Banffster said:
Sure bearings instead of bushings sounds good too, anything that improves the lifespan of those bolts. I have the latest and greatest version of the linkage with the bearings and it's pretty skookum, have you had problems there? I assume you had the old style with the bushings since you went all military grade with the ten tonne bearing
So I have been running a michelin dh 24 in a 2.2 size this year on the rear. Size is just a smidge smaller than a maxxis 2.5 width wise but a fair bit shorter. With the 3.5 dogbone I measured the BB to be 14.25 and a HA 63.83* on the angle finder. I have been riding at mount seven (home of the psychosis race) which is quite a rugged venue and I have to say that I am pretty darned satisfied with the BB height. I do still plan on making an adjustable dogbone that will go as long as yours (man that sounds bad) but I fear I will need to get shorter cranks with that setup. Less travel? I 'm not sure, I seem to rail through what I have now:eekster:
The bike is an absolute riot to ride as it sits at the moment, I would really like the F6 to be pretty similar to the current rig. Just give us more flexibility with regards to setup and fasteners that don't constantly bend or break. Part of the appeal of the F5 is it's simplicity, and bad ass moto looks.Keep it simple and easy to work on, I really like that aspect of the F5.
If I was redesigning the F5 (go on Chumba, give me a go!), I'd certainly go for bigger/stronger hardware cos I'm a belt and braces kind of guy. I think my version would cost a little more, but sometimes these things have got to be done - I totally agree it should remain as simple as possible.
In terms of versions, my bike's had the older bushing style throughout, then moved to bearing 'rocker' linkage (as this was the worst place for bushing wear and bolt snapping). That replacement part cost me a fortune because of shipping/import duty/£vs$ at the time etc. That's when I decided I would stop buy original Chumba parts and make my own. I don't think it
saved me any money but everything came out just how I wanted it each time. There are other mods on my frame that you can't see - on my frame, the lower dog bone mount was ovalising, causing some play (this is one of the problem of using smaller hardware, IMO). So I enlarged the hole and turned some steel tube to the right size and press fitted it to keep it strong. When I was taking the frame apart to do the last mods, I noticed that the bearings in the new rocker link which I had spent so much $$ on were already crapped out (less than a year). So I thought F**k it, I'm going to sort that too - hence overkill bearings. The bonus of that is that the rocker is now very easy to remove (no press fit parts to drift out), should I ever need to.
My kind of riding terrain is generally not deserving of an F5 if I'm honest, I just was sick of having bikes that were unreliable. I do ride in Scotland, Wales etc which can be rough places but in general my local trails in England are pretty slow/technical. The Chumba is amazing for the Alps/Morzine etc.
I was considering asking cane creek (I'm on 1st gen double barrel) if it's possible to slightly decrease shock travel, then I would slightly shorten the dog bone so that my static geometry remains the same but bottom out is 0.5-0.75" higher. I'm already running 165mm cranks and it's sketchy for me as it is! Cornering is good low, but we have some flattish rock gardens at my local trails which you have to pedal/pump through to maintain speed.
What shock are you running Banffster? I find the progression on the F5 is such that I almost never feel a harsh bottom out...I'm 13st and running a 325lb spring :yikes:
