Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey Guy's ,

I've been riding a Hammerhead 100X for 3 years and am considering making a switch to the Turner Flux. After studying the geometry charts and reading the Turner Forum, it seems I may have discovered a bike worthy of replacing the HH with......maybe!

I love the snappiness and the razor sharp handling of the HH, but have always felt it to be a little nervous going downhill. It seems the geometry of the Flux would solve this issue with it's 1 degree slacker HT angle and slightly longer wheelbase. My concerns are that the slacker HT angle and 1.6" longer wheelbase of the Flux won't allow me to accelerate and carve single track like I've become accustomed to on the HH. Two of my favorite trails contain fast, twisty single track and tight, uphill switchbacks. All of which, I can rail on my HH. I would hate to sacrifice this for a touch more downhill stability. Also fwiw, the bike will be raced a few times a year.

So, my big question to all you Turner guru's out there is...Will the Flux handle and accellerate on par with the Hammerhead while also providing the added touch of downhill stability that I'm looking for?......(or should I just keep the HH because the 2 bikes are so similar in nature?)

Thanks everyone in advance for your input.


MOJO
 

·
No, that's not phonetic
Joined
·
14,313 Posts
Why not toss an adjustable travel fork like a Reba or Talas on the HH and just rack it out for a bit more boing up front and a slacker HA when headed downhill? That would seem to get the handling you want for the descents without possibly sacrificing the tight quarters handling you like in the HH.

Just an idea. What fork do you have now?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I have a Float 100R

I've actually rode a buddy's HH with a Talas set at near max travel and didn't like the way the bike handled going down. It felt lethargic and pushed through some of the fast corners. Probably just a set up issue though.

Your probably right tscheezy. I could get an adjustable travel fork and cure my stability issues going down, but I hate messing with adjustments while I'm riding, even something as simple as dialing up a fork height. I'm more of a set and go kind of guy.
In addition, I sort of have new-bikeitis and have been looking to make a switch. I just haven't found a bike that's a better do all than the HH for what I do. I thought the Flux may be the one excetion though.


MOJO
 

·
No, that's not phonetic
Joined
·
14,313 Posts
If there was a particular fork (I'm thinking of something adjustable or taller than the current Fox) you were eyeing for the Flux, you could get it now and put it on the HH and see if that brings about some positive changes, and if not, you already have the fork for the new rig.

I tried to fight new-bikeitis once. It was the worst 5 minutes of my life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
I am kinda struggling with the same thing.....I have a HH 100X and a Burner....I just got the Burner and it is an XL so it has a .5" longer top tube than the HH. I have both bikes setup with the same distance from the nose of the saddle to the bars but the HH is running a 130mm stem vs a 120mm stem on the Burner. The struggle I have is that the HH is a dedicated race bike and is raced about 15 races a year. The Burner was supposed to be a backup racebike/all day light trail bike. Both bikes have the exact same spec, from brakes/cranks/fork/etc. The Burner just feels more stable but it also feels great in the corners and the climbs. It does not have that twitchy, nervous feeling of the HH but it also does not seem to get sloppy in the corners like a 69 degree HA 5" trail bike. What I am struggling with is if the Burner is an adequate race bike or if I am fooling myself with comfort....Since the specs on the parts and general measurments are the same (down to distance from top of saddle to center of cranks to the type of cranks and wheelsets), I can tell by my gearing how it compares when climbing and coming out of descents and I am holding higher gears/more speed in these situations...What do you guys think? I have been trying to figure out how to post this on both the Turner/Titus forums and get some advice....Thanks.

Greyeye
 

·
SNGLSPD
Joined
·
1,058 Posts
I have both

tscheezy said:
Why not toss an adjustable travel fork like a Reba or Talas on the HH and just rack it out QUOTE]

I have the Talus on my Edge cycles/HH100 even cranked all the way up it feels sketchty on the downhills.It is a great bike fast and quick.and I am faster on any given trail on it.

The Flux is such a different bike it doesnt even compare it is the most stable confident bike I have ridden,I have the same exact build as I had on the other so I feel I am giving it a fair comparison.I always felt the need to lower the seat on technical downhills and I never have felt the need on the Flux,it has improved my technical skills immediately,if you are on the Flux and keep pedalling it will go up and over anything.
Not that it is better,just different I decided to keep both bikes because of the differences.Night and day.
As far as which bike is more fun to ride the Flux wins,If I were a racer the choice would be the Edge Cycles.
The Edge feels like a three inch travel bike,the Flux feel like a five inches of travel,twice as plush.
Come at to the Fruita Fat tire fest and ride one,D.T. will be there.
 

·
\|/Home of the Braves\|/
Joined
·
1,926 Posts
Greyeye - you are one big dude!
Glad to hear that you are digging the Burner. I should be on mine late this week. Also very glad to hear that you like it as compared to the HH. The HH/Flux were strong options for me but the deal on the Burner was just too good to pass by - and I don't have to save up the extra $ for the full price frame!
 

