[descente]

i was leaning towards the DHR or legend a few months ago, but ended up buying a V10C. turns out the only bike i'd never ridden ended up being the wisest choice i've ever made. bikes are so good these days, it is hard to make a bad choice from a performance perspective. what it really boils down to is sizing and which bike will feel most natural to you, cause thats what is gonna let you boost jumps and munch rocks.

 

[jwick]

A person's reach is also a factor to consider which is rarely ever done. I'm 6'1", but I have a 76" reach. There's no way I could ride on a M anything again.

How does one measure their own reach? I've been wondering about this one for a while. At 6'4" I often find myself wondering about fitment between L and XL frames. Never really measured myself. (insert joke here)

 

[nmpearson]

^ gosh. Musta been pretty blingy.

I'm at 40.9 with an 08/09 boxxer team and rc4 steel spring. Dual ply DH MinIons.

Not really...i mean, kinda. None at None in Provo, Utah, United States - photo by nmpearson - Pinkbike.com

here's proof at the lightest= http://www.pinkbike.com/photo/6171128/

It was def built well though, i'm 220 and never had a problem with it. The wheels were subrosa's to kings...they came out at sub 2000g's. It brought the weight way down. i'm going to shoot for 37 next year. i want more of a beefy bike

 

[atrokz]

How does one measure their own reach? I've been wondering about this one for a while. At 6'4" I often find myself wondering about fitment between L and XL frames. Never really measured myself. (insert joke here)

There's two ways. One measurement is armpit to tip of longest finger, and the other is essentialy wingspan, which is what I measured. Tip of finger to tip of fingers, with arms stretched out.

The reason I think this plays a role, is you can have a guy who's 6'4" with a 72" reach, and a guy who's 6'1" with a 76 inch reach, so that when you're on the bike it ends up being close from foot to hand. You don't steer with the top of your head and there's more to ergonomics than height. You steer with your arms and pedal with your feet thus I believe reach to be a factor that's just as important as height.

 

[norbar]

In my opinion the Top tube has to do more with upper body length/height. For reach you shoud adjust bar width.

 

[Da Peach]

Not really...i mean, kinda. None at None in Provo, Utah, United States - photo by nmpearson - Pinkbike.com

here's proof at the lightest= None at None in Provo, Utah, United States - photo by nmpearson - Pinkbike.com

It was def built well though, i'm 220 and never had a problem with it. The wheels were subrosa's to kings...they came out at sub 2000g's. It brought the weight way down. i'm going to shoot for 37 next year. i want more of a beefy bike

slick.

 

[alpine slug]

I guess "proving" that you "win" some light-bike contest on the Toobz beats the crap out of taking top podium at a DH race in some class besides beginner.

 

[William42]

I worked hard for my beginner trophys. Fyck you, way to take all the pride away.

actually, I wasn't able to win a trophy in beginner

 

[Sam B]

Enough with the crap about who's bike is lightest or who isn't winning beginner. This is all about having fun in the woods on bikes.

It looks like this guy gets it...

Alex Poyner In Whistler VOD

 

[Ian Collins]

Enough with the crap about who's bike is lightest or who isn't winning beginner. This is all about having fun in the woods on bikes.

It looks like this guy gets it...

Alex Poyner In Whistler VOD

holy balls....thanks for sharing....the filming was buttery in that edit....so well done....serious props....

 

[Mo(n)arch]

Enough with the crap about who's bike is lightest or who isn't winning beginner. This is all about having fun in the woods on bikes.

Best quote ever! must spread rep!

 

[HardtailHack]

Wow I thought this thread did well to miss all the my bike is lighter than your bike posts but bam here they all are.

Just whack a 600lb spring on a Huffy, it will weigh 600lb but will be poppy as ****!

 

[climbingbubba]

Thanks guys, Just for the record, I never said anything about which frame weighed more. My current DH bike is 39.5 lbs. I would like to lose weight off the wheels though since they are beastly but that is more for performance than the sake of losing weight.

Also an update, I tried a medium demo around the parking lot yesterday and it did feel a bit to small for me. I am 6 feet but have the wingspan of someone 6'3ish. Little to compact for my taste.

But since we are talking about weight, the demo I rode yesterday was a young sponsored rippers and his demo was down to 33.8 lbs

 

[nmpearson]

sorry, i wasn't trying to prove anything. all i was saying is light can be achieved with a proper build

 

[ianjenn]

But since we are talking about weight, the demo I rode yesterday was a young sponsored rippers and his demo was down to 33.8 lbs

Yeah bet those wheels will hold up..... I am somewhat lazy on maintenance so proven components over weight any day. I still ride real DH wheels, tubes and tires. Bikes are like 38-40LBS. I am gonna build a lighter maybe 35-36 version see how it holds up.

 

[Pegboy]

I think I was the one that orriginally brought up weight. Lightening the bike up made a noticable difference to me, but I didn't go stupid light (comprimise durability) for the sake of trying to build the lightest bike out there. I am in the same market as the OP and just (after spending a bunch on parts last year) would rather avoid buying a new frame that gives me a 1lb+ weight penalty. I am currently on an 08 Factory Sunday with:
11 boxxer wc
Pushed DHX 3.0 ti spring
Boobar
point 1 DM stem
Elixer CR carbon brakes f&R
Ibeam Bel Air
721's on Hope's, DB spokes w/ 2.5 wire bead DHF minnion 3c's and 2.2 XC tubes
Saints cranks w/ LG1 taco guard
KMC X9 chain
Dura ace Ti cassette
Sram X9 der & XO shifter
Shimano 545 peds

I can't see losing weight anywhere that would add up to a pound so I can't really make that possible extra frame weight up anywhere else...hence the concern. And yes..I HAVE to use clip in pedals that I can adjust spring tension on.

 

[climbingbubba]

Yeah bet those wheels will hold up..... I am somewhat lazy on maintenance so proven components over weight any day. I still ride real DH wheels, tubes and tires. Bikes are like 38-40LBS. I am gonna build a lighter maybe 35-36 version see how it holds up.

ya except the kid raced the bike the entire season exactly like it was. The frame actually looked the most beat. He probably weighs under 140lbs.

Here is a little bit of build specs so you can get an idea, also he had SX casing tires on for a more pedal intensive race so add a pound for DH tires on regular tracks

medium demo frame
2011 boxxer wc
vivid air
descendant cranks
ENVE Carbon wheelset ran tubeless
ENVE Carbon bars
Avid carbon/mag codes
etc....

For his weight it seemed more than solid.

And I am not saying that I would ride it since im fat and a hack.

 

[Pslide]

More progression means that you can easily eat into more travel, which means more return stroke (thus, energy stored in spring) available to assist you with getting the bike in the air. I haven't had a *lot* of experience with double-progressive designs (DWDHR, Revolt), but with my small amount of riding time, I believe they have less pop than a purely progressive bike (SP DHR, TR450), and more than the linear frames.

The downside to the pure progressive bikes is exactly the same thing that makes them fun/poppy - you blow through a lot of travel easily and sit deeper in the stroke. That's what DW's work aims to rectify with the dual-progression.

I'm confused as to why you think a progressive leverage curve eats into more travel and will blow through travel, more so than say a linear or non rising rate curve. The whole point of a rising rate (or progressive) curve is to ramp up as you get deeper in the travel to avoid this.

I'll agree a progressive design does sit a bit deeper in its travel, but only because you can use a lighter spring thanks to the shape of the curve, whereas you're forced to use a heavier spring on a more linear bike.

 

[goodgrief]

I'm confused as to why you think a progressive leverage curve eats into more travel and will blow through travel, more so than say a linear or non rising rate curve. The whole point of a rising rate (or progressive) curve is to ramp up as you get deeper in the travel to avoid this.

I'll agree a progressive design does sit a bit deeper in its travel, but only because you can use a lighter spring thanks to the shape of the curve, whereas you're forced to use a heavier spring on a more linear bike.

there you go.

