Quantcast

NOT Firing the Burner up again. The new RFX

slimshady

slimshady

¡Mira, una ardilla!
Dec 20, 2007
5,424
3,278
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...
Regarding the CS debate, my sweet spot is the same one as in other many things: 420 FTW!

The trenduro geometry, with its longer front centers and shortish rear ones fits me good. I've been arguing in favor of this almost since I started riding 20 years ago. You know, those days when a road Colnago had better geometry than most of the top-end MTBs. Except maybe for Klein and Cannondale.
 
kidwoo

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Aug 25, 2003
42,146
13,340
Squirtin ketchup n' mustard on charred flesh
The chainstay housing thing is silly. That should have been internal, or at least have a recessed groove the housing could sit in, then the cover would sit flush over it.

The 'new longer geometry' thing is funny. Because it's already existed for years. They used to call it "the next size up"
 
Last edited:
HAB

HAB

Chelsea from Seattle
Apr 28, 2007
11,580
2,006
Seattle
kidwoo said:
The 'new longer geometry' thing is funny. Because it's already existed for years. They used to call it "the next size up"
Click to expand...
Yeah, but I'm loving being able to get a longer top tube without such a long seat tube. I've 6' with long arms and not that long legs, so the trend towards longer front ends makes it easier to find something that has a long enough reach without getting a stupid high standover.
 
HAB

HAB

Chelsea from Seattle
Apr 28, 2007
11,580
2,006
Seattle
kidwoo said:
Dude the seat tubes on those medium megatrails are ginormous. That IS a large in every way from another company. :D
Click to expand...
Totally agree that it's more like a large. It's the only medium bike I've owned since I was like 13.

It's got a longer reach and shorter seat tube than the size L Spitfire that it replaced.
 
Gary

Gary

"S" is for "neo-luddite"
Aug 27, 2002
7,666
5,583
UK
kidwoo said:
The 'new longer geometry' thing is funny. Because it's already existed for years. They used to call it "the next size up"
Click to expand...
It's funny until you try to buy a new bike... then it gets old far too quickly.

Last month I demo'd a Transition as reading reviews it seemed like a viable replacement for my old dying 02 SX... Now I'm 5'11" but like short low bikes with tight back ends. Always have. "a size down" kinda guy if you will. On paper, even the Medium Scout seemed like it'd be an inch too long up front for my tastes but oh no. shop dork knows better, I should be on a large he says! anyway I take the medium out for the whole day. ride a bit of everything (trail, Jumps, DH... even a few E word stages "Sssshhhhh...") kinda hated it.. not what I was after at all.. partly down to the shit wheel size characteristics and basically just too damn long in the front.. When I take it back the shop dork asks me how I liked it. "Not really..." but prepared to be proven wrong on the wheel size thing I ask "can you get a small in for me to demo?". "No" Then he goes on to tell me I should buy a large. I just need to adapt and I'll "love" it.. kid... fuck off!
 
kidwoo

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Aug 25, 2003
42,146
13,340
Squirtin ketchup n' mustard on charred flesh
Yeah that's not a real problem.

You're just a pussy. :D


Seriously though, you've been riding long enough to know what you want. Some shop fuck with half the lifetime riding experience is not an issue. The bike exists. You know it exists. Give your money to someone else if he's too stupid to take it.
 
Gary

Gary

"S" is for "neo-luddite"
Aug 27, 2002
7,666
5,583
UK
Ha ha... First world problem! ain't that what these here forums are for? !Puurrrrrrrr!" ;)

Oh... and don't worry. my money is in someone else's bank account already...

Didn't get the fashion Tranny in the end either.. stayed 26" and not regretting it one bit.
 
vinny4130

vinny4130

Monkey
Jun 11, 2007
454
215
albuquerque
I can't even for a moment pretend the full suspension mtb I'm buying is one I'm going to keep for more than a few years. I bought a burner and even though I like long a tt and short cs bike, it had many things going for it. The first time I rode it I felt like I couldn't manual it at all but a few rides later not a problem. The other reasons I got it was, it's most likely the last threaded bb, externally routed, straight tube, aluminum, made in the USA frame I would own. And that with the price it trumped the "geo" numbers, most everything else was pretty good and I do seem to like it. What turner has with the RFX is something just like everyone else and it's late to market. Also notable the shitty pivot bushings are gone. Soooo, that's a plus!
TL;DR
Nothing's perfect (burner cs)
Threaded bb (burner)
usa USA USA (burner)
No bushings in RFX enduroed for enduro....bro (RFX)
 
Last edited:
Kanye West

Kanye West

220# bag of hacktastic
Aug 31, 2006
3,741
473
My E29 would probably suck to ride if the chainstays were much longer. After riding it for a year I think it's a VERY integral part of the handling of that bike. Every 29er I've ridden besides that one feels kinda retarded honestly, and a lot of it has to do with the CS length I think. I don't find it to have any stability problems at higher speeds...