·
Do It Yourself
Joined
·
5,720 Posts
I agree with tscheeezy. Try an adjustable travel fork. It definitely changes the ride. I've had my HH for 3 years as well so I understand the itch to try something new. I've had 6 forks on mine though (02 Float, 03 Float, 03 Vanilla, 04 Minute, 04 Talas, and now PUSH Talas). The Floats were great at the time but I think the bike is a bit more stable with a bit more travel (i.e. axle to crown) up front. Not a lot but a little more. I've ridden it with 125mm. It's doable but obviously less than ideal. It takes more work to keep it from flopping and you really have to get on top of it on the climbs. Something around 105mm-115mm smooths out the skiddishness while maintaining decent handling. External adjustment like the Talas, Minute or Reba will let you dial the handling for the ride or even the moment. The HH has been a great bike and it's still PERFECT for my local trails. But I never stop looking though. I really wanted the MotoLite to work but the sizing is a bit off. I think the bb is a bit too low on the Flux. You might love it though. The only way to know for sure is to try it. Resistance is futile. The only cure for upgraditis is to give in.
 

·
No, that's not phonetic
Joined
·
14,313 Posts
Greyeye, I don't quite get your question. You are faster and more comfortable on the Burner, it handles better (for the most part), and you are wondering what exactly? Me so confused.
 

·
Flyin Canine
Joined
·
2,274 Posts
MOJO67 said:
I have a Float 100R

I've actually rode a buddy's HH with a Talas set at near max travel and didn't like the way the bike handled going down. It felt lethargic and pushed through some of the fast corners. Probably just a set up issue though.

Your probably right tscheezy. I could get an adjustable travel fork and cure my stability issues going down, but I hate messing with adjustments while I'm riding, even something as simple as dialing up a fork height. I'm more of a set and go kind of guy.
In addition, I sort of have new-bikeitis and have been looking to make a switch. I just haven't found a bike that's a better do all than the HH for what I do. I thought the Flux may be the one excetion though.

MOJO
So I have a TALAS on my hammerhead and I also found that at 125mm it does not feel good. For descending I tend to run it at about 105-110mm. I think you could get a TALAS and just run it at ~110 all the time and you would be stoked if you don't like to mess with settings mid ride. And if you still not happy you could always move the fork to the flux later like TS said. Another possible option is to get a 05 float and mess with the internal spacers to get it set to ~110. Other ways to tweak head angle you could try are buying a headset with more stack height or putting spacers under the crown race.

I rode a flux at IB and I liked it but all the parts were so different compared to my HH that I am not sure I can make a fair comparision.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
I am trying to figure out why the HH does not feel as good as I thought it was. Compared to my other trailbikes it is snappy and responsive. Compared to the Burner though, it feels slightly unstable and not as strong in the corners. I am trying to figure out what I am missing....? To me it seems like the HH should be a better race bike but it does not feel that way and I was wondering what someones input might be on this...For example, going fast into a turn and coutersteering or leaning into the corner both feel more stable on the Burner. I think part of it may be the HA and the fact that the HH puts me farther out over the nose as well. The problem with raising the bars or bringing them in closer is that I will then be level with the seat or not stretched out as much. I could throw a layback post on there but this seems like a last ditch effort, especially considering that the bike is the largest HH (as far as I remember). I guess I am looking for some reassurance that the Burner is a full season raceable XC bike when built with the proper spec.....or if its not, that I need to work on my setup on the HH....

Greyeye
 

·
Pixie Dust Addict
Joined
·
3,368 Posts
I just finished 2 consecutive weekends of X-C racing on the Flux, and it is the best race bike I've owned. It doesn't have the snappy feel that you think you would want, but it also is a great platform for putting the power down. The 4 inches of travel and neutral steering allowed me to attack on the singletrack (however, most of it wasn't very tight). The course this past weekend was a lot of bumpy cattle trails where I could stay in the saddle, turn the cranks and let the suspension soak up the bumps. On the gravel road climbs, I could set the pop-loc on the Reba and get out of the saddle if necessary. The rear would not bob, and the traction was good, even on loose surfaces. I'm about 5-10 with a 32" inseam and I'm running a 115 mm stem on a medium Flux, a zero offset post, and 1" rise bars. This setup works really well for trail riding (it keeps my weight a little further back than my previous bike), and I didn't feel like I was giving up anything X-C racing.
 

·
Do It Yourself
Joined
·
5,720 Posts
Greyeye said:
I guess I am looking for some reassurance that the Burner is a full season raceable XC bike when built with the proper spec.....or if its not, that I need to work on my setup on the HH....

Greyeye
I would think the Burner would do fine as an XC racer. Minor differences between gear isn't going to change anything. Racing is all about the engine. But I also think that 130mm stem on the HH is too long. If you can't get a good fit with a 120mm or smaller, it's not the bike for you. Fit trumps all.
 

