as per title, thinking of this for a new build, but would like some inspiration...
so does anyone own / have pics of their / their mates Orange 5 with coil shock (preferably Cane Creek Double Barrel) and 160mm Forks?
cheers
Bike Forum
anyone own an orange 5 with coil shock and 36's?
-
Posted 4 months ago #
-
I did. I would, looking back say don't bother. 160 on the front unbalanced the bike too much on anything other than trails which pointed down.
I'm not sure it needs a coil on the back either personally.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Yep, put a ccdb and Marzocchi 55 ti's on mine and I love it
Posted 4 months ago # -
If you want 160 up front the Alpine works better. A 5 with 160 is too slack but the ccdb is amazing!
Posted 4 months ago # -
Way too slack with 160mm forks, rode absolutely horribly. If you run them at 140mm the axle to crown is still longer than 32 Float 140's, I could tell the difference. Not only that you are carrying around an extra pound in weight for a slight stiffness increase, which IMO, unless riding really rocky stuff you don't need.
I think you will struggle to find the need for anything more than what a 2012 RP23 can offer, it is seriously good shock.
If you think you need more bike you would be much better off with an Alpine.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I run mine with 36's set to 140 was fine 160 great down hill a bit leary the rest of the time, coil shock is lovely and plush
Posted 4 months ago # -
Yep
36/160 Talas on the front and Fox Van RC to the rear. Love it!
Agree above about the 160 to some extent. I only wind mine to full travel on fast, steep, 'jumpy' stuff. Rest of the time I have them at 130mm travel which makes the bike corner much better on 'normal' singletrack. The coil on the back makes a massive difference but only on certain stuff. On the uphill climbs I can't notice any difference between the coil and the original RP23. On singletrack, no difference again. However, point the bike down something fast and bumpy and it makes a huge difference. Bike holds the ground at the rear rather than 'skipping' meaning later braking and more feel. Landing off jumps just brings a smile to my face.
No pics but I'll see what i can do tomorrow and post some
Posted 4 months ago # -
Here's a pick of what would be a better option if you want the 160 up front
Posted 4 months ago # -
I do and really like it. I like the slack head angle and do not find it an issue as I run a lot of sag to match the ccdb. I have pics but its a minging green one ! could post them if your bothered.
Posted 4 months ago # -
yeah, all pics appreciated, lets see this so called 'minging' green..
yer considered an alpine 160, but dont really need 160mm travel at the back, i have a 180mm bike, so something a little less. i do like a slack front end, it'll be getting a lot of alpine use this summer.
Posted 4 months ago # -
The coil rear really does make a difference to the way the the five responds. It feels much more controlled and stable over jumps, downhill and on the slower, techy stuff. In addition it climbs much better under power on rough stuff due to big increase in traction.
I also love the 55 ti's as again, so much more plush and controlled compared to my floats and just eats everything up.
Of course you're altering the way the bike feels, that's the whole point and it depends on what type of riding you like doing. You're taking away a little zip and nimbleness and adding a bit of beef and surefootedness.Posted 4 months ago # -
why tho ?....cos then youd turn the five into an Alpine...????????
Posted 4 months ago # -
Posted 4 months ago # -
It's not really the extra travel that's the issue, I think the overal weight & balance of the bike is more important.
For example I went from my 5 to a Nomad carbon and run it at 160mm each end, but it's a whole lot more balanced & over 5lbs lighter than my 5 was. The combination of the weight & linkage makes it pedal a whole lot better so you don't notice the extra travel. Considering the 5 & Alpine weigh nearly the same, I would probably go with the Alpine if I wanted 160 on the front.
Just because you can, doesn't make 160 a good idea in the case of the 5. At over 32lbs with a coil on the back (36 Van on the front) it was a bit of a heffer.
Posted 4 months ago # -
why tho ?....cos then youd turn the five into an Alpine...????????
maybe you already have a five and don't want to spend £3000+ on a new alpine? (i.e me!)
Posted 4 months ago # -
like i said ..dont turn the five into an Alpine..... its like cross breeding. !!!! dont do it...
Posted 4 months ago # -
why would i want to ? im happy with my five it does everything....
Posted 4 months ago # -
mmmm slack goodness.
so whats the weights of the alpine frame compared to a five frame then?
Posted 4 months ago # -
compare the two on the Orange website
lol im not doing it for you im off out for my tea soon... 
Posted 4 months ago # -
Posted 4 months ago # -
Seems to work for Danny MacAskill on his Five.
Posted 4 months ago # -
doesn't give any weights on the orange site...
Posted 4 months ago # -
It works out the Five AM has a 65.4 degree head angle which is ridiculously slack. I know on the Orange site it says 66 degrees but thats BS.
Take the 67 degree head angle from the Five Pro and put it in the green HA section here, then change the fork axle to crown to 512 (140mm 32 Floats). Then in the red section change the A2C to 545mm (160mm Float 36's).
+ -20mm A2C = roughly 1 degree change in HA, but that calculator is spot on.
Posted 4 months ago # -
sorry, had problems posting image earlier
Posted 4 months ago # -
thats a better green
Posted 4 months ago # -
just done that and comes out @ 65.95 (close enough to 66 degrees me thinks) slaaaak!
any one know weights of the frames? (5 & alpine)
Posted 4 months ago # -
just done that and comes out @ 65.95 (close enough to 66 degrees me thinks) slaaaak!
Errr, no it doesn't, 65.4 degrees.
fork height 512mm 545mm
head angle 67° 65.4°
seat angle 73° 71.5°Posted 4 months ago # -
Double post
Posted 4 months ago # -
either way it's pretty slack!
Posted 4 months ago # -
either way it's pretty slack!
Yep, feels like the Titanic on anything that isn't pointing downwards. I disliked it so much I bought a Five Pro instead.
Posted 4 months ago # -
that green us minging (sorry) lol
Posted 4 months ago # -
I'm sat on the fence here boys !,as I'm just about to order a 5 with talas 36's !,why shouldn't I ?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Don't do it, get the 32 RLC's (and kashima RP23) instead. I guarantee you will have the Talas wound down to 130-140mm most of the time if you do.
If you think you need 160mm of travel buy an Alpine.
You will thank me for this.
Edit:
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/fox-van-36-160mm-on-an-orane-5
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/orange-five-pro-or-am
I'm sure there are plenty more.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Talas? It's fantastic on my 5AM! It gives me 3 bikes on any ride. Put it down for up hill or standard ST approach steep and gnar and it's let out. It does feel 2 very different bikes and some might not like that but I adapt. Why not do the patriot? Saving my pennies for one!
Posted 4 months ago # -
I run a '08 with 36's and a Van R it slackened the 68 head out to 66 and it feels much better all round.
The coil shock means i don't need to carry out air sleeve maintenance so temperatures are controlled to avoid cavitation it's worked out far cheaper on servicing costs, and I'm not worried about the added weight, I just ride for fun.
And it's still the most fun bike to ride IMO.Posted 4 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