On my DH bike ('13 Devinci Wilson), I have the CS in the long setting, which is still like 16.9". That has a high pivot though, and in really hard berms it puts the weight into the front end very favorably as it gets longer. That bike absolutely gets better with speed. Bikes like the Demo feel sketchy as hell to me with the short chainstays and minimal chainstay growth. Even my old DHR with 17.5" chainstays felt super unstable because of the rear end behavior.

As Woo-woo said, the CS length at sag, and what happens to it in the couple inches past the sag point is what's important.



Anyway, who the hell buys $3k trail bike frames? I've been asking this question a lot, and nobody seems to know. I don't know anyone who does that, and I don't think I've ever met anyone at the trails or the resorts who does either. I think most people have enough sense that $3k or so will buy a competent complete bike with a few minutes of shopping around.

Is there some mythical customer base that I seem to be totally unaware of that's perpetuating this shit? Or do they just count on everyone getting discounts somehow?
 
dump

dump

Turbo Monkey
Oct 12, 2001
8,224
4,479
Hacktastic said:
My E29 would probably suck to ride if the chainstays were much longer. After riding it for a year I think it's a VERY integral part of the handling of that bike. Every 29er I've ridden besides that one feels kinda retarded honestly, and a lot of it has to do with the CS length I think. I don't find it to have any stability problems at higher speeds...

On my DH bike ('13 Devinci Wilson), I have the CS in the long setting, which is still like 16.9". That has a high pivot though, and in really hard berms it puts the weight into the front end very favorably as it gets longer. That bike absolutely gets better with speed. Bikes like the Demo feel sketchy as hell to me with the short chainstays and minimal chainstay growth. Even my old DHR with 17.5" chainstays felt super unstable because of the rear end behavior.

As Woo-woo said, the CS length at sag, and what happens to it in the couple inches past the sag point is what's important.



Anyway, who the hell buys $3k trail bike frames? I've been asking this question a lot, and nobody seems to know. I don't know anyone who does that, and I don't think I've ever met anyone at the trails or the resorts who does either. I think most people have enough sense that $3k or so will buy a competent complete bike with a few minutes of shopping around.


Is there some mythical customer base that I seem to be totally unaware of that's perpetuating this shit? Or do they just count on everyone getting discounts somehow?
Click to expand...
My guess is that carbon trial bikes have to be priced at $3K to cover the failure rates. Looking at you Santa Cruz.
 
SylentK

SylentK

Turbo Monkey
Feb 25, 2004
2,332
879
coloRADo
As someone who currently owns both a DW DHR and 5Spot (and GG MT), I'm not at all impressed.

That chainstay w/ shifter cable reminds me of my Sunday and having to put some tubing over the cable housing a la Jacy/Sam Hill's Sunday. Carbon must not lend itself to elevated chainstays?

I know geometry is super personal. But jeebus Turner, living in the dark ages with the short reach IMO. But I am biased as I'm tall w/ long torso and "normal' legs.
 
CBJ

CBJ

year old fart
Mar 19, 2002
12,878
4,221
Copenhagen, Denmark
kidwoo said:
Dude the seat tubes on those medium megatrails are ginormous. That IS a large in every way from another company. :D
Click to expand...
Or Genesis Geometry as Gary Fisher called in the 90s not sure why it did not catch on back then. Maybe it was the short stems that threw people off.
 
ianjenn

ianjenn

Turbo Monkey
Sep 12, 2006
3,001
704
SLO
I have a plastic bike now! The short CS on The Evil makes it super active but the 2" wheelbase difference between it and the Megatrail is noticeable at higher rates of speed.
 
gemini2k

gemini2k

Turbo Monkey
Jul 31, 2005
3,526
117
San Francisco
17.9" reach on an XL trail bike targeted at someone 6'3"...LOL. Do people like their heads to be forward of the front axle or something?

How do these companies keep justifying these prices for Chinese made frames? Seems ridiculous given that we know production costs are so small.
 