·
Bite Me.
Joined
·
4,531 Posts
Greyeye - I think there are race bikes and then there are race bikes. Since DT comments that I'm not inherently designed to propel bikes like Geoff Kabush or Ned (I'm 180lbs 6'1"), I find that moving up to a more trail oriented bike design has enabled me to race faster than I could on a dedicated 3" x 3" race machine. I think this is why the Burner may feel intuitively faster for you considering your size and weight. I always performed best on the climbs, gaining significant time over my competitors, but would lose major time on the downhills because I always feared a crash (for good reason having biffed in each of my first three races last year). When I moved onto the O2 for racing with 100mm up front, the change was like night and day. Even though I was hauling an extra pound up the hills (Romic), my climb times were not much less than before; however, the downhills just rocked. It was actually fun to ride again without major fear. For elite level riders there's definitely a niche for bikes like the HH and the Nitrous, for the rest of us, the Fluxes, O2s and Burners have more positives than negatives for overall performance IMO. Don't get hung up on the pigeon hole a bike is put into -race, trail, FR - you have to go with what feels right to get the necessary confidence to race and ride well.
 

·
Bodhisattva
Joined
·
10,848 Posts
As a very satisfied Hammerhead owner for the past 3 & a half years I am very intrigued by this discussion. Larry/Ventanarama is arranging for me to demo a Flux shortly so I help to contribute more soon. I have a hard time believing that there are going to be huge differences between the 2 bikes, but only time in the saddle will tell.

2 comments:
For elite level riders there's definitely a niche for bikes like the HH and the Nitrous,
The Hammerhead is not what I would call an elite level racer. It's more of a trailbike that can be raced, ala the Flux. Both have 4" travel & very similar geometry and weight.

AND
I agree that handling on the Hammerhead gets funky with more than 110-115 of fork travel. I generally keep mine at 105-108 for general riding and bump it to 115 for long techy descents which helps a lot. More travel than that and the front end gets too high & chopperish and the front wheel flops in the tight corners.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,137 Posts
Greyeye said:
I guess I am looking for some reassurance that the Burner is a full season raceable XC bike when built with the proper spec.....or if its not, that I need to work on my setup on the HH....
What's preventing you from actually racing it to answer your own question? After all you have one primary and one secondary racer; just move the secondary to primary and see how it goes. If it doesn't work, switch back to the HH. Since you already own both bikes (and one sits idle as a backup), it's not as if you make the Burner the primary, that you have to immediately sell the HH.
 

·
Bite Me.
Joined
·
4,531 Posts
The Squeaky Wheel said:
2 comments:

The Hammerhead is not what I would call an elite level racer. It's more of a trailbike that can be raced, ala the Flux. Both have 4" travel & very similar geometry and weight.
I tend to disagree but only slightly - I'd characterize the HH as a racebike that can be ridden on the trail. As I understand it, it's essentially a Titus RacerX with 100mm of travel. Compared to both the Flux and the Burner, the HH has a substantially more race oriented geometry. The HH runs a 71 deg. head angle and 73 degree seat angle compared to the Turners' 70 X 73.5. The wheelbase on the large HH is 42.5 compared to 43.8 on the Burner and 44.1 Flux. The HH may not be a dedicated elite level racer like the Nitrous, but its lineage is squarely in the racebike family compared to the twoTurner designs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
I am going to race the Burner this coming weekend and we will see how it does. By posting about the dilema, I was looking for some discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of the Burner vs HH, and I got it. I was also looking for comments on racing a 70 degree HA bike at the sport level. I have raced 69 degree 5" trail bikes before and they feel very fast downhill but wander to much in the climbing. This is something I learned after doing it for while. You guys have given me some good valuable insight into the issue and I will do a post race report....

I pre-rode the course last night on the Burner and I think it wanders a little more than the HH (going off trail when tired) and is not quite as "telepathic"....However, for a really rough trail with a lot of small drops and rough descencts and corners with lots of rocks and roots, I think the Burner will be more stable and hold more momentum into the corners and hills....Allowing me to be faster on this course.....Anyway, afterwards, I will let you guys know how it went....Thanks again for all the insight....

Greyeye
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
Roy said:
What's preventing you from actually racing it to answer your own question? After all you have one primary and one secondary racer; just move the secondary to primary and see how it goes. If it doesn't work, switch back to the HH. Since you already own both bikes (and one sits idle as a backup), it's not as if you make the Burner the primary, that you have to immediately sell the HH.
I just built it up about 2 weeks ago....So I was still riding out the kinks and getting used to it....

Greyeye
 

·
Bodhisattva
Joined
·
10,848 Posts
Lineage of the HH is the Racer-X, but the Hammerhead version (as opposed to the Titus Racer-X 100 version) is sufficiently different that I consider it more of a trailbike than race bike.
The HH has the straight gauge downtube, headset gusset & higher bottom bracket over the Titus version.

Also, since we're comparing, a quick check shows the following numbers between the HH & Flux.

Toptube: HH 24.25, Flux 24.2
Wheelbase: HH 43.25, Flux 44.1
Head Angle: HH 71, Flux 70
Seat Angle: HH 73, Flux 73.5
BB Height: HH 13, Flux 12.8

Those numbers are pretty darned close with the exception of the 3/4" longer wheelbase on the Flux, a slighly steeper HA on the HH (which is a fluid number since it slackens with a longer travel fork such as a TALAS) and a slightly higher BB on the HH.
You really think the above differences account for a very different ride? I don't. But that's why I need to demo a Flux to really know. ;)
 
1 - 20 of 43 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