 

[Udi]

I'm confused as to why you think a progressive leverage curve eats into more travel and will blow through travel, more so than say a linear or non rising rate curve. The whole point of a rising rate (or progressive) curve is to ramp up as you get deeper in the travel to avoid this.

Ramping up deep in the travel isn't going to stop you using the first 1/2 - 2/3 of your travel. If you compare two frames with identical average leverage ratios, but one progressive and one linear, the progressive frame will have a higher leverage ratio through the first half of the travel. Thus you sit deeper in the travel - dead simple.

I'll agree a progressive design does sit a bit deeper in its travel, but only because you can use a lighter spring thanks to the shape of the curve, whereas you're forced to use a heavier spring on a more linear bike.

Firstly, that's not correct - see above. It will sit deeper in the travel with the same spring because of the increased leverage in the early to mid stroke.

To go off on a tangent, I don't really agree with the spring theory either. If you tried this in practice, you would wind up with a bike that wallowed in its travel a lot. Think about the example I gave before, say you ran a 300 spring in the linear frame (and were happy with it). If you ran the same 300 spring in the progressive frame, you would now sit deeper into the travel statically, use more travel under cornering loads (greater dynamic geometry changes = reduced stability), and have less available travel - that would get firmer quickly. Now imagine that you used a lighter 275 spring like you suggest - you just made all those things even worse.

So I think on a progressive frame it would be safe to say you could actually use the same spring, or even a slightly firmer spring depending on the curves. Obviously shock tune would change to suit. The benefit with the progressive frame would be freedom to choose from improvements in bump absorption and/or bottom out resistance compared to the linear frame. The potential disadvantage is excessive travel usage / wallowing.

This is where complex (eg. dual) leverage curves can attempt to give the best of both worlds, but it can be tricky to tune damping curves (which are primarily speed sensitive in conventional dampers) to deal with the position-based variations.

 

[Pslide]

...

I agree with most of what you are saying, and there are many types of "progressive" curves, from linear rising rate to smiley curves and frowning curves (for lack of a better description lest I get into regressive progressive curves, etc). I think we are probably defining "progressive" differently. I think most people define progressive as anything with a rising rate, so that's what I assume when I heard the term. I think you are actually comparing a linear rising rate design to a progressive (exponential) rising rate, in which case I can see where you're coming from.

 

[Udi]

I think the extent of those things would vary if you were talking about a linear rising rate compared to an exponential rising rate (a linear rising rate would be better off - less hammock-to-wall/951 effect), but I think even if you were talking about a dead linear frame (eg. 2.5:1 all the way through) vs a linear rising rate frame (2.5:1 average), everything I said would still apply - in terms of what would happen if you used the same or lighter spring rate.

Correct me if I'm wrong though, it's late and I'm definitely no expert on the topic. Just intrigued by it.

For the record, I don't think there is one ideal curve that will answer everything, it's just one thing to think about when choosing a frame and tuning around it. On the other hand, it seems to me that if you're clever about it, you depend less on both suspension tuning and other factors (like axle path) to reach an ideal setup.

 

[norbar]

I think what you were talking about springs vs progressive you meant progressive first part of travel. Am I right? I notice that for example my legend where Keith claims the progressive part keeps the frame sensitive (the chain stretch keeps it from blowing through it too easily). So by analogy if the first part was linear and the 2nd part progressive and the spring was used so it would sit around 33% of the travel (where the frame is sill linear) the 2nd frame would use less travel if chain stretch and damping are the same?

Though I'm in the same place as Udi - little sleep and a long train ride behind me.

 

[JustMtnB44]

Back to the original topic, climbingbubba do you find the Canfield Jedi to not be poppy/lively enough for jumps and flowy trails? Is it better or worse than the Legend in this case? And is the take-away lesson from this thread that the 2011+ Demo is the best bike ever made?

 

[climbingbubba]

Back to the original topic, climbingbubba do you find the Canfield Jedi to not be poppy/lively enough for jumps and flowy trails? Is it better or worse than the Legend in this case? And is the take-away lesson from this thread that the 2011+ Demo is the best bike ever made?