Last edited:
slyfink

slyfink

Turbo Monkey
Sep 16, 2008
9,337
5,095
Ottawa, Canada
So, to compare apples to apples (all for medium sized dentists' bikes)

Phoenix Reach:16.85"
Phoneix CS: 17.4"
Phonix Wheelbase: 48.74"
Mach6 Reach: 15.81"
Mach6 CS: 16.95"
Mach6 Wheelbase: 44.85"

HD3 Reach: 16.3"
HD3 CS: 16.9"
HD3 Wheelbase: 45.12"

RFX Reach: 16.2"
RFX CS: 17.2"
RFX Wheelbase: TBD

Edited to add the GG (medium) as a baseline (you know, the official bike of RM)
GG Reach: 17.75"
GG CS: 17.3"
GG wheelbase: 47.3"

re-edited for lack of sleep! (Mach6, not Poenix should have been compared)
 
Last edited:
ianjenn

ianjenn

Turbo Monkey
Sep 12, 2006
3,001
704
SLO
That PHOENIX with 3" longer WB should feel a hell of a lot more stable. That RFX seems small in the reach department. I would like it at 17.5-18.5" in the reach department.
 
djjohnr

djjohnr

Turbo Monkey
Apr 21, 2002
3,017
1,719
Northern California
slyfink said:
So, to compare apples to apples (all for medium sized dentists' bikes)

Phoenix Reach:16.85"
Phoneix CS: 17.4"
Phonix Wheelbase: 48.74"
Mach6 Reach: 15.81"
Mach6 CS: 16.95"
Mach6 Wheelbase: 44.85"

HD3 Reach: 16.3"
HD3 CS: 16.9"
HD3 Wheelbase: 45.12"

RFX Reach: 16.2"
RFX CS: 17.2"
RFX Wheelbase: TBD

Edited to add the GG (medium) as a baseline (you know, the official bike of RM)
GG Reach: 17.75"
GG CS: 17.3"
GG wheelbase: 47.3"

re-edited for lack of sleep! (Mach6, not Poenix should have been compared)
Click to expand...
Look at the recommended heights for mediums though. Ibis's recommended height range for a medium is 5'4"-5'9", Turner's is 5'5"-5'9" and Pivot's is 5'9"-6'. It's tough to compares model sizes directly.
 
Nick

Nick

My name is Nick
Sep 21, 2001
24,067
14,719
where the trails are
djjohnr said:
Look at the recommended heights for mediums though. Ibis's recommended height range for a medium is 5'4"-5'9", Turner's is 5'5"-5'9" and Pivot's is 5'9"-6'. It's tough to compares model sizes directly.
Click to expand...
I rode a Medium Mach6, recommended for my 5'11 height ... UNRIDEABLE!!!1!1
 
big-ted

big-ted

Danced with A, attacked by C, fired by D.
Sep 27, 2005
1,400
47
Vancouver, BC
CBJ said:
Or Genesis Geometry as Gary Fisher called in the 90s not sure why it did not catch on back then. Maybe it was the short stems that threw people off.
Click to expand...
Um. It did. When GF introduced it everyone was running 135mm stems. What we're seeing now is just a more extreme version of it.
 
Kanye West

Kanye West

220# bag of hacktastic
Aug 31, 2006
3,741
473
So let me get this straight:

- Basically a catalog frame from overseas, which we all know is super cheap both in manufacturing cost and quality, and is no longer made in the USA.
- Whack geometry.
- Super late to market.
- Insanely expensive, as if it were a high-quality frame made in the U.S...except it's not.
- BlackOhio wants to see everyone's dongs. Without paying for it.

Sounds like it checks all the boxes?
 
gemini2k

gemini2k

Turbo Monkey
Jul 31, 2005
3,526
117
San Francisco
Hacktastic said:
So let me get this straight:

- Basically a catalog frame from overseas, which we all know is super cheap both in manufacturing cost and quality, and is no longer made in the USA.
- Whack geometry.
- Super late to market.
- Insanely expensive, as if it were a high-quality frame made in the U.S...except it's not.
- BlackOhio wants to see everyone's dongs. Without paying for it.

Sounds like it checks all the boxes?
Click to expand...

Working for companies like Turner must be really depressing. I can't imagine we're helping either.
 
Dogboy

Dogboy

Turbo Monkey
Apr 12, 2004
3,209
584
Durham, NC
Hacktastic said:
So let me get this straight:

- Basically a catalog frame from overseas, which we all know is super cheap both in manufacturing cost and quality, and is no longer made in the USA.
- Whack geometry.
- Super late to market.
- Insanely expensive, as if it were a high-quality frame made in the U.S...except it's not.
- BlackOhio wants to see everyone's dongs. Without paying for it.

Sounds like it checks all the boxes?
Click to expand...
I'm just going to go ahead and assume you were drunk when you posted this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom