy riding.TrailDude said:
Joined
·
436 Posts
hello traildude, just wondering if you can offer up any new ride reports on that sweet rig of yours, any changes coming up? Upgrades at all? I want a 6"+ travel trailbike that is stable at speeds and easy to do some small drops, I trying to learn some of this stuff, nothing big though as Im 44 years old and cant afford any trips to the ER! Anyhoo, Ive been eyeing the new 6 Pack and it does seem like the bike for me, only problem is it wont be around untill next spring! And the Supermoto is out now.
I never thought I could find a bike better than my '99 Quazi-Moto but this bike is it. Why stop at 6 inches when you can have 7 inches managed by a stable platform shock? I am leaving today for Moab with the SM for 5 days to pound the trails until I can't peddle any more.ride red said:
BTW, I'm even older than you and can tell you that a bike like this allows you to ride longer and farther since it soaks up most of the jarring hits that can tire a rider out. The only upgrade since build out so far has been the addition of a computer.
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Join the discussion