Ha ha, loaded question

I love the jedi and I think the place im having problems with it as far as being lively is getting the rear shock dialed (like mentioned above). Add that to the multiple shock settings and its been a bit hard to get it just right for all the different types of riding I do. If I set it up in the progressive setting for jumping then it gets tons of pop and is lively. It was hard to get the rebound tuned just right though since it tended to buck a bit more. I feel like the elka I have is just a bit off on the rebound tune since 3/4 of the clicks are unusable since they are way to fast and the last 1/4 goes from fast to stuck down. It feels like I only have 2-3 clicks of usable rebound clicks and I just can't seem to fine tune it. I would love to try a different shock on it like an avalanche. Also once set up for jumping (like other bikes im sure) it doesn't feel as good through the rough (or atleast compared to when it is run in the middle setting).

I guess in the end its more user incompetence then problem with the bike (and maybe a little bit of shock issues)

Comparing it to the legend is hard. I had a size to small on the legend so while it felt a bit more lively it also felt a bit less confidence inspiring on big hits.

I would really love to try a Demo, DHR, and TR250/450 out and see how they all feel side by side. I really like the jedi so I wouldn't be surprised if after testing all of them I decided to stick with it.

 

[Ian Collins]

I feel like the elka I have is just a bit off on the rebound tune since 3/4 of the clicks are unusable since they are way to fast and the last 1/4 goes from fast to stuck down. It feels like I only have 2-3 clicks of usable rebound clicks and I just can't seem to fine tune it.

honestly this is a common problem with elka....you should consider having another tune done for the elka specifically for your bike....email erik@elkaservicecenter.com and give him a run down on what's going on with your shock....he'll get you dialed in....the nice thing about sending it to him is that he's in america so you'll get it back quicker.....

i had the same issues with mine, and while i'll admit that the shock is inherently like that(small percentage of useable clicks relative to the zillion clicks it offers) he got mine tuned in to my liking and i have all the range that i need...great guy and quick service...give that shock another shot...

 

[climbingbubba]

I emailed him last night, we will see what he says.


I wish I could ride someone locals demo right now. Found a killer deal on an almost complete large demo 8. I could use the best parts off my current bike and it and sell of the rest and have an extremely rad bike and enough extra cash to buy a new wheelset and maybe even a fox 40. I just wish I knew how it rides and how the large would feel. I hear they corner amazing which is a huge plus for the local tracks. They are extremely twisty and turny with only a few high speed rough sections.

 

[EVIL JN]

A demo in large will be plenty stable while still maintaining its nimbleness due to its short stays. My current bike is a 2011 demo and i cant fault it any way except that i should have gone with a large with my 6' height.

 

[climbingbubba]

A demo in large will be plenty stable while still maintaining its nimbleness due to its short stays. My current bike is a 2011 demo and i cant fault it any way except that i should have gone with a large with my 6' height.

I am also 6 feet tall and the medium I tried felt rideable but cramped. Is there a big jump between the medium and the large? I keep going back and forth between which bike I want. I hate this time of year because I can't really ride due to weather so I just sit inside and think about how awesome any other bike would be except my own ha ha

 

[JustMtnB44]

I keep going back and forth between which bike I want. I hate this time of year because I can't really ride due to weather so I just sit inside and think about how awesome any other bike would be except my own ha ha

This is exactly what I am doing also. I'm currently riding a Turner Highline but am looking to move to something different for next year.

 

[climbingbubba]

This is exactly what I am doing also. I'm currently riding a Turner Highline but am looking to move to something different for next year.

The danger in this that I have found is I will buy a new bike now and ride it a few times and then I'll think of a new bike over the winter. I just need to wait til I officially can't ride anymore then buy one so I just lust after it all winter.

I bet the used bike selection will go up soon as well since everyone will be selling of their "old" models to get the 2012's over the winter.

 

[EVIL JN]

Around 30mm or something is the difference in reach between m and l.

I would say go for the large and if it feels a little on the large side you can just change to a shorther stem. I am currently riding with a 30mm stem and wont go back to anything longer which is why i want to go to large frame.

 

[mantra]

On paper the differencen between medium and large is 17mm in reach and in the toptube length.